Q. What will it cost if we pass the O.C. Central Park and Nature Preserve Initiative?

A. There is very little cost associated with this initiative. Measure W amends elements of the County general plan for El Toro that deal with noise, traffic, recreation and building intensity standards. It changes the permitted uses so that El Toro can't be used for an airport and only can be used for low density open space and park compatible purposes. Potential non-aviation uses can be developed in the future, if and when funds become available. The initiative doesn't require the County to do anything at El Toro beyond minimum governmental requirements to provide for public safety and basic maintenance.

Q. I've heard claims that a park would cost billions. How can that be true?

A. That figure came from a report bought and paid for by airport supporters and circulated by pro-El Toro airport groups. The report was propaganda, designed to put the park in the worst possible light.

On November 30, the County Auditor-Controller issued an impartial analysis prepared by Public Financial Management Inc. that completely refutes the deceptive claims of the pro-airport groups.

• The airport supporters' report falsely claims that the land must be purchased - for $418 million - but the County acknowledges that it can be given to the County for free as a public benefit. Part of the Tustin base will be transferred to the public for a park by this type of conveyance. The people already have paid for and own El Toro.

• The pro-airport report also claims that the County would spend $146 million on cleanup. The County analysis recognizes this as the responsibility of the federal government under the base closure laws.

• The plain fact is that schools like Chapman University, museums like the Bowers and Discovery Museums, cultural facilities such as the Orange County Performing Arts Center, sports stadiums like Edison Field were all built with private funds, not tax dollars.

• Airport supporters estimate that a "basic park" costs far less than one tenth of the cost of an airport. This can be funded with revenue accumulated from renting the existing base buildings, housing, stables, golf course and over a thousand acres of agricultural land.

Q. Whatever it costs, how do we pay for it?

A. In another study made public last year, consultants for the County estimated that interim reuse of the existing facilities can generate $293 million over 15 years - enough to pay for the basic park infrastructure.  Park supporters see greater income potential from efficiently renting what is already there.

• Much of what could be built at El Toro will be funded by Orange County's share of state park bonds. $285 million remains available for local parks from Proposition 12 and the most recent state park bond measure includes many millions more.

• Private philanthropy is a major source of funds for building colleges, parks and museums. There are many examples in Orange County of such projects being funded by wealthy individuals, corporations and private foundations. When the land is available for free, it becomes easier to get donors for the buildings.

• Cal State Fullerton is looking for additional campus space and would build its own facility at El Toro at no cost to Orange County taxpayers. The Auditor-Controller's study assumes that a university, museum, golf courses and other recreational facilities can be built in the first phase of the park development with revenue from renting the base and with less than $1 per resident per year from the County General Fund.

Q. When will the park be built?

A. Park opponents, in their report, assume that the park will be built immediately, which is the least sensible and most costly way. There is no rush to complete the 4,700-acre project. Our children and grandchildren will make many of the decisions about what is built there. Under this initiative, we will bank the land. The non-aviation uses of El Toro will be built only when funds become available.

• Balboa Park was stared over 100 years ago. All of the other major parks across American took decades to build and all have become major attractions which greatly contribute to the economy and quality of life of the communities they serve.

Q. What is the difference between the OC Central Park and the "Great Park"?

A.  The federal government is scheduled to give the land to the County. Measure W will change the County's General Plan so that the County's only permitted land use is for a Central Park.

• Part of the closed Marine base is already within the boundaries of the City of Irvine.  The State of California has designated the remainder as being in Irvine's "sphere of influence" and intended for future annexation.  For administrative reasons, many of our regional parks and beaches are annexed or incorporated within city boundaries.  Irvine City planners have been studying various concepts for what they call a "Great Park" that could be built at El Toro and be economically feasible.

• The City of Irvine is prepared to develop a region-serving "Great Park" at no cost to county government or taxpayers.  Revenue, such as from sales tax at concessions, would be shared with the County under a mutually acceptable agreement. If the County is honestly concerned with development or maintenance costs of a park they have a simple solution.  They can support Irvine's annexation - in accordance with state procedures - and let the City take the financial responsibility for the park.

• Once the federal government gives the land for a park under a public benefit conveyance, the law limits the County or the City of Irvine to development for that specified use. Otherwise, it must be returned to the federal government.

Q. Could we ever be hit with a tax increase for the park?

A. The County's own study finds that, "The initiative does not impose a new tax or tax increase."  Measure W says that there will be "no new taxes". If future generations of citizens wish to raise their taxes, to add additional facilities to the park, that is up to them. However, Propositions 13 and 218 require that any special new tax has to get approval from two-thirds of the voters. There is no way to tax the residents of the County, or of any city, for a park without their specific approval. That is California law! The taxes threatened by park opponents are just another dishonest pro-airport scare tactic.