So much for wanting an informed electorate....

[djonn]

I got a call a month or so back from a political pollster, wanting to know my views on a charter amendment coming up for a vote next month, which would if approved change Portland's form of government rather drastically.  I answered all the questions to the best of my ability, but told the caller that I hadn't yet made up my mind, as I was waiting to get my Voters' Pamphlet so I could read the measure and study it in detail.

The Voters' Pamphlet arrived today -- but it's not going to be as much of a help as I'd hoped.

Why not, you ask?  Because the text of that proposed charter amendment isn't in it.  Nor are the texts of any of the other three proposed charter amendments Portland voters are supposed to be voting on in the upcoming election.

It must be a misprint or a defective copy, right?  Apparently not.  All the pages are properly numbered.  Everything else is there -- ballot title, short summary, arguments in favor and in opposition -- but not the proposed amendments themselves.  And a Web check reveals that neither Web iteration of the Voters' Pamphlet (HTML or PDF) includes the amendment texts either.  Nor does any version of the Voters' Pamphlet include so much as a URL where one might find the amendment texts.

No . . . as far as I can tell, it appears that city and county officials are asking voters to decide four significant issues without letting us read the legislation we're supposed to be voting on.  And here Portland is supposed to be one of the most progressive cities in the US, too.

I have sent off a polite but astonished note via the county elections office's Web-feedback form.  I have also sent off a note to my favorite local TV news station.  We shall see what happens....

Comments

[djonn]

That's my objection, yes -- I think the full texts ought to be in the Voters' Pamphlet. And although you're correct that the material is on the city Web site, you have to go look for yourself, and you have to know where to look for it (which isn't 100% intuitive, since most voters are likely to go from the county-issued Voters' Pamphlet to the county elections department that issued it).

I can see, having glanced at the 80-page PDF for the form-of-government measure, why the county might have been reluctant to print it in full; that would have been a substantial expense. But I fail to see why county elections officials didn't at least provide the pointer to the City Web page in the Voters' Pamphlet itself (and perhaps offer to send printed texts to voters on explicit request).

As it is, the county's choice is inconsistent with the state's practice of including the texts of ballot measures in state-issued Voters' Pamphlets, and requires voters to make an effort that they should not have to make in order to obtain complete voting information. That's confusing at best, and legally questionable at worst; I can see the losing "side" on any one of these charter changes filing a lawsuit based on the omission.

[brashley46.livejournal.com]

One more thing, there, John, is that it seems to me to assume that every voter has Internet access. Which is not necessarily the case, even here in bigcity Toronto.

We Ontarians are going to be voting on a proportional-representation proposal this coming Fall, and they'd better have the exact wording available to everybody.

[martianmooncrab.livejournal.com]

they are just trying to save your brain from all those words and concepts..

[darcyjavanne.livejournal.com]

John, you silly man, don't you realize that educating the voters is a BAD thing?? ;-)

Here's the pdfs of the actual documents-as-filed: http://www.co.multnomah.or.us/dbcs/elections/2007-05/voters_pamphlet_filing.shtml#measure
(or, slightly more than what you see in the Voter's Pamphlet).