Laserfiche WebLink
MR. TRULSON: That would take care of the one <br /> question you had that referred to choice. . . . . . In other <br /> words, whether 50% would vote for it? That would take care <br /> of that part of the question. . . . . . <br /> MR. ODA: The other problem that I see with <br /> this is the fact even if you based it dn that fashion, those <br /> who are in favor--and there will be people in favor of status <br /> quo--how are they really in fact going to express their vote? <br /> MR. ISHIDA: What option? None of the above. <br /> MR. ODA: Well , if you put none of the above, <br /> that ' s option #4. And I think they have a right to express <br /> their views like anybody else. I would not like to be a party <br /> to any implied or assumed votes, like they did in the Con Con. <br /> If you let everybody vote for every option, <br /> you can see the problem, automatically. You can 't have every- <br /> body voting for every option, yes or no. You' ll never get a <br /> majority because every option will have a yes or no vote. <br /> There' s no way you can have a majority. If you split 100 votes <br /> three ways , automatically. . .the person who votes for option #1 <br /> will put no, no, on options #2 and 43, or, likewise, in the <br /> others who vote for option #3, vote no on options #1 and #2. <br /> So you have twice as many noes as you have yeses and you <br /> eliminate each other by virtue of the yes and noes. <br /> We thought about having everybody vote for <br /> every one and that ' s the kind of problem we ran into. We <br /> still have to come back to the majority of the votes for any <br /> option to pass. If you use the 100 vote example, how do you <br /> --beyond two options, how do you get, hope to get, a majority? <br /> It ' s very difficult. <br /> MR. OMONAKA: Can we define what is an item? <br /> Maybe we can--the first item will be say, 7 and no change, <br /> vote yes or no? <br /> MR. ODA: What ' s that? I 'm sorry. <br /> MR. OMONAKA: The law says now that the majority <br /> of the votes cast on any item for charter amendments. <br /> MR. ODA: On any proposition. <br /> MR. OMONAKA: Can we interpret option #1 and <br /> no change as one item? <br /> MR. ODA: No. It ' s any proposition receiving <br /> a majority of the votes cast in the charter election shall be <br /> considered approved by the electors. So if it' s--only 100 votes <br /> are cast, if option #1 is to prevail , it has to have 51 votes. <br /> This would be considered a proposition, a proposition, a prop- <br /> osition. (Each one. ) So you ' re splitting up 100 votes cast <br /> into three or four ways. How are you going to get 51 in any <br /> one proposition. Statistically, I suppose some mathmetician <br /> -11- <br />