Fighting foolish growth

Regarding the Oct. 9 Daily Pilot editorial “Greenlight shows no-growth agenda,� none of the major concerns of the residents of the city were addressed. To paraphrase a former president: It’s the traffic congestion, stupid! It’s the quality of life of the residents! It’s the potential decline in the property values of the residents! It’s the dysfunctional City Council!

First and foremost, the original Greenlight Initiative -- Greenlight I -- that passed in 2000 has been an overwhelming success. Ten major developments that added up to 40,000 average daily auto trips to our streets would normally have been rubber stamped into approval by the City Council. Instead, the residents spoke and, by a 63% majority vote, indicated they didn’t want that traffic. Can the Pilot deny we are better off today not having to try to drive through all those additional vehicles on our already congested streets?

Greenlight is not “no-growth,� as claimed by the Pilot. Greenlight is for consideration of residents’ wishes for the city by giving them the vote on major projects. If the residents vote down developments that would produce excessive traffic, that is their will. Does the Pilot believe the Greenlight Residents Group is making the voters vote against their best interests? Or is it the newspaper’s fear that the voters will continue to vote against the special interests that the Pilot now so blatantly supports in concert with a majority of the City Council.

Nowhere does the Pilot mention the 200,000 additional daily auto trips that can be added to the city by the current general plan or the 150,000 being proposed by the city’s update to that plan. Is this because the pro-development Pilot knows that the city’s streets are already congested and cannot accommodate the proposed additions without incurring massive traffic congestion throughout the city? Nowhere does the Pilot mention that over- congested streets and high-density development will change the character of the city, resulting in lower quality of life and lower property values for the residents.

The Greenlight II initiative is both an extension of the original Greenlight law and closes a loophole in it. It is designed to apply the same voter approval requirements to the hopelessly outdated current general plan. Unfortunately, an equally unsound general plan update that adds more major development is now well on its way to City Council approval. While the current Greenlight law will require a vote on parts of the general plan update, both initiatives are needed to bring excess development plans under control.

This new resident-protection initiative is needed because three out of the five pro-development City Council members were originally appointed to the council. The pro-development councilmen who were elected did so with overwhelming campaign-money advantages and Pilot endorsements. As these actions have produced a “single party� system, the only realistic way for residents to get a voice in the City Council is via this initiative process.

Another reason direct democracy is needed in the city is the council is again disregarding the wishes of the residents and is considering a massive politically and economically unachievable street system augmentation. An official city poll reveals that residents strongly oppose the massive widening of streets next to our neighborhoods and provision of overpasses that would be needed to accommodate all this additional traffic.

We do appreciate the Pilot’s editorial cartoon that shows a shark labeled “Greenlight II� waiting to devour a poor innocent developer, depicted as a small helpless female, seeking to make millions in development profits in Newport at the expense of the residents. Shame on the Pilot for taking up the cause of protecting the “poor� developer and opposing the right of the residents to have a vote on the future direction of the community, their property values and quality of life.

The Pilot calls Greenlight “no-growth� for trying to provide the residents of the city the right of approval on major developments that will negatively impact their lives and property values. However, we firmly believe the residents will vote positively for meritorious developments like additions to Hoag Hospital. The Greenlight II initiative enables the residents to vote for the growth they want, and we in Greenlight will support them.

* PHILIP ARST is the spokesman for the Greenlight Residents Group. JOHN FRANSEN is a member of the Greenlight steering committee.