Other Ballot Issues – #74, #75, #109, #111, Amendments A, V, W, X, Y & Z

Need information  on a ballot issue

You’ve come to the RIGHT place!

 

As a quick reminder…

Amendments
are initiatives that are trying to
change the Colorado Constitution

Propositions
are initiatives trying to
change or create new state laws

 

Proposition  #109
Bond Issue for Transportation – Fix Our Damn Roads

Authorizes bonds for transportation projects without raising taxes

Details:

  • Authorizes $3.5 billion in bonds to be used exclusively for road and bridge expansion, construction, maintenance, and repair of specific projects outlined in the measure.
  • Not to be used for transit, administrative or indirect costs and expenses.
  • Under the initiative, the principal and interest on the borrowed money would be paid out of the state budget, and the borrowed money and interest would be excluded from the state’s spending limit.
  • Executive branch agencies prohibited from transferring proceeds from the bonds to any other program or purpose.

Pros/Cons:

  • Known as FIX OUR DAMN ROADS
  • Written/driven by the Independence Institute https://i2i.org/were-fixing-our-damn-roads/
  • This is funding transportation without a tax increase
  • Defines specific projects for which dollars must be used
  • Dollars cannot be moved to other items, such as bike paths
  • Cannot be moved to general fund for pet projects
  • Forces the state legislature and CDOT to do their jobs

Additional Information:

Douglas County Commissioners support Prop #109

https://dcgop.org/167-fix-our-damn-roads-authorize-bonds-for-transportation-projects/

https://i2i.org/were-fixing-our-damn-roads/

https://coloradopolitics.com/in-response-we-dont-need-a-tax-hike-to-fix-colorados-highways/

 

 

Proposition #111 – Limits on Payday Loan Charges

Restricts the charges on payday loans to a yearly rate of 36 percent and would eliminate all other finance charges and fees associated with payday lending

Details:

  • Would restrict the charges on short term loans—commonly known as payday loans—to a yearly rate of 36 percent and would eliminate all other finance charges and fees associated with payday lending.
  • Currently, the maximum charges allowed for payday loans are as follows:

– a charge of up to 20 percent of the first $300 loaned,

– a charge of 7.5 percent for any amount loaned above $300,

– monthly maintenance fee up to $30 per month, and

– additional annual interest rate of 45 percent.

Pros/Cons:

  • A Democrat party plan to eliminate pay-day loan business
  • Government intrusion into the free-market through government regulation
  • Another “protect people from themselves” effort

Additional Information:

 

Amendment #74
Compensation for Property Value Decrease

Requires that property owners be compensated for any reduction in property value caused by state laws or regulations

Details:

  • The initiative was designed to amend the state constitution to require that property owners be compensated for any reduction in property value caused by state laws or regulations.
  • This initiative was submitted as a response to proposed setback requirements for new oil and gas development, including fracking. An initiative to establish minimum distance requirements for new oil and gas projects from occupied structures and certain bodies of water was filed on January 5, 2018, also targeting the November 2018 ballot.

Pros/Cons:

  • The state constitution is not the right place to enshrine this issue
  • Too difficult to amend as unintended consequences arise
  • There are already avenues to sue for property rights
  • Already tried in OR & WA with regrets
  • Even worse if passed and 112 does not
  • Juxtaposes personal property rights against government, in an attempt to stack the deck for the individual
  • However, it opens the door to frivolous lawsuits, extended court battles
  • Would tie up important public projects in courts, potentially all the way to the US Supreme Court

Additional Information:

Douglas County Commissioners Oppose Amendment #74

Amendment #75
Campaign Finance Limit (Stop Buying our Elections*)

Changes campaign finance contribution limits and requirements

Details:

  • Affects only four (4) Colorado state-wide races
    • Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General, Treasurer, General Assembly
  • Only affects a campaign where one candidate directs more than one million dollars
  • To their own campaign
  • A candidate committee
  • Or another committee or entity for the purpose of supporting or opposing a candidate in the same election.
  • The other candidates who do not self-fund 1 million or more can accept contributions 5x the current campaign limits
  • For Example: In 2018 Walker Stapleton could accept $5,750 per person vs. the current limit of $1,150, because Jared Polis has directed more than $1 Million into his campaign for governor

 

Pros/Cons:

  • Limits significant funding advantage of ultra-wealthy candidates
  • Helps even the playing field vs. Polis-like candidates
  • Highlights the absurdity of campaign finance laws
  • Incrementally takes a sledgehammer to current campaign finance language
  • Also targets soft money groups
  • Former GOP State Senator, Greg Brophy (R) is supporting this effort

Additional Information:

*Stop Buying our Election” group led by former Republican State Rep. Greg Brophy

https://coloradopolitics.com/campaign-finance-reform-petitions/

Amendment A
Slavery language Repeal from the current CO constitution

Repeals a constitutional exception on the ban of slavery that allowed for slavery and involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime

Details:

·Constitution contains a provision that allows convicted criminals to be forced to work in prison without pay or restitution.

·Would repeal an exception to the ban of slavery which allowed compulsory labor, involuntary servitude, or slavery if for the punishment of a crime.

·The phrase “except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted” means that anyone convicted of a crime could be subject to labor without consent in prison.

·The measure would remove this wording

Pros/Cons:

·This corrects outdated constitutional language

Additional Information:

This is a Legislative Constitutional Amendment, which required a bi-partisan approval by both chambers.

Amendment V
Age to run for office reduced to 21

Reduces age qualification for legislative members from 25 to 21

Details:

  • Would lower the required age to serve in the Colorado General Assembly as a representative or senator from age 25 to 21
  • Adds the following language: “No person shall be a representative or senator who shall not be a citizen of the
    United States, and who shall not for at least twelve months next preceding his or her election, have resided within the territory included in the limits of the district in which he or she shall be chosen.”

Pros/Cons:

  • CO one of 3 states that still has a 25-year-old requirement
  • The voters still have the ability to limit the age by not electing a younger candidate

Additional Information:

This is a Legislative Constitutional Amendment, which required a bi-partisan approval by both chambers.

 

 

Amendment W
Shorten Judicial Language on future Ballots

Shortens language on the Colorado ballot regarding judicial retention by consolidating questions

Details:

  • County clerks can write a single ballot question for each level of courts, thereby shortening the ballot.
  • Currently, the Colorado Constitution requires county clerks to write separate retention questions on the ballot for each judge or justice standing for retention.
  • The measure specifies that the ballot language for judicial retention questions would apply to the following courts:
  • -Colorado Supreme Court
  • -Colorado district courts
  • -County courts
  • -Other courts

Pros/Cons:

  • Reduces the size of ballots
  • Less cost to counties as they print and prepare ballots

Additional Information:

Douglas County Commissioners Support Amendment W

This is a Legislative Constitutional Amendment, which requires a bi-partisan approval by both chambers.

 

 

Amendment X
Industrial Hemp Redefinition

Changes the definition of industrial hemp from a constitutional definition to a statutory definition

Details:

  • Would remove the definition of “industrial hemp” from the Colorado Constitution and instead requires that industrial hemp has the same definition as in federal law, or if federal law allows a state to define industrial hemp, in state statute.
  • The industrial hemp definition was added to the state constitution by Amendment 64, the marijuana legalization initiative that was approved by Colorado voters in 2012

Pros/Cons:

  • Clarifies language between state and federal law
  • Aligns CO statute back to federal law language
  • Allows hemp grower in CO to do business nationally
  • Passed unanimously in the Senate

Additional Information:

This is a Legislative
Constitutional Amendment, which required a bi-partisan approval by both
chambers.

 

Amendment Y – Vote Yes
Congressional Redistrict Panel

Establishes an independent commission for Federal Congressional redistricting

Details:

  • Would create 12-member redistricting commission for 7 Colorado Congressional Districts
  • The commission would include:

four members from the state’s largest political party

four from the state’s second largest political party

four that are not affiliated with any political party – and have been registered unaffiliated for 5 years or more.

  • Final map requires approval of eight of the 12 members including at least 2 independents/unaffiliated
  • It would also require approval by the Colorado Supreme Court
  • Districts would need to be competitive

Pros/Cons:

  • Eliminates the liberal Colorado Supreme Court from drawing maps
  • Back stop should Republicans not hold Governor’s office and legislature at time of redistricting
  • Reduces chances of lengthy court battles
  • Could benefit GOP based on current drawn lines
  • Passed unanimously in the senate and house
  • 4/5 of the last five times the map o has been drawn by the state district court judge who have generally been appointed by democrats (rarely friendly to conservatives) and this takes that problem away
  • Built a fail-safe map- non- partisan congressional staff – submitted to the courts to review to ensure the constructional criteria were adhered to, not to determine the map
  • Independent commission – commission members are unaffiliated
  • State supreme court review of the products- not to re-write but only assure the process was correctly done
  • NO court can draw the map
  • Partisan leadership names will be added to a bucket, vetted to be sure they meet the criteria, then selected randomly by a 3-judge panel – of the 3 judges there can not have 2 of any of the primary parties
  • Criteria for candidates that not all possible independent commissioners come from Denver county – all congressional districts must be represented and at least one from west of the continental divide. (people from across the state of Colorado (candidates to be on the independent commission)
  • Pool of applicants and final 6 have to be approved unanimously by the 3-retired judge panel of different party

Additional Information:

This is a Legislative Constitutional Amendment, which
required a bi-partisan approval by both chambers.

 

Amendment Z – Vote Yes
State Legislative Redistrict Panel

Establishes an independent commission for State Legislative redistricting

Details:

  • Would create 12-member redistricting commission for 65 House and 35 Senate districts
  • The commission would include

-four members from the state’s largest political party

-four from the state’s second largest political party

-four that are not affiliated with any political party – and have been registered unaffiliated for 5 years or more.

  • Final map requires approval of eight of the 12 members, including at least 2 independents
  • Colorado Supreme Court to determine if staff committed “abuse of direction”
  • Districts would need to be competitive

Pros/Cons:

  • Eliminates the liberal Colorado Supreme Court from drawing maps
  • Passed unanimously in the state senate and house
  • Back stop should Republicans not hold Governor’s office and legislature at time of redistricting
  • Reduces chances of lengthy court battles
  • Could benefit GOP based on current drawn lines
  • 4/5 of the last five times the map o has been drawn by the state district court judge who have generally been appointed by democrats (rarely friendly to conservatives) and this takes that problem away
  • Built a fail-safe map- non- partisan congressional staff – submitted to the courts to review to ensure the constructional criteria were adhered to, not to determine the map
  • Independent commission – commission members are unaffiliated
  • State supreme court review of the products- not to re-write but only assure the process was correctly done
  • NO court can draw the map
  • Partisan leadership names will be added to a bucket, vetted to be sure they meet the criteria, then selected randomly by a 3-judge panel – of the 3 judges there can not have 2 of any of the primary parties
  • Criteria for candidates that not all possible independent commissioners come from Denver county – all congressional districts must be represented and at least one from west of the continental divide. (people from across the state of Colorado (candidates to be on the independent commission)
  • Pool of applicants and final 6 have to be approved unanimously by the 3-retired judge panel of different party

Additional Information:

This is a Legislative Constitutional Amendment, which required a bi-partisan approval by both chambers.

 

For more information on all ballot measures you can go to
the following websites:

https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/ballot/contacts/2018.html#i97

https://ballotpedia.org/Colorado_2018_ballot_measures