Measure F Appeal Will Be Heard in San Diego

An appellate court in San Diego will consider the legality of a local ballot measure passed last year to thwart Orange County’s plans for an airport at El Toro.

The controversial case was to be heard by the Santa Ana division of the 4th District Court of Appeal. But the panel’s six judges--including Presiding Justice David G. Sills, a former Irvine mayor--recused themselves Thursday. The judges did not give a reason.

The appeal was filed by a coalition of nine South County cities, including Irvine, that are fighting an airport at the retired Marine base. Los Angeles Superior Court Judge S. James Otero ruled in December that Measure F was unconstitutional and barred Orange County from enforcing it.

Having an entire panel of appellate judges recuse themselves from a case is unheard of, said Mark Petracca, an airport opponent and head of the political science department at UC Irvine.

Either the justices each have conflicts of interest--and then should have declared what those were--or they wanted to avoid ruling on the contentious airport issue, said Petracca.

“The plausible explanation is that these judges are subject to recall [and] this could come around and bite them,” he said. “It shows a profound lack of courage on their part to do their job, if indeed that’s the reason.”

On another legal front, the coalition of cities voted unanimously Friday to file a lawsuit against the county after supervisors voted this week to spend $5 million on a public-information campaign promoting the proposed airfield.

The money would be spent through June 2002 by the Orange County Regional Airport Authority, a 13-city coalition that supports an airport at El Toro.

*

Attorneys for the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority said they will challenge the spending in a separate lawsuit and through the Measure F appeal. They contend that the measure remains in effect until the appeal is resolved--a position disputed by pro-airport attorneys.

The public relations campaign “is illegal and totally irresponsible by the Board of Supervisors and needs to be stopped,” said L. Allan Songstad Jr., a Laguna Hills council member and chairman of the group.

Measure F, approved in March by 67% of voters, restricts county spending for new airport projects, large jails near homes and hazardous-waste landfills. It also requires two-thirds voter approval countywide before the projects could be built.

In January, the Board of Supervisors cited Otero’s ruling as clearance to resume spending money--as much as $1.2 million--on lobbying and attorneys to push for the airport project. The first $1 million of the public relations money would be spent through the end of this fiscal year, which ends June 30.

ETRPA attorney Terry Dixon said there are “several theories” under which a separate lawsuit could challenge the county’s most recent action.

He cited a 1999 legal opinion by County Counsel Laurence M. Watson that federal laws bar third parties from assuming authority over base closure activities.