`TAJ MAHAL' ABSENT IN LITERATURE : BOARD PRESIDENT DENIES PROJECT HIDDEN FROM PUBLIC.

Byline: Anne Burke Daily News Staff Writer

The photographs distributed by the pro-Proposition BB campaign told the story. Schools with drinking fountains unfit for a dog. Bathrooms more foul than a bus station's. Peeling paint, cracked linoleum, buckled asphalt, crumbling ceilings.

But did the photographs tell the whole story?

Missing among them was a readily available artist's rendering of the controversial Belmont Learning Complex, an $87 million school, housing and commercial project labeled by critics as LAUSD's ``Taj Mahal.''

Officials said this week that the $2.4 billion bond measure, passed by 71 percent of the voters last week, will go not only to repair dilapidated schools - the main thrust of the ``Yes on BB'' campaign - but also could help build the Belmont Learning Complex, also known as the Temple-Beaudry project.

About half of the Belmont complex's cost, at least $40 million-plus, would come out of the $900 million in Proposition BB funds set aside for new construction, according to board President Jeff Horton.

But on Tuesday, the day after the issue came up at a Los Angeles Unified School District board meeting and was set for a vote Monday, even Deputy Superintendent Ruben Zacarias said he wasn't aware that bond funds would help build the Belmont complex.

``If you ask the general public what the purpose of Prop. BB is, they would say for repairs and maintenance,'' Zacarias said. ``But I also know that Prop BB does have a provision for new school construction.''

One board member Tuesday accused his colleagues of purposely keeping Belmont out of the public discussion about Proposition BB out of fear that it could imperil the proposition's chances of passage.

``They clearly took Belmont off the agenda and put it on the back burner because of the public relations nightmare of a giant, centralized Taj Mahal,'' said board member David Tokofsky, referring to Horton and other school officials.

Horton said Belmont was temporarily put on the back burner for reasons having nothing to do with Proposition BB, but rather because it still needed to be reviewed by an oversight committee.

Horton added that board members openly discussed the Proposition BB-Belmont complex link at board meetings and talks with newspaper editorial boards.

``It was never hidden,'' Horton said.

Still, there appears to be no mention of the Belmont complex in campaign literature for Proposition BB. In fact, there appears to be scant mention, if any at all, of the construction of new schools in BB literature.

An LAUSD press kit referred to the bond as a ``school repair bond'' that would finance repairs and renovation.

The district's color brochure, which contains photos of schools in wretched states of disrepair, said the bond measure would help fix plumbing and heating systems, and pay for lead paint and asbestos removal, air conditioning, portable classrooms, and other projects.

A pitch by Angelenos for Better Classrooms, a coalition of parents, business leaders and others, said the measure would give ``the citizens of Los Angeles (the) opportunity to repair our schools and make them safe.''

Promotional literature for BB in the sample ballot noted that the measure would pay for ``vital repairs'' to old electrical systems, heating systems, roofs, bathrooms and other aging equipment and facilities.

While the literature indeed mentions that the measure would pay for the ``construction of new classrooms including the addition of factory-built classrooms to decrease class size,'' it doesn't appear to refer to the construction of new schools.

Erik Nasarenko, campaign manager for Angelenos for Better Classrooms, said that references to new classrooms are ``synonymous with building new schools.''

BB-backer Richard Katz said there was no effort to mislead the public about the Belmont project.

He said the pro-BB campaign emphasized repairs over new construction because that's how most of the money - $1.6 billion - would be spent, and because it was not yet clear where the new schools would go.

Why couldn't the literature mention Belmont Learning Complex?

``You'll have to ask the campaign consultant that,'' Horton said.

That would be Darry Sragow, chief consultant for Angelenos for Better Classrooms. He said he doesn't recall Belmont Learning Complex ever coming up during meetings with school officials and bond measure supporters about how the funds would be spent.

``Belmont is an extremely controversial issue on its own. The campaign did not deal with Belmont in any way or shape at all,'' he said.