Another conclusion would be irrational Having just returned from Israel and visiting the south, I know firsthand what it feels like to be in a rocket attack. I was visiting a home in Ashdod, when my host said, “Come, come.” I wasn’t sure if he was addressing me or his family so continued sitting and watching. In more urgent tones he urged me to get up and follow him. I then heard the sirens and realized that we were under attack and joined my host family in the shelter. How is it not clear that Hamas victimizes civilians on both sides of the fence? Whereas all schools in southern Israel are closed, sirens warn of incoming rockets and shelters have been built to protect civilians, Hamas seems to be doing the opposite to their civilians. Why are schools, U.N. buildings, et cetera, used as locations to store arms or from which to launch attacks? There is only one logical conclusion to the continued victimization of Israel and the Jewish people at the U.N., et cetera. Hamas and its allies do not want the Jewish people living in their homeland, Israel … no matter how much Israel is willing to compromise for peace. Any other conclusion would be irrational. Deborah Seidle, La Jolla Whistling past the graveyard? There was a letter concerning the city budget crunch in the Jan. 15 edition (“Life in Stalag 17,” Village News, page 6). Chip Bonghi claims the crisis was wholly preventable because it’s the result of all the additional costs of enforcing the alcohol ban. Mr. Bonghi’s “evidence” of this consists of the fact that he warned us not to do it, plus he claims he saw more cops and lifeguards on the beach this year. On a more serious note, Councilman Kevin Faulconer tells us we need to address both the short- and long-term issues of city spending that exceeds the city budget, on both a short- and long-term basis. He claims the short-term crisis, which would have resulted in some cuts in fire and police, plus closing branch libraries and recreation centers, was averted by the council’s action to raid city reserves.   Then he proposes, as part of a longer term plan, one-week furloughs of city employees, rolling closures of fire facilities and more community dialogue. To his credit, he says city hall must look internally for savings instead of continually cutting public services like police, fire, libraries and parks. I say “amen” to that last idea, but I’m afraid Faulconer is whistling past the graveyard with the type of savings he describes. The stock market meltdown may well double the required city contribution to the pension plan next summer, at a time city receipts take a downward path for the first time in recent memory. We have a “structural” deficit, according to the council’s own budget analyst (translation: the city always spends more than it takes in each year in recurring revenues like taxes and fees, so it makes up the difference with one-time actions like selling city property). Structural deficits suggest structural solutions.  The city needs to restructure and simplify its internal operations, eliminating the “nice to have” areas. What’s really needed is for the voters to start doing some homework, study the city budget, which is easily accessible on the city Web site, and force the mayor and council to answer a few questions. For example, did you know that the city has a housing commission, staffed by over 240 people, that manages 1,800 apartments? Why do we need three separate redevelopment organizations? How do you justify an “Arts Commission,” staffed not by volunteers but by paid city employees, whose primary function appears to be recommending to the mayor where to spend public funds on the arts? I’m sure there are many more questions to be asked, but I’d like to mention two more, based on a comparison of San Diego’s budget with that of Phoenix, also available on the web. Phoenix has a group of 14 administering its pension plan; San Diego requires 65. The Phoenix city council is supported by a staff of 48; San Diego has 96 for the same number of council districts.  There may be explanations; I think we’re entitled to hear them before any more talk of cutting parks and libraries, don’t you? Bill Bradshaw, Pacific Beach