JOSEPH N. BELL -- The Bell Curve

Three things happened last week to move me out of the “undecided”

column on Measure S, the Greenlight initiative.

First, the New York Yankees beat the Oakland A’s in the first round of

the American League playoffs. Second, a member of the Newport Beach City

Council spoke out publicly about growing criticism of the council’s

performance. And third, Newport Beach resident Tom Hyans left a package

in my mailbox at the Daily Pilot.

Let’s take them in order.

I had a lot of reasons for wanting the A’s to beat the Yankees, but

the main one was money. Oakland’s payroll was $32 million; the Yankees’

payroll was $108 million. When the Yankees got in trouble late in the

season, they simply bought whatever they needed from teams less

financially blessed that no longer were in the pennant race. In short,

they bought a pennant, an option not available to teams less

well-endowed.

The A’s almost stuck the Yankee bankroll up their nose -- but not

quite. They took it down to a final game and lost.

That happened the same week the Daily Pilot pointed out that the

opposition to Measure S was outspending the proponents about 10 to 1,

with most of the anti-Greenlight money coming from wealthy developers.

And suddenly it all came clear. The opponents of Measure S, who also

put up the snake-oil Measure T in an attempt to disembowel Measure S if

it passes, were the Yankees buying a victory. And the Greenlighters were

the A’s, out to prove that money alone should not make it possible for

public officials to ignore widespread concerns and convictions, strongly

felt and logically supported.

Which brings me to the public statements of Newport Beach Councilman

Dennis O’Neil, as reported in the Daily Pilot.

O’Neil was upset because he and his fellow council members were being

criticized for lack of direction and leadership by the proponents of

Greenlight.

He responded by calling Newport Beach “the best city in the county,

the state, if not the nation” and cited a smorgasbord of the council’s

accomplishments, from trash collection to public libraries to police and

fire protection.

Now all of that may be true, but it is also irrelevant in the debate

now taking place because it has nothing to do with the principle matter

on the table.

Greenlight addresses a very specific issue: the failure of public

officials in Newport Beach to address the concerns of a growing cadre of

residents over what they see as virtually unrestricted growth.

It is on that issue that the initiative was born and the criticism

O’Neil finds unfair is based. His failure to understand that -- and deal

with it directly -- seems symptomatic to me of the patronizing attitude

of the council members toward the proponents of Greenlight.

Which leads to Tom Hyans’ packet in my mailbox. It included a

disconcerting package of major projects before the Newport Beach Planning

Department, a copy of the Greenlight measure (which Nancy Skinner had

also sent me) and Hyans’ closing comments in the recent Speak Up Newport

debate on Greenlight.

He said, in part: “I believe that in government nothing happens in

moderation but rather as a reaction to extremes. As I look around this

city, I know why it’s still a great place to live. It’s not because of

any City Council or Planning Commission or any developer’s sense of

community over personal gain. It’s because every once in awhile, things

get so out of hand, the guys who live here say enough. And it’s time to

stand up and say enough again.”

So for me, finally, it comes down to two things, and the first is

purely emotional. I care more about seeing the Yankees lose than I do

about seeing the A’s win. And that goes for the Yankees in Newport Beach,

too.

Their approach has been either to ignore the anger and concern behind

Greenlight or to attack it with excessive money and verbiage. And because

they were afraid that might not be enough, they insulted our intelligence

with Measure T, which says in effect: “If the voters are stupid enough to

approve Greenlight, maybe they’ll also be stupid enough to negate it by

passing T.”

The second convincer to me is direction. That’s really what this

Greenlight flap is all about. The City Council is taking us in a

direction a lot -- quite possibly a majority -- of residents don’t want

to go, and the residents are saying, “Stop and listen to us and weigh

what we have to say.”

This brings to mind the proverbial mule that needs to be hit on the

head with a 2-by-4 to get his attention. If the 2-by-4 called Greenlight

is a less-than-satisfactory weapon, we are finally faced with the

question of whether that is more important than sending a very clear

message to the council.

As Hyans said: “They decry the loss of representative government, but

I say that when government represents the voters, I’m for it.”

Me, too. Meanwhile, I’ll be voting for Greenlight and cheering for the

New York Mets in the World Series.

* JOSEPH N. BELL is a resident of Santa Ana Heights. His column is

published Thursdays.