Initiative would allow citizens to decide Yorba Linda’s future
Jim Drummond - Political Perspectives
Yorba Linda Star - October 13, 2005 - Viewpoints Section
Complete Text - Requires Registration
Excerpts:
So far, arguments advanced by some City Council members against the grassroots Right-to-Vote initiative are less than impressive.
The initiative would require a public vote on major changes to the city’s general plan and zoning ordinances. But the council appears reluctant to share the authority to increase housing and commercial densities in the downtown area and throughout the city.
One argument, raised by Councilman Jim Winder and others, is that the initiative represents “bad government.” Winder said.
“The people elected officials to make decisions for them, because that is what a representative government is.”
However, this stance ignores the historic role of the initiative process in state and local government. Gov.
Hiram Johnson and his Republican reformers won voter approval for initiative, referendum and recall measures in a special statewide election in 1911.
Johnson thus wrestled control of the California legislature from the Southern Pacific Railroad and other special interests, returning some authority to the people.
The first state initiatives abolished the poll tax and aided University of California construction.
In Yorba Linda, the Right-to-Vote initiative would allow the city’s future to be shaped by citizens, not just the council members who collect thousands of dollars in campaign cash from developers and other individuals and businesses with ties to the building industry.
Although sitting council members promised to preserve the community’s low density and open space heritage, they’re now considering new zoning regulations that could increase density and traffic — not only around Main Street, but in a large central Yorba Linda area.
If Yorba Lindans want a more urban feel to their city, with development similar to Brea, Placentia and Fuller- ton, they can approve such projects at the ballot box. But if they don’t, they can hold the present and future councils to the city’s low-density heritage.
Another argument, advanced by Councilman Ken Ryan and others, involves the cost of holding special elections to vote on major developer-proposed projects. Council already says that maintaining Yorba Linda’s many enjoyable amenities—from lush landscaping to reliable police protection to a wide-range of sports facilities and other community activities — requires spending more money than might be required elsewhere.
So budgeting a few extra dollars to preserve a low-density environment certainly would be worthwhile.
Of course, a wise council could reduce costs by scheduling votes for regular election ballots and requiring developers to pay the costs of any special elections.
Ideally, the initiative will lessen developer influence in the city, as builders turn to more pliant, growth-oriented towns.
A by-product of a successful initiative would be sensible council campaigns, rather than the present-day contests fueled by big developer dollars.
Complete Text - Requires Registration
|
