Greenlight II
Newport Beach’s Measure X, known as Greenlight II, fails the test of principle. And it fails the test of self-interest.
The November ballot measure would require voter approval of any “major development” that would increase traffic by more than 100 peak-hour trips, increase density by more than 100 dwelling units or increase intensity by more than 40,000 square feet of floor area.
It would require voter approval of any “minor development” if the development in combination with others would exceed any threshold by even one trip, one unit, or one square foot within a 500-foot “neighborhood.”
The fiscal impact: increased costs to taxpayers for conducting citywide elections, increased costs to applicants because of more stringent noticing requirements.
It is the latest of many attacks on property rights dating back to the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution in 1791. It would invoke what Lord Acton called “the tyranny of the majority” to enable voters to veto any land use amendment, even if the people’s own elected representatives find it to be beneficial to the community or to the property owner.
Measure X would be mob rule by plebiscite, smugly gratifying to the majority of voters in the anonymity of voting booths, but seriously harming a single property owner who seeks a land use amendment.
It would shift the cost of controlling congestion from the general public to a few unlucky property owners. It would be a classic iteration of “I’ve got mine, but you can’t have yours.”
Measure X would require an expensive taxpayer-funded election whenever a project proposes to change a planning document. Some 65% of the homes in Newport Beach are in “planned unit development zones,” which means that most individual homeowners would need a vote of the people to add a room to a house.
Cities with ordinances similar to Measure X have found that they can’t stop population growth. The original Greenlight passed by Newport voters in 2000 didn’t do it. Even Newport Beach people have babies.
Greenlight II won’t work either. What’s next? Greenlight III?
This is Newport Beach’s centennial year. A proclamation by the City Council lauds the 100 years of freedom to improve property that gave the city its enviable ambience. It is ironic that Measure X now would empower a majority of voters to deny such freedom to their neighbors.
Reed Royalty
President
OCTax
Proposition 1C
If you’re thinking about how to vote on Proposition 1C on the statewide Nov. 7 ballot, think about this. From an economic point of view, housing is a positive element in our economy and it is a key component of smart growth and helps curb urban sprawl. The more diverse the housing opportunities, the better.
Proposition 1C creates a state trust fund and authorizes bonds to provide affordable housing assistance, senior housing, homeownership help for the disabled, among others.
Development and management of affordable housing is a huge financial generator for California.
Residents work in local businesses and shop at local stores, adding to an area’s economic vitality.
Proposition 46, the state’s rapidly depleting affordable housing fund approved by voters in 2002, created more than 276,000 jobs and for every $1 invested, with more than $20 accrued to the state’s economy in the form of private investment. Proposition 46 funds produced nearly 41,000 new rental units and assisted more than 42,000 families with homeownership.
But funds from Proposition 46, which raised $2.1 billion to finance for-sale and rental affordable housing, will be used up in just a few months.
When that money is gone, little money will be remaining at the state level to fund affordable housing, or any kind of housing for that matter. County and local governments certainly will not be able to pick up the tab since they continue to struggle to fix their roads and pay for adequate police and fire protection.
The housing crisis has hit few areas harder than Orange County; a median-priced home in the county now costs $626,000.
On average, university professors don’t make enough to purchase a modest home here.
Nurses certainly don’t make enough, and neither do fire fighters and policemen. The same goes for teachers and librarians.
In fact, only about 10% of OC’s households can afford to buy a median priced home in the county today.
We must find ways to fill the financial gap left by the depletion of Proposition 46, or the situation will get worse.
The near-term solution is Proposition 1C. It would provide $2.8 billion for affordable rental and for-sale housing including $500 million for work force housing, as well as homebuyer assistance, emergency shelters, housing for people with disabilities and housing for farm workers.
Prop. 1C has been endorsed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and more than 600 groups, including the Orange County Business Council, Orange County United Way, California Association of Realtors, Habitat for Humanity and the Building Industry Association.
According to the latest polls, Proposition 1C has strong support statewide, with up to 58% of queried voters indicating they will vote “yes.” Proposition 1C may not be the long-term solution for the housing problems of our state and county. But at least it’s a solution.
Glenn Hayes
Executive Director,
Orange County Housing Trust
Anaheim
