Related articles:

Sheriff's Department $2M in the red, adding to county's budget woes Sheriff to outspend budget 5th year in row

Finance and Accounting
Charles E. Gillman Company
Accounting Specialist Trades/Construction
RANCHO RESORT
MAINTANANCE POSITION Administrative & Professional
Jorgensen Brooks Group
Counselor Mechanical
Komatsu Equipment Co
Resident Field Mechanic Administrative & Professional
Tucson Urban League
CEO/President Sales and Marketing
Everready Glass
Sales Reps

For five budget cycles, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik's vast department has operated in the red.

At a glance this sounds appalling. It is essential that the public and the Board of Supervisors be aware of the overages, especially as the budget cycle for the fiscal year begins with the probability of county-wide cuts. However, public safety would be jeopardized if the department were required to squeeze its essential activities into the black.

First, the overages are small as a percentage of the department's budget. Second, they are not happening because Dupnik has been irresponsible or is profligate with his budget.

The bottom line: A safer community must be the goal. Nickel and diming the sheriff's budget in order to force it into balance isn't going accomplish that.

The sheriff's overages are hardly shocking. In 2006-2007, for instance, the overage was $1.3 million — about 1 percent of the department's $100 million budget.

"That's not flagrant," said County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry. "Clearly they're trying."

The sheriff's budget for the year ending in June is $111.4 million; he expects to be $2.1 million in the red.

Dupnik and Huckelberry note that some overages have been caused by unexpected costs or crises. "We're always trying to put our finger in the dike where it's bursting," Dupnik said Wednesday.

But Dupnik said the larger issue is "we are underfunded ... and substantially understaffed."

He cited statistics showing that Pima County has 1.43 commissioned officers per 1,000 population; for Marana, that figure is 2.6; in Oro Valley, 2.4; in Sahuarita, 1.9; and for the Tucson Police Department, 1.94.

"In law enforcement, we can't always just stop what we're doing when the shift ends and all go home," Dupnik said. "We wind up spending huge amounts on overtime."

To bring Pima County up to 2 officers per 1,000 would require hiring 198 more deputies, Dupnik said.

Then there's the jail, which as Huckelberry noted is "the single detention facility for every law enforcement entity in Pima County."

Dupnik has no control over how many people are detained by the Border Patrol or the Oro Valley or Tucson police. Worse, he said, most of the jail costs "are borne by the taxpayers of Pima County."

The federal reimbursement for incarceration of illegal immigrants last year covered only 3 percent of the county's actual costs, Dupnik said.

While the county charges $64 a day to house prisoners for the cities, it can only collect for those who are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the city courts. "If there's a state violation, too, the city doesn't have to pay," Dupnik said.

The county makes adjustments every year to try to shore up areas that are leaking red ink — one recent year it was jail food, another it was high turnover in correctional officers that forced up overtime.

But, as Dupnik and Huckelberry noted, finding ways to cut spending in public safety is a delicate, even dangerous task.

You can't decide to have an understaffed jail. You can't willy-nilly reduce the amount of overtime you allow deputies to run up investigating a crime. You can't cut back on judicial security. What can safely be reduced? What cannot?

"We pretty much leave those decisions to the sheriff and I believe he's done a pretty good job," said Huckelberry.

Without question, the sheriff's red ink added to Huckelberry's challenges: Pima County faces a $10 million budget shortfall this year, more than half from reduced state shared revenue.

County department heads were asked for alternative budget requests for next year showing reduced spending of up to 5 percent. Huckelberry did not ask Dupnik to do so.

We think this was wise. Forcing spending cuts would put the public's safety at risk.