Crime is the golden goose of Stockton politics. Promise voters solutions and they’ll approve almost anything. Even dubious ideas.
Measure N falls into that category. Stockton’s police and fire unions have reportedly spent over $1 million dollars on a campaign to “Keep Our Neighborhoods Safe” by instituting binding arbitration in contract impasses.
But N is primarily a money grab, an ill-advised throwback to the sort of auto-bot fiscal mechanisms that conveyor-belted Stockton into bankruptcy.
I don’t think Measure N would, if approved, push Stockton into insolvency. But it will cause more problems than it solves. Some observers even believe it could have the opposite effect of the one intended and make hiring police and firefighters harder.
“The mailer for yes on N promotes the idea that it’s bad for locally elected council members to make decisions about the budget and compensation and working conditions on the most important expensive services in the city,” said former State Sen. Patrick Johnston. “That assertion is insulting to the notion of democracy.”
N is not all bad. Nor are the unions pushing it. Stockton’s public safety unions today differ from their pre-bankruptcy predecessors. The pre-BK guys were greedy, spoiled, obstructive, and fiscally blind to the city’s overall budget beyond the part flowing into their wallets.
Public safety’s current leaders are willing to respectfully defend their position. They are keenly aware that a second bankruptcy is possible and vow Measure N will not cause it. They are not unreasonably acquisitive and grabby; they are reasonably acquisitive and grabby. And they have legitimate issues beyond money.
Measure N, I believe, is just the wrong solution.
Under the current system, if negotiations over public safety salaries, benefits, and working conditions reach an impasse, the city can impose its last, best, and final offer.
Under Measure N, should city and unions reach an impasse, a three-member “Board of Arbitrators” would take over. One arbitrator would be chosen by the unions, one by the city, one agreed upon by both. At a hearing, both sides would make arguments and present evidence. The arbitrators would decide the fair resolution.
Their decision would be “binding.” Final.
Bob Deis, Stockton’s City Manager 2010-13, who masterfully shepherded Stockton out of its fiscal crater, opposed binding arbitration. Arbitrators, he said, want to please both sides and get re-hired. So they “split the baby,” often by pledging money to unions the city cannot afford.
Also arbitrators are likely to be out-of-towners. They won’t live in Stockton, understand its nuances (they may lack municipal finance expertise), or experience the consequences of their decisions.
Stockton had binding arbitration until voters stripped it from the city charter in 2010 as part of the reforms necessary to restore city government to fiscal health. That should tell you something.
The other big selling point of Measure N is that it will not raise taxes. This is true. But proponents fail to mention that budgeting more money for police and firefighters means less for other things.
“The reason proponents are spending over a million dollars for binding arbitration is so that more money will be given to two bargaining unions,” Johnston said. “This can only mean that parks, libraries and other city services will be constrained in order to achieve the goal of Measure N.”
There will be less money for the city’s seven other public employee unions, too.
Stockton soldiered through a long period of austerity following its bankruptcy. It has entered the recovery phase. Measure N will diminish the recovery.
Already police and fire eat 74% — three quarters — of Stockton’s general fund (see pie chart). By way of comparison that figure is 48.9% in Tracy, 55% in Richmond, 73% in Modesto.
Vallejo could not provide fire figures by deadline but said police take 45% of the city’s general fund, as opposed to Stockton police, which take 54%.
Police get annual 4% Cost of Living Adjustments. In 2023 they demanded a 34% raise. They were given 18% and promised more. This year’s Measure A tax-revenue revision freed up tens of millions of dollars more for more police compensation. A recent city study found police compensation is currently 10% over market.
I’m not seeing a money issue with the police.
Dean Andal, a tax watchdog, former state assembly member, and former Chair of the California Board of Equalization, California’s tax board, believes Measure N will actually hinder the hiring of police and firefighters.
“First of all, if you believe—and I assume this is the goal of proponents of Measure N—that binding arbitration will result in higher salaries … then every time the cost of the existing police officers goes up, also firefighters, then there is less money in the general fund to pay for new police officers.”
Even if only firefighter compensation goes up, that means less money for new police officers, Andal added.
The Fire Department is suffering churn in its higher ranks (the rank and file is fully staffed) because compensation is below neighboring cities. Measure N could stop this churn.
There are other issues. Earlier this year, Det. Patrick High, president of the Stockton Police Officers’ Association, where Measure N originated, complained that contract negotiations sometimes drag on far past the beginning of the new contract. Measure N could resolve stalemates quicker.
But the cost of rectifying these middling issues is surrender of local control over the big issue–money.
High also disliked the structure of negotiations. “I can’t idly sit by and let contracts be decided by one or two people, and they decide what’s best.”
But isn’t that what arbitration is, three people deciding what’s best? Perhaps what really chafes the unions — apart from the legit side issues — is that in an impasse the city can impose its last, best, and final offer. The city can tell them no, and they don’t like it.
But I do. I like the idea that contracts are negotiated by our elected reps and their appointed staff. That a City Manager who lives here and others negotiate with the global interests of the city in mind. That unions–while treated fairly and with respect–are subordinate to the people they serve.
The context here is the bankruptcy. It was caused by imprudent leaders and greedy unions, compounded by the Great Recession. The current union leaders do not bear responsibility for that fiasco. But their predecessors do. The unions may be frustrated by the slow pace of recovery and the restoration of market-rate salary and benefits. But driving a city into a hole has consequences. Recovery takes years. Pretending otherwise is irresponsible.
Stockton does have a devilish problem hiring and retaining police officers. A force budgeted for 425 sworn officers stands at 371 (Stockton could use 600, but cannot afford them). But let’s be real. If roughly $360 million of Measure A revenue over a decade proved inadequate to staff up the police department, Measure N won’t either.
“The city and the Council members and everyone who runs for Council or Mayor emphasizes the need to attract more police officers,” Johnston said. “It isn’t necessary to change the charter to compel higher pay — without more revenue — in order to establish the objective of increased hiring of police officers.”
It looks to me like the police compensation has been brought in line with the going rate. Fire is lagging, in part because it never benefited from an infusion of Measure A tax dollars.
But even Gardea says — other issues aside — pay is improving.
“I’m happy we have headed in the right direction,” he said, “but we’re playing catch-up.”
Bankruptcy will do that to you.
Fitzgerald’s column runs on Wednesdays. On Twitter and Instagram as Stocktonopolis. Email: mfitzgeraldstockton@gmail.com