Committee deserves more time to do...

Committee deserves more time to do the job right

Your editorial regarding the Costa Mesa Community Redevelopment

Action Committee and the 19th Street bridge is off base (“Bridging

the gap to reality,” Sunday).

First of all, the committee recommended studying the effects a

bridge would have on the Westside, not a feasibility study for a

bridge.

You also say the bridge is a bad idea because it would make a

“highway.” What if a bridge reduced traffic on Victoria? Or if the

additional traffic caused by a bridge would allow for development of

a first-class market and similar shops along 19th Street? You don’t

know the answer to that or a dozen other important findings that

might come from a study.

You mentioned hundreds of folks objected to a 19th Street bridge.

Compared to the city population, a few hundred is nothing. Therefore,

we feel an impact study for a bridge is necessary before planning a

Westside redevelopment. Otherwise, the planning decisions would be

based on personal preference or knee-jerk reactions, like your

editorial. The committee would also like information on the effects

of development of the Banning property and the rezoning of the

industrial zones to residential, proposed by the city, before making

recommendations. The current problems on the Westside are primarily

the result of bad, or at least slapdash planning. The committee is

trying not to make the same mistakes.

Your editorial also takes issue with the makeup of the committee

and chastises them for taking so long to act. One of the reasons the

committee has been delayed is because the City Council has been

trying to shove the rezoning of the Westside industrial property down

our throats. They have painted that rezoning as “redevelopment,”

therefore, under our committee’s jurisdiction. In fact, that rezoning

has little to do with committee plans for the Westside, as the city

plans to go ahead with it regardless. The committee would need impact

studies for that, as well, before approving, or disapproving, the

rezoning. It has asked for those studies.

So far, the committee seems to want to go slowly, prepare

carefully and not repeat the mistakes of its predecessors. Whether

they will succeed, only time will tell.

Give the committee a fair chance before being so negative.

MICHAEL STEINER

Community Redevelopment Action

Committee member

Until a change happens, the blame rests with voters

There is no question about it: The Newport Beach City Council race

between Councilman Gary Adams, Rick Taylor and Ron Winship was

tainted.

The big question now is: “So what?” Ellis and political

consultants like him have been getting by with dirty campaigning for

years because we let them.

Hey, the public wouldn’t have even heard about this mess if Taylor

didn’t take the time and trouble to find proof. Even with the proof,

it will be interesting to see if anything comes of it all.

Our voting process is compromised in every election because of lax

rules and regulations, as well as the lack of enforcement of the ones

we do have. Until we collectively demand a chance, we have no one to

blame but ourselves.

CASEY MATHEWS

Newport Beach

Dirty political practices need to come to an end

Information that has come forth since the Newport Beach City

Council election, thanks to the Daily Pilot, has made it clear that

voters had incorrect information about local candidates due to

deceptive schemes by their opponents.

How much did the telephone campaign scheme, designed to

intentionally mislead voters, hurt Greenlight candidate Rick Taylor?

How much of an impact did malicious information about Wendy Leece

have on voters? We’ll never know for sure.

What I do know is that dirty politics must stop, and what better

place to begin that right here in our community. Guidelines and laws

should be developed with serious consequences for the perpetrators of

false information. Otherwise, the status quo will continue. Voters

will be misled by unscrupulous people who have little respect for the

integrity of campaigning or our voting system, and candidates who

fought fairly will be at a disadvantage and likely lose a race that

they might have, maybe even should have, won.

ANN SMITH

Newport Beach