If Merrill Lynch bought the City Council, by the way, as Moxley and Infante state, they got took. Treasure Island Associates, with Merrill Lynch Hubbard as the general partner, paid $43 million for the property. Assuming the referendum passed, they will sell it to the Athens Group for $37 million. Some deal. And while Moxley and Infante can argue the wisdom of cities making concessions to developers, they might have mentioned that the proposed project would generate several million dollars per year in local taxes-a pretty good return on a "giveaway."

Unfortunately, all that Moxley and Infante revealed in their lazy-minded hit piece was their ignorance of life in Laguna, where tree huggers and troglodytes are on a first-name basis-and sometimes even on the same side.

-Christopher Quilter, Laguna Beach

R. Scott Moxley responds: Like many Merrill Lynch supporters, Quilter is long on assertions and short on specifics. His claim that Lynch's project will generate "several million dollars per year in local taxes" is vague enough to conveniently elude proof; ignores the fact that many projects on prime beachfront property could produce similar revenue; and credulously ignores the cost to the city in traffic, congestion, water, sewage and the like. Quilter's credulity doesn't end there: he ought to be embarrassed to announce that he believes Merrill Lynch has spent years fighting for Treasure Island, all so that the Wall Street firm can ultimately lose $6 million.


Folks, your credibility gap is showing again. In Anthony Pignataro's "Power Play" (The County, April 23), the Weekly characterizes California's deregulated electricity market as a failure. At least one new competitor sees it differently. Commonwealth Energy (an electric utility from New England) proclaims in an April 7 press release that "deregulation has proven to be well-accepted and an overall success for consumers." The company further states, "Now other companies are lowering their prices in order to compete. That proves deregulation is working," and "This is a trend that's going to sweep the nation, and California is the model for everyone else to follow."

Elsewhere in the article, you claim that $40 million was collected from ratepayers to fight the ill-considered Proposition 9, which would have thrown the electricity market into chaos by dismantling California's carefully crafted restructuring legislation. It's hard to believe that the utilities would leave themselves open to possible legal action by collecting money from ratepayers to fund political causes. If that actually happened, why haven't we heard about the lawsuit?

Finally, your portrayal of nuclear power as "obsolete and dirty" is wildly inaccurate. As someone who is concerned about the environment, I'm compelled to point out a few facts.

*At 20 percent of U.S. generating capacity, nuclear power is the nation's largest source of emission-free energy.

*Nuclear-power plants reduce U.S. carbon-dioxide emissions by 133 million tons of carbon each year (and by 500 million tons worldwide).

*The American Society of Mechanical Engineers has stated that nuclear power is an "essential" part of any attempt to meet the carbon-emission reduction goals set by the Kyoto Protocol.

Wind and solar power may one day be viable alternatives, but we're dealing in realities, and the reality is that we need nuclear power. Remarkably, we've found a way to enjoy both clean power and lower electricity rates. Rather than complain, we should look forward to a future in which there will be even more of both.

-Richard Boyer, via e-mail


Since it has come to light that the Irvine Co. has historically opposed civilian aviation reuse at El Toro Marine Corps Air Station (Anthony Pignataro's El Toro Watch No. 102, April 23), do you feel that their current waffling could expose them to liability should they fail to actively oppose county plans?

-Matt Ruiz, Tustin

The editors respond: As our great mentor Richard M. Nixon once said, "Get down on your knees and pray with me, Henry."


I would like to thank Mr. Pignataro for his insightful articles on the proposed El Toro International Airport. I especially enjoyed El Toro Airport Watch No. 100 (The County, April 2), which summarized how the county has attempted to pull the wool over the eyes of the entire county time and again. While many of the facts in the article seem painfully obvious to me, I think that there are many folks out there who are not paying attention to what a debacle the county is thrusting upon its citizens.

While the OC Weekly is a fine publication, one must admit that it has a limited circulation. I was wondering whether Mr. Pignataro had considered submitting any of his articles, specifically Watch No. 100, to the LA Times and The Orange County Register editorial pages. Just a suggestion.

-Michael Hallisy, Foothill Ranch

The editors respond: Thanks for the tip, Michael. We did as you said and submitted Watch No. 100 to the Times and Register. Thanks to genetic engineering and the effects of global warming, we're confident pigs will be flying and hell will be freezing over any day now, so keep your eyes posted in those papers for Anthony's story.


Thank you for Randy Pesqueira's interview with the ever-prickly Cathy Curtis (Art, April 2). It is shocking to me that the Los Angeles Times could let her go and not even mention it! I am really disgusted with the fact that they have no intention of replacing her.

« Previous Page
Next Page »