Airport Foes Vow They’ll Be Back on Ballot

A day after a judge struck down an initiative aimed at blocking a proposed El Toro airport, south Orange County leaders said Saturday they will ask voters to rescind plans for the airport and use much of the base land for a sprawling park.

The decision to immediately begin work on a March 2002 ballot measure suggests that the intense battle over the fate of El Toro will continue unabated and dims hopes by some pro-airport forces that the judge’s decision would spark talk of compromise.

It would mark the fourth time voters had considered the airport issue since 1994, when they narrowly approved designating the 4,700-acre base for use as a commercial airport.

The proposed measure would repeal that initiative, known as Measure A. It would also change zoning with an as-yet conceptual development plan centered on a 2,500-acre urban park with a university, museums, gardens and sports facilities. Some commercial development and new housing could be included, officials said.

“It’s very clear from polling that the people of Orange County don’t want an airport and they’re supportive of a great park,” said Irvine Mayor-elect Larry Agran. “That’s exactly the course we’re on.”

Voters in March overwhelmingly approved Measure F, which required approval by a two-thirds countywide vote before the El Toro airport or other major government project is built. Anti-airport forces hoped the measure would kill the plan. But Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge S. James Otero ruled Friday that Measure F was “fundamentally flawed” because it usurps the Orange County government’s authority.

In his ruling, Otero said that if El Toro foes wanted to kill the airport, they should get voters to repeal Measure A. South County leaders, who fear the airport would bring traffic, noise and pollution problems, said they are taking the judge’s suggestion to heart.

“We need to do what we have to do, and the judge laid out a road map to do it,” said Bill Kogerman, an anti-airport activist.

Opinion polls in the county have shown that support for an El Toro airport has dwindled in recent years, now hovering around 35%. Many residents said they support the idea of a park at the base.

But those involved in the airport fight, as well as observers, said the ultimate success of a new measure may hinge more on the state of Orange County’s economy in March 2002 than on residual opposition to another airport. The airport plan’s narrow passage in 1994 during the height of California’s recession was fueled by a belief that it could provide a needed economic engine.

Airport supporters said their challenge in the next 18 months is to convince a skeptical public that the new airport is needed and that the county’s other commercial airport, John Wayne, can’t handle the demand for service.

“Our job is to sell why it’s needed in the region and in this area,” said activist Tom Naughton. “We have a lot of work to do between now and 2002.” Those drafting the new South County-backed measure now should make sure the park plan pays for itself, warned Supervisor Todd Spitzer, one of two anti-airport county supervisors.

South County officials have disagreed over the level of commercial development needed so Orange County’s notoriously anti-tax residents wouldn’t be asked to pay more for it.

“In light of Otero’s ruling, there’s going to be a lot of motivation for people to put their differences aside and decide on a non-aviation plan that can be put to the voters,” Spitzer said.

Agran, who made the “great park” plan a cornerstone of his recent mayoral campaign, said Saturday that planners could add commercial development to make the park plan more profitable. He said base redevelopment centered around a park can be profitable; an endowment could be created to help pay bills, he said.

Mission Viejo Councilwoman Susan Withrow said a plan for the base can hammered out. But what exactly the mix presented to voters should be ought to await the outcome of public hearings on the subject that the El Toro foes intend to hold.

“I don’t think it will be easy” arriving at a consensus, she said. “But it won’t be impossible. Nothing about El Toro has been easy.”

Fred Smoller, director of the Henley Research Center at Chapman University, said Friday’s court decision will challenge airport foes to find consensus on issues beyond their opposition to having planes flying overhead.

“The fact is that just saying ‘no’ to the El Toro airport isn’t good enough,” Smoller said. “They have to say that they’re for something.”

He agreed that future economic conditions are the biggest threat to killing the airport through another vote, “not whether there should be a 500-acre park out there or a 1,500-acre park.”

The fight over El Toro likely won’t end with another initiative, regardless of the outcome, Smoller said, because of the commitment by both sides.

“The game isn’t over,” he said. “We’re just going into extra innings. This issue will define politics in this place for the next 10 years.”