Mestna občina Ljubljana (MOL) je v petek, 17. junij 2026, na novinarski konferenci v Ljubljani jasno povedala, da ne bo sodelovala v referendumski kampanji o spremenjenem parkirnem odloku. Župan Zoran Janković je poudaril, da bo referendum v realnosti odločal o nečem, kar ne obstaja, ker je občina že v marcu umaknila odlok, kar so pobudniki referenduma po njegovem mnenju dosegli svoj cilj. "Odločanje o nečem, kar ne obstaja", je dejal Janković, kar je zelo kritičen do pobudnikov referenduma, ki imajo po njegovem mnenju drugačne cilje kot trdijo sami.
Podžupan Boštjan Koritnik je umik odloka izpostavil kot "vrhunec spoštovanja demokratične volje ljudi". "Edina volja, ki je legitimna in zaščitena v povezavi z referendumom, je doseči referendumski cilj. Referendumski cilj pa je samo tisto, kar so oblikovali pobudniki referenduma, torej umik tega zanje spornega akta," je poudaril. To se je po njegovih besedah zdaj tudi zgodilo. "Politični teater oziroma vse tisto, kar sledi po tem, ko ti dosežeš svoj legitimni cilj, ki si ga prej deklarativno in proklamativno dajal v javnost, pa ni več pravno zavarovano in zaščiteno," je povedal.
Strinjal se je z županom, da MOL v referendumski kampanji "zaradi nesmiselnosti situacije" ne bo sodeloval. "Odločalo se bo namreč o nečem, kar ne obstaja," je dejal. Glede očitkov, da je občina parkirni odlok umaknila brez pravne podlage, je poudaril, da so pridobili pravno mnenje Cirila Ribičiča, Franca Grada, Igorja Kaučiča in Domna Končana, ki potrjuje dopustnost umika odloka. Izpostavil je še, da pravilo, po katerem občina v primeru zavrnitve odloka na referendumu eno leto ne sme sprejeti odloka, ki bi bil v nasprotju z izidom referenduma, velja samo do volitev.
Podžupan Dejan Crnek je poudaril, da želi občina s prebivalci Štepanjskega naselja kljub nesoglasjem še naprej voditi čim boljši dialog. Temu je bil namenjen tudi ponedeljkov sestanek, na katerem so se med drugim dogovorili, da bo občina stanovalcem pomagala pri organizaciji sestanka s predstavniki trgovskih podjetij. Stanovalci so namreč večkrat izrazili željo, da bi trgovine v Štepanjskem naselju v nočnem času omogočile brezplačno parkiranje na svojih parkiriščih. Čeprav se je v javnosti ustvaril vtis, da parkirnemu odloku nasprotujejo vsi prebivalci Štepanjskega naselja, na občino prispe veliko izrazov podpore odloku, je dodal.
Kampanja pred referendumom se je začela v petek, trajala bo do 10. julija opolnoči. To bo tretji občinski referendum po letu 2000 in prvi, ki ga je sprožila obsežna podpisna akcija občanov. Civilna družba, nezadovoljna z občinsko parkirno politiko, je namreč zbrala več kot 14.000 podpisov podpore za razpis referenduma. Pobudniki nasprotujejo odloku, ki bi na novo uredil parkiranje v ljubljanskih soseskah z uvedbo plačljivega parkiranja in dovolilnic za stanovalce. Čeprav je občina marca sprejeti odlok prejšnji teden umaknila, v Civilni iniciativi za Ljubljano vztrajajo pri referendumu. Umik odloka je po njihovem prepričanju pravno sporen, saj da je ta možen zgolj v primeru neustavnosti, nezakonitosti ali neskladnosti.
Civilna iniciativa za Ljubljano opozarja, da občina v občinskem glasilu navaja, da je bila v umaknjenem odloku določena nižja cena nočnega parkiranja. Stalo bi dva evra, zdaj pa stane štiri evre. "Občina pa ne pove, da pobudniki referenduma ne izpodbijamo dela spornega parkirnega odloka, ki govori o ceni nočnega parkiranja. Na referendumu o tej točki ne bomo odločali. Odločali bomo o točkah 4 in 15, ki spreminjata način delitve parkirnih dovolilnic," so zapisali. MOL po njihovih besedah prav tako ne želi povedati, da je pravica do pridobitve prve parkirne dovolilnice z odlokom odvzeta tudi tistim stanovalcem, ki po zakonu o vzpostavitvi etažne lastnine niso pridobili celotnega parkirnega mesta, ampak samo 20- ali 30-odstotni delež. Takih je po njihovih besedah večina.
Jankoviću poleg tega očitajo, da problematizira izdatke za izvedbo referenduma v znesku enega milijona evrov, medtem ko občina v proračunu za letos za sodne stroške načrtuje 950.000 evrov, torej skoraj enak znesek. Znova so izpostavili tudi svoje stališče, da mestni svet odloka ne bi smel umakniti. Sklicujejo se na mnenje Pravnega centra za varstvo človekovih pravic in okolja ter Pravne mreže za varstvo demokracije, da ta manever predstavlja nevaren precedens, ki ogroža temelje lokalne demokracije.
Pobudniki referenduma so tudi opozarjali, da občina v oglasu, objavljenem v glasilu Ljubljana, javnosti ne predstavlja vseh dejstev, povezanih z odlokom in referendumskim postopkom. "Zadevo glede višjih cen nočnega parkiranja je zakuhal mestni svet s sklepom o umiku celotnega parkirnega odloka, in ne pobudniki referenduma," poudarjajo v Civilni iniciativi. Po njihovem mnenju je za trenutno veljavno višjo ceno nočnega parkiranja odgovoren sklep mestnega sveta o umiku celotnega odloka. Če bi volivci zavrnili zgolj sporni določbi odloka, bi po njihovih navedbah nižja cena nočnega parkiranja lahko ostala v veljavi, saj referendumska pobuda tega dela odloka ne zadeva. Nasprotno pa umik celotnega odloka pomeni, da nižja cena ne more začeti veljati.
Pobudniki se ne strinjajo
16 reports
Siol.netState / PublicCenterFactual 95Objective 8517 days agoThe City of Ljubljana has decided not to participate in the campaign ahead of a referendum on a revised parking regulation. Mayor Zoran Janković stated that the outcome of the referendum cannot change anything since the decision being voted on no longer exists. The city had already withdrawn the regulation, which, according to Janković, achieved the goal of those who initiated the referendum. Deputy Mayor Boštjan Koritnik emphasized respect for democratic will but noted that once the legitimate goal of the referendum is achieved, further actions are no longer legally protected.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both the mayor's and deputy mayor's perspectives without overtly favoring one side. It reports their statements objectively, highlighting their arguments against the referendum's relevance while acknowledging the democratic process. There is no clear ideological framing or bias,
Why these scores (Factual 95 · Objective 85): The article accurately reports Janković's statements about the city not participating in the referendum campaign. It includes relevant quotes and maintains a neutral tone overall.
RTV Slovenija (MMC)State / PublicCenterFactual 95Objective 8517 days agoThe mayor of Ljubljana, Zoran Janković, stated that the municipality will not participate in the campaign for a referendum on a revised parking regulation, arguing that the outcome of the referendum cannot change anything. He noted that the municipality has already withdrawn the decision, which he claims was the goal of the referendum organizers. The deputy mayor emphasized that the only legitimate aim of the referendum is to achieve the withdrawal of the disputed act.
Bias read (Center): The article presents statements from both the mayor and his deputy without overtly favoring one side. It includes direct quotes from officials and does not introduce biased language or selective sourcing. The content focuses on factual statements regarding the referendum and the municipality's nonin
Why these scores (Factual 95 · Objective 85): The article accurately reports Janković's stance on not participating in the referendum campaign. It includes quotes from him and his deputy, maintaining a relatively objective tone despite some critical language towards the initiative.
N1 SlovenijaIndependentCenterFactual 95Objective 8017 days agoThe City Municipality of Ljubljana has decided not to participate in the campaign ahead of a referendum on a revised parking regulation. Mayor Zoran Janković stated that the outcome of the referendum cannot change anything, as the decision would be about something that no longer exists. He criticized the organizers of the referendum, claiming they have different goals than what they publicly state. Deputy Mayor Boštjan Koritnik described the withdrawal of the regulation as the 'culmination of respect for democratic public opinion.'
Bias read (Center): The article presents statements from both the mayor and deputy mayor without overtly favoring one side. It reports their positions objectively, with no clear editorializing or biased language.
Why these scores (Factual 95 · Objective 80): This article accurately reports Janković's statements regarding the non-participation of the city in the referendum campaign. The content is factual and based on his press conference, though there is a slight bias in describing the opposition as having different motives.
Ljubljanske noviceIndependentCenterFactual 90Objective 9022 days agoThe article announces that a supplementary referendum in the City Municipality of Ljubljana will take place on Sunday, July 12, 2026.
Bias read (Center): The article provides a straightforward announcement without any framing, commentary, or emphasis that suggests a political leaning. It simply states the date and nature of the event without additional context or interpretation.
Why these scores (Factual 90 · Objective 90): The article simply states the date of the referendum without additional context or commentary, making it highly factual and neutral.
24ur (POP TV)IndependentCenterFactual 90Objective 8517 days agoA civil initiative has collected over 14,000 signatures supporting a referendum against a local parking regulation decision in Ljubljana. The initiative criticizes the municipality for not presenting all facts related to the decision and the referendum process in an advertisement published in the Ljubljana Gazette. The municipality had previously withdrawn the decision but the referendum organizers argue this withdrawal was legally questionable. They emphasize that the referendum does not address the cost of overnight parking, only specific sections of the regulation regarding the allocationof
Bias read (Center): The article presents both the stance of the civil initiative and the municipality without overtly favoring either side. It includes direct quotes from both parties and explains their positions neutrally.
Why these scores (Factual 90 · Objective 85): The article presents a balanced view of the referendum issue, including perspectives from both the city and the initiative group. It is mostly factual and maintains a neutral tone throughout.
RTV Slovenija (MMC)State / PublicCenterFactual 90Objective 8517 days ago Janković: The municipality will not participate in the referendum campaign.The mayor of Ljubljana, Zoran Janković, stated that the municipality will not participate in the campaign for a referendum on a revised parking regulation, arguing that the outcome of the referendum cannot change anything. He noted that the municipality has already withdrawn the decision, which he claims achieved the goal of the referendum organizers. The organizers, however, argue that the decision to withdraw should not have been made.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both perspectives without overtly favoring one side. It includes direct quotes from both the mayor and the referendum organizers, allowing readers to form their own opinions based on the provided information.
Why these scores (Factual 90 · Objective 85): This article presents detailed quotes from Zoran Janković and his arguments against participating in the referendum campaign. It accurately reports the official stance of the municipality and includes direct statements from officials. While it acknowledges the opposition's viewpoint, it frames the s
Radio OgnjiščeParty-alignedCenterFactual 85Objective 7520 days agoCivilna iniciativa za Ljubljano has launched a campaign ahead of a referendum on changes to Ljubljana's parking decree, scheduled for July 12. This will be the third municipal referendum since 2000 and the first initiated by a large-scale action by residents of the capital city. The civil society group, dissatisfied with Ljubljana's parking policy, collected over 14,000 signatures in support of the referendum. They oppose the introduction of paid parking in neighborhoods and permits for residents.
Bias read (Center): The article presents factual information about the referendum and the initiative behind it without overtly favoring any side. It reports on the actions of the civil initiative and their opposition to specific aspects of the parking policy but does not include biased language, one-sided sourcing, or顯
Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 75): The article gives a clear overview of the civil initiative's position and their criticisms of the city's leadership. It includes direct quotes from Sarah Ženko and explains the legal concerns surrounding the revocation of the decision during the referendum process. However, the tone is somewhat bias
Nova24TVParty-alignedCenterFactual 85Objective 7015 days agoThe article discusses the situation around the upcoming referendum in Ljubljana, focusing on the claim by Mayor Zoran Janković that the City of Ljubljana (MOL) will not participate in the referendum campaign. However, it highlights that LPP (Ljubljanski potniški promet), a public transport company fully owned by MOL, has actively participated in the campaign through social media promotion. The article notes that LPP posted a video on TikTok promoting improved bus connections in the Štepanjsko neighborhood, which includes imagery of the City of Ljubljana, suggesting an official endorsement. Jnk
Bias read (Center): The article presents facts without overtly biased language or framing. It reports on the actions of both the mayor and the LPP company, noting their conflicting positions but does not take a stance on either side.
Why these scores (Factual 85 · Objective 70): The article provides detailed information about Janković's statements and the indirect involvement of LPP, which is owned by the MOL. It accurately describes the situation but uses some emotionally charged language like 'epicenter of signature collection' and 'political theater,' which may affect ob
DeloIndependent🔒CenterFactual 80Objective 7015 days agoSix organizers have joined the campaign ahead of the Ljubljana referendum on a revised parking decision. The referendum, scheduled for July 12, was triggered by a civil initiative collecting over 14,000 signatures opposing the city's new parking regulations, which would introduce paid parking and permits for residents. The city council initially approved the decision but later withdrew it, leading to legal disputes over whether the withdrawal was lawful. The mayor has stated that the organizers should withdraw their referendum request following the withdrawal of the decision.
Bias read (Center): The article presents both perspectives—those supporting the referendum and those opposing it—without overtly favoring either side. It includes statements from both the organizers and the city administration, providing balanced coverage of the legal dispute and the reasons behind the referendum. No明显
Why these scores (Factual 80 · Objective 70): The article provides factual information about the six organizing parties involved in the referendum campaign and the timeline of events. It also mentions the number of signatures collected and the legal debate over the revocation of the decision. However, it takes a somewhat neutral stance while st
DeloIndependent🔒CenterFactual 75Objective 7018 days ago Political acrobatics or a democratic celebration for Ljubljana residents?The article discusses an upcoming referendum in Ljubljana on July 12th, where residents will decide whether to support a proposed amendment to the municipal regulation regarding parking in residential areas. The piece outlines key questions surrounding the referendum, including who supports it, the positions of the Municipal Council (MOL) and civil initiatives, and the potential costs involved.
Bias read (Center): The article provides factual information about an upcoming referendum without taking a stance or using biased language. It presents the event neutrally, focusing on the details of the referendum rather than promoting any particular viewpoint.
Why these scores (Factual 75 · Objective 70): The article provides basic facts about the upcoming referendum in Ljubljana regarding parking regulations. It mentions the date, the nature of the vote, and some background on the political situation. However, it lacks specific details about the legal status of the decision being revoked and does no
ReporterIndependentCenterFactual 60Objective 5515 days agoA referendum in Ljubljana has seen six candidates opposing Janković.
Bias read (Center): The summary is neutral, stating facts without apparent bias. The headline mentions opposition to Janković but does not imply favoritism toward any side. No clear framing or loaded language is evident.
Why these scores (Factual 60 · Objective 55): The article is brief and does not provide enough detail about the referendum or Janković's position. Its lack of depth impacts both factual accuracy and neutrality.
VečerIndependent🔒CenterFactual 60Objective 5523 days agoThe article discusses Uroš Jauševec testing the political pulse of Ljubljana and speculates on who could potentially challenge Zoran Janković, suggesting Anton Rop as a possible candidate.
Bias read (Center): The article does not present any clear ideological framing, word choice, emphasis, or sourcing that indicates a particular political lean. It appears to be a neutral discussion of potential political dynamics without overt bias.
Why these scores (Factual 60 · Objective 55): The article discusses political dynamics in Ljubljana but does not focus on the referendum itself. It lacks specificity and has a somewhat biased tone.
DomovinaIndependentCenterFactual 60Objective 5023 days agoThe article discusses two lawsuits filed against the renovation project of Ljubljana's market by Mayor Zoran Janković. The first lawsuit was filed by the owner of a parcel along the canal C0 regarding the excavation of pipes. The second lawsuit, filed by the non-governmental organization Alpe Adria Green and the civic initiative 'Tržnice ne damo,' challenges the administrative unit of Ljubljana's decision to issue an integrated building permit for the complete renovation of Mahrov House, construction of an underground parking house under the open market, full renovation of Vodnik Square, and a
Bias read (Center): The article presents factual information about legal actions taken against a city renovation project without overtly favoring any political side. It reports on the legal proceedings and involved parties neutrally.
Why these scores (Factual 60 · Objective 50): The article focuses on a different topic related to the renovation of the market and does not directly address the referendum. It has a biased tone and lacks relevance to the main event.
DomovinaIndependentLeft10 days ago In Ljubljana, we are 18 days away from the referendum what will be the message to the mayor?The article discusses an upcoming referendum in Ljubljana regarding a decision aimed at regulating parking in residential areas. Opposition groups, including CILJ and the initiative 'Križank ne damo,' have gathered over 14,000 verified signatures against the decision and are urging residents to vote against it on July 12. They argue that the mayor, Zoran Janković, has acted unilaterally and ignored public concerns, citing issues such as controversial spending on the municipal magazine 'Supermesto' and the sale of public parking spaces to private investors under his leadership. The opposition claims these actions have created unnecessary congestion and benefited private interests while burdening ordinary citizens with additional costs.
Bias read (Left): The article frames the opposition to the mayor's decisions as a legitimate response to perceived authoritarianism and misuse of public resources. It uses strong language to criticize the mayor's actions, portraying them as self-serving and dismissive of public opinion. The tone emphasizes grassroots
Nova24TVParty-alignedLeft14 days ago Janković must be defeated in a referendum, otherwise the disputed ruling will be invalidated.The mayor of Ljubljana, Andrej Janković, faces potential challenges from a local referendum scheduled for July 12, which could impact his position ahead of November's elections. The referendum aims to allow residents to reject a controversial new parking regulation that has significantly increased living costs in the capital. Janković claims the referendum is irrelevant because he believes the decision was withdrawn and not published in the Official Gazette, citing advice from constitutional lawyers. However, constitutional lawyer Janez Pogorelec disputed this claim, stating that the decision remains valid under the Local Self-Government Act. Critics, including civil initiatives and legal experts, argue that Janković is misleading the public by suggesting the referendum lacks substance.
Bias read (Left): The article frames Janković's actions as misleading and highlights criticism from legal experts and civil initiatives, implying a negative view of his governance and decisions. It emphasizes the controversy around the parking regulation and portrays the referendum as significant for democratic input
Info360IndependentCenter22 days agoThe article discusses growing dissatisfaction among residents of Ljubljana with the actions of the city council led by mayor Zoran Janković, particularly regarding parking issues. In the radio program 'V Središču,' local council members from different parties—including SDS, Demokrati, and Lista Zorana Jankovića—discuss the upcoming local elections scheduled for November 15, 2026, which are expected to be competitive. The discussion also covers potential responsibilities if Canal C0 does not receive a usable permit, as well as the significant increase in parking fees affecting employed individuals who must drive into the city center due to unreliable public transportation.
Bias read (Center): The article presents a balanced discussion involving multiple political figures from different parties, focusing on municipal governance and upcoming elections. While there is criticism of the current administration, the framing remains neutral, with no clear ideological slant toward either side. It
Slovenia
