Our fiscal crisis: why Oakland's is worse than other cities

By Len Raphael

Many people tell me that our fiscal problems are no worse than that of many other cities. In effect, like global warming or earthquake, there's nothing you can really do on a local level to fix the problem. But of course there are things we can do locally for global warmning and to prepare for quakes. If we continue to ignore our fiscal problems, we will not be afford more police, and in turn fail to attract new job creating businesses so we can pay for better schools etc.

About ten years ago that changed here. Pay was raised to become the highest in the country according to city salary survey that has since been removed from the city's website.

Benefits were increased from good to great, largely with contractually promised pension and post retirement medical coverage benefits.

But even during the bubble, the politicians were warned that that compensation and retirement benefits were unsustainable.

You can't blame Wall Street when our politicians did not put aside a nickle to fund the now 400Mill of retirement medical benefits. Or even when Council squandered close to a billion in real estate taxes to bet on the stock market since 1997 instead of conservatively investing it in bonds.

In 2003 our Council voted 35% RETROACTIVE pension increases to every current employee. Hundreds of millions of additional cost that will hit as the baby boomers retire soon.

Our politicians made those decisions because the residents paid no attention to city government unless it immediately impacted them such as with zoning or crack houses.

But the city's public service unions did pay attention.

They did what they should do: protect the economic interests of their members by getting them both great wages and great current and future benefits.

Somewhere in the next two to three years we face becoming another Stockton, Vallejo, or San Bernadino if we don't reduce our compensation costs.

City council candidates that are supported by Police, Fire, SEIU will not be able to make those tough love decisions that hurt the compensation of their supporters. They will not be able to carry out their promises of more police and more anti-violence programs because the compensation and retirement costs will consume any possible revenue growth we might have in the next ten years.