CRA Must Pay for Services or Be Shut Down, Lawmakers Say : Budget crisis: Yaroslavsky insists that the agency should give the city at least $37 million this year. But the council may not have enough votes to back up the threat.

Tightening the screws on the Community Redevelopment Agency, Los Angeles City Council members said Monday that they will consider closing the agency down if it does not contribute more to help the city pay for police and other essential services.

City Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, chairman of the council’s Budget Crisis Committee, said the semi-independent agency should contribute at least $37 million to the city general fund this year.

“Otherwise you are going to have people like me calling for eliminating the agency altogether,” Yaroslavsky said.

Council President John Ferraro and Councilman Marvin Braude expressed sympathy for that position. But it remains to be seen whether the council members can make such a threat stick by gathering the 10 votes needed to override an anticipated veto by one of the CRA’s biggest boosters, Mayor Tom Bradley.

As the council committee continued to grapple with the loss of up to one-quarter of the city’s general fund--because of drop-offs in taxes and state support--it also suggested for the first time a possible reduction in support for cultural affairs programs.

Committee members said they might cut all or part of a $5.4-million subsidy for public arts projects, cultural festivals and classes.

Discussions on the arts program and CRA are preliminary because Bradley has until April 20 to submit a budget proposal to the City Council, which then has about two months to mull over the spending plan.

But Monday’s discussion made it clear that the CRA will once again be at the heart of budget talks--much as it was last year when the agency was forced to give $25 million to help maintain other city programs. Bradley vetoed an attempt to take double that amount.

Yaroslavsky said he expects the agency this year to pay at least $37 million to fund the expansion of the downtown Convention Center. With the city’s general fund relieved of that obligation, the same amount would be freed to pay for police or other services that face cutbacks, Yaroslavsky said.

CRA Administrator Ed Avila pledged to “fully cooperate” with the city. But he added: “It’s up to us to argue forcefully for the agency and what it does.”

Redevelopment officials have argued against giving up their money--saying that it is used to pay for affordable housing, child care and other social services, in addition to assisting developers build massive projects.

If the agency was dismantled, the biggest beneficiary would not be the city, but the county, school districts and other agencies that would get the bulk of the property taxes that now go to redevelopment, Avila said.

That would mean just $15 million for the city in the fiscal year beginning July 1, and less in future years, Avila said.

Yaroslavsky replied: “I would rather have $15 million, rather than no dollars.”