Vote NO on PBG Ballot Questions !!

---

On March 13, there will be a Palm Beach Gardens Election with four ballot questions related to the city charter. There are no candidates on the ballot this year.

These questions, if passed, will have the effect of seriously weakening the term limits that we so dearly won in 2014.

You may have heard there is controversy about misleading wording on some of the questions, and a city resident has filed a lawsuit to challenge the language as dishonest. If the lawsuit is successful, voters will be told that the results will not count. It is too late to change the questions and absentee ballots have already been mailed.

It is difficult to tell from the ballot language what a yes or no vote really means, but here is our synopsis:

A YES on question 1 replaces much of the charter language to “clean it up” and bring it into line with state law. It also drops the requirement for city manager annual review, lets him (or her) live outside the city, throws out the votes for a candidate when they drop out of a race late, removes the requirement for charter reviews and many other things that go beyond “fixup”. Because there are so many substantive changes under the false guide of “fixup”, we urge you to VOTE NO ON 1.

A YES on question 2 extends council term limits from the current 2 terms of 3 years (6 total – adopted in 2014) to 3 terms of 3 years (9 total). Since this changes the rules for the current council (who would not be there if not for term limits), a very self-serving move, we urge you to VOTE NO ON 2.

A YES on question 3 allows council members to run again after their term limits are reached if they wait three years. Since this would have the effect of throwing out the 4th District Court of Appeals judgement in the Woods case, which ruled that term limited councilmen cannot run again, we urge you to VOTE NO ON 3.

A YES on question 4 drops the requirement for “majority wins” (50% + 1) in council elections. In a race with 3 or more candidates, the candidate with the most votes wins – even if it is only a small percentage of the votes cast. Since this “Incumbent Protection Act” makes it easier for incumbents with name recognition to split the opposition vote by encouraging a larger field to counter challengers, we urge you to VOTE NO ON 4.

For the actual ballot language see: SAMPLE BALLOT

With no candidates on the ballot it is expected to be a low turnout – perhaps 1000 voters or so. Keep in mind that when term limits were adopted in November 2014 – 20,000 people voted and over 16,000 voted for 2 terms of 3 years. If you think it is unfair for a handful of people to overturn the will of 16,000, then GET OUT AND VOTE ON MARCH 13.

For more information, see: PBGWatch.com