County Budget Targets Sheriff, Parks, Libraries

Built on wobbly assumptions and facing an uncertain reception at the Board of Supervisors, the Los Angeles County budget for the coming year was unveiled Monday, revealing a spending plan that its authors said “dictates austerity despite extraordinary levels of unmet needs.”

The proposed $14.2-billion budget recommends lopping $60 million from the Sheriff’s Department, laying off 1,100 workers and closing many libraries, parks and museums. Still, county Chief Administrative Officer Sally Reed said the plan “is likely the best-case scenario” that will almost certainly worsen before a budget is adopted by the board.

Reed said her budget includes some uncertain funding sources that may not materialize. She said the board asked her to be creative in drawing up the 1994-95 spending plan.

“I believe (this budget) is creative. Scary, but creative,” Reed said.

Supervisors said Reed’s proposal is only a starting point for their deliberations, and Monday there were both kudos and catcalls for her three-volume, six-inch-thick budget proposal. Most supervisors agreed that the Sheriff’s Department should receive more money, but there was no consensus as to how much more.

Board Chairwoman Yvonne Brathwaite Burke termed Reed’s budget proposal fair, but also indicated that individual budget items were likely to undergo significant overhaul.

“There is a long time between the proposed budget and the final adopted budget and in that time we are going to make sure that everyone gets a fair deal,” Burke said.

Supervisor Mike Antonovich blasted the proposal because of cuts to the sheriff and probation departments and the district attorney’s office. Antonovich said voters approved the Proposition 172 sales tax surcharge last year to guarantee increased funding for law enforcement, but that the funds are being siphoned off for health and other county uses.

Supervisor Gloria Molina, who has often complained that the sheriff received an inordinate share of the county’s resources, said these cuts went too far. She said the board should try to restore part of his budget by consolidating various departments and implementing other measures.

Sheriff Sherman Block said he planned to immediately begin lobbying supervisors in an attempt to plug his budget gap. He said he wants at least an additional $60 million just to maintain the current level of service.

Through the budget’s grim pall of increasing needs amid stagnant resources shone a couple of unusual bright spots: Health, mental health and welfare programs were fully funded or suffered minor cuts.

Also faring relatively well were the Municipal and Superior courts, public defender, coroner and Consumer Affairs Department.

Besides law enforcement and cultural and recreational programs, the largest cuts landed on basic governmental services, including the assessor, registrar-recorder and tax collector.

She also recommended cuts in funding and personnel for her office and those of the Board of Supervisors.

But Reed warned that the resources necessary to support even this lean budget may not materialize.

Several months ago, she projected a county deficit of $900 million and recommended drastic cuts to close the breach. But the board was unhappy with Reed’s calculations and ordered her to identify new sources of revenue. She pared the deficit estimate to $184 million by including some questionable revenue sources.

Reed said Gov. Pete Wilson and state legislators could take more of the county’s tax revenues or foist more costly state responsibilities on local governments to balance their own budget.

It is also unclear if the state will agree to drop restrictions it placed on the use of tobacco tax money and other health care programs. That could cost the county tens of millions of dollars that Reed factored into her budget.

The county could also lose an additional $93 million in a squabble with the state over how to calculate the split in property tax revenues.

*

But the most speculative revenue item in Reed’s budget proposal is $150 million drawn from the county employees retirement system. Reed said she hopes an actuarial study will show that the money can be transferred without jeopardizing the soundness of the pension fund. But officials at the Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Assn. have told some supervisors they will not release the funds.

Against this uncertain background, the various county departments will be jockeying for more money as the board opens public hearings June 1, and any department could be pared further.

Under Reed’s proposal the county’s recreational and cultural programs will be especially hard hit:

* Cuts in the parks department would result in the closure of eight swimming pools and 37 parks. Maintenance and repairs at the remaining 79 parks would be reduced.

* Fifty-one of 87 public libraries would be closed and 211 jobs eliminated. This comes on top of severe cuts last year that resulted in closing 10 libraries and sharply reducing operating hours.

* The Museum of Natural History is slated to lose $2.4 million, forcing suspension of education, research and outreach activities, including school tours. Exposition Park and the George C. Page Museum would be open only on the weekends and the museum would no longer be able t accept national and international exhibits.

Even departments that are being fully funded are having to make some adjustments to live within their budgets. Reed is recommending that the health department close seven of 45 health centers.

Comparison Spending

The Board of Supervisors directly control only $2.7 billion of the county’s $14.2-billion budget. The remainder must be spent on programs mandated by the state and federal governments. Here is how the spending controlled by the board compares to last fiscal year, according to the budget proposed Monday.

PUBLIC SAFETY Amount (in millions) 1993-94: $1,130.5

1994-95: $1,208.6

COURTS AND JUSTICE Amount (in millions)

1993-94: $290.5

1994-95: $339.7

HEALTH AND MENTAL HEALTH Amount (in millions)

1993-94: $467.0

1994-95: $453.9

SOCIAL SERVICES Amount (in millions)

1993-94: $545.0

1994-95: $466.9

GENERAL GOVERNMENT Amount (in millions)

1993-94: $296.6

1994-95: $246.2

Source: County of Los Angeles