Public Safety Officials Go to War Against Wilson’s Budget Cuts

Some of the most conservative people in government--county sheriffs and fire chiefs--have been organizing a revolt against Gov. Pete Wilson’s state budget priorities in recent days, giving rise to an unusual political conflict.

It is not often that sheriffs and fire chiefs oppose a Republican governor on policy. But Wilson’s call for shifting $2.6 billion from the counties and cities to education, and his opposition to a statewide extension of a half-cent addition to the sales tax when it expires June 30, could lead to big cuts in law enforcement and fire budgets.

In one county after another recently, there have been warnings of layoffs of deputies and firefighters, closings of jails, and the release of inmates if the cuts happen.

Although it is up to city councils and county supervisors to divide funds among competing interests on the local level, the state controls how much money each local government will receive. This year, for the first time, it appears that many reductions could fall in the public safety area.

As Sacramento Fire Chief Gary Costamanga explained last week, “Over the years when the budget had to be cut, it was the libraries, parks and general government that bore the brunt. They’ve already cut those to the bone in many cases. Now, it’s public safety that’s being impacted.”

The result is growing criticism from public safety officials of the governor’s proposals. A rank-and-file organization of firefighters, California Professional Firefighters, has begun a television and billboard campaign against the proposed $2.6-billion shift.

On Wednesday, sheriffs from across the state went to Sacramento to join a lobbying effort organized by the California State Assn. of Counties to persuade legislators not to go along with the governor’s wishes. And the Assn. of Bay Area Governments has called for a mass “siege of Sacramento” on May 19.

Wilson has staunchly defended his position.

After Los Angeles County Sheriff Sherman Block and several other members of the California State Sheriffs’ Assn. called upon the governor to abandon his opposition to the continuation of the half-cent sales tax, a Wilson spokesman brusquely rejected the idea.

“The governor has been and is currently adamantly opposed to extending the temporary sales tax increase,” said the spokesman, Franz Wisner. “A promise was made to the people of California that it would be temporary. The governor intends to keep that promise.”

Wisner went on to note, however, that Wilson backs counties putting measures on the ballot to individually extend the half-cent sales tax and is supporting a state constitutional amendment that would make public safety expenditures the top priority of city and county governments.

But Dan Terry, president of the firefighters group, dismissed this as an attempt to divert attention from the immediate problem.

He said that even if special elections were called in the counties on the sales tax, it would take time, and he noted that there is a legal dispute on whether a two-thirds or simple majority vote would be required. Even for law enforcement purposes, a two-thirds vote for additional taxation has proved very difficult to obtain.

Terry said of the constitutional amendment: “It couldn’t be approved by the electorate until the 1994 ballot. It has no real control language and doesn’t compel local or county governments to do anything. . . . In most cases, local governments prioritize police and fire right now, and yet that won’t prevent layoffs if state aid drops this year.”

Wilson, at a Capitol news conference Tuesday, decried what he termed “poor mouthing” by county officials on public safety cutbacks, and said there is no excuse for individual counties faced with the cutbacks not to call a vote to replace the half-cent tax that will otherwise lapse.

“For any district attorney or for any board of supervisors to poor mouth and say we don’t have the money to keep our people safe is a total cop-out,” he said. “They need simply to have the guts to let the people decide. How much courage does that take?”

Sheriffs and fire chiefs say they expect deep cuts as the impact of Proposition 13 comes fully to bear. Wilson’s budget proposals effectively would bring to an end the subsidy of local governments that began in 1978 when voters chose to slash property taxes.

The Professional Firefighters but not the state Sheriffs’ Assn. opposed Proposition 13 at the time.

Block has said he would have to lay off 1,700 of his 7,300 sworn deputies under a “worst-case scenario” of a 25% cut in his department’s operational budget. In Alameda County, Sheriff Charles Plummer said he may have to lay off 338 of his force of 1,300.

Among fire chiefs, Los Angeles County’s Michael Freeman said a worst-case scenario would bring $122 million in budget cuts and result in about a one-third curtailment of operations.

This would mean that 44 of 127 county-operated fire stations would have to close and 726 firefighters would lose their jobs, he said.

Ventura County Fire Chief George Lund said he would lose 42% of his operational resources.

“We’re in worse shape than L.A. County is,” he said. “We went to our Board of Supervisors this week and suggested it form a special fire assessment district, but it was very reluctant. The supervisors don’t want to let the state people off the hook.

“Probably the only place to join the battle is in Sacramento, and one idea that is gaining strength in many counties is to withhold all property tax revenue from the state until it becomes more reasonable,” Lund said.

Some sheriffs said that with funds diminishing in the continuing recession, social and educational spending must be cut while law enforcement and fire spending is maintained.

“The schools are sucking up money like . . . a sponge,” said Alameda County’s Plummer. “I’m not so sure they couldn’t manage themselves better than they’re doing.” He said chasing and prosecuting criminals has to be the spending priority.

Solano County Sheriff Al Cardozo, president of the State Sheriffs’ Assn., said: “It’s a difficult situation, because it makes everybody in law enforcement out to be that they don’t care about education. That’s not the situation, but law enforcement has to be a high priority.”