El Toro Airport Plan and Fairness

* I almost choked on my breakfast when I read your story “El Toro Jet Noise Analysis Isn’t Sound, Critics Say” (Aug. 12).

Vince Mestre, a nationally recognized acoustics expert, told the Board of Supervisors recently that most of the noise from commercial airplanes would be contained on the El Toro base.

According to Mestre, commercial airplanes will have a minimal impact on surrounding communities. In fact, most residents will be exposed to much less noise than they are now because commercial airplanes are much quieter than the military jets that currently use El Toro.

With striking graphics, Mestre also showed that El Toro has a much bigger buffer zone around it than LAX or John Wayne Airport.

What astonished me about the story is that it gave credence to ridiculous claims from a handful of South County residents brandishing Radio Shack noise meters who said their “calculations” differed from Mestre’s.

Even worse, the story repeated an undocumented, outlandish assertion by a Leisure World resident that noise from a commercial airport would somehow cause numerous deaths.

Now it’s one thing for citizens to stand up in a public meeting and say preposterous things. This is a free country, and that’s their right.

But it’s quite another for your newspaper to legitimize those inflammatory comments by repeating them. It’s also wrong and misleading to equate amateurish noise “calculations” performed by laymen with those of an expert like Mestre.

I understand that the technical issues related to building the El Toro airport are complicated. But it’s your job to separate the truth from the nonsense.

I have served on the Airport Commission for 15 years and I was around for the John Wayne master-planning process. I have seen these kind of outrageous claims before, made by people with absolutely no technical expertise, and they have been proven wrong again and again. It is irresponsible to give this garbage this much ink.

There are enough half-truths and myths floating around already without the Los Angeles Times making it worse. I hope that you will print this letter and at least attempt to set the record straight.

GARY PROCTOR

Chairman

El Toro Airport

Citizens Advisory Commission

Santa Ana

* I am writing to clear up any misconceptions that might have been created by the letter you received from Gary Proctor, who chairs the El Toro Airport Citizens Advisory Commission (CAC). The letter was inappropriately presented on a letterhead apparently created by Mr. Proctor and was not the result of official action by the commission. Additionally, Mr. Proctor’s actions far exceeded the charter of our commission, which is to advise the Board of Supervisors on El Toro-related matters.

I should point out that I totally support Mr. Proctor’s right to editorialize his opinions as many of us do. However, I consider his letter just another example of using his position on the CAC inappropriately. You may recall that during the Measure S campaign, Mr. Proctor signed a mailer as chairman of the CAC that stated the passage of S would result in a jail being built at El Toro.

Your newspaper has done an excellent job presenting both sides of the El Toro question. Mr. Mestre’s presentation to the Board of Supervisors was a prime example of what’s wrong with the entire El Toro process. The conclusions drawn from his presentation should have stated that if the pilots (who have already expressed their opposition) flew the proposed flight tracks, the quietest aircraft in the fleet mix would have minimal impact to the surrounding communities. The presentation was just another example of the county taking one element of data and using it to draw all-encompassing conclusions. The frustration expressed by those quoted in your article are to be expected, and are a part of this process. Mr. Proctor’s desire to silence those who are exercising their right to express their opinions is understandable given the weakness of the existing airport planning assumptions.

I hope this letter has served to set the record straight. I sincerely hope your paper will continue to provide balanced coverage of this extremely important issue allowing both sides the opportunity to be heard.

L. DAVID MARKLEY

Member

El Toro Airport

Citizens Advisory Commission

* According to the Aug. 12 article, there is a difference of opinion over the amount of noise residents will experience who live around the proposed El Toro airport.

A professional acoustics expert hired for his experience and knowledge told supervisors that most noise from jet engines at the proposed El Toro airport would be contained on the El Toro base and not have a serious impact on Orange County residents. South County activists denied and dismissed the report with varying criticisms. Who is right?

Let me see. Who should I believe? An unbiased professional whose career is dependent on accurate reports or anti-airport South County residents?

DEBRA O’DONNELL

Santa Ana

* Orange County officials continue to deceive residents in the hope they can get the airport started before another election. The real noise study which includes jumbo jets is planned for the fall. I suspect county officials are trying to downplay the noise problems by introducing a noise study biased in their favor. County residents can rest assured that the results of the real noise study will be made available after the November elections.

STEVE GICK

Lake Forest

* The Times on Aug. 2 had a revealing article describing the business relationship between former county Treasurer Robert Citron and Merrill Lynch’s super salesman, Michael Stamenson.

It stated that during the election campaign in 1994, Citron’s office refused to release documents in a timely manner to then-candidate John Moorlach, our current treasurer. Furthermore, Citron sent him information that Moorlach wouldn’t be able to use.

Does this not sound all too familiar? Did not the El Toro Planning Reuse Authority (ETPRA) recently have to take legal action in order to force the county to release information? It is my understanding that county staff is still not forthcoming in providing the required documents to ETPRA. Why is the county purposely obstructing the planning process? Because an open and honest process will make it difficult to hide negative information affecting their airport study. The integrity of the process is therefore highly suspect. By contrast, the study ETPRA conducted on the Millennium Plan was an open process with full public participation and total access to all documentation.

PAUL WILLEMS

Capistrano Valley