There really is a simple solution to the budget mess in Sacramento.
All they need to do is use the same approach that mega-businesses that aren’t cozy with the folks that print the money in Washington or responsible working families do when the money isn’t flowing in - curb spending and rethink how you do things.
Ford Motor Co. stands today as a thriving and lean auto manufacturer that is gaining market share and increasing profitability without overt help from Uncle Sam.
That wasn’t the case back in 2006 when Ford appeared headed for the trash heap with a $12.6 billion loss.
Not only did Ford management understand that the road they were on would ultimately take them the way of American Motors but so did the United Auto Workers. What happened next was a textbook case of reigning in costs and rethinking one’s core business and mission.
It took salary and benefit concessions, slashing the salaried workforce by a third and aggressive buyout packages to reduce costs while at the same time completely revamping products and fine-tuning the manufacturing process.
The State of California did push for early retirements and got a significant number in the first three years of the current five-year budget crisis. The only problem is they squandered the opportunity. Unlike Ford the state - in most cases - simply hired folks to fill the positions at lower pay. And in some instances they hired people close to the rate of pay that the retiring state workers got.
Then there is the issue of rethinking what you’re doing.
The City of Manteca has gone from 420 employees down to 349 employees during the three-year period ending in 2009. Meanwhile the state increased the number of workers slightly with the number now at 233,771.
In order to match Manteca’s nearly 17 percent staffing reduction, the state would need to shed roughly 30,000 workers. That would reflect an annual savings - once benefits are factored into the equation - of just over $2 billion annually.
That may not sound like a lot with a $27 billion deficit but had the cuts been made when most cities did them, the budget hole for the fiscal year starting July 1 would have been $6 billion to $8 billion less as staffing is an ongoing cost with savings that could have been used elsewhere in the budget each year.
Of course, such a suggestion would prompt a great cry and hue from the state that they couldn’t get the job done. Really. Then how come cities such as Manteca are still picking up garbage, running sewer plants, delivering water, keeping streets maintained, operating libraries, providing for the public safety, as well as conducting general government functions after taking a 17 percent hit in staffing?
The answer is quite simple. They were forced by reality to not just look for easy ways to save money but to rethink how they conducted business on behalf of the people they serve.
Working class families have gone through the same exercise.
They stopped buying new cars - something the state up until a few months ago couldn’t resist doing even after you exclude the CHP and emergency operations. They also cut back on stuff they couldn’t afford such as upgraded cable TV, dining out, and more.
The state just kept on spending.
That is why Gov. Jerry Brown will have an uphill battle even if the tax extensions are placed on the ballot.
There needs to be a clear demonstration that Sacramento is willing to sacrifice too.
Yes, the tax extensions will help schools - somewhat. The problem is a chunk of the money the tax extensions would bring in will still go toward efforts to conduct business as usual to keep a Sacramento workforce intact while everyone else from schools to cities are doing their jobs with a lot less people these days.
If the state doesn’t cut its bureaucracy by 17 percent then streamline its operations, doesn’t re-impose mandates it lifted on schools to give them more flexibility, and at the very least imposes reduced pensions for new hires as well as make existing ones contribute more then why should anyone vote for a tax extension?
As it stands now the state will be made whole before schools are. The most important priority needs to be services that people need day-to-day such as K thru 12 schools, public safety, and public health as in proper sanitation and such.
It is time not just for the state to make sacrifices and make tough decisions on what programs to jettison that aren’t part of their “core business” of providing essential and basic services but to also display that fabled California cutting edge vision to streamline the bureaucratic process.
Until then, extending the temporary tax increases or imposing new taxes is akin to asking voters to dump all of their cash into the toilet and flush it.
All they need to do is use the same approach that mega-businesses that aren’t cozy with the folks that print the money in Washington or responsible working families do when the money isn’t flowing in - curb spending and rethink how you do things.
Ford Motor Co. stands today as a thriving and lean auto manufacturer that is gaining market share and increasing profitability without overt help from Uncle Sam.
That wasn’t the case back in 2006 when Ford appeared headed for the trash heap with a $12.6 billion loss.
Not only did Ford management understand that the road they were on would ultimately take them the way of American Motors but so did the United Auto Workers. What happened next was a textbook case of reigning in costs and rethinking one’s core business and mission.
It took salary and benefit concessions, slashing the salaried workforce by a third and aggressive buyout packages to reduce costs while at the same time completely revamping products and fine-tuning the manufacturing process.
The State of California did push for early retirements and got a significant number in the first three years of the current five-year budget crisis. The only problem is they squandered the opportunity. Unlike Ford the state - in most cases - simply hired folks to fill the positions at lower pay. And in some instances they hired people close to the rate of pay that the retiring state workers got.
Then there is the issue of rethinking what you’re doing.
The City of Manteca has gone from 420 employees down to 349 employees during the three-year period ending in 2009. Meanwhile the state increased the number of workers slightly with the number now at 233,771.
In order to match Manteca’s nearly 17 percent staffing reduction, the state would need to shed roughly 30,000 workers. That would reflect an annual savings - once benefits are factored into the equation - of just over $2 billion annually.
That may not sound like a lot with a $27 billion deficit but had the cuts been made when most cities did them, the budget hole for the fiscal year starting July 1 would have been $6 billion to $8 billion less as staffing is an ongoing cost with savings that could have been used elsewhere in the budget each year.
Of course, such a suggestion would prompt a great cry and hue from the state that they couldn’t get the job done. Really. Then how come cities such as Manteca are still picking up garbage, running sewer plants, delivering water, keeping streets maintained, operating libraries, providing for the public safety, as well as conducting general government functions after taking a 17 percent hit in staffing?
The answer is quite simple. They were forced by reality to not just look for easy ways to save money but to rethink how they conducted business on behalf of the people they serve.
Working class families have gone through the same exercise.
They stopped buying new cars - something the state up until a few months ago couldn’t resist doing even after you exclude the CHP and emergency operations. They also cut back on stuff they couldn’t afford such as upgraded cable TV, dining out, and more.
The state just kept on spending.
That is why Gov. Jerry Brown will have an uphill battle even if the tax extensions are placed on the ballot.
There needs to be a clear demonstration that Sacramento is willing to sacrifice too.
Yes, the tax extensions will help schools - somewhat. The problem is a chunk of the money the tax extensions would bring in will still go toward efforts to conduct business as usual to keep a Sacramento workforce intact while everyone else from schools to cities are doing their jobs with a lot less people these days.
If the state doesn’t cut its bureaucracy by 17 percent then streamline its operations, doesn’t re-impose mandates it lifted on schools to give them more flexibility, and at the very least imposes reduced pensions for new hires as well as make existing ones contribute more then why should anyone vote for a tax extension?
As it stands now the state will be made whole before schools are. The most important priority needs to be services that people need day-to-day such as K thru 12 schools, public safety, and public health as in proper sanitation and such.
It is time not just for the state to make sacrifices and make tough decisions on what programs to jettison that aren’t part of their “core business” of providing essential and basic services but to also display that fabled California cutting edge vision to streamline the bureaucratic process.
Until then, extending the temporary tax increases or imposing new taxes is akin to asking voters to dump all of their cash into the toilet and flush it.
