I am disturbed by the inaccuracy and obvious bias shown in your June 13 article on the San Diego Managed Growth Initiative ("S.D. No-Growth Initiative Closer to a Spot on Ballot").
Both the article and the headline presented it as a "no-growth" initiative, which is an untrue allegation and accepts as fact the distorted interpretation and fears of the initiative's opponents. Pertinent background clarifying the intent of and motivation for this initiative was notably lacking in your write up.
The Growth Management Plan for San Diego was developed over a period of five years with extensive citizen input through planning board meetings, along with a sizable expenditure on consulting fees. This plan divided the open space into two categories: the planned urbanization , which is OK'd for development now, and the future urbanization , which is held in reserve for the future.
A conservative estimate of the parcels in the first category shows that there is enough well-situated land already cleared for industrial development to provide San Diego with homes, commercial and industrial development through the year 2000. The Managed Growth Initiative will not halt development in San Diego; it specifically addresses the untimely development of land in the future urbanization category when such is unnecessary at this time and presents problems to the city as a whole.