“Is it a smart move to sell a revenue-generating capital asset to pay for operating expenses that the city can’t afford? This would be like selling your house to pay for your credit card bill!”
Clearly the answer is No. None of us would do that in our own finances (I hope). The obvious thing to do is the hard work of prioritizing services - instead of the 20% cut across the board approach. Prioritizing forces strategic thinking, and discipline to make the tough decisions, because there will be lots of those decisions needed to be made in order to balance this city’s budget. There also needs to be lots of focus placed on economic development, and what it will take to make people want to invest and do business in Oakland. That should be the goal, not selling an asset to bring in one-time money to spend on an ever growing abyss of a structural deficit…
Thanks for this. I work for City of Hayward and I compare our staffing levels to Oakland and am amazed at the difference. Population alone doesn’t explain it. It would be interesting to compare number of positions per capita. For example I read Oakland has over a hundred attorneys whereas in Hayward I think it’s around 6 for a population of 160,000. Similarly the number of engineers in the transportation department in Oakland was over a hundred I believe and Hayward has maybe 6? Also I hear they still work remotely in Oakland. That’s ridiculous, Hayward public works department is 3 days a week minimum in the office. The sale of the coliseum site for no bid should be illegal.
As of yesterday, nothing has been put on the agenda yet. The concern, of course, is that Thao will try to avoid talking about any cuts until after the election.
“Is it a smart move to sell a revenue-generating capital asset to pay for operating expenses that the city can’t afford? This would be like selling your house to pay for your credit card bill!”
Clearly the answer is No. None of us would do that in our own finances (I hope). The obvious thing to do is the hard work of prioritizing services - instead of the 20% cut across the board approach. Prioritizing forces strategic thinking, and discipline to make the tough decisions, because there will be lots of those decisions needed to be made in order to balance this city’s budget. There also needs to be lots of focus placed on economic development, and what it will take to make people want to invest and do business in Oakland. That should be the goal, not selling an asset to bring in one-time money to spend on an ever growing abyss of a structural deficit…
Thanks for this. I work for City of Hayward and I compare our staffing levels to Oakland and am amazed at the difference. Population alone doesn’t explain it. It would be interesting to compare number of positions per capita. For example I read Oakland has over a hundred attorneys whereas in Hayward I think it’s around 6 for a population of 160,000. Similarly the number of engineers in the transportation department in Oakland was over a hundred I believe and Hayward has maybe 6? Also I hear they still work remotely in Oakland. That’s ridiculous, Hayward public works department is 3 days a week minimum in the office. The sale of the coliseum site for no bid should be illegal.
Great write up. Thank you. Do we know when this will be taken up at Council next?
As of yesterday, nothing has been put on the agenda yet. The concern, of course, is that Thao will try to avoid talking about any cuts until after the election.
Got it. Thank you!!!