MAILBAG:Impact reports needed before decision

I oppose the current initiative to change the city charter so that city hall is located behind the library because the initiative is badly flawed. It asks the people to make an emotional decision without knowing anything at all about the impacts or wisdom of locating city hall in the Newport Center Park behind the library.

No one — not you, not me, not Bill Ficker, not the City Council — knows what the environmental and economic impacts of locating city hall behind the library are or even whether an alternative site would be more suitable.

Thus, how can people make any sort of informed decision about whether city hall should be located there for all time to come as required by the charter amendment? This initiative is not simply a popularity vote but a charter amendment, which requires the city hall to be located behind the library whether it is ultimately a good idea or not.

Remember, people are being asked to change the city charter, which trumps all the other laws that govern the city. The initiative is a charter amendment. Come hell or high water, the city hall will be located behind the library if the initiative passes, no matter how unwise it is to put it there.

Normally, California law requires an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to be prepared before decision makers reach a decision to approve a project such as the city hall project.

Such an EIR analyzes such things as the land-use compatibility, drainage, hydrology, geology, transportation, traffic, circulation, noise, light, glare, biologic resources, public services and utilities, alternatives to the proposed project, long-term implications of the project, compatibility with other laws of the city, including the General Plan, etc.

The planning commission and City Council then vote to certify the EIR and approve or deny a project based on an informed decision.

In the case of the city hall initiative, no such analysis is done, and therefore the decision makers — which is the public in this case — have absolutely no such information.

What are the environmental and economic implications of locating city hall above the library? The adjacent library has constant problems with ground water, requiring pumps to pump out the water on a continual basis.

Is it wise to locate city hall where water has to be pumped out for all time to come? Is it wise to locate city hall behind the library when it can be located a block away at a less expensive cost?

Does anyone know the impacts that would be brought to light if an EIR were prepared? No, the public is being asked to make a blind decision. I normally support the right of the public to use the initiative and referendum rights California law has given us, which makes California very special because many other states don’t give their people these rights. However, the city hall initiative as a charter amendment without environmental or economic review or analysis is too flawed.

People should have the right to vote on city hall after the City Council has approved a project and certified an EIR, but to vote on it blindly as a charter amendment before any project analysis has been done is not the proper use of the initiative process, in my opinion.

JAN D. VANDERSLOOT

HOW TO GET PUBLISHED

Mail to the Daily Pilot, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626. Send a fax to (714) 966-4667 or e-mail us at dailypilot@latimes.com. All correspondence must include full name, hometown and phone number (for verification purposes). The Pilot reserves the right to edit all submissions for clarity and length.