Leaders Resist Reallocation of Prop. 172 Funds

Ventura County leaders made it clear Tuesday that they oppose former county manager David Baker’s suggestion that they revamp a local ordinance that directs all Proposition 172 sales tax money to law enforcement agencies.

Officials were quick to point out that tens of thousands of county voters signed a petition favoring the local ordinance in 1995 because they considered law enforcement their top priority. They added that the $30 million to $40 million generated annually by the half-cent sales tax has helped maintain Ventura County’s reputation as one of the safest counties in the West.

The local ordinance stipulates that law enforcement agencies are to receive all Proposition 172 proceeds, a requirement the statewide proposition does not expressly specify.

“The people voted on that [money] for public safety and I’m going to uphold that no matter what,” said Supervisor Frank Schillo, one of three supervisors who voted to adopt the local ordinance.

“I have a very basic belief that the voters were sold Proposition 172 and the continuance of the sales tax based on public safety enhancement,” agreed Supervisor Judy Mikels, another supporter. “I will not see that negated.”

Supervisor John K. Flynn, the swing vote in 1995 who enabled passage of the ordinance, said he doubts the board would be willing to challenge the sheriff and district attorney on this matter.

“Let’s face it, when you deal with the criminal justice system you are dealing with the most powerful political institution in the county,” Flynn said. “I’d rather look for other sources of money.”

Baker, who quit his job Monday after only four days as the county’s chief administrative officer, pointed to the county’s public safety ordinance in a six-page letter to county supervisors as one of the reasons for his resignation.

The ordinance, Baker wrote, creates a “financial imbalance which is dramatic and ongoing. Over time, while it guarantees rich resources for public safety, it does so at the expense of other community programs.”

Sheriff Bob Brooks said Baker’s criticism is unfounded and unfair. The sheriff said his department is not responsible for the county’s financial troubles that stem in large part from a recent $15.3 million settlement with the federal government over improper Medicare billing by the county’s mental health department.

“The county has a serious problem with mental health,” Brooks said. “It alarms me a little bit that all of a sudden [Proposition] 172 is the villain.”

Neither the sheriff nor officials in the district attorney’s office believe the county’s financial situation is as dire as Baker suggested.

Even if this were the case, officials said, they would not voluntarily relinquish any of their funding.

Aside from hurting their own budgets, they said, giving up public safety money would mean going back on a promise to the public.

“It’s not a matter of philanthropy, it’s a matter of protecting the community,” said Chief Assistant Dist. Atty. Gregory D. Totten.

Brooks said any attempt to repeal the public safety ordinance “won’t happen without a fight.”

The county’s public safety ordinance funnels tens of millions of dollars in Proposition 172 sales tax money collected each year to the Sheriff’s Department, the district attorney’s office, the public defender’s offices and the Probation Department.

In addition, the ordinance states that the county’s public safety agencies’ overall budgets shall not be reduced under any circumstances, and shall always receive adjustments for cost of living increases, even if other departments are faced with cuts.

Totten said that’s the way voters wanted it. “One reason we have the safe community we have is that elected officials have always placed a high priority on public safety,” he said. “Public safety is the first priority of government.”

Mikels said she thinks county supervisors and law enforcement officials would revisit the public safety ordinance if the county were facing bankruptcy. But with a projected $5-million deficit out of a nearly $1-billion budget, it’s not worth raiding public safety dollars, she said.

“While I am very disconcerted about a $5-million problem, and while it needs to be addressed now, we are nowhere near bankruptcy, we are nowhere near chaos,” Mikels said. “That seems to be a near-hysterical overreaction.”