By Editorial Board | Editorial, Rocky Mountain Voice
Ballot language: Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution concerning the modification of certain deadlines in connection with specified elections?
How it reached the ballot: Senate Continuing Resolution 24-002, supported by a 61-1 vote of the House and 34-0 vote of the Democrat-controlled Senate.
Background: This bipartisan measure simply seeks to provide an extra week of time for the secretary of state to meet election deadlines. The bill summary cites the deadline for military and overseas ballots as reasoning for the additional time. The measure would shorten an initiative petitioner’s time by a week, and shorten a referendum petitioner’s time to file following a session by a week. It amends the timeline for text and title of every measure on the ballot from 15 days prior to the voter registration deadline to 45 days before the election. The measure also requires justices and judges to make a decision to seek another term a week earlier. The measure would require 55% support to pass.
Our take: We certainly understand the secretary of state’s office wishing to have more time to prepare a ballot, but we consider that the size of the state government annually is larger, not smaller. It’s not like the secretary of state’s office is a small business doing more with less than it ever has. We also take into consideration common complaints of primary candidates with how abundantly slow the secretary of state’s office is with their signature petition counts, sometimes not having them counted before the candidates attend assembly. It appears sometimes the counting method is fingers and toes. The time to get a petition on the ballot would be decreased by this measure, which alone gives us reason to pause. A conversation for another day for the measure’s authors should be how to get big money out of propositions, and to make it truly a work of the people by the people, as intended. That might result in fewer petitions for the secretary of state to count, and then this measure wouldn’t be necessary. There’s also the element of workload that every manager should understand — there will be times where restructuring of work may become necessary. But, that would require government to work more efficiently, and think like a business. If the argument were for your county clerk, possibly, because they seem to be understaffed. The argument of the measure mostly seems to center around the secretary of state.
Our guidance: No.