• Thrillhouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    60
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Is this true? Lots of disinformation flying around about the fire dept in LA. I haven’t gotten around to fact checking for myself.

    • wjrii@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      55
      ·
      9 hours ago

      The immediate narrative of “they cut the budget” is not quite true. The budget was done while the city was negotiating with the main union, so they didn’t have exact numbers for additional wages and benefits, and the normal process is to leave them off entirely until the contract is done. That showed cuts on paper. They then finished the deal and ended up with a 6.5% total increase.

      HOWEVER, the broader point is that while the LAPD budget is being augmented to bring on hundreds of new officers and hire civilian support positions, the Fire department’s budget is stagnating, and the budget specifically eliminated 79 civilian support positions and lowered the overtime budget for firefighters. The chief pointed out it’s about the same size as it was 50 years ago. So, she basically took the media moment to get some attention on the need for more resources, and it turned out she was very right.

      The overal LAFD budget after the restored funds is around $895M. For comparison, the police budget got a 7.5% increase in city funding, and its ~$2B city budget is augmented by state and federal funds for about another ~$1.2B. I’m sure the fire department gets something, particularly when a massive emergency actually happens, but I couldn’t find any readily available numbers for any ongoing support from state or federal.

      And just for “funsies,” when Fox News reported on the FD cuts, they compared not to police, but to the city “spending millions on the homeless,” which while true, also reflected a full 26% cut from $250M to $185M. Never change, Fox News. /s

    • tacosanonymous@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      12 hours ago

      No. Even if it was, this isn’t a thing you can beat by throwing bodies or money at. It was just too fast.

      The argument I would allow is if that money had been spent by the world over the last 40 years to prevent climate change.

      • moody@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Fire mitigation is the issue, reducing its potential effects before it occurs since preventing it entirely is basically impossible. Without the budget, that stuff doesn’t happen, and that’s what leads to faster-spreading wildfires.