Laws governing the initiative process in Colorado

Laws and procedures

Laws governing ballot measures
State
• Laws governing state initiative processes
• Laws governing state recall processes
• Changes to ballot measure law in 2024
• Difficulty analysis of changes to laws governing ballot measures
Local
• Laws governing local ballot measures
Learn about Ballotpedia's election legislation tracker.
2024 » « 2022

Citizens of Colorado may initiate legislation as either a state statute or a constitutional amendment. In Colorado, citizens also have the power to repeal legislation via veto referendum. The Colorado General Assembly may also place measures on the ballot as legislatively referred constitutional amendments or legislatively referred state statutes. Referred amendments require a 2/3 vote of each chamber.

Crafting an initiative

Of the 24 states that allow citizens to initiate legislation through the petition process, several states have adopted restrictions and regulations that limit the allowable scope and content of initiated proposals. These regulations may include laws that mandate that initiatives address only one topic, restrict the range of acceptable topics for proposed laws, prohibit unfunded mandates and establish guidelines for adjudicating contradictory measures.

Single-subject rule

See also: Single-subject rule

In Colorado, each proposed measure must address only one subject. Unlike other states, Colorado's single-subject rule is closely tied to a measure's ballot title. If an approved measure encompasses some subject not clearly expressed in its title, only the unexpressed portion of the law is void. If a measure is too broad to be assigned a title that addresses only one subject, the measure cannot be placed on the ballot. However, if rejected, proponents may revise the measure--deadlines are not extended to accommodate these revisions.

See law: Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1, ¶ 5.5

Subject restrictions

See also: Subject restrictions (ballot measures)

Colorado does not restrict the subject matter of initiated measures. In addition, initiatives are not required to specify a funding source for mandated expenditures.

See law: Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1

Veto referendums on emergency legislation

In Colorado, veto referendums cannot be used on emergency legislation.

See law: Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1

Odd-year ballot measures

Measures that can go on the ballot during odd years are limited to topics that concern taxes or state fiscal matters arising under TABOR, the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (Section 20 of Article X of the Colorado Constitution). This requirement was added to state statute in 1994.

Measures that can go on odd-year election ballots include measures proposing new taxes, tax increases, an extension of taxes, tax policy changes resulting in a net tax revenue gain, changes to revenue or fiscal obligations, delays in voting on ballot issues, and approval for the state to retain and spend state revenues that otherwise would be refunded for exceeding an estimate included in the ballot information booklet.

See law: CRS 1-41-102. State ballot issue elections in odd-numbered years

Competing initiatives

See also: Superseding initiative; "Poison pills"; List of Colorado ballot measures

Colorado law provides that in the event that two conflicting measures are approved, the measure with the most affirmative votes supersedes the other on any points of conflict. However, the other measure is not wholly superseded.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 123

Starting a petition

Each initiative and referendum state employs a different procedure for filing petition applications. Some states require preliminary signatures while others do not. In addition, several states review each proposed statute, verifying that the law conforms to the style and conventions of state law and recommending alterations to initiative proponents. Some of these states also review the law for more substantive considerations of content and consistency. Also, many states conduct a review of the ballot title and summary, and several states employ a fiscal review process which analyzes proposed laws to determine their impact on state finances.

Proposal review/approval

See also: Approved for circulation and Colorado House Bill 15-1057 (2015)

Initiative proponents must submit the original text of the measure to the directors of the legislative council staff and the office of legal services for review and comment. Proponents must designate two people as those representing the proponents in all matters affecting the petition. Drafts are to be submitted in typewritten form and are to be written in plain, non-technical language, using words with common and everyday meaning understandable to the average reader. The results of the review are presented in at least one public meeting. The proponents may then make revisions in response to the recommendations given at the meeting. If the revisions go beyond the recommendations, the revised language must be resubmitted. If no further recommendations/comments are required an additional hearing is not required. Compliance with these recommendations is not mandatory.

Moreover, both representatives designated by proponents of the initiative must attend every review and comment meeting. If one or both of the designated representatives fail to attend a meeting, the initiative is automatically withdrawn. If an initiative is withdrawn for this reason, it can be resubmitted by proponents.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 105 and Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1, ¶ 5

Applying to petition

See also: Approved for circulation

Once the proposed measure has been reviewed, the original, amended and final drafts must be filed with the Colorado secretary of state. The secretary must then convene a "title board," which includes the secretary of state, the Colorado attorney general, and the director of the Office of Legislative Legal Services or the director's designee. At a public meeting, the board selects a title for the measure by majority vote. The title must be phrased in the form of a "yes" or "no" question. The board may also reject a measure if it fails to comply with the state's single-subject rule. If the proponents or any registered voter are unsatisfied with the title board's chosen title or single-subject ruling, a motion for a rehearing may be filed. If objections remain after the rehearing, the proponents or any registered voter may file an appeal with the Colorado Supreme Court.

The format for petition sheets is designated by the secretary. (A sample petition form can be downloaded from the website of the secretary of state. A proof copy of petition sheets must be filed with the secretary.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 105; Section 106 and Section 107

Fiscal review

See also: Fiscal impact statement and Colorado House Bill 15-1057 (2015)

Prior to the election, the director of research for the legislative council of the state's general assembly prepares a fiscal impact statement for the state's blue book detailing any effect a measure will have on revenue, expenditures, taxes and liabilities. Moreover, the director must prepare an initial fiscal impact statement for any initiative petition that has a petition form approved for circulation. This fiscal impact statement must be displayed on each section of the petition form during signature gathering.

A bill passed in 2021—House Bill 1321—requires specific language to be included in the ballot language for any initiative that increases or decreases tax revenue. The language must list specific services that would be affected.

For tax measures, Colorado law also directs the director to include an estimate of the measure's impact on the average taxpayer. The statement is available to the public upon request and an abstract of the findings are included in the state's ballot information booklet.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 102-124

Collecting signatures

Each initiative and referendum state employs a unique method of calculating the state's signature requirements. Some states mandate a certain fraction of registered voters while others base their calculation on those who actually voted in a preceding election. In addition, many states employ a distribution requirement, dictating where in the state these signatures must be collected. Beyond these overarching requirements, many states regulate the manner in which signatures may be collected and the timeline for collecting them.

Number required

See also: Colorado signature requirements

In Colorado, the number of signatures required for a successful petition is equal to 5 percent of the total number of votes cast for the office of Colorado secretary of state in the preceding general election. The secretary of state is elected every four years. Elections were held for Colorado secretary of state in 2022. The same total number of signatures is required for constitutional amendments, statutes, and referendums.

The chart below shows election years and the signature requirement for initiatives designed to appear on the ballot in those years:

Year	Amendment	Statute	Veto referendum
2023-2026	124,238	124,238	124,238
2019-2022	124,632	124,632	124,632
2015-2018	98,492	98,492	98,492
2011-2014	86,105	86,105	86,105
2007-2010	76,047	76,047	76,047

Changes in number of signatures

The chart below illustrates the increase in the required number of signatures over time.

See law: Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1, ¶ 2

Distribution requirements

See also: Distribution requirements and Colorado Amendment 71

Until the election in November 2016, Colorado did not have a distribution requirement. On November 8, 2016, however, Colorado voters approved Amendment 71, an initiated constitutional amendment, which imposed a distribution requirement of 2 percent of the registered voters who live in each of the state's 35 senate districts for initiated constitutional amendments, with the requirement based on the senate district boundaries and the number of registered voters at the time the initiative petition is approved for circulation.

Colorado does not have a distribution requirement for initiated state statutes.

See law: Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1

Restrictions on circulators

Circulator requirements

See also: Petition circulator

In Colorado, circulators are permitted to sign the petition that they are circulating. Each initiative petition contains a mandatory circulator affidavit. According to Colorado Revised Statute 1-40-111, a circulator is required to sign these affidavits before a public notary, and he/she must swear to and sign a statement, under the penalty of law, that he/she personally witnessed every act of signing the petition. According to statute 1-40-112, beyond residency, citizen, and badge requirements, those circulating petitions are required at least 18 years of age.

Once circulation is completed, the petitions are submitted to the secretary of state in bound volumes in accordance with statute 1-40-113.

See law: Colorado revised statutes 1-40-111, [1], and Colorado revised statutes 1-40-113

Pay-per-signature

See also: Pay-per-signature

Colorado allows paying signature gatherers based on the number of signatures collected.

Colorado had a law banning payments on a per-signature basis, but the ban was overturned in court as a violation of the First Amendment. Colorado requires petition organizations to receive licenses to hire paid circulators. Licenses require training courses on petition fraud.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 112 and Section 135

Out-of-state circulators

See also: Residency requirements for petition circulators

Colorado requires that petition circulators are US citizens and residents of the state.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 112

Badge requirements

See also: Badge requirements

Colorado law requires that paid and volunteer circulators be identified as such on badges. Colorado law used to require that the badges include the circulator's name, but this requirement was struck down in Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 112 and Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation

In Buckley v. American Constitutional Law Foundation (1999), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a Tenth Circuit Court decision invalidating a Colorado law that required circulators to display their name on a badge. The court held said, American Constitutional Law Foundation presented [evidence] that compelling circulators to wear identification badges inhibits participation in the petitioning process.

Electronic signatures

See also: Electronic petition signatures

Since electronic signatures are an emerging technology, the constitutionality of bans on e-signatures and the legality of e-signatures in states without bans is largely untested. Colorado law does mandate that signatures be collected in person.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 111

Deadlines for collection

See also: Petition drive deadlines; Initiative petition circulation periods

In Colorado, petitioners have six months to collect signatures after the ballot language and title are finalized. State statutes say a completed signature petition must be filed three months and three weeks before the election at which the measure would appear on the ballot. The Constitution, however, just says that the petition must be filed three months before the election at which the measure would appear. The secretary of state generally lists a date that is just three months before the election as the filing deadline.

Referendum signatures must be submitted 90 days following the adjournment of the legislative session at which the legislation targeted by the referendum was approved.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 108 and Article V, Section 1(2) of the Colorado Constitution

Getting on the ballot

Once signatures have been collected, state officials must verify that requirements are met and that fraudulent signatures are excluded. States generally employ a random sample process or a full verification of signatures. After verification, the issue must be prepared for the ballot. This often involves preparing a fiscal review and ballot summary.

Signature verification

See also: Signature certification

After a petition has been filed, the secretary of state reviews the petitions and signatures to ensure that they are in the correct form. The secretary then selects 5 percent of the signatures at random for verification. The total number of valid signatures is extrapolated from this sample. If this process shows that less than 90 percent of the required signatures are valid, the petition is a deemed insufficient. If this process shows that more than 110 percent of the required signatures are valid, then the petition is deemed sufficient. If the projected total is between 90 percent and 110 percent, a complete count is performed.

In June 2021, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) signed legislation, Senate Bill 250, eliminating the state's cure period for initiative petitions, which was 15 days. Under SB 250, initiative proponents were given five days to cure insufficiencies with circulator affidavits.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 116 and 117

Ballot title and summary

See also: Ballot title

Although the ballot title assigned by the title board appears on the ballot, a generic title is also assigned to each measure. Starting in November 2010, ballot measures are numbered as a follows:

• Initiated Amendments: Assigned numbers beginning with 60, restarting at 1 after 99.

• Initiated Statutes: Assigned numbers beginning with 100, restarting at 100 after 199.

• Legislatively-Referred Amendments: Assigned letters beginning with P, restarting at A after Z.

• Legislatively-Referred Statutes: Assigned letters beginning with AA, restarting at AA after ZZ.

Colorado does not include a ballot summary on the ballot. However, the director of research for the legislative council does prepare an impartial voter information pamphlet with a fiscal impact study and arguments for and against the measure. Any person, proponents or opponent, may submit information for consideration in drafting these sections.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 5, Section 407; Article 40, Section 115; Article 40, Section 124.5 and Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1, ¶ 7.5

Withdrawal

In Colorado, the designated initiative campaign representatives can withdraw an initiative up to 60 days before an election.

The election and beyond

Ballot measures face additional challenges beyond qualifying for the ballot and receiving a majority of the vote. Several states require ballot measures to get more than a simple majority. While some states mandate a three-fifths supermajority, other states set the margin differently. In addition, ballot measures may face legal challenges or modifications by legislators. If a ballot measure does fail, some states limit how soon that initiative can be re-attempted.

Supermajority requirements

See also: Supermajority requirements and Colorado Amendment 71

Until November 2016 election, citizen-initiated measures in Colorado did not require a supermajority for approval; they needed 50 percent plus one vote to pass. This included initiated state statutes, initiated constitutional amendments, and veto referendums.

On November 8, 2016, however, Colorado voters approved Amendment 71, an initiated constitutional amendment that imposed a 55 percent supermajority vote for constitutional amendments, including both initiated constitutional amendments and legislatively referred constitutional amendments. Amendment 71 contained an exception for amendments written to do nothing but remove language from the constitution, for which a simple majority is still required for approval.

See law: Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1, ¶ 4

Effective date

Within 30 days of the canvass of votes, the Governor of Colorado will issue an official declaration of the results. All approved measures take effect on the day of this proclamation.

See law: Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1, ¶ 4

Litigation

See also: Ballot measure lawsuit news

Different courts are designated for distinct kinds of initiative-related litigation. If an initiative fails to comply with federal law or regulations, a complaint may be filed in Federal District Court. If any registered voter wishes to challenge the sufficiency of a petition, he or she may file a protest with the State District Court with jurisdiction over the county where the petition was filed. Challenges to title board decisions are filed with the Colorado Supreme Court.

See law: Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40, Section 120; Section 118 and Section 107

Legislative alteration

See also: Legislative alteration

The Colorado General Assembly may change or repeal initiated measures. In the case of initiated statutes, this only requires a simple majority. In the case of amendments, the Assembly must pass the amendment by a two-thirds majority and place it on the ballot. (The same process required for ordinary legislatively referred constitutional amendments.)

See law: Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1, ¶ 4 and Article XIX, Section 2, ¶ 1

Re-attempting an initiative

Colorado does not limit how soon an initiative can be re-attempted.

See law: Colorado Constitution, Article V, Section 1

Funding an initiative campaign

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Colorado ballot measures

Colorado's campaign finance laws include the following notable features:

• Groups in support or opposition of a ballot measure in Colorado are treated differently than political action committees.
• Colorado prohibits corporations and labor unions from spending their money to fund advertisements in support or opposition of a ballot issue.
• Colorado allows corporations and labor unions to donate to Issue Committees.

State initiative law

Article V of the Colorado Constitution provides authority for the initiative and referendum process.

• Colorado Constitution, Article V

Title 1, Article 40 of the Colorado Revised Statutes governs the initiative and referendum process.

• Colorado Revised Statutes, Title 1, Article 40

External links

• Colorado Secretary of State, "Initiative Information"
• Colorado Secretary of State, "Initiative Procedures and Guidelines: A Citizen's Guide to Placing an Initiative on the Ballot"

Changes in the law

The following laws have been proposed that modify ballot measure law in Colorado. If a box is empty for any given year, it means Ballotpedia did not track any ballot measure or recall-related laws in that year.'

Proposed changes by year

2022

See also: Changes in 2022 to laws governing ballot measures

Senate Bill 222 (Proposition GG): Voters approved SB 222 as Proposition GG on November 8, 2022. The legislation required the ballot titles and fiscal impact summaries for initiatives that affect income taxes to include information on how the change would affect income taxes for different categories of income. Senate Bill 237: The legislation changed the definition used to determine whether an organization, such as a nonprofit, must report spending to support or oppose ballot measures with the state.

2021

See also: Changes in 2021 to laws governing ballot measures

House Bill 1321: The legislation required certain language, including a list of public programs that could be affected, to be used for the ballot titles of ballot initiatives increasing or reducing tax revenue. Senate Bill 250: The legislation enacted several changes to election policies in Colorado, including requiring circulators of recall petitions to have identification badges that state either "Volunteer Circulator" or "Paid Circulator", depending on whether the signature gatherer is paid or not; providing election officials 28 days, rather than 15 business days, to verify signatures for recall petitions; and requiring that a recall election for local and school officials be held at the same time as a general election if there is one within 120 days. The legislation also repealed the signature cure period for ballot initiatives.

2020

See also: Changes in 2020 to laws governing ballot measures

House Bill 1416: The legislation required a fiscal impact statement, rather than a shorter abstract of this information, to be included on ballot initiative petitions. Senate Bill 209: The legislation modified the effective dates for bills passed in 2020 that are subject to veto referendum petitions. The Legislature was suspended on March 14, 2020, in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. SB 209 modified veto referendum dates to account for session date changes in 2020.

2019

See also: Changes in 2019 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, "Evenwel v. Abbott," August 20, 2019 The U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that Colorado Amendment 71, including the amendment's signature distribution requirement based on the number of registered voters in legislative districts, did not violate the U.S. Constitution's Equal Protection Clause. Plaintiffs argued that legislative districts were based on equal population but the number of registered voters varied between districts, thus violating the one person, one vote principle. The 10th Circuit, in a 2-1 opinion, cited the U.S. Supreme Court's Evenwel v. Abbott (2016), in which the Supreme Court held that the Equal Protection Clause does not require "states to equalize the number of voters in each legislative district." Judge Michael Murphy wrote, "In the direct democracy context, voters are able to directly advance the interests of non-voting members of their families and communities when they decide whether to support a citizen initiative. Although citizens, unlike elected representatives, are not 'subject to requests and suggestions' from constituents, their vote on citizen initiative petitions can be influenced by private discussions with non-voting friends, family, and neighbors. In this way, voting-eligible citizens assume a role similar to that of elected representatives when those voters engage in the initiative process." Judge Mary Briscoe dissented, writing that the Court misapplied Evenwel. "When an individual casts a vote or provides a signature, he or she is representing only himself or herself and no one else. ... In the case at hand, for example, if a single signator is deemed to represent his or her senate district, then why require any additional signatures in order to assure that a proposed ballot measure carries sufficient support to be placed on the ballot? ... the case at hand does not implicate the principle of representational equality and is thus distinguishable from "Evenwel".

2018

See also: Changes in 2018 to laws governing ballot measures

House Bill 1145: The legislation was designed to repeal state ballot initiative laws that courts ruled to be invalid. The repealed laws restricted payment of signature gatherers according to the number of signatures collected to 20 percent of their total compensation and required signature gatherers to be state residents. House Bill 1268: The legislation established a process and procedures for recall elections against special district directors.

2017

See also: Changes in 2017 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: Laws governing ballot measures in Colorado a Colorado Senate Bill 17-152 was designed to implement changes to the state's rules governing constitutional amendments that were approved in 2016 by Amendment 71. Amendment 71 implemented a distribution requirement for initiated constitutional amendments and a 55 percent supermajority requirement for all constitutional amendments.

2016

See also: Changes in 2016 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: Laws governing ballot measures in Colorado a Colorado Amendment 71: Implemented a distribution requirement for initiated constitutional amendments and a supermajority requirement for all constitutional amendments. d Colorado House Bill 16-1071: Was designed to give counties the power of initiative and referendum similar to the power enjoyed by voters in municipalities. It was rejected by the State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee of the Colorado House of Representatives.

2015

See also: Changes in 2015 to laws governing ballot measures

See also: Laws governing ballot measures in Colorado a Colorado House Bill 15-1057: Was designed to require an initial fiscal impact statement to be prepared for any submitted initiative. The impact statement would have to be posted on the legislative council staff's website. The bill was also designed to require the fiscal impact statement to be summarized in a two-sentence abstract, which must be displayed on the petition signature sheets during circulation. HB 15-1057 also has provisions requiring each designated initiative sponsor to attend all review and comment meetings, dictating that the absence of any designated initiative sponsor effects the withdrawal of the initiative. d Senate Concurrent Resolution 15-002: This bill was designed to require two separate elections to enact initiated constitutional amendments, one to "authorize" the proposed amendment and one to "ratify" it. An exception would have been made for any initiated amendment that proposed simply to repeal previously adopted constitutional provisions.

2014

See also: Changes in 2014 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Colorado State Legislature d HCR 1002: Requires more signatures to qualify an initiated constitutional amendment for the ballot; requires signatures from each legislative district. HCR 1002 would be enacted on approval from the electorate of the state. It was introduced in 2014. Died in Senate State, Veterans, & Military Affairs Committee.

2013

See also: Changes in 2013 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Colorado General Assembly: d HB 1100: Requires that ballot titles be in plain language.

2012

See also: Changes in 2012 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Colorado General Assembly: d HB 1076: Bill description/summary: "The bill permits an initiative or referendum petition to include space for a registered elector to voluntarily include his or her telephone number, electronic mail address, or both. If a space for the information is included, a petition must clearly indicate that the information is not required in order for a registered elector to sign the petition." d HCR 1003: Proposes a constitutional amendment that would impose a 60% supermajority requirement on the passage of constitutional amendments. However, it would allowed voters to repeal amendments passed before 2013 with a simple majority. Although the supermajority requirement applies to both referred measures and initiated measures, the bill also imposes a distribution requirement on citizen-initiated measures. The bill's demise came after a co-sponsor of the bill accused a committee member of "hijacking" the legislation. 80 Colorado amendments have been approved in the past 45 years. a Colorado House Bill 1293 (2012): The bill makes various changes and clarifications in the laws governing recall elections.

2011

See also: Changes in 2011 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Colorado General Assembly: a Colorado House Bill 1035 (2011): HB 1035, if enacted, will require the state's "ballot information booklet (blue book) or other publication of initiated and referred measures to contain a statement before each measure informing the voter that the title was drafted by professional staff and is a summary for ballot purposes only. The statement also informs voters that the text of a referred measure was thoroughly debated by the general assembly and that the text of an initiated measure was drafted by the initiative proponents. Finally, the statement for referred measures informs voters that the measure is included on the ballot because it has passed a majority vote of the state senate and the state house of representatives, while the statement for initiated measures states that the measure is included on the ballot because the proponents have gathered the required amount of petition signatures." a Colorado House Bill 1072 (2011) HB 11-1072 creates several new requirements for initiative proponents. In particular, the bill requires proponents, within ten days of filing, to produce a report detailing all the expenditures relating to the circulation of the initiative. The report must include the dates of circulation, total hours worked, and gross wages earned by each circulator. After the report is filed, any registered voter may challenge the report within ten days. Initiative proponents then have ten days to correct the error or a judicial hearing is scheduled. If the judge determines that an intentional violation did occur, the proponents are subject to a fine equal to three times the omission. In addition, proponents may be subject to civil action by the voter who brought the challenge for the recovery of legal fees. Citizens in Charge Foundation rating: Reduces initiative rights. d Colorado House Bill 1090: HB 1090 would make several stylistic changes to ballot titles. The changes are intended to clarify ballot titles and the meaning of a "yes" or "no" vote. d Colorado House Bill 1304: Bill description/summary: "Section 1 of the bill requires the title board, when setting a title for a proposed initiated law or constitutional amendment, to write the title, to the extent possible, in plain, nontechnical language and in a clear and coherent manner using words with common and everyday meaning that are understandable to the average reader. Section 2 requires the same standard for the ballot title of a statewide referred measure." d Colorado Senate Concurrent Resolution 1: SCR 1 was a constitutional amendment that would require proposed amendments to receive a 60% super-majority for passage. This requirement would not apply to amendments repealing, wholly or partially, amendments passed before 2013. In addition, the amendment would create a geographic requirement based on the state's congressional districts. While these provisions would make the initiative process more difficult, the bill would require lawmakers to earn a 2/3 majority to modify or repeal a ballot measure for three years following its passage. Citizens in Charge Foundation rating: Reduces initiative rights.

2010

See also: Changes in 2010 to laws governing ballot measures

The following bills were introduced in the Colorado General Assembly: a Colorado Senate Bill 216 (2010): SB 216 would re-order how initiatives are placed on the ballot, putting legislatively referred initiatives first before citizen initiated measures. The bill passed the Colorado State Senate on May 7, 2010 by a 22-13 vote. The Colorado House of Representatives passed the bill on May 11, 2010 by a 42-23 vote. The bill was signed into law on June 10, 2010. a Colorado House Bill 1370 (2010): HB 1370 is a 2010 Colorado law which modifies Colorado's initiative laws. The bill requires the Secretary of State to inform approved petitioners about issue committee requirements (issue committees must be registered if 200+ petition sections are accepted or printed as part of circulation). The law additionally requires that those providing input on for/against arguments must provide identifying information. The law also clarifies, by a conforming amendment, the term "major purpose" as it relates to campaign finance provisions in the Colorado Constitution. In addition, the law requires that campaign ads/materials costing more than $1,000 must include a disclaimer with the name of the committee financing the material. The law also defines monetary penalties for willfully failing to file campaign finance reports in a timely manner. The bill was approved by the Colorado House of Representatives on April 22, 2010, on a 51-10 vote with 4 Representatives not voting. The Colorado State Senate approved the bill on May 10, 2010 on a 25-10 vote. The bill was signed into law by Governor of Colorado Bill Ritter on May 25, 2010. d SCR 3: This law would add a distribution requirement to the petition process for initiated constitutional amendments in Colorado, which currently does not have one. Specifically, it would: Require that 5% of the minimum total number of signatures on petitions must be gathered from residents in each of Colorado's U.S. Congressional districts. Require a 60% supermajority vote to pass an initiated constitutional amendment, with the exception that it would only take a simple majority vote to repeal provisions of the Colorado Constitution in existence prior to the 2011 odd-year election or to certain amendments related to Amendment 61 (2010). The resolution was defeated by the Colorado State Senate on May 11, 2010 on a 20-13 vote with 2 Senators not voting. d HB 1366: This law would make it illegal for a person who is on parole or probation for offenses involving unlawful sexual behavior or felony fraud to act as a petition circulator. The bill was approved by the Colorado House of Representatives on a unanimous 64-0 vote on May 4, 2010. The bill died in Senate Committee. d HB 1423: This law would eliminate the state's current residency requirement and change the wording of the affidavit portion of Colorado initiative petitions to reflect that the residency of the circulator is not required. The bill died in the General Assembly without a vote in either house of the Legislature. d HB 1047: This would establish a uniform style for statewide ballot titles. Changes would include: Removing the requirement that the rules of the Colorado General Assembly concerning the single-subject rule for its legislation be followed when setting ballot titles. Replacing the phrase "and, in connection therewith," with the word "that:;" Presenting the central features of the ballot issue in a list rather than in paragraph style; and Using indented bullets at the beginning of each item in the list. Expanding the "yes" or "no" response to instead say "Yes/For" or "No/Against." The bill was approved by the Colorado House of Representatives on February 9, 2010 on a 55-7 vote with 3 Representatives not voting.. The bill died in Senate committee. d HB 1424: would change the petition drive deadline for initiative petitions back to 3 months and 3 years before an election, rather than the three months it was changed to with the enactment of HB 09-1326. The bill died without a vote in either house of the General Assembly. d HB 1432 would restrict what information could be printed in the Colorado Blue Book, the state's official publication outlining ballot measures. The bill died without a vote in either house of the General Assembly d HB 1100: HB 1100 would have: Prohibited proponents of an initiative from withdrawing an initiative petition from the ballot or from consideration for the ballot after signatures to qualify it for the ballot had been submitted to election officials. Repealed the state's current law that authorizes the proponents of an initiative petition to withdraw the petition from consideration by requesting the Colorado Secretary of State, no later than 60 days prior to the election, not to place the petition on the ballot. Specified that the proponents or the designated representatives of the proponents of an initiative petition withdraw an initiative petition if the proponents or the designated representatives of the proponents: Do not submit the initiative petition to the secretary of state for title setting; Do not circulate the initiative petition for signatures after the titles and submission clause have been fixed and determined; Discontinue circulation of the initiative petition prior to the expiration of the period for filing an initiative petition with the secretary of state; or Do not file the initiative petition with the secretary of state for the examination of names and signatures. Made it illegal and a class 1 misdemeanor offense for any person, directly or through any other person: To pay, loan, or contribute, or offer or promise to pay, loan, or contribute, any money or valuable consideration to or for the proponents or the designated representatives of the proponents of an initiative petition, or to or for any other person, to compel, induce, or prevail upon the proponents or designated representatives to withdraw the petition from consideration as a ballot issue; or To receive, agree to accept, or contract for any money, contribution, gift, loan, or other valuable consideration for withdrawing or agreeing to withdraw an initiative petition from consideration as a ballot issue. The bill died without a vote in either House of the General Assembly