Is TwinPorts the Answer? That Depends : Transportation: If economic expansion is more important than quality of life, and if guarantees of financial benefit don’t matter.

H. L. Mencken once wrote, “For every problem, there is one solution which is simple, neat and wrong.” Putting San Diego’s airport on the border between the United States and Mexico may well be such a solution.

Many well-meaning San Diegans, including many political and other community leaders, have demonstrated their desire for a simple and neat solution to San Diego’s “airport problem.” The TwinPorts solution seems simple and neat, and, on the surface, it appears quite plausible. But is it?

The arguments in favor of a binational airport are both powerful and attractive. After all, what would be nicer than having an airport complex (Lindbergh and TwinPorts) with the combined potential to satisfy San Diego’s air carrier needs until the middle of the next century? And why must we continue to be a “cul de sac” if we have the opportunity to grow and be like other big cities with international airports? Surely, with our proximity to the cheap labor in Mexico, we can have all the benefits of economic expansion that will automatically accrue if only we have a binational airport.

If that were so, the TwinPorts scheme might not be a bad idea. But the promises its proponents make are open to serious question.

In the first place, is economic expansion what San Diego really wants? Is that the meaningful measure of merit for deciding the future of this community, or does quality of life take precedence? If the latter, TwinPorts may well be the last thing we would want to do.

But, even if that were not the case, does having a binational airport automatically guarantee the economic benefits envisioned by its proponents? Might there not be other outcomes? If cheap Mexican labor is the catalyst for the expansion, and if it can be accessed by the simple expedient of building airport facilities, why should Mexico or its prospective customers want to fool around with San Diego when they could go direct?

Option 4 of the study conducted by the San Diego Assn. of Governments would establish a regional airport commission to assess whether a system of commuter ports linking San Diego to major airline hubs might serve the region better than building a new airport or expanding Lindbergh. That same option would allow modest improvements at Lindbergh to permit the airport to continue functioning until 2010 and, conceivably, even longer.

In the interim, many unanswered questions could be addressed, first and foremost: what kind of community we really want and what we should do to obtain it.

If a new airport is part of that picture, there is always the possibility of further expansion at Lindbergh (Option 3). Who knows what the Navy and Marine Corps needs will be in the year 2000 and beyond? Indeed, Miramar (Option 2)--in most respects a far better location for a new airport than Otay Mesa--may at some future date be available at least for joint use to accommodate the relatively few cargo or international flights that might be needed for new industries and tourism. We can also preserve the TwinPorts option simply by rezoning the land in question.

There are times when it is wise to act and there are times when it is smarter not to. This is one of those times when we need to be sure we have our act together before we take a billion-dollar plunge without first knowing whether the result is what San Diego really needs and wants--or whether it is just another “solution” that is simple, neat and wrong.