Voters shape the LA city budget, too — here's how

L.A. city leaders will finalize the city budget this month, likely locking in drastic cuts to services to make up for department overspending, wildfire recovery costs and the potential loss of federal funding. L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ proposed cuts, which include more than 1,600 layoffs, have stoked a heated conversation about what the city prioritizes in the budget and how it makes financial decisions.

But city officials don’t have absolute say over everything in the budget.

Once in a while, voters get to make decisions that affect what the city can and can’t spend from that point on.

Here are some local ballot measures that L.A. voters passed in recent years that helped shape the budget today:

Increasing pension costs

What voters did: In the 2024 general election, L.A. voters opted to increase the amount spent on the police and fire pension system. They passed Measure FF, a city ballot measure that amended the City Charter to allow about 460 park rangers, port police and other peace officers to switch over to the more generous police and fire pensions system.

How it changed the budget: The measure will cost the general fund an estimated $23 million one-time payment and another $1 million annually. The general fund is the main account used to pay for most services, including libraries, parks and homelessness programs. Other costs will be covered by airport and harbor revenues.

The bigger picture: The city can’t cut back or opt out of its pension contributions — it’s obligated to fund these pension funds under the terms of the L.A. City Charter. So when more people have access to larger pension benefits, that’s less money for other departments. It also turns out that L.A. votes on pension system changes a lot, and this isn’t the first time they’ve approved increases. In 2001, voters raised the maximum benefit amount a retired firefighter or police officer could receive, to 90% of their salaries up from 70% (a decade later, they voted to decrease those maximums).

This year, L.A. paid an estimated $481 million to fund pensions for retired police officers and firefighters. That’s more money than any L.A. city department received, with the exception of only the police and fire departments.

Decreasing pension costs

What voters did: In 2011, voters rolled back some of the pension benefits they had approved in 2001, lowering the amounts that new sworn police and fire employees could receive under certain conditions.

How it changed the budget: The 2001 measure to consolidate pension systems lowered the overall cost of those pensions by an estimated $196 million over a five-year period, according to the city administrative officer’s analysis.

The city’s fiscal impact analysis of the 2011 measure to roll back certain benefits estimated it would lower the city’s contribution to these pensions by $152 million over the course of 10 years.

An LAPD patrol car.

(

David McNew

/

Getty Images

)

The bigger picture: There have been almost a dozen city ballot measures specifically about the police and fire pension system in the last 25 years, some aimed at expanding benefits and others focused on scaling back costs. The central tension over these measures is how to rein in the costs of L.A. employee pensions and retirement benefits overall. This year the city paid about $1.4 billion dollars, or about 17% of the general fund, to cover its obligations — an amount that’s ballooned over the past two decades.

Establishing an emergency reserve fund

What voters did: L.A. voters in 2011 passed Measure P, which sets aside money the city can only touch in cases of emergency.

How it changed the budget: Before Measure P, there was no official law on the books that said the city had to have an emergency fund — it was just a general city policy. The measure added a requirement to the City Charter that the city keep an emergency reserve fund amounting to 2.75% of the general fund (that’s about $220 million for this fiscal year). If the city wants to draw money from this fund, the move would need approval from two-thirds of the City Council.

It also set up a contingency reserve account, which stores money for unexpected costs that weren’t previously in the budget.

The bigger picture: Having an emergency fund requirement forces city leaders to plan ahead and keep a last-resort cushion for extreme situations. It also serves as a warning sign — if reserves are low, that means the city’s spending needs to dial back. L.A.’s city controller and chief administrative officer frequently pointed to the state of the reserve fund this year as a signal to leaders that spending was getting out of hand.

The city has a policy to maintain a total reserve (which includes the emergency reserve account, the contingency account and other “just in case” funds) of at least 5% of the general fund, but this year’s cost overruns made reserve numbers dip below that threshold. Bass’ proposed budget for the coming fiscal year sets aside money to fill that reserve back up again — at the cost of funding for other departments.

Giving the Ethics Commission a set budget

What voters did: In the 2024 general election, voters opted to protect the annual budget for the Ethics Commission, the group in charge of enforcing anti-corruption and campaign finance laws for the city.

How it changed the budget: Before 2024's Measure ER took effect this year, the Ethics Commission’s budget was determined by the City Council. Critics argued that was a major obstacle to the commission’s independence, since it risked having its funding taken away if it penalized city council members or their associates.

With the measure’s passage, the Ethics Commission now has a set minimum annual budget of $7 million, which can be adjusted depending on revenue trends.

The bigger picture: $7 million is small potatoes in terms of the $13 billion city budget, but this measure was much more about making sure the Ethics Commission could do its job effectively. It was part of a larger package of reforms for the Ethics Commission that gained momentum after the 2022 City Hall leaked audio scandal.

Increasing funding for the public library

What voters did: In 2011, voters passed Measure L, which increased the budget for the L.A. Public Library system.

Los Angeles' Central Public Library, lit up in yellow light at night.

(

Charley Gallay

/

Getty Images

)

How it changed the budget: The City Charter says L.A.’s library and parks departments must receive a certain percentage of the city’s property tax revenue for their funding. Measure L changed the percentage used for the Library department’s budget, ultimately increasing its budget by about 70%, and made its funding formula match that of the Recreation and Parks Department. This year the library department received $258 million from the city’s general fund.

The bigger picture: This measure arose in the wake of another city financial crisis, in which then-Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council cut two days a week of service from many city libraries to deal with budget constraints. Library service days haven’t been cut again since Measure L was passed.

How do measures get on the ballot, anyway?

It can happen one of two ways: either the City Council votes to put a measure before voters, or residents can collect enough signatures for a measure to qualify.

All of the measures mentioned above were worked out through City Council committees before getting the full council’s approval to be included on the ballot.

But several non-budget-related measures that voters passed recently (Measures ULA, a tax to fund affordable housing and HLA, a street improvement law) started out with signatures.

According to the city’s handbook on initiative, referendum and recall petitions, all you need is a group of five registered L.A. city voters to start a petition to get a measure on the ballot. The group must submit a letter requesting the city clerk to prepare an official petition, along with full text of their proposed law or charter amendment.

Once the petition language gets approved, the group needs to collect signatures. This year, the signature threshold for an initiative to qualify is just under 140,000 — it’s tied to the number of votes that were cast in the most recent mayoral race. (If you want the exact math, there were 929,974 votes cast in the 2022 mayoral runoff, and the signature requirement is 15% of that number.)

There’s a higher threshold for a charter amendment — around 329,000 signatures this year, or 15% of the number of registered voters in the entire city.