Who Benefits in Cityhood Drive?

Your story (Feb. 17) presents only the views of the Mission Viejo Incorporation Feasibility Study Committee. It glowingly reports William Craycraft’s jubilant accord with Fred Christensen’s findings for “cityhood” for Mission Viejo.

With joy, Craycraft says “incorporation is absolutely of necessity for the taxpayers of Mission Viejo.” The taxpayers have never been consulted, nor have they been asked to vote on whether or not they were interested in a study. It is common knowledge that the residents of Mission Viejo would rather have their status in the county as it is now.

The “hefty surpluses” the study mentions would not begin to pay for all the expenditures a city would require. No capital improvements are mentioned, and never in the past has the study group presented a plan for the future; only a constant din about what they are doing for us.

It would be of public interest to know who financed the study. Would it be many public-spirited citizens, or would it be a few donors who would be politically benefited for their efforts? Would the paid-for study slant toward cityhood or would the bottom line come from the Board of Supervisors? My school of thought is that of “don’t bite the hand that feeds you.”

Now that the report satisfies the committee, how are the spoils to be divided? One (member) of the committee is already being touted for the office of (county) supervisor. All their gains will be at my expense, as I will be buried under a mound of tax increases, just to smooth the ego of self-seeking, would-be politicians.

ARTHUR KATZ

Mission Viejo