Giving a Greenlight to slow growth

Yes, it does matter to me whether local campaign money comes from

Newport-Mesa residents, people outside the area, or companies.

Conventional wisdom in terms of campaign finance is that the campaign

that spends the most money generally wins. In the case of Measure S

versus Measure T in Newport Beach, it’s a classic case of two powerful

special interest groups (developers and the Newport Harbor Chamber of

Commerce) flexing their muscles and trying to overpower an underfinanced

residential grass-roots organization.

As one who has written a book on campaign finance, I don’t think that

direct corporate contributions to local campaigns should be permitted.

I also don’t think that the California Assn. of Realtors (a

Sacramento-based organization) should be allowed to contribute $52,000 to

a campaign whose sole purpose is to nullify a measure sponsored by a

local group of residents who have only raised some $38,000 to date.

In other words, I think that there should be contribution limits in

addition to a ban on direct corporate contributions. The Measure T

campaign is using all this outside money to confuse the voters by

disseminating untruths.

According to the Daily Pilot, they’ve spent more than $250,000, which

is almost 13 times what Measure S has spent. I think that Newport Beach

voters deserve a better campaign than this.

JENNIFER W. FRUTIG

Costa Mesa

Regarding the article comparing Measure S today with Measure A in

1993.

Alex Coolman’s piece spoke of the dense rows of houses on the cliffs

at the Castaways as a result of not passing Measure A back in ’93. He

neglected to mention the equally dense housing at Harbor Pointe across

the bay. It broke my heart when the measure failed and all that beautiful

land was lost for open space.

However, it didn’t fail just because the electorate didn’t want to

spend the extra $120 a year per household (ending in several years after

the bargain cost was paid off). The voters were faked out by the

development interests and the city.

They told us that the housing layouts slated for the sites had

incorporated in them large amounts of open spaces, parks and corridors to

the bay -- so why spend the money, albeit small, since we’d be getting

almost the same thing free.

The voters fell for it! Has any one seen any public open space or

environmental corridors? These developments are locked up. Every time I

go by the big guard house on Jamboree at Harbor Pointe, I see red. After

the projects were in, I wrote the city to find out about what happened

but got nowhere. I even wrote this newspaper saying someone on its staff

should investigate this fraud perpetrated on the voters.

In any case, we shouldn’t be faked out again by opponents of Measure S

saying that city officials (with real estate interests behind them) can

be trusted with what’s best for us and that we shouldn’t have to vote on

major changes.

KEN KVAMMEN

Newport Beach