Orange County Business Journal, October 14
Great Park Eases Projects Planned For El Toro Buffer

By DANIEL D. WILLIAMS

The Great Park initiative did more than kill an airport and free up land for development at part of the 4,480-acre former El Toro Marine base.

It made building around the base a lot easier.

While attention is on the upcoming auction of base land by the Navy to developers, there is even more land for building in the 14,000-acre buffer zone around El Toro.

Irvine alone is planning a massive project next to El Toro that stands to rival the size of the entire base. Lake Forest is drawing up plans for nearly 1,000 acres of office and other development next to El Toro. Another 100 acres are zoned for offices in Aliso Viejo.

Wide open: the market aside, development now is easier next to El Toro, as with Shea Properties’ Lake Forest project.

What’s at stake at El Toro seems small by comparison: of the base’s 4,738 acres, 350 acres are planned for development—an estimated 3,400 homes and 2.9 million square feet of retail, office and commercial space on the perimeter of a planned Great Park.

That compares to 7 million square feet of commercial space and 12,350 homes planned in Irvine by The Irvine Company and the city in the Northern Sphere alone.

“The Northern Sphere is a massive project,” said Bryan Fisk, manager of planning services for Irvine. “It will be bigger than the Irvine Spectrum at buildout.”

One reason there’s less excitement over buffer land is that it’s already in hands of owners with plans. And about 75% of the buffer already is developed. The Irvine Spectrum, for one, falls within the buffer.

“Virtually all of the land within the old military buffer zone is either already developed, being processed for development or protected as permanent open space,” according to an Irvine Co. report.

That includes the Northern Sphere, which was planned long before officials knew which side in the heated airport debate would win out.

But the death of an airport makes planning buffer land a lot simpler—there’s no worrying about how close homes would be to an airport or about sound-proofing buildings.

Another result: buffer land could be viewed in a new light. Farmland that used to be in the flight path could be slated for development. And planned office projects next to the base could be reconsidered for housing or retail.

The buffer was designed as a no-homes zone where noise levels from fighter jets were greatest. A commercial airport also would have opened up buffer land for more development as the noise footprint for commercial jets is smaller than that of military planes.

Most of the buffer—8,500 acres—lies within Irvine or on land the city plans to annex. Lake Forest has more than 3,000 acres, while Aliso Viejo counts 1,092 acres, Laguna Hills, 343 acres, Laguna Woods, 465 acres, Mission Viejo, 282 acres and Rancho Santa Margarita, 170 acres. Nineteen acres fall under the county.

Here’s a look at the buffer parcels and their potential uses:

Irvine

Along with the Northern Sphere, the Irvine Co. and city officials are planning another big project, a 730-acre expansion of the Irvine Spectrum.

The project, dubbed Spectrum 8, calls for 8.9 million square feet of medical and science buildings. The area is near the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway and Jeffrey Road.

Beyond that, there are “little bits and pieces” in the buffer, said city planner Lisa Aranda.

Among them are 50 acres on what’s known as Lambert Ranch. A farmer now owns the parcel, Aranda said, and is looking to sell it for development. The land is north of the base and the Foothill (241) Toll Road.

The University of California Regents own another 150 acres west of the base. The regents use the land for agricultural research and have no plans now for development, Aranda said.

The Northern Sphere has grabbed the most attention of Irvine planners and residents.

The project stands to add 35,000 people to Irvine in 15 years, planning services manager Fisk said. It’s also a hot political issue with a residents group and politicians lining up against the project.

Lake Forest

The city east of the base counts 846 empty, developable acres, said Jeremy Krout, a Lake Forest associate planner. The rest of the city’s buffer zone land already has been developed or designated as open space.

The rest is “zoned for light industrial, business parks, office, with a little space set aside for mixed-use,” Krout said.

The city plans to hire a consultant to develop a masterplan for the developable land, Krout said. It’s working with developers and property owners on a “holistic approach,” he said. Krout predicts the study will take a year.

Among the biggest parcels in Lake Forest are 380 acres owned by Shea Properties, part of Walnut-based J.F. Shea Co. The land is zoned for a business park.

Another major parcel is known as Portola South, 199 acres zoned for a business park and other commercial use.

The Nakase Family owns another 121 acres of agricultural land that’s also zoned for a business park.

Beyond that, there are some 19 small owners in the buffer, who count anywhere from two to 55 acres.

“What we don’t want is 20 acres here and 20 acres there,” Krout said. “We want a cohesive plan.”

Aliso Viejo

South of the base, plans are in place and are awaiting an uptick in the economy.

Clint Sherrod, planning director with the city of Aliso Viejo estimated about 100 acres remain developable within Aliso Viejo’s buffer zone. That land is divided into three parcels—expansion of Shea’s Vantis office development and Parker Properties LP’s Summit Office Campus, and an area next to Aliso Viejo Golf Course.

Shea is nearing completion of the first building at Vantis, where plans call for 1.5 million square feet of office space and 30,000 square feet of retail space by 2007.

Plans at the Summit call for another 700,000 square feet of development for a total of 1.7 million square feet at buildout.

La Jolla-based Emerald Venture Group Inc. owns the golf course and has plans for a clubhouse and possibly a hotel on the nearby land, according to Sherrod.

Other

Buffer land in Laguna Woods, Mission Viejo and Rancho Santa Margarita isn’t anywhere near what it is in other cities. The majority of land already is developed or set aside as open space, officials said.

A few pockets in Laguna Hills are zoned for mixed-use but are nearly built up. A Laguna Hills city planner said the little that’s left is zoned for shopping centers and other mixed-use.

In Laguna Woods, there’s a smattering of horse stables near El Toro Road west of Moulton Parkway that could be developed sometime down the road. For now, there are no projects in the pipeline.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Monday, October 14, 2002 - 09:46 am:

Freeway bolsters Inland growth

http://www.dailybulletin.com/Stories/0,1413,203%257E21481%257E923304,00.html

Inland Valley Daily Bulletin

Retailers expect boon from freeway's Foothill extension
By L.C. GREENE
STAFF WRITER

October 14, 2002

The soon-to-be-open Foothill Freeway extension may provide long-anticipated traffic relief for Inland Valley commuters, but it's also accelerated commercial growth in the area.

"It's proving an economic boon for this community,' said Fontana City Manager Ken Hunt.

While a short section of the freeway, from Rancho Cucamonga's Day Creek Avenue to Sierra Avenue in Fontana is already moving traffic, the opening of the entire 14-mile extension to La Verne will further enhance economic progress, he said.

The under-construction 40-store Summit Heights Gateway shopping center with its Kohl's and Marshall's department stores is only one example of the sudden growth on the city's north side.

Nearby, a Sportmart store and Barnes and Noble bookstore are also in the works. Plans for another northside development, Sierra Lakes, include a drug store and supermarket.

Unlike other cities along the extension, Fontana holds a good deal of still undeveloped land, Hunt noted.

In anticipation of the growth, a Vons market opened at the Heritage Village Center two years ago. And earlier this year, an AmeriHost Inn and Suites opened for business off Base Line Road.

Though construction on the freeway's section east to San Bernardino is not expected to begin until later this year or early next, Rialto is already experiencing the early rumblings of new development, said City Manager Henry Garcia.

"Those people who are in-the-know are already in the game,' he said. "We have seen a positive impact.'

Garcia declined to specify what development might be in the works.

The freeway's impact is already evident in largely built-out and retail-starved Upland. The 110-acre Colonies Crossroads freeway-oriented shopping center should encourage residents to shop locally, said Upland Redevelopment Director Steve Dukett.

Farther to the west, some commercial development is also expected near Monte Vista Avenue on the border of Claremont, he said.

On Friday, officials with the San Bernardino Associated Governments said the freeway stretch between La Verne and Rancho Cucamonga is expected to open sometime before Thanksgiving.

Problems in the paving process between Hermosa Avenue and Sapphire Street in Rancho Cucamonga pushed back the freeway's opening from mid-October to late October, then into November, said associated governments spokeswoman Cheryl Donahue.

Once paving is completed in the next few weeks, striping, guard rail erection, sign work and safety inspections will complete the process, she said.

On the Los Angeles County side, in Claremont and La Verne, the freeway is essentially done and ready for traffic, said Caltrans officials.


L.C. Greene can be reached via e-mail at l_greene@dailybulletin.com or by phone at (909) 483-9337

By DBinLF (198.81.26.112 - 198.81.26.112) on Monday, October 14, 2002 - 06:58 pm:

From above..."Another major parcel is known as Portola South, 199 acres zoned for a business park and other commercial use."

This land was originally zoned for the business park angle. Baldwin company then went to the BOS and wanted it changed to residential. Patio homes, high density. No more infrastructure and hundreds of new kids into the alrady max'ed out Portola elementary.

Local Portola residents complained and demanded expansion of Portola to accommodate the new kids. Baldwin company responded by saying if they weren't allowed to build the homes they would sell the property or lease the property or develop the property to ensure some noxious projects (i.e. auto repair, etc.) were built instead.

To date...no takers or construction.

Now that Portola has been annexed by Lake Forest...I look fwd to seeing the City's "Master Plan" for the area.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Tuesday, October 15, 2002 - 06:26 am:

...possibly including El Toro - NPB candidate Adams

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot/news/la-dpt-adams15oct15.story

Gary Adams: Wanting to keep on a steady course
By June Casagrande
Daily Pilot

October 15 2002

In a campaign in which maintaining Newport Beach's quality of life has been a rallying call for challengers, incumbent Gary Adams' prescription is simple: Re-elect the people who helped make the city's quality of life what it is today.

"I think a key issue in this campaign is whether or not a change in leadership is in order," said Adams, who can rattle off a long list of reasons Newport Beach is an extraordinary town: outstanding libraries, tight limits on development, top-notch staffers fighting for improved water quality and limits on John Wayne flights and expansion. "When you look at successes for any city government, I don't think you can top what's been done here in Newport Beach."

Adams said he is proud of his hard work to ensure the city's future. And that's why the current campaign is frustrating, he said.

"I think it's been easy for some people to say I'm part of a developer-controlled council, but if you look at the facts, you can see that's really disingenuous," he said.

For example, he noted, there has been no significant development in the city outside the general plan's guidelines in about 10 years. The biggest additions to the city in recent years, Newport Coast and Bonita Canyon, got their development entitlements from Orange County and the city of Irvine, respectively, before they were part of Newport Beach.

"In fact, by incorporating Bonita Canyon, I think we did a great job of keeping development there relatively low," Adams said.

Adams, who is endorsed by the Newport Beach Police and Firefighters Union, the Newport Beach Police Employees Assn., numerous past mayors and county Supervisor Jim Silva, said he is also proud and pleased with the work the city has done so far in controlling traffic.

"When you consider that we accommodate millions of visitors each year, when you consider that back in the late '70s and early '80s when the city fought Caltrans' plan to put a freeway for the city, you can see that some of Greenlight's positions on traffic are based more on fear than on facts," he said.

On the contrary, Adams said, a wholesale change in leadership poses perhaps the biggest threat to the city's future.

"I think change and debate are healthy, good things," Adams said. "But when things are going well, I think there's a lot to be said for continuity."

The John Wayne Airport Settlement agreement is a case in point, he said. The current agreement is well on track to gain court approval, in part because of the city's lobbying efforts in Washington, D.C.

Adams said that the best way to ensure its protections are to continue the work the city has already done. From there, he said, the city can consider regional solutions for the long term, possibly including El Toro.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Tuesday, October 15, 2002 - 06:31 am:

THE JOHN WAYNE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT:

From http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot/news/la-dpt-adamsside15oct15.story

GARY ADAMS ON:

"I think we've built up countywide support. I think we're doing what needs to be done to make our voice heard in Washington and we're very close to getting the federal court's blessing ....Once that's in place, we need to start looking for a long-term solution. I think it does need to be a regional solution and that might include El Toro."

By jerrystranglespoultry (64.147.9.202 - 64.147.9.202) on Tuesday, October 15, 2002 - 08:33 am:

These people have become truly pyschotic in regards to their El Toro obsession. "and that might include El Toro"? And pigs might fly, as well. Forget pornography, I am beginning to believe that Mr. Adams and his ilk have almost sexual fantasies involving large, cylindrical objects containing lots of windows and spewing kerosene fumes (catch the 9:10 phallus to Dallas, anyone?) Here's a long-term solution. Go f*** yourself, for a really long time.

By yeahbaby (65.211.216.238 - 65.211.216.238) on Tuesday, October 15, 2002 - 09:29 am:

My opinion is that we should pull some of that "county wide support" for JWA restrictions away until those pols in NPB stop pushing and supporting El Toro as an airport.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Tuesday, October 15, 2002 - 11:08 am:

LAX stores grapple with a new market

http://www.dailybreeze.com/content/bln/nmlaxshops15.html

SHOPPING: Merchants are stacking shelves with fewer costly items and more inexpensive products to survive the slump.

By Ian Gregor
DAILY BREEZE

Bettye Dixon stopped stocking so many expensive Cartier watches and began buying darker cosmetics.

Manuel Soto, Patricia Lee and Debra Seanez began offering more discounts and displaying fewer expensive candies.


For concessions operators like these at Los Angeles International Airport, surviving the post-Sept. 11 economic slump meant much more than laying off workers and postponing renovations. Merchants had to refocus their business plans in response to dramatic changes in customer demographics — especially the decline in free-spending Japanese tourists and business travelers.

For Dixon, who owns Duty Free Shops in terminals 5 and 6, and Soto, Lee and Seanez, siblings who co-own I Love L.A. gift shops in terminals 2 and 5, that meant shifting the focus of their product lines to Latin American and U.S. travelers.

Dixon’s airy, elegant Terminal 5 store still displays a wood and glass cabinet full of bright orange, green and yellow Hermes scarves, which retail for $250 to $350. But not for long.


“Believe me — sales of that have dropped so much we’re pulling it out of our shop,” said Dixon, who has owned stores at LAX for 16 years. “All of this is going to move out.”

DFS and I Love L.A. reflect the plight of many LAX businesses, which in turn mirror the regional landscape. Everything from Rodeo Drive shops and Hollywood to Disneyland and South Coast Plaza have been clobbered by the plunge in tourism in general and the Japanese visitors in particular, said Jack Kyser, chief economist for the private Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. Analysts disagree over whether they’ll resume coming here in substantial numbers in 2003, 2004 or even 2005.

“The Japanese travelers were a very important component of the local tourism industry and their disappearance has definitely had an impact,” Kyser said. “You just hear stories from all over Southern California.”

Nevertheless, no LAX concessions businesses went out of business after Sept. 11, although some chose not to reopen specific stores. HMS Host Food Services did not reopen Jamba Juice in Terminal 5; one of its two Starbucks and the Gordon Biersch Brewery in Terminal 8 and the Manhattan Beach Brewing Co. in Terminal 8 are open only four days a week, according to LAX spokeswoman Nancy Castles.

WH Smith closed its Bally’s and Sweet Factory stores in Terminal 4 but plans to put new stores in those locations.


Concessions sales at LAX still have not recovered to pre-Sept. 11 levels; DFS and I Love L.A. officials both said their revenue is down about 15 percent.


Much of their pain resulted from airlines eliminating flights to Japan.

Delta cut two daily Terminal 5 flights between LAX and Tokyo’s Narita International Airport, passengers from which provided Dixon with 52 percent of her revenue. Northwest trimmed its Terminal 2 LAX-to-Tokyo schedule from one flight a day to three flights a week, Seanez said.

The owners laid off staff and cut work hours, but that wasn’t enough. Both businesses had to rethink how they operate — Dixon more so because she was so dependent on Japanese customers, who typically spend five to six times as much as others. Now, her clientele is a more value-conscious group from Mexico and South America.

“We literally stood in the middle of the floor and said, ‘This is going, this is going, this is staying, we need more of this’,” said store manager Irwin Waldon, surrounded by cabinets displaying everything from $12 Cadbury chocolates to a $920 bottle of Remy Martin Louis XIII cognac in a crystal decanter.

Out went much of the beef jerky, cigars and expensive ties and scarves that were popular with Japanese but not with Mexicans and South Americans. Dixon said she used to sell 10 to 15 Hermes scarves a day; now she’s lucky to sell 10 a week. And the $1,250 to $11,000 Cartier watches have taken back seats to fashion watches by Anne Klein and Guess, which retail for $100 to $300.

DFS also changed its perfume and liquor purchasing and increased orders of darker cosmetics, which Latinas want to match their complexions, said Apryl Stewart, Dixon’s operations manager.


“We’re trying to key on those brands that are more Mexican- and South American-driven,” Dixon said.

DFS even changed the music that it pipes into the store from ceiling speakers. Before, customers heard smooth contemporary jazz; now they’re greeted with a bouncy Latin strain.


“We’re constantly rethinking,” Waldon said. “We’re asking travelers if they’d like to see anything different in the store.”

The changes also are apparent at I Love L.A. in Terminal 2, where passengers snapped up books, magazines and chocolates on a recent weekday afternoon.


Low-priced souvenirs such as brightly colored coffee mugs and $9.99 T-shirts with Beverly Hills and Los Angeles logos have pushed aside pricey leather Guess handbags and Guess watches. Sales of jewelry and $10 Bijoux Terner watches are up, as are Tag Heuer knockoffs, which go for $15 or two for $25, Lee said.

Snack-size packages of chocolates are hotter sellers than the larger boxes that Japanese businessmen like to bring home — and that used to be the company’s No. 1 seller.

“We’re working harder to make a profit now,” Lee said.

Publish Date: October 15, 2002

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Wednesday, October 16, 2002 - 06:31 am:

Beware of Measure B

Oct. 16, 2002 Orange County Register Orange Grove

http://www2.ocregister.com/ocrweb/ocr/article.do?id=7178&section=COMMENTARY&year=2002&month=10&day=16

By Leonard Kranser
Kranser is a retired businessman and editor of the www.eltoroairport.org web site. He lives in Dana Point.

Measure B on the Orange County ballot for Nov. 5 asks whether voters would like certain environmental conditions to be met prior to the transfer of ownership of the former Marine Corps Air Station at El Toro to local control. Like most readers, I am all for environmental safeguards but against bad measures. B is a bad measure.

Measure B has no effect upon whether El Toro is cleaned or not. The analysis by the County Counsel's Office states quite clearly in the Voter Information Pamphlet that "as an advisory measure, this measure would have no legal force or mandatory effect."

In fact, Measure W - the Orange County Central Park and Nature Preserve Initiative passed by voters in March - provides environmental safeguards. Both Measure W and the federal Environmental Protection Act require the Navy to provide a high standard of cleanup, which the Navy has agreed to do. After passage of Measure W, the assistant secretary of the Navy for installations and environment wrote, "We remain fully committed to funding the cleanup of El Toro, which is actively ongoing at several sites on the base, and standing by our commitments in the future."

Therefore, Measure B is a wasteful initiative that accomplishes nothing useful from an environmental standpoint.

It should never have been put on the ballot. It was inserted into the November election at the last possible moment and with a minimum of study.

Measure B was launched at the request of pro-airport Supervisor Cynthia Coad. Previously, Coad had voted against studying the cleanup of El Toro for park use when it served her pro-airport agenda to take that position.

What is the explanation for Coad's about-face? Why is this piece of political posturing being put on the ballot now that an El Toro airport has been rejected by the voters?

One possible explanation is that B's backers hope to salvage airport plans by stalling other uses of the property. Measure B asks us to vote that "the actual cleanup and remediation of El Toro must be completed prior to its transfer or sale." If B passes, future county politicians can point to it as an excuse for not accepting transfer of El Toro. The Navy cleanup's at the base site, which is now under way, could take years to "be completed." Until the last small bits of contamination are corrected, 4,700 valuable acres could sit nearly idle.

Measure B could delay the transfer of most of the base for public-serving parks, schools and museums. As it is written, residents could be kept from the green space in the park until the entire cleanup is completed.

Measure B could delay sale and development of property-tax-paying projects - houses, offices and retail facilities - that are planned for the balance of El Toro.

The County Auditor-Controller's Office states in the Voter Information Pamphlet that as a result of this measure, "Realization of [property tax] revenues could be postponed due to delays in the development" of El Toro.

The Voter Information Pamphlet argument in favor of Measure B reinforces the view that Measure B is a desperate attempt to salvage El Toro airport. Airport advocate Charles Griffin prepared the ballot argument.

Read it carefully. The Yes on B statement says that El Toro should include an airport "managed by Los Angeles World Airports." Such an environmental disaster in the heart of Orange County would put our residents, our traffic and our air quality at the mercy of the Los Angeles politicians who run LAX.

Measure B should never have been put on the ballot. It is time to stop those who seek to mask self-serving measures in fine-sounding language and put them before the voters at public expense. Vote "No" on B. It's a bad measure.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Wednesday, October 16, 2002 - 06:34 am:

Nice of the Reg to privde the link to eltoroinfo site on the page where the story is.

By av_architect (68.5.64.115 - 68.5.64.115) on Wednesday, October 16, 2002 - 06:38 am:

When Leonard's letters are printed by the papers he is always carefully identified as "Kranser is a retired businessman and editor of the www.eltoroairport.org web site. He lives in Dana Point." When the board members of AWG and their hired flacks and hacks write they appear to be "ordinary" concerned citizens. I wonder how come? (I've previously written both the Reg and Times asking this question but have recieved no response.)

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Wednesday, October 16, 2002 - 06:39 am:

LAX Will Sell Ads to Defray Higher Costs of Security

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-lax16oct16.story

LOS ANGELES

The facility barred them for 42 years, viewing them as a distraction to passengers. Revenue of $31 million a year is projected.
By Jennifer Oldham
Times Staff Writer

October 16 2002

To offset mounting security costs and lost revenue from concession and parking fees following the terrorist attacks, officials plan to allow advertising at Los Angeles International Airport for the first time in the facility's 42-year history.

The city agency that operates the airport expects travelers to see advertisements hanging from terminal ceilings and affixed to concourse walls next summer. The program, patterned after successful campaigns at Las Vegas-McCarran International and other airports, is projected to raise about $31 million a year for the airport agency. The airport's total estimated revenue this year is $790 million.

LAX is the only major airport in the country without an advertising program. The world's fifth busiest airport hasn't allowed advertising because officials believed that the money raised wouldn't offset the inconvenience to travelers.

"Advertising was not needed to enhance airport design and was of no particular advantage to travelers," said William Schoenfeld, who worked at LAX from the mid-1950s to the mid-'90s, first as an architect who helped design the central terminal area and then as assistant general manager for planning and engineering with the airport agency. "We were more interested in giving passengers information on where to go and how to make their trip comfortable rather than purveying a product."

But times have changed. With airports facing a cash crunch in the early '90s and again in 2000, more facilities turned to advertising.

At LAX, airport agency officials said their advertising program will be designed so it doesn't distract from general airport information.

"When people get off an airplane and come into this country for the first time, it's very important that they know how to get to baggage claim," said Rick Janisse, deputy executive director for properties and concessions for the airport agency. "We don't want to do anything that's going to create a lot of visual noise."

The city's Airport Commission voted Tuesday to authorize the airport agency to solicit bids from companies to administer the program. The vendor selected by the commission will be charged with selling ad space, designing and reviewing ads to ensure that they comply with city standards, and installing and maintaining them.

The airport's nine terminals could accommodate 467 ads in ticketing lobbies, concourse hallways and baggage claim areas, Janisse said. The airport agency is talking with airlines that lease passenger waiting areas from the city to see whether they are interested in allowing ads there.

Other airports with advertising programs said they have been a successful revenue source.

"Our program has been particularly helpful in augmenting our airport operating budget considering the impact of 9/11 on the aviation industry," said Hilarie S. Grey, public affairs manager for the Clark County Department of Aviation, which operates Las Vegas-McCarran International Airport. "Advertising and concession revenue have definitely played a role in helping our airport to offset new security expenditures incurred over the past year."

McCarran's program raises about $9 million a year for the airport -- the world's 11th busiest. The facility's campaign has won several industry awards.

By EDITOR (68.5.170.86 - 68.5.170.86) on Wednesday, October 16, 2002 - 07:54 am:

av_architect, I identify myself to the papers. I also try to get the website address mentioned since it helps to build viewership. Perhaps the AWG folks prefer not to do so.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Thursday, October 17, 2002 - 07:35 am:

Agran proved no angel in El Toro's end

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot/columnists/la-dpt-bell17oct17.story

THE BELL CURVE

October 17 2002

Last Sunday, the sound of Dave Henderson's bat as he knocked the Angels out of a World Series 16 years ago was finally obliterated from my head forever.

From now on, no matter what happens, it's downhill for the Angels, and it seems that everything has already been written and felt to express that satisfaction. So while we wait for the World Series, I'll move on to another winner, whose path to victory was as devious as the Angels' path these past few weeks was straightforward.

OK, Larry Agran, I give up. You win. You and that crew you've assembled in Irvine make Machiavelli look like a carnival grifter. Or the Enron crooks like common purse snatchers.

This latest move of yours to let the taxpayers in Bakersfield and Fresno foot the bill for that imaginary Great Park of yours is sheer genius. Our hired guns can't even come close. Never could. I've always admired professionals who are good at their work, and I've got to say that as a superb confidence man, you're in a class by yourself.

In case anyone reading this doesn't know what I'm talking about, I call your attention to Proposition 51 in the upcoming state election. Proposition 51 is called the "Transportation, Distribution of Existing Motor Vehicle Sales and Use Tax Initiative Statues." It would take about 4.5% of state sales tax revenue and divert it to a trust fund for "transportation, environmental and safety programs."

And guess what is tucked into the free lunch line under this umbrella? You got it. The Great Park.

Those of you who remember the mailing pieces that came out of Irvine the past couple of years extolling the Great Park might also recall that one of its selling points was a free ride for the taxpayers.

When Agran was reminded of this the other day by a Los Angeles Times reporter, he responded: "We never said that to create the Great Park will cost no money. It's only some of the more sinister people in Newport Beach who are asserting we said that."

Unhappily, our sin was not being sinister enough. We were out-sinistered as well as out-smarted by a considerable margin.

I grazed through some of the fliers I saved and found Agran telling The Times that a study commissioned by the city of Irvine provided a "thorough analysis that shows the park plan would pay for itself." He also said that the Great Park "will generate more than $25 million annually in net revenue ... with ample resources to design and build the park in phases and operate it."

He was quoted in the Orange County Register as saying that a plan to create an endowment for the park out of revenue from leasing parts of the existing base "creates an opportunity to build the great park at no taxpayer expense." And the sinister beat goes on.

The backers of Proposition 51 picked up a page from Agran's book by offering it up as found money because these goodies come from "existing funds" that don't require new taxes.

The "existing funds" have been siphoned off the state's general fund at the expense of education, health and social services that would have to be diminished or eliminated to build Agran's park -- the one that was offered up at no taxpayer expense. Opposing Proposition 51 is the only time I can recall seeing the League of Women Voters in bed with the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn.

Throughout this charade, Agran's genius has been in packaging. When a "Yes" vote favored an El Toro airport, he packaged it with jails and toxic waste dumps. When a "No" vote favored El Toro, he packaged it with a Great Park. So who would vote for waste dumps or against a park? Not enough people, that's who -- especially when they were also being told how this airport would destroy everything they held dear in their current lives.

Meanwhile, what were our guys doing with the Newport Beach money? They were running scared from lawsuits with "educational" fliers, a restriction that didn't seem to cramp the fiction style in Irvine.

I've been giving some thought to packaging we might have offered in response to the jails and dumps and great parks, looking for offerings almost certain to be embraced by voters. Tax reduction, for example. Who wouldn't vote for that? So we might have created a commission to study this matter, making sure beforehand -- of course -- that it would come to the conclusions we wanted.

Armed with this research, we could then offer a measure that would pair an El Toro Airport with a reduction in county taxes based on income generated by the airport. All baloney, of course. An offering on which we couldn't possibly deliver.

But we'd worry about that after the election. Oh yes. And we'd also convince the residents of Garden Grove and Huntington Beach that their lives would be destroyed by the certain expansion of John Wayne Airport if they didn't turn out to vote for El Toro -- which would be a lot closer to the truth than the discomfort in Mission Viejo if the airport did win.

Maybe I'm giving too much credit to Agran. Maybe the ideas for dumps and parks came from some of his half-million-dollar consultants. But Agran was always the front man, the guy manipulating the shells while we tried to guess which one the airport was under.

And if some of us were suspicious, it apparently never occurred to the folks who didn't bother to vote on Measure W that the airport wasn't under any of them.

So when they pass out the Enron statues for the Best Performance in Creative Deception, I've got to be pulling for Agran. If he wants to bring someone else up to the platform with him, so be it. But just keep that picture in mind when you vote on Proposition 51. "No" means "No" -- on both the Proposition and Agran's end run.

Meanwhile, go Angels!

* JOSEPH N. BELL is a resident of Santa Ana Heights. His column appears Thursdays.

By DBinLF (152.163.188.39 - 152.163.188.39) on Thursday, October 17, 2002 - 07:52 am:

Uh Joe! You can always vote No on Prop 51. Just like you did on F and W.

Don't get mad at Agran cuz you lost.

By prow (68.4.240.52 - 68.4.240.52) on Thursday, October 17, 2002 - 09:54 am:

I will be voting yes on 51. Considering what most states waste our taxes on this seems a bargain to me. I say yes!

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Thursday, October 17, 2002 - 02:19 pm:

The best (and worst) of Orange County - A

http://www.ocweekly.com/ink/03/07/best_a.php

ALISO VIEJO The fact that the words "yuppie haven" spring to mind about this newly born city isn’t totally off the mark. Scores of tract homes and apartment complexes (usually billing themselves as luxury apartments, not to be confused with rinky-dink ones) dot the hillsides. Clustered together to create make-believe communities, some of these developments seek to evoke the so-called good old days (Twelve Picket Lane), while others sell posh living (San Simeon, Tiburon). Located in the city’s heart, the bustling Aliso Viejo Town Center is the main hangout for teens and middle-aged folks alike; it’s basically the only hangout, home to such standard retail stores as Barnes & Noble and Pier 1. Should you venture here, be warned: parking has become a scarce commodity, and even when you find a space, it takes some clever maneuvering to squeeze your car between two monstrous SUVs. If the great outdoors is more your thing, AV (as the homies call it—word) has plenty of breezy, grassy rolling hills. It has also managed to retain some natural wildlife areas, with Aliso and Wood Canyons Regional Park located along one of its borders. Of course, there’s a darker side to all this idyllic scenery. The 73 toll road (a.k.a. the San Joaquin Hills Transportation Corridor) might make this area more accessible and the drive to work more serene, but it also cuts off some major wildlife corridors. Then there’s the highly questionable water quality of Aliso Creek, which feeds wastewater from a bunch of South County cities. Not to mention that if the El Toro International Airport ever gets built, Aliso Viejo lies directly under its proposed flight path. Living in utopia doesn’t come without a price.

Did you know . . . that old people claim Aliso Viejo is named after a tree located near Aliso Creek and that you can actually go down to the creek and see the tree?

Did you know . . . that old people are always saying that kind of crap? Old people.

=========

ARGYROS, GEORGE LEON Orange County’s version of Jeb Clampett—only less sophisticated—began at the bottom of the economic ladder and moved his way up to the top by ripping off those who remained at the bottom. He snagged a plum ambassadorship from Dubya thanks to the mountains of cash he’s given to the GOP over the years.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Thursday, October 17, 2002 - 02:24 pm:

The best (and worst) of OC - D

http://www.ocweekly.com/ink/03/07/best_d.php

DISAPPOINTMENT 1. In 2000, Larry Agran got himself elected Irvine’s mayor again. It seemed like a wonderful thing at the time. Throughout the 1980s Agran was the only unabashed liberal in Orange County municipal government and an implacable foe of the Irvine Co.’s myriad developments. Beautiful Quail Hill will remain open and undeveloped because of Agran’s fight. Irvine under Agran was the first city in America to ban CFCs. The abuse he took from the right wing—some of it anti-Semitic—was crude but largely ineffective. Far more dangerous was the Irvine Co. Frustrated by Agran’s slow-growth policies, in 1990, the developers succeeded in tossing Agran from office. During the years out of power, Agran made two choices. First, to vigorously oppose the county’s El Toro Airport plans. Second, and far less public, was to moderate his anti-development views. Though still a liberal, Agran no longer attacks city development. His running unopposed for mayor in 2000 was a chilling message to the rest of the city: Agran, far from an enemy of sprawl, had become the candidate of choice among the city’s powerful home builders. Huge Irvine Co. projects, such as the Northern Sphere, which will add 34,000 new residents to the city, sailed through with hardly any criticism. And every new draft of the city’s Great Park plan for El Toro has more and more residential and commercial development. Trust us, it didn’t used to be like this.

2. As long as Loretta Sanchez lives, the 69th Congressional District seat is hers. Sanchez is so entrenched that Republicans have ceded permanent control to her. So what has she done for the Latino constituents who fueled her victory? She staunchly supported an INS station in the Anaheim jails; supported the Bush administration in nearly every turn in the War on Terrorism; and joined the Blue Dog Coalition, the most conservative wing of an increasingly conservative Democratic Party. This should come as no surprise: as Loretta Brixey the Republican, Sanchez lost her race for the Anaheim school district board of trustees. In 1996, she changed her name from Brixey to Sanchez and her party affiliation from Republican to Democrat. In other words, she has become nothing less than Bob Dornan (the nut she replaced) with ovaries.

See also: Lou "Tell Me What to Do" Correa

=========

DUNN, JOE The soft-spoken and articulate state senator from Santa Ana proves that a Orange County Democrat can remain principled. Are you listening, Loretta?

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Thursday, October 17, 2002 - 02:27 pm:

The best (and worst) of OC - G

http://www.ocweekly.com/ink/03/07/best_g.php

GHOST TOWN If you want to see a genuine ghost town in Orange County, you don’t have to go any farther than the former El Toro Marine Corps Air Station. Separated from Irvine by just a chainlink fence are several city blocks full of modest ranch homes—formerly houses for Marine Corps officers and their spouses. Along with several military barracks, those houses have been empty since the base closed in 1999. Back then, when the base was supposed to become an airport, Irvine Mayor Larry Agran wanted the houses to be given to the homeless and called the county’s plan to bulldoze them "an absolute scandal." Now that the county’s airport plan has been replaced by Agran’s Great Park initiative, you’d think the housing at El Toro would go to the homeless. You’d be wrong; it will likely be bulldozed, shortly after it is sold to the highest bidder by the U.S. Navy.

Locations of other ghost towns: Knott’s Berry Farm; Huntington Beach Mall; Times Orange County.

By Anne Stevenson (68.5.60.229 - 68.5.60.229) on Thursday, October 17, 2002 - 08:11 pm:

I hope everybody caught the news brief in the Reg on Wednesday/10/16 02 (Accent, page 6) "Airport noise may curb kids'learning abilities." During the Munich Airport relocation, three universities, including Cornell, got an opportunity to study two groups of kids and the effect airport noise levels had on their test scores.When airport noise was high, the same kids got lower scores in reading and memory than when noise was reduced. The study is supposed to be more definitive than previous studies because the same children were studied during the process.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Friday, October 18, 2002 - 08:00 am:

Anne, see the Munich and other related studies on this webpage http://www.eltoroairport.org/issues/munich.htm
Seems that it took the Reg five years to catch up.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Friday, October 18, 2002 - 08:14 am:

Special interests feed at Prop. 51 pork barrel - Register letter

Friday, October 18, 2002

Proposition 51 is a reckless pork-barrel initiative that would only exacerbate the state budget crisis. ["Measure needed due to school-bus, traffic woes," Commentary, Reader Rebuttals, Oct. 13]. Anita Lorz claims Prop. 51 would deliver benefits "without a tax increase, since it uses the existing sales tax on cars to pay for programs." I am sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but there is not a school bus or Great Park fairy that will magically make these items appear with "no new taxes."

Prop. 51 would mandate that 30 percent of the state's vehicle fees be diverted to pet projects (for the initiative's donors), resulting in a zero-sum game. It means that either existing state projects of higher priority will be cut and/or taxes must be raised to offset their loss. There is absolutely no way around this.

Before you vote, ask yourself: Is it really worth a huge tuition hike for California State University and University of California students just so that a casino in Indio can get $120 million for a rail line? Is it worth closing some trauma centers just so that some rail crossings can be built for an air-cargo facility operated by billionaire H. Ross Perot in San Bernardino?

How about Larry Agran's massive legacy-building fantasy park competing for county and state park funds with Mile Square Park, Centennial Park, Bolsa Chica State Beach, O'Neil Park, Doheny State Beach, etc., some of which already have a severe maintenance backlog? Since Larry Agran and other Great Park proponents spent millions of private dollars to promote and pass Measure W, where's the same enthusiasm with private dollars to actually pay for the park?

The list of special-interest pork goes on. Voters, not just in Orange County but throughout the whole state, should drop-kick this initiative and vote "no" on Prop. 51.

Rex Ricks

Huntington Beach

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Friday, October 18, 2002 - 08:28 am:

[NPB candidate] Adams didn't vote on anti-El Toro measure

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot/news/la-dpt-newport18oct18.story

Council candidate Gary Adams says he had to go to Chicago on short notice. Opponent Rick Taylor is understanding.
By June Casagrande
Daily Pilot

October 18 2002

NEWPORT BEACH -- City Councilman Gary Adams did not vote in the 2000 primary election that included Measure F, the anti-El Toro initiative, voting records show.

Adams said that, on short notice, he had to go to Chicago on business around the time the election took place and that he certainly would have voted had he been in town.

"My business calls me out of town sometimes, but when I'm in town, I vote," he said. "When I have enough notice that I'll be out of town, I vote absentee.

"Sometimes it's on short notice, but whenever I can vote I do," he said. "It goes without saying. I take it seriously."

Adams has taken to task Rick Taylor, one of his opponents in the upcoming council election, for some of his airport-related campaigning because of revelations that Taylor, a major backer of an airport at El Toro, did not vote in March on Measure W, the Great Park initiative.

Taylor said that Measure F was very important to the city, but that often people, including his opponent, can have good reasons for not voting.

"The City Council was very much opposed to Measure F and he was on that council, but people do miss elections, often for good reasons," Taylor said.

Measure F, a county ballot measure nicknamed the Safe and Healthy Communities Initiative, would have required two-thirds voter approval for airport projects, large jails in populated areas and hazardous waste landfills.

The measure passed with a 67% majority. Newport Beach and Costa Mesa were the only two cities that came out solidly opposed to the measure.

Some now cite the measure as the first and deadliest blow to these cities' hopes of seeing a commercial airport at the closed El Toro Marine Air Base absorb some of the future demands for Orange County flights.

The measure was thrown out on grounds it was unconstitutional.

* JUNE CASAGRANDE covers Newport Beach and John Wayne Airport. She may be reached at (949) 574-4232 or by e-mail at june.casagrande@latimes.com.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Friday, October 18, 2002 - 08:48 am:

Screening Bottleneck Bogs Down John Wayne

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/orange/la-me-jwa18oct18.story

ORANGE COUNTY

By David Haldane
Times Staff Writer

October 18 2002

A computer malfunction combined with inexperienced screeners caused some people to miss their morning flights at John Wayne Airport on Thursday, one day after the federal government took over the airport's security.

"On the north side of the terminal the lines went back as far as the doors that go to the parking lot, which is a long way," said Skip Williams, security director for the federal Transportation Security Administration, which began providing security at the airport Wednesday.

As a result, he said, passengers going through security checkpoints from 7:30 to 9 a.m. faced waits of up to an hour, causing some to miss their flights. "We don't know how many," Williams said.

According to one report, only 64 of the 115 passengers booked on an American Airlines flight to San Francisco were able to get through security in time to board their plane. As the plane took off nearly half empty, one passenger said, its captain apologized, citing security delays.

A spokeswoman for the airlines could not confirm those numbers but said anyone missing a flight is routinely booked on a later flight. "I understand that several of our flights took delays to accommodate passengers who were late," Tara Baten said, "but we can't hold a flight indefinitely."

Williams said the problem was caused by the breakdown of a computer controlling the X-ray machine in one of the airport's four security screening lanes, which took about five hours to fix.

The situation was exacerbated, he said, by the fact that it was only the second day on the job for 150 federal baggage screeners beginning 60 hours of required on-the-job training.

"You have to understand that this is a brand-new force still in the training mode," Williams said.

The training began Wednesday as U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Y. Mineta inaugurated the use of federal screeners at the airport and announced that high-tech equipment to check baggage for explosives would be in place by December.

To accommodate future delays, airport officials said, they would reiterate suggestions that passengers arrive at least two hours before their scheduled departures.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Friday, October 18, 2002 - 10:31 am:

White House taps [pro-airport] Knabe to join security committee

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200%257E20954%257E932666,00.html

Los Angeles Daily News

By Michelle Rester
Staff Writer

October 18, 2002

Los Angeles County Supervisor Don Knabe has been been appointed by the White House to an advisory committee for homeland security.

Knabe is one of eight elected officials in the nation who will serve on the State and Local Officials Senior Advisory Committee.

The group is expected to issue advice on national and local security strategies to the president's Homeland Security Advisory Council, which was created in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Representing the most-heavily populated county in the nation, Knabe was sworn in Wednesday night.

"It was a very special moment for me, realizing we were involved in a very important thing," Knabe said Thursday after arriving home from Washington.

The group is expected to have several meetings before the end of the year and then will meet on a periodic and as-needed basis after that. The work, Knabe said, should not interfere with his obligations as a county supervisor.

Rep. David Dreier, R-Covina, praised Knabe's appointment and what it means to Los Angeles County and the state.

"Don is going to bring an important Southern California perspective to the board," Dreier said.

Knabe said part of the homeland security discussion during his first meeting this week included health care and its role in any future acts of terrorism. The plight of Los Angeles County and others faced with cutting trauma and emergency room care to balance budgets was discussed.

"For example, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center is a key component in emergency medical response if terrorists strike the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach," Knabe said. "The county's trauma and emergency room safety net must be preserved to ensure we are ready to respond to a serious disaster."

The group is expected to offer local perspectives on national security and develop strategies that take individual areas across the country into consideration, Knabe said.

"It was evident yesterday that we can't develop a cookie-cutter approach," Knabe said. "Flexibility will be the key."

By DBinLF (152.163.188.39 - 152.163.188.39) on Friday, October 18, 2002 - 12:14 pm:

Uh-oh

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Saturday, October 19, 2002 - 08:22 am:

Consider El Toro..even look to places like ONT and LGB

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot/news/la-dpt-taylor18oct19.story

THE RACE FOR NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL

Rick Taylor: Making the residents a No. 1 priority
By June Casagrande
Daily Pilot

October 19 2002

To Rick Taylor, an expansion of John Wayne Airport poses the biggest and most immediate threat to Newport Beach's quality of life. But the struggle to contain airport noise and expansion is also an example of how the city government needs to work harder to improve quality of life in every aspect of the city, he said.

"We need to get back to the people in every aspect of city life and get away from the effects of development dollars on our City Council," Taylor said. "It's not about the Kolls, it's not about the Conexants, it's not about the Marinapark hotels. It's about the people."

Traffic congestion, water quality, integrity in government and adding park space and playing fields are just some of the things the City Council must take on as part of a fundamental shift in focus, he said. But no battlefront in Newport Beach is more important to the lives of everyday families than the airport, he said.

"My strong concern is that the John Wayne Settlement Agreement is not all that the City Council has led the people to believe it is," Taylor said. "But make no mistake about it: There will be a challenge to it. Orange County's air traffic needs will be at 35-million passengers a year by the year 2020, and the settlement agreement only looks as far ahead as 9.8-million passengers. It's not a question of whether someone is going to challenge it. It's a question of when."

Taylor also said that the extension, in some ways, leaves the city more vulnerable to airport expansion than before. For example, its language allows some of the agreement's stipulations to be altered, which could mean an increase in flights prior to 2005 -- the date the original agreement was scheduled to expire.

"We need to look at a regional solution. We need to consider El Toro and even look to places like Ontario and Long Beach," said Taylor, a member of the Airport Working Group. "Newport Beach can't become the fall guy for all the air traffic in Orange County."

As a Greenlight candidate, traffic is also high on his priority list.

"The current City Council has actually weakened our traffic phasing ordinance," Taylor said. "They made it possible to declare certain intersections as 'infeasible intersections,'" meaning that the traffic problems there are basically irreparable and that, as a result, no changes should be made there.

Naturally, water quality and air quality are prime examples, he said. But again, these issues can best be addressed by a council that puts the people first, he said.

"I want to get up there and listen to people and make them feel comfortable coming up to the podium to address their council. In my mind, being on the City Council is one of the most humbling things you can do. You're a servant of the people."

*

RICK TAYLOR

AGE: 46

OCCUPATION: Attorney

FAMILY: Married to Irene; son, 11, and two daughters, 4 and 1

EDUCATION: Doctorate from Western State University; bachelor's from Cal State Fullerton; U.S. Army Institute of Administration in Indiana

COMMUNITY SERVICE: Member of the Newport Beach Citizens Aviation Committee; mentor of Youth Volunteers in Parole; vice president of the Airport Working Group; past director of Child Guidance Center of Orange County; alternate for the Airport Land Use Committee of Orange County

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Saturday, October 19, 2002 - 08:23 am:

Bell Curve straight on the Agran point

From http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot/news/opinion/la-dpt-mailbag19oct19.story

The Bell Curve was almost perfect in the column about Larry Agran and El Toro ("Agran proved no angel in El Toro's end," Thursday). I would just like to add that Agran should bring Rep. Chris Cox with him to the platform to get the Enron statues for the Best Performance in Creative Deception. Cox played a major role in getting the Navy to present El Toro to Irvine only one day after the last vote. Too bad Cox hadn't been as quick to protect his constituents when they had voted to have it an airport previously.

My thanks to the Bell Curve for pointing out the deception behind Proposition 51. Hopefully he will tackle some of the other initiatives as well.

AGNES DUBBERLY

Costa Mesa

By EDITOR (68.5.170.86 - 68.5.170.86) on Saturday, October 19, 2002 - 09:25 am:

Richard Taylor, AWG, signed the ballot argument against Measure V, asked the Attorney General to investigate Tom Wilson because of Wilson's relationship with ETRPA, campaigned against W claiming falsely that the Great Park would result in a property tax increase of 10 percent, and said the following re the Park:

El Toro Info Site Report, July 25, 2002
Airport Working Group brings sour grapes to picnic

“The latest version of the Great Park is no picnic,” declared Airport Working Group Vice President Richard F. Taylor of Newport Beach, yesterday.

The AWG reports that, "Our test is simple – can your family have a picnic on the sub-parcels outlined in Irvine's plans? Our findings show that it might be possible to have a family picnic on 671 acres at the 'Great Park'”

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Saturday, October 19, 2002 - 10:34 am:

Earn rent relief

From http://www.latimes.com/news/local/ontario/news/la-ivo-briefs19oct19.story

Businesses that operate at Ontario International Airport have earned more than $110,000 in rent reductions as part of a relief plan offered by the airport after the September 2001 terrorist attacks slowed air travel.

The Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners approved the rent relief amounts at a recent meeting.

Creative Host Services, which operates two Carl's Jr. restaurants at ONT, will get $28,743 in relief. Host International Inc., which operates gift shops and newsstands, will earn more than $27,000 in relief.

Budget Rent-A-Car will get $54,000 in rent relief

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Saturday, October 19, 2002 - 08:14 pm:

Measure A critic misleading

http://www2.ocregister.com/ocrweb/ocr/article.do?id=7821&section=COMMENTARY&year=2002&month=10&day=19

Oct. 20, 2002 Orange County Register Reader Rebuttal

By Shirley L. Grindle
Grindle is a longtime government watchdog who lives in Orange.

As author of Measure A, I feel it necessary to correct the litany of misinformation and political rhetoric offered by Supervisor-elect Chris Norby in his Oct. 11 Orange Grove column, "Measure A far from reform."

The theme of Mr. Norby's opinion piece reflects his lack of understanding about the purpose of Measure A, mischaracterizing the measure as "limiting voters' choices" and "limiting only non-wealthy candidates." The plain fact is that the measure gives citizens of Orange County the opportunity to improve the existing county campaign ordinance and close certain loopholes, which are being routinely abused by unscrupulous campaigners.

Contrary to what Mr. Norby would have voters believe, under Measure A, contribution limits are not permanently set. The authority to raise campaign contribution limits lies squarely with the voters and not with the Board of Supervisors or other county bureaucratic authority. When the limits become outdated, the voters can, through a ballot measure, raise the limits. In fact, Measure A actually loosens current contribution limits by removing the aggregation requirement, thereby allowing married couples to both give up to the legal limit. This essentially doubles the amount a two-person household can contribute.

Mr. Norby also incorrectly states the measure creates a new commission to enforce campaign laws. This is untrue. Mr. Norby would know this had he actually read the measure's language. It becomes apparent that his opposition to improvements that Measure A would make to the county ordinance is really seated in his disdain for contribution limits in general and his resistance to the closing of reporting and disclosure loopholes.

The supervisor-elect also claims that Measure A "bans certain slate mailers." This is absurd, as the measure merely closes a loophole that allows unethical candidates to skirt the law by benefiting from unlimited third-party payments to slate mailer organizations, which then produce and distribute that candidate's literature artfully disguised as slate mailers. Measure A establishes a requirement that a candidate must either pay fair-market value for slate mailers that are primarily dedicated to his/her candidacy, or if contributions are made by third parties to the slate mailer organization at the behest of the candidate (to help pay for the candidate literature), then those contributions shall be subject to the county's contribution limit.

As a further distraction, Mr. Norby argues that the current $1,000 contribution limit has "driven political money underground campaigns become dirtier." Well, Mr. Supervisor-elect, you just named your own sin and ethical indictment.

Lastly, Mr. Norby makes a desperate attempt to appeal to anti-El Toro voters by indicating that pro-airport forces are behind Measure A. I alone am the author of this measure, Mr. Norby, and I have always been solidly and publicly against a commercial airport at El Toro.

In my opinion, Mr. Norby is worried about being held accountable for his own recent campaign improprieties and is desperately trying to cloud the issue by deliberately misleading voters.

Measure A is not a new campaign law; it is a revision of the existing county campaign law (known as TIN CUP) that was first enacted by initiative in 1978, and later amended by the voters in 1992. A Yes vote on Measure A will render the county's current campaign ordinance consistent with recent court decisions and legal opinions by the Attorney General's Office, as well as close several loopholes currently being abused by political opportunists with a "win at any cost" ethic. A "No" vote on Measure A retains the existing county campaign reform ordinance including the contribution limit, but without the improvements proposed by Measure A.

A "Yes" vote is recommended in order to retain a campaign ordinance that is constitutional and enforceable and is tightly written to avoid unforeseen loopholes.

By EDITOR (68.5.170.86 - 68.5.170.86) on Saturday, October 19, 2002 - 08:43 pm:

Wow. It doesn't pay to get Shirley Grindle mad.

Now who will write the rebutal to my OC Register "No on B" piece that followed Norby's "No on A" op-ed by a few days? Tom Coad, Cynthia Coad, Charles Griffin? Or will it be ghost written by a consultant for the AWG?
Len

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Sunday, October 20, 2002 - 07:36 am:

Editor, the difference between A and B is that A is a lot more emotional. Both Grindle and Norby take it very personally while B, well, you saw it, they could not even get Coad to write the arguments in favor. No doubt A has strong ones.

The irony is that while the Norby campaign gave Grindle the last push, and a chance to get Coad et al on her side, her ire (and others') started with the Agran-Dornan 2000 Irvine council campaign. Even thugh the FPCC has been investigating, there is not much that can be done except to get the treasurer to be more creative with the accounting. Everything there, while nefarious, is perfectly legal. Same with AWG's contributions being tax deductible.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Sunday, October 20, 2002 - 07:39 am:

Arguments in Favor of, Against Proposition 51

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/orange/la-ed-oclettersa20oct20.story

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

October 20 2002

Re " 'Great' Reason to Pass on 51," Editorial, Oct. 13:

A "yes" vote on Proposition 51 will make Orange County a better place. Proposition 51 will provide local governments with money to fix dangerous roads, improve bus transportation and replace old and unsafe school buses without raising taxes. But, beyond this, Proposition 51 allocates $10 million in state funds per year to help the county create one of the nation's finest metropolitan parks.

Another good reason to vote for Proposition 51 is that it allocates $50 million for the Fly Away program -- a transportation program that will enable Orange County air travelers to use the Irvine Transportation Center to buy their tickets, check their luggage and board an express bus to airports outside the county, including Los Angeles International, Ontario International and Long Beach airports. This is a popular centerpiece of Irvine's strategy to meet future air travel demand without building a dangerous, noisy, polluting and unwanted airport at El Toro.

It is no secret that the California Legislature is dominated by a powerful Los Angeles delegation that is hostile to Orange County, particularly on the issue of an El Toro airport.

The most recent evidence of this hostility was the passage of AB 2333, which was designed to punish Orange County voters for opposing an El Toro airport by depriving us of tens of millions of dollars of regional state transportation funds. A veto by the governor was required to stop this ridiculous law from taking effect.

Orange County is a "donor county." Every year we send millions of dollars to Sacramento that are redirected to Los Angeles and Bay Area counties. This disparity of dollars is particularly evident in the distribution of funds for transportation and parks. Proposition 51 will help us begin to get our fair share of state funds.

We certainly can't expect Los Angeles politicians to allow any state money to be used to enhance the Great Park or establish a Fly Away program -- not when these same politicians are still working to dump LAX air traffic onto Orange County by building an airport at El Toro.

Proposition 51 gives Orange County voters the power to get back our fair share of the millions of dollars we have donated to Los Angeles, San Francisco and Sacramento -- and it will help us create one of America's greatest parks for the enjoyment of every Orange County resident. Those are great reasons to vote "yes."
Larry Agran
Mayor of Irvine

Re "Irvine's Great Park Plan Carries Equal Price," Oct. 8:

Isn't everything done by the state paid for by taxes? Once taxes are paid the money is then distributed to various projects and programs. The attack on Irvine by The Times is just that: an attack.

The tax issue was raised by the pro-airport side when it said that local taxes would be needed to build the park. This was a lie then and a lie now. If you were to ask them, an airport could have been built without any additional taxes. San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego all have parks for their citizens. Orange County should also be able to provide its residents a place to get away from the urban sprawl. With what we kick into the state coffers every year, we will just be getting what is due us.

So yes, I will be one who supports Proposition 51 come November.
Rick James
Laguna Niguel

The Orange County cities opposed to Proposition 51 are those that would have been seriously, adversely affected by an international airport at the former El Toro Marine base.

Why shouldn't the Great Park receive its fair share of state funding?

As for the air terminal, why would anyone object to a convenient service that would check our bags, transport us to the gate of our chosen airport and save us from the inconvenience and headache of driving, lugging bags, etc.?

Vote "yes" for Proposition 51 and allow Orange County to receive its fair share of our taxpayer dollars.
Geoffrey Collier
Irvine

I am furious since reading that Irvine and its mayor, Larry Agran, are slipping a few plums for themselves into Proposition 51. First, the citizens of California are being asked to pay $110 million to enhance Irvine with the Great Park that was used as bait to encourage their South County cohorts to kill the perfectly located, sorely needed airport at El Toro. Then, to rub salt into the airport wound, Irvine is boldly requesting $50 million for a "remote" airport terminal, so that the traveling multitudes from South County can check luggage and board a shuttle van to John Wayne, where they will cheerfully fly over the heads of the hapless Newport Beach folk.
Let's get a proposition that does not shower state millions on one city.
Keats Hayden
Newport Beach

I only hope the state denies any funds for this park and uses the money to boost medical help for people on fixed incomes and reopen the medical facilities in the state that have been closed because of lack of funds. Let's get real and help people who need help, like people on kidney dialysis that most health insurance companies no longer cover. They could use this money.
C. Byrne
Huntington Beach

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Sunday, October 20, 2002 - 07:48 am:

[Daily] Pilot picks for Newport races

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/pilot/news/opinion/la-dpt-1edit20oct20,0,921209.story?coll=la%2Dtcn%2Dpilot%2Dnews%2Dopinion

EDITORIALS

October 20 2002

In choosing who we believe is right to lead the city of Newport Beach over the next four years, we had to weigh several factors: the power and experience of incumbency, community involvement, breadth of knowledge of Newport issues, vision and most of all leadership.

So we tossed those all together and added a little green to the mix, and here's what we have come up with:

Tod Ridgeway, Gary Adams, Bernie Svalstad and Allan Beek.

Let's begin with Ridgeway in District 1.

The current mayor has certainly made his enemies in the anti-development Greenlight camp, and for that, he has become a target. Yet it is because of his bold statements that we believe he speaks with a confidence in his convictions. He knows what it takes to make a city run well and has proven that over the last four years.

While some may quarrel with his propensity to mince words, there is little doubt that Ridgeway cares about Newport Beach.

Next up is Adams in District 4.

Questions have arisen whether he has the time to serve, but Adams answered those to our satisfaction, pointing out that he has always found ways to prioritize his time. His accomplishments on the council, specifically his involvement in the general plan update, are proof of that.

Like Ridgeway, his skills as a politician are top notch and his experience and knowledge, based on his years as both a councilman and planning commissioner, will be an immense boon to the city over the next four years.

That's not to say we aren't impressed with his opponent, Rick Taylor. Taylor, a member of the Airport Working Group, seems to be running for all the right reasons and we commend him for that.

But for now, it's hard not to look at Taylor as a one-issue candidate, whose expertise and knowledge is largely in the area of airport issues. Still, we think he has a bright future in Newport politics and we encourage him to stay involved regardless of November's outcome.

Next is a tough race in District 6.

Three relatively unknown candidates are vying to succeed Dennis O'Neil, a strong two-term councilman. Of the three, though, there is one who clearly is more qualified than the rest, and he is Bernie Svalstad.

Svalstad is a former councilman for Fountain Valley and a six-year director of the Orange County Sanitation District. He knows how city government works. He has spent the last 18 years living in Corona del Mar raising a family and knows the town well. He has ideas for solving some of the most nagging problems, such as traffic and water quality. He will bring a steady hand.

Finally, we come to District 3 and Beek.

This race was difficult for us to decide because we have so much respect for his opponent, Don Webb. Webb has been a longtime employee and resident of the city. He is well versed in city issues and, by his own admission, is well acquainted with every street in town. He is easy going and well liked by most everyone who meets him.

But Webb's connection to City Hall posed a problem for us because of the potential conflicts that could come with his election. How would Webb vote on personnel issues, especially if it was a former co-worker or even a former boss? How would Webb vote on salary negotiations or city cutbacks? Would he vote with the taxpayers in mind, or his former colleagues?

Either he would have to recuse himself, or risk the scrutiny that would come with his vote.

We feel that's not what the city needs right now. Instead, we would encourage Webb to find another outlet to serve the city other than on the council.

Regardless of that, the choice of Beek is hard to ignore.

The son of city pioneer Joseph Beek, the founder of the Balboa Island Ferry, Allan Beek has blazed his own trail in Newport Beach history that even his detractors admit is impressive.

He successfully led the fight against Newport Center expansion. He is the father of the Traffic Phasing Ordinance and Greenlight itself and has long been a champion for the preservation of open space and the caps at John Wayne. He is a founding member of the environmental activist group Stop Polluting Our Newport.

He is a brilliant strategist who cares deeply about his hometown. While some may argue that Beek need not be elected because he has already changed politics forever with Greenlight and neutralized the power of the council to decide big development issues, he argues that there is a litany of smaller, equally important issues that could use his expertise.

We agree with him and believe that he deserves his time in the limelight, even one that has a tint of green.

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Sunday, October 20, 2002 - 08:12 am:

Law makes slate mailers more honest

http://www.dailynews.com/Stories/0,1413,200%257E24781%257E936198,00.html

Los Angeles Daily News

By Thomas D. Elias

October 20, 2002

LET'S say you're a dyed-in-the-wool Republican, one who's never voted for a Democrat in 15 or more years. You find a postcard in your mailbox shortly before the election called "Republican Voters' Choice."

It has X's beside every Republican name you recognize on the ballot, plus more for candidates seeking offices you never heard of and more X's marking several propositions, both state and local.

If you haven't done much research, haven't read your sample ballot and proposition booklet thoroughly, there's a good chance you'll take that card -- called a "slate mailer" -- to the polls and vote just the way it suggests.

The cards sent to "yellow-dog Democrats" who never vote for anyone but a Democrat look much the same, but with X's beside different names.

For both Republicans and Democrats who get these slate mailers, the operative warning is caveat votor . That's Latin for "let the voter beware."

For the recommendations on the card are not necessarily those of the state or local parties. More likely, many of those X's were paid for by candidates and proposition sponsors.

It's not unusual for a candidate or a proposition campaign to pay $100,000 or more for a slate mailer slot. There can even be bidding wars. No one says principle was ever involved here.

Example: When Gov. Gray Davis -- who had no competition within his party -- refused to pay for an endorsement on the primary election mailer of the California Organization of Police and Sheriffs last winter, COPS endorsed Republican Bill Simon. It's possible the more than $400,000 paid to COPS by Simon's campaign and his campaign management firm of Russo, Marsh & Associates had something to do with that. The COPS slate mailer had endorsed Davis in the past -- when he contributed to the organization.

Most mailboxes have not yet begun to fill up with slate cards. The flood begins soon and will flow until Nov. 4, the day before the election.

But this year's cards may bear a slightly different look than previous ones. They may actually let voters know some of the choices marked are not those of the political party they purport to represent. But that improvement may be for this one time only.

For even though many voters thought they were acting only against excessive campaign contributions when they passed the Proposition 34 election reforms in 2000, they also were adopting a new slate mailer rule.

From now on, the law says, any mailer that claims an association with a political party must state in very readable letters below any choice that runs counter to the party's that "This is not the official position of the (party the mailer appears to represent)."

In short, if a Democratic-looking slate mailer this fall were to recommend a vote for Republican Richard Ackerman for attorney general, or a vote against Proposition 52, which would allow Election Day voter registration, bold type would have to state this is not the party's position.

That would be a step toward honesty in slate mailers, which never reveal who has bought their slots and who has not, or how much anyone paid for the endorsement.

But the card operators are fighting this relatively minor change -- one that doesn't even require them to identify who paid for their endorsements. Even this weak improvement, they claim, infringes on their free speech rights.

How? Daniel Lowenstein, their lawyer, argues that the requirement for immediate notice when a stance differs from the official party position "commandeers" space that could go toward political expression and thus undermines the owners' right to free speech.

The card operators also told U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence Karlton in Sacramento that even if they must print disclaimers, they should only have to print one for each entire card, not one adjacent to each endorsement they make that's contrary to their party's. But the law specifically says the disclaimer must come "immediately below the ballot measure or candidate recommendation in the slate mailer, in no less than nine-point roman boldface type in a color or print that contrasts with the background so as to be easily legible."

That seems pretty clear, and it's ironic that Lowenstein should now be arguing for obfuscation. In his younger days, he chaired the state Fair Political Practices Commission and co-authored the 1974 Campaign Reform Initiative that sought to create more openness in elections.

There's good reason for Karlton to override the slate-mail owner protests and allow the new law to take full effect. As Lawrence Woodlock, lawyer for the current FPPC, reminded the judge: "A lot of voters think (slate mailers) are an organ of the political party."

The mailers deliberately create that impression, but it's a false one designed to hoodwink voters. Unless the new law is allowed to operate with full force, many more thousands of voters will be fooled in the future, just as millions have been hoodwinked in dozens of earlier elections.

Thomas D. Elias is a writer living in Southern California. He is the author of "The Burzynski Breakthrough: The Most Promising Cancer Treatment and the Government's Campaign to Squelch It." His e-mail address is tdelias@aol.com .

By Nellie (66.81.20.180 - 66.81.20.180) on Sunday, October 20, 2002 - 11:07 am:

Reasonable people will disagree about Prop. 51. It is a Halloween grab bag containing plenty of distasteful things as well as plenty of really good things.

Whatever your views on Prop. 51, you have to agree that Agran makes a good point, one that you seldom see expressed in the Times, "that the California Legislature is dominated by a powerful Los Angeles delegation that is hostile to Orange County, particularly on the issue of an El Toro airport."

He further points out, correctly, that "the most recent evidence of this hostility was the passage of AB 2333, which was designed to punish Orange County voters for opposing an El Toro airport by depriving us of tens of millions of dollars of regional state transportation funds. A veto by the governor was required to stop this ridiculous law from taking effect."

Agran may have over-reached in crafting the Great park component of Prop. 51, an error in political judgment perhaps, but his rationale is correct.

By parrotpaul (66.81.178.218 - 66.81.178.218) on Sunday, October 20, 2002 - 04:52 pm:

I just tool this pic of the World Series Stealth fighter about 5 minutes ago...he is making passes over Leisure World waiting to make a fly-over Edison Field after the National Anthem.

By The King (68.101.103.216 - 68.101.103.216) on Sunday, October 20, 2002 - 08:46 pm:

Bitchen.

I heard them over the house, and trampled the wife to get out the front door......I did catch a glimpse.

By antiinanaheim (216.249.90.52 - 216.249.90.52) on Sunday, October 20, 2002 - 10:37 pm:

I just got back from the game. What a game!!! One of the best baseball games I have ever seen. The F117 must have made his pass about 100' over the stadium flying in from centerfield. The noise of that plane is deafening. Can't figure out why it's called the Stealth. I saw it just fine.

By AOneL (68.5.28.234 - 68.5.28.234) on Sunday, October 20, 2002 - 11:18 pm:

Anti, I bet you weren't trying to find it with radar. That's why it's "stealth," virtually no radar echo.

Bob.

PS: Positively one of the better World Series games. A nail biter all the way!

By DBinLF (198.81.26.112 - 198.81.26.112) on Monday, October 21, 2002 - 06:23 am:

Actually, the Stealth shows up just fine on radar...until they starting throwing the switches and turn the gizmos on.

By antiinanaheim (216.249.95.104 - 216.249.95.104) on Monday, October 21, 2002 - 06:31 am:

Just kidding guys.

By parrotpaul (66.81.79.155 - 66.81.79.155) on Monday, October 21, 2002 - 06:46 am:

I was amazed the photo came out. Must be my anti-Stealth special Buck Rogers see everything lens.

By AFinMB (66.74.42.236 - 66.74.42.236) on Monday, October 21, 2002 - 07:55 am:

Soon, Sadaam will be seeing these jets.

By AOneL (68.5.28.234 - 68.5.28.234) on Monday, October 21, 2002 - 08:49 am:

Hopefully, the last thing he sees.

Bob.

By ChrisinLN (64.7.203.99 - 64.7.203.99) on Monday, October 21, 2002 - 04:10 pm:

I remember seeing one on display a couple years ago (ironically) at one of the last El Toro air shows.

It had two premier ropes around it (which kept anyone from getting too close to it. There was a sign on the second rope that accentually said… pass this rope and we can shoot you and then ask questions. And there were about five armed guards standing within the two ropes (just in case).

It's amazing that the technology is more than twenty years old. The jet has absolutely no curves what-so-ever. Everything is at right angles. Even the jet engines can't be seen.

By parrotpaul (66.81.77.6 - 66.81.77.6) on Monday, October 21, 2002 - 05:29 pm:

Nothing like a little military hype to keep the citizenry interested.

If you go out to the eastern slopes of the San Gabriels along the Angeles Crest highway, you can sit and listen to those suckers break the sound barrier every day. Palmdale residents must love that. Beats the kind of stuff El Toro would have brought here.

By Flash (138.84.200.55 - 138.84.200.55) on Tuesday, October 22, 2002 - 12:13 pm:

Wait 'till you see the Bird Of Prey.

By DBinLF (64.12.96.38 - 64.12.96.38) on Tuesday, October 22, 2002 - 05:03 pm:

Stealth's (F-117's) cannot break the sound barrier.

Must be something else.

By jerryfliesout (64.147.9.202 - 64.147.9.202) on Wednesday, October 23, 2002 - 09:04 am:

DB. Re must be something else;
Maybe Aurora?!

By DBinLF (207.104.92.10 - 207.104.92.10) on Wednesday, October 23, 2002 - 02:07 pm:

I can neither confirm nor deny the existence of Aurora.

It was a weather balloon...

By jerryafiftyone (64.147.9.202 - 64.147.9.202) on Thursday, October 24, 2002 - 02:36 pm:

Or maybe atmospheric interference...

By Media Watcher (66.41.91.59 - 66.41.91.59) on Saturday, October 26, 2002 - 09:51 am:

[Bringing] economic life to the old Norton air base faces a key vote this week

It's one big deal

Perot's effort to bring economic life to the old Norton air base faces a key vote this week

10/20/2002

By ADAM EVENTOV
THE PRESS-ENTERPRISE


SAN BERNARDINO - It's a big deal turning an old air force base into an economic engine estimated to generate up to 8,000 jobs in the next decade.

In fact, it's such a big deal that it took two years to negotiate. Now the deal awaits a vote on Wednesday by economic development agency for the former Norton Air Force Base.

If the Inland Valley Development Agency approves the deal, it will sell roughly 500 acres of the former base for $26 million to developer Hillwood and change the physical and economic landscape of the San Bernardino area that lost 10,000 jobs when the base closed in 1994.

Hillwood wants the 500 acres as a starting point for a larger industrial development it calls AllianceCalifornia, a cargo center that will make it easy for tenants to move goods between warehouses, trucks, trains and aircraft. Once it gets the land, Hillwood will have to clear portions of the base of old Air Force buildings, landscape the area and install roads and utilities.

In return, Hillwood will get land that could more than triple in value as it develops 4,000 acres on the former base, the base's airport, and throughout San Bernardino and neighboring Redlands.

"Hillwood is validating the east end of the market with their presence," said Rick John, senior vice president of the Ontario office of Collins Commercial Corp., a commercial real estate brokerage.

Since a separate organization operates the former base's airfield as an airport, Hillwood still needs to negotiate with the airport's management for the development rights around the runway.

Hillwood comes to the base with an impressive set of credentials. The company is owned by Ross Perot Jr., son of former presidential candidate H. Ross Perot, and brings experience -- not to mention financial backing -- to the project. The company has residential and commercial projects throughout the country but is best known for AllianceTexas, the nation's first airport used solely for industrial customers.

The company's presence in the market is speeding development around the former base, even though development had already begun marching its way east along Interstate 10. The San Bernardino area is becoming a hot industrial market because the area has affordable undeveloped land, said John Husing, regional economist.

Land prices can reach $5 a square foot west Interstate 15 because available land is becoming scarce in Ontario, Chino, Mira Loma and Rancho Cucamonga. In the San Bernardino area, land that costs $2 to $3 a square foot has already attracted warehouses for Stater Bros., medical-device firm Becton Dickinson, Hershey Foods and others.

Can Hillwood's name have that much impact on the area's development?

It already has. Two years ago, the airport authority would get one or two inquiries for the use of the airports hangars and aircraft maintenance buildings. Now there are three companies vying for the use of the airport's massive aircraft painting facility, three companies wanting to use an adjacent hangar and three companies wanting to establish executive jet operations at the airport, said T. Milford Harrison, executive director of the IVDA and the airport authority.

Wisconsin-based retailer Kohl's chose the former base for its distribution center not only because of the land costs and location, but because it already worked with Hillwood on other projects, said Kohl's spokeswoman Susan Henderson.

Federal Express, which has a $300 million sorting hub at AllianceTexas, will begin flying charter flights into San Bernardino because of Hillwood's relationship with Federal Express, Harrison said.

If the Inland Valley Development Agency approves the deal, the first thing visitors are likely to see are new signs defining the project area and new broker signs describing the tracts available, said John Magness, Hillwood senior vice president. Within the first year, Hillwood will begin landscaping the area.

AllianceCalifornia will split into sections called North Gate, West Gate, Central Gate and South Gate, evoking names of portions of the former base. Office development will likely occur on property fronting Tippecanoe Avenue.

How the project develops from there depends on what clients they attract. Initially, Hillwood will be able to offer an industrial park at prices below lease rates found in the Ontario area. As the airport and industrial park develop, lease rates and land values will climb.

"What happens on the airport side will help attract customers to the ground side of the project," Magness said.

The former base also has customs service established this month and Free Trade Zone status which gives importers breaks on import tariffs.

A key element to the project's success will be Burlington Northern Santa Fe's proposed construction of a 200-acre railyard on what is now Palm Meadows Golf Course. The railroad needs the railyard to add capacity. Its current San Bernardino yard handles more than 400,000 cargo operations a year, which is near its capacity.

Hillwood and the railroad want the railyard at AllianceCalifornia because it not only increase the railroad's capacity, but it will also attract customers to the project and reduce truck traffic between the existing yard and the former base, said Bob Brendza, the railroad's director of facility development.

But the proposed railyard almost killed the Hillwood deal when San Bernardino Mayor Judith Valles raised concerns about mile-long cargo trains traversing her city. The deal survived when the railroad agreed to go through the city's entitlement process.

It will be at least two years before construction would begin on the railyard.

AllianceCalifornia is also among the finalists in a site search by Build-To-Order, a start-up car maker that wants to build cars to order much like Dell builds computers to order for its customers. The Los Angeles-based company is expected to make its decision by the end of the year.

Reach Adam Eventov at (909) 890-4461 or at aeventov@pe.com

Online at: http://www.pe.com/business/local/PE_BIZ_ntexas20.5806c.html