MAILBAG - Nov. 2, 2006

Votes could alter Banning Ranch future

The creation of an open space, wildlife preserve and public wilderness park on the entire Banning Ranch could take one giant step closer to becoming a reality this November, with the passage of Proposition 84. Banning Ranch is a 400-acre privately owned oil field in west Newport Beach. With the purchase of this property (which will cost several million dollars), and its addition to Orange Coast River Park, there could be a swath of open space extending from West Coast Highway through Talbert Nature Preserve to Fairview Park in Costa Mesa.

Proposition 84 provides $45 million for park projects along the Santa Ana River.

In the unlikely event that Banning Ranch is developed as a residential neighborhood, Measure X (Greenlight II) would give the local community more influence, as Measure X would allow for a public vote on any large-scale development of more than 100 units or any development that creates more than 100 car trips an hour.

Save Banning Ranch: Vote yes on Proposition 84 and Measure X.

TERRY WELSH

Costa Mesa

Former chief’s facts tell the story

Former Costa Mesa Police Chief Dave Snowden’s commentary on Wednesday sure made me wish he was running for Costa Mesa City Council.

I know he’s not eligible, but he’s clearly someone who cares about the direction of this city based on his past experience as police chief. It was nice to read a statement from someone who knows what he’s talking about, who speaks honestly, and who bases his writing on facts instead of half-truths and outright lies. Snowden really hit it out of the park, and I hope the electorate takes his comments and integrity to heart and chooses wisely next week — because driving around this town, you can feel the divisiveness, even in individual neighborhoods where you see the Bruce Garlich and Mike Schaefer signs versus the Allan Mansoor and Wendy Leece signs next door to each other. I can’t wait for it to be over, and to see our great city return to reason (I hope).

MIKE MCNIFF

Costa Mesa

Crime did not go up in just two years

With all due respect to former Costa Mesa Police Chief Dave Snowden, crime is not on the rise in this city because Mayor Allan Mansoor wants to get rid of criminals. Costa Mesa is now a prime destination for those streaming over our borders. If we make it a little less illegal-immigrant friendly, we may stem the growing tide, and I think that is a good idea. The whole police training debate is but a sideshow for the real issue, which is this: Do we want to continue to welcome illegal immigrants to our city or set policies to stem the tide?

People are complaining about spending $200,000 for police officer training after we just spent $500,000 for a bridge across Placentia that is hardly used and is only a couple of hundred yards from a crosswalk. We do need to return to reason.

MARK GRIFFIN

Costa Mesa

Mayor’s plan too much ‘Keystone Kops’

Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor claims that the police and fire unions endorsed his election rivals, Bruce Garlich and Mike Schaefer, as payback because he supported Proposition 75. I strongly doubt that. After all, Mansoor also bizarrely blamed a recent fatal shooting on soup kitchens, of all things, a claim also apparently unfounded but which slanders persons living their Christian faith through acts of mercy.

It seems far more likely that the rank and file have balked at his immigration enforcement plan. At first, when it proposed that anyone in contact with police could be checked for citizenship or legal residence status, it seemed nothing less than a bludgeon to intimidate the city’s Latino residents, whether they are legally here or not. This may have played to the nativist xenophobes, but any moral and reasonable person would certainly have found it repulsively authoritarian.

A city may be made more beautiful by hiding utility lines, but not by hiding people of a certain ethnic group.

After the outcry, Mansoor modified the plan to affect only suspected felons arrested by Costa Mesa police — apparently to assure that murderers and bank robbers and rapists really get their comeuppance if they are found to have also overstayed their visas.

In other words, the proposal went from authoritarianism to Keystone Kops; if I were a police officer, I wouldn’t want any of it either. Certainly we want the city’s Police Department to enforce laws, but I question the mayor’s narrow selectivity — particularly the potential xenophobic appeal — of what additional laws he wants to enforce.

Customarily, most nonviolent offenses are enforced primarily at the level of government responsible for the laws violated. For example, the state Franchise Tax Board earlier this year announced that nearly 3,000 state tax scofflaws are believed to live in Costa Mesa. If local police should enforce all state and federal laws, this would require that the Police Department be trained to audit tax returns, wouldn’t it? Perhaps city police should then go after persons who travel abroad and don’t declare at customs all the jewelry, perfume and gifts they bring back?

At what point does willy-nilly become absurd? Costa Mesa has such rich diversity, and it’s an asset, not a liability.

But as a result of Mansoor’s policies, Costa Mesa has been veering onto an unfortunate and divisive course in the past couple of years — one that has brought us ridicule and notoriety. On Election Day let’s return city government to reason and common sense.

ROBERT E. LEE

Costa Mesa