You Can’t Make This Stuff Up - Chula Vista City Council

Being politically active means trying to stay on top of the various issues, their impact to citizens, and – yes - from time-to-time stomaching the politics. But it’s when politics are prioritized over the good of the city - that's when I get most perturbed.

The May 3^rd’ council meeting was one of those nights. It was like an episode of the ‘twilight zone.’  

At this meeting the City Council voted to save five police officer positions. 

1. Even though the police union had agreed with the layoffs
2. Even though ALL unions had agreed to shared cuts
3. Even though there was no money budgeted for the five positions

But there were a few moments that made this week’s meeting even more interesting – here’s a quick synopsis: 

KEEP YOUR WORD: Representatives from all the other unions spoke one-at-a-time to urge the council to stay true to their promise of shared sacrifice and to remind the council of the concessions each union had made in previous years.

SPEND MONEY: The president of the local taxpayer association (and recent candidate for office) used his personal money on robo-calls (those recorded political phone calls)urging residents to contact the council and support saving the police officer positions AND THEN in public testimony asked the council to spend money the City may not have.  

POLICE ARE MORE EFFICIENT: CV Police Chief addressed how the new reorganization of the department has produced more efficiency - essentially resulting in “the same number of feet-on-the-street today as there was in 2006-07.” 

NA, YOU’RE WRONG: Yet, in a dramatic speech, one council member - with a sheet of police response times -  dismissed the police chief’s report and stated “this is not about unions and negotiated agreements, it’s about public safety.”  

NOT WHAT WE MEANT:  Another council member responded to the various unions by saying the Council was “not breaking the negotiated agreement [to layoff officers]” but only  “waiting” on the layoffs.

MUMS THE WORD:  One council member at the April 26th council meeting publicly stated that he felt no sense of urgency to delay the layoffs unless it became evident public safety was being compromised.  Well, at the May 3rd meeting the council member said absolutely nothing  and cast the swing vote in favor of delaying the layoff of the five officers.  

So to recap -  the City Council’s actions on May 3 did the following:

• Saved five police officer positions in a three/two vote - Yay! Who’s going to argue with having additional officers?

• Added $48,000 to this year’s expenditure budget - The question remains where is this money going to come from? The City Manager says the city will find the money from the police department - but if there was additional savings there why weren’t they included in the negotiated talks?

• Added hundreds-of-thousands of dollars to next year’s budget for five police officer positions that were not included in the City Manager’s proposed balanced budget - Where is the City going to find this income? Will our parks, recreation, libraries, and senior center be on the hook for more?

• Devastated all hopes of future negotiations with collective bargaining groups - Why would they come to the table again? In fact, one of the largest union’s representative stated in their public testimony that they would not go to the table in the future.

Politics = 1

City =0

- Z