BREAKING NEWS: MASSIVE PARK CLOSURES TO BE RECOMMENDED BY PARKS & REC

It really is going to be a sad day for all San Carlos Residents when the effects of these budget cuts take effect in July. This is a look into the cuts of just one city department. You can be assured that most other departments are going to be making similar recommendations on cuts to the City Council.
As our city service’s, roadways, parks, schools, buildings erode over time as will our real estate values. Will this start a slow decline in the desirability of living in San Carlos. Will our current status of a destination city for families looking for a great place to raise their kids erode as well? If something is not done about this, the extra few hundred dollars a year we all would have spent on increased taxes could pale in comparison to the potential decline in our property values.
I hope all of this is not the case, but it is quite a risk to take.

Dan is right. The recommendations from the Park and Rec are the first of many that will come from all SC depts.
I guess maybe we should have passed Measure U…..woops.

What a shame. Are we still in the City of Good Living? Rather than go back and try dwell on how we got here, we should concentrate more on moving forward, getting out town fiscally sound and stop doing away with all that makes this such a special place.
I followed the entire Measure U campaign and ultimately was not persuaded either way. While the thought of an additional sales tax is disturbing, I can’t see how the chopping of the benefits of city employees is going to be a successful route, either. That seems like a long, drawn out fight in which we will never reap any type of meaningful benefit, or at least one that will help with our large budget issues.
Arugello Park is a treasure and Crestview is an outstanding venue for walking, running, soccer, etc.
I agree. Very sad.

While it appears that this will be the beginning of a downhill slide for public services, it would be nice to see if the various commissions can get creative here. Understood that they are under pressure to resolve the budgets over-night, however, it would be nice to see some sort of action plan to obtain other means of funding while programs are shut down. Of course such creativity cannot be implemented over night, but has there been any investigation into use fees or corporate sponsorships? It might result in calling a park,”Oracle Park” or “Larryland” but might supplement the deficits and keep our parks and other programs running until either the economy gets better or unless we figure out that supplementing certain city functions with private investment actually works.
The tax didn’t pass, and in reality, would the tax really increased city revenue by that much or would the additional tax incented buyers to buy more over the internet or in areas outside of San Carlos to avoid paying extra tax? Would it’ve been enough? (No, I am not hardcore conservative, but I do like to play devil’s advocate at times) This will never be known, however, if we want to keep our home values strong and our communities safe, we have to look at innovative alternatives to funding public programs outside of typical government funding by the public.

Wow! This is all that I can say at this recommendation. Why doesn’t the Youth Center charge fees for their services so that people who use the facility pays for its upkeep? It seems to make sense to at least make it available in this capacity.
–Chris

Is it a maintenance issue? Would creating a team of volunteers to maintain the parks help? It’s harsh, but if we want our kids to play in these parks, perhaps we’ll have to roll up our own sleeves and do something about it.

I’m curious…how will the city actually close a park? Fenced off? How will that work? At Crestview Park, are we talking just the playing field or are we talking the kids play structure and the basketball court too? I guess I just can’t imagine a fence large enough to encompass the entirety of that park and being effective.

Hi Jim,
That’s a good question. The only answer I have for you is the answer that was given at the ASAC meeting, which was that the parks would “fenced off”…what exactly that includes, I am not sure.
Bob

Good. I’m sorry to say it, but I am glad the city is finally taking its budget seriously.
If the city didn’t cater so much to families with kids, it wouldn’t attract so many families with kids. A more balanced city population would be a lot easier on the city budget. Kids are expensive, and I am tired of paying for the kids of people with houses worth >$1 million dollars. Pay for your own kids. You can afford it.
They could easily turn the parks into meadow-habitat for critters. That would be a lot greener than what we currently have, and a lot less expensive.

Instead of blaming people with kids for the budget issues in San Carlos, try thanking them for raising your property values through excellent schools. Pay any attention at all to what is going on out there and why people are paying a premium to live in San Carlos and you will find that it is the schools.

GET A CLUE — Thank you for your kind and neighborly response!
It is a bold assumption on your part that property values going up is inherently in the best interests of an individual (or a community).
I respect that it may be in your best interest, and you have every right to lobby for this to continue.
I would personally prefer to lobby for things that improve everyone’s quality of life. More support for our excellent fire and police departments, for example. That /is/ something that benefits everyone.
I respect that your opinion is different, I hope you can also respect mine. It makes living together much easier :).
F

Sadly, cuts to police and fire are a direct result of Measure U not passing too. I worked on the campaign…we were accused of scare tactics. The state is raping cities and imposing mandates that the city MUSTo comply with. By law. And on that note, benefits and staff pay have to be negotiated properly over time or the city gets sued. Bottom line. And prop. 13 has us collecting 1978 property tax rates that don’t keep us afloat. We have the lowest rate on the Peninsula. Look it up. Lots of factors. Most at the state level. That’s just reality. But folks want to blame “the city”. A volunteer fire dept? And volunteer police? In 2010 in San Mateo County? Yes, folks call for that too. Scary. The cuts we campaigned so hard to prevent are all happening now. San Carlos voters are getting what they asked for. I grew up here. It’s sad,indeed.

LT — I am completely with you on fire/police. The idea of cuts to fire and police scares me a lot too. I also don’t think our fine city staff are overpaid.
I also strongly agree that what the state is doing certainly sucks for us, even if they do not have much of a choice.
Beyond that, the City of San Carlos has a lot of problems, but I did not (and do not) believe Measure U is/was the right answer to them (though I respect that others do).
And yes, I do think the blame goes to “the city”. But perhaps not for the reason you think.
The city’s population is not balanced. IMHO, the overly kid-friendly policies are attracting more families with kids and driving away SINKs and DINKs[1]. They are tired of things like the school parcel tax, the youth center, library programs for kids, and (my personal favorite) the playground renovations at Burton Park removing facilities for adult use. I could go on, but you get the idea.
The fact is that SINKs and DINKs statistically have more disposable income. They are the people who have the extra money to support San Carlos businesses.
Now perhaps this is me being selfish, but I think we can agree that a thriving business community is good for everyone?
I think Measure U would have been the “two” of the ‘old one-two’ for San Carlos businesses. First you drive away their customers, then you raise their taxes.
SINKS and DINKS also do not take up places in San Carlos schools. Nor do they require baseball fields, or playgrounds, or city-sponsored parades of baton-twirling kids.
I strongly believe that a balanced community has to include a measure of families with kids as well as SINKs and DINKs. We need both to make a community, and I think the city is going to have to recognize that and adjust its policies to survive.
I guess we shall see if they do or not.
F
[1] I am sure you know this, but SINK = Single Income No Kids, DINK = Double Income No Kids.

LT is absolutely correct.
The people have spoken (four tries at the ballot box & four NO’s) and now we have to deal with it.
City Hall’s piggy bank is so low we’ll actually run out of money in three years. We have no alternative but to cut and cut hard this year.

Wow – for you people who think that Measure U wasn’t the answer please tell me what is? This is the city’s fault but it goes far back to the past administration and the ‘good old boys network’ that ran it.
Anyone remember our past mayor who was indicted? Anyone remember the allegations of ‘double-dipping’ and conflict of interest that was rampant during that administration?
We have only ourselves to blame because we elected them. Just like we have elected this city council and how very sad that this last election they ran unopposed. I can think of one in particular that should be run out of town instead of elected to office.
It may not be fair that we as citizens are being asked to pony up money in the form of a ballot measure and new taxation to help save this City of Good Living but there is no other answer. Unless the state re-vamps or repeals Prop 13 we are in a world of hurt people.
Not only are they talking about closing parks. Our City Council has asked the City Manager and Police Chief and Fire Chief to “explore” the idea of getting rid of our police/fire departments altogether. We will become exactly like the unincorporated areas.
When you call 911 it will be anywhere from 10-30 minutes before you get a first responder. I hope that your emergency can wait because you certainly will. No fire. No police.
Without your own police department patrolling the streets while you sleep it will be the criminals roaming those same streets. The sheriff’s department is too busy and too far away to do anything like patrolling our streets.
Your house is on fire? Grab the hose and start spraying cuz it’ll be awhile. Heart attack? Bummer. Forget the parks…….where is our protection. Sad day indeed.

It is indeed sad there is a proposal to close some city parks. I grew up in San Carlos many many years ago on Pine Avenue. During the summers, I practically lived at Burton Park and played Little League games shuttling between Burton and Arguello when the latter was built in the 50’s. Shuttling by bicycle, of course. Hillcrest park, while small was a great neighborhood park to meet friends for a few hours of youthful play.

oh please lets not overreact here. this is all about negotiation and public posturing to influence the council’s decision making process. every city department will do the same in advance of the final decisions. stay tuned for scare tactics about worse case scenarios from the police and fire unions. the same unions that got us into this mess with their greedy contracts. this is how politics works. the parks will be fine.

Maybe the threat of these cuts will create the impetus for a campaign like we had around the Measure B school parcel tax last year. I never saw the same push on Measure U — I think some people have an instinctually negative stance to higher taxes, so it takes a more concerted campaign to successfully sell it broadly.

First off F sounds like she just hates kids. Second I have to agree with Dave and did exactly as he, I grew up in San Carlos and have the best memories of going to Burton Park with my friends from 8:00am when the Rec Center opened until 10:00 pm when the lights went out. If it was not for Burton Park and other parks in SC I think most of us would have caused alot of trouble in town. Instead we all were involved in sports such as Softball, baseball, tennis etc. San Carlos is such a great town, I it would be a sad day if closures are approved.

I used to live in san Carlos and loved Arguello park. it seems totally crazy that this is even an option. The key is that san carlos residents have to stop saying “sad” and do something about it. If it requires an increase in sales tax, ask residents for donations, increase property taxes, whatever. It can not be that much to keep up the parks and at the end it’s where you live, right?

It sounds like a continuation of what we saw in the Parks and Recreation arena even before the Measure U election.
If you look closely, in the last couple of years, the City has:
1. Rented the Kiwanis Building to a school to raise $ for the General Fund
2. Given Heather School Field and the Arguello Park Tennis Courts back to the School District for upkeep to cut City Park & Recreation maintenance costs.
3. Cut hours at the Youth Center.
In December, the City Council went further in Parks & Rec with the Year 2 or “Y2 Cuts” and:
1. Ended the Special Needs Program on June 30th
2. Transferred the Healthy Cities Tutoring Program to the School District.
On the proposed cuts you mention, I would guess that the City could rent out the Laureola Park Building to a school – just like they did with the Kiwanis Building – for some added General Fund $.
Bottom line: the Park & Rec cuts from the last few years are continuing.

the park closures should be a windfall for RWC real estate. RWC can be marketed as the city where parks remain open.or the city that cares about its residents..lol

…or RWC can market itself as “residents who care about their city”. Remember, SC voters chose not to pass Measure U. It would have prevented several cuts. And for the record, did you know that the Park & Rec dept. is the only department in the city that isn’t subject to state & federal mandates (unlike other depts. including public works)?That’s why Park & Rec. programs are now on the chopping block. All this info was and is, available to voters.

If the city is going to recommend closing parks, why are they giving the Police a 3.5% raise on monday. This is disgusting. Take from the citizens, ask for new taxes, but keep giving raises.

Parks and Rec has the money to keep these parks open. Instead, it’s taken its entire capital budget of $2 million put aside for turning Highlands into artificial turf.
It’s madness. Now we’ll have one plastic playing surface and dozens of closed parks. It makes no sense. Write to the city council and tell them to use the artificial-turf dollars to keep the parks open.

I did not know that the City is giving the police a raise on Monday, but if that’s true, it REALLY makes me angry. They complain about entitlements that our “out of their control,” and then go and do this.
As much as I value the police and fire departments, I don’t think that they should come at the expense of quality of life elements like parks. Not to jinx myself or anyone else, but I’m actually not scared about cuts to fire and police. Volunteer fire departments have worked well in a variety of cities throughout the country. It’s my understanding that our fire department has reciprocity with neighboring towns so that if more help was needed than available within SC, other cities would get involved. And as for police, the best way to control for an increased need for police is to keep the youth center up and running, with quality programs to keep teens from getting bored.

http://www.mercurynews.com/peninsula/ci_14251581?source=email&nclick_check=1
Volunteer Fire and less police? Reduced response time. Yeah. That’s smart. Come on.

And by the way, Angry, you’re absolutley right, Park & Rec programs have a direct correlation to crime rates. We talked about that in the YES on Measure U campaign. We were campaigning to maintain funding for the Youth Center and other city programs that (logically) deter crime. But we were accused of “scare tactics” and often called “tax and spend liberals”. How quickly folks forget.

Well the Council did it, just like I expected them to. Last night they voted in a 3.5% raise for the POA. This will cost the city a little under 150k. Which park do you want to close to pay for this? The council voted 4-1 in favor of forcing the POA to take this money (the POA threatened to sue because they want more). What is really even more astounding about all of this is the 4-1 vote wasn’t who you would expect. Councilman Grocott who was against Measure U and has been the only one talking about reigning in government spending voted in favor of the raise. It was the new councilman Klein who voted against. I was really surprised to see him break ranks with his other Measure U Councilmen and vote against the raise. But I was even more surprised and disappointed in Councilman Grocott’s change of heart.

What I want to know is how much are our police and firemen already making? I have read some news articles that report some of our civil servants in San Mateo County are making a quarter of million dollars a year with over time. Also, what about the pensions we pay our retired civil servants? How much is that bill?
Most government workers have better health care benefits and income than the private sector. I think we need to see some transparency with these figures. Scare tactics are used to get folks to vote for tax increases and parcel taxes in order to have money to pay for high government pensions. Many cities will go bankrupt in California with these ridiculous salaries and pensions.
Why should San Carlos Business community have to suffer loss of revenue due to a higher sales tax? Office workers and out of town
consumers can easily shop and dine in RWC, Palo Alto, Menlo Park or Burlingame to avoid the higher sales tax. Thank God for Measure U failed. Our city would suffer more losses if it did.
We need other ideas to balance the budget. Let’s see some transparency with city government salaries and pensions.

SC Mom did you know that Police/Fire and public employee overtime is cheaper than hiring new employees? And overtime is necessary when you have a skeleton crew? It’s all transparent public information. Go get it. And for the record, the SC business community backed Measure U. The prohibitive option for businesses was the utility tax. It was discussed and voted on in many business forums. The Chamber, its board, and buinesses, including mine, supported the 1/2 of 1% sales tax shared by residents and SC visitors alike. In an affluent community like this (where I grew up), this new attitude of vilifying the public professionals who work on our behalf is appalling. Private sector professionals can go get a public sector job if it’s so much more lucrative. Funny though, when the economy is good, that’s never a popular move.

Can anyone provide a link to the city’s financial info? Lots of these posts claim that is out there somewhere. Would love to get some facts about how the city spends its budget, how much public employees are making, recent raises, percent of budget spent on parks and rec, profit/loss of fields based on fees received vs. costs to operate, etc.
Would love to understand: (1) why is San Carlos being hit so much harder than all these other towns? (2) why is San Carlos seemingly not taking actions we see in private sector: furloughs, pay cuts, no raises, prioritizing most critical community needs and making tradeoffs(for example, SC has reputation of most difficult building/permitting dept- maybe we are overinvesting in that relative to cutting parks beyond bare bones)?

HS,
Good questions. I think the private sector/public sector comparison is used way too often though. Running a city isn’t like running business. Typically when a business decreases spending (layoffs, pay cuts, etc) it coincides with a decrease in demand for services. For instance, when GM is selling fewer cars, there is less of a need for people to make the cars, so people get laid off. Unfortunately, this is not the case for government, at the same time you have a decrease in revenue due to a down economy (less sales tax, property tax, etc), you usually have an increase in demand for services – more people using the library, higher crime rates, increased medical calls, etc. So lays offs lead directly to decreases in services you used to enjoy.
So that’s where the problem is, it isn’t as easy as people taking a pay cut and the parks will be saved. We live in age that is really seeing the fall out of prop 13. While there are positive benefits to Prop 13, like senior citizens having fixed property payments, there are huge downsides: you have half the block paying $1000 a year to use city services and the other half of the block paying $15,000. As property values decline, the 15K payment no longer subsidizes the 1K enough to maintain city services. This is part of the problem for SC; another problem is a reliance on big box stores for revenue. As sales tax takes a hit, so does the ability to provide services. But due to the State tax structure, there is huge incentives to attract big box stores, so I do not blame SC for this.
As for your knock and recommendation on the building department – Building Departments pay for themselves through building permits, so that’s not solution. They are not wholly subsidized by the general fund on a long-term basis. So a decrease in building department personnel would also mean a decrease in revenue. I do agree though that PD/FD salaries should be looked at though, as well as there use of OT.
I think you honesty can pin this one on Mr. No-cott and his followers – you can not expect to live in a first class city, with first class parks, schools, youth programs and not to pay a little extra. It’s amazing; you live in San Carlos, and can’t pay 50 cents extra when you spend a $100? Mr. Grocott, I respect your success in SC, but I suggest you put your ideology aside, and support a future sales tax increase for the families you represent. I also suggest the City Council not give up and consider putting another ales tax measures on the ballot.
LT: And I agree. No one pays attention to government salaries during the good times, when public employees are well below the average, but when the bad times come, they are always the first to get blamed for the downfall.

Back East, many communities have outsourced many city services to the private sector. For example, most youth and recreation centers are all fee based so that the programs are supported by the fees to run them. At the same time, there is built in monies to offer scholarship and financial aid when necessary. It seems like options like this make sense in the current climate.

This might be of help in this conversation. This was on the White Oaks Blog but it pertains to this conversation thread about other communities outsourcing city services. It is an interesting read…
http://www.whiteoaksorg.com/?p=224
–Chris

Is Matt Grocott a hypocrite, is he on the take? He actually draws some of the same [health] benefits the city employees do – we are paying for that. True! And he doesn’t own a home in San Carlos. What does he lose if our city of good living becomes another Vallejo. Maybe when he drives the prices down he can get back into the market?
We need to take a hard look at what he is doing for/to our city. He’s been on the council longer than any other member. With his experience, I’d expect him to have some well founded solutions for our budget crises, yet I haven’t heard one other than fire city staff. Matt Grocott, firing staff is not going to get us $3.5 million back, is it? What is your plan? Details, please. You fought hard against Measure U, and declared more than a year ago we are not in a fiscal emergency. So help us, lead us, what are we going to do Matt Grocott? I honestly wish to hear you solutions-we’ll consider them – but you need to clearly spell them out. You must have had some good ideas to fight so hard against Measure U – please share them with us.
Scott