NEWS - May 2000
NEWS - May 2000WHAT'S HOT - Click on date. Complete story is below.
LA Times, May 31, 2000
“Talks Aimed at Saving El Toro Recreation Programs
Hit Snag”
Website Direct, May 30, 2000
Supervisors fail to act on Master Lease
Website Direct, May 29, 2000
Residents invited to Restoration Advisory Board
meeting on Wednesday
Base cleanup issues explained
LA Times, May 29, 2000
“El Toro Spending: Was It Worth It?”
LA Times, Valley edition, May 28, 2000
Burbank: “Airport Terminal Deadline Missed”
“Land for new facility can now be sold. If city doesn't buy it,
expansion plan is dead”
LA Times, Editorial, May 28, 2000
“Trouble Landing El Toro”
“Political Support for Airport Requires New Process”
LA Times, Opinion May 28, 2000
“How the Public Can Give Itself a Voice on County
Board”
Website Direct, May 26, 2000
Special airport meeting of Supervisors on Tuesday
LA Times, May 26, 2000
“Irvine's Plan Could Divide Airport Foes”
“City Council votes $4.5 million to promote 'great park' at former
Marine base, a plan at odds with other South County cities'.”
LA Times, May 25, 2000
“Mittermeier Gets It From Both Sides”
“For months, all pro- and anti-airport forces have agreed on
is she shouldn't handle issue. Executive won't surrender.”
Website Direct, May 24, 2000 FLASH
UCI 2000 annual opinion poll shows airport slipping
Website Direct, May 23, 2000
Board of Supervisors strip El Toro planning away
from Mittermeier
LA Times, May 22, 2000
“O.C.'s Spending at El Toro Marine Base Questioned”
Various sources, May 21, 2000
The War of Words Continues
LA Times, May 20, 2000
"New County Office Urged for El Toro"
"Mittermeier's memo proposes regular meetings and briefings to
open up the planning process."
OC Register, May 19, 2000
“Supervisors push on with airport”
LA Times, May 19, 2000
“Board Tries to Pull Its El Toro Plan Out of Stall”
Website Direct, May 18, 2000
What is the Pilots’ Plan?
Irvine Company reaction to alternate flight paths.
Website Direct, May 17, 2000
Navy tells County to get with it or base will be
padlocked
Website Direct, May 16, 2000
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing has few surprises
Orange County Business Council, May 16, 2000
Pro-airport business group makes recommendations
to Board of Supervisors
OC Register, May 15, 2000
“Meeting to focus on El Toro”
“Airport foes and backers plan to make presentations before the
county board.”
LA Times, Editorial, May 14, 2000
“Get a Plan Before Voting”
LA Times, May 12, 2000
“New El Toro Runway Idea to Be Urged for Study”
“A pilots group says southerly takeoffs would be safer than the
current county plan. FAA wants such an alternative, backers say.”
Website Direct, May 11, 2000
Los Angeles World Airports study shows little need
for El Toro
OC Register, May 10, 2000
“El Toro planning resumes; project behind schedule
LA Times, May 10, 2000
“Taxpayers Might Have to Pay Price for El Toro
Services”
“Supervisors will decide next week whether to allocate as much
as $2.2 million to keep recreational programs open after July 1.”
Website Direct, May 8, 2000
Board of Supervisors and El Toro
OC Register, May 7, 2000
“Measuring F”
Website Direct, May 4, 2000
Judge allows County to resume spending on airport
LA Times, May 4, 2000
“Board Wants Details on Cost of Base Cleanup”
“Making El Toro suitable for non-aviation use could be far more
expensive.”
Website Direct, May 3, 2000
Supervisors Hold El Toro “Study Session”
LA Times, May 2, 2000
“7 El Toro Scenarios on Table”
“County supervisors will discuss the options Wednesday. Most
include an airport, but plans of any sort could also be abandoned.”
LA Times, May 1, 2000
“More El Toro Closures?”
“Critics charge that the potential end of golfing, equestrian,
day-care and other services in July indicates how the county's planning
for the former Marine base has been flawed all along.”
(For full articles see L.A. Times at http://www.latimes.com and O.C.
Register at http://www.ocregister.com/news/)
As reported by this website yesterday, “A pact aimed at keeping a handful of recreation programs open at the former El Toro Marine base dissolved Tuesday after Orange County officials failed to reach agreement with those fighting plans for an airport there. The Navy has threatened to padlock the base July 1 if the two sides don't resolve their differences.”
“The sticking point involves the timing of possible jet flights and other aviation activity at El Toro. The county wants to begin airport-related work as soon as possible; foes, confident that they will ultimately shoot down plans for an airport, want to keep aviation activity grounded for as long as they can… Two pro-airport supervisors offered Tuesday in a private meeting to hold off on aviation activity at the base for 3 1/2 years, up from the two years offered last week. Anti-airport forces, who last week insisted on a five-year flight moratorium, were willing to drop to four years. Beyond that, neither side would budge.”
Editor: There was also debate over whether the county would be allowed to start construction earlier on aviation related facilities. All of this becomes moot if a Superior Court Judge upholds Measure F’s restrictions on June 23, in which case there can be no flights from El Toro without a vote of the people.
“Frustrated by the impasse, Board of Supervisors Chairman Chuck Smith said Tuesday that he'll ask his colleagues next week to consider filing a lawsuit against the State Lands Commission. He said commissioners are violating state law by deliberately delaying transfer of police protection from federal marshals to the Orange County Sheriff's Department.”
A July 1 lockdown of all activities at the El Toro base got a little closer today when the Board of Supervisors failed to reach agreement on a plan of action. The matter is put over until the June 6 Board meeting. Meanwhile the clock is ticking on a Department of Navy imposed deadline to sign a Master Lease by next month.
County staff has been negotiating with anti-airport forces on a deal to bar interim aviation use of the base. Without such an agreement, with ETRPA and TRP, the County is unlikely to get the State Lands Commission to schedule a special June meeting. The Lands Commission meeting would be necessary to approve retrocession of law-enforcement authority from the federal government to the state. Without retrocession, the Navy has said that they will not sign a Master Lease because they are unwilling to police the civilian activities at the base.
The supervisors could not agree amongst themselves, and with the airport opponents, on terms of an agreement baring interim aviation use. Such an agreement would strengthen the restrictions against aviation use which are already imposed by Measure F.
Volunteers on the Restoration Advisory Board (RAB) monitor the base environmental cleanup process. A citizen member of the RAB has written a memo outlining some of the most serious cleanup issues. The public is invited to the next RAB meeting at Irvine City Hall on Wednesday, May 31 at 6:30 PM. It is an excellent way to become informed about the ground pollution left behind at base closure.
“Proponents insist that the $35 million spent so far on planning is a small price to pay for a potentially big moneymaker. But one critic says the funds merely 'keep a standing army of consultants on hand to push an airport agenda.' “ Click for the entire article, including a breakdown of how the money was spent.
“The deadline for approving a new Burbank Airport terminal expired Wednesday, triggering a process that could end with the sale of land earmarked for the $300-million project. The draft terminal deal--signed by negotiators for the city of Burbank and the Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority last August--had been considered dead for months because of objections from residents, airlines and the Federal Aviation Administration… The City Council has agreed to put any terminal agreement before voters.”
“The short timeline ratchets up pressure on both the city and the Airport Authority to break the stalemate over the proposed 14-gate terminal… Prospects for the terminal deal dimmed in March, when FAA Chief Jane Garvey said the airport could not impose an overnight curfew without conducting a $4-million [normally 3 year] federal noise study. The nighttime ban on flights was considered a crucial element of the deal.”
Burbank Mayor Bill Wiggins, in a statement Tuesday, said city staff is now analyzing [non-aviation] redevelopment opportunities "for at least some of" the property. He said the City Council would make a decision within the next 60 days. The land could generate tax revenue and jobs as a business or industrial park.”
“In recent weeks, the Board of Supervisors has inched toward a better approach to the El Toro base reuse dilemma. By the end of last week, the board had regrouped by approving a new office to handle the proposed airport project, and shaken loose authority from County Executive Officer Jan Mittermeier. Unfortunately, the most important question will not be answered satisfactorily for some time. That is, will this be a cosmetic realignment, with many of the same old conclusions reached, or will there be a candid reassessment?”
…” It is unfortunate that, after years misspent on false starts, it now will take much longer to move the process forward. At least the journey is beginning.”
“For the last four decades, Orange County supervisors have relied on the development industry for most of their campaign funds. This is because political contributions generally are made by those who have something to gain or lose by the actions of the officials to whom they contribute.“
Grindle notes that a major change occurred when South County citizens weighed in to support supervisorial candidate Dave Sullivan in his unsuccessful bid to unseat incumbent Jim Silva. “If members of the public wants to change this scenario, they must step up to the plate with their campaign contributions. The only other alternative is total public financing, which is not likely to happen in ultraconservative Orange County.”
There will be a special meeting of the Board of Supervisors and El Toro Local Redevelopment Authority on Tuesday, May 30 at 10:00 AM. There is one public discussion item. “Consideration of Agreement with the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority (ETRPA) and Taxpayers for Responsible (TRP) Prohibiting Interim Aviation at MCAS El Toro for a specific term.”
Anti-airport leaders are negotiating an agreement with the county to allow retrocession to proceed and to permit a Master Lease to be signed with the Navy in order to continue non-aviation uses of the base – such as the stables, pre-school and golf course. In return, interim aviation use of the base will be barred by a written agreement between the two sides, as well as by the provisions of Measure F.
“A decision this week by Irvine to spend $4.5 million promoting a ‘great park’ at the former El Toro Marine base could trigger an expensive rift in the South County coalition fighting the county's plans for an airport at the base. The city's park plan is the third non-airport proposal to be floated from South County in the past two years and the second in the past year by the city… Supervisor Todd Spitzer said South County should unite behind a single non-airport plan to counter the airport.”
“The plan envisions about half of the 4,700-acre base transformed into a vast central park, with the rest used for museums, cultural centers, a sports complex and farm land. Maintenance of the property would be paid from agricultural leases and a mix of private and public cultural funds… Park supporters said it is superior to other non-airport proposals. ‘It will give people from La Habra to San Clemente an escape from the noise, traffic and congestion that plague our daily lives,’ Irvine Mayor Christina Shea said in voting for the plan, which received unanimous council support this week. ‘The great park will enhance our quality of life; an airport will degrade it. That's the bottom line.’
Editor: The other Irvine non-aviation plan is the Millennium Plan II, sometimes referred to as “Millennium Plan Lite”. It is a mix of parks, residential communities, sports and educational facilities and sites for high tech employment. Millennium Plan II was developed for inclusion in Irvine's annexation bid for the base property. It is a scaled down version of the original ETRPA Millennium Plan. The newer non-aviation plans have been reduced in density to counter the County's move towards a smaller, less dense "Green Plan" for the airport.
In related news, mailers arrived today, soliciting funds for "Yes, I want to support the Larry Agran for Mayor [of Irvine] campaign and the Great Park."
“A decision … to remove planning for the former El Toro Marine base from County Executive Officer Jan Mittermeier came after months of intense lobbying. … An aborted attempt last month to create a separate El Toro office failed after it was tied to a vote to fire Mittermeier. Only board Chairman Chuck Smith and Todd Spitzer backed the move, with colleagues Jim Silva, Cynthia P. Coad and Tom Wilson backing Mittermeier.”
“It was Silva who broke the logjam Tuesday by proposing the new office, with Mittermeier continuing as chief executive for all other county business. The unanimous vote was cast despite warnings from Mittermeier that taking away El Toro would violate her contract. Within hours of Tuesday's vote, Mittermeier and her attorney, … rejected the board's decision and, in essence, challenged supervisors to terminate her contract when they meet again June 6.”
“Silva, who supported Mittermeier a month ago, was beseeched by pro-airport forces angry at his earlier vote to keep her, sources familiar with the lobbying said. They told him that only a bold move to separate the airport would put the project back on track.” Pro-airport leaders have been calling for creation of an airport czar role.
“At the same time, [anti-airport Supervisor Tom] Wilson was lobbied by airport foes, who have long complained that Mittermeier was too secretive and defensive to provide critical leadership for building a consensus on the final El Toro development plan. They didn't buy Wilson's rationale that her mishandling of the issue actually helped the anti-airport side.” Anti-airport Supervisor Todd Spitzer has been consistently opposed to Mittermeier because of her management style.
“The second move toward détente was the board's unanimous pledge Tuesday to try to salvage a handful of recreation programs at the base slated to close July 1. The programs are losing money, but critics accused Mittermeier of thwarting attempts to make them more profitable because she fears they might interfere with the ultimate airport project.”
“One name floated for months to possibly take over El Toro planning is Stan Oftelie, executive director of the Orange County Business Council. Though the business council supports an airport at El Toro, Oftelie extendedan olive branch to airport foes, urging supervisors to level the playing field by studying a non-airport alternative to the same degree as the airport. Oftelie, formerly executive director of the Orange County Transportation Authority, said Wednesday he spoke with supervisors about El Toro last month but hasn't met recently with them.” The OC Register reports that the City of Irvine has budgeted $250,000 "to start a Tech Coast Chamber of Commerce as an alternative to the pro-airport Orange County Business Council."
Editor: We predicted, months ago that Mittermeier would be
made the scapegoat for the passage of Measure F and the shrinking support
for the airport, even though the real fault lies with the airport concept
and with the three Supervisor majority’s “airport at any cost” policy.
Giving the El Toro job to Oftelie of the OCBC will put a high-powered “white
knight” and executive team behind a renewed attempt to salvage the airport
project.
Today, UCI released the report of its year 2000 Orange County opinion poll, headed “Support Declining for El Toro Airport.” The subhead states, “Development of Airport at Former Marine Base ‘Unlikely” Residents Say”.
“A majority of Orange County residents now say they are opposed to a commercial airport at El Toro, and fewer than half think it ever will be built.” “For the first time [in polls going back to 1997] airport opponents in North County outnumber supporters, 45 percent to 41 percent.”
“Approval of the way county government has handled the airport development issue has reached a new low.”
“Fifty percent say they want John Wayne as the county’s only commercial airport, 32 percent want to develop El Toro… and continue to use John Wayne, and 7 percent want to close John Wayne and use El Toro as the county’s only airport.” Editor: Closing John Wayne to commercial aviation is widely considered to be the likely outcome of building El Toro.
Click here to access the UCI website and complete survey data.
At the Board meeting this morning, supervisors picked up on Jan Mittermeier’s proposal to reorganize El Toro planning, and apparently went a step further. They voted 5-0 to have El Toro planning report directly to the Board. Tom Mathews is in charge, at least for now. We have no indication of how Mittermeier will react to this breach of her contract, which gives her control over El Toro. She had previously threatened to fight any change.
Mittermeier survived an attempt to fire her last month when Tom Wilson balked. Wilson expressed concern, at the time, that firing Mittermeier would move El Toro planning under direct Board of Supervisors control - which is exactly where it seems to have moved today.
The Board did give one positive sign of change in the handling of El Toro reuse. They voted to negotiate with the Navy over a Master lease to continue the current non-aviation uses - stables, pre-school and golf course – and expand the scope to include the leasing of 44 buildings and utilization of over 800 housing units on the base. Mittermeier and her staff had been resistant to non-aviation use for the base.
“Orange County may have improperly spent more than $800,000 in highly restricted John Wayne Airport funds to pay contractors at the former El Toro Marine base, documents show. Two management firms were paid the money since July, although it appears from county records that their airport-related tasks had ended and most of what they were entrusted to manage was a few recreation programs: a golf course, horse stables, officers' club, a child care center, swimming pool and an RV storage lot. ‘They are not supposed to use airport funds for that. If they're doing that, then they are violating the law,’ said Donald R. Segner, a former FAA associate administrator, who has questioned the use of John Wayne Airport dollars for El Toro planning for more than two years.”
“Earlier this month, supervisors unanimously voted to have a county auditor "scrub" the internal account set up to handle El Toro planning costs. Supervisor Todd Spitzer demanded the review after county and airport officials conceded that … John Wayne money had been improperly used… to review El Toro planning work. Federal Aviation Administration officials would not comment directly on whether Orange County violated federal rules in its spending of John Wayne Airport dollars. The FAA has not reviewed Orange County's use of airport funds since the fall of 1998.
Spitzer said last week that if the county's internal auditor confirms that any airport funds were misspent, he will call for investigations by the FAA, the Department of Transportation and the U.S. Department of Justice. "On its face, it has the appearance of impropriety," Spitzer said.”
CEO Mittermeier, in a May 22 memo, referred to this Times article as "a sensational story about baseless allegations" and welcomed a review by the Internal Auditor.
In the OC Register, General William Bloomer (USMC, Ret.), writes that, “Advertisement took my airport statements out of context.” Objecting an ETRPA ad regarding runway safety concerns at El Toro, General Bloomer charges that “If the people of Orange County are interested in the truth… they can be guaranteed not to receive it from the group promoting the Millennium Plan.”
The Los Angeles Times editorializes, “Airport Funds Need Watching”. “The mingling of funds for John Wayne Airport and El Toro airport planning has produced some problems, we now learn. This should not have been a surprise, but it should prompt better oversight…. In the polarized split between pro- and anti-airport factions on the Board of Supervisors, it is left to the minority opposed to the project to double as spending watchdog.”
Last Sunday, a Times editorial made an erroneous statement, understating the increase in airport opposition. This writer felt compelled to send a letter of correction to the editor. To console others who have had their letters to the editor chopped - in the name of saving space - that they are not alone, I reprint the original words and what the paper printed today.
The published letter ended with; “The Times editorial overlooked a significant point, claiming that there has been ‘very little movement on the [airport] issue over time.’ In fact, there has been significant anti-airport movement.”
As originally submitted, it went on to state, “The front page of the February 15, 2000 Times reported, ‘El Toro Airport Opponents Take Lead in Survey – A Shift in the Air’. That most recent LA Times poll found ‘support for an airport at El Toro has dropped’ with 52% of all voters polled opposing the airport project and only 33% in favor.” The last, most factual part of the letter was deleted for publication. Letter writers are advised to keep them short.
"County Executive Officer Jan Mittermeier, reacting to criticism that the El Toro planning process has been closed, has proposed opening a new county office designed especially to deal with El Toro planning and also called for monthly board meetings, public hearings and weekly media briefings. Mittermeier proposed the changes [in a May 19 memo] after recent public hearings on the future of an airport at the former Marine air station. Allegations of a closed and secretive planning process emerged as a 'consistent theme' at the hearings, she noted."
"Mittermeier's proposed changes were hotly criticized as patronizing by Meg Waters, a spokeswoman for a South County anti-airport coalition [ETRPA]. Waters noted that the County has resisted providing information about its airport planning and is unlikely to change tactics despite the proposed organizational change. 'We had to sue for every scrap of information that we've gotten from the county.' She also noted that the Mittermeier's staff has routinely barred anti-airport officials from press briefings where the county provides its own limited spin on information. She and ETRPA vice chairman, L. Allan Songstad Jr., who is also a Laguna Hills City Council member, attempted to attend a major briefing on new airport plans 'but they threw me and Songstad out of that meeting,' she said."
“The future of the former El Toro Marine base remains wide open for now as county supervisors on Thursday decided to finish plans for an airport but also investigate non-aviation alternatives. In a spirit of cooperation rare in the El Toro debate, supervisors voted unanimously to complete environmental studies for the proposed El Toro airport.”
“They also instructed county staff to prepare estimates of the costs and work necessary to further study alternate airport plans - including different runway configurations - and non-aviation plans such as the Millennium Plan. Board Chairman Charles V. Smith said the county is required to finish the environmental studies by Measure A, which zoned the base for an airport, and Measure F, which requires such a study before a vote by the public on the plan.”
“Supervisor Todd Spitzer, an airport opponent, praised his colleagues for putting aside their differences to allow competing visions for El Toro to move forward. ‘I want to make sure that you have the right to tee up the best aviation plan you can, and we have the right to put up the best non-aviation plan we can,’ he said. ‘And then the people can decide.’”
A related Register story, “Irvine Company against jets over homes” reports that “the developer opposes” proposals for alternate airport plans including the V-runway plan and Pilots’ plan that involve land swaps or put aircraft over Irvine company homes. See the May 18 story below for the full text of the Irvine Company letter.
Editor: - Irvine Company opposition to the alternate plans strikes a blow at the Orange County Regional Airport Authority’s recent push for a “community friendly airport” at El Toro. The pro-El Toro OCRAA has been rallying around the less intrusive Pilot’s Plan as a political response to Measure F’s mandate.
“Orange County supervisors jump-started their troubled plan to build a commercial airport at the former El Toro Marine base, voting … to complete a stalled environmental review. and then--unless a judge decides otherwise--send the project to the ballot one more time. The vote revived the moribund airport plan”
“Supervisors discussed, but deferred action until Tuesday, on what to do about a handful of recreation programs operated at El Toro since the Marines left in July. The Navy told Smith in a letter this week that it will padlock the base July 1 unless the county has signed a lease for the entire base and a state commission transfers police power from federal marshals to the Orange County Sheriff's Department. The future of the programs appears grim, however.”
“Much of Thursday's discussion before supervisors centered on environmental cleanup at the former base, which is one of the most polluted sites in the nation. Jim Dragna, an environmental attorney hired by the county, said his firm has accepted most of the Navy's conclusions on the pollution levels, with the exception of two small base landfills and the extent of ground water pollution. Smith earlier this month asked for estimates on cleanup costs for an airport and for other types of development. Those weren't available Thursday.”
“Dragna said neither his firm nor the county has done its own analysis of all of the possible hazards at the base, such as unexploded ordnance, underground chemical storage tanks and ‘miscellaneous soil contamination.’ He recommended further study of the entire base if there is any chance the airport plan might be changed. The Navy ultimately is responsible for additional cleanup if unknown hazards are discovered after the property has been given to the county--but the county may have to sue the federal government to force the issue, Dragna said.”
Editor: - Citizens Marcia Rudolph, Gail Reavis and Dave Kirkey scolded the County’s consultants for their failure to attend Restoration Advisory Board meetings and for accepting Navy conclusions without independent study. They noted that there has been no investigation of contamination under the runways, several of which are to be torn up and moved in the latest county airport plans. They also noted that a major plume of contaminated water originating at El Toro is moving towards the Newport Back Bay but has not been adequately addressed because it has moved out from under the base property.
At the May 16 public hearing, pro-airport leaders in North County coalesced around the so-called Pilots’ Plan, developed by a group of present and retired pilots under the leadership of Villa Park Mayor Bob McGowan. The Pilots’ Plan has elements in common with the V Plan. In both plans, aircraft land from the north and depart towards the ocean. The east-west runways are removed.
In the Pilots’ Plan, the existing runway alignment is used but departing aircraft turn to the southwest after takeoff. In the V Plan, one main runway is reoriented to the southwest. In both plans, planes depart to the southwest over Irvine Company property and greenbelt space and cross over Newport Coast.
For information on the Pilots' Plan provided by Bob McGowan, click
here.
For reaction negative from the Irvine Company, to plans for overflying
its property,
click here.
A May 11 letter from the Department of the Navy, received on May 16 by Board of Supervisors Charles Smith, warns that, “we will begin the process of securing the installation”. In plain words, the Navy will padlock the base, displacing the users of the stables, golf course and pre-school… unless. The unless is if the County provides “a firm commitment… setting forth its willingness to enter into a master lease.” The letter notes that “We have been discussing a master lease with the County for the last two years.”
During that period, county leaders have been trying, unsuccessfully, to begin interim aviation use of the base. This has been blocked successfully by the South County cities of ETRPA. The County has stalled on a lease maximizing the non-aviation uses of the base assets such as the housing.
The Navy also requires that retrocession of legal jurisdiction take place in June. This too has been blocked by ETRPA so long as the county tried to use the airport facilities. However, ETRPA has made clear that it prefers the base to remain open for the various non-aviation uses. ETRPA has stated clearly that it will remove its objection to the retrocession transfer upon receipt of a legally enforceable agreement baring interim aviation use.
Almost 300 anti-El Toro activists rallies outside of the Hall of Administration this afternoon, carrying left over “Yes on F” signs and new ones proclaiming “67.3%” the margin of victory for Measure F. Nearby, a small group of union workers formed a picket circle in support of the airport.
Several speakers, including Supervisors Tom Wilson and Todd Spitzer, cautioned the crowd not to expect any change in the Board majority's actions. Spitzer said, "You will be depressed." It was a cold shot of reality for those who entertained hopes that the Board truly was considering all options.
Inside the meeting there were few surprises. Over 100 people sought the microphone in the marathon session.
Anti-airport speakers said why an airport was not needed and not wanted. However, they added little that was new about their thoughts for reusing the base. Airport opponents cited Measure F as a mandate to stop the airport project.
On the other hand, most airport proponents cozied up to Measure F as little more than a necessary call for more openness in the planning process. Airport backers exhorted the Board to keep planning and keep spending in pursuit of a better airport design. Not a word was said by the pro-airport elected officials and organizations about how they hope to get a final plan passed by two thirds of the electorate as required by Measure F.
Attorney Barbara Lichman, speaking for the Newport Beach Airport Working Group, took a harder line. Measure A, she said, allows the Board “no discretion” and the Supervisors are obliged to pursue another airport. She threatened the Supervisors that the County could be sued for damages if it spends anything on plans for non-aviation development.
Support was non-existent for the 28 million annual passenger (MAP) plan, that is the County's current preferred alternative. Instead, pro-airport forces coalesced behind their new mantra of a “community friendly” El Toro airport. Speaker after pro-airport speaker pined for a “down sized” El Toro of 15 to 18 MAP, with no east-west runways, no jumbo jets and no overseas flights. They spoke hopefully about curfews. However, Dana Point Councilman Wayne Rayfield scoffed that, “a ‘community friendly airport’ is an oxymoron. A community friendly airport is one that is somewhere else.”
Those who previously saw nothing wrong with takeoffs into the mountains, north and east of El Toro, collectively supported a new plan being pushed by Villa Park Mayor Bob McGowan, a former pilot. McGowan’s plan, dubbed “The Pilots’ Plan”, involves landing from the north over the mountains and takeoffs to the southwest over Newport Coast. One was left feeling that if McGowan’s plan really is better than the County's, then $30-40 million has been wasted by the County, on poorer plans. If McGowan’s plan is not better, or not feasible, then, despite his sincerity, it is being adopted as the pro-airport side's latest in a series of bait-and-switch moves.
The Board will meet again on Thursday, May 18 at 4:00 PM to consider actions. One bad idea that may be off the table is Supervisor Jim Silva’s wish for a November advisory election. That proposal took flack from such diverse quarters as the Vice Chairman of OCRAA, the Orange County Business Council, the Vice Chairman of ETRPA and Citizens for Safe and Healthy Communities – Yes on Measure F.
Click here for the full text of the Orange County Business Council's letter. This website has disagreed, several times, with the OCBC's solidly pro-airport spin - in our view, skewing the economic figures for an airport vs. non-aviation development, seeking to downplay the impact of an airport on housing values, and, of course, opposing Measure F. However, readers may be interested in the letter which will be part of the OCBC's presentation to the Board tomorrow.
The group urges the Supervisors to, "Identify reuse alternatives that will enable the county to meet long-term aviation demand projections or that are coupled with solutions that will." The OCBC recommends, "No election in November. Defer a fourth vote of the public on this matter until such time as all pertinent facts and data are available and have been shared with the public."
“The 4 p.m. hearing [tomorrow, Tuesday] at the Hall of Administration in Santa Ana is expected to be crowded and long as elected officials, representatives of organizations and citizens march to the podium to have their say. Supervisors still will consider alternatives for El Toro, but most observers believe they intend to plug away at the airport plan.”
“The [Citizens for] Safe and Healthy Communities Committee, which ran the Measure F campaign, has organized a rally to be held outside the administration building at 3 p.m. Tuesday, an hour before the hearing begins. The rally is intended as a show of support for a non-aviation plan at El Toro and for Measure F, which airport supporters are fighting in court.”
“Leaders of pro-airport groups also are preparing their arguments, urging pro-airport supervisors to do everything they can to get the airport project back on track. Bruce Nestande, president of Citizens for Jobs and the Economy, said supervisors should look at the hearing as an opportunity to correct past mistakes and make the airport project stronger for the future.”
“County supervisors are being encouraged to put an airport plan before voters as soon as possible. It's a bad idea for several reasons. First, the current big international airport plan at the closed El Toro Marine Corps Air Station has been discredited. Second, an alternative plan for an airport of more modest scale--one that might stand any chance of community acceptance--has yet to be developed for voter review. Finally, residents know so much about this issue already that any, "Should we have an El Toro airport?" question would be meaningless... the county is not yet far enough along in planning realistically for El Toro base reuse that it could present a meaningful choice to voters.”
“Supervisor Jim Silva, a crucial vote on the pro-airport majority of three, has led the push for a vote sooner rather than later, perhaps as early as November… An advisory vote would be fine if the county were starting out, but that is not where we are… merely asking, ‘Would you like an airport?’ (with the county to fill in the details) is no longer an option because of the low credibility of the planning process.”
“In short, before the county votes again on any airport plan, it needs a more credible plan, one that serves the localities and the region, which avoids double-talk about operations, and addresses obvious flaws. Moreover, it is time for a serious consideration of the non-aviation alternative. After three airport-related votes since 1993, let voters have a say on that idea as well.”
Editor: The three pro-airport supervisors are considering placing an airport measure on the November ballot, without the gathering of voters' signatures on petitions as was required with Measure F. To do so would be nothing more than another attempt to circumvent the will of the people. Measure F has mandated a process for the approval of any airport, which includes full disclosure of the plans, public hearings and a two-thirds voter ratification. Attend the rally and Board of Supervisors meeting at 3:00 pm on Tuesday to speak out, and e-mail Silva at this link.
“Orange County supervisors will be asked Tuesday to consider a proposal that would reverse the long-established flight directions for a commercial airport at El Toro, calling for planes to arrive from the north and depart to the south. Two pro-airport groups said they will ask for further study of the idea, long advocated by airline pilots as an alternative to the county's current airport plan.”
“Providing a fallback to the current proposal--labeled unsafe by airline pilots and air-traffic controllers--makes sense, said Villa Park Mayor Robert E. McGowan, an airline pilot… McGowan said Federal Aviation Administration officials have told him the county's current plan has too many hazards, including northerly takeoffs over Loma Ridge and easterly takeoffs into rising terrain. The alternative plan calls for the demolition of the base's east-west runway, an action the pilots also advocate.”
“ Board Chairman Chuck Smith said elements of the pilots' plan have ‘promise’ but that the county should not change course unless the FAA indicates there are problems with the county's proposal. So far, FAA officials haven't done that, said Smith.”
Editor: The County is reportedly $40 million into the often-changing El Toro plans and still can’t figure out how to configure an airport at the site. The AirLine Pilots Association has objected to the present runway plan since 1996 but has met resistance from the County. As indicated by the story below, the need for an airport of any type at the location still is in question.
County of Orange officials kept an important study, commissioned by Los Angeles World Airports, and published on February 28, 2000, under wraps. It was never mentioned during the Board of Supervisors’ May 3 “study session” on El Toro. This latest incident illustrates the County’s willingness to withhold or ignore important facts about El Toro. ETRPA obtained a copy of the report by a Public Records Act request and made it public today.
The report, “Air Transportation in the Los Angeles Region”, shows that there is little need for an El Toro airport and little reason to physically expand John Wayne airport.
Los Angeles World Airports operates LAX, Ontario, Palmdale and Van Nuys airports.
Excerpts from the report are now available on this website. It states that Orange County passenger demand will grow more slowly than projected by the County and El Toro proponents. LAX will continue to dominate international service. El Toro, if built, probably will see international flights limited to Canada and Mexico.
The report also supports anti-El Toro contentions that a two-airport system in Orange County is infeasible and that John Wayne may have to close to commercial traffic if El Toro is built.
“The stalled El Toro airport project sputtered back to life Tuesday after county supervisors voted to resume spending for environmental and legal work. Although the project was halted for one month [by Measure F] county officials said completion of El Toro environmental impact report now is six months to a year behind schedule…. A recent court order requires more work on the air-quality analysis.”
“Supervisors now are not likely to receive the documents until the end of this year at the earliest.”
“If horse stables, a golf course, the officers' club and a handful of other recreation programs continue operating past July 1 at the former El Toro Marine base, it could cost taxpayers as much as $2.2 million a year, according to a report Tuesday to Orange County supervisors. Board members said they would decide next Tuesday whether to approve the subsidy, which must be weighed against the need for other essential county programs. Among services paid for by general tax funds are health care, fire and law enforcement protection. The expenses represent the first acknowledgment by county officials that programs operated at El Toro while the fate of the base is debated must come from the general fund.”
“The county acknowledged in recent weeks that, even with the Navy contribution toward base costs, the programs are operating at a deficit, and that as much as $623,000 in costs might have to be covered by tax money. Continuing the programs without the Navy's help for another year would cost $3.7 million, and would bring in between $1.5 million and $2.4 million in revenue, meaning the county would have to pay between $1.3 million and $2.2 million a year.”
“County officials said they plan to meet today with Navy officials to discuss ways of keeping the base open after July 2, as well as the Navy's plan for environmental cleanup for the base. The on-base programs, including the golf course, officer's club, horse stables and day-care center, have been operated by the county on a temporary basis only for the past year during negotiations with the Navy for a longer-term lease.“
County officials said they plan to meet Friday with members of the anti-airport El Toro Reuse Planning Authority, which threatened to sue the State Lands Commission if it approved the police-powers transfer. Authority Executive Director Paul Eckles said the group is willing to drop its challenge if the county and the Navy guarantees that there will be no airport or aviation uses at the base before the property is deeded to the county.”
Editor: Airport opponents, including Supervisor Tom Wilson, favor extensive use of the base’s non-aviation facilities, including its housing units. County staff has been foot dragging on finalizing a lease, hoping that interim aviation uses might be included.
The Board of Supervisors will meet tomorrow, May 9 at 9:30 AM. Chairman Smith has agendized a supplemental item, “Direct County Executive Office to proceed with the planning activities for an airport at MCAS El Toro in accordance with the 5/4/00 court order in the Measure F litigation to include, at a minimum, continuation of: environmental impact documentation for California Environmental Quality Act and National Environmental Policy Act, negotiations with the Department of the Navy and all work necessary to obtain a Master Lease, environmental clean-up work and litigation representation.” In other words, resume spending money at a furious clip.
On May 16, the Board will meet for a special Public Hearing at 4:00 PM and to possibly act on items raised at their May 3 “study session”. Anything could happen. Proponents of a “smaller-friendlier airport” are urging action on the newest in a long string of politically motivated changes in the airport plan.
The pro-airport supervisors are known to favor placing a “non-binding advisory vote” on the airport on the November ballot. Citizens supporting Measure F will be rallying against this fakery, in the outdoor plaza at the Hall of Administration at 3:00 PM. Measure F should be as much "advice" as the supervisors need. Its important to attend in large numbers to demand compliance with the mandate of Measure F. Bring your Yes on F signs.
The Board also is scheduled to meet on May 18, at 4:00 PM in their capacity as the El Toro Local Redevelopment Authority.
The Register editorial expresses hope that the County does not “get the wrong message from a court ruling on Thursday that allows it to move forward with airport-related spending.”
“It's clear that the ruling deals with only one limited aspect of the initiative. And whether Measure F stands or falls, the county voted overwhelmingly for it. So the supervisors would do well to look at what message county voters were sending. The old 'cram an airport down their throats' approach no longer works. The board needs to pay less attention to the courtroom and more attention to what's best for the entire county.”
In a separate news story, the Register revisits Supervisor Tom Wilson’s troublesome decision to vote against firing Jan Mittermeier.“Wilson finds himself in odd position: By citing the CEO's 'failures' while voting to keep her, the supervisor irks both Mittermeier's fans and foes.”
Superior Court Judge Otero accepted a County request to allow temporary resumption of spending on the El Toro project, at least until a June 23 court date. The judge bought County arguments that Section 4, which defines what the County can spend, is vague.
However, his ruling was limited to the matter of spending only. He did not touch the requirement that the voters approve any airport project by a two-thirds vote. He pointedly told the media present, “I am not permitting an airport to be built by my very limited and narrow ruling.”
Measure F allows spending on completion of the airport EIR. This is required, in preparation for a public vote on the project. Some airport opponents have been surprised at how quickly the County had terminated all spending, even on activities allowed by the Measure. The only items of spending that are significantly affected by today’s ruling are expenditures for publicity and lobbying, which are not allowed under Section 4 of the initiative, but which the judge has now approved.
Nothing changes the reality that 67.3% of county voters said that they want to limit County spending on the unpopular airport project and that they want to give any final approval.
“Before deciding the fate of a proposed airport at the closed El Toro Marine base, Orange County supervisors said Wednesday, they want a detailed cost of cleaning up what is one of the most contaminated sites in the country. The U.S. Navy has promised $160 million toward cleanup at El Toro, based on what it estimates it will cost to bring it up to environmental standards for use as an airport… Costs for something other than an airport haven't been determined.”
“Board Chairman Chuck Smith told county staff at a Wednesday workshop on El Toro options that he wants cleanup estimates by May 16, when a public meeting will be held to decide what to do next about airport planning… Ultimately, the federal government is responsible for cleaning base contamination. However, if costs exceed what has been budgeted, it could drastically slow the process and leave the county in the position of having to front cleanup money so the property could be used sooner, officials said.”
In other stories about the May 3 meeting the OC Register writes, “O.C. seeks dialogue with anti-airport cities. Supervisors want to hear what alternate plans would require. And what it would take to break a stalemate.” The upbeat story deals primarily with Supervisor Spitzer’s urging to the Board to sit down with anti-airport cities and “find out what resources they can bring to bear” on planning the base reuse.
The Newport Beach-Costa Mesa Daily Pilot took a different spin. “Supervisors discuss El Toro alternatives. Pro-airport forces say they are optimistic because the airport project, while on hold, remains an option.” Reportedly, “Newport Beach officials were relieved when the Orange County Board of Supervisors still seemed to consider an airport at El Toro a viable option for the future of the closed Marine Corps base.”
A large crowd of some of Orange County’s best informed and brightest attorneys, officials and citizen activists sat in enforced silence for four hours this morning as the Board of Supervisors went through a four hour “study session” on El Toro basics.
However, the closest the Board came to real basics was when Supervisor Jim Silva asked rhetorically, “Does Orange County need an airport [at El Toro]? … Maybe we don’t need an airport but we need to know this in a professional manner.” He then continued by urging the Board, “Let’s put the airport on the ballot in November”. This would produce a non-binding advisory vote that settles nothing.
Tom Wilson said of the idea, “We’ve already had an advisory vote with Measure F. This looks like an attempt to breathe life back into Goliath by his friends after his defeat by David.”
Todd Spitzer asked the morning’s only other question about need for the airport. “What airlines are on record as supporting an airport at El Toro?” Jan Mittermeier responded that, ”Southwest wrote something… We have nothing else in writing.”
Supervisors had questions related to the County’s frozen position, barred from planning for an airport by Measure F but also barred from implementing a non-aviation plan by Measure A. County Counsel explained that non-aviation planning could go forward, but the voters would eventually have to change the General Plan to conform. That requires a vote to amend Measure A, once the project is prepared.
Chairman Smith said, “It would not be very bright of us to [spend money to] plan something we couldn’t implement.” Todd Spitzer repeatedly urged his colleagues to invite “anti-airport entities”, like ETRPA and the City of Irvine, to the table to see if they had resources for the non-aviation planning process. This could relieve the County of having to fund the planning. Smith was not quite ready for that today.
Smith also wanted staff to clarify the cost of environmental cleanup for the various reuse options, though it was unclear as to who, Navy or County, might end up with the bill.
Supervisor Silva said, “I’d like to see the County separated form the LRA.” He suggested that the Local Redevelopment Authority be expanded to include Irvine, Lake Forest, Newport Beach and Anaheim. Supervisor Coad asked without specificity, "Is there interest in expanding the LRA?"
Much discussion centered on the need to resolve the long delayed negotiations with the Navy over a Master Lease, without which, the Navy has threatened to padlock the base in July. Anti-airport forces have killed the County’s hopes for a lease that allows interim aviation uses. Today, planners urged the Board to approve a non-aviation “bridge lease” to permit continuation of the existing stables, golf course and similar activities. Tom Wilson pushed hard for “eyeball to eyeball” negotiations with the Navy, to allow expanded non-aviation uses such as low cost housing, use of the pool, and any requests from “paying customers”.
This went onto the staffs “to do list” for the May 16 meeting. No actions were taken today.
“Seven options for the future of El Toro--from continued airport planning to complete withdrawal from the base reuse process--will be discussed Wednesday in a special meeting of the Orange County Board of Supervisors… Board members will discuss the options at the 8 a.m. [tomorrow] meeting but will not take public comment. The public will be allowed to speak at a May 16 [4:00 PM] public hearing, after which supervisors may take action.”
“Airport planners said the county can absorb a six- to 12-month delay in the planning process and still make an airport opening deadline of 2005. But Mittermeier said other issues loom in addition to the uncertainty over Measure F's impact. One is a revision in air-quality analyses from the county's environmental review of the airport plan, which on its own could push back supervisors' final consideration of an airport for a year.”
Among the options to be discussed by supervisors:
A non-binding advisory vote in November is a bad idea and skirts the protections incorporated into Measure F. The voters have said that the airport can only be approved by a two-thirds vote and after proper disclosure of all of the facts. We should not be asked to fly blind and trust the County to do the right thing with an “advisory vote”.
“If a host of popular services open to the public for the past year at the former El Toro Marine base ends July 2, as some fear, it will be another example of internal bungling similar to the flawed process of trying to build a commercial airport there, according to critics of the planning process. A county report surfaced last week that showed that services on the base are causing a $623,000 deficit, even though they were intended to make a $500,000 profit.”
“ Supervisor Tom Wilson said last week that he wants the base kept open and hopes to intervene with the Navy--which has contributed $2 million, a subsidy that will end June 30. But two other supervisors…[Smith and Spitzer] said they have lost confidence in the county's ability to manage anything related to El Toro. ‘I don't have any trust at all in the county's numbers or [its] analyses, said board Chairman Chuck Smith, an airport supporter. ‘I certainly hope we can salvage this in time, but based on the performance of the CEO [County Executive Officer Jan Mittermeier], I have absolutely no confidence that will occur.’”
“State Lands Commission Executive Officer Paul Thayer … said commissioners are concerned about toxic cleanup at El Toro. Commissioners asked the county in December to document the cleanup of contaminated areas and how unused military ordnance will be disposed. ‘We're still waiting,’ Thayer said.”
“A source familiar with base programs said county staff long has wanted to close the base completely if there was no chance of flights and thwarted attempts .. to make [interim use] changes. ‘Anything that doesn't directly support an airplane landing at this base [has been] considered a waste of time and money,’ said the source. ‘The county [officials] had a one-year reprieve to get their act together and they haven't. The loser in this is the public.’”
Click here for previous news stories
