Sacramento—New polling finds that, by a wide majority, California voters think special districts that provide communities with essential services such as fire protection, healthcare and core infrastructure should receive a share of any future federal funding aimed at helping local agencies affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The survey conducted by Probolsky Research found that 64 percent of those surveyed said “yes, communities served by special districts should receive a share of any future federal funding for local governments affected by coronavirus.” The voter research was commissioned by the California Special Districts Association (CSDA) and conducted from October 12-15.
To date, federal COVID-19 relief funds, established by the CARES Act, have been distributed to state, city, and county governments, while communities that receive essential services from special districts have been largely left out. There are just over 2,000 independent special districts serving California, and about 30,000 nationwide. They provide a large share of local services in the United States, including 42.1 percent of utilities, 33.6 percent of healthcare, and 15 percent of fire protection.
The results of the poll come as special districts continue to press for a federal legislative solution. The Special Districts Provide Essential Services Act, introduced in the House of Representatives as H.R. 7073 by Congressman John Garamendi, D-Calif., and in the Senate as the bipartisan S. 4308, sponsored by Senator Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., would require states to direct five percent their future Coronavirus Relief Fund allocations to special districts. Twenty-five members of the California House Delegation and Senators Kamala Harris and Dianne Feinstein cosponsor the bills.
According to an internal survey of special district leaders conducted by the CSDA this summer, California’s special districts are anticipating a $1.26 billion COVID-19 impact on their budgets through the end of Fiscal Year 2021. $1.26 billion is significant, considering 56 percent of California’s special districts operate on less than $1 million in annual revenue.
Because of COVID-19 financial effects, 46 percent of special districts are uncertain or likely to reduce their essential workforce levels atop 22 percent that already had done so as of July 1, 2020. Further, 54 percent of districts are uncertain or likely to reduce essential services in addition to 36 percent that had already experienced sustained service cuts by July 1.
Probolsky Research conducted a live interviewer telephone and online survey of 900 voters of all age groups, diverse ethnic backgrounds, and varied party registrations and voting habits, with a margin of error of +/-3.3 percent. A breakout of those surveyed by gender, political party, and all age groups found that support for federal funding for special districts ranged from 58.3 percent to 73.1 percent. Broken out by geographic regions of the state, the poll found that approximately 63 percent of Southern Californians, 61 percent of Central Valley Californians, and 69 percent of Northern Californians thought special districts should receive a fair share of future funding.
The voter survey also asked Californians a broader funding question: whether the state has an obligation to pay for services when it mandates a local government to provide new services or programs. An overwhelming 73 percent said the state should pay for programs it requires local agencies to provide, addressing an issue that has been litigated to the California Supreme Court since voters passed Proposition 4 in 1979 with 74 percent of the vote.
Proposition 4 Constitutionally required the state to reimburse local governments for the costs of any new programs or higher levels of service the state mandates local governments to provide. Yet, the State of California has routinely ignored this provision and forced local agencies to impose higher fees on residents to cover the cost.