A campaign mailer by any other name ...

By: JIM TRAGESER - Staff Writer | Wednesday, October 11, 2006 8:56 PM PDT ∞

This isn't a column. Well, not legally, anyway.

Sure, it looks like a column. Might even read like one (a poor one, anyway).

But I'm completely confident that I'm on solid legal ground in saying this is not a column.

Of course, I base that assertion on the same legal theories that caused the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority to use taxpayer money to mail out an expensive, glossy brochure to three-quarters of a million voters last week claiming that Lindbergh Field can't meet our region's future air transportation needs.

Wasn't cheap, either: The authority spent 197,000 of our dollars on printing and mailing costs for that brochure. That's almost 200 grand on a brochure telling us how to vote next month.

Oops, sorry. I forgot: It was not a campaign mailer. The authority's attorney said so, so it must be true.

Sure, there's a ballot measure in November asking us whether local officials should try to get their hands on Miramar Marine Corps Air Station for civilian use.

And, yes, the brochure does go into great detail about how Lindbergh Field needs to be replaced.

But since the brochure didn't actually mention Miramar or the vote, why, it's not a campaign mailer.

It's just that in writing this not-a-column I'm having a hard time seeing how a brochure arguing that Lindbergh Field must be replaced isn't intended to sway votes. How it somehow isn't a campaign mailer. How it doesn't violate laws against using public monies to try to influence voters before an election.

But even if the authority did somehow stay legal through a technicality (and that's what it would be), there's the overwhelming stench of politics all over this brochure.

The airport authority works for us.

And for our employees to try to tell us how to vote?

Well, let's just say that if I used company time and equipment to prepare a presentation on why I deserve a raise, I don't think the bosses would approve.

There's also the issue of factuality. To wit: Many of the "facts" in the brochure about Lindbergh Field and a projected new civilian airport (at some unspecified location) have been disproved or at least called into serious question by transportation experts.

But the members of the authority decided before they even began their multimillion-dollar site "search" that they wanted Miramar. They spent those millions of dollars in a charade of a search, with a majority of board members not interested in any long-term airport solution that wasn't Miramar. Not too many folks were surprised when the authority concluded its "search" by declaring that Miramar was the only possible location for a future airport.

So it's nothing for them to waste another $197,000 of our money on an "informational" brochure of questionable factual accuracy.

Truth is, though, the members of the authority are prepared to spend as much of our money as they think is necessary to get public approval of their desire for a civilian airport at Miramar ---- even though this region has not had a serious, sober debate on whether Lindbergh actually needs replacing or not.

Now that's a debate that might actually serve some public good ---- too bad the authority won't spend any money on it.

-- Contact staff writer Jim Trageser at (760) 631-6628 or jtrageser@nctimes.com.

First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.