By Bailey Ludlam

ANNAPOLIS, Maryland: A veto referendum about in-state tuition for illegal immigrants is headed to the 2012 statewide ballot. On Thursday, July 7 election officials announced that a total of 63,118 signatures were verified; exceeding the state requirement.^[1]

Although the proposed measure has already exceeded the minimum 55,736 signature requirement, the measure has not yet been officially certified. According to officials, about 40,000 signatures remain to be verified. Linda Lamone, the state elections administrator, said the petition won’t be officially certified until July 22.^[2]

The veto referendum questions legislation that would allow illegal immigrants to pay in-state or in-county tuition at Maryland colleges. However, in order to qualify students are required to have attended a Maryland high school for three years, as well as prove that their parents or themselves paid taxes. According to reports, the legislation is estimated to cost $3.5 million by 2016.^[3] An estimated 10 other states have adopted similar laws.

By Al Ortiz and Bailey Ludlam

Maryland and Ohio: Veto referendum supporters in Maryland and Ohio have little time to spare. Petition drive deadlines have arrived. In both states, voters may see challenges on legislative bills approved this year on their next statewide ballots.

Maryland

Almost immediately following the approval of Senate Bill 167 legislators and opponents gathered to initiate a petition drive for a veto referendum for the 2012 ballot.

The legislation in question would allow illegal immigrants to pay in-state or in-county tuition at Maryland colleges. However, in order to qualify students are required to have attended a Maryland high school for three years, as well as prove that their parents or themselves paid taxes. According to reports, the legislation is estimated to cost $3.5 million by 2016.^[1] An estimated 10 other states have adopted similar laws.

In order to qualify a veto referendum on the statewide ballot, a minimum of 55,736 valid petition signatures must be submitted by June 30, 2011. The state’s distribution law requires that no more than half of the required signatures be from any one county or the City of Baltimore.

On June 22 election officials validated a total of 47,288 signatures.^[2] However, just one day prior to the deadline, Del. Neil Parrott said he would submit 8,448 signatures to the Maryland Secretary of State’s office at 7 p.m. Thursday, June 30, to meet the midnight deadline.^[3]

The petition drive deadline is June 30, 2011 at midnight. The State Board of Elections has two days to verify the submitted signatures.^[3]

The referendum, however, may still face a legal challenge. According to reports, it is highly likely that the proposed measure may face a lawsuit following the June 30, 2011 petition deadline. Of the initial batch of signatures, it is estimated that approximately 17,000 were gathered online via a website called mdpetitions.com, which some have called into question for the possibility of fraud.

Ohio

According to state law, a total of 231,149 signatures were needed for the proposed Ohio Senate Bill 5 veto referendum to be placed on the statewide 2011 ballot. However, in a record breaking performance, referendum proponents submitted a grand total of 1,298,301 signatures to the Ohio Secretary of State on June 29, 2011 in a parade marching towards the secretary’s offices. This breaks the previously held record of 812,978 signatures in 2008 for a constitutional amendment allowing a casino resort in Clinton County.^[4][5]

According to state law, those signatures must come from least half of the 88 counties in the state. The Ohio Secretary of State now has until July 26, 2011 to verify signatures once they are turned in. On June 17, 2011, less than two weeks before the petition drive deadline, supporters announced the collection of 714,137 signatures.

The June 30 petition drive deadline represents the ninetieth day that the controversial Senate Bill 5 legislation was signed into law by the Ohio Governor. The referendum aims to overturn the bill during the 2011 general election. SB 5 limits collective bargaining for public employees in the state. Most notably, it prevents unions from charging “fair share” dues to employees who opt out. SB 5 advocates say that the measure is crucial in helping out the struggling state economy, while opponents say that the law takes away earned bargaining rights.

Stay tuned for updates on both proposed referendums!

Upcoming deadlines

Other deadlines for the month of July include:

State	Filing deadline for 2011 ballot	Signatures for amendment	Signatures for statute
Ohio	July 6, 2011	385,245	115,574 + 115,574
Washington	July 8, 2011	NA	241,153

BOISE, Idaho: The deadline has arrived for the three Idaho education reform veto referenda, as supporters have claimed that enough signatures have been collected in order to place them all on the ballot. The three measures were filed in response to three different education bills that were recently signed into law. One measure would repeal a newly passed law that relates to teachers’ collective bargaining agreements. According to reports, the law ends tenure and removes issues like workload and class size from contract negotiations. The second referendum was filed to repeal a similar law also dealing with collective bargaining. The proposed veto referenda were filed with the Idaho election’s office on March 18, 2011. A third veto referendum was filed after a previously pending third education-related law was signed into effect.

In order for any veto referendum to be placed on the 2012 statewide ballot for Idaho voters to decide, at least 47,432 signatures for each targeted bill must be collected within 60 days after lawmakers leave for the session. Session ended on April 7, 2011, solidifying the June 1 deadline for the referendum efforts. Supporters must submit signatures to county clerks’ offices throughout the state by the end of the business day.

Once the clerks verify enough signatures, the verified signatures are then returned to the supporters. Supporters then have until June 6, 2011 to submit them to the Idaho Secretary of State.

The following laws are being targeted by the three referendum:

• Senate Bill 1184 deals with technology and online learning.

Statement of Purpose

• Senate Bill 1110 relates to teacher merit-pay bonuses.

Statement of Purpose

• Senate Bill 1108 governs collective bargaining rights dealing with teachers in the state.

Statement of Purpose

Edited by Bailey Ludlam

Not only did Ballotpedia’s 2012 count inch up by two this week, but two new states were added to the mix in a series of exciting developments, ending in an increased total of 35 measures in 16 states.

One state legislature, that just two weeks ago was reported to act on several ballot proposals, finally sent one to its voters. Minnesota is now set to send at least one measure to the ballot next year by adding a same-sex marriage ban amendment to the count. Minnesota Legislature can still potentially certify re-introduced proposals in legislative session next year. An estimated 18 proposals remain pending.

The measure, a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment, proposes banning same-sex marriage. Unlike previous, unsuccessful attempts to place a marriage amendment before state residents, the 2012 measure may leave open the possibility of same-sex civil unions.^[1]

New Mexico joined the group of states with certified measures, letting voters decide on a Judicial Standards Commission Amendment, which was retroactively added to the 2012 Tuesday Count, having been approved by legislature on March 18, 2011.

The measure would add two members to the Judicial Standards Commission by changing the New Mexico Constitution. The commission investigates allegations against judges, conducts hearings, and also recommends sanctions to the New Mexico Supreme Court.^[2]

The year is flying by as June rapidly approaches, with developments for 2011 ballot measures mirroring the rising summer temperatures. This week, the 2011 total kept consistent with its flat-line of certified ballot measures, but like an anticipation of volcanic activity, much is brewing below the surface.

The 2011 Ohio collective bargaining veto referendum is gaining a lot of attention, and as of May 20, 2011, more than a month before the petition drive deadline, supporters claimed that they had collected approximately 214,000 signatures. We Are Ohio spokeswoman Melissa Fazekas stated that a sampling of those signatures showed a validation rate of about 60 percent.

According to reports, the group should collect 400,000 signatures at that rate in order for the measure to make the ballot. Fazekas said, “Our goal is to collect between 450,000 and 500,000 [signatures].” ^[3]

State law stipulates that referendum supporters have until June 29, 2011, 90 days after the targeted law was signed by the state governor, to collect additional signatures. A total of 231,149 signatures must be collected from registered voters; equal to 6 percent of the total number of voters in the 2010 gubernatorial election. Additionally, those signatures must come from least half of the 88 counties in the state.^[4]

Texas State Legislature has less than a week of session left, with May 30, 2011 being the last day, so keep an eye out for certified ballot measures for the 2011 election in next week’s Tuesday Count.
RECENT PROPOSALS:

• Montana Definition of Person Amendment (2012) – may appear on the November 6, 2012 ballot in the state of Montana as an initiated constitutional amendment. The measure would define “person” to include all members of the species Homo sapiens at any stage of development, according to the Montana Secretary of State‘s website.
• Montana Juror Prosecution Amendment (2012) – may appear on the 2012 ballot in the state of Montana as an initiated constitutional amendment. The measure require that “jurors be informed of their power to determine the propriety of the law to prevent unjust prosecutions”, according to the Montana Secretary of State‘s office.
• Oregon Emergency Reserve Fund Amendment (2012) – may appear on the November 6, 2012 statewide ballot as an legislatively-referred constitutional amendment. The proposed measure would dedicate a portion of current “kicker” tax rebates to a rainy day fund. Additionally, the measure would include a tax break for long-term capital gains.^[5]

SPOTLIGHT:
A controversial Seattle Viaduct Tunnel replacement question was officially approved for the August 16 ballot on May 23. The groups Protect Seattle Now and the Sierra Club had petitioned the city to allow a vote on a portion of the tunnel ordinance approved earlier this year. The portion of the ordinance which was decided by a King County judge to be up for referendum was the section which would give the city council the authority to proceed with the tunnel contracts which have been approved, after the Environmental Impact Statement is finished later in the year.

This narrow subject matter has raised the question that if this is defeated in August, it does not mean the tunnel project will be halted. State officials have already stated that this vote will not stop their plans to go ahead with the replacement of the viaduct. A vote in 2009 by the city already allows for replacement of the tunnel, the question still undecided is what will replace the current viaduct. The Seattle Department of Transportation has already spent money preparing certain areas of the city for construction of the proposed tunnel. Those against the tunnel want this measure to be a vote for or against the project, but it is unlikely the scope of the language will allow for that.

Official language is to be released May 24, the deadline for placing measures on the August ballot.

BALLOT LAW UPDATE

Court actions concerning I&R: A California tech firm, Verafirma, is suing the San Mateo County Elections Office in a bid to allow electronic signatures for state initiatives. In Ni v Slocum, Verafirma founder Michael Ni is challenging San Mateo County’s rejection of an electronic signature in favor of Proposition 19. The California First District Court of Appeal heard arguments in the case on May 10. Initial reports suggest that the court may be hesitant to rule on a such a technical issue.^[6][7]

Bills to watch: California Senate Bill 168 would ban pay-per-signature in the State of California. Violation of the law would constitute a misdemeanor offense. Current law does not prohibit the practice, but it does require that petition forms include a notice indicating that the circulator may or may not be a volunteer. The bill has passed the Senate and has been referred to committee in the State House.^[8]Citizens in Charge rating: Reduces initiative rights.

Click here for the complete Ballot Law Update report!

Which Nevada 2012 ballot measure is headed to the State Supreme Court? Click here to test your ballot knowledge!

By Leslie Graves

Of the 24 states that allow ballot initiatives, 15 use the vote cast for governor in the most recent election to determine the number of signatures required on initiative petitions. One state, Maryland, that allows only the veto referendum process, also calculates the number of required signatures based on votes cast for the office of Governor of Maryland.

Of the 16 total states where signature requirements are based on the vote cast for governor, 12 held gubernatorial elections in 2010 and therefore, their signature requirements for initiated measures in 2012, and 2014 have now changed. The change also applies to 2011 and 2013 statewide ballots in Maine and Ohio, which are two of the three states that allow citizen-initiated ballot measure elections in odd-numbered years. (The third such state, Washington, did not have a gubernatorial election in 2010.)

The 12 states where the signature requirements have now changed are:

In 10 of the 12 states, the signature requirement increased because more votes were cast for governor in 2010 than in 2006. However, in two states, Michigan and South Dakota, fewer votes were cast, so in those two states, petition advocates won’t need to collect quite as many signatures for the next four years as they were required to collect in the previous four-year period. In both states, qualifying a constitutional amendment requires signatures equal to 10% of the vote cast for governor in the most recent election.

BISMARK, North Dakota: The United States Census numbers are in and for some states that means adjustments in Congressional seats as well as adjustments to initiative and referendum requirements.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau the state of North Dakota had 672,591 residents on April 1, 2010, a 4.7 percent increase from the 2000 count of 642,200 people. ^[1] In the last decade, initiative and referendum laws in the state required at least 12,844 valid petition signatures in order to qualify initiated state statutes or veto referenda. Initiated constitutional amendments, on the other hand, required 25,688 valid signatures. ^[2]

The census data, however, increased all petition signature thresholds. According to state officials, initiated state statutes and veto referenda are now required to collect a minimum of 13,452 signatures, while initiated constitutional amendments need 26,904. ^[2]

An estimated eight ballot iniatitives are being circulated but Secretary of State Al Jaeger said it is uncertain if the new signature requirements will apply to the existing measures. State officials said they are in the process of seeking legal advice about the matter. ^[3]

By Bailey Ludlam, Johanna Herman and Al Ortiz

MIDWEST REGION, United States: In the third part of Ballopedia’s five part series of regional breakdowns, the Midwest region of the country presents 14 total ballot measures, which is the exact number of measures those six states had back in 2008. Two states had no changes to their count from 2008 to 2010 and one state, Ohio, had the biggest decrease of measures on the ballot from 5 to 2. Missouri had the most measures of the six states, with 6 proposals on the ballot. The most notable measures this region boasts include issues such as recall, health care, and 2 constitutional convention questions that automatically appear once every decade or more in those states for voters to decide.

The states that Ballotpedia has included in the Midwest region are: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri and Ohio. Below is a breakdown of how many statewide measures are on the ballot in the Midwest and how that compares to 2008, followed by summaries of each state. The information was compiled by Ballotpedia’s analysis of the 2010 ballot measures.

Overview

Magnifying the states

Illinois

Only one measure is scheduled to appear on the statewide ballot in Illinois this year. Although two citizen initiatives were filed and proposed for 2010, both failed to meet the state’s requirements to qualify. Following in the state’s usual pattern, the one measure certified for the ballot is a legislatively-referred constitutional amendment.

In the last decade, only one measure has appeared on the ballot. In 2008, voters were asked if they wanted to hold a constitutional convention. The automatically referred question appears on the ballot every 20 years. The measure was rejected in 2008 by a vote of 67%.

In 2010, however, the Illinois Governor Recall Amendment asks voters if an amendment should be made to the state constitution to allow for the recall of the state governor. Specifically, the proposal would allow voters to recall the governor and require that at least 20 state representatives and 10 state senators, equally balanced from each party in each chamber, sign a notice of intent to recall the governor before a petition can begin to be circulated.

Should Illinois voters approve the proposed amendment, it would become the 19th state to implement this process. The latest state to adopt a recall amendment was in 1996 in Minnesota. Supporters argue that the measure is necessary due to Illinois’ “long record of malfeasance” and has been described as the “ultimate way to get ethics in Illinois.” Opponents, however, argue that the measure doesn’t truly represent a citizen recall and that the requirements to execute the proposed recall are steep.

Indiana It’s slim pickings as far as 2010 ballot measures go in Indiana, but the lone ballot question scheduled to appear on the November ballot is causing quite a stir in the Hoosier State. Public Question 1 would add property tax caps to the Indiana Constitution, and groups on both sides of the argument are making sure they voice their opinions before voters flock to the polls next month.

One of the supporters of the amendment is Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, who argued that the proposal would lead to a 2 percent increase in net household income as well as creating 97,000 new jobs. Daniels cited a Ball State University study that backed these assessments. Indiana Lieutenant Governor Becky Skillman echoed the governor’s arguments, stating that adding tax caps to the Indiana Constitution “assures families their property taxes will be low and predictable forever.”

On the opposing side is the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, who argued that the proposal sets different property tax limits on different categories of property. Residential taxes will be capped at 1 percent, rental property in residential areas will be capped at 2 percent and taxes for business will be capped at 3 percent. As a result, the Chamber of Commerce gave the example that it wouldn’t be far-fetched that a $200,000 residence would have a lower yearly property tax bill than a $100,000 business.

Iowa Iowa is one of two states in the Midwest region to have a constitutional convention on the November ballot. Iowa is also one of five states to have this question appear on the ballot every 10 years. The last time the measure was placed on the ballot was in 2000, when voters rejected the proposal.

The other measure on the ballot, Measure 1, would allow 3/8ths of one cent to be used in support of the Natural Resources and Outdoor Recreation Trust Fund the next time the state legislature approves a sales tax increase. This would establish permanent revenue for natural resources and outdoor recreational programs in the state.

The low number of measures in 2010 shouldn’t come as a shock to the voters of the state, as only two previous questions have appeared on the state ballot in the last decade. 2008 yielded one measure, and before that, the only other question to appear on the ballot was the previously mentioned constitutional convention question in 2000.

Michigan Like Iowa, Michigan voters will see a question that asks if voters want a constitutional convention. In the Midwest state, the measure appears on the ballot at 16-year intervals. The last time the question was asked was in 1994, when voters rejected Proposal A by 72%. Voters similarly rejected the idea of calling a convention by 77% in 1978.

On a completely different topic, legislators referred a constitutional amendment to the ballot to bar any officeholder convicted of a felony involving deceit and fraud from holding public office for 20 years. Proposal 2 would extend an existing 20-year ban on election of legislative officials who have been convicted of felonies involving “breach of public trust.” The proposed amendment would broaden the ban to local and state elective offices and would specify “break of public trust” as including dishonesty, deceit and fraud.

Missouri

One measure has already appeared on Missouri ballots this year but before the year is over, voters will face five more statewide questions. Of the five questions, three are citizen initiatives and three aim to change the state constitution.

In 2010 four initiatives submitted signatures. Two of those four measures were certified for the November 2 ballot. A third measure, known as the “real estate taxation amendment,” was referred to the ballot following a Cole County Circuit Court ruling on August 31.

At least nine legislative referrals were proposed for the 2010 ballot, however, as of the end of the legislative session on May 17, 2010 only three were certified for the 2010 ballot. One appeared on the August 3 ballot as Missouri Health Care Freedom, Proposition C. The measure was approved by 70%.

In November, however, voters will vote on taxes, election reform and animal rights. All three certified citizen initiatives have become some of the most discussed measures of the year.Amendment 3 proposes prohibiting the tax of real estate sales or transfer of real estate. The campaign effort in support of the proposed measure has drawn in more than $3 million dollars as of early October. A similar measure is scheduled to appear on the Montana ballot.

Another tax related issue that has raised a large amount of campaign funds is Proposition A. If approved by voters in November, voters in Kansas City and St. Louis would hold a referendum on keeping the levy in 2011 and every five years thereafter. If the levy is rejected by voters the tax would be phased out and could not be reinstated. The campaign has raised more than $7 million for the proposition. The opposition has raised an estimated $400,000.

Similarly Proposition B has raised more than $1 million in support of the proposed measure. Proposition B, also known as the “Puppy Mill Initiative” would adopt new rules for dog-breeders. Proposed changes include capping the number of dogs that are used for breeding purposes, require resting periods between breeding and establish other requirements.

Ohio Contrary to Ohio’s historical trends, absolutely no measures will appear on the November 2010 ballot. However, two measures were already voted earlier this year. On May 4 voters approved two legislatively-referred measures: Issue 1 which renewed the state’s Third Frontier Bond and Issue 2 which relocated a Columbus-area casino previously approved in 2009 to a new location.

Despite no measures on the fall ballot, earlier this year, a veto referendum was certified for November 2. The measure, also known as the Ohio Slot Machines Referendum called for asking voters to cast their ballots on Gov. Ted Strickland’s plan for video slot machines. After filing signatures and questions raised about allowing the referendum to advance to the ballot, supporters withdrew the measure on June 28. The withdrawal cleared the way for Strickland’s video slot machines and reduced the total Ohio 2010 ballot count to two.

Local measure activity

Note: Research for local ballot measures in the Midwest region is currently ongoing in the weeks leading up to the 2010 general election.The figures below reflect the research concluded so far by Ballotpedia.

In Illinois, so far 30 counties have local issues on their ballots, totaling 81 measures. Of those 81, six deal with school bond issues and ten deal with school taxes of some kind. Many local ballots will also carry an advisory question asking the State Assembly to take steps to reform the public pension system.

In Ohio, so far 34 counties have local measure and due to the large amount of issues covered on the ballots, staff just lists School and County wide issues, unless significant news is given to other issues in the county. Taking that in to consideration, 148 measure are listed on the November ballot so far. Of those, 35 deal with school taxes of some sort, 8 deal with school bonds and 10 deal with income tax raises which go towards school fundings.

In Michigan, 23 counties so far have local measures on their ballots with a total of 110 measures. 14 of those deal with school taxes and 8 deal with school bonds.

In Missouri only 17 counties have listed issues on their ballots with only 41 total measures. A low amount of school issues, with only 5 school tax issues and 4 school bond issues.

Next week’s Regional Breakdown: Northeast ballot measures.

Last week’s Regional Breakdown: Southwest ballot measures