Jack, I'm with you on every ballot measure. A miracle? I hope over 50% of the voters have come to realizations that you have. It's almost like common sense.

Jack, you got them all right.

Is it just me or does the wording of the ballot question for the term limits measure seem particularly loaded?

"Shall County Charter limit on voters' right to elect a person to more than two four-year terms be repealed?"

Do the county measures have to go through the same committee process as state measures relative to titling and wording?

The library district measure is particularly disingenuous, and the promoters amazingly dishonest.

The county can form a library distruct without the current ballot measure. To do so, the county needs consent from each other taxing jurisdiction in the geographic area encompassed by the proposed taxing district.

So, just get say, PPS and david Douglas, to agree to a new taxing district, with the effect that compression will have on their individual tax receipts.

Yeah. No library district under that scenario. Just like the defeat of the Tualatin UR district renewal and expansion because of the objextion by TVF&R. So instead we get the current end run proposal, sold on the basis of "...its for the kids..."

What is truly outrageous is that MultCo screams, rightly, when CoP plays the urban renewal district game which cuts into county revenues, yet here turns around and does the same thing to every other taxing district / jurisdiction.

Two faced scum on the County Commission.

When the district is formed, and the tax levy is passed by the sheeple in the district ("It's for the kids") the schools and other taxing districts will still get reduced revenues because of the compression mechanism.

Phrasing it as involving a "voters' right" is so disingenuous. Right now, voters aren't entitled to elect someone a third time, and so in fact there is no "right."

If they have to rig a ballot measure, it's just another indication that it doesn't deserve a "yes" vote.

I had to read, re-read, parse, re-parse the term limit measure to get at what I was supposedly voting for/against. Dirt bags, every single one of the twerps who strung that question together.

Term limits freed the county of the previous bunch. I used to be staunchly anti-term limit, until I saw how entrenched some politicians become. If only we had term limits for certain senior senators

I disagree with you about the election dates for a vacant county board position. I voted yes for the May/November elections, since a lot more people are inclined to vote during the regular elections vs. a special election. Holding an election as soon as possible doesn't give a lot of time for potential candidates to decide to run, and to muster the resources to do so.

Wouldn't it make sense to disallow appointees to open seats from running for that position?
I've always thought the appointing was a gaming that undermines fair competiton in an election.

Great analysis. However, the "Oregon" Historical Society tax is 26-118, not 26-115.

Like the "Oregon" Convention Center and "Oregon" Zoo, metro-area taxpayers never get the credit for subsidizing these state-sounding institutions.

Thanks for the correction on the measure number, which I've fixed.

Agree with you across the board EXCEPT for 26-110. I don't think that just because you are working in elected office, you should have to quit to apply for a better job.

I can interview for a better position while maintaining my current position. If interviewing for that job detrimentally effects my performance of my current job, I'll probably get fired. So should a politician at the next election if they've neglected their current job to apply for another. But we shouldn't restrict them from doing so.

Nah. They waste three to six months of the taxpayers' money neglecting their existing office to run for the new one. And/or using their existing office to run for the new one.