Culver City's Budget Process is Broken. Public Input Can Fix It.

EDITOR'S NOTE: The following is an editorial piece submitted by a source unaffiliated with Culver Crescent. The sentiments expressed in this article do not reflect the stance or opinions of Culver Crescent or any of its writers.

By Bubba Fish, Culver City Councilmember

Culver City is facing a serious budget crisis. But with real public input, we have a chance to fix it — and build a more equitable and sustainable future.

During last year’s budget cycle, the city identified an ongoing structural deficit in our General Fund of $5 to $10 million annually. This year, the City Council unanimously declared a fiscal emergency and called for a special election this August, asking voters to approve a quarter-cent sales tax increase.

I supported that measure, as did the four other Councilmembers — but even if it passes, it won’t be enough. The revenue, estimated at $6 million annually, won’t fully close the gap, leaving little room to invest in the programs and services our community relies on. And as the Olympic and Paralympic Games approach — and economic uncertainty grows under the current federal administration — having a healthy and sustainable city budget will be even more important.

In Fiscal Year 2013, our General Fund expenditures totaled $88 million. Thirteen years later, they’re now just over $200 million.

Inflation explains only part of the growth — most of it comes from the city expanding services, staffing, and obligations, all without a long-term strategy to sustain them.

So how did we get here? And more importantly, how do we make sure we don’t end up here again?

When I asked city staff earlier this year whether our budget process was designed to address our deficit in any meaningful way, the answer I received was a definitive no. The plan, instead, was to hope the sales tax passes — maxing out our legally allowed rate — and avoid any cuts.

What followed was a largely opaque budget process, with limited engagement from either the Council or the public. The proposed budget that staff is presenting this week was created without much input from either.

During two full days of budget work plan presentations, we heard from fewer than 20 members of the public. That’s less than 0.05% of our city. No surveys. No community forums. No effort to ask: What do you value? What should we fund more — or less?

I’m incredibly grateful to our hardworking staff, including our CFO, who has gone above and beyond to educate residents on how to understand the city’s budget. But there’s a difference between educating the public about the budget and giving them opportunities to participate in its formation. While both are critically important, we are in desperate need of the latter.

Culver City prides itself on inclusive planning. We do it with nearly every plan the city creates — from our General Plan to our Parks Master Plan, our Complete Streets Design Guidelines to our Racial Equity Action Plan. But when it comes to the city’s most consequential document — its annual budget — we largely leave the public out.

That’s why today, Councilmember McMorrin and I are proposing a $250,000 investment to develop a community-driven budget process — one that’s transparent, participatory, and built to last.

This proposal directs our staff to return to Council with a plan to develop changes to our budget process that incorporate best practices from peer cities, include outreach strategies that meet people where they are, and actively engage a representative cross-section of our community.

The process would include multilingual outreach and create multiple opportunities for community members to meaningfully help shape the most important document our city creates.

Some may question how we can justify spending $250,000 during a fiscal emergency. But the truth is: we can’t afford to maintain the status quo. Investing in a more inclusive budget process is investing in the long-term fiscal sustainability of our community.

The reason we’re in this position is because our current process leaves the public out.

Budgets should be living documents — responsive to changing community needs — not rigid blueprints set in stone. With a more flexible budget, we could more easily shift resources to successful programs and deepen investments in services that make life better.

But when budget decisions happen in a vacuum — when just five Council Members are left in a mostly empty room on a Tuesday afternoon to decide which programs get cut and which survive — we risk weakening both the quality of our services and the public’s trust in how they're delivered.

The result? An ever-ballooning budget — and a City Council left without the community buy-in needed to make even the most necessary structural changes.

That’s why cities around the world are finding innovative ways to encourage residents to help shape their city budgets. They’re finding that a participatory process doesn’t just lead to better outcomes for residents—it can strengthen cities’ long-term fiscal health. When residents have a real say, they help identify priorities, flag inefficiencies, and build the buy-in needed to sustain tough but necessary choices.

Our city budget is the clearest reflection of our values. If we want those values to represent all of Culver City — not just those who can drop work to speak at a public meeting on a Tuesday afternoon — we need a better process.

We don’t need to wait for another crisis. We can act now — by investing in a budget process shaped by the people and belonging to all of us.

If you share that vision, I hope you’ll make your voice heard following Tuesday’s Finance Department budget presentation — either in person at City Hall or by joining us on Zoom. Let’s show that Culver City is ready for a budget process built by — and accountable to — its people.