Opinion Editorial About The Oxnard Airport
As Appeared in the
LOS ANGELES TIMES
Sunday, October 1, 2000
'Our' Future Is That of
People With a Better Vision
Opposition
to Oxnard Airport comes from many quarters, all sharing a belief that its
burdens outweigh benefits.
A partial list would
include:
* The vast majority of
the residents of the city of Oxnard--the longtime as well as the new.
* The people of
Ventura County who realize that the airport is a money pit that publicly
subsidizes a few private special interests at the expense of all county
taxpayers and will lose the county $350,000 this fiscal year.
* People who realize
that Oxnard had to pay $2.24 million this year to bus children around primarily
because schools can't be built where they are needed because the airport has a
two nautical mile restrictive zone around it.
* The Oxnard School
District, which passed a resolution in September 1999 calling for closing the
airport.
* The Oxnard Airport
Authority's mission statement committee, which recently recommended closing the
airport. Members in favor of that action represent neighborhoods and the school
board--hence tens of thousands of residents and their children.
* Oxnard Mayor Manuel
Lopez, the only city or county politician who has had the courage to stand up
against special-interest groups promoting the airport and for the precious
interests--children and quality of life.
* Homeowners restoring
homes in the city's historic district, which predated the airport, who are
increasingly exposed to noise, danger and threats of encroachment by the
airport.
* Homeowners who
realize that their property taxes contribute more to the county general fund
than does the airport and that their residential property value is diminished by
the airport's existence.
* Taxpayers who
realize that airport revenue can only go back into the airport and cannot go
into the county's general fund.
* People who are tired
of being scared in their own homes, waiting for a plane to crash on them.
* People who can't
sleep at night and are awakened too early in the morning by aircraft noise.
* People who care
about fairness and dislike the disparity in treatment by Ventura County
Supervisors, who protect Camarillo from commercial flights but dump them on
Oxnard.
* Oxnard Shores
property owners who fear scheduled commercial jet traffic is coming and will
destroy the beautiful beach area and its residential property values.
* People who moved
from the San Fernando Valley and Los Angeles to escape from the noise,
congestion and pollution created by Van Nuys, Burbank and Los Angeles
International airports.
* People with enough
foresight to realize the area's chief asset is its beauty and tranquility, which
are being eroded by the airport.
*
The businessmen and women who believe the airport hurts their businesses.
* People who believe
that county supervisors are mismanaging another county resource and who realize
that the airport property is extremely valuable and should be redeveloped into
something beautiful, compatible and profitable for the entire county.
*
People sick and tired of subsidizing an airport that continually loses money
while destroying the area's quality of life.
* People sick and
tired of listening to the 150 hobby fliers who endlessly circle and buzz homes
and neighborhoods for their selfish enjoyment, while those below cannot enjoy
the peace and safety of their homes and backyards.
* People who realize
we don't need three airports in such a small area because airports, unlike train
stations, need not be within 25 minutes of the one another.
* People who realize
that closing an airport is not extraordinary and that on average one airport
closes every week somewhere in the United States.
* People who don't
believe you need to take an airplane to get to an airport.
* People who realize
that the pro-airport groups are spinning economic myths while ruining the
economy and the environment for their own profit.
* People who realize
that it is pure myth that the airport is good for business and tourism.
* People who realize
the airport's burdens far outweigh any benefits.
*
* *
Simply
put, "our" includes all the people who see something better for
Ventura County. The public is losing. It's time for the airport to close and for
the community to create something wonderful, compatible and profitable in its
place.
-
- -
Attorney Timothy Clifford Riley Represents Oxnard Shores on the Oxnard Airport Mission Statement Committee That Voted to Close the Airport by 2005
About the Author
TIMOTHY
CLIFFORD RILEY of the Oxnard Shores
Is
A Consumer Protection Attorney
Attorney Timothy Clifford Riley is a former Adjunct Professor of Law at Pepperdine University School of Law, and is a Certified Member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum. Attorney Riley and his litigation assistant - wife Hayden reside at the Oxnard Shores.
A Consumer Protection Attorney licensed in both New York and California, Riley has won multimillion dollar jury verdicts for his clients, and for the past eighteen years, represented people that have been taken advantage of, and those with very serious physical and emotional injuries, catastrophic automobile accidents, wrongful death claims, medical malpractice claims, product defect injuries, insurance claims and disputes, injury to property value, business disputes, civil litigation and civil appeals.
His office Phone Number is 805-984-2350.
Click to go to Attorney Timothy Clifford Riley's Home Page
Letters To the Editor Submitted By Your Neighbors That Appeared in the
LOS ANGELES TIMES
Subsequent
To Attorney
Riley’s
Editorial
'Our'
Future Is That of People With a Better Vision,"
LA
TIMES
Wednesday,
October 4, 2000
Oxnard
Airport
* Re " 'Our'
Future Is That of People With a Better Vision," Ventura County Perspective,
Oct. 1.
Timothy Clifford Riley
is 110% correct.
As a 20-year homeowner
and taxpayer of Oxnard, I have often wondered about the purpose of the Oxnard
airport. In all that time I have known of only one person using the shuttle
flight to Los Angeles International Airport. Most people use the shuttle bus.
The airport seems to be
more a storage unit for automobiles from Asia. Is the city getting some benefit
from the income raised or is some private owner pocketing the money?
Instead of having my
taxes support the airport, I would certainly much rather have the land put to
better use, commercial or residential. The taxes raised thus might even allow
the city to repave my street.
As for tourists, I
suspect most people vacationing in Southern California visit Disneyland, Magic
Mountain, Knott's Berry Farm, etc. Our draw for filling hotel rooms seems to be
San Fernando Valley and Los Angeles people who prefer to drive up to the area.
CHARLOTTE KENDIG,
Former School Teacher
Oxnard Shores
***
LA
TIMES
Wednesday,
October 4, 2000
Oxnard
Airport
*
Re " 'Our' Future Is That of People With a Better Vision," Ventura
County Perspective, Oct. 1.
The problems of the Oxnard airport were well itemized in this article.
There seems to be a multitude of reasons to close the airport and only marginal
benefits to its expansion. This is a matter of utmost importance to Oxnard. As
the airport goes so will the city.
Expanding to a regional
commercial jet airport in the heart of this city would result in a blighted
future for the city. The Burbank Airport is in constant conflict with the
surrounding community, which has deteriorated in its shadow. Playa del Rey's
beautiful beaches are wasted because of the roar of the overflying jets out of
LAX.
Oxnard pays a heavy
price for its airport through taxpayer subsidy, obstruction of school sites,
decreasing surrounding property values and impacting the serenity of the
beautiful beach community in its flight pattern.
The idea that this is
justified by virtue of the tourists it brings is false. Potential tourists drive
through Oxnard by the millions on the Ventura Freeway and Pacific Coast Highway.
There is not much to make them stop here, and they don't. Is Oxnard to be
condemned to be a servant to the surrounding upscale communities? And to pay for
the privilege?
The mayor of Oxnard has
pleaded for the airport's closure because the city, especially the school
system, are restricted by its presence. The inability to build schools within a
two-mile radius of the airport puts polluting buses on the street, adding to the
traffic crunch and decimating the school funds available for books and supplies,
and condemning the children to hours and hours of wasted time.
Why aren't the
officials listening? Our children need us all to advocate for them (as well as
ourselves) in this matter. Close the airport!
SEYMOUR ZEMLYN, MD
Oxnard Shores
***
LA
TIMES
Wednesday, October 11, 2000
Oxnard Airport
* Re " 'Our'
Future Is That of People With a Better Vision," Ventura County Perspective,
Oct. 1.
Timothy Clifford
Riley's argument for closing the Oxnard Airport is logical and points out the
dangers inherent [in] its continued operation.
Our beautiful pastoral
community does not need the noise, congestion and pollution found around other
nearby airports. Near-misses between airplanes and accidents from overshooting
the runway are news stories that we are all familiar with.
A cursory review of
the area surrounding the Burbank and Van Nuys airports shows that real estate
prices are low because the area is unsightly. Nobody wants to invest in a nice
home or in upscale commercial stores near an airport. Neighbors complain about
noise, and there is inevitably prolonged litigation, petitions and complaints.
The Oxnard Airport
truly benefits the few at the expense of many. The negatives of having this
airport are obvious to all of us who live in this beautiful area.
MITCHELL W. EGERS,
Attorney
Oxnard Shores
***
LA
TIMES
Sunday, October 8, 2000
Oxnard
Airport
It is obvious that
the county should not control the Oxnard Airport as the majority of supervisors
appear to care nothing about the health, welfare and safety of the people in
Oxnard.
The board paid no
attention to my request that it at least delay the approval of expanded air
service until it could examine the school problems in Oxnard caused by the
airport. Most of the board seemed to think that the problem is new development.
Most of the affected areas are the oldest neighborhoods in Oxnard, predating the
Oxnard Airport.
In addition, the
airport is destroying the education opportunities for our children to walk to a
neighborhood school. The county should pay for the busing that is required
because of the airport. Much of the busing is related to not being able to place
schools where they are needed in the central city where most of the families
with children can afford the older homes.
The best plan would be
for the Oxnard Redevelopment Agency to buy the 216 acres of the airport that is
in the city and owned by the county with a plan to move or eliminate the
airport. The agency can borrow the money without a vote of the people and repay
the loan with increment tax derived from the new private use of the upgraded
land.
JANE TOLMACH, Former
Oxnard Mayor and City Council Member
Oxnard