Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Move to place 'Son of Amendment 41' on fall ballot unsuccessful

Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News

Published May 26, 2007 at midnight

Text size  

More Colorado Government

More stories »

Democrat Jared Polis' effort to put "Son of Amendment 41" on this fall's ballot has failed - for now.

A three-member board that reviews ballot proposals determined Thursday that the ethics proposal - it would have included a tax on lobbyists - violates the state's single-subject rule.

The board reversed its earlier decision to allow the measure to proceed.

The proposal was filed by high-profile attorneys Mike Feeley and Mark Grueskin, who were hired by Polis and other Amendment 41 supporters after the sweeping ethics measure was approved by voters last November.

Grueskin said Friday that the Amendment 41 coalition won't decide until next week what step to take next.

The coalition could appeal the ruling to the Colorado Supreme Court, draft a new initiative or drop the matter.

Polis, a former State Board of Education member who is running for Congress in the 2nd District, could not be reached for comment Friday.

He has admitted that Amendment 41 was poorly written, leaving officials confused as to who is covered by the sweeping measure.

For example, one portion of Amendment 41 outlaws elected officials, government employees and their children, and government contractors from accepting anything worth more than $50. But another provision states that the ban is necessary only if the gift is given by a person seeking to influence an official act, which is already covered under the state's bribery laws.

The proposal for the 2007 ballot would have:

• Imposed a tax on lobbyists, then allowed the legislature to change it from year to year, which some critics said would violate state budget and finance rules.

• Provided definitions for terms in the original Amendment 41.

• Changed the political affiliation requirements for members of a five-member ethics commission created by Amendment 41.

• Re-enacted most of Amendment 41 if it were ruled unconstitutional. A lawsuit seeking to throw out the measure is pending in Denver District Court.

Grueskin said the 2007 ballot proposal was intended to put into the state constitution the language that lawmakers adopted this year when they passed Senate Bill 210, which implements Amendment 41.

Arguing against the 2007 proposal was Jack Tanner, an attorney for the First Amendment Council, which is trying to have Amendment 41 declared unconstitutional.

He argued the proposal did so many things that it violated the state's single-subject rule.

or 303-954-5327