Alameda County Unveils Proposed 2011-12 Budget

Cautious optimism is the watch-word for Alameda County's proposed 2011-2012 budget, even as the cash-strapped county struggles to bridge a $138 million gap. 

"We're not closing the door on programs or laying off hundreds of employees, but it's really been a balancing act, " said County Administrator Susan Muranishi. "It's going in the right direction, but it's very slow."

The county plans to make $54.5 million in systemic cost reductions, trimming an additional $83 million through one-time cuts. 

To do it, administrators slashed vacant positions and redesigned service models to better capture federal dollars.

In addition, nearly all of the county's more than 20 public sector unions have agreed to cost-of-living freezes. Employees now cover 10 percent of their health care costs. New hires in the public safety sector will receive significantly smaller pension plans than their predecessors. 

But with local unemployment still in double digits, many who rely on county services will find little to be optimistic about.

California lost more than a million jobs in the recession, and too few have come back. Growth has clustered in just a few sectors—mostly technology and manufacturing—but construction and government jobs have lagged behind. Job growth flattened sharply nationwide this  spring, and local median home prices, while above rock-bottom, are still down 45 percent from their peak a few years ago.

Sacramento is another big question mark for the county.

Gov. Jerry Brown proposed shifting $6 billion in public protection and social programs from the state to the counties, including federally mandated efforts to drastically reduce the state's prison population.

Under the county's proposed budget, public protection will lose dozens of jobs, even as the burden on local law enforcement agencies is expected to grow.

Like local governments across the state, Alameda County is holding its breath, waiting to see whether the governor's proposed tax extensions—meant to foot the bill for much of the proposed reallignment— will materialize.  

"We're keeping a close eye on that," Muranishi said. "From a policy perspective, it makes a lot of sense to have programs administered locally, but the problem is always the funding."