Has the city pulled in its horns to focus on getting the taxpayers out of this hole? Hardly:
It's full speed ahead on San Jose's new city hall. Shortly after $214M in bonds were signed off June, 1999, the city discovered
it also needed $26M for land plus an extra $44M for parking. By November, 2000, the bill was $325M. By November, 2001 the
bill was $343M.
Not so much as a public "Ooops!" from the mayor or city council.
Part of this pesky $124M was the omission of $5M in new furniture. The $5M was revised to $45M for furniture and "technology."
Adding insult to over-run, the city's bid specs were written to make sure Cisco networking and VoIP equipment was chosen.
The mayor is "shocked" and "disappointed" by this chicanery! Nonetheless, after a ceremonial beheading of underlings,
the mayor and city council continue to plow ahead.
Without apologies, San Jose's city hall bill is now $388M. Every nickel is "essential."
Simultaneously, San Jose wants a new 7,000-seat music hall downtown, starting with $20M in redevelopment funds. Never mind
the adjacent Shark Tank (OK, "HP Pavilion") stands empty on many days even when the NHL is not on strike (don't get me started)
and San Jose State has 6,500 seats only a couple miles away.
They "need" to spend this $20M to make San Jose a great city.
Sadly, Santa Clara County hired a consultant who "proved" a county-funded 7,700-seat music hall at the county fairgrounds
would turn a profit. The county is proceeding even though the cost ballooned 53% (to $87M) in less than a year and the usual
underwriting channels declined to participate in issuing the bonds needed.
The county is anxious to burn another $87M.
The local symphony and ballet are both on the verge of extinction but San Jose wants to expand its Museum of Art for $3M
annually. No word on what else in the budget may be sacrificed to fund this ambition.
Not daunted by three years' lack of job growth, San Jose is plowing ahead with an airport expansion. The project totals
$1.8B with the city plotting how to issue $160M+ in Airport Revenue Bonds on top of $250M of such bonds in 2004. (The county,
state and feds are also on the hook.) The city claims this deal is "self-funding" since the bonds will be re-paid out of landing
fees, etc.
If so, how did a 55% traffic increase since 1990 not generate enough fees to already fund an airport expansion? What happens
if traffic continues to decline, as it has for the last three years?
Super-size the airport for $410M. It's "essential" to the future of "America's next great city."
San Jose also wants to put up a $3M guarantee to attract a grand prix race. The original guarantee was only ~$250K but
was increased as other sponsors dropped out. The mayor defends risking city funds on the grounds "it gives to the Leukemia
foundation."
Funding charitable donations with taxpayer money is "essential" spending?
In between, the mayor quietly agreed to re-write the city's contract with their garbage contractor to cover unexpected
cost over-runs. Details are sketchy but it looks like the city is out another $2M, without public review, to ensure "labor
peace."
The $2M was truly "needed." Just don't ask the mayor to explain why. At least not in public...
But now, having burned $825M+ of taxpayer dollars, the mayor is finally taking a stand.
The head of the Valley Transit Authority (VTA) is being blamed for the over-expansion, declining ridership and the resultant
budget woes. Rather than pay $330K severance guaranteed in his contract, the mayor threatened to stop payment "to protect
the taxpayers."
Rather than "waste" $330K of additional taxpayer money to move the VTA forward, now the mayor suddenly wants to protect
the taxpayers? And pay lawyers to do it?
After $825M+ was freely spent, the mayor actually got positive press coverage for grandstanding over this $330K. This
tells us all you need to know about San Jose budgeting and politics.
