Mailbag - June 8, 2000

Having been acquainted with Allan Beek, I find it difficult to believe

that he would “rough up” anyone (“Battle of dueling measures heats up,”

June 6). I can understand his frustration caused by the apparent

inaccurate information being disseminated by the signature gatherers for

the rival Traffic Phasing Ordinance Initiative.

There is no excuse for any “incorrect” information to be given by the

signature gatherers to the citizens of Newport Beach.

I remain very upset after reading your article (“Signing up for the

great initiative debate,” May 18). In this article, former Newport Beach

Mayor Clarence Turner is quoted as saying he thinks “it’s quite possible

that people [collecting signatures] may have been saying things that are

incorrect” when gathering signatures for the amended TPO initiative. He

goes on to state that he is “trying to make sure this stopped happening.”

I am very concerned because I was approached by two signature

gatherers at Gelson’s market. They encouraged me to sign the initiative

in order to “stop the expansion of John Wayne Airport.” I was very

surprised. I thought this initiative was about traffic and development,

not stopping the expansion of John Wayne Airport.

It is the responsibility of the initiative’s backers to educate the

signature gatherers they have hired to accurately present their

initiative prior to asking the voters to place their name on the line.

If, as Clarence Turner stated, it is quite possible that voters

received incorrect information, the petition process should start again

with any incorrect statements publicly corrected.

YVONNE HOUSSELS

Corona del Mar

Resident agrees with 17th Street merchants

I’m calling regarding the article, (“Grass-roots group criticizes 17th

Street plan,” June 1), and I am wondering if I was at the same meeting.

The temper of the meeting was not about dumping traffic on residential

streets if we don’t go to six lanes. The temper of the meeting was that

residents and store owners alike do not want a six-lane thoroughfare

going down 17th Street where people will not shop and the three month

construction will ruin our mom-and-pop store atmosphere that we have on

17th Street.

Anyone at the meeting would have heard over and over again that people

want to try bus turnouts, left-turn signals. And the biggest problem is

that the city is not listening, even to its own ad-hoc committee. Its

mind is made up because there are $4 million dollars being dangled in

front of them to do this.

The residents at this meeting agreed with the store owners who do not

want a six-lane thoroughfare down 17th Street. We want to accommodate

ourselves to live here and pay taxes here and we want the city to listen

to us or it’s going to reflect on election day. Unfortunately, we have a

traffic engineer who does not get the gist of the small-town atmosphere

in East Side Costa Mesa.

GAIL PERKINS

Costa Mesa

Costa Mesa should take more time to review budget

I have a case of budget envy (“City Council studies upcoming budget,”

May 24). Now, I’m aware that coveting your neighbor’s budget process is

not something people usually admit to in public, but it’s true.

Sure, I know that my city’s process starts out well with community

objectives, the policy decisions that are out in plain sight for everyone

to see and for staff to be guided by. And, yes, I know that staff’s

proposals for getting and spending money are presented in an accessible

way. Some even say they are attractively packaged.

But the public part of the process comes and goes in a two-week flash.

It starts June 5 when the first budget documents are made available to

the public, and is over June 19 with budget adoption by the council. It

doesn’t give me time to savor the nuances, the hidden meanings, the

mysteries hinted at between the lines.

What goes here, there? Who gets what, when? Why did they do that? What

of the future? Two weeks, with just a no-public-comment study session and

only one public hearing, is not enough time to decide how to get and

spend $80 million.

I’m envious that Newport Beach citizens take a less hurried approach.

They take the time to get to know their budget intimately. They are

introduced to it in May and their council reviews it in sections -- with

public comment -- until their final vote on June 27.

I’d like to have more than just two weeks with Costa Mesa’s budget.

I’d even like the city to put it on the city’s Web site so I can

conveniently explore every nook and cranny of the budget with my home

computer.

Costa Mesa’s process is otherwise good, but too brief. I seek a

process that well-meaning citizens will find rewarding so they will look

forward to critiquing the budget each year instead of just looking the

other way.

As an involved citizen, I must learn what’s under the covers of the

Costa Mesa budget. Borrowing the timing of Newport Beach’s process could

improve my chances of curing budget envy.

TOM EGAN

Costa Mesa