As we discussed at our last meeting, August 15th at noon is the deadline for submission of ballot arguments to be eligible for free selection to be printed in the voter information pamphlet.
Most of them seem like obvious responses for us, but I still need to dig through a couple. I'll follow up with more information on this soon, but in the meantime please think about taking on writing an argument for the party on any of these measures that moves you.
There are six measures and we should be able to come up with six arguments! And I'm going to insist we have them ready the day before they are due. More info to come.
It will be interesting to bring this up to the Ballot Simplification Committee and see how they address it. Want to go with me to some of their meetings this coming week?
Thanks, Mike. I'm not sure I understand the statement below, "They are saying Sec 510 will govern this ballot word count when it only allows for a maximum of 100 words". Can you clarify what you mean by that?
Given the complexity of all this, I'm thinking it may be desirable to send the Ballot Simplification Committee something in writing about it stating our position. Here is a brief outline of what such a letter might look like.. Would you care to expand on it?
Still not feeling like I see the big picture, Mike... Perhaps if you modify my letter below to correctly cite the alleged violation?
Sorry you can't make the Ballot Simplification Committee meeting Monday, at least until mid-afternoon – anyone else like to go? It's an excellent way to learn more about the ballot measures and you can weigh in on the proposed descriptions if you see anything you think should be changed.
You can take this out.
According to Elections Code section 9051, "The ballot title and summary... shall not exceed 100 words, not including the fiscal impact statement." (See https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/elections-code/elec-sect-9051.html).
You can show CA law for 75 words and address the issue of promotional language.
These different numbers are confusing me as to what is and what isn't relevant here and why. Can you edit the draft letter to make the case for what you believe they need to do in order to be in compliance with the law, citing the language from the state code(s) that you believe applies?
Actually, the BSC is not the appropriate body to present this information too. They are not going to change the ballot statement. They are only going to draft ancillary language to go with it. That language is not governed by the law.
Well, that makes a difference! Looking at the past formats, I think you're right. Neither the Ballot Simplification Committee's digest, nor the controller's statement, appear on the actual ballot, only the language prepared by the city attorney. So you're saying that is the only part that is governed by these length restrictions in state law?
Well not exactly.....during our call tonight Richard presented new case law in support of ANYTHING that is contained in the ballot handbook along with support information still has to remain impartial. He can talk to you about it tomorrow before you go. His number sent to you under separate cover.