A judge ruled Friday that portions of the ballot materials connected to Measure A on the June 2 ballot are misleading and should be changed.
The ruling stems from a legal challenge filed by former San Diego City Councilmember Scott Sherman, who alleged voters were being presented with inaccurate information regarding the effects of Measure A, which, if approved by voters, would impose a tax on homes that are unoccupied for more than half the year.
Sherman claimed that the ballot question, ballot argument and official impartial analysis connected to Measure A falsely suggest the measure will confer certain guaranteed results such as increased housing availability and millions in annual revenue that will go toward affordable housing, homelessness prevention and other city services.
Superior Court Judge Blaine Bowman agreed with many of those arguments, particularly the measure's descriptor as the "Empty Homes Tax." Bowman said Thursday that the word "empty" would be misleading to voters, who he said were likely to envision dilapidated, abandoned buildings, and suggested the term "Non-Primary" should be used instead.
Bowman also agreed with Sherman's contentions that the ballot materials suggest revenue will go towards housing and infrastructure projects, when revenue will go into the General Fund without restriction.
Bowman did decline to order requested changes to the measure's ballot argument because he said the statements contained in that document are protected free speech.
A City Attorney's Office spokesman said the office could not comment on pending litigation.
Shane Harris, spokesperson for the No on Measure A campaign, said in a statement. "This is a win for transparency and for the voters of San Diego. No matter where you stand on this measure, voters deserve clear, honest, and unbiased information when making their decision."
