The March 2025 special election results once again highlight the persistent challenges of low voter turnout. While many measures passed, the limited participation raises concerns about the fairness and transparency of the process.
The results show that a large majority of public measures on March 4, 2025, were approved by voters. Of the 38 questions asked, only four failed—two involving property tax increases, one a franchise fee increase, and one regarding the establishment of a municipal utility.
While many local governments succeeded in passing proposals, low voter turnout remains a concern. The average turnout was just 13.4%, with 22 measures seeing less than 10% participation. Turnout was higher in communities with significant debate or where the measure had appeared on previous ballots. However, even in these areas, only one community surpassed 50% voter turnout.
The Need for Greater Voter Engagement in Local Elections
Years ago, state lawmakers addressed low turnout in school elections, which averaged just 6.7%. To remedy this situation, the legislature passed HF 566 in 2017, moving school elections from September to November, leading to a 150% increase in turnout.
Recognizing similarly low participation in local bond elections, lawmakers enacted HF 718 in 2023, moving all local bond elections to November and requiring direct notification to registered voters. This reform successfully increased turnout and public engagement in financial decisions.
It’s now time for another legislative change to further boost voter participation. All voted levies affecting property taxes should be placed on November ballots to maximize voter engagement. If November is not an option, at minimum, direct notification should be required to inform voters about special elections involving property tax issues.
Voter Confusion and Misleading Messaging
Beyond the issue of election timing, promotional materials from local governments can be misleading. For example, 22 public measures on the March 2025 ballot involved school property tax levies for infrastructure (physical plant and equipment levy – PPEL). Some proposed increases, while most sought renewals, allowing school districts to market them as measures that would “keep property taxes the same” or “not increase property taxes.”
If voters reject these renewals, they could see significant reductions in their tax bills. However, approving them maintains the tax burden for years, and with rising property assessments, keeping the rate the same often results in higher tax payments. To address this, a mandatory one-year “time-out” period should be required once a tax reaches the end of its term. For example, after a school district’s 10-year infrastructure (PPEL) levy expires, it should wait one calendar year before proposing a renewal. This would ensure clearer messaging and help voters better understand what they are voting for.
Conclusion
The March 2025 special election results once again highlight the persistent challenges of low voter turnout. While many measures passed, the limited participation raises concerns about the fairness and transparency of the process. To strengthen democracy at the local level, lawmakers must take action by consolidating tax-related measures into higher-turnout elections and requiring clearer, more transparent communication. Ensuring that all voters have the opportunity to engage meaningfully in these decisions is essential for maintaining public trust and accountability in governance.
Print a PDF