Proposition 13 passed resoundingly with 65% of the vote and resulted in amending the State constitution. This initiative restricted property tax increases to 1% of the assessed value of a property, with a maximum annual increase of 2%. Perhaps the most famous state-wide ballot initiative was Proposition 13, which passed in 1978 to limit property taxation. Californians need 10% of registered voters’ signatures in a City to qualify an initiative for the ballot or 5% of registered voters’ signatures for a statewide one. Ballot initiatives put the power back into the hands of the people, and make government more responsive to the will of voters. Most of us are familiar with Ballot Initiatives because this mechanism is a favorite in our state, leading them to be referred to as California’s fourth branch of government. The other tool, the Referendum allows citizens to approve or reject statutes previously adopted by their elected representatives. The BI enables citizens to propose new legislation and pass these proposals into law by a majority popular vote. The first of these is the Ballot Initiative (BI). Besides the Recall, the California State constitution provides two other mechanisms for voters to directly decide on important policy and governance issues. He gives his opinion on local issues weekly.Californians will be voting soon in the Gubernatorial Recall election. Jim Drummond is a longtime Yorba Linda resident. The 2,039-unit number for the prior 2008-13 period was similarly apportioned to include all income levels: 230 extremely low, 230 very low, 371 low, 412 moderate and 796 above moderate. Thus, the 669-unit allotment for the 2014-21 planning period includes 80 for the extremely low-income category, 80 very low income, 113 low income, 126 moderate income and 270 above-moderate income. The state-assigned housing numbers for Yorba Linda identify needs at all income levels, not just for low-income households as often stated. Nobody submitted statements against either measure, though Measure I is now under widespread attack. Measure H passed 8,477 to 5,474, and Measure I won 7,400 to 6,464, an endorsement coming from just 17 percent of registered voters.Ĭouncil members signing ballot arguments for Measure H were John Anderson, Tom Lindsey, Nancy Rikel and Jim Winder, while Anderson, Lindsey and Winder signed the arguments for Measure I. Indeed, only 14,547 Yorba Lindans cast ballots in the 2012 June primary, while 35,164 voted in November, a historically consistent ratio. Measure H would rezone two Savi Ranch parcels totaling six acres to allow up to 180 units, and Measure I would rezone nine westside properties totaling some 40 acres to allow up to 770 units. So, Measure H and Measure I were readied for a vote, with council choosing a June 2012 election over a November ballot, though the latter would have met state requirements. In this city, a public vote on major zoning changes is required under Measure B, adopted in 2006. The state’s mandate, of course, is that cities provide opportunities for the construction of affordable housing through amenable zoning rules, which usually means allowing higher densities on available vacant land. This and future columns will present pertinent information on events that led to the current conflict and demonstrate how an effort to satisfy a state mandate created so much turmoil. Much of Yorba Linda’s current political ruckus can be traced back to decisions the City Council made in late 2011 and early 2012 regarding two measures placed on the June 2012 primary election ballot – decisions that resulted in a fateful number of unintended consequences.Īnd the present campaign-style rhetoric surrounding those two-year-old council choices obscures central facts bearing on the city’s high-density and affordable housing debates.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |