Six years ago, Costa Mesa voters approved Measure Y which puts certain types of development, both residential and retail, in the city up for a public vote.
Measure Y is nonsense on steroids, an evisceration of private property rights which imposes an unjustifiable hurdle before developers trying to meet market needs. The results have been predictable, as development has been stifled in the city. And like it or not, the measure makes it harder for the city to meet the state’s housing goals. The failure to meet those those goals carries tangible penalties to the city.
On the ballot this Nov. 8 is Measure K, which falls short of repealing Measure Y, but does carve out certain commercial and industrial areas of the city from the public vote requirement. Opponents of Measure K trot out the usual NIMBY talking points. They complain it “will not lower housing costs,” because it doesn’t “provide housing for working families” and “does not stop evictions or rent hikes.”
Strictly speaking, this is all true, because that’s not in the scope of the measure. If defenders of the status quo cared about lowering housing costs and providing housing for working families, they would recognize that the solution, ultimately, is to make it possible for more housing to be built. The status quo, with Measure Y, is an impediment to that. Simple.
While Measure Y should be totally repealed, a partial carve-out is what is on the table. That’s preferable to what supporters of the status quo would rather have, which is an artificial barrier to construction simply because they don’t like the idea of more people being able to live in Costa Mesa and because they don’t like apartments.
We encourage Costa Mesa residents to respect private property rights and pass Measure K to give the market more of a chance to work and provide homes and jobs for future Costa Mesa residents.
Sourcing & Methodology
To help you make decisions about the numerous candidates, measures, propositions and other races on your ballot, our editorial board (made up of opinion writers and editors), makes recommendations every election. The process is completely separate from newsroom reporting and journalists. With the exception of our executive editor, the members of our editorial board are not news reporters or editors.
Sal Rodriguez, the opinion editor for the Southern California News Group’s 11 newspapers, heads the editorial board and guides our stances on public policy and political matters.
Every week, our team analyzes legislation, monitors political developments, interviews elected officials or policy advocates and writes editorials on the issues of the day. Unsigned editorials reflect the consensus of our editorial board, with the aim of offering arguments that are empirically sound and intellectually consistent.
We apply this same process when considering to endorse candidates.
As a practical matter, we are selective in which races we endorse in. We endorse on all statewide ballot measures, competitive congressional races, select races for the state legislature and select countywide and city elections.
We identify credible candidates through surveys and interviews, deliberate based on our editorial precedent and in light of contemporary realities, and issue endorsements accordingly.
