County Workers Offer Alternative Budget : Spending: Supervisors criticize plan, saying most proposals require changes in state law and approval of the governor.

Los Angeles County residents got their first chance Wednesday to tell the Board of Supervisors what they think of a bare-bones budget proposal that aims to close an unprecedented $1.2-billion deficit by slashing services and cutting jobs. But few showed up to offer an opinion.

As a result, attention focused elsewhere--on an alternative spending proposal generated by a coalition of mostly unionized county employees. The proposal by the so-called Emergency Coalition to Save Los Angeles contained 22 proposals for balancing the county budget, mostly by raising revenue instead of closing County-USC Medical Center and other health clinics and eliminating 18,255 county jobs.

In another development, Dist. Atty. Gil Garcetti confirmed in an interview that he has contacted private attorneys about representing his office in a potential lawsuit against the county. That suit, he said, would be similar to one threatened by Sheriff Sherman Block, who has contended that proposed cuts would curtail law enforcement services to dangerous levels below those mandated by courts and state lawmakers.

“We have talked to some lawyers who have done some pro bono work for us in the past,” said Garcetti.

“I am prepared to do everything and anything I can and should do to protect the safety of our community. I would hope that doesn’t involve a lawsuit, but that possibility is there.”

The supervisors also set in motion a process that could lead to higher taxes or user fees on cable TV and water and sewer service, and a business license tax. A public hearing will be held in August before any final action is taken on imposing or raising the taxes.

The public debate, however, focused on the alternative budget proposal offered by the coalition, which is being spearheaded by the union representing half of the county’s 80,000-plus employees, the Service Employees International Union, Local 660. Three of five supervisors said it offered few constructive alternatives to the Draconian cuts in jobs and services they are faced with making.

“You keep presenting alternatives that have no validity,” board Chairwoman Gloria Molina told coalition spokesman Joel Maliniak. She said nearly all of the recommendations require changes in state law and the governor’s signature, which would take much longer than the few weeks the county has to balance its budget.

Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke went further, saying she was angry at the coalition and the union that created it. Burke noted that the coalition is spending as much as $500,000 for TV and radio ads that tell residents to call the supervisors with complaints about the spending cuts.

“Your PR campaign is, in a sense, a misrepresentation,” she said. “You should be directing attention to the governor’s office and the Legislature.”

Maliniak and another coalition spokesman responded that the supervisors should read the report carefully before attacking it, and they defended the ads’ call for county residents to take their complaints about pending budget cuts to the supervisors.

“They’re our elected leaders,” Maliniak said. “They’re not only the ones who will decide the budget, but we want them to act as our chief lobbyists in Sacramento, too. That’s why we’ve targeted them.”

In previous years, the sick, the poor, the disabled and others relying on the county’s safety net successfully pleaded for particular programs to be saved from the budget ax. But it will be different this year, all involved said Wednesday.

As the county faces perhaps its worst budget crisis ever, the supervisors are intent on balancing their budget and already have made $257 million in cuts. That leaves $1 billion more in cuts to be made, or that much revenue to be found elsewhere.

Chief Administrative Officer Sally Reed has proposed closing County-USC, the nation’s busiest public hospital, and imposing massive layoffs and service cuts to meet that goal. Now it is the supervisors, ever-conscious of reelection bids for three of them next year, who must balance Reed’s blueprint with public input and other factors in cobbling together a workable budget.

The supervisors spent much of Wednesday discussing budgetary matters, but most of their decisions on the proposed $11.1-billion budget will not come until late July, after citizens and county officials from the various departments continue to have their say.

One option proposed Wednesday by Burke would allow early retirement for employees. After Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky suggested that such a move may not save much money because of costs associated with buying out longtime employees, the supervisors postponed discussion of the matter.

The supervisors also discussed lowering salaries of entry-level deputy district attorneys as a way of shaving dollars. But they were confronted by an angry Garcetti, who said his department is being unfairly targeted, and that lowering beginning salaries from $43,000 to $38,000 would make it all but impossible to recruit good prosecutors.

“We are not talking about reducing the salaries of deputy sheriffs,” Garcetti said. “This would be an insult and a slap in the face to every deputy district attorney.”

Garcetti last week told the board any cuts in his budget would cripple law enforcement efforts. He told supervisors Wednesday that despite Reed’s proposal that he cut staff and services to reduce his budget by 20%, he will not be making cuts unless forced by the supervisors.

“The only way I can [make cuts] is by laying off prosecutors and stopping the prosecution of certain crimes,” he said in an interview afterward. “I’m not going to feel good when I say close the library, close a park, but we need that money to prosecute someone who just committed a rape or a robbery.”

Molina kicked off the first of eight planned public budget sessions by saying no one will be happy at what the supervisors do, but that she hopes to adopt a budget “that meets everybody’s needs.”

El Monte Mayor Patricia A. Wallach told the supervisors her city of 111,000 is among a host of municipalities that rely on the county for law enforcement, medical services, libraries, parks and more.

“I’ve come to implore you that if you must cut, please cut very, very carefully,” Wallach said. “The sick, the poor, the needy should not be overlooked.”

Representatives of the union-driven coalition then presented their “Alternative Plan to Keep L.A. Working,” which they billed as a better plan to solve the county’s fiscal problems than Reed’s.

Maliniak suggested several revenue-raising proposals, including more equitable collection of fines and taxes, a tax on alcoholic drinks, sale or lease of surplus county property and utility and business license permit fees.

After sharp questioning by board members, Maliniak conceded that the bulk of the proposals would require changes in state law.

In addition, the coalition said lawmakers in Sacramento should return about $1 billion in tax revenue that the state collected from the county in recent years.

In commenting about one coalition proposal that the county sell surplus property, Yaroslavsky asked Reed if such sales would be possible given that “most of the developed property, including . . . this building, is already mortgaged.”

Reed confirmed that the behemoth county Hall of Administration--the county seat of government--already has been put up for collateral on a prior bond deal.

As many as 10,000 employees may have to be laid off, Reed has projected. About 2,000 of them are slated to receive pink slips in the coming weeks because of the existing cuts.

On Wednesday, Gilbert Cedillo, the SEIU’s general manager, dropped his criticism of the board and spoke of a partnership to solve fiscal problems. The union sued the county last week over the cuts and sought a temporary restraining order to halt the layoffs, but a judge on Friday denied that request. Times staff writer Jeffrey L. Rabin contributed to this story.