Small Gathering At City Information Session for Council Appointment Process

It was a small gathering, at least in the time I was there, which was abbreviated in order to attend other meetings.  However, I am a bit surprised that more people did not show up, even if it was only to do as I did, to see who showed up.

As Interim City Manager Paul Navazio said in his brief remarks, “Tonight’s meeting is really geared at getting people information about the process and how it’s going to work.”

He also offered to meet with anyone who is potentially seeking or interested in the appointment process to discuss with them things about the city’s operations.

Mayor Joe Krovoza said, “I think it’s going to be a fascinating and very open process.”

“We’re looking for great people,” he continued.  “I don’t have a candidate, I’m just really looking forward to getting great applications and community interest.  I hope this process actually brings out people who otherwise would not participate in an election.”

Is this a job that people want?  Once upon a time I would have expected 50 people to put their names in the hat.  Now maybe not.

I may be drawing way too much from this first foray into outreach, but while I was there, there were less than ten members of the public at this event and it is hard to know how many people were truly interested.

Let us suppose there is a very subdued response, and only a few people put their hats into the fray, do we accept that?  Should the city actively conduct outreach to the community to get qualified and quality applicants?

One key question that ought to be considered is the possibility at least that the rules have changed.  Governor Brown is going to attempt to put a special election on the ballot for June.  My guess is he will find a way to make that happen.

If he does, that greatly reduces the possible costs to the city for a special election.

However, before plunging wholeheartedly into that scenario, recognize that problems would remain in that the council would have to undergo a prolonged vacancy to get to the June election – unless they appoint an interim and if they appoint an interim for five months, why not just appoint them for 18 months.

Bottom line then, is that the city must find a way to attract qualified applicants and that is not easy.

First, the hours are long and difficult.

Second, there is basically no pay.

Third, the council has a reputation of being a bit on the contentious side and the community is both engaged and demanding.

In other words, the pay is low, the hours are hard, and the job is often thankless, at best.  Who would volunteer to do such a thing?

I may be overreacting to the low turnout, but I don’t feel a huge buzz for this process.  And unfortunately, this council faces some rather serious challenges that the average person does not know about.

It was ironic that I went, following the meeting, to the Finance and Budget Commission meeting to hear to the City Manager speak to the issue of unfunded liabilities.  On January 18, next Tuesday, the council will have a workshop on this issue and the City Manager will actually unveil the impact of the revised assumptions by PERS on our budget.

It does not figure to be a pleasant discussion.  As we learned last night, we have a growing unfunded liability for our retirement pensions.  The problem is that the original assumptions on which PERS based its rates were flawed.

We were told for years that public safety employees live shorter lives than non-safety employees.  Thus, we justified a higher pension rate of 3% and a lower retirement age at 50.  That assumption is untrue, safety workers live on average about the same length of time as non-safety workers.

Moreover, people are living longer than PERS forecast, they are retiring earlier, and they are receiving a higher salary.  When PERS changed the formulas for calculating pensions, they were effective not only into the future but retroactively.  The result was a huge amount of money, that would be owed retirees, that was unfunded.

This is the biggest issue the council must grapple with for the next 18 months, and it behooves people who want to run to know about it.

Bottom line, the city wants to educate people on the process which is great, but if people want to serve on the council it is probably much more important that they come tothe  meeting on January 18 than any other informational meeting.

Hopefully, the attendance at this meeting is not reflective of the public’s interest, but if I were on the council, I would at least be a bit concerned at the underwhelming response so far.

—David M. Greenwald reporting