Summary
The Colorado Supreme Court reviewed the Title Board’s setting of the title and ballot title and submission clause for Proposed Initiative 2015–2016 No. 68, which would establish a constitutional right to a healthy environment. The court held that the initiative satisfied Colorado’s single-subject requirement and that its title was fair, clear, accurate, and not misleading or impermissibly phrased as a catch phrase. The court affirmed the Title Board’s actions.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Proposed Initiative 2015-2016 #68 violates Colorado's constitutional and statutory single-subject requirement.
- Whether the title and ballot title and submission clause for the initiative are fair, clear, and accurate or instead misleading because they use catch phrases, omit material information, or contain vague language.
Holdings
- Initiative #68 contains a single subject: creating a constitutional right to a healthy environment. Its provisions defining local government, assigning environmental protection the highest priority, addressing conflicts between state and local laws, and creating enforcement remedies are implementation provisions necessarily and properly connected to that central purpose.
- The Title Board's title and ballot title and submission clause are fair, clear, accurate, and not misleading. The phrases “healthy environment” and “fundamental right” are descriptive rather than impermissible catch phrases, and the title need not identify every potential effect, remedy, or subordinate legal right.
Key quotations
“The scope of our review is limited.” (at 631)
“Implementing provisions that are directly tied to the initiative's central focus are not separate subjects.” (at 632)
“The title as set by the Title Board adequately informs voters of the key elements and purpose of Initiative #68.” (at 635)
Factual background
Bruce Mason and Karen Dike proposed a constitutional initiative establishing a fundamental right to a healthy environment for natural persons in Colorado, including future generations. The initiative would require state and local governments to assign the highest priority to protecting a healthy environment, authorize more protective local laws to prevail over conflicting less-protective state laws, and create enforcement actions. Tracee Bentley and Stan Dempsey challenged the Title Board's title and ballot title, arguing that the initiative contained multiple subjects and that its title was misleading and used impermissible catch phrases.
Procedural history
Proponents submitted the final version of Initiative #68 to the Secretary of State on January 8, 2016. The Title Board set the title on January 20, 2016, and after Petitioners filed a motion for rehearing, adopted an amended title on February 3, 2016. Petitioners sought review under section 1-40-107(2), C.R.S., alleging violations of the single-subject and clear-title requirements.