Proposed County Charter Amendment Could Indirectly Affect Law Enforcement in Pasadena

While the Pasadena Police Department does not receive direct funding from Los Angeles County, a county charter amendment recently approved for the November ballot by the Board of Supervisors to restrict 10 percent of the county’s budget for social services and bar use of those funds for law enforcement purposes could have indirect effects on law enforcement in Pasadena, said Police Chief John Perez.

The L.A. County Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 Tuesday to place the referendum on the ballot.

If passed by voters, it would require a minimum of 10 percent of L.A. County’s unrestricted general funds — roughly $360 million this year — to be set aside annually for housing, jail diversion, mental health, and other social services, as well as alternatives to incarceration.

Supervisor Sheila Kuehl, who championed the measure, said it is about expanded access to safety net programs and pushed back against the idea that it amounts to defunding law enforcement.

“It’s time to bring our budget into alignment with our actions, intentions, and vision. The supervisors have said we want to move people from custody to care, and our constituents are pleading with us to expand housing and treatment options and stop relying on punitive, outdated law enforcement tactics,” Kuehl said.

The lone vote against the measure came from Supervisor Kathryn Barger, who said it would unnecessarily restrict future boards and make it harder for the county to manage through economic downturns.

Opponents also said they worried the potential for the measure to cause money to be directed away from law enforcement, primarily the L.A. County Sheriff’s Department, could have a negative impact on public safety.

Perez said the measure would have no potential impact on the Pasadena department’s budget if passed. “However, it has a potential impact if the county sheriff is forced to reduce the budget that could close stations like Altadena, or restrict services they provide to us, such as (New Year’s) resources, court-related assistance, mutual aid when needed, and other types of resources they provide.”

The Sheriff’s Department generally provides about 1,000 deputies to help Pasadena police deal with the massive crowds surrounding the Rose Parade and Rose Bowl football game each year, Perez said. If the department is forced to reduce its budget, there’s a good chance the county will not be able to provide the same level of support in the future.

The Sheriff’s Department also provides services on trains that pass through Pasadena via the Sheriff’s Transit Services Bureau, and staffing could potentially be affected by the charter amendment, Perez said.

Perez said he agreed with the spirit of the measure, but had concerns that it was too broad and did not involve enough research and planning.

“I do support and understand the need for public safety to use nonprofits (and) specially trained private entities for many of the types of calls we handle, but it requires time and thought to develop a long-lasting approach,” Perez said.

“I believe the real goal is to allow law enforcement to continue responses to calls for service that — at least initially — involve potential violence, aggression or stressful events and teach officers how to become referral specialists in getting the right assistance for people,” he said.

“So, a better model can be built with the right think tank and serve as an example for the nation; however, a transfer of budgets to non-safety areas without much thought or examination would greatly impact the sheriff and all people of the county,” according to the chief. “What may work in rural areas will likely need adjustments and evolution in processing to properly work in dynamic areas like Los Angeles.  Much more discussion and planning are needed to avoid the quick decision-making without any empirical examination.”

The Coalition of County Unions filed suit Wednesday seeking to remove the charter amendment from the ballot.

The lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court claims the charter amendment violates the procedural requirements of the county’s Employee Relations Ordinance which requires 90 days advance notice of proposed charter amendments to the labor organizations with bargaining relationships with the county.

County CEO Sachi Hamai has said 10 percent of the county’s unrestricted general funds would amount to roughly $360 million this fiscal year. 

The amendment as drafted sets a 10 percent threshold for direct investment “to address the disproportionate impact of racial injustice” to be phased in by June 30, 2024. The ordinance would allow the board, by a four-fifths vote, to reduce the set-aside “in the event of a fiscal emergency that threatens the county’s ability to fund mandated programs”

“If passed by voters, the charter amendment would allocate funds to be spent in a number of broad categories, including youth development programs, job training for low-income communities, access to capital for minority-owned businesses, rent assistance and affordable housing, community-based health services, and jail diversion programs.

It would prohibit such funds being used for or redistributed through law enforcement or correctional agencies, including the District Attorney’s Office, but would not prohibit its use to cover costs related to trial courts.