Pros and Cons of Prop. K

In response to “A Vote to Help End a Fiscal Mess,” editorial, Oct. 15:

Your editorial misses the point regarding Prop. K. Its supporters make it sound too good to be true. Well, it is too good to be true. It would have a dramatic impact on Los Angeles International Airport and the other city airports in a number of ways.

First, it changes the way the LAX is managed. For the past 50 years airport users have paid for the construction, maintenance and operation of the city’s airports. Not one dime of taxpayer money is used. Management decisions have been based solely on the criteria of what is best for the traveling public. Proposition K will inject City Hall politics into the operation of the airport. The City Council members can’t manage their own affairs. What makes them think they can be trusted to run this precious municipal asset?

Second, there is no profit at the airport. The City Council plans to create a false profit by raising landing fees, parking fees, lease fees and every other revenue source at the airport. This could have a devastating impact on airport users. Consumers will pay more for parking, airline tickets, overnight package delivery, as businesses pass their increased costs to the consumer.

Third, nothing in Proposition K limits how much money the City Council can take or what the council can spend it on. There is no satisfying the insatiable appetite of politicians when it comes to spending money that is not theirs. There is not one word in the charter amendment directing the money to police, fire or any other essential service.

Fourth, why fix the airport if it’s not broken? LAX works. It generates over $31 billion for our local economy and 400,000 jobs. The Los Angeles economy is struggling enough without the City Council trying to squeeze millions of dollars out of this important regional resource.

ROGER COHEN, Vice President, Air Transport Assn., Los Angeles