If You Only Read the Ballot Language You May Be Being Duped

The Need for Proper Evaluation of Local Government Ballot Measures

Numerous distinguished editorials plus Grand Jury investigations in three Bay Area counties have shown that there is a great public need for an independent evaluation of the misleading language used in local government ballot measures. As the Alameda County Grand Jury report in 2021 exposed, nearly all the 75-word ballot language (also called ballot labels) proposed by local governments suffers from strong proponent bias and a lack of needed information for a voter to make an informed decision. This is not surprising considering that everyone involved with the creation of the ballot language is interested in the measure passing. Transparency is lacking as are any checks and balances. No person or agency is required to review and approve the 75-word ballot language for fairness and accuracy. The 75-word ballot label which is typically the only thing many voters ever see in making their decision on the measure before them. In spite of the apparent bias and inaccuracies found in what we see, State law requires ballot labels to be “a true and impartial synopsis of the purpose of the proposed measure, and shall be in language that is neither argumentative nor likely to create prejudice for or against the measure”. Clearly, the law is not being followed.

After careful examination of the problem, and the unwillingness of local governments to fix the problem, the Alameda County Civil Grand Jury Association believes we have developed an effective solution styled after the popular YELP rating system.  Active members of the Alameda County Grand Jury Association, itself, have stepped up to take on this important task of rating upcoming local ballot measures. This impartial and experienced civic organization provides the necessary expertise to evaluate upcoming local ballot measures in a timely fashion and in a manner consistent with the time limits and procedures required by state election law.

Listed below is necessary background information which outlines what ballot information should be provided, and illustrates the lack of meaningful information most cities, counties, school districts and special districts provide in their 75-word Ballot label.  

Our solution to the lack of transparency in Ballot Wording is to perform an objective review by a select committee based on the following:

• The rating body will be the Alameda County Civil Grand Jury Association composed of past Civil Grand Jury members in good standing.
• We will use a 5-star rating system that resembles a Yelp Score with which almost everyone is familiar
• The members of the ACCGJA will be analyzing each measure with the final score simply being the numerical average of all the raters being combined to create an average score.
• Not to exceed 15 rating members.
• The results will be posted on the ACCGJA website as well as given to the local agency proposing the measure and distributed to the press and interested civic organizations.
• As an option, the individual cities or agencies will be given the opportunity to submit the proposed measure to the rating panel in advance to learn what score their proposed ballot language would receive. The ACCGJA will provide a response within 3-4 days of submittal. The goal is to help in advance in order to have a more complete 75-word document for the voters.
• The ACCGJA response will not tell the agency what to write but will detail what information is missing or causes a lower score.
• We strongly emphasize that the ACCGJA is NOT interested in the merits of any ballot measure being proposed. Our only concern is that the ballot label has complete information, is accurate and unbiased as required by law.

CAN AN AGENCY PUT ALL THE INFORMATION WITHIN THE 75 WORD BALLOT LABEL?                                                                                 

Even though many politicians, city council members, public school administrators, etc. sometimes claim that the 75-word limit prevents them from including all of the information they should put in the ballot label, the 2021 Grand Jury report shows that it is possible to provide consistent and reasonably complete information to the voters within the 75 word ballot label limitation, simply by limiting extraneous verbiage put there to argue for passage. A template has been designed around the information that is needed so that each type of measure (tax, bond, and misc. other types) would be required to fill in the information in those specific fields for that type of measure. 

As a comparison, most are familiar with a nutrition label on a food products, which is a template for a food’s contents. We can have a similar template for a ballot measure’s contents. A ballot language template should produce a consistent format, with necessary details and monetary values provided to the voter. The limiting factor of only 75 words makes this more difficult, but is certainly doable. An explanation could be included for additional information about that proposed measure (with more detail) and where to find it. Listed below is an example of how ballot language could look if the Alameda County Grand Jury Association model were adopted, with a blank provided for the answer to the individual information requested. A potential response and the number of words needed to do that is shown. 

The majority of local ballot measures are Bond or Tax Measures. 

For each type of ballot measure, the information the voter needs, and the amount of words it would take are listed below for any type of ballot measure:

1. BOND MEASURES: GENERAL OBLIGATION, REVENUE AND SCHOOL BONDS 

2. TAX MEASURES: SALES TAXES, PARCEL TAXES, REAL ESTATE TRANSFER, AND EXCISE TAXES 

3. MISCELLANEOUS MEASURES:  NONTAX/NON-FINANCIAL MEASURES   

1.  Bond Measure -Information needed: 

      1. Intent of bond  

      2. Amount of the bond 

      3. The annual cost should be stated in $ per $100,000 of assessed value of a property 

      4. Duration of the bond and total estimated cost to repay the bond 

      5. Is there another similar bond already in place? If so that bond information should be included.

      6. What is the money specifically being spent for?

     7. Is it a Capital appreciation bond or a standard bond?*

     8. Will it take a 2/3, vote or 55% to pass? 

*A capital appreciation bond defers most of the interest cost to later years resulting in a lower initial tax but a significantly greater total repayment cost.

(We might consider merging this list above with the list below since they appear repetitive other than the word count)

Bond Measure –The following template format matches up with the criteria above, and provides examples of answers and the number of words needed to respond. The heading should be self-explanatory by the description so any person could reasonably understand what it is or be able to look it up somewhere on the ballot. No heading is needed for the Intent line which is the 1st line of the 75 word ballot label.  Sample responses are provided.  

 1`.Intent = To build new middle school, seismic retrofit, etc.                                         words 10-15                                  

 2. Amount = $260 million                                                                                               words: 3-4   

3. Annual cost per $100,000 of assessed value=$40                                                  words: 6-8   

4. Duration and estimated bond cost over duration= 30 years/ $550 million             words 11-12        

5. Similar bond = yes, previous $50 million bond maturing in 2029                                                                                                                                  words 3-10                      

6. Money specifically spent on=                                                                                    words: 15-20  

7. Standard or CAB bond= Standard                                                                              words: 1-6 

8. To Pass= 55%                                                                                                               words 3-4 

9. Extraneous language unrelated to the matter which could be considered as deceptive to the voter.

 ***** There are 8 total points possible for Bond Measures. 1 Point for each criteria. Extraneous language could subtract one point if applicable.

 2. Tax Measure. 

Information that should be in a Tax Measure’s ballot wording. Based on that information the voter should be able to easily make an informed decision: 

 Information needed: 

1-Intent and structure of tax (i.e. a % for a sales or transfer tax, or a $ per parcel for a parcel tax)  

2- Amount of the tax generated per year 

3 -Duration of the tax 

4- Is this a Special or General tax?

5- Where is the money specifically going? (If a special tax)

6-Is there another similar tax already in place? If so that tax info should be included. 

7-Will this take 2/3, vote or simple majority to pass? 

8- Extraneous language unrelated to the matter which could be considered as deceptive to the voter.

Tax Measure -Template format that matches up with the criteria above, and number of words needed to respond. The heading should be self-explanatory by the description so any person could reasonably understand what it is or be able to look it up somewhere on the ballot. No heading is needed for the Intent line which is the 1st line of the 75 word ballot label.    

1-Intent and structure of tax (i.e. % or $ per parcel)        words: 10-30 

2-Tax Generated per year=$23 million                               words: 6-7 

3-Duration= 15 years                                                           words: 3-4 

4-Special or General Tax = Special                                    words: 5

5-Money to be spent on =                                                   words: leaves 30+ words for this and the intent section above  

6-Similar Tax already =yes, existing 4% transfer tax       words: 4-8 

7-To pass = 50%+1, or 2/3                                                   words: 3-4 

8- Extraneous language unrelated to the matter which could be considered as deceptive to the voter.

*****There are 7 total points possible for Tax Measures. 1 Point for each criteria. Extraneous language could subtract one point if applicable.

3. Ballot Measures other than a Tax or Bond such as creation or changing of zoning regulations or the General Plan, changes of regulations, advisory bodies, etc.: 

Information needed 

 1-Intent of the Measure –  

2-Are there any financial effects if this measure passes?  If so- how much?

3-Duration of the measure if it passes  

4-Where will the money go that is spent on this if it passes, if applicable  

5-Does the measure deal with 1 or more separate issues?

6-What % needed to pass 

7.-Extraneous language unrelated to the matter which could be considered as deceptive to the voter.

For measures which are neither a tax, bond nor spending issue, such as Hayward’s Measure OO (dealing with allowing non-citizens or minors to serve on city committees), or a zoning or General Plan change, the emphasis of the evaluation should be on clarity of language. Some of the template criteria may be inapplicable. The heading should be self-explanatory in the description, so any person could reasonably understand what is being proposed, or be able to find it somewhere on the ballot. No heading is needed for the Intent line which is the 1st line of the 75 word ballot label.    

 1-Intent of the Measure –                                                               20-35 words 

2-Financial effects and amount, if any =                                       0-15 words, intent and money spent 

3-Duration= 10 years                                                                        words: 3-4  

4-If applicable, Money to be spent will go to=                              words: leaves 30+ words for this, financial effects and intent, if applicable  

5-Does the measure deal with 1 or more issues                      (this is to be determined by the rating panel)      

6- % needed to pass=50%                                                               words: 6-7 

7-Extraneous language unrelated to the matter which could be considered as deceptive to the voter.

7

  *****Because of the variability of what might be proposed on a local ballot, there are a variable number of total points possible for Measures Other Than a Tax or a Bond. The review panel will establish the number of points to be used. Assign 1 Point for each criteria used. One point may be subtracted for extraneous language.

Conclusion: As described above, the proposed solution is a rating panel whose function is to evaluate and rate the proposed local ballot measure’s language. The Alameda County Civil Grand Jury Association’s rating will be based on how accurate and impartial the synopsis is of the purpose of the proposed measure and does the wording accurately and transparently describe the benefits and costs that will be incurred?  

All cities, the county, school districts and other special districts are empowered by state law or by their own charters, if they are charter cities, to pass local ordinances, propose taxes increases, or issue bonds, but only if the increase  is approved by the voters. Most bonds and special taxes require a two-thirds vote. School bonds require a 55% vote, and so-called general taxes require a simple majority vote. A special tax is one dedicated to a particular area of spending, e.g. parks or police, etc. A general tax is one where the revenues can be spent on any civic need. 

Several California cities went bankrupt after the 2008-2009 recession for reasons including past overspending and bond repayment obligations. A better understanding by the voters of what they were voting on may have averted those bankruptcies. The sole concern/focus of this rating system is the language of the up-to-75-word “ballot label”—the only language that all voters will certainly see when voting on a measure, whether or not they read any additional materials. We are not interested in the merits of the measures involved; we are only interested in whether the information is there for the voter to make a more informed vote than in previous years. 

Pertinent Laws on ballot language: (1) Cal. Elec. Code §13119(b): “If the proposed measure imposes a tax or raises the rate of a tax, the ballot shall include in the statement of the measure to be voted on the amount of money to be raised annually and the rate and duration of the tax to be levied.” 

(2). Cal. Elec. Code §13119(c): “The statement of the measure shall be a true and impartial synopsis of the purpose of the proposed measure, and shall be in language that is neither argumentative nor likely to create prejudice for or against the measure.” (Cal. Elec. Code § 9051 states equivalent requirements.)