Belmont Project

* Re “Don’t Complete the Belmont Learning Complex,” Opinion, Dec. 5: I am in the process of paying my property tax bill, and I can see what it costs me personally for our schools. I don’t want to have to pay out another $250 million, the cost of the Belmont project, or my share thereof, to replace it, when I believe it is a salvageable project.

About 20 years ago, a similar dangerous condition was discovered at a construction site across the street from the Farmers Market, in the Park La Brea area. Construction was halted while the gas pockets were vented, and when inspectors gave the all-clear, construction resumed and the area has been safe and productive since that time. The Belmont project is far from a write-off. It can be made safe and usable, and God knows that we need the facilities as soon as possible.

MARSHALL KLINE

Los Angeles

* As one who was responsible for financing approximately $1.5 billion in housing mortgages for the city of Los Angeles using tax-exempt bonds, I find nothing remarkable about the Los Angeles Unified School District financing the Belmont Learning Complex with variable rate debt (“Belmont Financing Leaves Total Cost in Question,” Dec. 5). Many of the housing projects--all with below-market rents and private developers--used such bonds. Only during several weekly periods in the last 17 years has the rate on such bonds even reached 7%, with the average rate under 5%. In no case did any of our participating developers opt to move from short-term to long-term fixed rates.

If the issuer, such as is the case with the LAUSD, has the ability to handle short-term rate blips, such financing can save substantially in interest costs.

DAVID PEREL

Los Angeles