Reasons to Oppose a Runway Veto.

1.    Hopefully, a longer or a second John Wayne runway may be unnecessary. Future supervisors should be free to weigh the matter based on the needs that they have to face in the future.

2.    A decision on a vital county asset like John Wayne - as with the decision on El Toro - should be made after thoroughly studying the costs, alternatives and environmental impacts - and involving the public and business community.

3.    This permanent veto against airport expansion is being granted without adequate study of long range needs. County and SCAG consultants projected OC air travel demand to more than double. This agreement fails to address how the county will serve this future travel demand.

4.    Apparently the FAA, airlines and the pilots have not been asked about the runway length. The airport may have no current plans for the runway but what about 15 or 25 years from now? Lighter, faster, quieter aircraft are being developed using composite materials. Will we be able to meet the runway requirements of future aircraft?

5.    One city is being given what its councilmen call "a huge victory ... its No. 1 goal" - a veto forever over runway decisions made by future county supervisors  The agreement goes far beyond state law, which can change, by extending the city's veto power into Costa Mesa and unincorporated areas - something Newport has not had.

6.    The deal will help to maintain higher air fares and limit destinations from John Wayne - impacting the county's economy and residents.

7.    Runway limits should be negotiated with the renewal of passenger and flight limits in 2015, with all airport capacity factors on the table at once.

8.    There is not one good reason for this action at this time. Restrictions to protect airport neighbors are in place until at least 2015 (and then only can be changed after an Environmental Impact Report.) 


For these and other reasons, today's Board is urged not to empower one city, in perpetuity, to veto decisions by future county supervisors, thereby locking the gate on their ability to meet the county's air travel needs as they evolve. Why do it?

October 24, 2006 - revised