Sunday, July 16, 2000
Candor
for El Toro
A
complete overhaul of planning is needed
The anniversary of the closing of El Toro Marine Corps Air Station has
prompted some second-guessing
about what might have been had the planning
process gone more
smoothly. There also is some wishful thinking at the Hall of
Administration
about the discredited big international airport plan, and with it, a
failure to recognize
the deep problems with the county's approach to base reuse.
The recent one-year mark saw county supervisors in the throes of realigning
the organizational
chart for El Toro planning. The Board of Supervisors took
control of airport
preparations away from former County Executive Officer Jan
Mittermeier, and
that was enough to precipitate a crisis over her tenure.
Mittermeier eventually
left, and now the county is looking for two new executives:
one to run the
county and another to implement the thin board majority of three's
current commercial
airport plan.
Airport proponents have no choice but to acknowledge the depth of community
opposition, but
have attributed some of the impasse to a lack of professionalism
and competence
among county planners. While the execution of airport plans may
have been bungled,
that's hardly the whole story. It misses the mark completely to
suggest that if
only the professionals had been more professional, then the process
would be further
along.
One problem has to do with a lack of candor on the part of county leaders.
For
the county to go
forward with the kind of big international facility that was
envisioned, an
entirely different and more forthright public discussion would have
been necessary
as a prelude. That conversation never took place in the seven-year
period after the
base closing was announced. It would have required
acknowledging that
real sacrifice would be required for Irvine and surrounding
communities to
the south, and perhaps, ironically, even parts of pro-El Toro
airport Newport
Beach. Cities would have been called upon to accept
round-the-clock
flights, arriving and departing on flight paths where a lot of people
would see and hear
big airplanes.
Because the skies over Southern California are so crowded already, it also
would have been
necessary to talk about closing John Wayne Airport. El Toro
would have had
to be described more candidly as offering both international flights
and short- and
medium-range service, and also handling the county's general
aviation traffic.
The county understood that such a plan never would win
community acceptance,
so it tried instead to float one that, over time, made
aviation experts
out of ordinary citizens. Once the public began to get up to speed
on runway design
and flight operations, the public relations war was lost. The
county retreated
to a position where it hoped, without acknowledging so, that the
Federal Aviation
Administration could be pinned with responsibility for insisting on
how El Toro would
have to operate. Now, at least, Board of Supervisors Chairman
Chuck Smith seeks
FAA guidance on flight plans, but this may be too little too late.
The county's breach of public trust on El Toro is already established.
It arises
from the fact that
it never conducted a full and honest discussion on the airport.
So if we are going
to talk about flawed planning, let's be clear about how deeply
the flaws run.
Outright misrepresentation from the top down contributed more to
time-wasting than
all the alleged incompetence of hired planners, who were only
giving the policy
people what they wanted.
Additionally, by insulting the intelligence of community leaders and activists,
the county further
alienated its own constituents. Today, it will be hard-pressed
ever to get a credible
airport planning process underway anew, even in the unlikely
event that it were
to propose a more modest and community-friendly airport
plan--say, a general
aviation facility or second "reliever" airport at El Toro.
The second and more fundamental problem is the matter of who plans for
the
base, whatever
ends up going in there. The county leadership is indulging in
fanciful course
correction if it now thinks that merely rearranging the name tags at
the planning table
somehow will produce a more "professional" and "efficient" plan
for the base.
We have argued that the process is so badly broken that it needs a complete
overhaul to be
more representative of community interests and reflective of the
spirit of federal
guidelines for base reuse. Some of the players have changed since
1994, but the same
element on the Board of Supervisors complaining about
unprofessional
planning is responsible for hijacking the Local Redevelopment
Authority and providing
no place for other interested parties at the policy table.
In the meantime, the county limps along, addressing important but tangential
questions such
as what happens next to civilian activities at the base. In this
manner, it moves
from stopgap measure to stopgap measure, dealing with
important parts
but essentially still adrift on what to do about the whole.