Predictions
I was impressed with your 2005 prediction (Jan. 3 issue) that in my zeal to raise funds for Chapman U, I would offer shares of Chapman to the public in a Dutch auction.
While your prediction is prescient, it is slightly off base, as are all such predictions (with the notable exception of Chapman’s Anderson Center for Economic Research, whose forecasts are always right-on).
To set the matter straight, I am planning an IPO of the entire university.
You’re confused about the Dutch auction. My planned auction is actually intended for a spinoff of our Dodge College of Film and Media Arts. That spinoff will not be a Dutch auction, but more accurately a reverse Dutch auction with derivative options pegged to the price of gold subject to a financial collar with a spread based on the price of UCI warrants.
Also, I noted your prediction that “Inside OC” replaces “The O’Reilly Factor.” You should be aiming higher. For example, I plan for “Dialogue with Jim Doti” to replace “60 Minutes.”
James Doti
President and Donald Bren
Distinguished Chair of Economics
Chapman University
Orange
El Toro, Cont’d
Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn thinks that El Toro “doesn’t belong to people in Orange County” and that “people think just because they live next to (El Toro) they ought to be the ones to decide.”
OK, mayor, let’s use your logic in a reverse scenario: Just because you live next to LAX doesn’t mean you should be the ones to decide its future. So how about we put your $11 billion LAX (non) expansion plan to a vote in OC? Doesn’t sound so great now, does it?
El Toro is an OC land-use issue that has been decided, in accordance with federal law, by the citizens of OC.
Outside of Newport Beach and Costa Mesa, I cannot think of any reason why an Orange County resident would think this was a good idea. Say “no” to King James of Los Angeles and his oligarch mentality.
Douglas K. Blaul
Trabuco Canyon
The solution to the oft referred to theoretical air travel demands in Southern California that L.A.’s Mayor Hahn and some of the activists in Newport Beach are concerned with, is easy.
Just turn on the lights at John Wayne Airport 24/7.
Voila, problem solved, and without any additional capital outlay.
Tony Dallendorfer
Laguna Niguel
I see Fullerton wants to run El Toro airport.
Los Angeles made a similar request 18 months ago and was told “no” by the Bush administration. Since Fullerton happens to be part of California, they likely would not get a different answer.
However, there are a couple countries that Bush gladly would allow to run an airport at El Toro.
Mexican President Vicente Fox simply could tell Bush to hand over “The Bull.” That way he can continually unload his country’s poor population at an even quicker pace. Now there would be no customs on site to make things inconvenient, and there are about 5,000 housing units on the base that could immediately house 65,000 “guest workers.”
The Saudi Arabian Royal Family could have El Toro simply for the asking. The next time Al Qaeda acts up on American soil, Saudi nationals, especially ones related to Bin Laden, again quickly will need to be evacuated without the hassle of an FBI interview.
Rex Ricks
Huntington Beach
The Irvine Company owns thousands of acres around the former Marine Air Station at El Toro. If there is a Marine base at El Toro, then the land around the base has to be zoned for commercial use only.
If the base is sold, the land can be rezoned for residential. As then-mayor Larry Agran informed the people in attendance at the Irvine City Council meeting on Aug. 24, the Irvine Co. will make $1 million per acre if the land around the base is developed as commercial property but they will make $2 million per acre if that same land is developed as residential property.
The U. S. Navy is planning to sell off this beautiful military base valued in 1998 dollars at $10 billion. The Navy is right in step with where the Irvine Co. and their buddy Rep. Christopher Cox, whose wife was on the base closure commission that closed El Toro, want them.
Bill Turner
Costa Mesa
State Budget
Lack of a common definition of the word “cut” is going to cause great public confusion during the forthcoming protracted debate of the state budget.
While we believe the general public’s understanding of the word “cut” is a reduction of an existing amount, a number of legislators have morphed the term into something quite different and misleading. They use “cut” to describe a reduction of an anticipated increase.
Fortunately, there is a good term that can be used to distinguish between the two.
An official government report (the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee’s “Revenue and Taxation Reference Book” of 1980, page A-10) defines “Slobovian loss” as: “Loss of something you don’t have but thought you might get.” (Lower Slobovia is a mythical country created by the late Al Capp in his satirical “Li’l Abner” comic strip.)
Cal-Tax believes it will greatly enhance the public’s understanding of the budget debate to differentiate between actual cuts and Slobovian losses.
David R. Doerr
Chief Tax Consultant
California Taxpayers’ Association
Sacramento
