Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Budget topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Police department budget: Measure I to fund 34 patrol positions; crime analyst added via internal reallocation
Summary
Police officials told the commission that the recommended FY 2026 budget relies on Measure I to fund 34 patrol positions and that equipment replacement and a new facility debt service are allocated largely to Measure C.
The Santa Barbara Police Department presented its FY 2026 recommended budget to the Police and Fire Commission and outlined where Measure I and Measure C funds would be applied.
Police leadership described a department authorized for 211 full‑time equivalents when fully staffed and said the FY 2026 recommended budget is roughly $70.6 million. Budget manager Alec (surname not provided) told the commission the recommended budget includes funding sources that combine the general fund, state and grant funding, Measure C and Measure I.
Alec said the department’s revenue increases reflect fee adjustments, notably a $5 increase to parking citation fines to offset staffing and software costs and a municipal code and fee overhaul for massage establishment permits and sole proprietor permits. Chief-level staff explained the massage‑permit work is intended to strengthen oversight of establishments where illicit activity can occur, citing coordination with the City Attorney and the California Massage Therapy Council and state law as drivers of modernized permitting and inspection authority.
On staffing, finance staff told the commission that Measure I is recommended to fund 34 police positions focused in patrol; department presenters described these as existing positions that had been frozen or reduced in prior budget cycles and not as new headcount. The department also said it will add a crime analyst position funded through internal budget adjustments rather than an additional citywide appropriation.
Measure C funds were reported as continuing to finance equipment replacement projects, including body‑worn and vehicle camera licensing renewals and duty equipment replacements. Budget staff identified a $13.9 million increase to the recommended budget related to new building debt service and construction‑period costs for a planned police facility; finance staff described the long‑term amortization as roughly $7 million annually for about 30 years once the building is completed and principal payments begin.
Department leaders described shortages and efforts to reduce vacancy rates, an emphasis on retention and recruitment, and the creation of a community engagement coordinator and other professional staff. Alec noted parking citation revenue increases, massage permit fees, and minor animal control and other fee adjustments as revenue sources to help balance department finances.
Commissioners pressed for detail on several items: where the 34 Measure I‑funded officers were assigned (patrol), whether Measure I funds represent new money or backfill for existing services (staff said the funds sustain existing essential services and do not free up other dollars for new spending), and the scale of overtime (Alec said the department budgets roughly $2.6 million for overtime and uses historical patterns to set the number). The department also confirmed an internal charge of about $587,000 reflecting cost recovery for a sergeant assigned to the airport funded by the airport enterprise fund.
Ending: The Police Department’s recommended budget will proceed with the city budget hearings; Measure I and Measure C allocations, the crime analyst position and proposed fee changes are part of staff recommendations to the City Council.
