MAILBAG - Oct. 27, 2006

Endorsement not linked to proposition, as mayor saidA lot has been said about Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor’s support of Proposition 75 being the reason the city’s firefighters and paramedics and others decided not to endorse him for reelection. The Daily Pilot editorial on Sept. 23, “Keep a critical eye on endorsements,” again raised that issue. Speaking for your firefighters and paramedics, nothing could be further from the truth.

Proposition 75 would not have changed anything for us, except the volume of paperwork our members had to complete and our association had to store for years and years.

Currently, when a member joins our association, he or she is given the option of contributing to our political action committee. He or she signs a form stating either yes or no for PAC contribution and that’s it. It’s his or her choice.

Members also have the option of changing their minds at any time about political action committee contributions, and some members have exercised that right in the past. If they have been contributing and want to stop, they simply make a phone call to our treasurer and tell him. It’s that simple.

The change for us, if Proposition 75 would have passed, would have been the requirement that every member had to sign the same form each and every year, even if they were not going to make any changes in their decision to contribute or not. And the association would have had to save those forms for years in case of any questions.

Are we against more useless government required paperwork? Yes, we are. All of us already do way too much “required” paperwork.

Would it have been tedious to make certain all 100 members got their paperwork back to us on time? Sure. There is no doubt we would have had to deal with folks who “lost” or “misplaced” forms.

The issue of storing those forms would also have been a problem because we have no office. All of our board members are volunteers. Our treasurer has his hands (and garage) full of records we are currently required to keep. Adding yet more boxes of paper to those records, and useless paperwork at that, would have been just one more inconvenience. And for what purpose? Just to have more useless paperwork collecting dust?

During the Proposition 75 campaign, we talked to numerous firefighters, police officers and sheriff’s deputy groups about what it would mean to them if Proposition 75 passed. Every one of the groups we talked to already gave members the opportunity to contribute to political action or not and to change their mind at any time.

So why support something that would only cause more useless paperwork without providing any change?

MIKE HASTERT

PAC Chairman

Costa Mesa Firefighters Assn.

Newport Beach needs development restrictionsWill the new Newport Beach general plan reduce traffic? The new general plan update will reduce traffic when compared with the old general plan. However, the old general plan offered such an aggressive build out, just about any update to the general plan would have reduced traffic. Writing a general plan update reducing traffic when compared with the old general plan would have been like rolling out of bed. Those finding comfort in offering the argument that the latest general plan is better than the old general plan because it offers less traffic shouldn’t find a great deal of comfort.

As a teenager might offer: well, duh. Of course there is less traffic when compared with the old general plan.

Is there more traffic proposed in the new general plan than is on the ground today? Yes.

Did the city, in its general plan visioning process, ask the public if traffic was an outstanding concern? Yes, and the city responded saying that traffic is a key concern. One not so flattering example of our proposed existing general plan was the approval of over 1,300 residential units for the Banning Ranch. In the general plan update, recommended by the general plan advisory committee, these allowed residential units were reduced by around half. The City Council could have taken the position that less traffic would have been achieved by reducing the residential units proposed on this piece of property. The council could have taken the suggestion by the advisory committee; however, the City Council chose to override the advisory committee and re-raise the residential units to more than 1,000 units. And, the council also chose to override the advisory committee and raise the density and add additional commercial area, additional hotel rooms and additional living units in a number of areas around the city, over and above the recommended densities and uses proposed by the advisory committee.

In defense of the council members, they lowered them in some areas also. The council also lowered car trips around the city by lowering the amount of building by floor area ratio.

But, the question posed by the Pilot and the one before the voters is, Was it enough?

One example of a current planning project that suggests it’s not enough is the Holiday Inn expansion on West Coast Highway below the Newport Heights Theater Arts building on Cliff Drive. The development adds almost 30% more hotel rooms. This development builds most of the available land area on the site, but it is not the maximum build out allowed under the existing or new general plan. To achieve that new “lower floor area ratio” approved by the council, the building style would have to be some type of more dense or taller building, such as two stories over underground parking.

Another example offering insight as to the new general plan’s effectiveness to curb development that would curb traffic is the approved development at West Coast Highway and Dover Drive. This plan offers residents a new drug store, traffic signal and two levels of retail and restaurants over two levels or perhaps three levels of underground parking. This development is allowed under the existing and new general plan and it consolidates the many drive cuts on West Coast Highway. The floor area ratio of developed area is less than required under the new general plan. However, Councilman Tod Ridgeway, who infrequently rebuffed any building proposal, thought this project might be too dense.

The limits set forth in the new general plan allow each of these expansive developments and their commensurate increase in traffic, and the new general plan has not done enough to either limit these types of building projects, to regulate their design or to protect against the traffic inherent in their building.

DON KROTEE

Newport Beach

Dropout candidate Venezia needed thicker skinI live in District 4 in Newport Beach. Here are some thoughts on the issue of whether we should vote for Barbara Venezia in “protest.” I believe Councilwoman Leslie Daigle should apologize for her inappropriate remarks, but she should not be vilified.

How many among us have been tempted to mention our position when we have felt put off by being told we cannot do something we wanted to do? In my view, Daigle’s silence on this issue has not served her well, but I don’t think that alone disqualifies her to serve as an elected official in Newport Beach.

Although I do not know Venezia personally, I have heard her speak on numerous occasions. I have found her to be just as Tom Johnson described her in his column on Oct. 6 (“Newport can stop the dirty politics”). There is no doubt she is well-informed and sincere in her desire to make District 4 and the city of Newport Beach a better place to live for all of us. Hers is a new voice bringing light to many issues important to residents of the recently annexed Santa Ana Heights.

I remain troubled by the haste in which the city found it necessary to post signs along the Back Bay trails about fines associated with not “picking-up” after your horse following the annexation.

Arguably, she was a victim of “dirty politics,” but in my opinion, it was mild by today’s standards for such things.

Public officials are closely scrutinized in today’s media and are often unfairly criticized by their constituents. Serving the public as elected leader requires a very thick skin.

Further, if one really wants to eliminate the personal attacks in political campaigns and be an effective civic leader, it is done through engagement, not withdrawal. This is why I respectfully disagree with Johnson in calling for a protest vote for Barbara Venezia.

Hopefully, Venezia will continue to serve our community as a voice of concern to our council, but she should not be elected to a seat that she has chosen not to continue to pursue.

TIM BROWN

Newport Beach