CITY LEADERS MUST SHOW VOTERS BONDS ARE WORTHY.

Byline: Michael Feuer 

LOOK around at the infrastructure of your community and it is plain that Los Angeles has not been investing enough in its future. The West Valley police station is bursting at the seams; the Sherman Oaks library can't meet neighborhood demand; sidewalks haven't been properly repaired for decades. The same is true all over the city.

Now, blessed by a robust economy, city officials are scrambling to make up for lost time with bond measures for capital improvement. There's no doubt the needs are pressing. But to date, they have not been adequately prioritized and the bond proposals, with one exception, have not been carefully planned or properly reviewed.

The council voted last week to move more than $270 million in capital projects toward the November ballot, but can we look voters in the eye and say honestly they'll get their money's worth?

The tab for L.A.'s infrastructure needs, including construction or renovation of dozens of police and fire facilities, runs into the billions. With 70 percent of the city's $2.7 billion operating budget spent on the daily needs of the Fire and Police departments alone, the city's general fund can never foot the bill. Upgrading our infrastructure will require bonds, but voters have been burned before by promises unkept. Consider the Valley police station promised in 1988, funded as part of a $176 million bond, but never built.

The first step toward restoring voter confidence is for city leaders to do a better job defining priorities for capital improvement. Next, we need to develop cost-efficient projects with accurate budget projections and realistic completion dates. Oversight must include accountable managers empowered to reject mid-project changes that historically have led to cost overruns.

For the past two weeks, a committee of the City Council has debated proposals for bond-funded projects and made recommendations to the full council about what deserves a place on the November ballot. The result is a mixed bag. The best proposal approved by the committee is a library bond (which includes 12 projects for Valley residents), well-planned at its inception and then improved through review by two separate council committees over the past year.

The Library Department has an exceptional record of delivering bond-funded projects on time and on budget, and we have added further citizen input to an already fine oversight system. At a monthly cost of only 60 cents for the owner of the average home, the new library bond is clearly worthwhile. That's why it won unanimous support from the City Council and the mayor.

The committee also took steps to create close oversight for all other measures that may be approved for future ballots, and further analyzed a plan to repair sidewalks with a 20-year, pay-as-you-go approach. This special tax may appear on the ballot in November.

Mayor Riordan suggested a ``Blue Ribbon Commission'' to review bond proposals, a fine idea provided it includes relevant experts and its recommendations go to the full council.

That's where consensus ended, however, and what happened next threatens to undermine solid proposals such as the library bond. The committee, by a 3-2 vote, moved forward two last-minute bond proposals that have received almost no review at all - one for Exposition Park, one for the zoo.

It was a striking action considering the committee chose to postpone two bonds (for fire and police projects) crucial to our future well-being. The rationale for delaying those measures was straightforward and correct - neither underwent the detailed review of the library bond. Yet simultaneously, with no prior council scrutiny, little definitive information and only superficial discussion, a committee majority recommended the Exposition Park and zoo measures be readied for the ballot.

True, both proposals will be reviewed in the next two weeks, and they may prove worthy of support. The benefits, particularly to our kids, could be wonderful. As chairman of the Arts, Health and Humanities Committee, which oversees children's issues, I want very much to improve these resources. But that misses the point. Making 11th-hour decisions about tens of millions of dollars is no way to run a city. Good government is about solving problems and keeping promises; it's about setting priorities, planning carefully, and providing strong fiscal oversight.

Los Angeles needs bond-funded capital projects to restore its infrastructure and prepare for rapid growth in the 21st century. If city leaders fumble now, it will be years before voters give us another chance to meet our pressing needs.