Note: I’m currently analyzing the 2024 Mesa County ballot (pdf) and all the measures on it, and will post as much information as possible on what I find out prior to putting out a consolidated and shorter Voter Guide later on.
Amendment G – Modify Property Tax Exemption to include Veterans with Disabilities
Amendment G, is a constitutional amendment referred to the ballot by the Legislature. It would reduce the property taxes paid by some veteran homeowners by expanding the existing homestead exemption to include veterans who have disabilities that make them unemployable.
Since it’s a constitutional amendment, it needs 55% of the vote to pass.
Amendment G would lower property taxes for some veteran homeowners who have disabilities that make them unemployable
The homestead exemption reduces the amount of property taxes paid by some groups of Coloradans, including seniors 65 years and older who have lived in their homes for over 10 years, veterans with service-connected disabilities rated 100% permanent and total by the federal government and surviving spouses of Armed Forces members who died from a service-related injury or disease.
Under Amendment G, veterans who qualify for the Total Disability Individual Unemployability (TDIU) rating as determined by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs would also be allowed to take the homestead exemption on their property taxes, too, regardless of their age. Amendment G would thus expand the number of veterans eligible for the homestead exemption by approximately 3,700 people.
It’s estimated this measure would cost the state about $1.8 million in budget year 2025-2026, since the state would reimburse local governments for the amount of property taxes they lose due to Amendment G.
Arguments for: Everyone seems to like it. No lawmaker, either Democrat or Republican, in the state legislature voted against putting this proposal on the ballot, and there has been no organized opposition to it.
Arguments against: It could make it more difficult for local governments to administer property taxes. There don’t seem to be any other arguments against it.
Recommended vote: YES (needs 55% of the vote to pass)
Amendment H – Judicial Discipline Procedures
Amendment H is a proposed constitutional amendment that would create an independent board to judge judges on unethical conduct. The new board would be made up of citizens, lawyers, and judges who would conduct judicial misconduct hearings and impose disciplinary actions, and the measure allows more information about the proceedings to be shared earlier with the public.
Currently, an independent judicial commission made up of people appointed by the Colorado Supreme Court and the Governor investigates allegations of misconduct against judges, and information about complaints against judges and investigations of them is not disclosed until late in the process, if at all.
Law and Justice concept. Mallet of the judge, books, scales of justice. Gray stone background, reflections on the floor, place for typography. Courtroom theme.
Amendment H would create an “Independent Judicial Discipline Adjudicative Board” separate from the Colorado Supreme Court, to preside over judicial discipline hearings and impose sanctions. The new board would be made up of four district court judges, four attorneys, and four citizens appointed by the Colorado Supreme Court and the Governor. The new board’s decisions would be considered final unless there is proof of a legal or factual error upon appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court.
An important change Amendment H would make is that currently complaints that lead to informal punishments for judges are not disclosed to the general public, and no information about a complaint against a judge becomes public until or unless sanctions are recommended, which occurs much later in the review process. Under Amendment H, the proceedings against a judge will become public as soon as formal charges are filed.
Main argument for: Judicial discipline in Colorado has historically been mostly self-regulated, leading to challenges in oversight and self-protection. This amendment would enhance transparency and public confidence and trust in the courts.
Main argument against: The current system works just fine. Judges know how and when to discipline judges. This amendment transfers this authority to attorneys and citizens, who can’t fully understand judicial ethics and the unique challenges of being a judge. The existing system of checks and balances on the judiciary, like nominations and retention elections, assure only the best people become and remain judges.
Who’s for it:
The Colorado Supreme Court Justices themselves support it, according to a 2022 article in the Colorado Springs Gazette.
Amendment H is supported by the Colorado Democratic Party and the Colorado League of Women Voters.
Who’s against it:
The Judicial Integrity Project opposes the measure, arguing that that it is too weak and far stronger measures are needed, saying “If Amendment H passes, it will be almost impossible to obtain necessary reforms because legislators will allege they did the job with Amendment H.”
I emailed Chris Forsyth, Esq., Director of the Judicial Integrity Project and asked him about the Amendment. He wrote back:
“The adoption of Amendment H will thwart future reform because legislators will claim they did the job with H. It provides a smidge more transparency and that’s it. It’s not worth a vote. But unfortunately, many people may think just like you are thinking — this is the best we can get. And that’s a really sad thought. [Amendment] H will essentially put the nail in the coffin of more responsible reform for quite a while.”
Recommended vote: It’s a toss up. I was initially going to vote for it until I talked to Christ Forsyth and found out how weak of a measure it is. But if we vote no on Amendment H, are we letting the perfect be the enemy of the good? Is a tiny bit of progress toward holding judges accountable for bad behavior worth all the trouble of setting up this commission just to get us “a smidge” more transparency? I’ll leave it up to you.
Amendment J:
Amendment J repeals the current definition of marriage in Colorado’s Constitution that says only a union of one man and one woman is a valid or recognized as a marriage in Colorado.
In 2006, Colorado voters approved an amendment to the state constitution saying only the union of one man and one woman is a valid or recognized marriage in Colorado. Amendment J repeals this language, which has been declared unconstitutional by state and federal courts anyway.
Recommended vote: Yes
Amendment K:
County Clerks asked for this amendment, saying as Colorado ballots get longer and longer, they need more time to put the ballots together and proof them to make sure they get them right.
Amendment K would make deadlines one week earlier for citizens to submit signatures for initiative and referendum petitions, and would require judges who intend to file declarations that they intend to seek another term file those forms one week earlier than they currently do. It would also require that the content of ballot measures be published in local newspapers 30 days earlier than under current law. Currently judges have to file a declaration saying they intend to seek another term at least three months before the general election. Amendment K moves up the deadline for judges to file this form to one week earlier.
The Colorado County Clerks Association asked the legislature to put Amendment K on the ballot, so they can get an additional week to build, review, proof, translate and test hundreds of different ballot types needed for each election. As Colorado’s ballots get longer and more complicated, county clerks need more time to ensure that the ballots voters get are accurate.
Recommended vote: YES
Ann
What do you think of the ranked voting initiative? I’m not overly impressed with we have now but I’m also not too excited about ranked voting. Our system desperately needs improvement but I’m not sure what would work.