Mix-and-Match Views on Taxes, Parks, Airport

Re “Irvine to Ask Landowners to OK Higher Tax,” Feb. 9:

I see Irvine is going to ask for a tax hike to keep parks and streets looking good. That doesn’t make sense. How can Irvine’s City Council find millions of dollars each year in an effort to kill the county’s El Toro airport plans and not have enough money to do the things a City Council ought to do?

My guess is the probability of two-thirds of Irvine’s voters approving any tax hike hovers somewhere between slim and none. It seems to me the better way to get Irvine out of its financial bind is to reject Measure W on the March 5 ballot. That way the county can bring into operation at El Toro the commercial airport that will produce millions of dollars each year in new tax revenue for Irvine to use keeping its parks and streets looking good without a tax hike.

Norm Ewers

Irvine

*

Did I read correctly? It appears that the city of Irvine is seeking a tax increase to take care of its parks, streets and lights, and is also asking for donations to fund its schools.

Add this to the hoax of “profitable private toll roads,” and answer the following: Why should we believe that the “Great Park” will be built without tax increases for all Orange County residents?

Kathleen F. Klein

Tustin

*

Pro-airport claims still persist that the proposed park is a tax liability, despite the analysis to the contrary by the recent county report. There is a serious tax question at stake in the debate over El Toro, but it relates to county plans for an airport.

There is no money budgeted by the county for:

* The cost to build extra freeway lanes that airport traffic will require (according to Caltrans) from San Clemente to Anaheim, and east to Riverside.

* The cost of sound insulation for 10,000 or more homes, and many hundreds of schoolrooms.

* The cost of the aviation rights to fly below 1,500 feet over Laguna Woods residences.

* The cost of a fuel delivery and storage system at the base.

* The loss of tax revenue ($35million annually) due to the projected loss of $3.5 billion in property values from the coast to Anaheim and Yorba Linda.

* The cost of the health impact (on both the county and residents) of the 50 daily tons of pollution that air operations will release into the air we all breathe.

* The possible cost to the county to make bond payments if airport revenue is insufficient (as is the case with the California 73 toll road revenue).

County taxpayers should be aware that huge county tax increases (more than $50 million annually) are very likely if we fail to pass Measure W on March 5.

Michael Smith

Mission Viejo

*

A recent mass mailing of anti-airport literature to Orange County residents by Measure W proponents suggests that an airport at El Toro will cause residential property values to plummet. This statement is not only totally inaccurate and amusing, it borders on absurdity and insanity, as nothing could be further from the truth.

The compelling evidence: Those residents living in the immediate flying area of John Wayne Airport and the former El Toro Marine Corps Air Station have seen their property values skyrocket in the past 10 years. The same high housing values have benefited the communities surrounding John Wayne --including Irvine, Costa Mesa and Tustin--Ontario, Burbank and other similar-sized airports.

No comparison can or should be made with Los Angeles International Airport, which dwarfs John Wayne and the El Toro airport in terms of size, complexity, flight volume, population density, commercial industries, etc. Not a shred of credible evidence has ever been presented to indicate or project a downward spiral of home prices when the El Toro airport becomes operational. Quite the contrary, a modern airport attracts high technology industry, tourism, increased trade, needed jobs, coupled with an inevitable and enviable significant leap in home real estate prices.

The steadfast and intelligent voters of Orange County will not be swayed by the desperate and attempted deceptive tactics designed to capture their votes.

Roger Garcia

Laguna Hills

*

I just read from anti-park people that my property taxes will go up by $352 if Measure W passes. Amazing they would know this exact figure when there isn’t a single initiative on the ballot requesting a tax increase.

Orange County voters, regardless of their feeling about an airport or Measure W, must realize that the only way a tax increase can occur is if 67% of the voters approve it. That is California law.

Anti-W pundits are banking the ignorance and scare tactics. The choice is simple: Want a polluting, noisy, traffic-inducing airport? Vote no on W. Don’t want an airport? Vote yes. As a 37-year resident of Orange County, I know what my choice is!

John Berry

Aliso Viejo

*

Re “Runway or Walkway? Measure W to Decide” (Orange County commentary, Feb. 3):

The article by opponents of Measure W is riddled with half-truths. First, Measure W opponents cite the limited capacity at 500-acre John Wayne. Times readers deserve to know that San Diego’s 474-acre Lindbergh Field carried 15.8 million annual passengers in 2000, compared with 7.7 million at John Wayne. Both airports have one commercial aircraft runway and restricted operating hours. Obviously, if Lindbergh Field can handle 15.8 million annual passengers, John Wayne can carry the 9.8 million that Newport Beach has agreed to in order to obtain an extension of its present operating hours. Increasing John Wayne from 7.7 million to 9.8 million--27%--will more than meet the county’s airport growth demand.

Second, a $700,000 search for a suitable commercial airport site in Orange County mandated by the county, financed principally by the FAA and conducted by 300 Orange County citizens from November 1988 to December 1989, overwhelmingly rejected El Toro as an appropriate site for a large commercial airport. Although thoroughly documented in a 312-page report presented to the Board of Supervisors on April 3, 1990, the county has never made public the study’s principal finding: No suitable site for a large commercial, international airport exists in Orange County. Not at El Toro and not at John Wayne.

Third, no one has ever considered Palmdale as an alternative airport for Orange County. The Airport Site Coalition Study Team recommended 6,700-acre March Inland Port, not Palmdale or George. March is 23 miles from El Toro, has the longest runway in California (13,300 feet), is fully operational now, has adequate fuel storage, low landing fees, no conflicting air traffic patterns with other airports and is actively promoting expanded use of its facilities. The statement by Measure W opponents that Riverside residents do not want Orange County air passengers is false. The city of Riverside may not, but Riverside County, Perris and Moreno Valley constitute the joint powers authority operating March Inland Port, and they warmly welcome Orange County airline passengers.

And talking about future air passenger growth demand, Measure W opponents completely ignore the underused facilities at Ontario International Airport, whose service area includes about 80% of Orange County.

The large majority of Orange County voters who favor a central park over an airport agree with Measure W opponents when they say, “Let’s stop bickering and join to ensure that our quality of life is preserved and our economy is strong.” The only way we can achieve this worthy goal is to vote yes on Measure W on March 5.

Dave Blodgett

Airport Site

Coalition Study Group

Laguna Woods

*

Larry Agran and the Irvine City Council should also consider asking the Irvine residences to be assessed for the “Great Park” they have been promoting with millions of Irvine tax dollars. According to BBC Research Consulting of Denver, this would amount to an annual tax increase to the city of Irvine. Of course, if Larry and his friends can get the “Great Park” paid for by all of Orange County residences, it will cost all of us only $604 annually. Any extra money he has left over can be donated to the Irvine schools.

Jack Valley

Costa Mesa