Viennese referendums

The Viennese referendum polls have been a consultative instrument of referendum democracy that has been used at the level of the Vienna community since the early 1970s . Its legal basis is based on Sections 112a to 112d of the Vienna City Constitution and the Vienna Popular Consultation Act of December 13, 1979 in the version of April 17, 2001.

history

The growth of citizens' initiatives and the increasing need for citizen participation also led to calls being made in Vienna in the 1970s to supplement representative democracy with more direct democracy . As usual, the leading political classes were rather skeptical of these demands, while opposition political groups and popular mass media saw them as an opportunity for increased effectiveness. In view of the legitimacy deficits of decisions made by representative democracy, which were often discussed at the time , there were also considerations to secure controversial factual decisions plebiscitarily. This constellation led to the first Viennese referendum on the observatory park (1973) and, subsequently, to the Viennese referendum law.

The direct democratic instruments of the Viennese referendum were introduced in a legally restricted form: In contrast to the Swiss model of referendum democracy, corresponding votes can be enforced by a quorum of five percent of those entitled to vote in the last municipal council elections (57,106 signatures are currently required); the vote does not have a formally decisive effect, but serves only as a consultative to "advise" the municipal council. In addition, although the municipal council can decide on surveys at the district level, this cannot be enforced by signing "from below".

The history of the Viennese referendums shows this to a large extent as a document of the discontent of the citizens willing to vote. The plebiscitary legitimation of heavily controversial projects could usually not be achieved (unlike, for example, in the case of the capital issue of Lower Austria ). Even the broadest political and media alliances suffered surprising defeats in the case of particularly controversial projects (such as the 1991 vote on the EXPO Vienna-Budapest 1995).

The current referendum in Vienna took place in February 2010 after a break of almost twenty years. It is atypical insofar as it was initiated “from above”, i.e. by the city government and, in the opinion of numerous commentators, in order to propagandistically support the popularity of the governing SPÖ, which has fallen on the defensive, before the upcoming elections.

Important surveys and their results

Observatory park vote, May 21-26, 1973

A heterogeneous prevention alliance of citizens' initiatives, the Greens, and the media campaign of the powerful Kronenzeitung is against the partial construction of the non-public park of the University Observatory Vienna Währing . The mayor of Vienna, Felix Slavik , who was involved in the construction project, only received a two-thirds majority in the re-election to the party executive after the result of the vote (57.4% against the building with around a third participation) and made his decision on June 2, 1973 his office available. Immediately after the vote, the rector of the University of Vienna , Günther Winkler, declared that opening the park after the construction project failed was out of the question. 40 years after the referendum, in May 2013, the park was opened to the public.

Question: “Do you agree that 3,615 square meters, that is 6.14 percent of the 58,891 square meter observatory in Vienna-Währing, will be used for the new building of a zoological institute at the University of Vienna, with part of the previously closed area as a park designed and made available to the public? "

• Eligible voters: 1,227,832
• Valid votes: 409,658
• YES: 174.294
• NO: 235.364

Flötzersteig vote from March 16 to 18, 1980

Due to the particularly complex question, the result appears unclear. A majority of voters are in favor of expanding the Flötzersteig as the second western entrance to Vienna, but only a minority is in favor of the project of a high-altitude motorway-like expressway favored by the municipal council. The project is subsequently not implemented. At the same time as the question about the expansion of the Flötzersteig, questions are asked about the future of Vienna's district cemeteries (majority against the abandonment and in favor of preservation); on the priority of public transport over private transport (majority in favor) and on the political triangular posts outside of election campaign periods (majority against).

Eligible voters: 1,172,816

Question 1: “Are you in favor of effective measures to accelerate public transport in Vienna, such as creating separate tracks for trams in the street area, demarcating tram tracks in the street area with thresholds and the like; Priority for the tram with traffic regulations and traffic lights? "

• Valid votes: 330,056
• Invalid votes: 8,659
• YES: 255,828 (77.5%)
• NO: 74,228 (22.5%)

Question 2: "Should the propaganda stands that stand on sidewalks, grass surfaces, etc. or are attached to trees and the like and disrupt the cityscape, also be allowed outside of election times?"

• Valid votes: 330,507
• Invalid votes: 8,208
• YES: 112,212 (33.9%)
• NO: 218,295 (66.1%)

Question 3: "Are you in favor of creating a second western entrance to Vienna by expanding the Flötzersteig-Bundesstraße?"

• Yes?
• a) as a crossing-free elevated road over the Wiental and Linzer Straße,
• b) as a street on the same level with a regulated intersection with Linzer Strasse;
• No?

• Valid votes: 323,827
• Invalid votes: 14,888
• YES: 183,332 (56.6%) - of which 58,498 without variant, 100,981 for Hochstraße, 23,853 for level

• NO: 140,495 (43.4%)

Question 4: "Are you in favor of the unanimous resolution of the local council of May 30, 1975, which from 1995 on the abandonment of the Altmannsdorf, Erlaa, Gersthof, Hadersdorf, Heiligenstadt, Hetzendorf, Hirschstetten, Kaiser-Ebersdorf, Kalksburg, Lainz, Leopoldau, Meiding, Pötzleinsdorf, Siebenhirten, Stadlau and Stammersdorf-Ort provides, a) remains intact and these cemeteries are converted into parks from 1995 or b) is modified so that these cemeteries are preserved, even if no new grave sites can be created? "

• Valid votes: 318,216
• Invalid votes: 20,499
• Variant a): 117.315
• Variant b): 200.901

Vote on the Conference Center and Urban Renewal, November 15-17, 1981

In this case, the opposition ÖVP tries to use the instrument of the local referendum to score points with popular concerns. In particular, it is against the conference center at the UNO-City, today's Austria Center Vienna , to which the ÖVP will dedicate a referendum at national level in the following year 1982 , which received well over a million signatures. The town hall majority's strategy here is to more or less openly call for a boycott of the referendum initiated by the ÖVP - an attitude that is somewhat problematic from the point of view of securing voting secrecy. In any case, it explains the minimal percentage of no votes in the November 1981 survey.

• Eligible voters: 1,155,179

• Question 1: "Are you in favor of ensuring that jobs are secured by giving priority to urban renewal (for example, housing improvements instead of further suburban settlements, local supplies instead of new supermarkets outside Vienna, more greenery instead of concrete)?"

• Valid votes: 183,589
• Invalid votes: 3,005
• YES: 169,666
• NO: 13,923

• Question 2: "Are you in favor of the City of Vienna finally not participating in the billion-dollar project for a new conference center at the UNO City and instead expanding the Hofburg as a conference center?"

• Valid votes: 182,699
• Invalid votes: 3,895
• JA: 164,190
• NO: 18,509

Vote on the Steinhof grounds from December 9-11, 1981

The construction project of a large green area behind the area of ​​the Steinhof hospital, carried out by a community-based construction company, is being opposed by a citizens' initiative that forces a referendum by collecting signatures. In addition to the controversial project, social housing as a whole, a levy for unlet apartments, increased funding for the renovation of the old town and the increase in funds for business settlements to secure jobs are also being questioned. The chain of predictable yes decisions does not support the legitimation of the project by a majority of the active voters, which the municipal council majority hoped for. Only 46.5% of the voters decide to build on the Steinhofgrund, 53.5% are against. Mayor Leopold Gratz accepts the decision of the Viennese and proclaims: The Steinhof area will now be opened.

• Eligible voters: 1,154,496

• Question 1: “Are you in favor of the fact that non-profit-making housing (social housing) by municipalities and cooperatives with its diverse forms of housing (multi-storey houses in vacant lots in densely built-up areas, apartments in refurbished old buildings, new housing estates, terraced houses) is a priority for Vienna's municipal policy remains?"

• Valid votes: 247,010
• Invalid votes: 20,938
• YES: 206.044
• NO: 40,966

• Question 2: "Are you in favor of the modernization and revitalization of old Viennese buildings worthy of preservation (by social housing developers, by house owners and tenants or by groups of young people to whom houses are handed over for refurbishment) to be stepped up, whereby the income from a fee for unlet apartments ( which is to be provided by the house owners) should exclusively benefit the renovation of old buildings? "

• Valid votes: 249,584
• Invalid votes: 18,364
• YES: 209.078
• NO: 40.506

• Question 3: "Are you in favor of the redevelopment of the old town receiving more public funding, with the main goal of preserving the characteristic Viennese cityscape in the older districts and at the same time creating modern living space there?"

• Valid votes: 249,959
• Invalid votes: 17,989
• JA: 224,455
• NO: 25.504

• Question 4: "Are you in favor of building 885 modern and affordable apartments in Vienna-Penzing (Steinhof-Grund), whereby at the same time more than 200,000 square meters of green space, which were previously inaccessible to the Viennese, are to become public green space?"

• Valid votes: 261,162
• Invalid votes: 6,786
• JA: 128,755
• NO: 132,407

• Question 5: "Are you in favor of increasing the use of financial resources in addition to housing construction in order to maintain full employment in Vienna in order to secure or relocate large and small businesses?"

• Valid votes: 247,195
• Invalid votes: 20,753
• YES: 212,742
• NO: 34,453

• Question 6: "Should the Steinhof grounds be built?"

• Valid votes: 262,603
• Invalid votes: 5,345
• YES: 122.209
• NO: 140.394

Vote to keep tram line 8, February 22-24, 1990

Although 94 percent of the participating voters (with a low turnout of only 6 percent) are in favor of keeping the tram line parallel to the U6 (formerly Stadtbahn) on the Gürtel, this will be discontinued as planned by the municipal administration. The political grouping of the Vienna Greens sees this action as one of the reasons for their success in the next municipal council election. The Passenger Association sees itself as primarily responsible for the provision of around 70,000 signatures . The fact that the question was overloaded with numerous other problems or with the suggestion of district-wide referendums may have contributed to the confusion of the voters.

• Question: "Should the following polls be carried out in different parts of the city because of the threatening deterioration of the traffic and environmental situation in Vienna?"

• 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 12th, 15th, 16th, 17th, 18th, 19th district: Are you in favor of the fact that the tram runs on the entire route of today's line 8 despite the redesign of the belt as well as the extension and Renaming of the Stadtbahn to U 6 will be retained?
• 15th district: Are you in favor of tram line 9 continuing through Felberstrasse and not having to give way to a road expansion planned there for car traffic?
• 21st district: Should the heavy traffic now driving through Floridsdorf's residential area be relocated to the existing bypass without building new roads?
• 15th, 16th district: Should the 3.3 hectare area on the Schmelz at the corner of Gablenzgasse and Possingergasse remain undeveloped and open to the public as a park?
• 12th district: Should the Hetzendorfer allotment garden areas (Altmannsdorfer Anger, Egelsee, Strohberglinien, Gaßmannstraße) remain undeveloped?
• 13th, 23rd district:

a) Should the 4 hectare green area Maurer Lange Gasse / Kaserngasse be kept free of any development, including partial ones, and be accessible to the population?

b) Should the Körnerschlößl located there be kept as a school location and be used as a public eco-project school (10 to 18 year olds) and as a public cultural center and should the mentioned projects be stopped until the results of the survey are available?

• Eligible voters: 1,129,808
• Valid votes: 68,745
• Invalid votes: 286
• YES: 63,503
• NO: 5,242

EXPO vote and barrage in Vienna, May 14-16, 1991

The Vienna-Budapest Expo project for 1995 is rejected by a 65% majority, regardless of broad support from politics, the media and business circles, but the Vienna barrage ( Freudenau power plant ) , which was raised at the same time, was approved by the voting citizens with a majority of over 70%. As a result, the Danube City on the left bank of the Danube in Vienna is expanded even without an expo , and the referendum instrument is not used for around 19 years.

• Eligible voters: 1,127,743, turnout: 43.7 percent

• Question 1: "Are you in favor of a world exhibition being held in Vienna in 1995?"

• Valid votes: 485,907
• Invalid votes: 6,936
• JA: 170,807
• NO: 315.100

• Question 2: "Are you in favor of the Danube power plants building a hydropower plant in the area of the Freudenau port ?"

• Valid votes: 488,063
• Invalid votes: 4,780
• JA: 354,533
• NO: 133,530

“Vienna wants to know”: referendum from February 11 to 13, 2010

In a referendum from February 11 to 13, 2010, five questions on various topics were put to the population.

• Eligible voters: 1,144,877, turnout: 35.9 percent

• Question 1: "Are you in favor of creating the opportunity in Vienna to hire new caretakers ?"
  • Valid votes: 360,854
  • Invalid votes: 9,596
  • YES: 302,559
  • NO: 58,295

• Question 2: "Are you in favor of a comprehensive offer of all-day schools in Vienna?"
  • Valid votes: 355,804
  • Invalid votes: 14,646
  • YES: 272,418
  • NO: 83.386

• Question 3: "Should a city ​​toll be introduced in Vienna ?"
  • Valid votes: 362,364
  • Invalid votes: 8,086
  • YES: 85,079
  • NO: 277.285

• Question 4: "Are you in favor of the subway also running at night on weekends?"
  • Valid votes: 364,036
  • Invalid votes: 6,414
  • YES: 199,968
  • NO: 164.068

• Question 5: "Are you in favor of the fact that there should be a mandatory dog license for so-called" attack dogs " in Vienna ?"
  • Valid votes: 365,315
  • Invalid votes: 5,135
  • JA: 326,839
  • NO: 38,476

Referendum from 7th to 9th March 2013

Another referendum was carried out from March 7th to 9th, 2013. The city government decided on the questions on December 14 at the last city council meeting in 2012.
The questions (possible answers) were:

• Question 1: "How should the parking space situation and quality of life for district residents be improved?"

A) Parking regulations are to be introduced for every Vienna district.

B) There should be solutions for individual districts (taking into account the interests of the neighboring districts)

• Valid votes: 344,433 (86.11%)
• Invalid votes: 55,548 (13.89%)
• A: 125,775 (36.52%)
• B: 218,658 (63.48%)

• Question 2: "Should the city endeavor to host the 2028 Summer Olympics?"
  • Valid votes: 386,661 (96.67%)
  • Invalid votes: 13,320 (3.33%)
  • YES: 108,247 (28.00%)
  • NO: 278,414 (72.00%)
• Question 3: “The municipal companies offer the Viennese population important services. For example water, sewer, garbage collection, energy, hospitals, community housing and public transport. Are you in favor of protecting these companies from privatization? "
  • Valid votes: 388,605 (97.16%)
  • Invalid votes: 11,376 (2.84%)
  • YES: 338,754 (87.17%)
  • NO: 49,851 (12.83%)
• Question 4: "Should the city develop further renewable energy projects based on the example of citizen solar power plants, which are implemented with financial participation from citizens?"
  • Valid votes: 365,687 (91.43%)
  • Invalid votes: 34,294 (8.57%)
  • YES: 245,231 (67.06%)
  • NO: 120,456 (32.94%)

Individual evidence

1. ↑ Constitution of the Federal Capital Vienna (Vienna City Constitution - WStV)
2. ↑ Law on the implementation of public polls (Vienna Public Polling Law - WVBefrG)
3. ↑ Arbeiter-Zeitung of December 14, 1981
4. ↑ Vienna wants to know: referendum from February 11 to 13, 2010 ( Memento of the original from January 11, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. 
5. ↑ Archived copy ( Memento of the original dated February 5, 2015 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. 
6. ↑ wien.gv.at: Wiener Volksbefragung 2013 ( Memento of the original from January 16, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. , December 14, 2012. 

literature

• Josef Rauchberger (editor): Keyword democracy - 50 years of current affairs. PR-Verlag, Vienna 1994, ISBN 3-9011-1102-6 .