Mailbag: Want to improve the city? Fix the schools first

Re: “Costa Mesa’s latest budget surplus: $6 million,” (Oct. 8): Now the city needs to decide what to do with the surplus.

For the past four years, City Hall has concentrated on improving the city’s “hard” infrastructure — streets, alleys, sidewalks, medians. This policy has been justified partly on the grounds that capital improvements have been neglected for too long.

It also has been justified on the grounds that a nicer-looking city would attract developments that would attract desirable families, a goal shared by the mayor and mayor pro tem.

Mayor Jim Righeimer lauds developments on the Westside that “are raising property values … and bringing in additional young professionals and families with more disposable income” (Commentary: Costa Mesa can be proud of an improving Westside,” March 14).

Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger opines that communities need to attract young families.

Such improvements to the hard infrastructure are an indirect way of attracting new residents. On the other hand, improving the schools — a part of the “soft” infrastructure along with libraries, parks and recreation, is a more-direct way to attract desired residents. Real estate professionals say that good schools are at, or near, the top of the list of desirable city attributes.

Cities can benefit when they collaborate with their school districts on high-quality early education programs (“Commentary: Cities should support early childhood education,” Oct. 3).

Costa Mesa should use surplus revenue to help fund high-quality early education programs in city schools. This will more directly attract families that value good schools.

Tom Egan

Costa Mesa

The writer is a former Newport-Mesa Unified trustee.

*

Commissioner’s piece omitted facts

Re. “Commentary: Council hecklers are chilling speech for other Costa Mesans,” (Oct. 13): In this commentary, Planning Commissioner Jim Fitzpatrick correctly brings to light an outburst at a council meeting during which the mayor was called an “ass.” He even argues that this hostility is keeping his friends and supporters away from the council chambers.

I would agree to an extent with this conclusion. People avoid council meetings for other reasons, though, like having to wait five hours for a turn at public comments.

But back to the incomplete commentary. This outburst was not unprovoked; it was a reaction to our mayor’s actions.

A recent article, “Harper’s Cove smaller lot sizes win Costa Mesa council approval” (Sept. 17), also highlighted a resident yelling at our mayor from the audience. The mayor had vilified the neighbor’s opposition because the new development would encroach on their supposedly illegal structures. This neighbor of the project reacted by yelling out “that is absolutely untrue” and “don’t lie to these people” before leaving the meeting.

Both reactions — at different meetings, about different agenda items and from different people — share the common frustration of having a mayor whose actions show he does not care about the residents’ quality of life.

This coin has two sides, an action and a reaction. Honestly ask yourself how would you react if the mayor’s decision would forever negatively impact your quality of life? This has happened and is happening all over our city under his leadership and that is why he needs to go. It is time to put his political career to rest. Remember in November. Save our city. No more “Riggy.”

Chris McEvoy

Costa Mesa