FAIR GAME:

I’m a card-carrying member of the Newport Beach Chamber of Commerce, am active in the business community and have regular interaction with many of the city’s government officials.

I’m also a resident.

All that being said, I also like Phil Arst.

I know what you’re thinking, that’s almost like saying a bad word to many of those previously mentioned.

It’s kind of like a four-letter word that if your mother heard you say it, she’d make you wash out your mouth with soap. OK, maybe it’s not that bad, but at times it seems close.

Arst, as many of you know, is the key voice and leader of Greenlight and its sequel, Greenlight II, coming to a city near you this fall.

The proponents of Greenlight II say the measure is needed to preserve Newport Beach’s quality of life. They say it’s designed to fight traffic increases and protect the city from over-development.

I appreciate Arst’s passion and commitment. He’s done of all of this while fighting through some pretty overwhelming medical issues. Trust me, I know.

Phil’s also not afraid to take on all naysayers, including the Daily Pilot when he thinks it’s wrong. Which, I might add, is often.

But, all that being said, I can’t support Phil’s course of action with Greenlight II.

Does that mean I want more cars on the streets? Absolutely not.

Does that mean I want over-development of commercial property? No again.

Am I pro-development? Not necessarily, but like most people I believe that good projects can add to the community and in many cases update tired buildings.

Like I said earlier, I’m a Newport Beach resident. I plan on being here for a long time, God willing.

If you follow the trail of Greenlight, their initial rallying point began in 2000 fighting against a hotel and conference center proposed at the Newport Dunes.

People against the project argued that it would heavily impact traffic flow and trips on Coast Highway.

Those in favor of the project argued that traffic wouldn’t be affected during peak traffic hours. They also argued that the city desperately needed a larger conference area to attract more tourism to the community.

Who was right? It’s probably still open to debate.

But the community moved on.

From there, Arst and his friends next fought to defeat a proposed Koll office project near the airport.

And this one is really where Greenlight lost me. Of all the places to build a commercial project why not support a project that would be built in and around other commercial properties. If we don’t do it as a city, Irvine will and has. And if you haven’t noticed, in that area Irvine in some cases is just across the street.

Supporting that project would have added credibility to Greenlight that it’s OK with the right project in the right area.

It wasn’t like the project was a proposed office tower in Mariners Mile. Something, incidentally, that I, too, would fight against.

And next it was another hotel, this time on the bay front, which they stopped in favor of a proposed park. Maybe this one was good, maybe not. Time will tell.

But here’s what irks me most about Greenlight.

This fall, six of the seven Newport Beach City Council seats are up for grabs. And Greenlight, so far, doesn’t counter with candidates, they counter with a ballot measure.

If Greenlight and their followers truly believe that their way of the future is right, put some candidates up, hit the pavement, win a council majority and let’s all get back to representative government.

If the people truly support the Greenlight ideals, then have them elect their people.

Then we can eliminate the crying afterward about a pro-development council appointing or electing pro-development people to fill vacated posts.

Why is it now that we elect people and then tie their hands with ballot initiatives?

Let’s vote ‘em in, and if we don’t like them, then vote ‘em out!

That seems, to me, to be the American way.

is the publisher. Readers may leave a message for him on the Daily Pilot hotline at (714) 966-4664 or send story ideas to dailypilot@latimes.com.