[ad_1]
How well did you know or understand its implications the last time you voted in the referendum?
The government puts the referendum to the ballot for all sorts of things. Tax increases beyond acceptable property tax hikes are most common in suburbs, bond issuance is also common, and borrowing money for large projects is common. A referendum can be as grand as a call to amend a state constitution.
Referendums are often accompanied by important information campaigns. But do you always know the pros and cons of your proposal?
What would you do if you were asked to do
As a matter of fact, this year’s state constitutional amendment called for it. The Illinois Constitution Amendment Act requires that a “brief description of such amendment,” a “brief argument in favor of the same,” and a “brief argument against” be given and issued in pamphlets to the Secretary of State. says it won’t. It will be mailed to all households and can be downloaded from the office’s website.
So did this year’s statewide amendments to union bargaining rights. A very simple pamphlet was produced with one paragraph explaining, one paragraph in favor and one paragraph in dissenting opinion. comprehensive? No, but what?
So what if all governments submitting referendums had to do so? Many of those governments have already provided information about them, so you might say it wasn’t necessary. , it has rubbing.
Let’s say it’s a school district. School districts are permitted to distribute “information” about the referendum. That is, asking voters directly for their approval.
But that line is blurry. When Warren Township High School District 121 titled its June referendum pamphlet in big, well-designed type, “Investing in Students,” was it informational or a campaign? To the district’s credit, the pamphlet properly quantifies the tax increase, and the wording is very discreet. (Voters approved the tax increase.)
But Batavia Unit 101 District said this fall, when it provided information about a $140 million request to replace two schools and do other work, it said it would “issue bonds at the same time as repaying existing debt.” , generate funds…raise property taxes on bonds and interest.” That’s true, but it wasn’t said that property taxes would be reduced if the district didn’t take on the new debt. (This proposal was rejected by just 24 votes.)
A pamphlet like the one the states require in constitutional amendments could have provided simple pros and cons. There are also other ideas to consider, both locally and nationally. California legislators proposed requiring disclosure of top donors in the referendum petition, then demanding disclosure of people, businesses or organizations supporting and opposing the bill. In a referendum question, Idaho legislators proposed asserting their rights over what the additional tax would be spent on.
Also, check out the Arizona Secretary of State’s 2022 General Election Information Brochure, which is required by Arizona law. It provides a much larger list of pros and cons for every referendum statewide (there were 10!). Such requirements go a long way toward providing transparency and resulting in a more informed vote.
[ad_2]
Source link
