Yes! on Proposition U should have been your editorial for three reasons.
1--If the voters did otherwise, is there any doubt whatsoever that our pro-development council would pounce upon this to declare a mandate for greater development? You incorrectly suggest the populace would react with a second initiative, as though the incredible amounts of work and dedication required were as easily collected as are political contributions from developers.
2--The recent flurry of ordinances are clearly not designed to respond to the will of the people, as you contend, but is rather a power ploy to squelch that will. The council's rush to rezone 52,000 parcels of land without adequate hearings and the stampede to exempt from the proposition's reach 20 and 30 years of massive development in the Westchester area are just two examples of the council's contempt for what the people want and need.
3--Proposition U will not prevent development. It will only place the burden of proving need on those who wish to build larger buildings. It is the developers who have the money to hire the experts, present the testimony, and who can pull the political strings to make their case. For too many years the residents of this city, the alleged constituents, have had to rely on minuscule finances, volunteer time, and missed work to attend public hearings in their attempts to save their city from the horrendous traffic and density problems that are the very wellspring of Proposition U. It is time the burden was placed where it belongs--on the developers.