Watchdog commentator fast and loose with facts

TOD RIDGEWAY

It’s important to correct the record in regard to a recent column by

a local watchdog (“Watchdog,” May 29). The person’s commentary played

fast and loose with the facts in several ways, including:

* A Newport Coast Drive overpass. I believe that many Newport

Coast residents would be outraged to see a $7-million to $10-million

monolith over Newport Coast Drive (complete with long ramps or

elevators for disabled access). There are practical problems with

this idea, too. The overpass would have to be on private property and

be permitted by the Coastal Commission. After the two to three years

it would take to find project funding, go through design, go through

the California Environmental Quality Act and receive a Coastal

Development Permit, the entire side of the Newport Coast near the

school will be built out, negating the need to protect the area

against construction traffic. The overpass would be an unpopular and

unnecessary white elephant.

* City Council appointments. All City Council appointments have

been filled per the requirements of the City Charter. The charter’s

provisions were approved by the people of Newport Beach more than 60

years ago and have stood the test of time since then quite well. I

don’t question the time-honored “constitution” set forth by the

Newport Beach voters -- I’m surprised that the writer does.

* Our harbor. In criticizing the work of our Congress, the writer

forgets that our legislators in Washington and Sacramento have

secured almost $17 million for the Newport Bay in recent years --

enough to get the major dredging program underway this fall, if all

goes according to plan. I think that’s a good track record.

* City Hall, part I. The writer, while admitting to the City

Council on May 24 that she thinks we need a new City Hall, alleges

that the city’s issuance of Certificates of Participation to fund it

isn’t legal. It clearly is -- the world-class Central Library on

Avocado was built with such certificates. They can be issued without

new taxes.

* City Hall, part II. The writer offers a cost of “$760/square

foot” for City Hall compared with only “$1.50/square foot” for a

lease. She therefore compares a per month rate with a cost to

construct an entire project (and even her construction cost is

wrong). That’s just bad math. Then, without telling her readers, she

includes the cost of a parking structure and a new fire station in

that figure. Here are the facts. The annual cost to finance about $40

million (which includes the cost of the new City Hall, the parking

structure and a new fire station) is about $2.8 million a year for 30

years. City Hall should last 60 years. If we use the writer’s idea to

pay $1.2 million annually to lease space in a tilt-up building on the

edge of Costa Mesa, the net present value of the cost of those lease

payments is more than $56 million over that same 60-year period.

The cost of the certificates to replace City Hall (and build the

fire station and parking structure) is $44.5 million. Plus, at the

end of our 60 years, the taxpayers still own a valuable parcel of

land on the Balboa Peninsula. Not so with a Costa Mesa-adjacent

lease. It’s no wonder that cities and businesses across our region

are moving away from leasing when they want to keep a permanent

presence in the community.

I appreciate the writer’s interest in our town. She obviously

wants to provide a service to our city. But if she keeps stretching

the truth in her columns, she is not serving anyone.

* TOD RIDGEWAY is a Newport Beach City Councilman.