I hope that it's not too late to let Times readers know what a bad decision your editorial writers made when they opposed Proposition U.
When the initiative passes, it will finally scale commercial development in Los Angeles to reasonable limits. It will also reduce the City Council's ability to pay back the developers for thousands of dollars in contributions and favors. Often, these pay-backs are approvals for high-density building complexes, generally at the expense of local residents (voters and taxpayers) who must live with the burdens of increased pollution, terrible traffic, reduced municipal services and a reduced quality of life.
Those of us who have the opportunity to watch the City Council in action know that the council you described in your editorial was elected in Camelot. We've already seen them try to subvert Proposition U even before our votes are cast. Remember, what the council gives just before an election, they may take away right after.
The voters should realize that the cards are already stacked in favor of developers. If they want to build more than codes allow on a parcel of land, they apply for a variance. Time after time, the council enacts it despite protests of local citizenry, and a big office building goes up where affordable housing and stores once stood. The developer, who lives across town (or across the country, or in another country), makes a bundle of cash and tax benefits, and the people who used to live and work in the area must relocate and look for new jobs.
Moore is president and Kayser is vice president of the Federation of Hillside and Canyon Assns., Inc.