Read the State Legislative Tracker. New edition available now!

Difference between revisions of "City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Commission, Measure LL (November 2008)"

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Text replace - "{{california}} Category:California 2008 local ballot measures" to "{{california counties}} Category:California 2008 local ballot measures")
(3 intermediate revisions by one user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
The '''City of Berkeley landmark preservation commission, measure LL''' was on the [[November 4, 2008 ballot measures in California|November 4, 2008 ballot]] in [[Alameda County, California ballot measures|Alameda County]] for voters in the City of Berkeley, California.  Measure LL was a [[veto referendum]] attempting to overturn a city ordinance passed by the city council.  About 6,000 Berkeley residents signed the petition to put Measure LL on the ballot.
+
{{tnr}}A '''City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Commission, Measure LL''' ballot question was on the [[November 4, 2008 ballot measures in California|November 4, 2008 ballot]] for voters in the City of Berkeley in [[Alameda County, California ballot measures#November 4|Alameda County]], where it was '''defeated.'''
  
* Measure LL was defeated with 43.24% of the vote, overturning the ordinance.
+
Measure LL was a [[veto referendum]]. A "no" vote was a vote to overturn a city ordinance passed by the city council. The city ordinance that was successfully overturned via the majority "no" vote on Measure LL would have granted the city's Landmarks Preservation Commission new authority to prohibit, instead of suspend, demolition of historic resources. The overturned ordinance also would have:
  
Measure LL said:
+
* Eliminated property owners' approval in establishing historic districts.
:"Shall ordinance No. 6,958-N.S., Repealing and Reenacting Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter3.24 (Landmarks Preservation), passed by City Council, granting the Landmarks Preservation Commission new authority to prohibit, instead of suspend, demolition of historic resources; eliminating property owners' approval in establishing historic districts; and substantially revising procedures for designating historic resources (including limiting reconsideration of properties not designated) and regulating alteration or demolition of historic resources, subject to appeal to the Council, be adopted?"
+
* Revised procedures for designating historic resources (including limiting reconsideration of properties not designated)
 +
* Regulated alteration or demolition of historic resources.
  
==Support and opposition==
+
==Election results==
 +
 
 +
{{Short outcome
 +
| title = Measure LL
 +
| yes = 21,743
 +
| yespct = 43.24
 +
| no = 28,537
 +
| nopct = 56.76
 +
| image =
 +
| unresolved =
 +
| state = Local
 +
| percent = 50.0
 +
}}
 +
: ''These <u>final</u> election results are from the [http://www.acgov.org/rov/v084/results.pdf Alameda County elections office]''.
 +
 
 +
==Ballot question==
 +
 
 +
{{Q box |
 +
  text = '''Measure LL:''' "Shall ordinance No. 6,958-N.S., Repealing and Reenacting Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter3.24 (Landmarks Preservation), passed by City Council, granting the Landmarks Preservation Commission new authority to prohibit, instead of suspend, demolition of historic resources; eliminating property owners' approval in establishing historic districts; and substantially revising procedures for designating historic resources (including limiting reconsideration of properties not designated) and regulating alteration or demolition of historic resources, subject to appeal to the Council, be adopted?"
 +
 +
}}
 +
 
 +
==Support==
  
 
A "yes" vote on Measure LL was supported by the Berkeley city council, the League of Women's Voters, and the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee.
 
A "yes" vote on Measure LL was supported by the Berkeley city council, the League of Women's Voters, and the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee.
 +
 +
==Opposition==
  
 
A "no" vote on Measure LL was supported by the Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association, the Berkeley Green Party, the Green Party of Alameda County, Berkeley Citizens Action (BCA), Berkeley Daily Planet, the San Francisco Bay Guardian, the Council of Neighborhood Associations (CNA) and others.
 
A "no" vote on Measure LL was supported by the Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association, the Berkeley Green Party, the Green Party of Alameda County, Berkeley Citizens Action (BCA), Berkeley Daily Planet, the San Francisco Bay Guardian, the Council of Neighborhood Associations (CNA) and others.
 +
 +
==Path to the ballot==
 +
 +
Measure LL was a citizen-initiated measure. About 6,000 Berkeley residents signed the petition to put Measure LL on the ballot.
  
 
==See also==
 
==See also==
Line 17: Line 46:
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
 
+
{{submit a link}}
 
* [http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/uploadedFiles/Clerk/Elections/Measure%20LL%20Landmarks%20Referendum.pdf Text of Measure LL]
 
* [http://www.ci.berkeley.ca.us/uploadedFiles/Clerk/Elections/Measure%20LL%20Landmarks%20Referendum.pdf Text of Measure LL]
* [http://www.acgov.org/rov/documents/summary_report.pdf Election results], PDF, page 9.
 
 
* [http://savethelpo.org/ "No on L" website]
 
* [http://savethelpo.org/ "No on L" website]
 
* [http://yesonmeasurell.org/ "Yes on L" website]
 
* [http://yesonmeasurell.org/ "Yes on L" website]
  
 
{{california counties}}
 
{{california counties}}
[[Category:California 2008 local ballot measures]]
+
[[Category:City governance, California, 2008]]
 +
[[Category:Local housing, California, 2008]]
 
[[Category:Local zoning, land use and development, California, 2008]]
 
[[Category:Local zoning, land use and development, California, 2008]]

Revision as of 07:15, 3 January 2013

A City of Berkeley Landmarks Preservation Commission, Measure LL ballot question was on the November 4, 2008 ballot for voters in the City of Berkeley in Alameda County, where it was defeated.

Measure LL was a veto referendum. A "no" vote was a vote to overturn a city ordinance passed by the city council. The city ordinance that was successfully overturned via the majority "no" vote on Measure LL would have granted the city's Landmarks Preservation Commission new authority to prohibit, instead of suspend, demolition of historic resources. The overturned ordinance also would have:

  • Eliminated property owners' approval in establishing historic districts.
  • Revised procedures for designating historic resources (including limiting reconsideration of properties not designated)
  • Regulated alteration or demolition of historic resources.

Election results

Measure LL
ResultVotesPercentage
Defeatedd No28,53756.76%
Yes 21,743 43.24%
These final election results are from the Alameda County elections office.

Ballot question

The question on the ballot:

Measure LL: "Shall ordinance No. 6,958-N.S., Repealing and Reenacting Berkeley Municipal Code (BMC) Chapter3.24 (Landmarks Preservation), passed by City Council, granting the Landmarks Preservation Commission new authority to prohibit, instead of suspend, demolition of historic resources; eliminating property owners' approval in establishing historic districts; and substantially revising procedures for designating historic resources (including limiting reconsideration of properties not designated) and regulating alteration or demolition of historic resources, subject to appeal to the Council, be adopted?"[1]

Support

A "yes" vote on Measure LL was supported by the Berkeley city council, the League of Women's Voters, and the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee.

Opposition

A "no" vote on Measure LL was supported by the Berkeley Architectural Heritage Association, the Berkeley Green Party, the Green Party of Alameda County, Berkeley Citizens Action (BCA), Berkeley Daily Planet, the San Francisco Bay Guardian, the Council of Neighborhood Associations (CNA) and others.

Path to the ballot

Measure LL was a citizen-initiated measure. About 6,000 Berkeley residents signed the petition to put Measure LL on the ballot.

See also

External links

BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
Suggest a link


Cite error: <ref> tags exist, but no <references/> tag was found