Mathis Winkler
NEWPORT BEACH -- It's an argument Greenlight opponents brought up over
and over again during the election campaign: Newport Beach residents
repeatedly will face costly elections on development projects that
trigger a citywide vote under the slow-growth measure.
Approved by 63.1% of the city's voters, Greenlight recently became
part of the City Charter. From now on, any general plan amendment for a
project that adds more than 100 peak-hour car trips or dwelling units, or
40,000 square feet more than the plan allows, will have to go before a
citywide vote.
But Greenlight supporters -- still recovering from the "election
aftershock" -- said that elections for elections' sake had not been their
motivation.
"The basic principle is whether a project is meritorious," said Phil
Arst, who along with other community activists such as Allan Beek, Tom
Hyans and former Mayor Evelyn Hart, led Greenlight to success.
"We would look to the [City] Council to not even bring up to a vote
projects that didn't even meet the guidelines."
PUTTING GREENLIGHT TO WORK
Those "guidelines" Arst talked about have to be approved by at least
six of the seven council members.
They were included in a paragraph in the ballot initiative, which
encouraged the City Council to come up with guidelines for Greenlight's
implementation, "provided that any such guidelines shall be consistent
with the [initiative] and its purposes and findings."
Although council members initially had considered establishing a
committee to come up with suggestions for putting the measure in place,
they decided in the end to get recommendations from city officials and
adopt a list of guidelines after holding public meetings.
A study session on Jan. 9 will give residents a chance to present
ideas to council members.
"Anybody that's interested should be there," said City Atty. Bob
Burnham, adding that he's given a draft of recommendations to city
officials.
While Burnham said that he had not talked to Greenlight supporters
during the drafting of his report, he did say that he had considered
comments from Beek, Hart and others in his recommendations.
"To some extent the guidelines weren't just a product of me looking at
the measure, but a product of things said in the past six to eight
months," he said.
The list of topics in need for clarification is fairly small.
First, council members will have to decide on a starting date for the
initiative's "look-back period." Should they set 1990 as the date, any
