Finding Responsive Leadership

Since 1993, Orange County has spent tens of millions of dollars and expended enormous political capital over a proposal for a major airport at the closed El Toro Marine Corps Air Station. Nothing has budged the strong and broad-based opposition in surrounding communities.

Residents went to the polls in March to limit elected officials’ power in such projects, clearly outraged at the deeply flawed leadership of the county. The Times expressed concern that even with legitimate grievances, complex land-use planning should not be done at the ballot box and that representative government must prevail.

Now a court has weighed in. Last week, a judge ruled against the initiative, Measure F, which had passed overwhelmingly. It would have required that airports, large jails within a half-mile of homes and hazardous waste landfills get two-thirds voter approval. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge S. James Otero said that voters could not tie the hands of county supervisors in planning.

While the ruling properly upholds the authority of elected officials, such a finding leaves an incomplete answer to a question that has profound meaning all across development-pressured Southern California. When government proves unresponsive to the concerns of residents, what legal remedy is there short of outright political revolt? It is easy enough to say voters can throw the rascals out, but the way districts are drawn and the influence and access of movers and shakers can make it difficult for ordinary citizens to oust entrenched officials.

Residents are demanding more say in decisions that affect their environments, whether through the new neighborhood councils being formed in Los Angeles or the efforts of communities to curb sprawl. Still more ways to include citizens in planning must be found.

We have argued that in the case of El Toro, a reconfiguration of the Local Redevelopment Authority, now made up entirely of the county supervisors, would provide a credible base for addressing community concerns. This is so regardless of whether the future holds an airport or a nonaviation plan. As it stands, a thin majority of three headstrong supervisors controls Orange County’s most important planning decision.

When that problem is resolved, the county can address properly the choices for the future of the base. It also can focus clearly on what its specific regional aviation responsibilities might be in an era of crowded skies.