POLICE BOND LACKING SECURITY; OFFICIALS YET TO OFFER SPENDING GUARANTEES.

Byline: Deborah Sullivan Daily News Staff Writer

Barely a month before the election, Los Angeles city officials have yet to finalize guarantees to ensure the $744 million public safety bond is spent as promised.

On Wednesday, officials said details on oversight and management protections will not appear on the April 13 ballot as part of the legally binding language of the measure. Instead, the City Council will adopt them in an ordinance.

Embarrassed by past bond issue failures to deliver on promises to the San Fernando Valley and other communities, city officials who drafted the proposition say it contains more protections than ever before to ensure the money is spent correctly.

``Probably nowhere in the history of bonds in L.A. has more attention been paid to the accountability mechanisms attached to a bond than has been paid to this bond measure,'' said Deputy Mayor Noelia Rodriguez. ``The mayor's supporting this bond measure because it has as airtight an accountability mechanism as is practicable.''

Critics remained skeptical despite such reassurances.

``Who will be accountable for how this money is spent?'' asked Kris Vosburgh, executive director of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, which opposes the bond.

``What penalties does anyone face if the city doesn't comply with its promises?''

Bond guarantees include a thorough cost analysis, full funding and a detailed list of the 18 fire stations, six police stations, new police headquarters building, new Valley bureau and other public safety facilities to be build over a five- to seven-year period. It requires two-thirds approval to pass. The measure also would create a citizens oversight committee ``to ensure project, budget and schedule commitments.''

But the specifics of how that committee would work, its membership, terms of office, authorities and responsibilities, are not included in the ballot language. Those details will be presented in a council ordinance still being written by the City Attorney's Office.

The pending ordinance would call for a citizens oversight committee of five professionals selected by the mayor and council with an overall program director chosen by top officials. An internal oversight committee of Chief Legislative Analyst Ron Deaton, Chief Administrative Officer Keith Comrie and the mayor also would watch over bond expenditures and schedules.

But those assurances are not yet set in concrete and legal experts said any provisions not on the ballot are subject to change and so are not legally binding.

In addition, the composition of those in charge of setting up oversight has raised questions.

``Is a committee of Ron Deaton, Keith Comrie and so on sufficient?'' asked Councilman Joel Wachs. ``There's always a committee of Ron Deaton and the others.''

Vosburgh, the taxpayer watchdog, said a Proposition BB school bond oversight committee could not prevent gross misuse of the money.

``Our experience on the Proposition BB committee shows us that oversight committees are not an effective way to guarantee that taxpayers dollars will be properly spent,'' he said.

Assistant City Attorney Colin Chiu, who is drafting the ordinance, said he does not know when it will be completed. He said the office still is sorting out the fine points of establishing the bond's management and oversight structure.

``I don't have a definitive answer for how that is going to be done,'' he said. ``We know what the target is. But I don't know how we're going to get there.''

It's unclear how such guarantees could be made permanent through a city ordinance, which is subject to change by subsequent council votes.

But officials said political pressure would prevent the city from weakening the oversight committee or other bond protections.

``If anybody in office in Los Angeles has not gotten the message that bond measures must be executed on time and on budget, they haven't been listening,'' said Councilman Mike Feuer, who has pushed for the bond guarantees. ``Any public official who thinks that bond management should be anything but strengthened is going to pay the price at election night. And should.''

Other city officials said the public and news media must play a critical role in policing the police bond.

An ``impartial summary'' of the bond measure that will appear in the ballot pamphlet provides some information on the question of accountability but municipal law experts agree that is not as binding as the ballot language itself.

``I would much rather go into court with the power of the language of the statute itself, as opposed to ballot materials,'' said Tom Hiltachk, a Sacramento and Santa Monica-based attorney specializing in political and election law.

Feuer said the city has learned from its past mistakes.

``We can give a citizen oversight committee the information to get the job done, the authority to make changes in project management and the ability to communicate with citizens of the city,'' he said.