Court rulings on local efforts to manage growth by initiative and referendum in California
unusually broad and well-entrenched in California. As a result of that right, residents of that state have employed both of these tools of direct democracy to manage local growth. In this article the initiative will be treated as the power of voters to draft and implement growth control measures within local governmental settings. The local growth control referendum will, in turn, represent their power to rescind local governmental actions that fail to promote a desired level of growth control. This article describes how courts in California have developed a body of case law governing such local efforts to control growth by direct legislation.
Trends in Local Growth Control Ballot Measures in California
This article began as a background resource paper to provide information and analysis for a discussion of local growth control by initiative and referendum. It was used in conjunction with the first annual LAND USE LAW AND PLANNING CONFERENCE presented by the Public Policy Program, UCLA Extension, on February 20, 1987. The research for this article was designed to assess several prevalent perceptions about the use of land use ballot measures. First, there has been a growing and widespread perception that attempts at planning by initiative have dramatically increased in cities and counties throughout California in the last two years. It is also perceived that more and more voters favor these ballot measures as a means of controlling growth. There is a belief that the use of initiatives and referenda to achieve local growth controls is not only increasing in frequency, but that the range of land use issues addressed by these measures is changing in significant ways. Last, there has been considerable discussion about the likely future of land use ballot measures. In order to determine the accuracy of these perceptions, we collected and analyzed information about all identified local land use ballot measures in California since 1971. The "Methodology" section of this article describes how the data was collected and compiled in the Matrix of Land Use Planning Measures. Using the data in this Matrix, we analyzed the frequency of ballot
Italian Influence on the Development of Calvinist Scholasticism
THIS ARTICLE TRIES to show that the rise of Calvinist scholasticism, which was the most important development in Calvinist theology during the second half of the sixteenth century, stemmed largely from several converging Italian influences, particularly from the writings of Peter Martyr Vermigli and Jerome Zanchi. Here Calvinist theology refers not only to the personal thought of John Calvin but also to the teachings of the founders of the Reformed or Calvinist tradition as it spread out from Geneva and Switzerland to France, Germany, England, Scotland, Poland, and the Low Countries. In this context Calvin emerges as the brightest star in a galaxy of Reformed theologians which includes Heinrich Bullinger, Pierre Viret, Theodore Beza and Wolfgang Musculus as well as Martyr, Zanchi and others. These theologians were often more influential than Calvin himself at a given place or time or on a given point of doctrine. Bullinger, Martyr, and Martin Bucer were all more important for spreading Calvinist ideas to Edwardian England than was John Calvin. Early Elizabethan Protestantism looked more to Zurich than to Geneva, as did early Polish Calvinism. German Calvinism owed more to Heidelberg than to Geneva.' These leaders developed their theologies sometimes in mutual dependence, sometimes with surprising independence. By no means was their relation to Calvin simply that of disciple to master, for each gave a personal nuance to his style of Calvinism. Thus the sixteenth century Jesuit Cornelius Schulting states on the opening page of his five volume polemic against Calvin and Peter Martyr that Martyr was clearer and far more learned than Calvin.2 Recently John Bray has pointed out that research in seventeenth century Calvinism leads "to the conclusion that the impact of Calvin upon the Calvinistic movement has been greatly over-rated. It may well be that some of