County Budget Deficit

In their attempt to limit budget deficit increases, the Los Angeles County supervisors have decided to curb extensive borrowing which uses valuable county real estate as collateral (July 18). I suggest supervisors curb extensive salary and pension increases and consider reductions in these same areas as one way of convincing the electorate that they are really serious about about curbing the runaway deficit. M. ROY SEIDLER Los Angeles

Re “County Mortgaged Most Major Assets,” July 16: It is no surprise that the Board of Supervisors chose to fund county services in part by mortgaging and wringing out equity from inflated property values. It is no surprise the the Board of Supervisors chose to fund county services by pledging property as collateral. What is surprising is the extent to which borrowing money was defended as a means of avoiding inevitable cuts in services. Slashing of vital services will be necessarily more profound as funds for servicing the debt continue to increase.

Despite this bleak forecast, some unnecessary county projects apparently proceed unabated. Atop Friendship Park, a largely unspoiled tract of land adjacent to Rancho Palos Verdes with hiking trails, picnic areas and unparalleled views of the Pacific, Supervisor Deane Dana proposes to construct the Deane Dana Nature Center. This project, and the millions borrowed to fund it, is all the more astounding when Dana is quoted in your article in regard to borrowing money to fund services, “We should have bitten the bullet and we didn’t . . . we’re operating right on the edge.” Hopefully, our county fiscal crisis has laid this and other unnecessary projects to rest. JOSEPH SCHOFIELD San Pedro

Passage of Proposition 13 was the taxpayers’ message for government to reduce spending. The message was ignored. Creative financial machinations bypassed the spirit of Proposition 13. Inevitable financial disaster lay ahead and it has finally struck Los Angeles.

Can politicians ever learn that there is indeed a bottom to every barrel and that there is much more to governing than giving themselves raises? ALLEN G. HOWLETT Fullerton

Re “Supervisors Hope for Aid From Clinton,” July 14:

Well and good that Supervisors Gloria Molina and Zev Yaroslavsky dare to lobby the Clinton Administration on behalf of our county in its attempt to balance the budget. But where is the requisite daring to tell the voters that Proposition 13, just as opponents predicted, has been the most powerful instrument that has put an ax to all those services that nurture and sustain a community? (Hospitals, schools, libraries, parks, museums, police, fire departments, suicide prevention lines, etc.)

When will people realize that they can not get services for nothing? Proposition 13 needs revision. We need to protect people on fixed incomes from losing their homes, but we also need to protect our city, county and state from losing all those services which protect, educate, nurture and give lives meaning and are truly cost-effective in the end. I hope that a brave politician will arise to say that to the voters. MYRNA L. INY Marina del Rey

Re “A Voter Deal to Avoid the Orange Aura” by Joel Fox, Column Right, July 9:

You can see the tax increase measures coming. As the next few weeks reveal the magnitude of Los Angeles County’s fiscal crisis, supervisors would be wise to consider the suggestions put forth for a “contract of reforms.” The people directly affected by layoffs and cutbacks will understandably focus on their own situations and may not consider the far-reaching impact of the budget deficit. To be proactive to the expected responses of outrage, supervisors should acknowledge spending errors of the past and face the future with courage.

Consolidation, streamlining and spending reductions are all desirable goals, but defining such goals for each program is where the contract must begin. The unwelcome prospect of layoffs and cutbacks is an exercise in doling out pain, and attempts to alleviate the depth of these actions usually involve another form of pain, a tax increase. If we taxpayers are to be persuaded that an increase is necessary, we must be convinced that the business practices that brought about this situation will be changed. BARBARA ENDO Torrance