Sacramento Has a
Spending Problem.

Overspending continues without improving core outcomes for Sacramento. The City’s main focus must be public safety, parks, and economic development — not duplicative offices, untracked grants, and programs with no performance benchmarks.

The Office of Public Safety Accountability reviews the same cases and reaches the same conclusions as Internal Affairs 98% of the time. It’s a $1.3M expense with no real added value that hurts officer morale and recruitment.

Caring for the unhoused primarily rests with the County and State. Consolidating the fragmented system into a single governing body, and transferring the City’s interim shelter properties to the County, will reduce the City’s budget by up to $30M annually.

Measure L puts a straightjacket on the City to spend millions on youth services but requires no performance benchmarks nor oversight. The intent is laudable but the outcomes are questionable. Fix the program to deliver results or send it back to the voters to save $9.3 million.

Reduce all eight Council budgets by $200,000 each, and the Mayor’s office budget by $400,000, to redirect scarce taxpayer resources toward core priorities like public safety, infrastructure, and economic development that strengthen Sacramento’s community.

Property acquired for unhoused services was reversed in favor of an unfunded youth sports complex. The City should use the land for its stated purpose or sell it to a viable operator. Land is valued at $14M.

A culture of fairness doesn’t require a specialized $850,000 department. It requires competent managers and HR practices focused on individual qualifications and performance.

Sacramento cannot singlehandedly address climate change yet spends $1.1M on a plan with no clear destination. Its goals are better achieved through existing departmental operations.

The Affordable Fee Waiver Program is a worthy investment when the budget can support it. It can’t right now. The City must make difficult cuts across the board, and this program is no exception.

Many services the City provides are readily available through private providers. If it can be found in the yellow pages, it shouldn’t come with a government pension and restrictive labor agreements.

Sacramento City’s trash rates are $200/year higher than Elk Grove, Rancho Cordova, and Citrus Heights — smaller cities with less scale. Allowing qualified private companies to compete for trash pickup can generate up to $28M in savings for households and franchise fees for the City.

Parks maintenance is widely available through private vendors at lower cost. Expanding private contracts would maintain current service levels while reducing expenses — and affected City employees could transfer to other departments.

The City Council mandates union-only janitorial hiring with no benefit to taxpayers. The City can select vendors who treat employees well without being restricted to union contractors.

The City pays for security guards at 34 public sites including sites like the Broadway Cemetery. Modern solutions — cameras, real-time analytics, and responsive patrols — deliver better service at significantly lower cost.

The City claims to support local business while enforcing regulations that make it nearly impossible for small businesses to compete on City contracts — driving up costs for every taxpayer in the process.