Opinion ID: 2595388
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Fair, Clear, Accurate Titles and Summary

Text: Determining that the initiative does not contain multiple subjects does not end our inquiry. The Board's chosen language for the titles and summary must be fair, clear, and accurate, and must not mislead the voters. See In re Ballot Title 1999-2000 # 29, 972 P.2d at 259. The titles and summary are critical to the voters' accurate understanding of a proposal. Eliminating a key feature of the initiative from the titles is a fatal defect if that omission may cause confusion and mislead voters about what the initiative actually proposes. See In re Ballot Title 1997-98 # 62, 961 P.2d at 1082. Garcia argues that the titles and summary for initiative # 258(A) do not accurately state the proposal and will mislead the voters. We agree. The titles and summary do not state, paraphrase, or summarize the initiative's provision that no school or school district shall be required to offer a bilingual education program. This omission of a key feature of Initiative # 258(A) is material, and renders the titles and summary misleading. The initiative and the titles recite that parents of non-English speaking children may opt out of the English immersion program into a bilingual program. But the initiative provides that no school district or school shall be required to offer a bilingual education program. Thus, unless schools voluntarily offer a bilingual program  a decision which will, under the initiative, apparently have to occur school-by-school and which will thus depend on individual school resources and the predilections of individual school principals and faculty  parents of non-English speaking children may have no meaningful choice, despite the initiative's seeming provision of such a choice. Due to the omission from the titles of the initiative's prohibition against bilingual programs being required, voters could reasonably conclude that Initiative # 258(A) does not alter the authority of school boards to implement the initiative's opt-out provision by requiring bilingual programs. Although the titles need not state every detail of an initiative or restate the obvious, they must not mislead the voters or promote voter confusion. See In re Ballot Title 1999-2000 # 29, 972 P.2d at 266. Titles that contain a material and significant omission, misstatement, or misrepresentation cannot stand. See In re Ballot Title 1997-98 # 62, 961 P.2d at 1082. The Title Board's failure here to articulate in the titles that school districts and schools cannot be required to offer bilingual programs promotes confusion. Voters could assume that parents of non-English speaking students will have a meaningful choice between an English immersion program and a bilingual program, and, thus, favor the proposal as assuring both programs. We hold that the titles are materially defective for failure to include a key feature of the initiative, which results in misleading and confusing the voters.