The Measure M ‘Conspiracy’

Re your Jan. 2 editorial “Conspiracy to Kill ‘M’ ”: Hey, lighten up, guys. The word “conspiracy” usually implies secrecy, with intent to break the law. Opposition to Measure M has been anything but quiet. The county supervisors were warned in writing even before they put it on the ballot. And since when is it illegal to ask the Supreme Court to rule on an issue?

The traffic congestion you point out is, in fact, a major reason for opposing M. Measure M would waste 3.1 billion tax dollars without helping that congestion at all.

It would considerably improve the quality of life in Orange County--but only for a few consultants and other transportation groupies. The rest of us would have to pay for mass-transit boondoggles that are dangerous, are expensive and don’t work. Measure M is a slick bill of goods sold to the voters with a $4.5-million advertising campaign funded by a few developers.

The court will consider facts and legal arguments in the case, not the publicity. Five solid points have been raised, any one of which could invalidate Measure M. Is your intemperate language (“conspiracy,” “shamelessly,” “reprehensible,” etc.) due to your unspoken fear that Measure M may not stand up in court?

If not, what’s your problem?

BILL WARD, Costa Mesa