LETTERS : U.S. FUNDING TO AREA MISLABELED AS `FREE'.

In mid-April, I took issue with the funding for a transportation facility in Thousand Oaks. I now take issue with some of the funding for laptops in Simi Valley police cars (Daily News, July 2).

Let me be clear. I did not take issue with the building of the transportation facility in Thousand Oaks, and I certainly do not take issue with laptops for the Simi Valley police force. Anything that upgrades the capability of police agencies to do their job gets my support.

Please let me make my point yet again. Simi Valley simply stated that part of the money came from federal grants. In the case of Thousand Oaks, the argument was that the city would ``lose'' $1.8 million if the transportation facility is not built. I contend that the people of Simi Valley paid for the $106,463 federal grant and the people of Thousand Oaks paid for the $1.8 million they are to get.

This same ``free money'' scenario is doubtless played out every day all over the country. We are paying federal bureaucrats handsomely, and on into their retirements, to send a bit of money back when our local politicians are successful in presenting a compelling case. The question is: How much did the citizens of our two towns pay in taxes to get their ``free'' federal money? Times two? Times three? Times four?

I think that if we really want smaller government, there is no better place to start than to stop this sort of federal largess. We could save the cost of all those federal, and state bureaucrats, and lower our tax burdens accordingly. Then local folks could decide what they want for their towns. And fund whatever it is themselves much more cheaply, I'm sure.

John Pierson 

Thousand Oaks

Taxpayers footing bill for immigrants' care

Re: ``Woman aids immigrant seniors'' July 9. What self-serving drivel! Only Maggie Molina-Kantor, whose source of income is from taxes, both federal and state, can help immigrant seniors, legal and illegal, keep their federally tax-supported lives intact.

Another tax-supported individual, Sue Tantangelo, with the Ventura County Area Agency on Aging, blathers about language barriers isolating the elderly. In fact, everyone in the article is dependent on taxpayers.

OK, here comes the ``when I was young'' stuff. My grandmother was from Ireland. She did, indeed, speak English. She also felt that to live in a country required one to become a citizen. When she became too ill to live on her own (she lived in an apartment in Manhattan subsidized by my father and one of his sisters), Grandma moved in with one of her daughters. My father and his other sister helped pay the bills.

My Italian friends had their limited-English-speaking grandparents living with them. My Puerto Rican friends had their grandparents living with them. Does anyone doubt where I am going with this complaint against ``only the taxpayer'' can support these people? Where are there families? Why should the legal, hard-working taxpayer be the one to support these complex, duplicative, interlocking, self-serving bottomless maws called Social Services.

Wake up! This country is awash in tax money. Yet, we always are asked for more. I urge everyone to get involved. Find out where your tax dollars are being spent and how wasteful the spenders are.

Hugh M. Flynn

Simi Valley

Water district plans have weak foundation

James Colbaugh, general manager of the Las Virgenes Municipal Water District, performed a feat of confusion, if not chicanery, when he presented the proposed budget for 1997-98 at the June 24 board meeting. The budget, among the largest in the water company's history, planned expenditures of $44 million and made an estimate for income of the same amount, based on very questionable assumptions.

Included in expenditures were funds allocated to cogeneration of electricity by fuel cells, an untested experimental technology. This was in conflict with the board's decision two months ago to defer that project.

Another prominent increase in the budget was for additional personnel to be allocated to ``increased communication with community groups (including homeowner associations, city councils, schools and watershed stakeholders); expanded school and public education programs; and more active involvement with other city, county and regional planning efforts.''

In his presentation, the general manager began by apologizing for the new budget format which he claimed made comparisons with previous budgets very difficult. He also complained the staff had found major difficulties in the budget's preparation. At least $1.5 million in inaccuracies had come to their attention since printing of available copies.

In follow-up discussion, the executive director of the Triunfo Sanitation District, a partner with LVMWD in some programs, declared his board had reservations about a number of expenditures for which that organization would be responsible. He indicated his board would not accept the budget as proposed.

When the three directors present (Knopp and Petersen being absent) showed some hesitation and reservation in acting on the budget, General Manager Colbaugh made it plain he would shut down operation of the water company July 1 if he did not have an approved budget at that time. The legal counsel present at the meeting, supported the general manager in his demand.

After this, Colbaugh suggested he would continue to correct and refine the proposed budget, and would negotiate with Triunfo to seek their approval after the July 1 deadline. On the strength of his verbal promises, the board voted to approve the budget, contingent upon approval by the Triunfo Sanitary District.

Vernon M. Padgett, M.D.

Calabasas

Skateboarders broke rules, deserved fine

Upon reading about skateboarders, it was interesting to read comments from Jim Kirkpatrick, the executive director of the International Association of Skateboard Companies in Santa Barbara, and the comments from a mother who was incensed when her son and a friend were slapped with fines that could cost $100.

The article stated that the teens were skateboarding in a prohibited area - a shopping plaza. The fact says it all! These kids chose to ignore the rules of the mall that were put in place for the safety and comfort of their customers and they got caught.

I agree with her that it is better that they do this than drugs or driving drunk, but if there is no place for their kids to go, then these parents should do something about finding a more acceptable place for their kids to fool around in.

But even more importantly, these parents should teach their kids to obey the law, and that if they don't then they have to pay the piper.

I can certainly sympathize with them that there is no place to indulge in their ``sport,'' but to insist on ignoring rules or prohibitions that were put in force to promote public safety, such as in malls, or other public gathering places, where skateboarders are a definite hazard to pedestrians and patrons, is inexcusable under the circumstances. I personally know at least three people, two of them elderly ladies, who were severely injured by skateboarders indulging in their sport where they should never have been in the first place.

I am all for adequate recreational facilities for everyone, but now the recreation centers that exist in most of the neighborhoods are not even safe to go into, what with all of the gang activity and fights, drugs and such in them. They are not properly patrolled, and many are not even open during the hours that the general populace can use them safely.

Granted, it costs money to support them, but the investments by the cities would be well-worth the expense, and if properly managed and patrolled, there would be less need for policing in other areas. I would not even mind being taxed for such purposes, assuming the taxes went toward those facilities and not into some general-fund deep pockets of the politicians in charge.

Of course this is expecting a great deal of our ``public servants'' who are so free with our money, and who have their own questionable agenda and self-interests to look out for. But unfortunately, that is a fact of life nowadays.

- Graydon Wayne

Santa Clarita 

Tennis courts provide little benefit for most

Well, well, the spoiled yuppies are whining again because the city - that means you and me - won't cough up the money so they can enjoy their hobby.

Have you read about the tennis players in Moorpark? All 300 of them in a city with a population of about 28,000! They want the other 27,000-plus of us to build eight to 12 tennis courts at a cost of $300,000 to $500,000. That's a lot of money and it doesn't even mention maintenance.

I personally don't think that the city has an obligation to do anything which benefits so few at such a cost to so many, especially in a time when we are wondering where we will get the money for important things like police and fire protection.

Eleanor Clement

Moorpark