Local Control and Prop. 218

The article on Prop. 218 (Oct. 8) may have helped some people understand the five pages of fine-print mishmash with which the Jarvis organization wishes to distort the California Constitution.

But one statement by Jarvis president Joel Fox needs refutation. He is quoted as saying, “It’s putting power into the hands of the people .J.J. I believe we the people should control government.”

The assertion sounds democratic, but 218 would lead to a result opposite from local control. It actually takes power away from little people, puts it in the hands of wealthy, even absentee, landowners, and by destroying local governments’ capacity to take responsibility for their communities, makes them dependent on handouts from Sacramento.

More sensible is Times financial writer James Flanigan (Oct. 9), who is concerned with impact on the economy. “Passage of 218,” he writes, “would lead to cutbacks in public facilities such as parks, libraries, even some police services. Starving public amenities does not help business.”

Another economic fallout is seen by analysts at Standard and Poor’s and Moody’s, who predict 218 would bring a drop in credit ratings, crippling the cities’ ability to borrow for needed improvements.

T. WILLARD HUNTER

Claremont

In speaking against Prop. 218, county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky said, “What’s at stake is fire suppression, libraries and, in some communities, parks.”

Why isn’t it their plush offices, their chauffeured limousines, their “fact finding” world junkets and their huge pensions that they “non-voted” themselves several years ago that are at stake?

TRENT DAVOL SANDERS

La Canada