Get email alerts on the Referendum Question 2 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses second referendum question and whether to include inflation adjustment
Summary
Board members discussed a possible second referendum question (examples ranged from $300,000 to $500,000 annually) and debated whether to include a built-in inflation factor in ballot language or instead address inflation during community outreach.
Get email alerts on the Referendum Question 2 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
During the presentation on referendum strategy, staff outlined three illustrative options for a second ballot question that would raise additional operating revenue (staff used $300,000, $400,000 and $500,000 as examples) and explained how those amounts would translate into approximate household impacts.
Staff cautioned that including a built-in inflation factor can be a political liability — "the word inflation for many people automatically it's a red flag" — and recommended addressing inflation in community meetings instead of embedding it into the ballot language. Board members generally signaled support for pursuing a Question 2 in principle but asked staff to return with narrower options and with state levy-certification implications before the board signs a resolution.
AI generated
The text on this page is AI generated. Summaries, highlights, analysis, and video transcripts are all produced from the original source material.
AI can make mistakes, so if you spot one, and we will fix it for everyone.
Note: the source content is unaltered by us. Any content source we link to, be it a video, an audio recording, or a document, is presented exactly as its publisher released it. That publisher is usually a government body, sometimes an individual official or another organisation.

