Critics of Measure Q in the November 5 vote point out that the three-quarter cent increase in sales tax would be an unexpected windfall for municipal employees.

They believe the decisive evidence is the contracts signed in 2023 with the city’s seven employee groups.

In all seven contracts, the memorandums of understanding (MOUs) stipulate that the labor organizations and the city will discuss the city’s financial situation on or about March 1, 2025.

The letter of intent states that in the event of a 5% increase in VAT compared to the previous financial year, both parties agree to open the contract only with regard to wage issues related to the current contract.

However, if Measure Q is passed, it will not trigger the reopening on March 1, 2025. The reasons for this are:

*The VAT increase must take place in the financial year ending on June 30, 2024.

*Measure Q, if passed, would not take effect until January 1, 2025.

*And the city would only benefit from the increased sales tax after the end of the first quarter of 2025, i.e. months after March 1.

Six of the seven employee groups signed three-year contracts that run until 2026. The local fire department opted for a two-year contract that ends in 2025.

The bottom line is that the existing MOU language on the reintroduction of wages will not be triggered by the adoption of Measure Q.

And with the current sales tax in place, revenues are unlikely to increase either.

This is because sales tax has grown slowly in recent years due to the sharp increase in online retail sales.

There is, however, more than a grain of truth in the fact that some of the $13 million in annual sales tax increases that Measure Q is expected to raise if passed will likely end up in the pockets of existing city employees.

City Councillor Charlie Halford points out that this is basic economics.

Wage costs in cities are rising, as are wage costs in the private sector.

And just as in the private sector, there is a risk that a city that is not even remotely competitive will lose skilled workers with specialized skills that are in high demand.

They also find it difficult to find qualified applicants for the vacant positions.

A prime example of this is the recent loss of the Deputy Chief Financial Officer and the Head of Financial Accounting.

Both were hired from Stanislaus County about six months ago. They left their jobs in Modesto because they were getting better pay in Manteca.

Stanislaus County, which is experiencing a massive staff shortage, significantly increased salaries at the beginning of the year, including in the finance sector.

The two workers have since quit and are returning to Modesto to find better-paying jobs.

City Manager Toni Lundgren said the city is now looking into whether it can tap into its reserves and reallocate responsibilities so Manteca can pay more to recruit and retain key finance department personnel.

The two positions are crucial for the city to maintain an overview of audits and financial supervision.

Halford gives examples that go to the heart of the arguments of the “Yes on Measure Q” committee for the passage of the three-quarter cent sales tax increase that expires after 20 years: police officers and firefighters.

“The reality is that we have to remain competitive with Bay Area cities as well,” Halford said.

He noted that this is especially true for carriers who work a 24-hour shift and then have several days off. Commuting is then less of a problem as it can only be done twice a week and at times when there is no traffic congestion.

Halford noted that during his tenure as Manteca police chief from 1997 to 2008, the police department consistently struggled to hire qualified officers because city police salaries were not competitive enough compared to regional jurisdictions.

Budget reflects

Financing issues

When the current city budget, which took effect on July 1, was adopted, only 5 of the 44 positions in the general fund that department heads deemed critical to maintaining existing or targeted service level goals for citizens were approved.

And – as Halford pointed out – at that time only two of the positions (two additional police officers) were actually funded from the general government budget.

The other three were park rangers.

These three positions are funded by appropriations from certain community funds established to cover the costs of ongoing park maintenance and other expenses in new neighborhoods. Homeowners in these neighborhoods pay the labor and operating costs for the parks.

If this trend continues—meaning the city cannot find new general fund revenue to fund a large number of Manteca parks that are not maintained by the annual CFD levies—you will likely be able to tell the difference between a CFD park and one that is 100% funded by the general fund by looking at the landscaping and maintenance.

It is a haunting reminder of a number of realities.

*Labor – in the form of police officers, firefighters, road workers, recreation workers and the like – ensures that the city’s 91,000 residents receive services.

*Wages and benefits account for 60.9 percent of the total $73.8 million general fund budget for this year, a percentage roughly in line with the other 481 cities in California.

*Taxes, such as those levied on regrowth for certain services provided by CFDs, must only be used for their intended purpose. In short, it is illegal to use CFD funds to pay for the work of park workers who fund them to work in a park that is not funded by CFDs.

*Manteca competes not only with nearby cities and the private sector of the northern San Joaquin Valley for skilled labor, but also with communities in the Bay Area. This applies not only to police officers and firefighters who typically commute over the Altamont Pass during off-peak hours, but also to positions that require extensive specialized training and are in high demand, such as wastewater treatment plant operators.

Against this backdrop, Manteca is trying to retain and attract urban workers.

A year ago in Manteca – which currently employs 474 people in the household and corporate funds (sewer, water, solid waste) – nearly 12 percent of funded positions were vacant.

Manteca was doing even better than San Joaquin County, which struggled to fill 1,239 vacancies, or 17 percent of the budgeted 7,942 workers.

Such a situation does not necessarily lead to money being released.

Important work that cannot be postponed must continue to be done, such as police and fire protection, as well as the daily tasks of the city’s water and sewer systems. As a result, the cost of overtime is skyrocketing.

Other work unrelated to ensuring public safety and health still needs to be done, often forcing the city to contract with outside companies to fill gaps in its ability to provide services.

And many of these vacancies often have a snowball effect and can cost the city money in the long run, losing everything from funding sources to the inability to meet critical operational requirements, such as keeping financial books up to date.

To contact Dennis Wyatt, email [email protected]

.