Thursday, February 25, 2010

MP3 of Meeting with Doug Long (Dir. Parks & Rec)

This morning Debbie Freeman and I met with Doug Long, the San Carlos Director of Parks and Recreation.  Doug graciously allowed me to record the conversation, the MP3 of which can be downloaded here.

Doug Long Interview (mp3).

Here are some of the main points.  I will add to this later....

The Budget Situation: The city has a 'structural' (recurring) $3.5 million deficit.  Parks and Rec has to come up with $900K in repeatable, annual savings. $600K in savings would result from the closure of the Youth Center,  Crestview Park and either Laureola or Arguello Park.

Outsourcing Park Maintenance: The city is looking at outsourcing the lower skill 'mow and blow' aspect of park maintenance.  Mow and blow accounts for $400K and could be cut by 50%, yielding a savings of $200K.  These numbers are still very preliminary.  Doug has never had personal experience working with an outsourced vendor.  But he is cautious about outsourcing more than mow and blow based on anecdotes from colleagues.  I am in favor of encouraging a more aggressive outsourcing policy.  But hear Doug for himself on the MP3.

User Fees:  The city is looking at raising user fees.  Parks and Recreations brings in fees of roughly $1.7 million from camps, classes and the like.  Just a 12% hike in those fees would yield another roughly $200K.

Sports Organizations: AYSO, CYSA & SCLL are discussing ways of funding the parks that they use.

Park Sponsors:  Doug was cool on the idea of corporate park sponsors. His concern is in how you filter appropriate businesses (would you let a liquor store sponsor a park?). 

While this is very encouraging, NONE OF IT WILL ACTUALLY HAPPEN if we don't demonstrate our numbers and repeat our priorities.  There will be many competing voices.  More to come on how to do that soon....

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

The Budget Numbers

Parks and Rec has a $5.1 M budget (2009-10 adopted), but costs the city a net $3.4 M after user fees (classes, camps, etc.).  This net $3.4 M is roughly 10% of the city's $34.6 operating budget.  Parks and Rec is going to be chopped from 10-20%.

Parks Maintenance jumps out at me.  It is 20% of the parks and recreation budget (30% of the net expense).  The org chart (see below: click to enlarge) is littered with maintenance workers costing $1.1 M.   Doug Long volunteered in his initial presentation that these workers were a bad target for cuts since they are dedicated to the city (unlike an outsourced vendor) and ready to be responsive to urgent city needs.  That sounds to me like they are underutilized.   I want to know how much responsiveness would be lost and how much money saved if we outsourced park maintenance ENTIRELY.  I just have to believe government salary and benefits for always available maintenance workers are FAR above the going rate charged to corporations by private landscaping companies.  We should, at any rate, know the numbers of what could be saved.




Friday, February 19, 2010

PROGRESS REPORT

First, credit here goes to Debbie Freeman. We can now report....

(1) A Meeting with Doug Long

Next week, a small group of us will meet with Doug Long. Our goals are to get an update on his current thinking and to preview the ideas expressed here.

(2) Organizational Meeting

A meeting will be held for those who are interested in learning more and helping out at 7PM on Thursday, March 4 at the Youth Center. Flyer to come...

(3) Public Hearing

A 'Study Group' hosted by Parks and Rec on March 13th. The time, location and agenda are TBD. We will ask Doug about it.

(4) Council Meeting

'The Big Council Meeting' is on March 22nd. By then we will be well known to decision makers. If we can manage an exceptional, coordinated turnout for public comment, who knows? We may have cooked up a little influence by then.

Don't forget to take the online poll and share your opinion of the proposals we are going to preview with Doug. Be heard!

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Now it is the street lights. Ugh!

San Mateo Daily Journal: SC Streetlights Cut 45%

A 45% cut in San Carlos street lighting is in the budget cards.  What we've got is a situation here folks.

Let neighborhoods pay to keep their lights 100% lit.  There are up front costs in turning lights off.  Why are there upfront costs?  I have no idea.  Savings come in the out years.  I want the lights back ON in the out years.  I just want to opportunity to dig into my own pockets.

Thursday, February 11, 2010

POLLS: SHOW OUR NUMBERS

The polls (look right) are an opportunity for our numbers to be counted.  City council cares more when the numbers are higher.

Could Amalgamation Wipe Out Structural Deficit?

On Facebook Tara Russell asked:

For years Cities like San Carlos have been shunning the idea of amalgamation - San Carlos has a population of approx 28,000 Belmont about the same - together they are less than Redwood City or San Mateo. I would like to see a study of potential savings that could be reached if the two Cites were to amalgamate, at least support functions (e.g. finance dept, HR, IT) if not operating Depts as well. Loosing a Cities identity is a concern when times are good and we can all get everything we want, but when a community like San Carlos, that is so committed to outdoor living, is left to consider life without full access parks then I think we all need to get a lot more creative.

WE NEED A WONK to weigh in here. Could amalgamation wipe out the structural payments issue that plagues San Carlos finances?  Could it offer a 50%ish boost to city revenues?  Let's just brainstorm here.

First, let me say that I love SC.  That's why I live here.  It is just that I grew up in a small New England village that was amalgamated into one, very insubstantial, but fiscally healthy town.  Each village retained an identity.  And at least one neighboring village that went it alone, literally withered and died.  Time has a way of doing that.

Quick background: SC suffers from a 'structural deficit' (the city is perpetually underfunded). The cause is that when Prop 13 passed (limiting property taxes generally) San Carlos was locked into receiving a 13% payout on local property taxes, whereas neighboring towns average 20.2% (see: smartvoter.org).  That's right, your property taxes are paid elsewhere, and only a portion of it is returned to the city.  By a quirk of timing, San Carlos expenditures were low at the moment that rates were locked into a Prop 13 funding formula. And so, we must suffer forever. Prop 13 is a third rail of CA politics. Touch it and die. No solution..... Or?

If we were to amalgamate with Belmont, could that be enough premise to nest under the higher Belmont remunerations? I will gladly abandon the San Carlos name in order to increase our funding by 50%+. I could see the legislature, or whoever approves amalgamations, or oversees property tax payouts becoming open to a lobbying effort that was tied under this umbrella issue.

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Harmonizing Many Voices

Via Facebook (search: Keep San Carlos' Parks Open) and your email networks, this community has awakened to the imminent swinging of the city's budget axe.  Make no mistake, the mayor, council members and city staff have signaled that Parks and Recreation will bear a disproportionate burden.  In fairness, the 'competition' is public safety.  With crime on the rise, in my neighborhood too, the choices are stark.  The old paradigm of fighting over fixed resources is a loser for our side.  Our only hope is to tap the entrepreneurial vein which runs deep in our community.

Fire up the email networks one more time, to encourage two channels of organization.

(1) Facebook is the place to speak.  Its utility is unmatched.  For those who want to be heard, create an account and search 'Keep San Carlos' Parks Open'.  There is nothing to it. 

(2) For those who want an executive summary or simply don't use facebook, bookmark http://keepsancarlosparksopen.blogspot.com/ to stay up to date on opportunities for action and to follow the emerging consensus.

To the 'turf war' partisans.... Both sides have demonstrated their love of our parks.  In the next battle we are allies.  Your skills and experience are valuable.  To the newly energized, the past two weeks has encouraged me that our numbers are great, our passions inflamed and the levers of democracy in a small town available to those with a unified voice.