MAILBAG - Nov. 30, 2000

Abdur-Rahim Hameed’s column “Death of housing is birth of permanent

poverty” (Nov. 16) is a bit disjointed at best.

He begins by stating that a job is “just a temporary solution,

something that can come and go” and then extols the virtue of home

ownership as “something better . . . savings in the form of a house.”

If we are all one paycheck from poverty, what does he think is going

to happen to the house payment when the economy takes a downturn? He then

rails against environmental rules because they have stalled the Bolsa

Chica development. Does he really think someone of average means would be

able to afford a home in that development?

Then, after dismissing a job as a temporary solution, he states that

jobs are the solution to poverty for the unskilled and undereducated. Say

what?KEVIN BULLAT

Huntington Beach

Reader defends city’s police salary offer

Huntington Beach is one of the safest cities in America -- it is not

Watts or East Los Angeles, and I think that should be taken into

consideration when setting police salaries. Thank God that no police

officers have been killed in shootouts. I am a pro-police person --

always have been, but taxpayers can have input on these matters.

In his letter (“Readers say police deserve more than what city

offers,” Nov. 16), Brandon Reed states that police officers do not get

“stock options, year-end bonuses, engage in profit sharing, etc.” That

may be, but they get benefits that are much more valuable -- such as

20-year retirement, health care for life, no deductions for pensions, and

they can get even bigger pensions by claiming disability even for high

blood pressure. These are benefits that private-sector employees at

almost any level can only dream of.

In addition, police officers want their salaries compared only to

police salaries in other cities. That means that cities are in

competition with all other cities able to pay higher salaries -- cities

like Newport Beach. City councils should not allow these union employees

to get away with this device. No reason they should not be compared to

comparable jobs in the private sector.

Taxpayers, wake up. When these officers are making $200,000 in six or

seven years, and we are still still making our present salary --

increased by 3% to 4% a year -- how will we be able to pay the taxes

required, and if we think that police officers are arrogant now -- just

wait.

JOHNNY B. MULLINS

Huntington Beach