Clerk’s office compares April 5 approval rates to those in 10-year study
Cass Cliatt
Friday, April 08, 2005
About 52 percent of the referendums on Tuesday’s ballots in suburban Cook County were approved by voters, down slightly from the 10-year trend in approval rates revealed by a recent report released by Cook County Clerk David Orr.
Voters said “yes” to 35 out of 67 ballot questions this week that were dominated by 40 tax- and bond-related referendums.
Keeping pace with the 10-year trend, support remained greater for ballot questions seeking tax increases through “bond” rather than “tax” wording, 50 percent versus 47.1 percent. However, the margin was much smaller than in the Clerk’s 10-year study, where a 69 percent approval rate for referendums worded as “bond issues” seemed to indicate that wording makes a difference among voters who voted “no” to ballot questions with strict “tax” wording 44 percent of the time.
A first-ever analysis of referendums released before the election showed that local jurisdictions in the suburbs -- cities and villages; townships; the county; and park, library, school, fire and sanitary districts; – put 537 tax and bond referendums on ballots over the past 10 years, and voters supported 274 of them.
“Our recent analysis showed that voters in general are supportive of efforts to improve the communities where they live and work,” Orr said. “We saw on Tuesday that really hasn’t changed.”
Overall, when considering 891 referendums from Feb. 1995 to Feb. 2005, the report showed voters gave approval 57 percent of the time, a rate 5 percent higher than for Tuesday’s election.
Voter support for school district and township ballot questions saw the biggest declines Tuesday when compared to the 10-year average, while support for park and library district referendums increased.
Initiatives dealing with management of local government continued to enjoy wide support, with three out of three school districts voting to abolish the township treasurer of schools position. Still, efforts to establish home-rule authority failed, continuing a trend of spotty support for such initiatives.
“In particular, our study showed large approval rates for measures that residents might see as streamlining government,” Orr said. “We saw that again on Tuesday when 71 percent of the government-related referendums won voter support.”
Orr’s 10-year referendum study did not attempt to predict voting for future elections, but rather to provide a historical picture of voting habits and how and when local jurisdictions pose questions to voters.
The detailed 10-year report is available on the Clerk’s elections website www.voterinfonet.com.
Explanation of referendum categories -- April 5, 2005 Consolidated Election
Tax-related referendums
Included referendums seeking voter approval for adjustments to tax rates, tax caps and tax extensions, as well as ballot questions that would affect taxes through the issue of bonds.
Government referendums
Dealt with such issues as establishing home-rule authority, abolishing the township treasurer of schools position and establishing a new jurisdiction.
Infrastructure referendums Asked voters solely if they approve of such initiatives as the construction of new buildings, renovations to existing buildings, etc. The wording of many of these referendums was advisory in nature and did not focus on the cost of funding the improvements. Ballot questions focusing on collecting funds for the improvements were counted among tax referendums.
Service referendums Asked voters to support changes in the services offered by city, village, township and county governments – in the case of the April 2005 election, refuse disposal.
School, park, fire and library jurisdictions did not appear in this category – although the argument could be made that they are exclusively service-based institutions – unless their ballot questions dealt with changes to a specific service program.
Miscellaneous referendums
Asked voters if they would support buying or selling residential and commercial properties, creating new zip codes, annexations, making changes to the jurisdiction’s debt service, etc.
Click here for: The numbers – April 5, 2005* (Suburban Cook County)
*(Requires Adobe Acrobat Reader)