Van Westrum v. Smith

834 P.2d 261, 16 Brief Times Rptr. 1287, 1992 Colo. LEXIS 627, 1992 WL 166123
CourtSupreme Court of Colorado
DecidedJuly 20, 1992
DocketNo. 92SA243
StatusPublished

This text of 834 P.2d 261 (Van Westrum v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Colorado primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Van Westrum v. Smith, 834 P.2d 261, 16 Brief Times Rptr. 1287, 1992 Colo. LEXIS 627, 1992 WL 166123 (Colo. 1992).

Opinion

Justice ERICKSON

delivered the Opinion of the Court.

Anthony van Westrum, registered elector (petitioner), pursuant to section 1-40-102(3)(a), IB C.R.S. (1991 Supp.), seeks review of the validity of the title, submission clause,1 and summary set by the Initiative Title Setting Board (Board)2 for a pro-pospd statutory amendment to modify the distribution of proceeds from the state-supervised lottery. The petitioner asserted that the title, submission clause, and summary set by the Board do not reflect the true intent and meaning of the proposed Initiative and, therefore, sought a rehearing. The Board denied the petitioner’s motion for a rehearing and retained the language originally set by the Board. We affirm-.

I

The Board conducted the public meeting required by section 1-40-101(2) and set the title, submission clause, and summary for an initiated statutory amendment (Initiative) to section 24-35-210, 10A C.R.S. (1988 & 1991 Supp.). The Initiative would amend section 24-35-210 of the Colorado Revised Statutes to provide revenues from the state-supervised lottery as an alternative source of revenue for school financing. Beginning in fiscal year 1992-93, the Initiative proposes a reduction in the amount of lottery proceeds that are currently distributed from the lottery fund to the Conservation Trust Fund and to the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation. The Initiative also proposes a reduction in the amount of lottery proceeds that may be appropriated for state capital construction, in fiscal year 1998-99 and places a limit on the amount of lease-purchase obligations that may be made after January 15, 1993. Beginning in fiscal year 1992-93, the Initiative proposes that all lottery proceeds not otherwise transferred or distributed be appropriated for financing public schools as an offset to property taxes levied for that purpose. The text of the Initiative is included as an appendix to this opinion. The petitioner contested the validity of the title, submission clause, and summary fixed by the Board and filed a motion for rehearing under section l-40-102(3)(a), IB C.R.S. (1991 Supp.).3 On June 5, 1992, the Board [263]*263denied the petitioner’s motion for rehearing and voted to retain the language of the title, submission clause, and summary set by the Board. Pursuant to section 1-40-102(3)(a), review is sought in this court.

II

The question is whether the language set by the Board for the title, submission clause, and summary fairly and correctly expresses the true intent and meaning of the Initiative and adequately informs signers of petitions and voters of its effects. We answer in the affirmative.

The title, submission clause, and summary at issue provide:

Title
AN ACT TO MODIFY THE DISTRIBUTION OF LOTTERY PROCEEDS TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF LOTTERY PROCEEDS DISTRIBUTED FOR LOCAL AND STATE PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS; TO LIMIT STATE CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF OBLIGATIONS WHICH MAY BE MADE IN FUTURE YEARS FOR CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION; AND TO PROVIDE THAT ALL REMAINING LOTTERY PROCEEDS BE APPROPRIATED FOR FINANCING PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO OFFSET LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED FOR SUCH PURPOSE.
Submission Clause
SHALL THERE BE AN ACT TO MODIFY THE DISTRIBUTION OF LOTTERY PROCEEDS TO LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF LOTTERY PROCEEDS DISTRIBUTED FOR LOCAL AND STATE PARKS AND RECREATION AREAS; TO LIMIT STATE CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF OBLIGATIONS WHICH MAY BE MADE IN FUTURE YEARS FOR CAPITAL CONSTRUCTION; AND TO PROVIDE THAT ALL REMAINING LOTTERY PROCEEDS BE APPROPRIATED FOR FINANCING PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO OFFSET LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED FOR SUCH PURPOSE?
Summary
This measure amends existing law to provide revenues from the state-supervised lottery as an alternative source of revenue for school financing. The amount of lottery proceeds which are currently distributed from the Lottery Fund to the Conservation Trust Fund and to the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation in the Department of Natural Resources is modified by reducing the total amount of lottery proceeds which may be so transferred or appropriated in fiscal year 1992-93 and thereafter.
This measure modifies the amount of lottery proceeds which are currently appropriated from the Lottery Fund for state capital construction, the current recipient of approximately two thirds of all state lottery fund net revenues, by reducing the total amount of lottery proceeds which may be so appropriated in fiscal year 1998-99 or at an earlier date if existing lease-purchase obligations have been discharged. A limitation is established on the total amount of obligations which may be made after January 15, 1993, for capital construction.
This measure requires, commencing in fiscal year 1992-93, the appropriation of all lottery proceeds not otherwise transferred or appropriated for financing public schools as an offset to property taxes levied for said purpose.
This measure would limit the maximum amount of lottery proceeds distributed to the Conservation Trust Fund to $7.5 million for each fiscal year and to [264]*264the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation in the Department of Natural Resources to $7.5 million each fiscal year. The annual amount of lottery proceeds for state capital construction would be reduced; for example, by approximately $24 million in fiscal year 1992-93 and $44 million in fiscal year 1993-94. The remaining lottery proceeds to be used for financing public schools would reduce property taxes for schools; for example, by approximately 2.1% in fiscal year 1992-93 and 3.9% in fiscal year 1993-94.

Ill

The people’s constitutional right to initiate legislation and constitutional amendments is granted by article V, section 1(2) of the Colorado Constitution. The statutory scheme for initiated legislation or a constitutional amendment requires the Board to designate and fix a title, submission clause, and a summary for initiative petitions before they are signed by electors. See § 1-40-101(1), (2), IB C.R.S. (1991 Supp.). “The purpose of the title setting process is to ensure that both persons reviewing an initiative petition and the voters are fairly and succinctly advised of the import of the proposed law.” In re Proposed Initiative on Education Tax Refund, 823 P.2d 1353, 1355 (Colo.1991) (hereinafter Education Tax Refund Initiative); Dye v. Baker, 143 Colo. 458, 460, 354 P.2d 498, 500 (1960).

In performing its statutory duty, the Board is not required to describe every feature of a proposed measure. In re Proposed Initiated Constitutional Amendment Concerning Limited Gaming in Manitou Springs, Fairplay and in Airports, 826 P.2d 1241, 1244 (Colo.1992) (hereinafter In re Limited Gaming in Manitou Springs); Education Tax Refund Initiative, 823 P.2d at 1355; In re Proposed Initiative Concerning “State Personnel System”,

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
834 P.2d 261, 16 Brief Times Rptr. 1287, 1992 Colo. LEXIS 627, 1992 WL 166123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-westrum-v-smith-colo-1992.