Irvine, Supervisors Draw El Toro Fire

* Re “City Challenges Irvine Co. on El Toro,” April 28:

Perhaps the Irvine Co. doesn’t openly tell prospective home buyers about the possibility of an airport being built nearby, but they also don’t warn prospective buyers about the Irvine City Council that uses childish games to threaten private business and other governmental bodies that might disagree with their views.

Such abuse of governmental position and power by elected officials is a far greater danger than any commercial development.

MICHAEL EVANS

Santa Ana

* Councilmen Dave Christensen, Larry Agran and their ilk threatened the Irvine Co. and its chief executive, Donald Bren, with dire consequences over the company’s political and business position on the El Toro airport.

I thought Bren and his company had a constitutional right of free speech? Or did they sacrifice it when the city was formed?

Maybe the 1st Amendment was repealed in Irvine while I was on vacation last week.

DAVID CLARK

Irvine

* Those favoring an international airport at El Toro seem to be getting bolder all the time. They claim that Orange County both wants and needs an international airport. If this is actually true, why do they seem so intent on suppressing opposing views?

First they send--at taxpayer expense--the three pro-airport supervisors to Washington to meet with officials there. They claim that the anti-airport supervisors would merely keep saying, “I disagree.”

Is this a valid excuse to shut them out of the discussions? Since when do those opposed not get a chance to state the reasons for their opposing viewpoint?

Now the pro-airport group, again at taxpayer expense, has obtained permission to run pro-airport commercials on TV.

I object to the use of my tax dollars to present a totally one-sided picture that is detrimental to the interests of many of us who reside in South County.

In addition, the pro-airport group refuses to make public a judge’s ruling on using funds from John Wayne to resurface runways at both John Wayne and El Toro (May 2). This is for a facility that has not yet even been approved. I question the legality of concealing such court rulings.

If the three supervisors truly believe the airport is a good and popular option, why do they feel it necessary to use questionable tactics to silence those who oppose it?

It should be able to survive on its own merits after allowing open, honest discussion with both sides being accorded equal opportunity to be heard.

MARJORIE A. GILL

Lake Forest

* Suddenly the county decided to “comply with set procedures,” and thus delayed the planned interim cargo flights out of El Toro from July 2 to sometime next year.

The county’s decision to “go by the book” was imposed upon them by airport opponents. In all candor, is this not an implicit acknowledgment of a failed policy?

The defining question is, should the pro-airport board majority rise to the challenge by adopting policy guidelines of strict compliance with set procedures that must be applied to all aspects encompassing the El Toro planning process?

Clearly, failing to act in the affirmative, the board majority must accept responsibility for the continuance of an onerous policy of not complying, misinformation and even deception!

PAUL WILLEMS

Laguna Niguel

* I think that I and the rest of the public should have access to both the raw and processed data the county collects during the El Toro airport noise flight tests the county plans to run in June.

Data files should be open to public access for possible further independent processing. File formats and equipment calibration information should be published in a common computer-readable format.

Enough technical information should be supplied so that an acoustic engineer could evaluate the raw data and the county’s conclusions independently.

DICK BAXTER

Laguna Niguel

* Orange County is recovering from bankruptcy.

Can’t anyone stop our Board of Supervisors from throwing $3 million tax dollars down the toilet on a totally valueless airport test that will influence not even one single unbiased voter?

No rational person would believe that flying a handful of unloaded quiet planes for a couple of days over routes that have not even been approved by the Federal Aviation Administration would be representative of the annoyance of having one plane flying overhead every 3 minutes, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

This test will not demonstrate the gridlock traffic, smog or crime an international airport will bring. Isn’t the government watching how our tax money is being spent? Can’t we hold the three responsible supervisors personally liable for this disgraceful waste of our tax dollars?

DAVE SCHLENKER

Laguna Woods