06-17-2014, 06:06 AM
I think part of the problem was the way the question was worded. Someone who voted "yes" to $300 but "no" to $150 (because they favored $300) effectively cast a vote for $85.
Rather than giving a yes/no choice for each level, they should have listed the levels ($85, $150 and $300)and had voters select their single highest preferred level. That way, whichever level got the highest number of votes would have won, since anyone voting for $300 would also be willing to pay less than $300.
Also, rather than proposing rate increases that have an expiration date (automatically reverting back to the previous rate), they should word the resolution to create a new base rate, and then require a review of the mandatory fee at least every X number of years.
Rather than giving a yes/no choice for each level, they should have listed the levels ($85, $150 and $300)and had voters select their single highest preferred level. That way, whichever level got the highest number of votes would have won, since anyone voting for $300 would also be willing to pay less than $300.
Also, rather than proposing rate increases that have an expiration date (automatically reverting back to the previous rate), they should word the resolution to create a new base rate, and then require a review of the mandatory fee at least every X number of years.