The layoffs of 80 of Oakland's 776 police officers on Monday moved closer to reality Friday as the police union's leaders agreed to all of the city's demands but demanded a three-year layoff moratorium as a prerequisite for any concessions.
Members of the Oakland Police Department listen on June 24 as the City Council talks about laying off officers. (Lacy Atkins / The Chronicle)
It's an ultimatum the City Council says it cannot promise, given that the city's financial woes are expected to only deepen over the next three years.
"We definitely value their work," said Councilman Ignacio De La Fuente, a longtime labor leader. "But there's no way financially that the city can do this. ... This is a financial crisis we've never seen before."
The union said it would agree to have officers pay 9 percent of their salaries toward their pensions, like the rest of the city's workers, saving the city an estimated $7.8 million this year. In addition, union leaders said they were willing to create a two-tier pension system: Under the current system, officers can retire at age 50 with 3 percent of their salary for each year of service. The proposal would mean new hires could retire at 55 with 3 percent of their salary for every year of service.
Both the union's membership and the City Council would have to approve the proposal, which would prevent the 80 layoffs Monday.
Union President Dom Arotzarena said Thursday's riots and the city's high violent crime rate justify a minimum staffing in the department.
"We're giving everything they want," he said. "We just want a little guarantee for public safety."
The union wants the city to guarantee no layoffs for three years of any officer hired before March 21, 2009 - the day that four officers were slain on duty in one of the deadliest days in U.S. law enforcement history.
Under that criteria, the city could still lay off 25 officers, Arotzarena said. But given the complex financing of police in Oakland, that wouldn't save the city any money. Measure Y, a voter-approved 2004 parcel tax, funds 63 officers if the city budgets for a certain number of officers. If the city laid off even two officers, it would lose the funds from the parcel tax.
Council President Jane Brunner said she sympathizes with the police, but fiscal realities demand another solution.
About 10 percent of the budget goes toward debt service and 75 percent pays for police and fire. The city is hamstrung by such high costs, Brunner said.
Agreeing to no layoffs "would be irresponsible," said Brunner, one of the council's most ardent advocates for maintaining police staffing. "Nobody wants to see officers laid off, but you have to be able to afford what you want."
Brunner said the city's negotiating team - herself, De La Fuente, City Administrator Dan Lindheim and, recently, Mayor Ron Dellums - offered no layoffs for all officers until June 30, 2011. They also promised no layoffs until June 30, 2013, for the roughly 600 officers hired before June 5, 2006.
A key question is what voters want.
The council wants to put two ballot measures up for the November election.
One would suspend for three years the minimum staffing requirement mandated by Measure Y. The other would be some sort of tax.
A proposed parcel tax would raise some $50 million but require homeowners to pay $360 a year. An increase in the sales tax might make Oakland's sales tax the highest in the Bay Area. It's currently 9.75 percent, but some, including mayoral candidate Don Perata, have proposed raising it to 10.25 percent to fund police.
"This council is very open to bringing back laid-off officers or making sure less are laid off," Brunner said. "But you can't promise something you don't have the money for."
