Burbank faces another deficit and possible cuts to public safety

Burbank officials spent roughly six hours Tuesday going through the proposed 2017-18 fiscal year budget, in which the city faces another deficit, may eliminate some firefighter positions and could earmark funds to purchase body-worn cameras for police officers.

Cindy Giraldo, the city’s financial services director, walked council members through the extensive budget, saying that there is a projected deficit of about $1 million for the upcoming fiscal year.

During the mid-year budget review in March, city staff had expected the 2017-18 budget deficit to be about $3 million.

Giraldo said the city is projected to generate about $164.9 million in revenue, which mainly comes from sales, property and utility-users’ taxes. However, expenses are expected to run roughly $166 million, with a little more than half going toward public safety.

Looking further out, Burbank’s financial forecast looks even more bleak. Giraldo said the city is projected to see about a $5.7 million deficit during the 2018-19 fiscal year, and the shortfall is expected to climb to about $16.6 million by the 2022-23 fiscal year.

Giraldo said that, in the past, a large portion of the deficit was due to the city’s decision to defer paying its pension liabilities for several years, paying less than the employer’s normal cost.

City Manager Ron Davis said that, although Burbank may be facing a deficit over the next six years, “the current financial condition of the city is sound.” He added that aside from some budget requests to help maintain the level of services the city provides, there are no major changes being made to the budget.

“In fact, we’re proposing that business stays the same so that we don’t have a lot of dialogue and debate about this year’s budget, but rather can ask council to work with staff on directions going forward,” Davis said. “The unbalanced forecast is what we need to talk about.”

One way Burbank is looking to bolster its revenue is by proposing to raise its fees for water and sewer services. Sean Swe, a utility rate analyst for Burbank Water and Power, said those living in single-family homes using about 6,000 gallons of water a month should see their monthly bill go up by about $1.46 if the rate hike is approved.

The sewer rate is proposed to be raised by 1%, while there are no proposed changes for electric and refuse services, according to a city staff report.

There were two proposed budget changes with which council members and some residents did not agree.

Burbank Firefighters Assn. President Eric Rowley, who was backed by about 20 firefighters from Burbank and Glendale in the council chambers, voiced his opposition to Fire Chief Tom Lenahan’s proposal to cut three unstaffed positions within the department.

The current budget covers 60 firefighters, but the department has been operating with 55 sworn personnel. Three of those positions have been left vacant for years, and the salaries assigned to those spots have been used to pay for overtime costs, Lenahan said.

The fire chief’s proposal is to eliminate those positions, with salaries that total $505,199 annually, and reallocate the money to the department’s overtime budget.

“This is a change, really, to the budget document to accurately reflect where and how we spend our budget,” Lenahan said. “And as always, we will work within our budget to stay within our budget.”

Rowley and Councilman Jess Talamantes, a retired Burbank firefighter, disagreed with Lenahan and said that once those firefighter positions are eliminated, they would be difficult to restore.

“With our current staffing levels, the Burbank Fire Department is not as prepared to respond to emergencies as our neighbors in Glendale, Pasadena and the city of Los Angeles,” Rowley said.

Councilman Bob Frutos, who had recently gone on a ride-a-long with the Burbank Fire Department, said that he would rather see those three vacant positions filled rather than cut.

Davis said that when it comes to needs-based staffing, he has found that it is not that difficult for the City Council to approve adding personnel when needed.

“I just don’t see that it’s been that hard, in my 20 years here, to do this,” he said.

Police Chief Scott LaChasse also brought up an issue that was not fully supported by the City Council and the Burbank Police Officers’ Assn., which was to earmark $586,000 to purchase body-worn cameras for officers.

LaChasse said that, although he would like the money to purchase the devices, which he said would provide the department with clearer evidence when needed in certain situations, the proposal is being made to let future council members know that there is intent to buy them down the road.

LaChasse and Davis said that, although funding to purchase the cameras can be found in the upcoming budget, city staff has yet to figure out how to pay for the recurring cost of maintaining the equipment and storing the video recordings, which are estimated to cost between $420,000 and $500,000.

Frutos, a retired police officer, said that he could not support having body-worn cameras at the moment because of the city’s other financial obligations and because there has yet to be any city policy drafted regarding how to treat and maintain the footage.

anthonyclark.carpio@latimes.com

Twitter: @acocarpio