State Budget Tax Shift

* I was very disappointed to see The Times editorial (“What a Beast of a Budget,” June 23) credit the Legislature for “doing its job” in passing this year’s state budget on time. By any standard, the legislators’ primary job is to represent their constituents and protect their needs. In this task, they are faltering in their fundamental duty to the people of California, particularly those residing in Los Angeles County. At this time, no budget would have been preferable to this budget.

In an effort to escape blame for another marathon delay and the humiliation of paying the state’s bills with IOUs, the governor and the Legislature placed a higher priority on meeting an arbitrary deadline than on meeting their basic responsibilities to the public they represent. Hardest hit in the process will be the counties of this state--the providers of last resort--and the people they serve.

The loss to counties statewide may well top $555 million, with Los Angeles County this year confronting property tax losses exceeding $292 million, and perhaps even as high as $492 million if voters reject a statewide sales tax extension in November.

There is no disagreement that schools deserve appropriate funding. But as a state program, K-12 public education should be funded with state revenues such as the sales tax, rather than local property taxes that properly should be reserved for local services. As a result, it is Sacramento, not the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, that has made the decisions which will close hospitals, health centers, mental health clinics, libraries and parks.

EDMUND D. EDELMAN

Chairman, Board of Supervisors

Los Angeles County

* Robert E. Tranquada (Commentary, June 21) erroneously blames the politicians for transferring $2.6 billion county property taxes to school support.

The voters decided that 40% of all state funds should be allocated to education. Of the remainder, the county uses 49% for police and fire protection, leaving only 11% remaining for all other governmental functions.

It is perfectly proper for the voters to decide to allocate 40% of revenue for education by constitutional amendment and they should assume full responsibility for the consequences.

MAURICE D. ROUBLE

San Diego

* I am impressed! The action of the governor absconding with local property taxes, then saying he doesn’t need to raise taxes, is truly breathtaking.

I realize that arrogance, bluster and cynicism are the ABCs of our state government. However, the blatant hypocrisy, the utter gall shown by Gov. Pete Wilson and Assembly Speaker Willie Brown take things to unimaginable heights.

What next will they inflict on California? One can only tremble at the thought of what they will perpetrate.

JIM GOODENOUGH

Los Angeles

* What will a $250 million increase in the state prison budget buy? It now costs approximately $30,000 a year to house a nonviolent drug offender in this state; 75% of the people in our state penal system fall in this category.

In a state where there are 5 million nonviolent drug offenders the increased prison budget will house only 8,000 more. On the other hand, the same money invested in college or job training at $6,000 a head will provide 41,000 residents per year the knowledge or job training to make a good living in this state.

Under these circumstances throwing money at the prison system is stupid. Denying the public an education is ensuring them a Third World standard of living and that is just plain stupid. As we dismantle our education base for the police state we are creating remember, when you are stupid, you suffer.

JAY LINDBERG

Glendora