Supervisors Hear Pleas for Funding : Government: The first of 15 days of hearings on how to slash $600 million is agonizing and at times raucous. The district attorney says cuts mean he will not be able to prosecute any petty crimes.

In the midst of the worst financial crisis ever to confront the nation’s most populous county, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on Monday convened the first of 15 days of budget hearings with little hope of restoring hundreds of millions of dollars in proposed cuts in services, personnel and benefits.

In a sometimes raucous daylong hearing, supervisors heard one appeal after another--from speakers ranging from union activists to Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti to advocates for parks and mental health facilities--as the board began efforts to patch a $600-million hole in its $13.1-billion budget.

“Every group has needs to address,” said board Chairman Ed Edelman. “This pits one against another. That’s what happens when you have a shrinking pie. You fight over the scraps that are left.”

Supervisor Gloria Molina said that even if the board cannot do much about the dismal cuts, it can at least let the taxpayers know who is responsible.

“We should have a sign outside all the health centers and other facilities we will have to close, saying ‘This essential community center is being closed courtesy of the governor, Sen. David Roberti, Speaker Willie Brown and your local legislator.’ ”

In its controversial budget accord adopted last month, the state took $2.6 billion in property taxes away from counties and cities to increase school funding.

Los Angeles County bore the brunt of the revenue loss, and it is now the last of 58 counties statewide to adopt a final budget.

Supervisors had invited the complete Los Angeles delegation to the state Legislature to the board’s hearings, but not one member attended. Molina said they should be invited again, after the Legislature’s recess, which is expected to begin Wednesday.

“The toughest decisions are on the local level, and I want them to be part of it,” Molina said. “Let them come here as we do and look employees eyeball to eyeball.”

Despite their efforts to shift the blame to Sacramento, the supervisors took some heat from hundreds of community members who attended the hearings, including activists with a group called People First who disrupted the meeting and caused the supervisors to take an abrupt lunch break as sheriff’s deputies cleared the chambers.

“I hope you all got your helmets,” screamed one demonstrator. “Because there’s going to be a riot if you go ahead with these budget cuts.”

Outside the supervisors’ meeting room, 250 county workers and community activists chanted and waved placards reading “Fight Back,” and “No Takeaways, No Layoffs.”

“I’m out here because of my job--I want to keep it and its benefits,” said Denise Secrist, 28, a clerk-typist at the Department of Children’s Services. “The way the board spends, it’s ridiculous. There are most definitely other edges to cut before they start cutting ours.”

The coalition of 13 unions that represent the bulk of the county’s work force presented a report that identified an additional $447 million to $590 million in revenues and savings, and urged the board to hold off on service cuts and suspend budget deliberations for 45 days while these new revenue sources are explored.

“The requested suspension is . . . necessary to avoid the social costs of implementing the . . . proposed budget,” the report concluded. “Unquestionably, lives will be lost because of the reduction of health and lifesaving services, children will suffer because of the closure of parks and organized recreation activities, and crime and human misery will increase because of the loss of basic human services, which provide a safety net for the least fortunate in our community.”

The report argues that it is foolhardy to pursue layoffs and service cuts until the outcomes of several money-producing bills before the Legislature are determined. For example, the county is lobbying the Legislature to allow it to enact a library assessment district that would bring in an estimated $32 million per year, according to the report. Another bill would allow a half-cent increase in the sales tax with a two-thirds vote of the public. Such an increase would raise $200 million from January to June, 1994, according to the report.

In addition, the unions assert that the county could save more than $100 million by selling off or leasing such county assets as surplus property, buildings and museums. A projected $25 million to $50 million could be saved by more aggressive marketing of the county’s enhanced voluntary time-off program, the report estimates.

“We faced a similar budget crisis last fall and the knee-jerk reaction was to ask employees to take pay cuts and impose layoffs,” said Bart Diener, a spokesman for Local 660 of the Service Employees International Union. “But unions and management were able to find several cost-saving measures that avoided those outcomes. We think that is also possible now.”

Under the proposed budget, the county’s 80,000 rank-and-file workers are expected to bear much of the brunt of the budget cuts. The proposed budget is based on union workers taking an average 8.25% wage cut, to save more than $215 million annually.

The proposed budget also calls for closing more than half the county’s community health centers, most parks and recreation facilities, and half of all libraries. More than 5,000 employees would face layoffs, and payments to general relief recipients would be cut by 27% to the state mandated minimum of $212 a month.

Even departments facing smaller cuts found plenty of grounds for objecting to the spending plan.

Garcetti made a particularly emotional appeal to the board, saying: “If there was ever a time to prosecute more crime, not less, it is now. People are living in fear and that fear is destroying Los Angeles.”

The district attorney, whose department is slated to lose $19.1 million, said the funding cut will mean the layoff of 108 prosecutors and the end of prosecutions for misdemeanors ranging from drunk driving to graffiti, concealed weapons, drug possession and spousal abuse.

“It also means not one petty theft will be prosecuted,” Garcetti said. “Tell that to the business community.”

Garcetti said that instead of suffering cuts, his department needs a dramatic increase in staffing. “By any standard, my staff should be doubled,” Garcetti told the supervisors.

Despite the case he presented, some supervisors were not encouraging about more funding.

“It isn’t anywhere near as dramatic” as portrayed, said Molina, indicating that as much as $8 million in the proposed district attorney’s office budget was earmarked for raises in salary and benefits.

And to bring the focus back to the task before the board--attempting to balance all the needs of the community--Molina said: “Every nickel I give to you comes out of health and welfare.”

Still, Garcetti struck a chord with other supervisors.

Supervisor Mike Antonovich presented a motion calling for full funding to 1992-1993 levels for the district attorney’s and public defender’s offices, and for the sheriff’s and probation departments.

“Even at last year’s expenditure level, law enforcement is inadequately funded,” Antonovich said.