Date: 03/25/2015

Final
BILL SUMMARY for HB15-1057

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON STATE, VETERANS, & MILITARY AFFAIRS

Votes: View--> Action Taken:
<none><none>





10:35 AM -- HB15-1057

The committee took a brief recess.


10:40 AM

The committee returned to order. Representatives Court and DelGrosso, co-prime sponsors, presented House Bill 15-1057. Under current law, the Legislative Council Staff (LCS) prepares fiscal impact statements for all citizen-initiated measures that are certified for the statewide ballot. This bill requires that the LCS prepare initial fiscal impact statements for all measures submitted to the title board.

The initial fiscal impact statement must include an abstract describing the measure's effect on state and local government revenues, expenditures, taxes, and fiscal liabilities, as well as a two-sentence fiscal impact summary. The LCS must submit the statement to the proponents and the title board prior to the meeting at which the measure's ballot title will be set, and post it on the LCS website. Both the abstract and the summary must appear on initiative petitions circulated for signature collection. The bill permits the LCS to later update the fiscal impact summary, if necessary, when preparing a fiscal impact statement for the Blue Book, the official voter guide for statewide ballot measures.

The bill also requires both designated representatives of the initiative proponents to appear at all review and comment meetings. If either of the two representatives fails to appear, the initiative will be considered withdrawn, although proponents may resubmit their initiative. Further, the bill encourages proponents to submit their own estimate of the measure's fiscal impact to the LCS, and it allows them to submit an estimate to the title board along with the measure. The version submitted to the title board may be amended from the original version.

The bill requires the LCS to consider any fiscal impact estimate submitted by the initiative proponents. The LCS and the Office of Legislative Legal Services (OLLS) may provide comments about the fiscal impact submitted by proponents at the review and comment meeting. The Secretary of State must immediately provide the LCS and OLLS with a copy of each measure properly submitted to the title board and the proponents' fiscal impact estimate, if the estimate was amended.

Representative Court distributed and discussed amendment L.006 (Attachment A).

15HouseState0325AttachA.pdf15HouseState0325AttachA.pdf

10:49 AM

The bill sponsors responded to questions about Attachment A. They distributed examples of two different types of fiscal impact abstracts (Attachments B and C).

15HouseState0325AttachB.pdf15HouseState0325AttachB.pdf 15HouseState0325AttachC.pdf15HouseState0325AttachC.pdf

10:58 AM -- Kevin Kelly, representing 9 to 5 Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Kelly objected to displaying the fiscal impact of a measure on a petition form. He indicated that it could be misleading and more properly belongs in the Blue Book. He responded to questions from the committee.

11:03 AM -- Christine Watson, representing the League of Women Voters, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Watson discussed transparency in elections. She expressed support for the bill with the adoption of amendment L.006.

11:07 AM -- Martha Tierney, representing America Votes, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Tierney expressed her opinion that the bill is unconstitutional and objected to the fact that the fiscal impact abstract on the petition as proposed by the bill would lack judicial review. She responded to questions from the committee.

11:17 AM -- Stan Dempsey, representing the Colorado Petroleum Association, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Dempsey agreed with the premise that voters should be provided with information about the fiscal impact of ballot measures as early as possible. He commented about the members of the business community who support the bill.

11:19 AM -- Russ Haas, representing the Colorado Union of Taxpayers, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Haas spoke about his personal experience as a proponent of a ballot measure. He expressed his opinion that he was unfairly treated by the authorities.

11:22 AM -- Doug Kemper, representing the Colorado Water Congress, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Kemper reiterated prior testimony with regard to the importance of election transparency.

11:24 AM -- Dennis Polhill, representing the Independence Institute, testified in opposition to the bill.

11:26 AM -- Mark Radtke, representing the Colorado Municipal League, testified in support of the bill.

11:28 AM -- Elena Nunez, representing Colorado Common Cause, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Nunez agreed with Ms. Tierney's assertion that the bill is unconstitutional. She stated that the bill seeks to provide transparency in the wrong way.

11:31 AM -- Chad Vorthmann, representing the Colorado Farm Bureau, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Vorthmann spoke about the number of ballot initiatives that are filed with the Secretary of State each year. He asked for more transparency and clarity.

11:33 AM -- Julie Whitacre, representing the Colorado Education Association, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Whitacre expressed her opinion that the changes made by the bill are only cosmetic and will not truly affect transparency. She stated that the bill will do more harm than good.

11:40 AM -- Chris Watney, representing the Colorado Children's Campaign, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Watney reiterated the testimony of prior witnesses with regard to election transparency and the importance of informed voters.

11:42 AM -- Pat Dunn, representing What the Frack Arapahoe, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Dunn expressed her opinion that Colorado's initiative process is open and honest and does not need to be changed. She responded to questions from the committee.

11:45 AM -- Tamra Ward, representing Colorado Concern, testified in support of the bill. Ms. Ward spoke about the benefits of the bill from a business perspective.

11:47 AM -- Kaye Fissinger, representing Our Health, Our Future, Our Longmont, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Fissinger talked about the various things voters consider when deciding how to vote on a measure. She expressed her opinion that the bill would illegally alter the substance of initiative petitions.

11:53 AM -- Ricardo Martinez, representing Padres y Jovenes Unidos, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Martinez expressed his opinion that the bill is undemocratic and undermines the citizens' right to be heard.

11:55 AM -- Karen Dike, representing herself, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Dike expressed her opinion that the bill benefits big business, especially the oil and gas industry, and it is detrimental to the average Colorado citizen.

11:58 AM -- Lyn Gullette, representing Co-operate Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Gullette expressed her opinion that the bill will make it more difficult for citizens to get initiatives on the ballot. She responded to questions from the committee.

12:02 PM -- Melissa Munoz, representing herself, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Munoz expressed her opinion that the bill will make it more difficult for citizens to get initiatives on the ballot.

12:06 PM -- Randee Webb, representing What the Frack Arapahoe, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Webb discussed the initiative process.

12:09 PM -- Lizzy Stephan, representing New Era Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Stephan expressed her opinion that the bill would result in an incomplete picture of ballot measures for voters.

12:12 PM -- Gena Ozols, representing NARAL Pro-choice Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Ozols reiterated the testimony of prior witnesses with regard to the importance of complete information.

12:16 PM -- Becky Long, representing Conservation Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Long expressed her opinion that the bill would increase the risk of inaccurate and incomplete information for voters. She responded to questions from the committee.

12:21 PM -- Sonia Skakich-Scrima, representing herself, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Skakich-Scrima expressed her opinion that the bill will be an onerous and costly burden on citizens who are considering placing initiatives on the ballot.

12:25 PM -- Phil Hayes, representing the Colorado AFL-CIO, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Hayes reiterated the testimony of prior witnesses with regard to the constitutionality of the bill, the lack of judicial review of the fiscal impact statement, and the fallibility of LCS. He responded to questions from the committee.

12:32 PM -- Sam Schabacker, representing Food and Water Watch, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Schabacker expressed his opinion that the bill will make it more difficult to access the ballot.

12:34 PM -- Cole Toureau, representing himself, testified in opposition to hydraulic fracturing. Mr. Toureau did not sign up to testify.

12:35 PM -- Reuben Espinosa, representing himself, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Espinosa discussed the fiscal note process.

12:38 PM -- Phillip Doe, representing Be the Change, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Doe discussed constitutional provisions regarding the citizen initiative process.

12:42 PM -- Harry Hempy, representing himself, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Hempy spoke about the history of the initiative and referendum process in Colorado.

12:46 PM -- Dianne Thiel, representing herself, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Thiel spoke about the changes she would need to see in the bill in order to make her support it.


12:49 PM

Representative Ryden announced that she would lay the bill over for action at a later date.


12:50 PM

The committee adjourned.