Slow-growth measure effort plugging away

Susan McCormack

NEWPORT BEACH -- Proponents of a measure that would limit the City

Council’s power to issue development permits have one-third the number of

signatures needed to get the initiative on the March ballot and say they

are not deterred by lack of support from city officials.

The initiative, if passed, would require a majority public vote on major

general plan amendments. Proponents define “major” amendments as proposed

developments that would create more than 100 peak-hour car trips, add

more than 100 dwelling units or add more than 40,000 square feet of floor

area.

Phil Arst, one of the leaders of the initiative drive, said his group of

residents has gathered 2,500 of the 7,500 needed. The group has been

collecting signatures since July, and it has three more months before all

the signatures are due, he said.

Despite the magnitude of what the initiative would do if it does get on

the ballot and is passed, it has sparked very little public interest or

debate in Newport Beach.

But Arst said he is not worried about getting all the required

signatures.

“The summer season is slow and we have really concentrated our efforts

and built up now,” he said. “This takes awhile to get people organized,

so now we believe we’re moving forward.”

City council members and developers have been unenthusiastic about

discussing the controversial measure, called “Protection against traffic

and density” or the “green light” initiative by its proponents.

The definition of “major amendments” appears to be one point of

contention between proponents and city officials. While proponents say

the initiative would allow projects under certain sizes to be completed,

Councilman Gary Adams said that it may exclude slightly larger projects

that could benefit the community.

“It would probably eliminate a lot of good small- to medium-size general

plan amendments where the property owner won’t have the wherewithal to go

through with an election or be subject to the time implications,” Adams

said.

Paul Kranhold, a spokesman for The Irvine Co., said he is reluctant to

comment on the initiative.

“There is a long way to go before it’s ever to be seriously considered by

voters,” he said. “I haven’t really taken a close look at the

initiative.”

Arst said he believes opponents have been increasing their efforts in the

last few weeks by conducting research to gauge residents’ feelings on the

issue.

Corona del Mar resident and environmental activist Fern Pirkle said she

received a phone call about a week ago from a market researcher who did

not identify for whom she was working. Pirkle said she was asked numerous

questions that eventually seemed to hone in on the city’s traffic phasing

ordinance and the initiative.

“Whoever was behind [the poll] does not want the initiative to be

successful,” Pirkle said.

Arst said the initiative would probably result in one to two additional

votes per year. However, the votes would not cost the city money because

they would be part of the next general election unless the developer paid

for an interim election, he said.

Some are comparing the measure to the Safe and Healthy Communities

Initiative, which El Toro airport foes are pushing because it will

require two-thirds of county voters to approve any construction of new

jails, airports or landfills.

City officials say initiatives like these take the people-invested power

away from elected leaders.

“The problem [with the green light initiative] is it really takes away

the ability of the city to respond to changing environmental conditions,”

Adams said. “General plans aren’t meant to be static documents.”

Arst disagrees.

“We need to establish citizen overview,” he said. “[It’s] not the best

way to run a city, but better than what we have now.”