FIVE THINGS SAN DIEGO NEEDSRealize Government Costs Money
By Ernie Anderson
Thursday, March 6, 2008 | What five things does San Diego need most? My professional life was spent in management and government, so that background is going to be the primary driver for my comments.
I. Management/City Employees
The balance of my thoughts may not be in order of importance, but this point is first for a reason. There will always be problems. Whether it’s finances, natural disasters, mistakes, relationships or crime, problems are a part of everyday life. Unfortunately, you can’t always control them, so what happens in life is not as important as how you deal with it.
 |
| Ernie Anderson |
Just as we all deal with our own personal problems every day, government too must address or manage its problems.
I’ll let others debate the more effective forms of government to manage the city. I’ve been around long enough to know it’s the quality of the individuals filling the roles that is important. Pete Wilson was the strongest, most effective and influential mayor San Diego has had. His force of personality, vision and intelligence didn’t need the formal mantle of strong mayor to run the city.
 Conversely, there are those who don’t have those abilities and the full range of duties and responsibilities of a formal position are unfulfilled. After an incredible run of effective managers over the years, in the last decade the mayor and council chose to keep ineffective managers because they pandered to their needs. All this within the bounds of the council-manager form of government designed to avoid just that scenario. As a result, we are where we are today because of their inability to manage the problems.
Now, within the strong-mayor form of government, it is essential that the mayor hire a strong and effective manager to run the day-to-day business of the city. Just as the city manager wasn’t free from politics in the council-manager form of government, this manager won’t be either. BUT he or she has to be a stronger hand than is now the case.
City employees have had a tough time in the last seven or eight years. Lack of a strong city manager and clear, centralized direction of day-to-day operations and an unprecedented exodus of management talent and corporate knowledge are two issues that have adversely affected city employees and how they do their jobs. But the worst that has happened is how they have been unfairly vilified because of the pension issue.
Study after study shows that job satisfaction ranks first ahead of money and all other considerations related to work. Up until this decade, San Diego was recognized and emulated nationally for their management and innovation. City employees were an important part of the award-winning and innovative programs copied and praised across the nation. Employees were valued and felt good about themselves and their work.
Then came the pension controversy and everything changed. Employees were criticized daily in the newspaper and long-planned retirements were threatened.
Outside of a handful of management employees, city employees had nothing to do with the decisions leading to the pensions that are the subject of the controversy. Nearly 60 percent of the tax-supported employees are police and fire employees; people who put their lives on the line for us all every day. The large majority of the remaining employees have dedicated their professional lives to serving the public.
The scenario reminds me of the Vietnam War and how the returning veterans were treated: vilified rather than being treated as the heroes they were. They didn’t have anything to do with the decisions leading to Vietnam either. Thankfully, the citizens of our country recognized their mistake and now celebrate the brave young men and women who serve their country, regardless of the popularity of the conflict.
City employees deserve no less.
II. Prioritize Programs/Expenditures
In the private sector, when a company develops a product that is desirable, it sells well and results in revenue to the company. Supply and demand works well. In the public sector, the demand for government services will always outweigh government’s ability to supply those services. Consequently, in government, it is essential to prioritize programs and expenditures.
As important as prioritizing expenditures is, the dialogue and infrastructure to reach a consensus on what is most important has been strangely missing. Mindless "across-the-board" budget cuts have been implemented in the recent past and continue today. Economic development programs that bring tens of millions of dollars to San Diego’s economy annually are being cut at the same rate as one time a year community events.
A process to engage San Diegans in this issue is essential. Citizens must have a structured opportunity to express their needs and decide how and at what level they want to pay for meeting those needs. Polling, workshops, interactive websites, community forums are all important tools, but just showing up and giving citizens their three minutes to vent isn’t adequate. I want to see a plan for arriving at our priorities and funding levels that includes meaningful input from the public.
III. Adequate Tax Base
There are really two issues here.
1. The first are the laws and formulas in the state of California that determine how our tax dollars are allocated. If this is a new issue to you, you probably think your sales and property taxes are evenly distributed throughout the state based on population. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our tax dollars are used to subsidize schools and government services in jurisdictions to the north and it amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars. Periodically there are discussions to address this issue among our local and state legislators, but it is a difficult issue. Restoring our fair share of taxes to San Diegans would mean taking the money away from those that have it now.
I believe a prudent course of action would be for government and the media to partner together to educate San Diegans on this issue and speak in one voice through our vote and our legislators that San Diego must receive its fair share of tax dollars.
2. Even if we were successful in gaining our fair share of tax dollars, demand will still exceed government’s ability to supply services. It’s not my intent to address whether or not our tax base is adequate or not. Once citizens have the opportunity to prioritize government programs and services, they are going to have to decide what services they want and how much they’re willing to pay for it.
Which leads me to my next point:
IV. Political Leadership
It’s the rare politician that doesn’t campaign on providing more service, new programs or a grand building of some sort and promise to pay for it by cutting government spending while cutting or not raising taxes at the same time. There’s a reason for their approach: They get elected.
The city of San Diego’s Independent Budget Analyst recently wrote an excellent report addressing the “structural budget deficit” facing the city of San Diego. Unfortunately, the structural deficit described in the report is not a recent phenomenon.
The current situation has its roots in the economic downturn in the early 1990s and the state’s subsequent raid on the city’s revenues to mitigate their own financial problems. Rather than reducing expenses to match the revenues, services were maintained through the use of one-time revenues, not fully funding programs and not providing funds for cost increases. Despite the growing structural deficit, programs were expanded and new programs and facilities were added without any new funding sources (no one has labeled them illegal yet). All of these practices that contribute to the problem are continuing today.
It’s time for the elected officials and candidates to be honest and straight forward in addressing the cost of government services and the tax base necessary to support them.
V. Vision
San Diego is a great city. The weather, the location by the ocean, the diversity and the people all help to define us. When I started the curbside recycling programs in the 1980s and led the city’s efforts to reduce beach and bay pollution earlier this decade, both programs were successful beyond anyone’s expectations.
Recycling participation hovered at nearly 100 percent, even though people initially saw separating their trash as a bother, and beach and bay postings and closures due to pollution were reduced by over 60 percent in just three years. Why were they both so successful?
Both programs were supported by strong public relations programs to educate the public why the programs were needed and what the public could do to help. San Diegans made both programs successful because they had the opportunity to be part of the solution.
City government and its problems are but a small part of San Diego, yet it’s what has defined San Diego for the past four years. "Pension" has been the focal point. How to fund it, how to take it away, how to change it. Fine. Let’s have that dialogue; but where is the perspective? What is our vision for San Diego? It can’t just be "solve the pension problem."
So I’ll end with this: Where is the vision and where are the support programs to engage the public and make that vision a reality?
Ernie Anderson is not your typical bureaucrat. The six-time Emmy Award winner started and managed the city of San Diego’s successful curbside recycling program in the 80s; won the Government Finance Officers’ highest national award for designing and implementing a program that saved the city well over $100 million in the 90s; and revitalized and managed the city’s efforts early this decade that reduced beach closures and postings due to pollution by more than 60 percent. What are the five things you think San Diego needs? Write your piece and e-mail it here.
Reader Feedback
Comments are now displayed with the newest at the bottom. Not sure you're seeing all of the comments? Click here:
Comments so far on this story: 1. Fred Williams wrote on March 5, 2008 11:13 PM:
"--"Despite the growing structural deficit, programs were expanded and new programs and facilities were added without any new funding sources (no one has labeled them illegal yet)."-- Let me clearly label the city's paying for the ballpark as illegal. Moores, McGrory and Gwinn should be put on trial for their role in this fraud, and the city should recover hundreds of millions. Is that what you're getting at Mr. Anderson?" 2. Billy Bob Henry wrote on March 5, 2008 11:20 PM:
"Then came the pension controversy and everything changed. Employees were criticized daily in the newspaper and long-planned retirements were threatened....... That is completely FALSE. No one criticized employees, we took issue with the scam pensions and nothing more. When you have HS educated cops and FF making $250K per year and then getting multi million dollar pensions at age 50 there is a HUGE problem, and it needs to be fixed. Plain and simple." 3. Realty vs Reality wrote on March 5, 2008 11:33 PM:
"What a coherent perspective, on the heels of the tiresome, incoherent babble of Mr Waring. If only Mr Ernie Anderson were the Anderson who replaced Waring. Instead, we have the same broken, bureaucratic, abusive government coming out of Land Use, with director-level staff initiating the same exclusively pro-business, pro-developer maneuvers on behalf of the Sanders government and the self-serving Councilmembers." 4. Rick wrote on March 5, 2008 11:49 PM:
"Excellent article. However, it makes the assumption that the people in elected positions today can be trusted. They can not and it reflects in the attitude of the public to every item in the article. It took a long time for the officials to lose this trust and it will take a long time for it to return. Only by actions that reflect the best interests of the public will that occur." 5. Hands across the aisle wrote on March 6, 2008 6:08 AM:
"The predicate assumptions of Mr Anderson's FIVE is that there's a genuine concern for the public welfare driving the actions and policies of this administration;I: The Mayor has a strong manager running things but her time is spent servicing a very small circle of old friends. They are requited with their monopolization and any attempt to "democratize"her time will be punished.II:Dialogue implies "give and take" and that's an un-natural act for an oligarchy.III: Citizens,treated like 'mushrooms", kept in the dark and fed "poop" 24/7-365 are very unlikely to have the luxury of informed decisions or choices.IV: Fees and assessments are "taxes" by other names and in a county with 1,000+ millionaires the use of the word "taxes" gets you 'purged" from the ranks of the re-electable and exiled to Rcho Santa Fe. Ostracized. V: The current vision being sustained is the proprietary 'staus quo". Another very unlikely. Mr Anderson is Today's "Diogenes"." 6. RD wrote on March 6, 2008 6:36 AM:
"WOW! A clear and concise explanation with facts. How refreshing. Thank You Mr. Anderson. Mayor Sanders, Mr. Francis, all councilmembers and anyone running for council should speak as clearly. More importantly Mr. Anderson identifies the root causes of weak leadership and the desire to please no matter what the results. The rethoric by our current leaders sorely lacks action. There is no cognivtive plan bringing all three branches of local government together to solve this mess. If fact, the opposite is true with each respective branch claiming the other is the source of all things that have gone wrong. ENOUGH with the FINGER POINTING. For the last four years little has been done. For the last 30 months a lot of money been wasted. Where are the leaders this City needs?" 7. Sparky wrote on March 6, 2008 8:26 AM:
"FINALLY... a piece that addresses the issues of San Diego. Very insightful and on point. Too bad our Mayor, City Attorney, City Council and District Attorney lack the vision, understanding and ability to communicate as well as Mr. Anderson. Mr. Anderson, well said." 8. Jim Dodd wrote on March 6, 2008 9:56 AM:
"I was one of those Viet Nam era folks, and I continued on for a career. I agree that City employees should get the same treatment as we military. So lets change the pension system to 50% pay after 20 years of service. LCDR Jim Dodd, USN (Ret.)" 9. Sparky wrote on March 6, 2008 11:31 AM:
"Billy Bob Henry; the only thing heard is; BLAH BLAH BLAH. Same rant; no thought, meaning or relevance. Hands across the aisle: what the heck are you trying to say? "Diogenes" WOW!!! Rick; is it not our responsibility to hold our elected body responsible and accountable to ensure they are truthful and working in our best interest? The problem as I see it; the voters/community at large have allowed this to occur. Lack of involvement, interest and refusal to speak up has left the vocal minority to control the outcomes of politicians. The silent majority is left to its own devises and the outcomes of such actions. Leadership is key, coupled with vision and honesty. ALL lacking in the crop of individuals in office and seeking to take office in the coming elections. So much rhetoric without substance." 10. Jim wrote on March 6, 2008 11:44 AM:
"What an excellent article and insight. BBH needs to get off his soapbox. He has criticized city employees from day one despite what he says here. Level of education is not the only or even predominant issue as to how much an employee should be paid. The truth is not everyone can or wants to be a police officer or firefighter. This creates a market condition that requires better pay to attract qualified candidates. Level of education is only one component. Many a college grad has failed to make it in public safety. As stated in the article, city employees had nothing to do with the pension underfunding and should not be blamed for it." 11. Ann wrote on March 6, 2008 12:16 PM:
"I thank you for your insightful article. I believe I remember when you were Financial Director that your work in finance got the City an "outstanding" rating in 1990's from GFOA. At the same time I believe you were awarded a national award from GFOA for developing and administering a "zero base management" review program saving the City $100 million. I was involved with that nationally recognized organization. (Government Finance Officers Association) You are still talked about there as in expert in management and finance. Too bad the City didn't appreciate your value and use your expertise in a time life this!" 12. jr wrote on March 6, 2008 12:32 PM:
"A fair salary with fair benefits. Revamp the retirement system to a 401k system as the Feds have done and then a fair medical system with a 20% copay. Begin looking at a teachers salary and then judge all other positions as should they make more or less? Remember where we live and you can pay people less here to give them access to paradise." 13. Just Wondering wrote on March 6, 2008 12:44 PM:
"Hey Mayor Sainz, oops I mean Sanders, did you read this. Did you understand it?" 14. Sparky wrote on March 6, 2008 1:25 PM:
""jr"; YOU are what is wrong with this City. 401K systems will not allow you to draw qualified candidates with the salary YOU are willing to pay. "Remember where we live and you can pay people less here to give them access to paradise." YOU sir are NUTS!!! Last time I checked, my mortgage cannot be paid with sunshine nor can my children's college tuition, let alone the gas for my car. How about looking at what we pay actors and sports figures; compare their worth and salaries to teachers, nurses, police and firefighters. 20% co-pay for medical care? A socialized medical system like Canada? Go to Canada and ask ANYONE what they think of their medical coverage and bring this goofy idea up again!! Lets all hope the Mayor wakes up before San Diego is re-named Detroit." 15. JR wrote on March 6, 2008 2:01 PM:
"Not bad, but for one thing: government and media aren't properly 'partners' except in places like China, North Korea and the SDUT op/ed page with Jerry Sanders and his handlers. Media collusion with the Freaks What Am In Charge is part of how we got into this mess." 16. tseuG wrote on March 6, 2008 2:05 PM:
"Mr. Dodd. City employees' pension uses a 2.5% times-years-of-servi formula. After 20 years of employment, City employees are entitled to recieve 50% of their pay, at age 55 (greater age requirement than military pensions). Whats your point? And please don't confuse this with the SPSP savings account benefit, as most pension critics do. It replaces Social Security and costs the City no more than Social Security would, and only if every employee elects to contribute the maximum, which many don't." 17. Frank G wrote on March 6, 2008 4:42 PM:
"IMHO BBH criticizes because he was a washout, not capable of meeting the standards (physical, mental, and ethical). I'm saying it, he should prove otherwise if he can. He hasn't before, and it explains the irrational bitterness and vitriole he posts here as Billy Bob Henry and at the UT as Johnny Vegas" 18. Frank G wrote on March 6, 2008 4:46 PM:
"by the way, Mr. Anderson (echoes of the Matrix....) excellent article, straighforward viewpoint. The City will miss your expertise" 19. Realty vs Reality wrote on March 6, 2008 5:43 PM:
"JR, thanks, well said! That bit about media and government collusion did strike a dissonant note. Guess that's what you get from someone who, despite an obvious ability to think normally, believes that Pete Wilson was San Diego's most effective mayor..." 20. Ernie wrote on March 6, 2008 6:30 PM:
"Partnership was probably the wrong word if it led you to “collusion”. The media is an incredibly effective means of reaching the public and, like it or not, it influences and educates people. With great causes like recycling and pollution prevention, the media coverage was the key to mobilizing the public. Utilizing them in the same way to regain the tax dollars that are wrongfully diverted from San Diegans is a logical strategy. If government does their job to frame and highlight the issue and present the facts, the press will cover it." 21. Realty vs Reality wrote on March 7, 2008 12:30 PM:
"You are correct, Mr Anderson: "collude" implies secrecy. And it is no secret that presently the U-T and the Sanders regime operate openly and in concert. What I meant was "media and government propaganda." Which still strikes a dissonant note." 22. Fred Williams wrote on March 8, 2008 11:29 PM:
"Ernie, you commented: "media coverage was the key to mobilizing the public. Utilizing them in the same way to regain the tax dollars that are wrongfully diverted from San Diegans is a logical strategy." ---Do you mean the GOP Convention, Moores and Spanos deals specifically, or is your list longer? Please open the doors for those of us unable to attend those closed meetings. Let's name these crooks -- We need our money back."
Feedback Rules
Users may post more than one comment, but should not pose as multiple users. Multiple posts from the same IP address but with a different user name on each will be reviewed to determine whether abuse has occurred.
Posts with overly personal attacks or unsubstantiated allegations may be edited or deleted.
Please be patient with the posts -- there may be a delay before they appear on the site -- and make sure to enter the code in the "image verification" box.
Add Your Comments
|
PRINT 
E-MAIL STORY
SHARE
FACEBOOK
REDDIT
NEWSVINE
DIGG
DEL.ICIO.US
BLINKLIST