Readers Respond

At issue: Those gathering signatures for the Traffic Phasing Ordinance

Initiative have been accused of giving Newport Beach residents inaccurate

information.

I am very upset after reading your article about the Traffic Phasing

Ordinance Initiative (“Signing Up for the Great Initiative Debate,” May

18).

There is no excuse for any “incorrect” information to be given by the

signature gatherers to the citizens of Newport Beach.

In this article, Former Newport Beach Mayor Clarence Turner is quoted

as saying, “he thinks its quite possible that people (signature

gatherers) may have been saying things that are incorrect,” when

gathering signatures for the amended Traffic Phasing Ordinance

Initiative. He goes on to state that he is, “trying to make sure this

stopped happening.”

I am very concerned because I was approached by two

signature-gatherers at Gelson’s Market. They encouraged me to sign the

initiative in order to, “stop the expansion of John Wayne Airport.” I was

very surprised. I thought this initiative was about traffic and

development, not stopping the expansion of John Wayne Airport. Is this

some of the “incorrect” information to which Turner referred?

It is the responsibility of any other initiative backers to educate

the signature-gatherers they have hired to accurately present their

initiative prior to asking the voters to place their name on the line.

If, as Turner stated, “it is quite possible” that voters received

“incorrect” information, the petition process should start again with any

“incorrect” statements publicly “corrected.”

YVONNE HOUSSELS

Corona del Mar

Your article regarding the gathering of signatures for the Traffic

Planning Initiative did not fully convey the reason why Greenlight

supporters are so frustrated.

The initiative is designed to be a counter-initiative to Greenlight’s

Protection from Traffic and Density Initiative, and contains a “poison

pill” clause which would, if it receives more votes, invalidate

Greenlight if both initiatives are adopted by voters.

Knowing this fact, one can see how deceitful it is for the

signature-gatherers to have repeatedly told citizens that this initiative

is just an extension of Greenlight. If a resident is supportive of

Greenlight, they should “just say no” when asked to sign the counter

initiative.

SUSAN SKINNER CAUSTIN

Newport Beach

Ahhh, sins of omission ... I had to write the City Clerk today asking

her to remove my name from the “Traffic Phasing Ordnance” initiative

signed in error yesterday when at Pavilions on Bayside because the woman

led me to believe I was signing for the “Greenlight” ordinance when I was

actually signing just the opposite ... the “Redlight” initiative.

If you back a measure and stand behind it, why not have the fortitude

to take your stance openly instead of inveigling a signature?

LINN AITKEN

Corona del Mar