‘Sky Is Falling’ Mentality Marks Pro-Airport Pair

Re “Runway or Walkway? Measure W to Decide,” Commentary, Feb. 3:

In their continued misguided effort to promote an unneeded, unwanted and unsafe airport at El Toro, Stan Oftelie of the Orange County Business Council and Reed Royalty of the Orange County Taxpayers Assn. offer one more example of the “sky is falling” alarmist mentality of the pro-airport faction.

Their article contends that Orange County’s “explosive growth” over the last 20 years demands an airport at El Toro. They neglect to point out that even with that growth, John Wayne Airport, in its restricted capacity, has more than adequately handled the county’s demand for passenger service.

John Wayne usage consistently has remained stable at well under its capped capacity for several years, and Orange County is anticipated to grow very slightly over the next 20 years. With John Wayne currently operating at only 78% of the 9.8-million annual passenger cap restriction proposed by Newport Beach, it is clear that it can handle all of Orange County’s needs well into the future.

Secondly, if Oftelie and the Business Council’s solution to job creation in this county is $6-an-hour baggage handlers and service workers who will have to commute from Riverside County, further congesting those thoroughfares, then we have a serious problem with our county’s business leadership. But then again, low wages do mean higher profits for the wealthy entrepreneurs who will benefit from an airport at El Toro. Maybe this explains whose “quality of life” Oftelie and Royalty are really concerned about.

I urge all voters to vote “yes” on Measure W, for your future and your children’s future.

Gary Thompson

Mayor Pro Tem

Rancho Santa Margarita

*

A majority “no” vote on Measure W on March 5 will bring to Orange County a 21st century airport. An airport will bring thousands of jobs and promote economic growth, something the county needs.

In his State of the Union message, President Bush reminded us how critical it is to revive the economy, and he said the way to grow the economy is to grow jobs. An airport at El Toro would do just that. An airport at El Toro would create more jobs than any other option, directly and indirectly very important to both small and large businesses. I think the president meant to include Orange County.

Jobs are critical to one’s standard of living and quality of life. An airport at El Toro would create thousands of jobs of all types and pay scales, critical to people buying homes, making mortgage payments, paying rents, paying bills and ensuring property values will be maintained.

There are those who are silent on the matter or who have expressed the opinion that an airport at El Toro would have little impact on jobs or that jobs are really not that important to people in Orange County. For example, it seems the Irvine Co. is more concerned about extending and promoting its historic legacy of the Irvine Ranch and probably would deny that an airport at El Toro has greater long-lasting benefit to Orange County. So it remains silent.

Disneyland has said an airport at El Toro would have no significant impact on its tourism business. It’s hard to figure that one out. There are congressional, state, county and city leaders as well as academics and media types who spin the anti-airport at El Toro sentiment. Even the ex-Los Angeles mayor and gubernatorial candidate, Richard Riordan, recently returned to Orange County to confess he was wrong three years ago when he then viewed an airport at El Toro as necessary. Today he says an airport at El Toro is not necessary. Yet he campaigns that jobs are important.

Measure W fails to clearly tell the taxpaying voter what it stands for and what the consequences of a “yes” vote would be. Measure W should not have been presented to voters in its current form. I doubt it would pass judicial review, should it be tested, because of this lack of clarity.

Orange County will pay dearly for its inattentive concern if it passes Measure W in its present form, in terms of time and millions of tax dollars. The taxpayers of Orange County can prevent this from happening by voting “no” on Measure W.

Victor H. Jashinski

Corona del Mar

*

As I read the commentaries on both sides, I found a few comments to be disturbing. The pro-airport article refers to this past year’s utility crisis, national defense and Sept. 11. Is this done to put fear in the anti-airport faction? Then there’s the reference to former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Could there be a more blatant attempt to imply his endorsement of an airport and to capitalize on his popularity? Please stop the posturing. The taxpaying residents of Orange County will tell everybody soon enough what they do or do not want.

Mark Johnson

Yorba Linda

*

Our “war against terror” has revived a significant truth: The same information can be seen very differently depending on who presents it. In Orange County’s big El Toro controversy, the information about the airport versus the Great Park is so contradictory it is difficult for a neutral observer to know what to believe.

Therefore, it is best to judge each piece of information by who is giving it. For instance, at the end of the two commentaries, The Times provided information on the authors. The pro-airport view was from Stan Oftelie, president of the Orange County Business Council, and Reed Royalty, president of the Orange County Business Taxpayers Assn. The pro-park plan was written by Alan Songstad, chairman of the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority and a Laguna Hills City Council member.

Few of us have the time to research the accuracy of information, but just identifying the authors and why they are arguing the issue helps us determine which side of the debate better represents our own interests. Check it out, I think you’ll see what I mean.

Marion Olson

Anaheim

*

Several correspondents recently have questioned the need for the Great Park as called for in Measure W. I can attest from my own observation to the underutilization of William R. Mason Park, but they are missing the point. Measure W is an extensive (and potentially expensive) smokescreen. “Anything but an airport” is its supporters’ aim, and they will endorse any alternative, ignoring the relentless increase in population (in the very areas that are anti-airport) and the opportunity of using a heaven-sent tract of land for the airport that Orange County will so desperately need in the coming years. Where they depart from reality is in suggesting that this pastoral pipe dream will be cost-free. In these difficult times, what Orange County needs is more income and jobs, and less overhead expenses.

Bert Wyatt

Irvine

*

Re “El Toro, Round 3: Read the Fine Print, Then Vote ‘No,’” Commentary, Jan. 27:

Shirley Conger’s article warning about the fine print contained in Measure W (the park plan) sure hit a nerve with airport opponents. The Feb. 3 Letters to The Times section was peppered with letters from South County airport opponents unhappy with her observations. Too bad.

I, for one, want to thank her. Who of us has the time to completely read every word of every initiative, let alone research how to get it in the first place? She did just that, found some serious concerns about Measure W that the park proponents failed to mention, and quoted them to us. I believe they were significant enough to take a pass on Measure W.

Ophelia Martinez

Orange

*

After reading both commentaries Jan. 27, I would call it a third-round TKO. Champ: Measure W.

Shirley Conger left me perplexed when she said that though Measure W purports to offer a pristine, open-space park, in reality, it undermines the protections we already have. What exactly are those protections we already have? Three supervisors hell-bent on a polluting, 24-hour second airport with traffic and all the accouterments that will accompany this unneeded project? I’ll take the protections that Measure W offers with a park.

Mary Schwartz

Santa Ana