As multiple wildfires rage across Los Angeles, causing unprecedented levels of destruction, the citys budget has come under scrutiny. Its an example of misinformation that has spread during the crisisand a sign of the increasingly complicated calculations cities will have to make to address the realities of climate change.A number of articles criticized Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass for cutting the fire departments budget by some $23 million (while funneling more money to police), but that assessment isnt completely accurate. Though the 2024-25 budget that was approved did show a deficit, it doesnt reflect a Memoranda of Understanding that was finalized in November, giving the Los Angeles Fire Department an additional $76 million, council member Bob Blumenfields office confirmed, resulting in a $53 million budget increase compared to the previous year.Still, the LAFD is underfunded in relation to what the city needs. And long before these January fires, officials were saying that the city had outgrown its fire department. Its understandable that the public would be concerned about resources as greater Los Angeles deals with incredibly damaging, and difficult to contain, fires. But experts say that narrow scope doesnt capture the full, complicated picture of city budgets, or the resources needed to combat climate changeand the extreme weather it worsensin a meaningful way.Multiple jurisdictions at playLocal governments are seeing greater impacts of climate change, and though most have emergency management departments, its hard to prepare for something that has never happened beforewhether its a hurricane that hits the mountains of North Carolina or a wildfire that breaks out during record drought and winds.For an area like Los Angeles thats close to so many other cities, its not only L.A.s budget in play. Some of the jurisdictions affected by the fires, like Malibu and Santa Monica, have their own emergency management departments, as well as mutual aid agreements in which neighboring municipalities pledge to help each other out, says Carlos Martn, an architect and engineer who works on housing and disaster preparedness.All that to say, its a wide range of jurisdictions and government levels playing a role here, he says (though he notes that most of them are underfunded, which is a broad issue). Cities also rely on counties for funding, and counties then ask state or federal governments for disaster support. More and more, cities are relying on the federal government, Martn says, because the resources just arent there locally, and the damages are way more than anybody ever anticipated.(And how much federal funding will be available under incoming President Donald Trump remains to be seen; during Californias deadly 2018 wildfires, he initially withheld disaster aid until he saw that many affected residents voted for him. Hes since reiterated threats to withhold aid in the future.)Looking beyond budget numbersJust comparing budget totals doesnt show the whole picture of what a city is investing in. Simply cutting a budget or adding to a budget doesnt mean thats going to have the [right] impact, says Jason Grant, director of the International City/County Management Agency (ICMA), a national association of more than 13,000 local government employees. What are we trying to address? he asks. That needs to be the focus.If a fire departments budget was cut and that meant it couldnt increase capacity or purchase necessary equipment, thats one thing. If a budget increased because everyone got a raise but no staff was added, would it have made a difference in response? The focus needs to be, What is it we are funding and not funding, Grant says, and how will that help us address the concerns were facing here in our community.The LAFD does need more funding; cuts to things like overtime have already created operational challenges, the department chief has said. But some of the recent cuts eliminated vacant positions, freeing up money for new classes and gear. And its hard to know how much changing the 2024-25 budget would have helped a situation as devastating as thisin which hydrants were tapped in an effort to put out hundreds of house fires, compared to the typical one or two theyre designed for; amid record-high winds that grounded water-dropping aircraft while fanning flames and carrying embers far and wide; and in which a series of climate events coalesced to set up the perfect conditions for disaster. Our infrastructure is not set up well for this, Martn says.There are ways that increasing the budget could have helped, surely, for specific equipment or additional resources. But again, its hard to prepare for an unprecedented event.Preparing for future disastersEven if the fire department had a larger budget, it wouldnt necessarily mean that L.A.or any other citywould be prepared for the next disaster. And allocating funds to emergency response deals with just one aspect of the challenge. Cities also need to invest more money in climate adaptation and mitigation. Studies have found that every $1 invested in disaster mitigation saves up to $13 in disaster losses. Its like taking a pill to prevent the disease versus getting the disease treated afterwards, Martn says. Thats the way we have to start thinking about these events: What we used to think of as individual crises [are now] chronic things.Its difficult to turn the conversation about these fires toward that bigger picture when people are suffering now, homes and lives have been lost, and entire neighborhoods have been destroyed. In fact, the fires are still burning, so its understandable to focus on the efforts to put them out, and to help people recover. Making sure residents are safe obviously takes precedence at this moment, Martn says. But if we cant also begin to consider mitigation and prevention strategies, then when are we going to have that conversation? he asks.Within a month of Hurricane Harveys landfall in Texas in 2017considered the wettest tropical cyclone on record for the U.S.officials proposed a major flood control bond measure. Though it wasnt passed until a year later, the fact that legislators thought about it while Texas was still recovering is notable. Its also a sign, though, of how we tend to prepare for disasters only in the aftermath of one. Martn hopes others can learn from the L.A. fires to better prepare now, instead of waiting for their own tragedies.Its a difficult balance, especially for cities with limited budgets. And its a learning process. Climate investments can be a matter of trial and error; they also require long-term thinking that goes well beyond a budgets framing of one fiscal year. Cities may increase renewable energy and switch school bus fleets to electric as part of their mitigation efforts, but that likely wont stop a natural disaster from happening the next year. The climate impact of those changes (and the funding they receive) arent immediate.Cities have to balance all these questions: how to prepare, how to mitigate, how to ensure theyre able to respond when something happens, and how to prioritize competing needs. Those conversations are more important, says the ICMAs Grant says, than Monday-morning quarterbacking budget line items while entire neighborhoods burn. The reality is, we are here. How do we prevent these fires from spreading? How do we make sure this doesnt happen again?As L.A. begins recovering and rebuilding, ideally, the fires will become a milestone event that other cities across the country learn from. Those lessons could inform not only future fire department budgets but also mitigation efforts, building codes and housing laws, insurance policies, and so on. Martn reflects on the Great Chicago Fire of 1871, and how its historic devastation led to modern building codes and insurance requirements.Its this complex picture of adaptation, mitigation, response, and recovery that city officials must learn to juggle. The last thing I want to see is people investing so much in their emergency management and first responders, Martn says, and not thinking about the long-term planning and equity issues.