The Selma Enterprise asked Mayor Dennis Lujan on his views on spending the proceeds of Measure S -- the half-cent sales tax increase to pay for increased police and fire services -- and the city's financial shape.Q How close is the city to filing bankruptcy? How much has been borrowed?

A On a scale of one to 10, we are at zero [to filing bankruptcy.] Selma is one of the luckiest cities in the Valley. We were No. 1 is sales tax per capita revenue for such a long time. We brought in more sales tax than Fresno, the fabled Clovis, and any other town.

Our bad times are usually better than most city's good times. The essentials will be maintained.

We went through $1.7 million in reserves since 2006 so we wouldn't have to lay people off. We haven't borrowed anything from anybody.

Q What would be the current state of the city finances without Measure S (being used to supplement the city budget)?

A We would be treating fire and police the same way as we are treating public works, recreation, finance department and the planning department. They would have seen cuts. Because of Measure S the police and fire won't see cuts. Thank God for Measure S. Thank God that the Council has the discretion to reallocate funds from Measure S.

Q How many officers would you have to lay off without Measure S?

A Probably six safety personnel.

Q Why expand service with officers and cars when you say you need Measure S just to keep the current level?

A The cars we have now are junk. The Council is not spending the money. It is the police and fire departments. They are getting together and deciding where they want to spend the money. The hole that will be created for safety services will be filled with Measure S.

We are not anticipating having to lay off anyone in fire or police in Measure S. Measure S [decisions are] not the City Council. Measure S is the fire department, the police department, their unions, there's a lot of stakeholders in this. They want to run the show.

The Council is saying "do what you want with the money." We've washed our hands of it. Fire, police, tell us what you want. I don't think the Council spent one day making an expenditure plan. We just reviewed it.

You should talk to the fire and police chiefs about why they spent the money so late. It's not the Council.

Q But isn't the Council the people that make sure that this money gets spent?

A Anytime we do something contrary to what the fire department or the police department wants, we get a hailstorm of criticism. This is something we don't intend to suffer through. We just make darn sure that control is with the police and fire chiefs and the unions.

I wish I could have been the face of Measure S. Then that money would have been spent as it came in. Nobody would have been sitting on it. It was the fire and police chief that felt that there was no rush in spending that Measure S money.

Q If Measure S money is going into the general fund, how will the public know that Measure S won't be used for things other than safety services?

A It absolutely will be used for things other than safety services. That money from the general fund that we loaned Measure S, that money was supposed to be used for something else. We subsidized Measure S, we loaned it money.

That money was probably from public works, from anything else. We fronted the money. It became safety money when we loaned it to Measure S. It was a loan and it will be repaid. Measure S is a stand-alone revenue stream. We didn't have any Measure S money coming in at the time that the police chief made the decision to put the officers in MAGEC.

Q How firm a grasp does the Council have with the budget?

A The City Council has a great grasp of the information given to us. If that information is misleading or downright false, then our perception will not be accurate. We would hope that the information that we're getting is correct.

Q How was the City Council so unaware of the city's finances a month ago that you approved a new spending plan April 6 for Measure S that now has to be thrown out?

A It was the fire, police and their unions. They made the first one and the second one too. They come to us and tell us what they need. Is that information correct? That's the only thing we have to go on. Garbage in, garbage out. We depend on our chiefs to give us information.

One day they may be saying they need 10 cars and then the next day they need two sworn officers, one for gang suppression and one for drug suppression. Those are recommendations that they give us. How are we going to refute what they're telling us? That's from the horse's mouth. If we find out it's not accurate, the door will be wide open for them to leave.

Q What will you do if the state takes more money from the city?

A We will lose $800,000. We are looking at personnel. You can't find that money in maintenance and operations. We just don't buy that many paper clips and paper.

Q So isn't it concerning that you just hired two more police officers?

A Apparently there are two worlds. There's the police and fire and then there's everyone else. They have their own revenue stream. They are not being affected at all in this economic downturn at all because of Measure S.

They talk about the police officers furloughs, I'm stunned that they bring it up. They are being reimbursed 100 percent. They aren't losing a dime on those furloughs. There's people in that department that are losing money, but it isn't any of the patrolmen.

That's a misconception that police and fire are suffering like everyone else. They are not. Measure S isn't going to save the city, it's just going to save fire and police. They are insulated.

Q How long have you known that Measure S was going to be needed to keep the current level of safety service? Is that why the chiefs didn't spend the money?

A They're sitting back because they felt comfortable in what they did. They didn't think they were doing anything wrong. I know the fire chief was banking on his money buying a shiny truck with cash. Now he's been pushed to the point where he's going to have to do a lease-purchase program on it.

People have been pushing the chiefs to do things. Unfortunately they're reacting to the perception that they mismanaged Measure S by not spending it immediately. That's up for debate.

Q Do you think Measure S would have passed based on the results we have seen today?

A The police and fire were going out there telling people that we had 3,000 gang members ready to pounce on us. You reap what you sow. You passed a measure by panicking people. Where's the urgency now? People want to sit on the money to buy a new truck in cash and to buy 10 new cars.

The perception was urgent, that we needed this immediately. When both of the chiefs sat on the money, it doesn't look good. It doesn't make the Council look bad, it makes the chiefs look bad.

A part of Measure S was that we couldn't get our "money-grubbing paws" on it. I took offense to that. You have to be careful what you wish for. Council didn't touch it. The two chiefs sat on it.

I was actually in a forum where someone said there were 3,000 gang members in Selma. If you had stood up and tried to refute that you would have been stoned. It was almost a mob mentality. That isn't the way to run a government. That isn't the way to pass a safety tax. But that's what was done.

But we do need a fire engine and a new facility. But do we need more officers or firefighters? I don't know. I have people coming up to me all the time telling me that we have too many. That's still up there for debate.