Mathis Winkler
NEWPORT BEACH -- Do development projects during the last decade count
or don't they?
That's the question supporters and opponents of a growth-control
measure on the Nov. 7 ballot have been throwing back and forth for
months.
The disagreement heated up again last week when Councilwoman Jan Debay
used two small proposed expansions as examples of insignificant
construction projects that would require a citywide vote if Measure S
passes.
Also known as the Greenlight Initiative, Measure S 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 or
more than the general plan allowance.
Measure T, an opposing initiative, would add parts of the city's
traffic phasing ordinance to the city charter and nullify Measure S if
voters approve both measures.
The projects -- a 2,160-square-foot lobby expansion and a
440-square-foot filing room -- are both located within areas of the city
that have reached their "construction allowance," Debay said.
"This means that they have to wait and go to the ballot," Debay said
during Tuesday's council meeting. "The whole citizenry will have to vote
on these small additions."
Greenlight supporters countered that Debay is mistaken, and that those
projects would not exceed the allowance.
At issue is a larger question of whether the measure's accumulation
period -- the time during which developments are counted toward the
threshold that would trigger a citywide vote -- would begin in 1990 or
this year.
The text of Measure S states that all projects "within the preceding
10 years" would count toward the threshold. Its supporters say that
another clause, which encourages the City Council to adopt implementation
guidelines for the initiative, would allow council members to set Nov. 7
as the accumulation period's start date.
Allan Beek and Phil Arst, two major Greenlight supporters, both said
their campaign would not challenge the later date.
But told about the two men's assurances, Debay said she didn't think
the City Council could ignore the measure's "preceding 10 year" clause.
"The way it's written, it's set in stone," said Debay, who supports
Measure T and will leave office after the election because of term
limits.
"I think they made a mistake in writing it and wish they hadn't
written it that way," she said. "I don't think there is that flexibility
that their verbal agreement can counter the way this thing is written."
