Proposition 13’s Effect Was Delayed, But Trouble Now Looms in California
features
Staff Correspondent
When Proposition 13 was passed by California voters in 1978, there were predictions of gloom and doom by public officials. Fire, police, parks, libraries, street sweeping, health and other local and regional government services would be decimated, they said. Employees would be laid off by the hundreds, if not thousands.
But it didn’t happen, at least not then.
Generous state bailout grants were available. California had not indexed its income tax and, with inflation booming and with federal grants through CETA and other programs, there were huge surpluses in the budget. These were returned to counties, cities, schools and special districts so no one in government worried. The taxpayers who saw their property taxes permanently cut were delighted. No employees lost their jobs, the fire departments more or less had business as usual.
Time bomb ticking
There was, however, a time bomb ticking. And in 1981 it went off!
The state had indexed its income taxes. Salaries and other costs were up. Federal programs terminated. The overall economy was down because of recession. There was no more surplus to bail out local government and, furthermore, the state, because of declining revenues, might even have to increase taxes not covered by the limitation of Proposition 13—something cities and special districts found it legally difficult to do.
In the city and county of Los Angeles, massive cuts took place. County hospitals and clinics as well as other programs were cut. The city cut street sweeping, recreation and library hours and made other trims. Fire and police agencies had to take their share of cuts, too.
The city fire department had been asked over the past few years to take selected cuts in manpower for fire suppression activities. Emergency ambulance service primarily manned by civilian personnel actually had increased.
Faced with a decrease in available funds in the summer of 1981, the fire department, police department and other agencies were requested by the mayor to cut again.
“Previous budget restrictions had a negative impact on our ability to deliver adequate fire protection,” city Fire Chief John Gerard told a city council committee. “Further reducing the number of fire fighters on duty every day will critically affect day-to-day activities of the department. Another delay in the purchase of fire apparatus will have an enormous long-term effect on our ability to deliver the services people expect from us. Let there be no mistake. The fire department will no longer have the resources necessary to adequately protect the tax base and maintain a proper level of emergency services!”
Although Gerard’s presentation was well received and the department did gain back three of 10 mechanic positions previously lost, plus reinstatement of an order for three aerials, major reductions were made.
Battalion 16, one of two in the Los Angeles harbor area, was closed and consolidated with Battalion 6. Battalion 8’s five stations in South Los Angeles were divided among adjacent battalions. These reductions eliminated six battalion chief and aide positions, although there will be no reduction in rank.
Single new position
One new position for a battalion chief for an expanded audio-visual service was added to cut down travel time for inservice training.
Staffing for six reserve rescue ambulances was eliminated, but now the task force (two-piece) engine company with which they are housed will provide personnel when activated for emergencies. In a total revision of operating procedure, one of the two engines will respond with the ambulance but without red light and siren, leaving the other engine and truck in service as a light task force.
Subsequent cuts included deletion of the department’s tractor company, reduction of staffing on Heavy Utilities 6 and 88 to one operator, deletion of $350,000 for the current year’s ambulance replacement program, and reduction of 12 fire fighter “add-back” positions.
Battalion Chief Gerald Johnson, community liaison officer, notes that the department now has only 789 on-duty fire suppression personnel, the lowest number in years.
“Immediately following the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978-79, “Johnson said, “the LAFD operating budget was reduced by over $10 million, or 10.2 percent. Daily citywide fire suppression staffing was reduced by 100, to 825. There was also a reduction of 17 civilian employees including several in the vehicle and maintenance shops. Over $1.5 million of the department’s normal equipment replacement program was deleted, including the purchase of 11 triple combination apparatus. A trust fund approved by the voters in 1975 to provide $4.75 million annually over a 10-year period to construct 34 fire department facilities was also deleted by Proposition 13, so that 22 of the facilities are no longer funded. The number of fire fighter recruits was reduced from 320 to 80 that year, with an obvious impact on the affirmative action program.
“During the following two years the department was permitted to increase fire suppression daily staffing slightly— to 834—and to partially restore some equipment replacement. It was not possible to completely catch up on the replacement of apparatus, including that of 10 aerial ladder trucks.
Staff Reductions
“All during this post-Proposition 13 period there has not been any reduction in the funding or level of service provided by the 41 first-line ambulances which are staffed by civilian ambulance and paramedic employees. However, staffing reductions have impacted the six backup ambulances and two paramedic engine companies manned with fire fighting personnel. These units are still operating but without the additional personnel provided for the emergency medical service funtion.
“The department has been instructed by the mayor to submit a potential 10 percent reduction list for the 1982-83 budget. It has been possible to avoid closing fire stations to date, but it seems that a further reduction of this magnitude will jeopardize continued staffing of some stations.”
A proposition will be on the June ballot to modify the city’s police and fire pension system to reduce uncapped cost of living benefits.
Johnson points out that both police and fire departments have already suffered a significant loss of experienced senior personnel since the passage of Proposition 13, and fears are that a reduction in pension benefits will launch a massive wave of retirements.
In other cities, the reports vary.
Glendale Fire Chief Allan Stone told Fire Engineering that his department actually had added two fire prevention inspectors and one fire fighter to a shift for a truck company.
“We have a major redevelopment in downtown Glendale and, with other buildings, our tax base has risen. So we have no cuts. Our city has been fiscally conservative and, in times like these, this good municipal management pays off.”
In Kern County, Assistant Chief A. Roy Tullis reports that the Kern County Fire Department has been able to maintain its existing personnel level and operating budget, at least for the present.
“We are in a no-growth posture. Even though population is increasing and we badly need additional fire stations in at least two locations, funding is just not available,” Chief Tullis reports.
Maintenance off
“New construction and major rehabilitation of existing stations has been drastically curtailed due to lack of funds for capital projects. Due to cutbacks in personnel of the county general services department (they maintain existing stations), general maintenance has fallen off and some of our stations have deteriorated badly. The bottom line is that we have to do more with less.”
By contrast, Bob Simpson, chief of the Anaheim Fire Department, reports that Proposition 13 has not had a very negative effect because the city does not have a heavy reliance on ad valorem property
“Such is not the case with several of our neighbors. In my association with the fire chiefs in Orange County, several have been and continue to be hit very hard by Proposition 13,” Chief Simpson adds.
County also cut
Los Angeles County Fire Department has also faced some major budget cuts but, because of a complex fiscal situation, most have been avoided to date.
The Los Angeles County Fire Department is actually two separate agencies for fiscal purposes.
Chief Clyde V. Bragdon Jr. is chief engineer of the fire protection (funded mostly by direct taxes on the areas involved). He is also the forester and fire warden, which is funded by county general fund taxes and state payments for protection of “state-interest” watershed lands. Approximately 25 percent of the department’s budget is for the forester and fire warden units which primarily are deployed in watershed, rural and semirural areas.
“The effect of Proposition 13, which froze assessments as of 1975 levels with some inflation increases allowed, have had little effect on our fire district operations,” explains Assistant Chief Fred Morton, head of the department’s fiscal division.
He notes that following the first year of Proposition 13, the state ordered all district programs funded at 95 percent of previous years, plus growth. He also adds that through a formula devised and approved by the California Legislature, funds were allocated to special districts (including fire).
“These funds are allocated at the sole discretion of the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors, and to date they have allocated adequate funding for the fire districts to operate on existing levels with little opportunity for growth.”
Budget already tight
Morton adds that the county fire department has always operated on tight budgetary controls. But if additional fiscal shortfalls should take place, he said, there could be major problems in the districts which protect several million people throughout the county.
“Since this is a special district tax,” Morton said, “we have not competed with general fund revenues, but with other special districts. The flood control district had a special assessment approved by two-thirds of the voters (as per Proposition 13) and this assessment took additional pressure off the fire districts.”
In the new budget the forester and fire warden division had been ordered to take cuts of approximately $3.5 million which were to be made with closing of Engines 82, 44, 64, 325, 307 and Station 46 in the San Fernando Valley.
With the exception of 46, all of these county-funded units are housed with other units, mostly district funded, so there would be some protection.
“The problem,” Morton points out, “is that these units are strategically deployed in the watershed region, and when brush fires occur there obviously would be fewer units to respond and longer time for moveups—thus greatly increasing the potential for major losses in the area.”
Funding for the forester and fire warden units comes from the California Department of Forestry (CDF), which underwrites approximately the same amount the CDF would spend to protect the watershed. (The amount is significantly less than CDF salary and equipment outlay in areas solely protected by CDF.) This amounts to approximately $15 million of a $45 million budget. Thus the general fund provides the balance.
Some interim funding
Because of the critical fire danger existing in these areas, the board of supervisors has agreed to interim funding. As of Dec. 1, none of the units has been taken out of service.
Another problem for the county was the reduction in the number of nonsworn fire fighting personnel available for watershed fire fighting and construction.
“Much of our watershed fire fighting operation is mutual aid with the United States Forest Service, Los Angeles and other cities, and Ventura and Kern Counties,” Morton says. “The Forest Service has taken substantial cuts in both its fire fighting and prevention budgets in the Angeles National Forest, therefore throwing additional burdens on the County.”
The County had been using CETA funds for the civilian fire workers in these areas, but with the end of this funding, other sources of manpower had to be found.
Camp base facilities already existed and Bragdon negotiated with the California Department of Corrections to provide minimum security prisoners to man several of the previously depleted camps.
“We in the fire service have no idea what the fiscal future holds,” Morton says, “because any state help and additional county funding is based on an expanding economy with increases in sales tax revenues in contrast to property taxes. If the recession ends and business increases, some of the cuts may be canceled. But if not, additional trims in manpower, equipment and the ultimate protection to the people will occur.”