Lobbying Costs Mount as Local Agencies Seek Way on El Toro

With the deadline for a military decision on future civilian use of El Toro Marine Corps Air Station still more than a year away, nearly $2 million in local taxpayer money has already been allocated or spent to lobby Washington officials for or against a proposed commercial airport at the base.

And the pace of spending promises to accelerate even more next year, as pro- and anti-airport forces step up their lobbying efforts as the closure deadline nears.

This intensive lobbying effort has raised concerns in some quarters, not only because of the public funds being spent to woo Washington officials to one view or another but also because of the lack of public disclosure on what goes on behind closed doors.

Whether it’s county representatives meeting with officials of the national pilots union to discuss the relative safety of the base’s east-west and north-south runways or anti-airport folks schmoozing members of the state’s congressional delegation, both sides seem to be intensifying their efforts to sway the Navy’s decision on what the base will become.

“Mindful of the timeline, people are focusing more attention on the issue and the significance of it,” said Julie Puentes, executive vice president of the Orange County Business Council, which supports the airport project.

Tensions over the competing lobbying efforts were raised to new heights recently, when county Chief Executive Officer Jan Mittermeier rejected a request by Supervisor Thomas W. Wilson to provide the board with detailed schedules, expense reports and information on lobbying trips already taken and planned by county staff.

Mittermeier’s rejection prompted Wilson to ask that she be stripped of her El Toro planning oversight duties.

Mittermeier reversed her position Friday, saying she will issue the supervisors reports every two weeks during regular board meetings.

Wilson said he still plans to schedule a meeting Dec. 2 to discuss Mittermeier’s job performance.

“I just think it’s in the best interest of all concerned to know what we are doing and how we are spending the money and the time,” said Wilson said, referring to the airport planning project and the competing non-aviation plan being developed with some county financial support.

“I think if we are going to go forward with the process, the general public needs to know the facts about both plans,” Wilson said.

Since 1995, both the county and the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority--the lead agency in charge of the non-aviation plan--have each devoted nearly $1 million to spend on lobbyists and travel associated with the lobbying effort.

The city of Newport Beach alone has spent $125,019 since 1995 on lobbying efforts, while Taxpayers for Responsible Planning, an anti-airport group, has doled out nearly $28,000 to rub shoulders with federal officials.

Other groups, like the pro-airport Orange County Business Council and the Airport Working Group, also are considering allocating funds to hire lobbyists and to make lobbying forays to Washington next year.

*

Regardless of their stand on the airport, all sides agree on the importance of cozying up to federal officials.

“We visit Washington two times a year at a minimum,” said Bill Kogerman, director of the anti-airport Taxpayers for Responsible Planning. “Out of sight, out of mind. They need to be reminded that we are here.”

The soon-to-be-abandoned Marine base falls under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Navy, which is in charge of the conversion issue. The next big decision will come in fall 1999, when military officials determine whose plan for the base is most in the public’s interest--and who is awarded ownership of the 4,700-acre base.

The base lies within the county’s land-use-planning boundaries but also falls within the city of Irvine’s so-called sphere of influence.

Irvine officials are contemplating a bid to annex the base property, which could have serious implications for the airport project, since the city is strongly opposed to an airport.

But since the Department of the Navy named the county the lead agency to oversee the planning process, county officials have much more of a say in dealings with federal officials.

County representatives such as Courtney Wiercioch, the county’s airport project manager, and Mittermeier have visited Washington at least half a dozen times since 1995, Wiercioch said.

Recently, they have discussed planned runway use with representatives from the Air Line Pilots Assn., the largest pilots union in the nation.

At those meetings, county officials also discussed the status of the base reuse plan, something that is scheduled for completion by April 1998.

“What we do not do is malign those who are opposing the county,” said Wiercioch, responding to criticism from airport foes about what goes on behind closed doors.

The county also employs two lobbying firms to schedule meetings and conferences regarding the El Toro issue.

One lobbyist, Jim McConnell, who represents the county on many issues, including El Toro, was paid $464,000 over the last two years. But Wiercioch estimates that only 5%--or $11,600 a year--of McConnell’s lobbying fees are attributable to El Toro related issues.

The lobbying firm Hill & Knowlton received $24,000 over two years for its work on the El Toro issue.

In addition, the county has engaged four “team managers” who have traveled to Washington. Attorney Michael Gatzke, who represents the county on El Toro-related legal issues and traveled to Washington with county delegation earlier this month, is paid $225 an hour. Wiercioch declined to say how much of his time has been spent on El Toro--he also does work on John Wayne Airport matters--and said she could not provide the total amount he has been paid since 1995.

Bruce Wetsel, a consultant who joined Gatzke on the latest Washington trip, has a contract that says he can earn a maximum of $165,000 a year. Gary Simon, a real estate consultant who has traveled on behalf of the county, has a contract that puts a ceiling on his earnings of $156,000. And Mark Mispagel, another attorney, is being paid $200,000.

Since 1995, the four estimate that they spent about $80,000 on all El Toro travel, not only to Washington.

Though Supervisors Todd Spitzer and Wilson have raised concerns about the county’s expenditures on travel and lobbying, Wiercioch said county spending on El Toro lobbying is minimal.

Since 1995, the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority has spent $727,703 in lobbying contracts and travel expenses. Now the official agency in charge of the non-aviation project, their stake in the lobbying effort has increased, authority officials concede.

Their goal is not only to gather intelligence on what the county has told federal officials but also to convince military officials of the non-aviation plan’s credibility.

“The feds . . . are certainly recognizing our organization,” said Richard Dixon, chairman of the organization. “We represent 500,000 impacted individuals that live next to the El Toro Marine base.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

El Toro Lobbying Money

Since July 1995, more than $1.5 million has been spent lobbying both for and against a proposed airport at El Toro Marine Corps Air Station. Here’s how the spending divides:

ANTI-AIRPORT

*--*

Lobbying/ consulting Travel Total El Toro Reuse Planning Authority $727,703 $12,300 $740,003 Taxpayers for Responsible Planning 3,025 24,722 27,747 Total $730,728 $37,022 $767,750

*--*

PRO-AIRPORT

*--*

Lobbying/ consulting Travel Total Orange County 568,204* 80,000 648,204 Newport Beach 110,984 14,035 125,019 Total $679,188 $94,035 $773,223

*--*

* Does not include Michael Gatzke’s $225 per hour fee

Source: Individual agencies; Researched by LORENZA MUNOZ / Los Angeles Times

Los Angeles Times