Comparing Costs of Spring and Fall Elections in Tustin

Regarding your editorial “Tustin Springs Backward” (Nov. 26): I must disagree with you on several points. First, the council minority (one of whom is up for reelection next year) mirrors your claims of added cost and low voter turnout for an April election.

This same council minority was in favor of the city spending $40,000 to $60,000 to purchase equipment to monitor airport flyover noise, when it would have been cheaper to hire an outside consultant for considerably less. This same minority was willing to spend city funds to defend the city against both The Times’s and Register’s threatened litigation on First Amendment grounds in the infamous “newsstand resolution,” and yet again when they tried to evict a medical clinic that performs abortions from the city. So it would seem that money isn’t the issue.

The low voter turnout excuse is historically correct, but realistically wrong. Councilmen Carl Prescott and John Kelly have made the city of Tustin a laughingstock in recent months with their irresponsible, self-aggrandizing posturing on issues irrelevant to city government and their elected office. Many Tustin residents, including myself, are sick of these shenanigans and are paying close attention to local government issues.

I feel that a separate city election would bring out plenty of voters to hopefully return our council to a professional body of public servants, not the soap opera it has become recently.

CHRIS CRINER

Tustin