Seeking Help, County Gets Cold Shoulder in State Spending Plan

With his new proposed budget, Gov. Gray Davis made it clear that despite the state’s $3-billion surplus Ventura County and other local governments will not benefit from the windfall.

County officials, who had expected a significant portion of the funds, expressed frustration about the governor’s decision.

“All local governments had hopes that there would be something coming down to us,” county Auditor Tom Mahon said. “But it appears that the governor’s emphasis has not been on local government, but really has been on schools.”

The proposed budget sets aside some funds for local governments to improve public safety and transportation, and to expand health care and housing for the poor. Those funds must be divided among 58 counties.

“We’re just kind of getting our pencils sharpened as far as determining what local governments will receive,” said Larry Siegel, the county’s deputy administrator for government affairs. “And as far as I see in the budget right now, there’s not much to write down.”

During the next several months, Siegel will estimate what Ventura County is likely to receive from the state’s 2000-01 budget.

The governor proposed extending the $100-million public safety program and adding $21.3 million, which would give each local law enforcement agency an additional $100,000. He also set aside $100 million for one-time competitive grants for law enforcement agencies, and $4 million to reimburse agencies for officer training.

*

Santa Paula Police Chief Bob Gonzales said he hoped the proposed public safety funds will be approved in the final budget.

“It will definitely help a small police agency like ours that is strapped for money,” he said.

Davis also proposed an additional $24.8 million for emergency room services and $21.2 million for affordable housing programs. And the administration also increased the state housing tax credit from $35 million to $50 million annually.

Though county officials were disappointed by the governor’s budget, they said local governments could still receive additional funds during the budget bargaining process.

“It’s not a good start, but it’s definitely not over yet,” said county budget manager Bert Bigler. “We will do our best to make our needs known, and we’ll have a much better idea once the May revision comes out.”

Ventura County hopes to retrieve some of the estimated $300 million lost by the county, city governments and special districts since property taxes were shifted from county to state coffers seven years ago.

*

In November, the state announced that it would pay $1.6 million back to Ventura County and its 10 cities. An additional $1 million is expected to arrive this spring. But officials said that doesn’t come close to reimbursing local governments.

“The counties lost considerable money to the state, and we have suffered from that,” Mahon said. “The hope has always been that there will be some way of recovering some of what they took from us.”

Ventura County officials also hope to receive some funds that are not earmarked for specific agencies or programs, so they can make progress toward balancing the county’s books and erasing its $5-million projected deficit.

County Supervisor John Flynn said he plans to lobby local legislators for more money for local governments. He expects the final budget to be substantially different from the governor’s proposed budget, and to include more funds for housing and mental health agencies.

“I think the Legislature is going to work the governor’s budget over,” Flynn said. “I don’t think he’s really going to get what he wants. He is going to face some opposition from the leadership in the Legislature.”

Assemblyman Tony Strickland (R-Thousand Oaks) said he will push for more funds for local governments.

“I’m a believer in sending more money locally and letting them decide how to spend the money,” Strickland said. “What’s necessarily good for Fresno and Bakersfield might not be good for Ventura County.”