Statement from the Coalition to Protect L.A. Neighborhoods & Jobs on the lawsuit filed against the No on S ballot argument:

The Coalition to Protect LA Neighborhoods and Jobs is disappointed, though not surprised, to see that the backers of Measure S, struggling in the court of popular opinion, have turned to the court of law hoping to confuse voters about their poorly written ballot measure that would slash thousands of jobs, hurt our local economy, cut a hole in public budgets, and make it impossible to address rising rents or homelessness.

Their charges are simple. First, they contest the economic study by Beacon Economics, the highly regarded research firm founded by former UCLA Anderson Forecast director Christopher Thornberg. Second, they dispute that the measure could have effects for as long as ten years. Third, they are upset about the date of the report’s release. 

To the first, we welcome the chance to put the economic impact of slashing housing development on trial, we welcome the submission of their own economic data, and we especially welcome the opportunity to see them justify their absurd claim that Measure S would leave 95% of development intact, which they have never attached to publicly available data.  

To the second, we welcome a discussion about Section 5 of their initiative, which would institute permanent restrictions on the use of the very planning tools that Los Angeles needs to address its housing crisis. Measure S offers no new resources for speeding up the development of community plans. Community plans typically require ten years to complete. It’s clear to anyone who understands the realities of rising rents and city planning that Measure S adds a ten-year "silent moratorium” to its proposed two year housing ban. 

To the third, we grant that the Beacon report on Measure S was not released publicly until December 15th. The November 18th publication date slipped in from an earlier draft of our ballot argument. The Coalition regrets the error, and we look forward to Measure S’s backers explaining their use of the court’s time before a holiday weekend to correct a typo.