Money battle doesn’t quite break the bank

Mathis Winkler

NEWPORT BEACH -- While the battle of competing measures on the Nov. 7

ballot promises to rank high on the list of most expensive campaigns in

the city’s history, the biggest contributor to one of the measures alone

spent even more money on a previous election.

The Irvine Co., which has given $147,000 to the Measure T campaign so

far, forked out about $530,000 to support a 1986 ballot initiative

proposing to expand Newport Center.

Although the City Council had approved the expansion project, a

residents’ group called Gridlock challenged the project with a

referendum.

Allan Beek, a Measure S supporter, led that group 14 years ago.

While the company and other committees supporting the expansion far

outspent Gridlock, voters rejected the project by 3,130 votes.

Beek on Friday said the Irvine Co. this time is trying to sway voters

with large contributions.

“It is obvious that the Irvine Co. is trying to buy the election,” he

said, adding that the Measure T campaign has already spent more money

than it has raised.

“I presume the vendors are putting up the credit only because they

know that the Irvine Co. will be there to pay the bills,” Beek said.

Measure S, or the Greenlight initiative, proposes to put before a

citywide vote any development that allows an increase of more than 100

peak-hour car trips or dwelling units or 40,000 square feet over the

general plan allowance.

Measure T would add parts of the city’s traffic phasing ordinance to

the City Charter and nullify Measure S, should voters approve both

measures.

So far, Measure T has raised $327,061 and spent $387,324, compared to

$61,562 raised by Measure S supporters, who have spent $38,012, according

to campaign disclosure statements filed Thursday.

Measure T supporters rejected the claim that money could buy them

votes.

“That’s like saying people aren’t going to vote for [George W.] Bush

because he’s raising money,” said Tom Edwards, co-chairman of the

campaign. “If people are going to make decisions on that basis, then God

help us all.”

Edwards said the campaign’s biggest expenditures included mailings and

publications. The campaign also paid $10,500 for a voters’ poll. He

declined to reveal the results of the survey.

Edwards added that the Measure T campaign had to raise a large amount

of money since it began its campaign much later than Measure S.

“We started six weeks before the election cycle began,” said Edwards.

“We had to basically hit the ground running. ... It takes a lot of money

to educate people on what [Measure S] is all about.”

While Measure T would protect property values and keep the city from

being flooded with fast-food restaurants and similar low-end

developments, Edwards said Measure S would drive investors away from the

city and lead to its decline.

“If you have a stake in this community, I don’t see how you can

support Measure S,” he said. “I don’t think that [Measure S supporters]

have a stake in this community.”

Beek, who said the Measure S campaign had spent most of its money on

advertising, postage, campaign fliers and signs, said Edwards is wrong.

“Of course, we think it’s exactly the opposite,” he said. “Measure S

makes [Newport Beach] a more desirable community by making it what

residents want it to be instead of having it imposed by people who just

want to make money.”