El Toro Editorial Hits Turbulence
* Re “El Toro’s Deep Divide,” Orange County editorial, Feb. 4:
If anyone has “avoid[ed] telling the truth and . . . stretch[ed] the rules” it is those South County cities that call themselves the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority. They are spending millions of taxpayer dollars on misleading mailers and full-page newspaper ads designed to prevent the construction of a civilian airport the county needs more every passing day, and which they, themselves, will use more and benefit from more than any other city in Orange County.
For The Times to say the present Board of Supervisors majority “regard voters as the enemy and have adopted a bunker mentality toward them” is grossly unfair. The present Board of Supervisors (all five of them) inherited the problem it now has. It is the two minority members who have shirked their responsibility. In my judgment, Supervisors Cynthia P. Coad, Jim Silva and Chuck Smith should be commended for having the political courage to do what is right, not what happens to be politically expedient.
NORM EWERS
Irvine
* Your editorial provided information on a subject that will ultimately affect every Orange County citizen, but unfortunately it was mostly old propaganda that anti-airport people continually use in your paper as well as in campaign material.
For instance, many of us would like to hear from North County elected officials. I grow weary of hearing the same rhetoric over and over quoted from South County cities. We are well aware that cities like Irvine oppose it, but I’m from Anaheim and want to know the reasons an El Toro airport would be good or bad for my city. I want to hear airport information from those whom I’ve elected to represent me.
Should we be listening to just those who make the most noise? What they say just might not be the whole truth, and it might not represent my interests. After all, the supervisors who support an El Toro airport represent the majority of citizens. We need to hear more information from their perspective.
South County cities have spent and continue to spend multimillion dollars to get their information out. I was hoping The Times would provide a little different perspective rather than regurgitate what we’ve already been told.
MARION KRONE
Anaheim
* Your editorial contains a negative spin on the airport planning activities and shows a strong bias toward the South County point of view. Your comment on disenfranchisement of a community is particularly upsetting.
When the time came for the Marines to leave El Toro, Orange County was expected to come up with a reasonable operating plan for the reuse of El Toro, with the emphasis on airport use. Somewhere in that time frame ETRPA was formed and was invited to join the supervisors in the planning process. They declined, saying they would not participate in any talks if an airport use was included.
So the entire planning process to that date was to be thrown out because a tiny percentage of Orange County residents were miffed that they were not allowed to control the planning process. It was just as though the majority of residents didn’t exist, and the supervisors were to be ignored although they were doing the job they were elected to do. That tiny percentage was really attempting to disenfranchise the majority of Orange County.
The implication that the county is not forthright about John Wayne Airport plans is also out of line. It is beginning to look like The Times’ staff are card-carrying, dues-paying members of ETRPA.
WILLIAM J. KEARNS
Costa Mesa