The Case Against the Los Angeles 'Neighborhood Integrity Initiative'

Planetizen has been covering the genesis of the Neighborhood Integrity Initiative since its earliest days—specifically, November 2015.

Now the city is just a few short weeks away from voting on the initiative's controversial reforms of the city's development process, now described by more prosaic nomenclature: Measure S. Election day is March 7, 2017, but Los Angeles residents have been inundated with mail on either side of the issue, while the city has been plastered in billboards financed by the Yes on S campaign.

Online, however, the No on S campaign has dominated the discussion, led by former Planetizen blogger Shane Phillips. Phillips has published in several forums about the realities of the city's housing market (i.e., despite the Yes on S campaign's claims about runaway development, the city is building well short of enough housing to meet the demands of its growing population). Here's a roundup of articles by Phillips:

• Don’t Call It a Boom: Despite Uptick, LA Still Adding New Housing At a Snail’s Pace (Abundant Housing LA)
• Top 7 Reasons to Oppose Measure S, the Los Angeles "Neighborhood Integrity Initiative" (Better Institutions) 
• Op-Ed Don’t listen to the backers of Measure S. Los Angeles isn’t overdeveloped; we’re in a housing slump (Los Angeles Times)
• List of Housing Projects That Would Be Banned by Measure S – 19,000 Units and Counting… (Better Institutions)

In the past week, several high profile endorsements have also voiced strong opposition to Measure S, including the Green Party of Los Angeles County and the Los Angeles Times editorial board. The headline of the Los Angeles Times editorial uses a memorable turn of phrase to drive home its argument: "Measure S isn't a solution to L.A.’s housing woes, it's a childish middle finger to City Hall. Vote no." Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti also recently announced his opposition to Measure S, as did the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition. Curbed Urbanism Editor Alissa Walker, whose name will be familiar to Planetizen readers, has also taken to Twitter to debunk some of the claims made by the Yes on S campaign.

How many Yes on S mailers did you get today? This one's funny as the LAT just published its official No on S stance: https://t.co/BpGqnVx778 pic.twitter.com/7QeQvrYUCV

— Alissa Walker (@awalkerinLA) February 12, 2017

Measure S also claims that it will protect your rent-controlled apartment and prevent tear-downs. Important: Measure S *DOES NOT DO THIS* pic.twitter.com/47laXSnP9z

— Alissa Walker (@awalkerinLA) February 9, 2017

Including this LA Times quote is super misleading. Measure S does nothing to stop McMansions and luxury condos that don’t need zone changes pic.twitter.com/zRU6nbs6nS

— Alissa Walker (@awalkerinLA) February 9, 2017

Walker also shared a Tweet highlighting the varied quality and quantity of endorsements on either side of the Measure S issue.

Compare the three pro-S people on this mailer (all *former* LA leaders) with the broad coalition of leaders and groups who oppose Measure S pic.twitter.com/LMOLlbSUBL

— Alissa Walker (@awalkerinLA) February 9, 2017

Endorsements for Measure S have been a thorny issue, after the Yes on S campaign falsely claimed actor Leonardo Dicaprio endorsed the measure. The Yes on S campaign eventually had to describe the endorsement as a "misunderstanding."

Both campaigns have websites. The Yes on S website is paid for by the Coalition to Preserve LA and sponsored by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation. The No on S website is paid for by the Coalition to Protect L.A. Neighborhoods and Jobs and sponsored by CH Palladium, LLC and No on S - Build Better L.A. Sponsored by Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO, Coalition of Organizations Representing Working Men and Women, and Businesses.