There Otta be a Law

Preventing the defeated levis from being put back on the ballot over and over again. I forsee an emergency levi for COSI and any schools that may have failed being put on a ballot for voting when few will show up to defeat it.

COSI will be shoved down our throats weather we like it or not. They wont close it, they'll just keep levies till it opens again.

No votes yet

That restricts one group from proposing to the public the need for something?

Democracy in action?

To stop from being badgered into getting something we DONT want or need. If something fails, there should be a minimum waiting period before its placed back on the ballot. Too many times when a levi is defeated its right back on the ballot a few months later and if it fails again its back on over and over and over and over ........

I say a year.



COSI was to be self supporting and never to be a tax supported entity. I think that is one of the reasons it failed to win in its' bid to operate at the tax payers expense.


I say five years unless it's a school levy - then the waiting period is six years.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack change the law so that a failed levy had a time frame before going back on the ballot - well, that would be democracy in action.

And, Dottie, there are a lot of people who think this is a good idea...

Yes, it would, then.

And what it would show us that there still is a need for funding or taxes or levies.

But taking the libertarian conservative bend wouldn't it be better to let it go and thereby reduce the taxes one pays?


Conservatives and libretarians want less government and more freedom, correct?

So why would a law be needed?

"Maybe it's just me, but I don't get it..."

Get it now?

Lesser government and less laws and less regulation but when people do not want to revisit a situation, there should be a law to prevent the issue from coming back.


Ya know I knew that.

I just enjoy, maybe a little too much, using your bosses comment.

A waiting period to get back on the ballot? That'd mean school levies as well, I assume (and the Zoo, Parks, Library). Just silly. Who cares if it's back on the ballot? You don't want it? Vote 'no' again. Not like it takes a lot of time to do so.

... for any one public agency. Only one levy for the Zoo, and if the zoo wants more money the citizens would have to vote for all money or none. That would put some excitement into funding. A public agency would be afraid to request a levy because they might lose all their funding. For example, the Zoo has a 2.5 mill levy, and wants anothe 2 mills. It would have to put up a levy for 4.5 mills, and risk losing all funding. They certainly would be more hesitant about asking for more money. Or what about a law that no agency could ask for a new levy if it already had one. Additional levies would be against the law. It would have to be "all or nothing" each time.

Old South End Broadway

Badgering? Democracy?

"something we DONT want or need."

Something you do not want or need, perhaps?

...sometimes I have no idea what you're referring to...

I didn't presume you knew anything.

"better to let it go and reduce the taxes one pays?" does a law that says an organization must wait a period of time before they could submit a failed levy request to the voters again - relate to your question? The alternative to such a law would be to allow such organizations to put levy requests on the ballot election after election after election.

"And what it would show us that there still is a need for funding or taxes or levies."

How does making an organization wait before they make another request relate to this?

Maybe it's just me, but I don't get it...

...led to confusion...thought you were saying I made that statement...

also - no double meaning in the first comment, either (knowing nothing...)...though I can see how it might have come across as such. :)

I'm not the only one.



Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.