EDITORIAL : BOND-ISSUE BOONDOGGLES; WITH A RECORD LIKE THIS, IT'S NO WONDER THAT THE PUBLIC DISTRUSTS CITY HALL.

LOS Angeles municipal government has a huge credibility problem, one that's going to make it hard for the city to convince voters to approve any more long-term borrowing.

Since 1989, the city has obtained voter approval for bond issues worth more than $1.6 billion, but L.A. often has failed to accomplish the projects promised to voters and sometimes spent the money on other things.

Here are just a few of the city's unkept promises:

Proposition N provided $67 million to install a new Fire Department dispatch system, but 10 years later the work still isn't complete.

Proposition 4 provided $60 million for fire sprinklers in city buildings, but the city actually used $15 million of the money to buy an office building. And the dollars ran out before sprinklers were installed in City Hall and in city offices in Van Nuys.

Proposition M, which passed five years ago, provided $235 million to build two new emergency communication centers with a new 911 system. The money hasn't been spent yet, construction still hasn't started, and thousands of people who call the current 911 system aren't getting through.

Those and other examples, reported in Monday's editions of the Daily News, paint an unflattering and infuriating image of local government boondoggling.

Voters may well ask themselves, what's the use of approving any more bond issues as long as city officials take far too long to do what they promised and sometimes don't even get around to it at all?

That's particularly true as voters also are reeling from the recent behavior of the Los Angeles Unified School District.

This year, the LAUSD pushed Proposition BB, the $2.4 billion bond issue for school repairs and upgrades, but the district wasn't candid about its construction plans for some of the money. And after the bond issue passed, some LAUSD leaders tried to bypass an oversight committee that voters were promised.

We are glad that a court has said the school-bond oversight committee must be allowed to carry out its duty. Still, these kinds of mistakes and miscalculations by the city and the school district will cause voters to think long and hard before approving any more bond measures requested by either entity. And who could blame the public for feeling that way?