PROPOSAL NUMBER: 008-06
PROPOSAL NUMBER: 008-06
1. Date proposed 10/10/06. Sponsor: Legislative Committee
2. TITLE:
Proposal to oppose Amendment 38: Petitions
3. FULL PROPOSAL:
Oppose Amendment 38
4. BACKGROUND:
The Colorado Constitution currently provides two ways for citizens to propose changes to state, city, or town laws. In both processes, citizens collect a certain number of signatures on a petition to place a law change on the ballot. For one process, citizens propose a change that becomes law if voters approve it. For the second process, citizens challenge a law approved by elected officials. A challenged law takes effect only if voters approve it.
Amendment 38 expands the ability of citizens to propose and challenge laws at all levels of state and local government, including school districts, counties, special districts, authorities, and other special purpose government entities. Amendment 38 also changes existing procedures for placing a measure on the ballot by petition and applies them to all levels of government. Amendment 38 does not affect measures that governing bodies refer to voters. Tables 1 through 3 in the Blue Book (http://www.leg.state.co.us/lcs/0506initrefr.nsf/89fb842d0401c52087256cbc00650696/ef672f6ea5d1abb087257139005def62/$FILE/2005-2006%2033%20bb.pdf) summarize differences between current procedures and the proposal. While the tables reflect local procedures in state law, procedures may vary under city or town charters or by local ordinance.
5. Justification/Goals:
Ballot issue in November.
6. PROS:
1) Amendment 38 makes local elected officials more responsive to constituents by extending the petition process to all state and local governments. It ensures that public policy issues of concern to the voters will be addressed at the appropriate level of government. It encourages citizen reforms to improve government. Laws proposed by citizens are subject to months of public debate leading up to an election, encouraging voter interest and participation. Citizens will gain an expanded voice in government actions that affect their lives, with a greater likelihood that officials will focus on their concerns.
2) Amendment 38 streamlines petition procedures and creates a uniform process. All measures to propose or challenge a law by petition will be before voters at a November election, which helps avoid special elections at the local level and may improve voter turnout. Additionally, the procedural changes make the petition process more workable for proponents and more helpful to voters. Specifically, Amendment 38 limits the length of ballot titles. It clarifies the requirements for petition signatures. It simplifies and shortens time frames related to court challenges, so rulings are made before ballots must be printed. It requires that signatures on petition forms count unless protested by clear and convincing evidence. Additionally, proponents and opponents of a measure will assume the primary role in providing the information that is distributed to voters for all issues placed on the ballot by petition.
3) Amendment 38 supports the existing constitutional right of the people to reject new laws passed by elected officials in Colorado. In the past ten years, roughly 76 percent of enacted state laws could not be challenged by voters because they contained a safety clause. Amendment 38 limits the number of laws that may be exempted from possible challenge, allowing voters to respond to and challenge most of the decisions of their elected officials. Further, Amendment 38 requires governing bodies to respect the decisions of voters on measures that get on the ballot through the petition process by requiring a vote of the people before changing that voter-approved policy.
4) Amendment 38 encourages changing statutory, not constitutional law. Under Amendment 38, state laws proposed by citizens and approved by voters will require voter approval to be modified or repealed, unless the law itself allows legislative changes. Amendment 38 also allows the legislature to reduce the number of signatures needed to propose changes to state statute, further encouraging changes to statutes, rather than to the constitution.
Cons:
1) Amendment 38 weakens representative government. Citizens elect representatives to consider all points of view on issues, to make policy decisions, and to change those decisions when necessary. Under Amendment 38, more laws may be enacted that have not received sufficient refinement and that cannot be changed without another vote of the people. Voters will ultimately be ill-served by expanded petition use that limits the authority of their governing bodies. Further, under Amendment 38, city and town election laws and charter provisions that have been approved at the local level will be voided through a statewide measure.
2) Amendment 38 invites abuse of the petition process by eliminating current safeguards. For example, limiting the ability of election officials to check petition signatures and shortening the time for protesting signatures increase the likelihood that invalid signatures will be counted. Eliminating the state requirement that each petition signature page include the ballot title could result in voters not knowing which petition measure they are signing. By easing current requirements, the citizen petition process could become a powerful mechanism for placing numerous measures on the ballot. A sound petition process should include sufficient checks and balances to maintain public trust.
3) Amendment 38 may result in voters having to decide an increasing number of complex policy issues with less analysis than they have today and may result in laws that conflict with others laws, are unconstitutional, or create budgetary problems. An impartial analysis or summary of a proposed measure is not permitted, and background information or assistance currently provided by government officials and employees is restricted. Important issues may be oversimplified by individuals with an interest in the success or failure of a measure, with long-term implications overlooked. Further, proponents will determine how much information is provided on both sides of the issue because opponents’ comments are limited to the length of the comments submitted by proponents.
4) Amendment 38 limits governments’ ability to respond to changing circumstances, economic conditions, or emergencies. Unless specifically provided in the law, lawmakers cannot amend any law adopted by voters through the petition process, even if an event occurs that requires a change. For example, state lawmakers trying to respond to an emergency situation might have to wait up to two years to ask the voters to change a law. Further, under the new provisions for challenging laws, timetables for holding elections at the local level can delay the implementation of laws and create a way for a small group of citizens to stall the legislative process.
Sponsor’s comments: While this appears to increase the Green 10KV Grassroots Democracy and promote Decentralization of government, it actually weakens it by allowing small groups to get initiatives on the ballot (possibly in conflict with Respect for Diversity and Social Justice). The new process eliminates the safeguards to ensure petitions are signed only by valid (or even legal) signers, and limits the ability of opponents to make comments in the Blue Book (both in conflict with Personal and Global Responsibility). The financial costs alone are significant and local districts may be required to hold elections (which they pay for, costing thousands of dollars per election even in conjunction with a general election) for even minor issues, and the roadblocks to even desirable and necessary future legislative changes are ill-planned (going against Future Focus).
7. Alternatives to the proposal:
Not taking a position on this issue.
8. Supporting statements:
Legislative Committee Report:
Amendment 38: Petitions
Internet Links:
http://www.leg.state.co.us/lcs/0506initrefr.nsf/89fb842d0401c52087256cbc00650696/ef672f6ea5d1abb087257139005def62?OpenDocument
Websites:
http://www.squarestate.net/showDiary.do?diaryId=2466
Editorial:
http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_4427659
Referendum Summary:
Amendment 38 expands the ability of citizens to propose changes to state and local laws; modifies current procedures for proposing changes to laws; limits governing bodies’ ability to change, enact, or repeal measures proposed by citizens and decided by voters; and limits the number of measures governing bodies may exempt from voter challenge.
Background: The Colorado Constitution currently provides two ways for citizens to propose changes to state, city, or town laws. In both processes, citizens collect a certain number of signatures on a petition to place a law change on the ballot. For one process, citizens propose a change that becomes law if voters approve it. For the second process, citizens challenge a law approved by elected officials. A challenged law takes effect only if voters approve it.
Amendment 38 expands the ability of citizens to propose and challenge laws at all levels of state and local government, including school districts, counties, special districts, authorities, and other special purpose government entities. Amendment 38 also changes existing procedures for placing a measure on the ballot by petition and applies them to all levels of government. Amendment 38 does not affect measures that governing bodies refer to voters. Tables 1 through 3 in the Blue Book (http://www.leg.state.co.us/lcs/0506initrefr.nsf/89fb842d0401c52087256cbc00650696/ef672f6ea5d1abb087257139005def62/$FILE/2005-2006%2033%20bb.pdf) summarize differences between current procedures and the proposal. While the tables reflect local procedures in state law, procedures may vary under city or town charters or by local ordinance.
PROS:
1) Amendment 38 makes local elected officials more responsive to constituents by extending the petition process to all state and local governments. It ensures that public policy issues of concern to the voters will be addressed at the appropriate level of government. It encourages citizen reforms to improve government. Laws proposed by citizens are subject to months of public debate leading up to an election, encouraging voter interest and participation. Citizens will gain an expanded voice in government actions that affect their lives, with a greater likelihood that officials will focus on their concerns.
2) Amendment 38 streamlines petition procedures and creates a uniform process. All measures to propose or challenge a law by petition will be before voters at a November election, which helps avoid special elections at the local level and may improve voter turnout. Additionally, the procedural changes make the petition process more workable for proponents and more helpful to voters. Specifically, Amendment 38 limits the length of ballot titles. It clarifies the requirements for petition signatures. It simplifies and shortens time frames related to court challenges, so rulings are made before ballots must be printed. It requires that signatures on petition forms count unless protested by clear and convincing evidence. Additionally, proponents and opponents of a measure will assume the primary role in providing the information that is distributed to voters for all issues placed on the ballot by petition.
3) Amendment 38 supports the existing constitutional right of the people to reject new laws passed by elected officials in Colorado. In the past ten years, roughly 76 percent of enacted state laws could not be challenged by voters because they contained a safety clause. Amendment 38 limits the number of laws that may be exempted from possible challenge, allowing voters to respond to and challenge most of the decisions of their elected officials. Further, Amendment 38 requires governing bodies to respect the decisions of voters on measures that get on the ballot through the petition process by requiring a vote of the people before changing that voter-approved policy.
4) Amendment 38 encourages changing statutory, not constitutional law. Under Amendment 38, state laws proposed by citizens and approved by voters will require voter approval to be modified or repealed, unless the law itself allows legislative changes. Amendment 38 also allows the legislature to reduce the number of signatures needed to propose changes to state statute, further encouraging changes to statutes, rather than to the constitution.
CONS:
1) Amendment 38 weakens representative government. Citizens elect representatives to consider all points of view on issues, to make policy decisions, and to change those decisions when necessary. Under Amendment 38, more laws may be enacted that have not received sufficient refinement and that cannot be changed without another vote of the people. Voters will ultimately be ill-served by expanded petition use that limits the authority of their governing bodies. Further, under Amendment 38, city and town election laws and charter provisions that have been approved at the local level will be voided through a statewide measure.
2) Amendment 38 invites abuse of the petition process by eliminating current safeguards. For example, limiting the ability of election officials to check petition signatures and shortening the time for protesting signatures increase the likelihood that invalid signatures will be counted. Eliminating the state requirement that each petition signature page include the ballot title could result in voters not knowing which petition measure they are signing. By easing current requirements, the citizen petition process could become a powerful mechanism for placing numerous measures on the ballot. A sound petition process should include sufficient checks and balances to maintain public trust.
3) Amendment 38 may result in voters having to decide an increasing number of complex policy issues with less analysis than they have today and may result in laws that conflict with others laws, are unconstitutional, or create budgetary problems. An impartial analysis or summary of a proposed measure is not permitted, and background information or assistance currently provided by government officials and employees is restricted. Important issues may be oversimplified by individuals with an interest in the success or failure of a measure, with long-term implications overlooked. Further, proponents will determine how much information is provided on both sides of the issue because opponents’ comments are limited to the length of the comments submitted by proponents.
4) Amendment 38 limits governments’ ability to respond to changing circumstances, economic conditions, or emergencies. Unless specifically provided in the law, lawmakers cannot amend any law adopted by voters through the petition process, even if an event occurs that requires a change. For example, state lawmakers trying to respond to an emergency situation might have to wait up to two years to ask the voters to change a law. Further, under the new provisions for challenging laws, timetables for holding elections at the local level can delay the implementation of laws and create a way for a small group of citizens to stall the legislative process.
Estimate of Fiscal Impact
State spending and revenue. Amendment 38 is expected to increase the number of statewide ballot petitions by two in each even-numbered year and eight in each odd-numbered year. Currently, the state budgets for eight petitions in an even year and two in an odd year. Costs will increase due to a greater number of petitions, and because state courts must review ballot disputes within newly established deadlines. Costs will decrease to approve each petition because signatures will only be counted and not verified. Overall, state spending will increase by $119,000 annually in even-numbered years and $269,000 in odd-numbered years. Amendment 38 also imposes a $3,000 fine for certain offenses related to government officials discussing pending ballot issues, which may increase fine revenue to the state. Total fine revenue has not been quantified.
Local government spending. Local governments without a petition process will be required to establish such a process, incurring administrative and computer programming costs. Local governments may experience an increase in the number of petitions received. Costs will depend upon the number of petitions filed.
Sponsors comments: While this appears to increase the Green 10KV Grassroots Democracy and promote Decentralization of government, it actually weakens it by allowing small groups to get initiatives on the ballot(possibly in conflict with Respect for Diversity and Social Justice). The new process eliminates the safeguards to ensure petitions are signed only by valid (or even legal) signers, and limits the ability of opponents to make comments in the Blue Book (both in conflict with Personal and Global Responsibility). The financial costs alone are significant and local districts may be required to hold elections (which they pay for, costing thousands of dollars per election even in conjunction with a general election) for even minor issues, and the roadblocks to even desirable and necessary future legislative changes are ill-planned (going against Future Focus).
Sponsor Position: Oppose amendment 38. This committee can see no advantage to passing this “Grandson of Bruce” petition “reform”.
Vote results;
Charlie Green: Support
Tanya Ishikawa: Support