County Chief Fights the Law and the Law Usually Wins

With only a few weeks left as Ventura County’s chief administrator, Harry Hufford is taking on the most sacred of county covenants: law enforcement funding.

Hufford, a sage veteran who has earned a reputation as a financial Mr. Fix It for his budget prowess, is determined to overhaul a controversial ordinance that directs more than $40 million annually in Proposition 172 sales tax money to public safety agencies.

Hufford’s plan calls for a 3.75% cap on annual inflationary allowances granted to those agencies. Moreover, it could put discretionary power over the sales tax money back in the hands of the Board of Supervisors during times of financial crisis.

“I’m the guy with years of experience that has to bring these ideas to the board,” Hufford said. “They came to me and said, ‘We have a problem here, please help us.’ I’m trying to help them.”

His proposal represents the first serious challenge to the 1995 public safety ordinance and pits the chief administrator against the county’s two most powerful politicians--Sheriff Bob Brooks and Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury. Both officials have denounced Hufford’s plan, saying it would “cripple law enforcement’s programs and harm the safety of this community.”

The potential cuts to their budgets “would translate quite simply into too few cops on the beat and too few prosecutors in the courts,” Brooks and Bradbury said in a joint statement last week. Changes to the county ordinance would also require a public vote, they said.

But Hufford, who will step down in April after 14 months as interim county manager, is standing firm. He warned supervisors last week of a projected $7.3-million shortfall this fiscal year, adding that the board was “handcuffed” by the public safety ordinance.

“I’ve tried to show them how it limits their ability,” said Hufford, who noted that law enforcement budgets have swelled since the ordinance was passed in 1995 while mental health, hospital, planning and other budgets have shrunk.

On Tuesday, the board will consider Hufford’s proposal to amend the ordinance. Supervisors John Flynn, Judy Mikels, Kathy Long and Steve Bennett said they want to hear more about the plan. Only Supervisor Frank Schillo remains opposed to any change.

That Hufford even has the ear of the other board members on such a hot-button issue is testament to his administrative and political abilities, observers say.

“Two years ago, the climate wasn’t there politically,” said Bennett, the board’s newest member, who has openly criticized the ordinance. “Then Harry came to town and everything changed. He can maneuver through complicated political forces, and that makes a difference.”

Herbert Gooch, a political science professor at Cal Lutheran University, agreed that Hufford’s managerial skills made it acceptable to discuss possible changes to the public safety ordinance.

“This was a holy cow in Ventura,” Gooch said. “But one man changed everything. For the first time someone said, ‘Wait a second, let’s put that out in the open. Let’s talk about it.’ ”

In defending the ordinance, Brooks and Bradbury noted that since the law was passed the county’s crime rate has dropped well over 30%--”a decline that is unquestionably linked to the maintenance of law enforcement efforts made possible by this ordinance.”

But Ventura County already had a reputation as one of the safest counties in the country before the ordinance was approved. The fact that the crime rate has continued to fall only makes other government services more of a priority, Gooch said.

“This is a hang ‘em by their thumbs county,” Gooch said. “But a lot of other issues have started to crowd out law enforcement. Now you don’t hear about Charles Manson on your door. You hear things like helping the sheriff keep up with pay standards. That’s a tougher sell.”

Hufford Quickly Targeted Ordinance

How the battle over public safety funding plays out may be Hufford’s ultimate legacy.

Hufford, who served as Los Angeles County’s top administrator from 1974 to 1985, was hired in an interim capacity in December 1999. He filled the position left vacant by David Baker, who stunned supervisors when he quit after only four days on the job.

Baker left a scathing six-page resignation letter warning that the county was on “the brink of financial chaos.” He said the chief administrator’s role was too weak to control the budget, adding that the public safety ordinance in particular presents “a structural 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 and non-safety employees,” Baker said. “The community politics in affecting change,” he added, “are acknowledged as treacherous.”

After his arrival, Hufford quickly realized that officials would have to revisit the public safety ordinance in order to deal with long-term effects on the county budget.

“The day I got here, I recommended a change,” he said, noting that no other county in the state has an ordinance that restricts the board’s budgetary powers in this manner.

He asked all public safety departments, which absorb more than half of the county’s discretionary funds--more than $116 million--to share the pain of mandatory cutbacks.

The Sheriff’s Department, which receives the bulk of the Proposition 172 sales tax money, responded to Hufford’s request by reducing costs by $3 million. The sheriff’s annual budget is about $124 million.

Hufford said it wasn’t enough. He criticized Brooks’ two-person patrol car program and said the department also could have taken steps to delay expensive academy classes.

“What they offered just didn’t meet our financial needs,” Hufford said. “In the end, we needed more. The ordinance became a barrier. It limited my ability to balance the budget.”

Hufford said the problem with the ordinance is that it guarantees a bounty for public safety agencies, while requiring little accountability for how the money is spent.

“The money comes in and just goes,” Hufford said. “There’s little analysis of staffing patterns or program expenses.”

Throughout his tenure, Hufford has quietly kept up his lobbying efforts to amend the ordinance. Bradbury said he felt Hufford’s anti-ordinance momentum right away. In casual conversation, he mentioned it. Adjustments were needed.

“Every time we get together, he talks about it,” Bradbury said. “He made it clear he thinks this is terrible and wants to get rid of it.” Supervisors also got an earful, with Hufford telling them every time they wanted money for a new program that it wasn’t there. Public safety was gobbling up all of the money, he said.

Hufford denied he has waged a campaign for a policy change.

Still, Hufford said he has been open and direct about his feelings on the issue and if he has the board’s attention it is because it is warranted, not because there is any hidden agenda.

“I’m Joe Friday,” he said. “Just the facts. I lay out the facts and everyone can decide for themselves.”

Indeed, with his straight talk and folksy demeanor, Hufford has even managed to win over the trust and respect of the sheriff and district attorney, despite their differences.

“He’s a man I trust completely,” said Bradbury, who met with Hufford Thursday to discuss the proposal. “He’s a man I’d like to have as a lasting friend.”

Bradbury and Brooks said they are still willing to work with Hufford to hammer out a compromise, but they remain adamant that the current proposal goes too far. “Harry is a reasonable man,” Bradbury said. “There’s lots of room for discussion.”

Sheriff, D.A. Are Ready for a Fight

The county’s two top law enforcement officials also make it clear, however, that they are ready to flex their political muscle to protect their budgets.

Bradbury said three ongoing death penalty cases and 28 other homicide cases have stretched his department’s resources. A lengthy criminal investigation that resulted in the recent indictment of 28 Hells Angels and their associates has pushed his department over budget by $834,000.

The sheriff and district attorney want to guard against the types of budget cutbacks their departments were forced to endure in the early 1990s. The county was forced to make across-the-board service cuts at the time because the Legislature was siphoning local property tax dollars to balance the state budget.

To help recover some of the losses, then Gov. Pete Wilson proposed that counties support renewal of a half-cent sales tax for public safety. Proposition 172 was approved by voters statewide in 1993.

But the new law did not specifically define public safety, and counties, including Ventura, continued to use the money for a variety of programs and services.

Frustrated and feeling betrayed by supervisors, Bradbury and then Sheriff Larry Carpenter organized an effort in 1995 to reserve all money generated from the sales tax specifically for their departments as well as the public defender’s office and probation services.

Their campaign collected more than 50,000 voter signatures to place a measure on the ballot calling for a public safety ordinance. A bitterly divided Board of Supervisors ultimately voted 3 to 2 to approve the ordinance, forgoing an election.

In addition to shifting all sales tax money to public safety, the ordinance stipulates that the county cover the costs of salaries and benefits of those agencies as well as “associated inflationary costs.” The inflationary costs were tied to salary increases, which can run as high as 7% to 10%.

One of Hufford’s chief gripes is that the “associated inflationary costs” in the ordinance are ill defined. His plan calls for capping the annual inflationary costs at 3.75% by pegging it to the Consumer Price Index, rather than negotiated salary increases and other departmental expenses.

Under this formula, he estimates that the county could shift more than $4 million next fiscal year from public safety to mental health services, road upkeep, pesticide regulation and other county programs.

But Hufford takes his plan one step further, asking the board to consider a provision that would suspend the public safety ordinance entirely during times of financial crisis. This would give the supervisors ultimate flexibility on budget issues, he said.

He noted that the state has a similar “deflator” mechanism that allows the Legislature to suspend automatic spending or revenue formulas during adverse financial situations.

The sheriff and district attorney vehemently object to this particular part of Hufford’s plan, saying it would require voter approval. In a report to supervisors, Hufford states he is prepared to draw up a more specific plan outlining such a provision that could be presented to voters if the board so desires.

Meanwhile, Brooks and Bradbury are wasting no time in marshaling their forces. They have already consulted with other powerful community supporters, who said they are willing to lend their time and wallets to another public safety campaign.

“Yes, we’ve already had that discussion,” Bradbury said. “It’s not something you leave till the last minute.”

Hufford said he can’t be concerned about a potential standoff, but at the same time notes that there is room for compromise.

And if they can’t reach agreement?

“So what . . . ? At least I didn’t just write a letter and leave town,” Hufford said. “I’m standing up before the board and telling them what needs to be done.”