Councilman Matt Grocott describes his approach as one centering around common sense. At the same time, it would be nearly impossible to find a more polarizing figure in San Carlos than Councilman Grocott. From the budget to synthetic turf, his name is the one that consistently comes up.
I thought long and hard about writing this post, but in recent weeks it has become evident that he, by himself, is a major topic for discussion in San Carlos. Quickly going through the most recent comments on this blog will prove that very point. Let me be clear, this is not intended to be a forum to praise or attack Councilman Grocott. I realize there is a lot of anger and a lot of support over the decisions he has made and some of the campaigns he has led. If you have a well-reasoned post supporting or critiquing the actions by Councilman Grocott, we will happily post them. Regardless of how you feel personally about his service to San Carlos, the fact is that I believe you do need to respect the time and energy he does put forth. For the most part, being on city council is an unbelievable time commitment and it is time that he takes away from his family in order to do what he believes is best for San Carlos.
The overwhelming majority of the anger that has recently surfaced centers around the defeat of Measure U. Councilman Grocott did not support Measure U and, in fact, championed the fight against Measure U, stating that San Carlos did not need an additional 1/2 cent sales tax and could instead focus its efforts on trimming the city budget. With many of the proposed budget cuts now becoming public after being released from the different city departments, residents are starting to get a glimpse into the reality of what San Carlos may look like with the proposed budget cuts in place. Deep cuts in police, fire, safety, parks and other city-staffed positions will all impact the way residents view their city. In some cases, it already has. One thing about running a blog like this and working in San Carlos real estate is that you do hear from the community on a daily basis on a number of topics. The one thing I can tell you is that there is a considerable amount of anger out there right now. People feel like they are paying a premium to live in San Carlos and with the proposed budget cuts in place, many are starting to wonder if San Carlos is worth it. It kills me to say that because you will not find a bigger supporter of San Carlos than myself, but if I am giving a fair assessment of what I have come upon over the last few weeks, it’s the truth.
Councilman Grocott has consistently put himself as the “1” in many 4-1 votes in San Carlos. Some view this as being disruptive, others view it as having the courage to stick to his beliefs and protect a valid minority interest. On the recent major issues to come before city council, Councilman Grocott has been the lone dissenting city council member. He was the only one not to endorse Measure U and he was the only one not to vote in favor of installing the synthetic turf.
I believe that Councilman Grocott has a very loyal following in San Carlos. The question is whether his support is waning in the wake of the defeat of Measure U as the impact is now being realized. Interestingly, in an unopposed election in November, he finished behind Councilman Grasilli and the newest member to the San Carlos City Council, Andy Klein. He was 274 votes behind Councilman Grasilli and 118 votes behind Councilman Klein.
In fairness to Councilman Grocott, the cuts put forth so far are only proposed cuts. Before becoming entirely unglued, I would say that those who are most angry should wait and judge the defeat of Measure U on the actual cuts, once they are accepted by the city council
I have spoken with some residents who say they voted against Measure U, but had no idea the proposed cuts would ever get this deep or affect their lives to the point where they would realize a substantial impact. This reaction has supporters of Measure U with their hands up in the air. If anything positive does come out of the current budget crisis, it is perhaps the fact that more San Carlans appear to more closely monitoring what is going on in their city.
There are many San Carlos residents who praise Councilman Grocott’s common sense approach of not spending what the city doesn’t have and further reject the idea of raising taxes as a way to get from point A to B, especially in a recession.
It is very easy to play Monday Morning Quarterback. Councilman Grocott or any other single individual is not to blame for the budgetary crisis in San Carlos. The reality of the budget crisis in San Carlos is just now settling in for most residents. The focus should now be on finding a solution. The first major attempt at saving city services and to help close the budget shortfall was shot down when Measure U went down to defeat. Now, the most immediate solution seems to be trimming the budget to the point where it is becoming uncomfortable for San Carlos residents. Whether the “common sense” approach works for San Carlos through budget cuts remains to be seen.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=a1d0a36f-5911-4915-b3b2-8db22898f80c)
29 Comments
That is a very well written and fair characterization on a very touch subject. I applaud you for having the guts to write it. I for one do not subscribe to the positions taken by Councilman Grocott on most issues. I am pro Measure U and for the installation of synthetic turf on the lower field at Highlands Park. I do not believe he offers common sense solutions and think he is a divisive force in our community. That being said, I do respect the time and effort he has put in for the citizens of San Carlos.
I haven’t agreed with Mr. Grocott on his positions, but something about me does like having someone on the council to check or question, what would otherwise be, rubber stamped resolutions.
Thanks for your writing and thanks to Matt Grocott for all the time and effort of serving on the Council. Has anyone considered parking meters downtown? All the surrounding towns have them and although I prefer free parking wouldn’t that help our budget shortfall?
Hi Lois,
Thank you for your comments. Parking meters downtown have been considered and are currently being considered. The issue has created some push-back from downtown merchants, for obvious reasons. The city is currently studying what the proposed return on investment would be. Expect to hear more on this soon.
Thanks,
Bob
Matt puts in the time and is well prepared to ask questions on the subjects
to be voted on, obviously dont always agree with his decisions.
His positions on city staffing and salaries are right on, dont people
realize that we can not solve our financial problems unless we cut
where the majority of the budget is spend !!
There is obviouly no easy way to balance the City budget without upsetting a significant segment of the community. Some service cuts must be made. Hopefully, those cuts producing the least degree of disruption will soon be identified and implemented.
In addition, increased revenues should continue to be explored. I voted no on Measure U because it seemed to be a ineffective method of taxation. If I were going to buy a big ticket item at say Best Buy I would shop elsewhere and save a few dollars. I would do it because I could. I think most others would do the same. So, rather than increasing revenues it would have decreased retail sales and hurt the City and its businesses.
Some form of a fair, limited duration parcel tax might appropriate to get the City through this slump. If we like clean parks, smooth streets and fast public safety responses we need to somehow pay for them. For some it may mean one less dinner a month at Town or fewer Starbuck visits. For most San Carlos residents, a few hundred dollars a year for 3 to 5 years would be rather insignificant. However, our elected officials and city management better not waste that money on the nonessentials.
Lastly, why are people blaming the city employees for the budget problems? Their wages and benefits were fairly negotiated and approved by city council.
Be angry if you must at the decision makers not the workers. Employees in San Carlos are certainly not the highest paid in the Bayarea. For the great majority, their retirement benefits are not outragous if you consider they have never received stock options or annual bonuses. In addition, have paid into the system more than an private employee pays into Social Security.
I for one support many of the decisions that Matt Grocott has taken for the citizens of San Carlos. We don’t need another “yes man” on the city council. We need someone that questions not just agrees, Matt performs this service for our citizens.
We are a small community, why our city manager has to have an assistant is beyond belief. I believe we need to look at all aspects as to where we can cut for some of the higher paid city employees. We need to attract businesses to our city as well as customers for those businesses. I applaud our city planner on attracting restaurants to our downtown area. I remember a time when you would not see a car on our streets after 7 or 8pm now its hard to even find a parking spot at that time.
I do not blame our city employees for our budget problems, but I do blame some of those decisions that have given out retirement benefits that we can ill afford (PERS). You can’t pay out full salaries for retired employees and hire someone to take their place. I believe what San Carlos needs is some old fashioned “common sense” – don’t spend more than you have.
It is only reasonable and even desirable that there should be one or more members of the City Council who will disagree with others from time to time unless they are all robotic flunkies for the City Manager. I like Councilmen who, when the Manager says “Jump,” say something other than “How high?” This is esp true on tax issues. It would definitely be possible to maintain most services by cutting salaries as contracts come up (who voted for those contracts anyway other than most incumbents?), contracting out, and haing targeted layoffs. Remember that successful local companies have cut salaries and still move along nicely; San Carlos, unless good management, could do the same, but, instead, the proposals for cuts will initially focus on punishing the voters by denying them past services. Will our Councilmen see through this ruse and have the courage to make personnel cuts? We shall see. My vote against Measure U stands with no regrets. I can hardly wait until the incumbents come up for re-election this fall, if they dare.
Bob
There is also a lot of anger at government organziations wasting taxpayer money. At EVERY level of government, there is a constant attempt to raise more revenue – whether in the form of higher taxes or higher fees.
Recently there was a story in the SF Chron about a Bart station in the East Bay that was being built or remodelled. This station lies between the freeway directions so that pedestrian bridges are needed to bring Bart riders over the freeway to the Bart station. Since the bridge goes over the freeway, CalTarns has input on the bridges. Well guess what, Cal Trans did not approve the “welds” on these pedestrian bridges and therefore did not approve the safety and installation of these bridges. You would have thought that BART would have made sure the bridges would work and be approved by CalTrans, before they bought the bridges. But NO! They did not. So now the bridges which cost taxpayers something like $6M or going to be thrown away. Again this is just another example of government waste and ineffieciency. That is what really has people angry.
If government organizations continually need more money, maybe the answer is not “let’s raise more money” but “let’s learn to do with less”. Of course, it is never really LESS, the best we generally see is that the rate of increase of the government taxes and fees slows down.
The other issue in play here is that the “tax and spend” group generally denigrates and attacks the “let’s make do with what we have” group on kind of a personal level. Why should the “tax and spend” group be angry, because in the Prop U election, the “let’s do with what we have” group was larger?
Where does respect for majority rule go? Does the “tax and spend” group support the right to vote only if votes are cast supporting their position?
I do not get “angry” at someone who does not agree with me.
In my mind, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
I do not agree with the “tax and spend” group but I respect their right to have their opinion. It would be nice to see the same consideration extended in the reverse direction.
If government spent the same amount of time providing services on a more efficient basis as they do trying to raise additional money from the taxpayers, maybe some progress could be made.
Like others, I don’t always agree with Mr. Grocott’s position, but for the most part, he forces people to think about the decisions they are making and that is good for the council and for San Carlos. I voted no on measure U because the council has, for years, felt their easy way out of every budget issue is to add a tax. That cannot be the only answer–clearly it hasn’t worked well to date.
The city government has been a tight-knit, members only community for too long. For many years the council and other city departments were in a group hug that was impossible to penetrate. Matt tends to challenge that behavior and is often met with criticism for it. I applaud him for taking the time to give to the city in the way he has. Agree or disagree with Mr. Grocott, he is passionate about the city.
The bottom line is that we have made poor money management decisions in recent years and we are now having to pay for those bad decisions. It’s time to stand up and own issues we have and find creative ways to resolve them.
I have always been a big fan of Matt’s. In my seven years of living in San Carlos, I’ve been amazed at how perennially poorly run and managed the City is, regardless of who is serving in City Council. Thankfully, Matt has been a constant voice questioning the wisdom of group-think on issues like the SCOOT bus measure (where would we be now if that measure had passed?).
Perhaps the issues start and end with the paid city managers, and the city councilors only have limited power. Regardless, the downward trajectory of the City is quite depressing to witness. I therefore applaud Matt for his tireless energy.
Incidentally, “props” to Arn Cenedella on his post.
I don’t have a problem with any of the comments above, but I have to insist that actual “facts” are used. It is far too easy to spew rhetoric that the government is overspending and blaming them for a budget shortfall. The bottom line is you have five councilmen doing the very best that they can under an almost impossible set of circumstances. The post above “daring” them to run again is completely out of line.
Let’s look at the facts:
1. San Carlos has a 3.5 million dollar budget shortfall.
2. The cries for reducing benefits and salaries (of which the city is obligated to pay under contract) would at best reduce the budget by $400,000). Where is the other 3.1 million going to come from?
3. The real source of the city’s budgetary issue is linked to Prop 13. San Carlos, at the time thought they were doing something beneficial for their city, but it ended up biting them when Prop 13 was not repealed. A well written article in the daily journal today does a good job of illustrating this point. San Carlos, a town of 28,000 people, receives about $850 per person, 27% less than towns like Burlingame, Menlo Park and Redwood City. If we were just on par with the other cities and their Prop 13 take, we would not have a budget shortfall, but a surplus. You cannot be so far behind other towns on your pro-rata share of property tax distributions and think that you are going to be able to keep up without some type of tax increase or some other type of revenue generation. You can only go to the well so many times, and it has finally caught up with San Carlos.
4. For those that like to say the government should cut more, and as much as I like going into City Hall and being greeted by a computer screen where there used to be a person, or looking at the Kiwanis Building like it is a ghost town, I’m fine with cuts. The council has gradually been cutting salaries and benefits for each department that has come before the council over the last few years.
5. Speaking of salaries and benefits, the only department to come before city council and receive an increase in salary and benefits that was not in line with the city’s financial situation was the fire department…..a deal negotiated by Mr. Grocott. Finally, Mr. Grocott has voted for all of the contracts relating to salary and benefits that have come before council over the past three years. If I am wrong here, please let me know.
Nobody, likes a tax increase. It is far too easy to blame it on our local government. If you would like to blame our local government, go back to the council of the late 1970s, and ask them about Prop 13. I mean that’s really what we are talking about here. I do object to being labeled the “tax and spend crowd,” however, if that’s what it takes to save all that makes San Carlos special, go for it.
I don’t know Matt, but from watching him at council meetings my impression is he is a man of integrity and a voice of reason based on principle, not just an agitator for publicity or other motives. I agree he serves an important role to hold the council accountable and offer an alternative perspective. And after all, he was elected by the voters of SC and thus represents a significant segment of our community….whether you happen to agree with him or not. Losing him to the board of supervisors would be a loss for our city.
Mr. Divorak is not correct to say that I have voted in favor of every employee contract. I have not. Furthermore, the contract with the Fire Department was negotiated at the time the department was put back together in 2004/05 and was a 5 year contract, not commonly done. We won the concession of such a long term contract from Local 2400 in order to have a stable budget we could count on for an extended period of time. Usually the unions go for no more than a three year contract at best; two is more the norm.
Thanks for the post, Matt. Also, thank you for the correction to the post above.
We are happy to have anyone make a comment, but please do make sure your comments are accurate, if it is based on something other than a general opinion. Unfortunately, if postings cannot follow this rule the thread will be removed. It is not reasonable to expect Mr. Grocott to have to defend factually inaccurate comments on this site.
As an elected official, I don’t usually blog on these types of matters. However, I have been asked by numerous residents to provide an accurate account regarding certain councilmembers’ past voting records on City Hall employees’ salaries and benefits contracts, namely over the past three years.
Let me start by saying that as City Clerk, I am the keeper of the City’s permanent records – Minutes, Video archives, and Council Packets. These records date back to 1925 when the city was incorporated (with exception of video). These are your records, which can be viewed either on-line at http://www.epackets.net or via City Hall in my department.
Councilmember Grocott has in fact voted affirmatively on at least four different employee labor unit contracts over the past three years, with the exception of a meeting where he was absent:
1/25/10 Police Officers Association contract
12/8/08 Teamsters contract
11/10/08 Management, Mid-Management and Confidential Units contracts (Absent)
10/27/08 AFSME-Clerical contract
6/25/07 All Labor contracts
Again, this information has been provided at the request of the public, since these are your records. I encourage you to use the website above and/or the video archives to become more informed on your city government. I can be reached at City Hall at 802-4219.
Christine D. Boland, City Clerk
This piece is very well written and, based on my observations, is a fair commentary on Matt Grocott. I find myself agreeing with most of his positions on issues that have been before the city council. It is easy to blame Prop 13 for all budget problems and to raise taxes to solve all budget difficulties. It’s time for San Carlos to live within its means. In my opinion, Matt is to be commended for his opposition to Prop U.
Recently, while a Belmont-San Carlos Fire Board Commissioner, Mr. Grocott also voted to give the Belmont-San Carlos Fire Chief an 8% salary increase in two steps – 4% immediately and then another 4% six months later.
This was while he was also commenting on the 3% and 3.5% salary increases given to City employees (such as Police Officers) as being too high.
Seems a bit inconsistent.
I known matt Grocott as a devoted people’s councilmember, honesty, integrity, truth and people’s right are his only reasons for sitting in the chamber.
IMAGINE, If only, every of elected officials would READ & ASK and not ruber stamp every piece of legislation…. what a world would that be.
Common sense?
What is ‘common sense” about knowing that you’ve got a huge income shortfall ahead – a huge deficit is looming; and working actively towards prevention of generating new income streams? That’s common sense?
Where I come from – if you haven’t got the funds to meet your expenses you a) cut expenses, and b) get another job so that you can meet those expenses. Matt wants to be great at part a – to the point of cutting off his nose to spite his [adorable] face. But what about part b?
Matt Grocott what is your plan. Please show us how your plan balances the budget?
Matt Grocott – does your plan prevent us from going Vallejo’s route?
Please be specific, answer completely – please no platitudes – you tout accountability – you tout that you are an independent business man – please show us how to make income equate expenses.
Please stand up and be the leader you want to be Matt Grocott – but gives us a clear idea of where you are leading us.
I await your response.
Citizens of San Carlos don’t be fooled, for working a measly ten years on the City Council Mr. Grocott receives life time medical benifits from you all. Furthermore he advertises his construction company by posting his sign across the street from City Hall. Dont you think that’s a conflict of interest? The real employees of the City of San Carlos are the lowest paid in the county and the most over worked but he wants to point the finger at us?
**Note: the final line of this post was removed because it did not comply with the Terms of Use. Terms of Use can be found on the About page of the San Carlos Blog.
I have know Matt Grocott since he started running for city council. I have to say, Matt has stayed the course from the beginning on what he said should be done for San Carlos. I respect a person who keeps his/her word and tries their best. Matt is a person who has worked tirelessly for many years trying to keep San Carlos one of the best places to live. San Carlos needs a person to speak up, even if its not a popular opinion. True a person in the public eye can have an influence on ballot measures, but the fact is, the majority of people in San Carlos voted against Measure U. Please, for those that don’t like the rode we are on, volunteer and be part of the solution and not just a sideline commentator.
Matt, thank you
Craig, Do you know Matt’s plan for dealing with our budget crises? Have you heard him articulate something cogent and complete?
All the Matt Grocott fans (and I’m not saying I’m not one) out there, have any of you heard a real, thorough plan? If so, please share.
We all love a maverick – they sound great, they speak to some of our natural skepticism of government. But now it’s time to act and progress, rather than talk and impede. Let’s get past the outward appearances and feel good platitudes, and get to the bottom line. Let’s hear some solutions – complete – not partial, but complete solutions. No more phony-baloney.
Matt Grocott, you’ve been a leader in this city for ten years. You are, without a doubt, though not solely, responsible for where we are. Now we need to know your solution. What is your vision? How do we not go the route of Vallejo? What can you do to mitigate the effect of this crises on our fine city? Come on Matt, how are you going to lead us out of this mess?
And Matt, you don’t own a home in San Carlos, show me that without a horse in that race, you can make good decisions for those of us that do.
Please, Matt Grocott, what is your plan? Show us how you think we should equate income with expenses. These are not rhetorical questions. These are serious times, we need earnest answers.
Matt Grocott, please show us what you’ve got; how do you think expenses should be equated to incomes?
Is it true that ten years on SC city council gets you lifetime health
benefits? If true, that is a perk that the city truly can’t afford
and should be gotten rid of . . . let’s try trimming that cost now and
for the future.
Over the years, Matt Grocott is the one City Council member who has consistently represented my point of view on important issues for this city. Thank you Matt. I am extremely grateful for your continued presence on the City Council.
Why has Matt been so heavily criticized for his opposition to Measure U? In case you didn’t notice, the measure lost. That means the majority of San Carlos residents did not want it passed. Wow, imagine that. Matt spoke out on behalf of the majority of San Carlos residents. What nerve. Too bad the rest of the City Council didn’t have the nerve.
Matt has pointed out that city employee salaries and benefits have risen at a much greater rate than city revenues. Don’t shoot the messenger. Why wouldn’t you take a look at this issue as part of the solution? It may not fix the whole budget deficit but it could be one very positive step in the right direction. Just because Matt made this point in campaigning against Measure U, it doesn’t mean it is his sole responsibility to come up with some magic plan that will make all our budget problems go away.
Let’s stop attacking Matt. This isn’t about Matt. It’s about facing a not so pleasant reality that we residents of San Carlos are going to have to deal with in the months ahead. The voters of San Carlos made a statement. They did not want an increase in city sales tax. Without raising taxes it seems fairly obvious that we need to make cuts in operating expenses. Have you got any constructive suggestions on how to meet this challenge? If so, share them. It’s easy to tear down what some one else says but really, if you aren’t part of the solution, you are part of the…….
Richard,
It is nice of you to come to Matt’s defense.
Have you heard Matt’s plan for the future? Do you know how he plans to lead us out of this mess?
We know Matt reads this blog, and he responds when it seems to suit him. He’s yet to metnion a cogent plan. On Monday, at the city council meeting he mentioned “passing the hat” at city events. I’m sure he has more than that planned for dealing with our budget.
Please, Matt Grocott, what is your plan? Show us how you think we should equate income with expenses. These are not rhetorical questions. These are serious times, we need earnest answers.
Matt Grocott, please show us what you’ve got; how do you think expenses should be equated to incomes?
Richard-
Not to nitpick, but I think it’s inaccurate to suggest that Matt spoke out on behalf of the majority of San Carlos residents. Yes, Measure U was defeated at the polls, but the majority of San Carlos didn’t actually vote; only about 2600 residents voted against it. That doesn’t mean the results aren’t valid or should be overturned; but it also doesn’t necessarily mean Matt speaks for everyone.
Regarding his being singled out, I think it’s only natural when “Plan A” fails to direct the “what now” questions to the lone dissenter against “Plan A.” That’s not to suggest Matt didn’t have good reasons for opposing Measure U or no one else is responsible for solutions. Moreover, that also doesn’t mean that Matt doesn’t have good intentions and there isn’t value in having a different point of view on many issues. But I think constructive dissent needs to go beyond just going against the flow and provide leadership on alternative solutions when his/her outlook is adopted.
Given his influential role, I’d be curious to hear Matt’s opinions on:
1) Will he vote to declare a fiscal emergency (which would enable majority vote revenue measures to return to the ballot this year)? If not, what constitutes a fiscal emergency in his opinion?
2) What are the specific revenue measures and cost cutting measures he recommends for us to fix this current problem (noting that he may very well have communicated this in other forums)?
Newly appointed Counciman Andy Klein opted out of the pay and benefits the council receives in light of the budget situation. The above comments about benefits are true. Mr. Grocott refused to give his up. He spoke about it in the press. So he vilifies our city employees for their benefits, while collecting them himself. With all due respect to Mr. Grocott’s time and effort, this is another example of his hypocrisy. It’s not new.
While Mr. Grocott was “speaking out” about City employees getting 3% and 3.5% annual raises, it’s still puzzling why he didn’t speak out about the 5% – 6% annual raises for Fire Department union employees he voted to approve as a Fire Commissioner. Or the 8% raise he voted to approve for the Fire Chief again while serving on the Fire Commission.
It’s also interesting to note that of the current Council Members, the one Council Member who voted back in 2004 and 2005 to increase City employee pension benefits was also Mr. Grocott. The other Council Members had not yet been elected to City Council. Yet Mr. Grocott talks about what “they” (i.e. the City Council) did in this area. A check of the record shows that he was indeed one of the Yes votes on this.
Mr. Grocott’s comments are often very carefully worded – to draw attention to some of his actions. And to draw attention away from others.