The 2022-23 Budget: Wildfire Response Proposals

The 2022-23 Budget: Wildfire Response Proposals Summary In this brief, we provide our initial assessment and recommendations in response to the major wildfire response-related proposals in the Governor’s budget, based on the information available at the time the brief was prepared. We may provide additional analyses as additional information becomes available from the administration. Governor’s Budget Includes Several Major Wildfire Response-Related Proposals. The Governor’s budget provides a total of more than $920 million (mostly from the General Fund) for various wildfire response-related proposals across multiple departments. We note that, in addition to these proposals, the Governor is proposing a wildfire and forest resilience package, along with several other smaller wildfire-related proposals. Overarching Issues for Legislative Consideration. Overall, we find that supporting additional wildfire response capacity is merited given the worsening pattern of large and severe wildfires in recent years. However, we find that the proposals would result in a very large increase in the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s base support budget, most of which would be ongoing. Additionally, it is unclear to what extent some of the proposals will enhance response capacity and over what time frame. Finally, we find that the state would continue to benefit from the development of a statewide strategic wildfire plan to guide related funding allocations. Assessment of Specific Proposals. Despite the absence of a strategic wildfire plan, the Legislature must still make funding decisions. Accordingly, we review the Governor’s major 2022-23 wildfire response-related budget proposals. Based on our initial assessment, we classify the budget proposals into four categories. Specifically, we find that (1) some proposals generally appear reasonable; (2) two proposals could potentially have merit, in whole or in part, but lack important details or justification at this time; (3) some proposals assume funding will be provided in another proposal; and (4) some proposals appear not to be the most cost-effective approach to improving response capacity. Recommendations. Based on our assessment, we provide recommendations to inform the Legislature’s budget deliberations. As an overarching recommendation, we suggest the Legislature consider the proposals in the context of its overall priorities, keeping in mind the overarching issues for legislative consideration we identified. In terms of the individual wildfire-response proposals, we recommend the Legislature (1) approve the proposals that appear reasonable, (2) withhold action on proposals that lack important details or justification, (3) withhold action on proposals that assume funding will be provided in another proposal, and (4) require specific information to be reported for proposals that do not appear to be the most cost-effective approaches to increasing wildfire response capacity. GABRIEL PETEK | LEGISLATIVE ANALYST JANUARY 2022 INTRODUCTION This Brief Provides Our Initial Comments. Brief Includes Five Main Sections. This brief This brief is designed to provide the Legislature consists of five main sections. First, we provide with our initial assessment and recommendations background on wildfires in California, as well on the major wildfire response-related proposals as recent state funding for wildfire response. in the Governor’s budget to help guide legislative Second, we summarize the Governor’s major deliberations. We may provide additional analysis, wildfire response-related proposals. Third, we comments, and recommendations, as relevant, in the provide some overarching issues for legislative coming weeks as additional information becomes consideration. Fourth, based on the information available from the administration. We also note available at the time this brief was prepared, we that, in addition to these proposals, the Governor is provide an initial assessment of the Governor’s proposing a wildfire and forest resilience package, major wildfire response-related proposals. Finally, along with several other smaller wildfire-related we provide recommendations for the Legislature as proposals. We summarize the wildfire and forest it considers these proposals. resilience package in our brief, The 2022-23 Budget: Wildfire and Forest Resilience Package. BACKGROUND Recent Years Have Seen Some of Largest State Has Historically Focused Mostly on and Most Destructive Wildfires. In recent years, Reducing Wildfire Risks Through Response. California has experienced a growing number of The state addresses the risks of destructive destructive wildfires. As Figure 1 shows, most of wildfires through a combination of (1) prevention— California’s largest and most destructive wildfires reducing the likelihood that a wildfire will start, have occurred in recent decades. This trend has (2) mitigation—lessening the damage that wildfires been particularly notable in the last few years, which have seen some Figure 1 of the worst wildfires in the state’s recorded history. For example, the Most of the Largest and Most Destructive 2018 wildfire season included the Wildfires Have Occurred in Recent Decades Camp Fire in Butte County, which became the single most destructive wildfire in state history with nearly 9 19,000 structures destroyed and 8 20 Largest 85 fatalities, including the near-total 7 20 Most Destructive destruction of the town of Paradise. 6 A few key factors have contributed 5 to the recent increase in destructive 4 wildfires, including climate change, 3 poor forest and land management 2 practices, and increased 1 development in fire-prone areas. 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020sa a Includes wildfires that occurred in 2020 and 2021. 2022-23 Budget Series 2 cause when they do occur, and (3) response— are used as part of the state’s mutual aid system. suppressing wildfires after they start. Traditionally, Also, in collaboration with CalFire, multiple state the state has focused mostly on response. departments provide staff for hand crews, including For example, from 2005-06 through 2020-21, we the California Military Department (CMD), California estimate an average of close to 90 percent of the Conservation Corps (CCC), and the California base support budget for the California Department Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire)—the (We discuss hand crews in further detail in state’s lead agency for fire protection in the State the nearby box.) Responsibility Area (SRA)—has been dedicated Some Response Resources Provide Greater to fire response (rather than fire prevention or Flexibility Than Others. Some of the resources mitigation). (The SRA makes up roughly one-third of used by CalFire and other agencies—such as the state’s land area and consists mostly of privately year-round fire crews and fire engines—provide owned forestlands, watersheds, and rangelands.) baseline capacity to fight wildfires. Other resources State Uses Mix of Approaches, Across provide additional capacity during the peak wildfire Multiple Agencies, to Respond to Wildfires. season or larger wildfire events. (This additional The state uses a variety of resources—such as fire capacity is sometimes referred to as “surge crews, hand crews, fire engines, helicopters, and capacity.”) For example, CalFire regularly operates air tankers—to respond to wildfires. Most of these 356 fire engines, which includes 65 engines resources are under CalFire. However, other state that operate on a year-round basis as well as departments also have resources dedicated to fire 291 engines that operate on a seasonal basis. response. For example, the Office of Emergency In addition to these engines, the department also Services (OES) maintains a fleet of fire engines that maintains a fleet of 48 reserve fire engines to Hand Crews in Wildfire Response Hand Crews Play Important Role in Wildfire Response. Hand crews support fire response by constructing fire lines, assisting fire engine crews with deployment of fire hoses over long distances, providing logistical and operational support, and extinguishing hotspots to help contain fires. Hand crews also do fire mitigation work, such as hazardous fuels reduction and vegetation management projects, when not responding to wildfires. Decline in Inmate Population Has Affected Availability of Hand Crews. Historically, the majority of the hand crews utilized by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire) have been operated through agreements with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation for use of state prison inmates. These inmates are housed at conservation camps located in or near forests throughout the state. In the past decade, the state has enacted various changes to sentencing laws that have significantly reduced the inmate population. This, in turn, has reduced the population housed at conservation camps and available to serve on inmate crews. Specifically, according to the administration, CalFire historically operated 192 inmate crews. However, the number of funded crews declined to 152 as a result of a 2020-21 budget action to consolidate the state’s conservation camps in response to inmate population declines. Furthermore, the administration reports that, as of August 2021, only 63 out of 152 authorized inmate crews were staffed. Some Steps Taken to Offset Loss of Hand Crews. To address the decline in inmates available to staff hand crews, CalFire has partnered with other agencies, including the California Conservation Corps and the California Military Department, to provide staff for hand crews. Additionally, CalFire has received funding to hire firefighters to help address this decline. We highlight some of these recent augmentations in Figure 2 on page 4 of this brief. 2022-23 Budget Series 3 provide additional surge capacity. Furthermore, Base Wildfire Response Funding Has when a fire (or other disaster) is large enough Increased Substantially in Recent Years. that it overwhelms a community’s capacity to In response to severe wildfire seasons and growing respond, it can request additional resources—such wildfire risks, the state has augmented funding as fire engines or other equipment—from other for various wildfire-related activities in recent governmental entities through the state’s mutual years, including those related to wildfire response. aid system. The state supports the mutual aid As Figure 2 shows, the state has provided system in a number of ways, such as by providing augmentations for a variety of response-related state-funded fire engines to local communities purposes, such as to support additional firefighters, through the OES program mentioned previously. hand crews, support staff, fire engines, air tankers, Currently, there are 260 engines operating as part helicopters, and various types of new technology. of this program. Most of these augmentations have been made Figure 2 Key State Wildfire-Response Funding Augmentations in the Last Few Years 9 CalFire— Blackhawk Helicopters. $315 million one time (General Fund) over a few years beginning in 2018-19 to replace all 12 of CalFire’s helicopters, and $14 million ongoing to support increased maintenance and staffing associated with the helicopters. 9 CalFire and CCC—Emergency Response and Preparedness: Fire Crews. $143 million (General Fund) in 2021-22, and $124 million and 617 positions ongoing to support 16 new CalFire hand crews staffed by seasonal firefighters, eight year-round CCC hand crews, and six seasonal CCC hand crews. 9 CalFire—Relief Staffing. $85.6 million ongoing starting in 2020-21 (primarily from the General Fund) to support additional firefighting positions and fire response surge capacity. This includes: (1) $34.2 million to support 172 permanent firefighting positions; (2) $44 million for 378 seasonal firefighters and other surge capacity; (3) $7.5 million for the six CalFire contract counties, pursuant to the state’s existing budgeting methodology for contract counties, which is tied to CalFire’s budget for fire response resources; and (4) $1.8 million for facilities and equipment, such as purchasing vehicles. These increases are partially offset by a reduction of $1.9 million to reflect a lower level of unplanned overtime within the department’s fire protection program as a result of the higher ongoing staffing levels. 9 CalFire—13 Year‑Round Fire Engines. About $40 million (mostly General Fund) in 2019-20 to purchase and staff 13 additional fire engines on a year-round basis. Includes $8.3 million (one time) to purchase the fire engines and $32.6 million ongoing for 131 positions. 9 OES—Fire Engine Pre‑Positioning. $25 million annually to pre-position mutual aid fire engines and other related equipment in order to decrease local response times to potentially destructive wildfires and other disasters. This funding was provided on a one-time basis in 2017-18 (GGRF) and in 2018-19 (General Fund). Funding was extended on an ongoing basis in 2019-20 (General Fund). 9 OES—110 Fire Engines. $25 million one time (GGRF) in 2018-19 to purchase 110 additional fire engines, and $1.1 million ongoing to maintain and fuel the additional engines. 9 CalFire—Innovative Procurement. $15 million one time (General Fund) in 2019-20 for CalFire to work with vendors to test proofs of concept for various potential firefighting technology solutions. 9 CalFire—Air Tankers. $13 million ongoing (General Fund) beginning in 2019-20—increasing to $50 million upon full implementation in 2023-24—for contract funding for flight crews, maintenance parts and logistics, and 50 additional positions to operate and maintain seven C-130 air tankers that CalFire expects to receive from the federal government. 9 CalFire—Heavy Fire Equipment Operator Staffing. $10.6 million ongoing (General Fund) beginning in 2019-20 for 34 additional heavy fire equipment operators to operate bulldozers. 9 CalFire—Wildfire Forecasting. $4.4 million (General Fund) in 2020-21, increasing to $7.6 million ongoing, and 24 positions to implement the FireSIM and FireCAST wildfire forecasting technologies that were identified through the innovation procurement. 9 CalFire, OES, CMD, and CPUC—Wildfire Threat Assessment. $2 million (General Fund) in 2020-21, increasing to $9.5 million in 2021-22 and ongoing ($9.3 million General Fund and $191,000 PUCURA) and 22 positions to establish the Wildfire Forecast and Threat Intelligence Integration Center, consistent with the requirements of Chapter 405 of 2019 (SB 209, Dodd). CalFire = California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; CCC = California Conservation Corps; OES = Office of Emergency Services; GGRF = Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund; CMD = California Military Department; CPUC = California Public Utilities Commission; and PUCURA = Public Utilities Commission Utilities Reimbursement Account. 2022-23 Budget Series 4 to CalFire’s budget, but some other agencies wildfires occur simultaneously, as has happened have also received additional resources, such as in recent years. Notably, the state has experienced CCC and CMD. As shown in the figure, the state several severe wildfire seasons in recent years that provided some of these funds on an ongoing basis, have challenged the state’s capacity to respond. while it provided others on a limited-term basis. For example, in 2020, according to data from Driven by augmentations such as these, CalFire’s CalFire, roughly 7,900 requests for fire engines, total base wildfire protection budget has grown 900 requests for dozers, and 600 requests for by nearly two-thirds over the past five years alone helicopters could not be filled. (from $1.3 billion in 2017-18 to $2.1 billion in 2021-22). As shown Figure 3 in Figure 3, CalFire’s overall budget has also increased, with its State Spending on CalFire Has Grown combined budget for fire protection, (In Millions) emergency fire suppression, and resource management and $4,000 fire prevention rising by roughly 3,500 45 percent over the past five years Resource Management 3,000 and Fire Prevention (from $2.5 billion in 2017-18 to 2,500 $3.7 billion in 2021-22). 2,000 Emergency Fire Suppression Extreme Wildfire Events Can 1,500 Still Strain Response Capacity. 1,000 Despite recent augmentations, 500 Base Fire Protection extreme wildfire events can still strain resources. Resource 2005-06 2007-08 2009-10 2011-12 2013-14 2015-16 2017-18 2019-20 2021-22 availability can be particularly CalFire = California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. challenging when multiple large GOVERNOR’S PROPOSALS Governor’s Budget Includes Several 2022-23 and $14.6 million annually thereafter Significant Response-Related Proposals. for CalFire to purchase various types of The proposed budget provides a total of more than reserve equipment, including four fire hawk $920 million (mostly from the General Fund) for helicopters, 54 fire engines, and ten dozers. various wildfire response-related proposals across The Governor also proposes funding for a few departments. Major proposals include: a contract that would provide CalFire with exclusive use of ten helitankers for the next • CalFire—Staffing and Operational three years until the state anticipates receiving Enhancements. The Governor proposes federal C-130 helicopters. $400 million ongoing General Fund to improve the health and wellness of CalFire firefighters. • CalFire—Computer Aided Dispatching According to the administration, details of this (CAD)/Automatic Vehicle Locator (AVL) proposal will be developed in consultation with Program Hardware and Service Refresh. the state’s firefighter associations and may be The Governor proposes $41.8 million available in May. ($23.9 million General Fund and $17.9 million State Emergency Telephone Number Account • CalFire—Emergency Surge Capacity and [SETNA]) in 2022-23 and roughly $30.5 million Resource Enhancement. The Governor ($22.5 million General Fund and roughly proposes $179.8 million General Fund in $8 million SETNA) annually beginning in 2022-23 Budget Series 5 2023-24, along with 43 positions, for CalFire • CalFire—Training Centers. The Governor to install AVL in the rest of its fleet, implement proposes $15.7 million General Fund in a five-year replacement cycle for all of its 2022-23 and $272,000 ongoing for 13 new AVL equipment, and provide ongoing support fire engines and other equipment for the for the AVL and CAD systems. (According to Ventura Training Center and the California Fire CalFire, 1,200 of its fleet of 3,600 resources Training Center South. currently have AVL installed.) CAD is CalFire’s • OES—Enhancing Fire and Rescue primary dispatch system, and AVL is a system Mutual Aid Fire Fleet. The Governor that integrates with CAD and tracks the proposes $11.2 million General Fund in real-time location of resources in the field. 2022-23 and $10.9 million ongoing, along with • CMD—Enhancing and Expanding 11 positions, to support OES’ mutual aid fire Fire Crews: Task Force Rattlesnake. engine program. The Governor proposes General Fund • CCC—Enhancing and Expanding CCC Fire resources of $39.9 million in 2022-23 and Crews. The Governor proposes $8.1 million $41.3 million annually thereafter and 15 State General Fund in 2022-23 and $10.2 million Active Duty positions to covert 13 seasonal ongoing to support ten hand crews (four new CMD hand crews to 14 year-round crews and conversion of six seasonal crews to hand crews. year-round), as well as an additional 18 staff • OES and CalFire—Fire Integrated positions and 13 corpsmember positions to Real-Time Intelligence System (FIRIS). support these crews. The Governor proposes $30 million ongoing • CCC—Rightsizing Fire Crew Resources. General Fund and 31 positions for the The Governor proposes $1.8 million General FIRIS system, which provides real-time Fund in 2022-23 and $2 million ongoing for aerial data and predictive models to inform 13 additional corpsmembers and 11 staff to the state’s response to wildfires and support existing CCC fire crews. other hazards. • CalFire—Various Capital Outlay Projects. • CalFire—Contract County Crews. As shown in Figure 4, the Governor proposes The Governor proposes $25.4 million General $175.2 million ($119.7 million General Fund Fund in 2022-23 and $35.4 million ongoing to and $55.5 million in lease revenue bonds) fund 12 hand crews for contract counties (two in 2022-23 for various capital outlay projects, for each of the six contract counties), as well mainly focused on replacing and relocating as a rebaselining of other funding provided to facilities such as unit headquarters, fire contract counties. (The state funds contract stations, and air attack bases. This includes counties to provide fire protection services funding for both continuing phases of on behalf of the department in SRA within previously approved projects and new county boundaries.) projects. The total estimated cost for the proposed projects is about $713 million. 2022-23 Budget Series 6 Figure 4 CalFire Capital Outlay Projects Proposed for 2022-23 (In Thousands) 2022-23 Fund New or Total Project Project Amount Source Continuing Cost Statewide: Replace Communications Facilities, Phase V $37,266 GF Continuing $41,618 Hemet-Ryan AAB: Replace Facility 33,661 LRB Continuing 37,523 Prado HB: Replace Facility 21,831 LRB Continuing 24,600 Lake/Napa Unit Autoshop and Warehouse: Replace Facility 19,713 GF Continuing 22,917 Potrero Forest FS: Replace Facility 14,675 GF Continuing 17,370 Chico AAB: Infrastructure Improvements 10,605 GF Continuing 12,491 Shasta Trinity UH/Northern Operations: Relocate Facilities 6,288 GF Continuing 109,759 Lake Napa UH and St Helena FS: Relocate Facility 5,000 GF New 42,714 Intermountain Conservation Camp: Replace Facility 3,831 GF Continuing 73,895 Humboldt-Del Norte UH: Relocate Facility 3,558 GF Continuing 57,317 Paso Robles AAB: Infrastructure Improvements 3,277 GF Continuing 3,859 South Tahoe FS: New Facility 3,000 GF New 16,680 Hollister AAB/Bear Valley HB: Relocate Facility 2,131 GF Continuing 53,550 Minor Projects 2,068 GF New 2,068 North Tahoe FS: New Facility 2,000 GF New 15,680 Tehama Glenn UH: Relocate Facility 1,500 GF New 63,720 Columbia HB: Replace Facility 1,228 GF New 17,435 Howard Forest HB: Replace Facility 1,228 GF Continuing 17,885 Higgins Corner FS: Replace Facility 789 GF Continuing 12,029 Bear Valley FS: Relocate Facility 750 GF New 9,594 Macdoel FS: Relocate Facility 586 GF Continuing 11,879 Wilbur Springs FS: Relocate Facility 150 GF New 12,214 L.A. Moran Reforestation Center Improvements 50 GF New 5,826 Self-Generating Power in Tehama-Glenn and Fresno-Kings Units 50 GF New 30,100 Totals $175,235 $712,723 CalFire = California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection; GF = General Fund; AAB = Air Attack Base; LRB = lease-revenue bonds; HB = Helitack Base; FS = Fire Station; and UH = Unit Headquarters. OVERARCHING ISSUES FOR LEGISLATIVE CONSIDERATION In this section, we identify some overarching in the future. Accordingly, it is reasonable to provide issues for the Legislature to consider as it additional resources to improve the state’s capacity evaluates the Governor’s various wildfire to respond to future wildfires. In particular, in response-related proposals. principle, it makes sense to enhance the availability Additional Wildfire Response Capacity, of flexible resources that can surge when needed to Particularly During Extreme Events, Is Merited. respond to major wildfires. As mentioned previously, there has been a pattern Proposals Would Result in Very Large of increasing numbers of severe wildfires in recent Increase in CalFire Base Support Budget, years, which have strained the state’s capacity to Mostly Ongoing. As shown in Figure 5 on the next respond. Moreover, the effects of climate change page, if the Legislature adopts all the Governor’s are likely to lead to growing risks of severe wildfires wildfire response-related proposals, CalFire’s 2022-23 Budget Series 7 total base support budget for fire protection to acquire new fire engines for training centers, some would increase by 33 percent (from $2.1 billion in of which would replace older engines and some of 2021-22 to $2.8 billion in 2022-23). This represents which would increase the number of training engines the largest annual increase since our office started available. While trainees may appreciate these new regularly tracking this information in 2005-06. engines, it is unclear how the proposed engines (For reference, the average annual increase has would improve response capacity or provide other been 8 percent since 2005-06.) Also, in contrast measurable benefits to the state. to the Governor’s proposed wildfire and forest We also note that the Governor proposes to fund resilience package, most of the augmentations for some activities for which it may take a few years wildfire response-related activities are proposed to see benefits. Notably, the Governor proposes to be ongoing. (In addition to the proposed to acquire helicopters and other equipment, which augmentations to CalFire’s base support budget, can take substantial time to procure. For example, the budget also includes significant new funding for CalFire estimates it will take roughly one additional capital outlay projects.) year to receive each additional helicopter ordered. Unclear to What Extent Some Proposals As such, it would take roughly four years for the Would Enhance Capacity and Over What Time department to receive all four of the proposed Frame. As noted above, the concept of improving helicopters. The department also estimates it would wildfire response capacity has merit. However, the take up to three years to receive the additional extent to which some of the Governor’s proposals proposed fire engines and dozers. Additionally, the would expand this capacity and over what time various types of capital outlay projects proposed period is unclear. For example, the largest proposal by the Governor often take at least a few years to included in the Governor’s budget is $400 million complete and be available for use. in ongoing General Fund to support the health Some Proposed Spending Is Excluded and wellness of CalFire firefighters. As we discuss Under State Appropriations Limit (SAL). further later in this brief, while supporting firefighters The California Constitution imposes a limit on is a worthy endeavor, it is unclear how this funding the amount of revenue the state can appropriate would be allocated, including how much would be each year. The state can exclude certain capital provided to increase staffing versus increasing pay outlay appropriations from the SAL calculation. and/or benefits. If the proposed funding is used to Of the roughly $855 million proposed from the increase compensation, it is unclear to what extent General Fund for major wildfire response-related (if at all) it will result in greater response capacity. proposals in 2022-23, the Governor excludes roughly Similarly, the Governor’s budget includes a proposal 30 percent ($252 million) from the SAL. This includes $132 million for equipment and $120 million for capital outlay Figure 5 projects. The remaining roughly CalFire Budget Summary $603 million of General Fund— (Dollars in Millions) almost all of which is proposed on an ongoing basis—would likely 2021-22 2022-23 Change count towards the limit. If the (Estimated) (Proposed) Amount Percent Legislature were to reject any of By Program the wildfire response proposals Base Fire Protection $2,113 $2,809 $695.0 33% excluded from the SAL calculation, Emergency Fire Suppression 838 413 -424.4 -51 it would generally need to repurpose Resource Management 745 414 -330.1 -44 the associated funding for other Othera 68 72 4.0 6 SAL-related purposes, such as Totals $3,763 $3,708 -$55.0 -1% tax reductions or an alternative a Other includes the Office of the State Fire Marshal, Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, and Department of Justice Legal Services. excluded expenditure. (In our report, CalFire = California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The State Appropriations Limit, we cover SAL issues in more detail.) 2022-23 Budget Series 8 Absence of a Strategic Wildfire Plan Makes more strategic approach to addressing wildfire It Difficult to Assess if Proposals Are Optimal risks. Specifically, as part of the 2019-20 budget Approach. We continue to believe that the state package, the Legislature required CalFire and OES would benefit from the development of a statewide to conduct an assessment of the existing wildfire strategic wildfire plan, as we discussed in our response capacity through state and mutual aid February 2020 report, The 2020-21 Budget: resources to identify gaps in capacity, cost-effective Governor’s Wildfire-Related Proposals. The approaches, and fire response goals. (We refer to purpose of the plan would be to inform and guide this as the “required assessment” in this brief.) The state policymakers regarding the most effective required assessment was due on April 1, 2020, but strategies for responding to wildfires and mitigating has not been provided to date due to competing wildfire risks. In particular, the plan should include workload demands. According to CalFire, the guidance on future funding allocations to ensure administration has no estimated time frame the highest-priority and most cost-effective for completing this report. Absent the types of programs and activities receive funding and that information that would be in a strategic wildfire plan the state supports an optimal balance of funding for and the required assessment, it is difficult for the resilience and response. Legislature to determine whether the proposals put The Legislature has taken steps to attempt forward by the administration represent the most to secure information that would facilitate a appropriate and cost-effective mix of approaches to meet the state’s needs for fire response. ASSESSMENT OF SPECIFIC PROPOSALS Despite the absence of a strategic wildfire plan, this brief was prepared. These proposals the Legislature must still make funding decisions include the following: and respond to the budget proposals put forward • CalFire—Contract County Crews. We find by the Governor. In order to assist the Legislature the proposed expansion of hand crew in this process, we assess the Governor’s capacity in the state is likely merited given specific 2022-23 wildfire response-related budget the recent declines in inmate crews and the proposals, based on the information available importance these crews play in the state’s to us at the time of the preparation of this brief. response and resilience strategies. Notably, As we discuss further below, we find that (1) some the proposed added capacity would be proposals generally appear reasonable; (2) two provided through the state agreeing to fund proposals could potentially have merit, in whole or crews for contract counties, which the state in part, but lack important details or justification has not generally done in the past. (The state at this time; (3) some proposals assume funding did provide some one-time funding to contract will be provided in another proposal and thus counties as part of the 2021-22 wildfire and the proposals should be considered together; forest resilience package.) We find that it is and (4) some proposals appear not to be the reasonable for the state to provide support most cost-effective approach to improving for contract county hand crews because response capacity. the state will likely derive significant benefits from them. This is because the crews would Some Proposals Generally conduct activities in the SRA—such as Appear Reasonable vegetation management projects and wildfire We find that some of the Governor’s proposals response—that are likely to reduce the appear reasonable based on the information likelihood of major wildfires. We also note that provided by the administration at the time the state already provides funding to contract counties for similar types of activities to 2022-23 Budget Series 9 prevent and suppress wildfires, such as for fire is anticipated to be provided for salaries and engines and crews. Additionally, the proposed $580 million for benefits. rebaselining of funding for contract counties • OES—Enhancing Fire and Rescue Mutual appears to better reflect the costs the state Aid Fire Fleet. This proposal would support would likely incur if contract counties were OES’ mutual aid fire engine program, which not providing services on behalf of CalFire is an important part of the state’s ability to in the SRA. access surge capacity. However, at this time, • CalFire—Various Capital Outlay Projects. it is unclear how specifically the additional While the full costs of the proposed capital funding proposed by the Governor would be outlay projects will be substantial, we find that used. Specifically, it is unclear to what extent the new projects would address important the funding would be used by OES to replace infrastructure needs for the department, such existing fire engines more frequently or as replacing aging facilities that do not meet provide a more robust maintenance program the department’s operational needs. We do for its engines. Without this type of basic not have concerns with the funding included information, it is impossible for the Legislature in the budget for the next phases of previously to evaluate what specific improvements to fire approved CalFire capital outlay projects. response capacity would be expected from this proposal and whether they would justify Additional Information or Justification the additional costs. Needed for Some Proposals Some Proposals Assume Funding Will We find that two proposals could potentially Be Provided in Another Proposal have merit in whole or in part, but lack some key information or justification at this time. These We find that the some of the Governor’s proposals are: proposals assume funding will be provided in the staffing and operational enhancements proposal. • CalFire—Staffing and Operational As such, it will be important for the Legislature Enhancements. The last few years have to consider these proposals together as we placed significant strains on firefighters. discuss below. Accordingly, it is reasonable in principle to dedicate additional funding to support their • CalFire—Emergency Surge Capacity health and wellness. At this time, however, the and Resource Enhancement. Given administration has not provided any details the high number of unfilled requests for on what the proposed $400 million in ongoing response-related equipment—including fire General Fund resources would support. This engines, helicopters, and dozers—over the makes it impossible for the Legislature to past few years, we find that it is reasonable for assess whether the proposal represents the the Legislature to consider providing additional appropriate funding amount, what specific resources to increase the availability of such outcomes would be achieved from this equipment. However, the Governor’s proposal funding, and whether the proposed funding does not account for all the operational costs would be the most cost-effective approach associated with the proposed equipment. to improving the state’s capacity to respond Specifically, according to CalFire, the costs to potentially destructive wildfires. Notably, of staffing the proposed helicopters are $400 million would represent a substantial included as part of the staffing and operational increase in funding for CalFire personnel. For enhancements proposal. Accordingly, it will reference, the budget estimates that spending be important for the Legislature to consider on CalFire personnel costs will total $1.5 billion the two proposals together. Additionally, given in 2021-22. Of this amount, about $930 million the complex and technical nature of decisions about the relative operational value of various 2022-23 Budget Series 10 types of equipment in specific wildfire • CalFire—Training Centers. At this time, it conditions, it is particularly difficult to evaluate is unclear what additional response benefits the merits of this type of proposal absent a would be provided by acquiring 13 new strategic wildfire plan. engines for CalFire’s training facilities and • CCC and CMD Fire Crew Proposals. The whether those benefits justify the cost of proposed CCC and CMD hand crews (and the Governor’s proposal. We note that associated support staff, as relevant) would the need for some or all of the proposed provide a significant increase in the resources training engines could potentially be met available to assist in responding to active by repurposing older fire engines that the wildfires, as well as conducting hazardous department would otherwise sell. We do not fuel removal projects at other times. We raise concerns with the purchase of other expect that such an expansion would provide training equipment. important value to the state. However, we note • OES and CalFire—FIRIS. Since 2019, the that additional CalFire staffing is anticipated to state has been piloting the use of FIRIS—a be required to oversee the proposed changes system that provides real-time aerial data to the CCC and CMD crews. According to and predictive models to inform the state’s the administration, this additional staffing response to wildfires and other hazards— is included in the staffing and operational through an agreement with Orange County. enhancements proposal. Given this, it will be Under this proposal, OES and CalFire would important for the Legislature to consider the take over FIRIS from Orange County on proposals together. a permanent basis and expand the level of service provided to include two planes Some Proposals May Not Be Most providing 24-hour coverage each at a total Cost-Effective Approach to Improving cost of roughly $30 million annually. (The Orange County pilot included two planes, one Response Capacity that provided 24-hour coverage and one that We have some initial concerns with the remaining provided 12-hour coverage.) However, it is proposals because they may not represent the most unclear whether this additional level of service cost-effective approaches to improving response is necessary. This is because the departments capacity based on the information available at the have not provided sufficient justification for time this brief was prepared. Specifically, we have why the current level of service is insufficient, such concerns with the following proposals: particularly given that they have access to • CalFire—CAD/AVL Program Hardware and similar aerial data and capabilities through Service Refresh. While CAD and AVL provide a partnership with CMD. Furthermore, while important functionality to the department, the departments did not evaluate what the it is not clear to us whether (1) the benefits cost would be to continue the existing level of of extending it to every CalFire resource— service, we would expect it to be significantly including every vehicle operated by any lower than $30 million per year given that the CalFire staff—outweighs the substantial cost, proposal notes that it would cost $17 million (2) a five-year replacement cycle is necessary, for Orange County to continue providing the and (3) such a replacement cycle is consistent existing level of service. (According to OES, with the practices of governmental entities Orange County is not interested in continuing with this type of technology. to manage this program.) 2022-23 Budget Series 11 RECOMMENDATIONS In this section of the brief, we provide our and various types of technology. It will be initial recommendations on the Governor’s major important for the Legislature to ensure that it wildfire response-related proposals to inform the is comfortable that the Governor’s proposals Legislature’s budget deliberations based on the build on, rather than duplicate, these information we had received at the time this brief existing resources. was prepared. First, we provide an overarching • Priorities for Ongoing General Fund. recommendation that the Legislature consider It will also be important for the Legislature proposals in the context of its overall priorities. to consider the Governor’s wildfire response Next, we provide a series of recommendations proposals in the context of its priorities for on the individual wildfire-response proposals we the use of ongoing General Fund resources assessed. Specifically, we recommend that the since most of the proposed funding would be Legislature (1) approve those proposals that appear provided on an ongoing basis. reasonable, (2) withhold action on two proposals • SAL Implications. It will also be important for pending the receipt of certain information from the the Legislature to consider the implications administration, (3) withhold action on proposals that for the SAL as it reviews these proposals. rely on funding provided through another proposal, As discussed earlier, the Governor excludes and (4) require relevant departments to report roughly 30 percent of the $855 million on certain information for proposals that do not proposed for major wildfire response-related appear to be the most cost-effective approaches to proposals in 2022-23 from the SAL. increasing wildfire response capacity. This includes $132 million for equipment and $120 million for capital outlay projects. Consider Proposals in If the Legislature were to reject any of Context of Overall Priorities these proposals, it would generally need to Given the size of the proposed wildfire repurpose the associated funding for other response-related augmentations, we recommend SAL-related purposes, such as tax reductions that the Legislature weigh all the proposals in the or an alternative excluded expenditure. context of its priorities and other budget decisions, • Ability to Enhance Additional Response keeping in mind the following considerations: Capacity Cost-Effectively and • Governor’s Wildfire Resilience Package. Expeditiously. Finally, given the amount As we discuss in greater detail in a separate of proposed funding, it will be particularly brief, the Governor’s 2022-23 budget plan important to ensure that the mix of proposals includes a total of $800 million from the represents the best mix of resources to General Fund over two years (in addition to improve the state’s ability to respond $200 million annually from the Greenhouse cost-effectively. Ideally, the Legislature Gas Reduction Fund) for various wildfire would have a strategic wildfire plan to help prevention and mitigation efforts. Ultimately, guide these decisions. However, given the a key question for the Legislature will be how pressing nature of this issue, the Legislature to balance additional resources for wildfire could consider providing some or all of resilience versus response. the requested resources while continuing • Augmentations Provided in Recent to pursue more information from the Budgets. Notably, recent state budgets have administration to inform future decisions. provided various augmentations for wildfire To the extent it provides funding for only some response-related resources as mentioned resources, it could focus on the resources previously, including for fire crews, hand that have the clearest demonstrated ability crews, fire engines, helicopters, aircraft, to improve response capacity, are likely to 2022-23 Budget Series 12 provide near-term wildfire response benefits, Withhold Action on Proposals and are least likely to change substantially That Assume Funding Provided in based on information that would be provided Another Proposal in a strategic wildfire plan. We recommend that the Legislature withhold action on the proposals that are proposed to Approve Proposals That be staffed in part with resources included in the Generally Appear Reasonable staffing and operational enhancements proposal. Some proposals meet clearly identified needs, • CalFire—Emergency Surge Capacity and include sufficient details to enable us to adequately Resource Enhancement. We recommend assess them, and are likely to be reasonable even in withholding action on this proposal because the absence of a strategic wildfire plan. Accordingly, it would be staffed in part through resources we think it makes sense for the Legislature to proposed in the staffing and operational approve them. These proposals include (1) CalFire’s enhancements proposal. Accordingly, the contract county crews proposal and (2) CalFire’s Legislature will want to consider this proposal various capital outlay proposals. along with that proposal, the details of which Withhold Action on Proposals are not anticipated to be available until May. Additionally, this proposal is particularly Pending Additional Information difficult to evaluate absent a strategic wildfire As we discuss previously, there are a couple plan or required assessment because proposals that may have merit in concept, but are decisions about how to prioritize the use of lacking adequate details and/or justification at this various types of equipment in fire response time. For these proposals, we recommend that is complex and technical. Accordingly, if the the Legislature withhold action pending receipt Legislature ultimately does want to provide of additional information from the administration. resources in this area, it could consider If the administration does not provide sufficient approving the full requested amount or take information to justify their approval, we recommend a different approach. For example, one that the Legislature reject the proposals in whole or alternative could be to approve some of in part. These proposals are: these resources in the budget year and defer • CalFire—Staffing and Operational action on the remaining resources to a future Enhancements. As previously discussed, year. (This could potentially be done without there is no information available on how delaying the receipt of equipment, since the proposed funding would be used and some equipment such as the helicopters, why $400 million is the appropriate level of will take multiple years to arrive regardless.) funding. Based on our discussion with the The Legislature could make its approval administration, we understand that additional of additional resources contingent on details on this proposal may be available in the administration preparing the required May. Until such information is available, we assessment to help guide decision-making. recommend the Legislature withhold action • CCC and CMD Fire Crew Proposals. on this proposal. We also recommend withholding action • OES—Enhancing Fire and Rescue Mutual on the CCC and CMD fire crew proposals. Aid Fire Fleet. We recommend withholding Our understanding is that the CalFire action pending receipt of information on staffing to oversee these crews is assumed how the proposed funding would be used to to be provided as part of the staffing and support OES’ fleet, as well as substantiating operational enhancements proposal. that the specific benefits that would be Accordingly, the Legislature will want to provided by this proposal justify the cost. consider these proposals along with that one. 2022-23 Budget Series 13 Require Specific Information on • CalFire—Training Centers. We recommend Proposals That Do Not Appear requiring CalFire to report on why these training engines are needed given that the Cost-Effective department can use reserve engines or As discussed previously, there are a few engines that would otherwise be surplused proposals that do not appear to be the most for training purposes. Specifically, the cost-effective approach to improving response department should be able to articulate the capacity based on the information available at the specific consequences of not having these time of the preparation of this brief. Accordingly, new engines on its capacity to respond to we recommend that the Legislature require the wildfires or identify other measurable benefits administering departments to report specific to the state. Absent a compelling rationale information to address these concerns. To the for these engines, we recommend modifying extent that the responses are not compelling, we the proposal to reject them. (We do not raise would recommend the Legislature modify or reject concerns with the other equipment proposed these proposals. These proposals are: to be funded.) • CalFire—CAD/AVL Program Hardware and • OES and CalFire—FIRIS. We recommend the Service Refresh. We recommend requiring Legislature direct OES and CalFire to report the department to report on (1) how the at budget hearings on an alternative to their benefits of extending AVL to every CalFire proposal that would fund FIRIS at the current resource—including every vehicle operated level of service, rather than the higher level by any CalFire staff even those not directly of service proposed. This would provide the involved in fire response—outweighs the Legislature with important information on cost of the proposal, (2) why a five-year its options for continuing this program and replacement cycle is necessary, and allow it to assess whether there is another (3) whether a five-year replacement cycle is approach that would meet the state’s needs at consistent with the practices of governmental a significantly lower cost. entities that use this type of technology. Such information would be important for the Legislature to determine whether to modify the proposal to provide AVL to a subset of the fleet or with a longer replacement cycle. 2022-23 Budget Series 14 2022-23 Budget Series 15 2022-23 BUDGET LAO PUBLICATIONS This report was prepared by Helen Kerstein with assistance from Jessica Peters, and reviewed by Anthony Simbol. The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) is a nonpartisan office that provides fiscal and policy information and advice to the Legislature. To request publications call (916) 445-4656. This report and others, as well as an e-mail subscription service, are available on the LAO’s website at www.lao.ca.gov. The LAO is located at 925 L Street, Suite 1000, Sacramento, California 95814. 16 LEGISLATIVE ANALYST’S OFFICE