Ljubljana parking referendum fails
Translated from Slovenian, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- A referendum on Ljubljana's parking policy failed to meet the required turnout, meaning the contested parking ordinance remains in effect.
- Only 19% of eligible voters participated, falling short of the 20% threshold needed to reject the ordinance.
- While 94% of those who voted opposed the ordinance, their numbers were insufficient to overturn it.
A referendum aimed at overturning Ljubljana's new parking policy has failed, with insufficient voter turnout meaning the contested ordinance will remain in effect. The municipal election commission announced that less than 19% of eligible voters participated in the referendum, falling short of the necessary 20% threshold to reject the measure.
Despite the low turnout, the vast majority of those who did vote, 93.96%, cast their ballots against the parking ordinance. However, these 40,324 votes were not enough to meet the legal requirement for a referendum to succeed. The law stipulates that a majority of valid votes must be cast against the ordinance, with at least one-fifth of all eligible voters participating in the opposition.
Six organizations, including several political parties like Levica and Vesna, had campaigned against the ordinance, which proposed paid parking and resident permits in Ljubljana's neighborhoods. The City Municipality of Ljubljana did not participate in the campaign. While the city council had previously withdrawn the ordinance, the referendum initiators insisted on proceeding, arguing the withdrawal was legally questionable.
The Civil Initiative for Ljubljana, which spearheaded the referendum, gathered over 14,000 signatures to trigger the vote. They also filed a constitutional court petition challenging the legality of the ordinance's withdrawal. For the initiators, the parking ordinance had become a symbol of broader issues in the city's governance.
Originally published by Delo in Slovenian. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.