Page One

Last year Governor Davis’ early budget projections estimated that California would finish the 2001/2002 fiscal year with a $10-12 billion surplus. After the state’s allocation of your tax dollars to bail out energy providers, that estimate was reduced to approximately $4.5 billion. One year later, Governor Davis announced an estimated $23.6 billion dollar state deficit. Furthermore, if local governments (cities, counties and special districts) had not made their ERAF (Education Relief Augmentation Fund), “contributions” today’s deficit would be $28 billion. 

Local government has often been called a stepchild of the state; unfortunately, the parent in this relationship is abusive. Since 1993, state government has taken over $1.5 billion as a result of ERAF from Alameda County and still millions more from cities and other local jurisdictions according to the Association of Bay Area Governments. The county’s total annual budget is $1.5 billion. 

Once again, it’s budget time for local, state and federal governments; and because of the massive state deficit, local government will be forced to make deeper cuts in the delivery of local services. Local government collects many of your tax dollars. However, state statute requires that we forward the money to Sacramento. The state government returns a portion of the funding to local governments. On average the state sends counties 16 cents, cities 18 cents and special districts like East Bay MUD and AC Transit 13 cents of every tax dollar collected.  

State statute dictates that local governments are mandated to provide a certain level and certain types of services; and in return are reimbursed for a portion of the operating cost. The problem is current funding formulas and reimbursement strategies do not yield enough money to effectively deliver these state mandated services. Thus when there is a shortfall, which is always the case, local governments are forced to make service cuts. Alameda County also has a structural problem, the cost of providing our mandated services is rising faster then the increase in the amount of money we take in every year. Furthermore, Proposition 13 has limited the ability for local government to raise revenue. 

Prior to Governor Davis’ budget announcement this year, Alameda County had identified a $46.7 million projected shortfall for the next fiscal year. County officials developed a strategy for closing our own gap however; we are expecting an additional hit from the state of approximately $38 million. Currently, cuts to critical services and valuable programs are being considered; discussions about creative new programs to address unmet needs are almost non-existent. 

Alameda County is required by law to pass a balanced budget by June 30. This means local elected officials once again have to look our residents and constituents in the eye as we make grave decisions. We will read about the tough choices to cut local programs and their affects on residents in the press for months to come.  

While the issue is problematic there are things everyone can do. First, we must realize that in difficult times we must all share the load. The question is, are we sharing the load equally or does the governor disproportionately cut services to people and communities most in need?  

I have convened a working group with local administrators and elected officials from Alameda and Contra Costa counties to discuss how to make the cuts as painless as possible. We will advocate for an equitable distribution of the cuts. I encourage residents to take a similar approach. Ask the governor and the state legislature, to maximize all revenue generating possibilities? Inquire how the cuts being allocated – are their any “sacred cows,” and if so why? Do not let those in Sacramento operate under a cloud of secrecy; they will have a more difficult time making the cuts if they know you are watching.  

Keith Carson 

Alameda County Supervisor 

District 5