Supervisors Pick Costlier Route for Public Safety Funds

Ventura County officials Tuesday chose the more costly of two routes to ensure that public safety agencies keep pace with inflation, a move that will add $5 million to the county’s budget deficit going into the next fiscal year.

Under an ordinance adopted by the Board of Supervisors last year, public safety budgets are set to increase automatically each year for inflation. At issue Tuesday, however, was the very definition of inflation.

The county’s legal advisor offered a conservative definition, one that would have adjusted for inflation based strictly on the consumer price index. That approach would have had minimal impact on the county’s projected $18-million spending gap for next fiscal year, which begins July 1.

But Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury, arguing on behalf of public safety officials, took a different approach. In an opinion submitted last month, Bradbury argued that salary increases for public safety personnel should also be included when factoring inflationary costs.

Despite concerns from union representatives about the impact on other departments, the Board of Supervisors voted 3 to 2 in favor of Bradbury’s interpretation.

That means for fiscal year 1996-97, public safety budgets would increase by about $10 million over their present level of nearly $150 million. Meeting that obligation would stretch the county’s projected budget shortfall to about $23 million.

“I want to make sure that we keep the pressure on the criminals,” Supervisor Frank Schillo said. “My goal is to make this the safest county in the state, and I don’t know any other way of doing it.”

In addition, supervisors approved requests to add staff to the Juvenile Court and the public defender’s office.

In an effort to balance the county’s budget next year, officials have already ordered all departments other than those in public safety to prepare ways to cut their budgets by 25%. And now, with $5 million added to the budget shortfall, departments will have to prepare for even deeper cuts.

Supervisors Maggie Kildee and Susan K. Lacey cast the dissenting votes, saying they were uncomfortable not knowing how the cost-of-living adjustments for the public safety agencies would affect the other departments.

“I can’t go along with that because there are still so many unknowns we have to deal with,” Lacey said. “I feel a little uncomfortable having such a pointed hearing without hearing from the entire county family.”

Last year, the Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance guaranteeing that all money generated by Proposition 172--a statewide measure aimed at funding public safety agencies--would go to the sheriff, district attorney, public defender, probation and fire services.

While county leaders and law enforcement officials have been working out the details of that ordinance over the past year, the inflationary question remained unresolved.

On Tuesday, union representatives called for a more detailed financial analysis of how the cost-of-living adjustments might affect other departments and programs.

“We don’t know what it means for the rest of the employees in this county or the rest of the citizens who receive services here,” said Barry Hammitt, president of the county employees union.

But Mike Saliba, executive director of the Ventura County Taxpayers Assn., urged supervisors to go forward with the more generous of the adjustments for inflation.

“We’re here because we don’t want public safety services to lose ground,” he told the board.

In supporting that plan, Supervisor Judy Mikels called on Bradbury and Sheriff Larry Carpenter to work more closely with county officials in the future to address budget matters.

“I don’t believe our mission and goals are at loggerheads,” Mikels said. “I think it’s the system that is sometimes at loggerheads.”