Sketching out a worst-case scenario of San Jose's budget meltdown, city officials warned this week that they could lay off as many as 349 police officers and 145 firefighters, slashing close to a quarter of the city's public safety employees.

The city is also looking at millions of dollars in other cuts, including shutting off neighborhood streetlights for much of the night and eliminating some gang-prevention programs.

There has never been a major layoff of police officers in the city's modern history. But last year San Jose laid off 49 firefighters, and this is the second year in a row the Police Department has faced layoffs.

The apocalyptic scenarios presented at preliminary budget sessions this week are based on the assumption that the city won't extract concessions from public employee unions. But it's now clear that even with concessions, the layoffs will be severe.

City officials say the looming $110 million deficit projection is very real and must be made up through a combination of layoffs, concessions, program cuts and pension reform.

"I think it is inevitable there will be significant cuts," said Tom Manheim, a spokesman for the city manager's office. "We don't know how large the numbers will be. And more importantly, we don't know where the City Council will make those cuts."

The final decisions on layoffs are expected to be made during council budget sessions in June.

Manheim said that even if all 11 unions agree to 10 percent concessions in total compensation, which includes salary and benefits, the Police Department could still lose 237 positions, while firefighters could lose 82.

Citywide, nearly 600 positions are potentially on the chopping block, he said.

Cutting the Police Department down to about 900 sworn officers would bring the department to staffing levels the city hasn't seen since the mid-'80s, when San Jose's population was about 700,000, about 300,000 less than it is today.

"It's too early to see exactly what will be played out," police Chief Chris Moore said. "But just having the discussion of cutting 350 officers certainly caused us great concern."

Would fewer cops mean less public safety?

"Of course it would," said Sgt. Jim Unland, vice president of the police officers union. "At some point our elected officials have to say 'No more.' A city's No. 1 priority is to provide public safety for its citizens. No reasonable person would try to make the argument that 900 cops is enough to do that for a city of 1 million people."

Unland said that the cuts would mean it would take police longer to react to emergency calls, a much smaller traffic unit, fewer detectives to solve violent crimes and fewer special units to find and catch violent criminals.

In refocusing its limited resources, police may also have to stop investigating property crimes such as car thefts and burglaries.

The San Jose Fire Department has 650 full-time employees, so a reduction of 82 firefighters would reduce its ranks to 568.

Last year, the department laid off 49 firefighters after the city couldn't secure sufficient concessions from the firefighters union to save those jobs.

The police union avoided layoffs, however, by making more concessions than the firefighters.

Jeff Welch, president of San Jose Firefighters Local 230, said in a statement Tuesday: "The negotiation process has just begun and we're committed to working with the city on a combination of salary concessions, significant pension reform and operational efficiencies that will protect service levels for the community and save taxpayer dollars."

Under a budget-balancing scenario presented Monday to the council, city officials also proposed turning off some neighborhood streetlights from 11:30 p.m. to 5 a.m. In addition, library branch hours could be reduced from 4.5 days a week to three days a week, and two of 10 community center hubs could be closed. General fund dollars spent on the city's pavement maintenance program would be axed, and the park ranger program would be eliminated.

Mayor Chuck Reed and City Council members said Tuesday that concessions were needed to save vital jobs. And some elected officials noted that about half the deficit is due to skyrocketing employee pension costs.

"The reason we're asking for a 10 percent cut (from the public safety unions) is that we're trying to save the jobs of police and firefighters," Reed said. "The retirement costs alone for police and firefighters add up to $45 million next year. "... The cuts we're asking for will not cover it, but they will cover part of it."

Councilman Pete Constant, a former San Jose police officer, said: "It's really important that all of our city's unions -- especially police and firefighters -- understand the impact of the concessions we're asking for. If they're unable to make the concessions, then we'll have to face cutting up to 350 police officers, and I don't know how we'll have the ability to protect our residents."