I think your article "Slow-Growth Initiative Foes Fire an Opening Volley" (May 3) has finally exposed the real players behind the slow-growth fight.
As we all know, the war is being waged against developers who have every right to defend themselves. But what this article clarifies for us is that leaders of the slow-growth movement are not all they appear to be. While they continue to harp on the traffic congestion that development causes, they don't want a 10-lane highway that could actually relieve the congestion because the route goes right by their homes!
Instead, they want "a smaller, 'scenic' corridor." Now that will really relieve a lot of congestion, won't it! Obviously, these slow-growth leaders are all for solving traffic congestion as long as it doesn't come too close to home.
The arguments for and against the slow-growth initiative use opinion, emotion and statistics. The real outcome of such an initiative, if it passes, would most likely be somewhere in between. But I have no doubt that housing and rental costs would increase from their already high levels--another perfect example of supply and demand.