Los Angeles has traditionally had an impact with respect to urban growth issues on other cities, including ours.  Speculation on what the defeat of Measure S signifies, and whether it is all that relevant to YVR, is welcome in Comments.

From the Los Angeles Times, March 8:

Labor and business leaders declared victory Tuesday night over a bitterly contested ballot measure that would have imposed new restrictions on building apartment towers, shops and offices in Los Angeles.

As of midnight, returns showed Measure S going down to defeat by a 2-1 margin, with more than half of precincts reporting. …

Neighborhood activists had championed Measure S as a way to reform a broken planning process at City Hall, arguing that it would prevent out-of-scale projects that ramp up traffic and fuel gentrification.

But opponents — including labor unions, business groups and Mayor Eric Garcetti — warned it could eliminate jobs and exacerbate the housing crisis, throwing the city into economic turmoil.

The divisive campaign doubled as a referendum on urbanist dreams of a denser, taller Los Angeles, bemoaned by critics as the “Manhattanization” of L.A. …

As the battle over Measure S raged this year, local lawmakers hustled to speed up updates to community plans that guide neighborhood development. Garcetti pledged last fall that he would ban private meetings between developers and planning commissioners …

Measure S targeted the long-standing practice of changing city rules to permit buildings that are taller or denser than the established restrictions would ordinarily allow.

It would have imposed a moratorium lasting up to two years on building projects that require zone changes and other alterations in city rules. It also targeted the controversial practice of “spot zoning” by barring Los Angeles officials from amending the General Plan — a document that governs development across the city — to make way for individual projects in areas they would otherwise be banned.

But the campaign was hardly a dry debate between planning wonks.

At news conferences and rallies, the Yes on S campaign railed against City Hall corruption, the eviction of poor tenants, rising homelessness and the health threats to children living along freeways.

Campaign director Jill Stewart argued that the city has been deviled by a “pay-to-play” culture in which politicians agree to rewrite zoning rules for real estate developers who sink money into their campaigns. …

Much of the debate revolved around whether Measure S would help or hurt tenants as rents continue to soar. Backers of the ballot measure argued that it would combat luxury towers that were displacing longtime renters.

Opponents countered it would squelch housing production and accelerate evictions by blocking development on land that isn’t zoned for housing.

 

And there was also this on the ballot:

Los Angeles voters also weighed in Tuesday on how to regulate marijuana: A ballot measure that would allow Los Angeles to tax and license commercial cannabis shops was leading by a hefty margin Tuesday night. A competing measure that was later abandoned by its proponents was trailing.