This three-part series will provide guidance on how to successfully pass a ballot measure, including garnering community support, identifying critical factors, effective communication techniques, and legal requirements. Let’s start with current voter perceptions.

THE VOTER ENVIRONMENT. Everyone wants their tax measure to be successful. The question of what makes a successful tax measure becomes more imperative as revenue fails to meet increasing financial and service demands; and as it becomes ever more challenging to convince voters to support the measure.

Many factors lead to success at the ballot box and they may differ significantly among jurisdictions depending on the local political climate. This article seeks to identify those commonalities among successful tax measures despite local conditions. Keep in mind: they aren’t much different than forty years ago. But in today’s world, they are far more critical.

As we look at ranking the factors, it is almost impossible to define which is more important. We need to understand what’s different today than in the past that affects our ability to get new taxes approved.

First, our voting population has become disconnected from their government. People simply do not understand (or often care) how their government services are funded. We don’t teach “civics” in school anymore. People are leading busy lives; and, they have a much higher expectation of what their local government should be doing for them. A city’s responsibility to create a vibrant and connected community or that they are the source of revenue to pay for the services citizens demand does not resonate with many voters, particularly the younger ones.

This is compounded by the confusing and convoluted way revenue flows to local governments within the State of California. Have you recently tried to explain to voters in your area how much of their Property Taxes actually funds local municipal services? Or what ERAF I and ERAF II are, why there was a triple flip and what it actually does, or why Charter cities can do things General Law cities can’t?  It’s almost impossible…and when you do, they are confused and disbelieving!

Second, there is a very shallow trust of government in general. When asked, many voters will express serious doubt that their governments (local, state, federal) manage money well. True this trust tends to be greater at the local levels, but it is still much more fragile than in past decades. If that is the predominant perception among target voters, why vote to give that entity more money? We’ve all heard it: “If they managed what they have better, we wouldn’t have to pay more taxes.” Social media continually highlights elected and appointed corruption and mismanagement; and even though it isn’t municipal staff doing these things, yet we often get painted by the same brush.

Third, price elasticity. Wages have not kept up with the cost of living in California. Voters are getting hit by tax and ballot measures from local government, special districts, state government et al. They are feeling rate increases in utilities and we are increasing local fees for permits and services. All of this money emanates from the same place – the pockets of our residents and businesses. We are reaching, and in many cases have reached, the tolerance limits of voters’ willingness and ability to pay more.

Part II of this three part series will provide a case study for the City of Hayward, who successfully passed two local ballot measure in succeeding election years with overwhelming support (67.3% and 73%). Yes, it’s possible. Don’t miss out on learning how to make it happen.