A great example is Measure A which was passed in the last election a few months back in Santa Clara county:

> Shall the measure amending the Santa Clara Valley Water District Ordinance 11-01 to limit Board members to four successive four-year terms be adopted?

Term limits? Heck yes! Voters agreed: term limits are A GOOD THING. Measure A passed!

What wasn't mentioned AT ALL, anywhere in the question put to the voters, is that Santa Clara Valley Water District board members are already limited to 2 terms in office. This was extending term limits from 2 consecutive to 4 consecutive terms. It was getting rid of/weakening term limits. A blatant misrepresentation on the ballot.

Who wrote the text of Measure A? Why the Santa Clara Valley Water District board members who wanted their terms extended, of course.

That's the exact scenario for the PA measure - judges had a mandatory retirement age of 70 and the measure was to set that age at 75. People didn't know that there was already a limit. The original wording provided that info and it failed. Then they rewrote it like this just to get it to pass (I think they also took it to court, where an interesting party, a judge, ruled on the wording).

Interesting.

Here in Washington, an "easy" fix for that is that the initiatives get a column for the "Yes" side and a column for the "no" side, in our voting booklets that we get in the mail with the ballots. But IIRC CA is still in person voting, right?

Yeah the voting booklet has the same design here, and the "No" side called them out on it. But who reads that? (Other than me and you, obviously.) The ballot itself had only the text which I quoted.

I suppose I don’t know how in person voting works. Are there pamphlets inside the booth? Otherwise how are people supposed to refer to it?

WA has been mail-in voting for years, so I vote at home with the pamphlet on the table and a cup of coffee.

Pamphlets are allowed inside the booth, but you have to bring it. They are sent separately in the mail some weeks before the election. At the voting booth they just give you the ballot. The ballot only has the brief descriptive text.

We have vote-by-mail as well, but the number of people who actually read the pamphlet and make an informed decision (rather than just briefly scan the ballot at the last minute) is small enough to matter.

It seems most people don't even research the ballot before going to the polls. People are surprised by the referendums, so how can they make an informed decision? Many seem to go to the polls with the plan of filling out the super bubble to vote party line without even looking at the candidates on the ballot (Dem or Rep).

There was another a few years back where it was reversing the measure to prevent the repeal of another measure which was to stop something else. Still not sure whether I voted for or against something.

Judges get paid whether the state wins or not.

Yes, but collecting fines can be a big revenue stream that helps keep their salary high. This is especially true at the municipal level where all the players know each other. It's also a big deal for judges that get elected to look like they're for law and order.