St. Petersburg Times
Special report
Video report
Multimedia report
  • Owning vs. renting
    The end of the real estate boom has led to a community mix that some owner-occupants say they didn't bargain for. See detailed, clickable maps with data for your neighborhood.
  • More multimedia reports
Print Email this storyEmail story Comment Letter to the editor
Fill out this form to email this article to a friend
Your name Your email
Friend's name Friend's email
Your message
 

Column

You want a ballot? Here, read this first

By HOWARD TROXLER
Published October 28, 2007


ADVERTISEMENT

When the voters of St. Petersburg show up for city elections on Nov. 6, a poll worker will hand them an unusual letter.

Voters will be asked to read the letter before voting, then to hand it in before leaving. There will be 50 copies circulating at each precinct.

The letter, written by the city's government, spells out the consequences of voting a certain way in one of the races for City Council.

The choices in that race are between an incumbent council member, James Bennett, and an option on the ballot labeled "New Election."

This unusual choice has arisen because Bennett's opponent pulled out.

The city's letter explains that if "New Election" gets the most votes, there will be a new primary election in January and a new general election in March.

Then there is a clause informing voters that such an election would be held...

... at an estimated cost to the City of approximately $248,000.

Now, let's hold on a second.

I believe the city's intention is honorable. After all, this is a confusing situation.

But there's plenty of opportunity beforehand for voters to become informed.

And the inclusion of the warning about the cost - who gets to calculate it, by the way? - crosses the line into editorializing.

If you vote this way, it's gonna cost you.

As it so happens, warning voters about the expense of a new election is a key part of Bennett's own re-election campaign as well.

If you go to his Web site (www.electbennett.com), you'll see a box warning about the cost of a new election.

Bennett's Web site even has a list of stuff that $248,000 would buy - school programs, law enforcement, fire trucks, youth programs, sewer and park improvements.

And you know, good for him. The expense is a fine political argument against voting for "New Election."

I asked Bennett on Friday about the city's letter, and he said it was the first he'd heard of it. As a candidate, he's working hard to make sure voters know what's going on. He's even mailing out 13,000 brochures this weekend.

As for the problem with a government letter doing the same thing inside the polling place, Bennett said, "I know what you're saying."

In this instance, there's no organized campaign in favor of "New Election."

But what if there were? Would that side of the issue be entitled to have its own rebuttal in a letter issued to voters in the voting booth?

We have had several examples around here lately of local government using tax dollars to "educate" the voters.

Now this itch by the government to "educate" voters is reaching inside the polling place itself. This would be illegal for any individual candidate, party or group.

Well intentioned, yes.

But this road leads to only one destination, and there's an old saying about what that road is paved with.

* * *

There's a copy of the city's letter and the instruction sheet to poll workers for its use on TroxBlog. On the blog you'll also find lots of stuff about other recent issues, along with many reader comments.

Click on the "Blogs" link at www.tampabay.com, or use the direct address, blogs.tampabay.com/troxler.

[Last modified October 28, 2007, 00:04:56]


Share your thoughts on this story

Comments on this article
by James 11/25/07 11:06 AM
what's even scarier than letters in the polling place is John's suggestion for candidates to post a bond to run....
by Diane 10/29/07 06:56 PM
We voted early on Oct 23 at the SOE office on 1st Ave N & 5th St. No one gave us the letter you mentioned to read before voting. Apparently people voting early will not receive the letter? Or some will & some won't? Is this a voting rights violation?
by Virginia 10/29/07 12:36 PM
I am voting for Jamie, but this letter business is very poor policy. This has no business at the polling places. Adding the cost is paramount to advocacy for Bennett. I would like for the public to know who is responsible for this action.
by Clem 10/28/07 09:36 AM
So , what is your point ? The more information the better . You must running out of things to write about . I was taught that a columist always wrote based upon research , done by a reporter ; didn't you skip a step ? People are snickering!
by john 10/28/07 07:30 AM
This is probably unconstitutional, but since this cost so much already, I wonder if candidates shouldn't post bonds so they have to stay in the race and not trigger all of the costs and confusion of dropping out.
Subscribe to the Times
Click here for daily delivery
of the St. Petersburg Times.

Email Newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT