Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Legislative Review Committee - 09/12/1996 -Adm(”’strative Services p A I .1 I’ I I 55 5 .55 II € II.~I~I -.1 I I ~II II I~II I -—.-I •5 - ••••~I -I - LEGISLATIVE REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMBERS Council Members Alan Apt Legislative Review Committee Chairperson (970)221-6505 Ann Azari Mayor 221-6505 Bob McCluskey Council Member 221-6505 Staff Members Guy Boyd Director of Administrative Services,221-6570 Poudre Fire Authority Pete Dallow Director of Administrative Services 221-6797 Molly Davis Deputy City Clerk 221-6516 John DeHaes Special Projects Advisor,Light and Power 221-6703 Susanne Edminster Transportation Services Policy Analyst 224-6049 Stewart Ellenberg Risk Manager 221-6774 Marty Heffernan Assistant to the Director of Cultural, Library and Recreational Services 221-6064 Alan Krcmarilc Finance Director 221-6788 Blair Leist Legislative Affairs/Assistant to the Director of Administrative Services 221-6796 Jaime Mares Human Resources Director 221-6535 Gale McGaha Miller Water Quality Technical Manager 221-6231 Deryle O’Dell Deputy Chief,Police Services 221-6840 Rondall Phillips Director of Transportation Services 221-6615 Steve Roy City Attorney 221-6520 Tom Shoemaker Natural Resources Director 221-6263 Michael Smith Water/Wastewater Utilities Director 221-6681 Liz Stroh Integrated Resources Manager 221-6522 Tom Vosberg Policy Analyst,Community Planning and Environmental Services 221-6224 Kevin Wilson Fire Marshall,Poudre Fire Authority 221-6570 Brian Woodruff Environmental Planner 221-6604 Legislative Review Committee Council Member-Staff Meeting Meeting Minutes for September 12,1996 Council Attendance:Alan Apt,Ann Azari,Bob McCluskey Staff Attendance:Darin Atteberry,Susanne Edminster,Marty Heffeman,Jaime Mares, Gale McGaha-Miller,Deryle O’Dell,Ron Phillips,Liz Stroh,Bill Switzer,Sherrie Temple,Tom Vosburg,Kevin Wilson,Kevin Westhuis, Blair D.Leist (Recorder) Legislative Luncheon Tuesday,October 1,1996;Lincoln Center-Ludlow Room The luncheon format will be as follows: 1.Concise review of 1997 Legislative Agenda (mailed to delegates and candidates in advance. 2.Delegate/candidate presentations to address specifically: --Elements of the 1997 Legislative Agenda delegate/candidate supports or does not support. --Legislation to be introduced/sponsored by delegate. --Legislation that,if elected,the candidate would introduce/sponsor. --Position on retail wheeling. --Position on planning/land use issues. --Position on transportation issues. 3.Staff Presentations --City financial condition --Retail Wheeling --Planning/land use --Transportation 4 Open Discussion Actions:1.Staff will provide 2-3 questions in retail wheeling,planning/land use,and transportation to present to the delegates and candidates in a pre luncheon letter.1997 Legislative Agenda will be mailed to the delegates and candidates along with the letter. 2.Courtesy invitations will be sent to Poudre School District (Don Unger) and Colorado State University (Dr.Al Yates). II.Statewide Ballot Issues CML has taken positions on the following ballots: 1.SCR-2 Constitutional Amendments 2.Changes in Property Tax 3.Petitions (AKA.Son of 12) 4.State Land Board The two ballots of particular municipal concern are the Changes in Property Tax and the State Land Board. Actions To Be Taken:1.Changes in Property Tax Draft resolution for Council opposing the initiative. 2.State Land Board Alan Apt will talk to CSU and PSD regarding ballot impacts Process Note:Council can take a position on initiatives and make public.Staff;however,is not legally allowed to analyze or make promote positions. III.1997 Legislative Agenda Issues of Clarification HazMat:Language needs to be updated;not regulated under fire code. Action:Request that Natural Resources review and make changes as necessary. Planning and Land Use:Add a section supporting state funding of natural areas and open space.Add section supporting study of mountain backdrops. Remove specifics pertaining to the SmartGrowth recommendations. Action:Alan Apt will discuss reasons for generalizing the SmartGrowth recommendations with Council Member Jannett. Fire Protection:Add prohibition of non-rated wood roofs. IV.Other Business 1 The 1997 Legislative Agenda is scheduled for the October 1,1996 Council meeting (two months earlier in the year than adoption of the 1996 Legislative Agenda). 2.Th Legislative Luncheon is also two months earlier than last years. V.Adjourn The meeting adjourned at 8:20 a.m. Respectfully Submitted this 12th day of September,1996 Blair D.Leist ___r —A Vol.22,No.18 August 30,1996 by Ken Bueche,Executive Director n addition to the many candidate elections,Colorado’sjam-packed November 5 ballot will contain a dozen statewide ballot issues. While the Secretary of State’s office has not certified the final ballot or as signed ballot numbers for the initia tives,four referred and eight initiated measures appear to have qualified for the ballot.Several of these will substantially impact municipal governments and local communities.See the table on page 5 for a com plete list of ballot issues. CML’s Executive Board and Ballot Issues Commit tee have taken positions on five issues that especially affect cities and towns.The issues and CML’s positions include: Amendment A referred by the General Assembly requiring most constitu tional amendments to be approved by at least 60 percent of voters and encouraging utilization of statutory changes rather than constitutional amendments. Support •An initiative repealing the real property tax exemption for most re ligious and charitable organizations. Oppose •An initiative broadly extending ini tiative and referendum rights to all local governments. Oppose •An initiative broadly a’ffirming parental rights but not defining the extent or impact of those rights. Oppose The League staff is continuing to CML In This Issue Statewide ballot issues affect communities CDLDRADIEMUNICIPAL1.EAQUE •An initiative reconstituting the State Land Board and its mission in order to preserve the state’s public trust lands. Support FPolicygroup Time to select reps for CML committee page 2 ———Ac FCC ruling Cities gain partial victory over zoning issue page 7 analyze these support and oppose measures and will be providing additional in formation on them in up coming CML publications and meetings. The ballot issue that has generated the greatest mu nicipal concern and which is anticipated to be mostBallotdisruptiveistheinitiative This initiative is often re,9 ~and referendum measure. ferred to as “Son of 12” because its provisions are ~.‘strikingly similar to the central feature of Amend ment 12,which was overwhelmingly rejected by voters in the November 1994 election (77 percent against,23 percent for). The public’s rejection of Amend ment 12 in 1994 should not make op ponents of “Son of 12”complacent, however,because “Son of 12”was only recently filed with the Secretary of State and has thus far received little public attention. The accompanying article on the continued on page 5 Outline of CulL position oWl9 general ele tion state ballot issues STATUS CML POSITION Referendum A requiring constitutional amendments to be ap-On ballot proved by at least 60%of those voting on the issue (Constitutional Amendments) Referendum B modifying time period for mailing information to voters on ballot issues (Ballot Information Mailing Time Periods) Referendum C authorizing the General Assembly to establish qualifications for county sheriffs (County Sheriff Qualifications) Referendum D exempting unemployment compensation funds from TABOR limits (Unemployment Compensation Exemption from TABOR) Initiative repealing property tax exemption for various non-profit entities (Changes in Property Tax Exemption) Initiative providing for enforcement of term limits applicable to federal elected officials (Term Limits) Initiative liberalizing initiative and referenda rights applicable to the state and local governments (Petitions or Son-of-Twelve) Initiative prohibiting various methods of taldng wildlife (Prohibited Methods of Taking Wildlife) Initiative imposing campaign finance limitations on candidates for state offices (Campaign Reform) Initiative facilitating preservation of the state’s public trust land (State Land Board) Initiative confethng parental rights (Parental Rights)Petitions filed,subject to verification Oppose Initiative authorizing limited gaining in Trinidad (Trinidad Gaming)Petitions validatedbySupremeCourt, ballot certification pending Ballot issues,continued frompage 1 “Son of 12”initiative (page 3)will sues and focus on “Son of 12.”Municipal officials may obtain give municipal officials an initial While local governments are cau-more information on any of the primer on the amendment.More in-tioned to observe restrictions on cx-statewide ballot issues by contacting formation will be published in the penditure of public funds,municipal Geoff Wilson,David Broadwell, September-October issue of Col-officials should spread the word on Sam Mamet,or Ken Bueche at the orado Municipalities magazine,“Son of 12”and other ballot issues League office,(303)831-MI 1. which will review all the ballot is-that impact your community. CML Newsletter—August 30,1996 5 TOPIC Support On ballot On ballot No position On ballot No position No position On ballot On ballot Oppose On ballot No position On ballot Oppose On ballot No position No position Petitions filed,subject to verification Support No position a— Oldwi el n wbottles:C IoN sue deserves to be named ‘Son of 12’ 1~ by Geoff Wilson,General Counsel tions.”By declaring that the initiative Secretary of State in the last generalandreferendumpowerextendstoelection.This means that the “Son of n general,the “Son of 12”~m matters of “legislative policy,”a term 12”amendment will make it far easier posal dramatically expands the never before used to describe the for small groups within a community opportunity of citizens to legis-scope of the power,the amendment,if to force the public to pay for elections late directly through the initiative adopted,will inevitably lead to pro-on ballot issues reflecting their panic- and referendum process.By extending ~acted litigation (much of it paid for ular “vision”for the community. the initiative and referendum power to by taxpayers).In addition,the “Son of 12” voters in a myriad of governmental Municipalities already regularly amendment would dramatically cir units,and dramatically liberalizing the wrestle with the difficult question of cumscribe many valuable anti-fraud procedures by which a petition quali-which actions procedures by making signature inval fies for the ballot,this proposal as-within their idation and protests more difficult.‘~ sures that voters will be deciding an authority are Among other things,any protest ever-increasing number of state and “legislative”would have to be filed within seven local matters by direct vote.(and thus sub-days after a petition is filed (a very If voters have the feeling that ject to initia-short time within which to evaluate they’ve seen most of this proposal be-tive and refer-signatures),the protest could not be fore,they’re right;virtually every-endum)and amended,and a signature could only thing in the “Son of 12”proposal ira which are not.be disproven by proof “beyond a rea repackaging of provisions from Dou-J3 allot Whether by sonable doubt.”By reducing the num design or ber of signatures required on local peglasBruce’s notorious “Amendment Colorado voters in the 1994 election.draftsmanship,signature validation and protest 12,”which was soundly rejected by ,merely sloppy titions and the stringency of the Bruce is the most prominent supporter the “Son of processes,the “Son of 12”amend- of the “Son of 12”proposal,having 12”proposal ment would greatly increase the op recently announced that he would -~.~“can only com-portunity for relatively small groups abandon his effort to eliminate the plicate this is-of voters to force elections on “their” state’s main revenue stream,the in-sue for municipalities and the other issues. come tax,in order to focus all of his local entities to which the proposal energies on this proposal.would extend the initiative and refer-Delays and limits Since 1910,Colorado voters have endum power.By declaring all “petitions”to be reserved the initiative and referendum subject to the TABOR amendment’s power for themselves as to state and -Reduced signatures election provisions,the “Son of 12” municipal “legislation.”The “Son of “Son of 12”would not change the amendment significantly delays local 12”proposal would extend this power number of signatures required on a government actions upon which a ref to electors in “any local government”statewide petition,but would dramati-erendum petition is filed,as well as (including counties,school districts,cally reduce the number of signatuies limiting local voters’authority to se and special districts),as well as “all required on municipal initiative and cure a prompt election in response to other governmental entities,”includ-referendum petitions.Presently,there their initiative petitions.Present law ing enterprises and authorities.Re-is a constitutional ceiling on signature requires consideration of most peti ceipt of a valid petition in some of requirements of up to 10 percent of tions at a regular or special municipal these jurisdictions would oblige them,the registered electors of the munici-election held between 60-150 days af for the first time,to develop voter lists pality for referendum petitions and 15 ter a petition is found sufficient.Un- and conduci elections.percent for initiative petitions.The der the “Son of 12”amendment,citi Initiatives and referenda could ad-“Son of 12”amendment would slash zen petitions could only be submitted dress only “legislative policy”matters the requirement for both initiatives to voters on the election dates speci and not the “application of adminis-and referenda to 5 percent of those fled in the TABOR amendment:the tration procedures to specific situa-who cast votes for all candidates for continued on page 8 CML N~wsIstter—AugUSt 30,1996 3 ‘Son of 12’,continQd from page 3 * Ballot ‘96 USPS 075-590 Periodical postage PAID at Denver,Colorado A[Th 8 CML News!MAYOR 2O’~SP.0 FT COLLINS CO 8OS22~O58O take effect until 91 days after post- passage publication. Furthermore,any petition filed within the three months prior to an election could not be voted upon at that election; instead,the measure would have to await the next avail able election date,which would often be a full year later!Thus,a small group of people could delay an ordi nance for more than a year, ~‘simply by ob taining a few regular biennial local election date; the general election date (in Novem ber of even-numbered years)and the first Tuesday in November of odd- numbered years. Additionally,this provision of the amendment would require that TA BOR ballot-issue notices be distrib uted,at local taxpayer expense,to all registered voters in the jurisdiction in connection with all local initiatives and referenda (presently,such notices need only be distributed in connection with ballot issues concerning the vari ous fiscal matters addressed in TA BOR). The amendment also increases the opportunity for delays following pub lication of new municipal ordinances. Citizens now have 30 days following post-enactment publication of most ordinances to submit a referendum pe tition,which suspends the ordinance and permits the governing body to re peal the legislation or schedule the or dinance for a popular vote at a regular or special election.The “Son of 12” amendment extends the time for circu lation of a referendum petition by pro viding that local measures shall not as “emergencies”and take effect sooner than 91 days after post-enact ment publication. Payment provisions Finally,the “Son of 12”amend ment forces taxpayers to provide free political advertising to petition propo nents.The amendment requires that the government print and deliver to petition proponents as many petition forms as they may require.The gov ernment may charge petitioners only $1 per 100-entry petition form;to the extent that this does not cover the government’s cost,the taxpayers,of course,will be forced to pick up the difference. Furthermore,the amendment forces taxpayers to pay for the distribution of a 500-word statement,written by peti tion proponents,to every active regis tered voter in the jurisdiction. This mailing may also include a “summary”of comments submitted in opposition to the petition;how ever,this summary would be pre pared by the local election official, rather than the petition opponents themselves. signatures on a petition. Even if no referendum petition is filed,the 91-day delay before an ordi nance can take effect will slow down local governments’ability to respond promptly to community needs or de sires.The amendment permits only nine measures per year to be adopted 1660 Lincoln Street,Suite 2100 Denver,Colorado 80264-2101 SCR 2 Consfitudonal Amendments V A constitutional amendment referred by the General Assembly. V Requires 60%voter approval of proposed constitutional amendments. V Exempts from 60%voter approval requirement and substitutes a majority voter approved requirement until 2003 for proposed constitutional amendments to amend or repeal any provision which was initially approved by less than 60%of the voters. V Provides that proposed constitutional amendments may be voted on only at the biennial regular election in even-numbered years. V Provides that for the first four years after enactment of a statute initiated by voters any amendment to or repeal of the initiated statute must be approved by a two-thirds vote of all members elected to both the House and the Senate. r changes in Property Tax Exemption V An initiated constitutional amendment V Eliminates the tax exemption for real property used for religious purposes but continues the property tax exemption for personal property used solely and exclusively for religious worship. V Amends the property tax exemption for schools to state that the exemption for schools includes colleges and universities. V Eliminates the property tax exemption for real property used for strictly charitable purposes and substitutes an exemption for real property used for community corrections facilities,orphanages,or to house low-income elderly, disabled,homeless,or abused persons. V Continues the property tax exemption for personal property used for strictly charitable purposes. V Provides that otherwise exempt property used or held for private gain or corporate profit is not exempt V Requires that property tax rates of local governments be reduced in order to prevent the taxing entity from realizing a net revenue gain as a result of the property tax exemptions being eliminated. r Peddons An initiated constitutional amendment containing numerous provisions relating to the state and local initiative and referendum power. Scope of proposal/rules of construction/general provisions V Is intended to “strengthen citizen control of government’;creates “fundamental rights”. V Provides that the initiative is self-executing,severable,and supersedes conflicting constitutional,statutory charter or other state or local laws. V Provides that time limits specified in the amendment shall “extend”to expire on a government business day. V Requires that any future voter approved initiative shall remain in effect until changed by voters,unless otherwise stated therein,or unlawful. V Requires advance voter approval for state or local petition laws,rules,or regulations adopted after March 1,1997. Enforcement V Requires that suits alleging a violation of the amendment be filed within one year of the violation. V Provides that violations shall not be “excused by substantial compliance or good faith,but shall require strictest scrutiny and full enforcement.” V Provides that successful plaintiffs shall receive “from a district”their costs and attorney’s fees;defendants will receive such costs and fees only is the suit is frivolous. Definitions and Scope of Reserved Power V Extends “petition rights”to voters in all “districts”.“District”is defined as including the state or any local government “including enterprises,authorities, and all other governmental entities”.“Petition”is defined as including a “citizen-sponsored referendum or initiative on district legislative policy”; “legislative policy’expressly excludes “the application of administrative H-i procedures to specific situations”.(Currently,only state voters and voters in municipalities possess the initiative and referendum power;this measure would extend this power to voters in counties,school districts and special districts,as well as in jurisdictions such as authorities and enterprises,that typically do not conduct elections.) Initiative Title Setting V Requires that initiative titles shall not exceed 100 words,shall be set within seven days of a request and may be set by any district court. V Prohibits development of a ballot issue summary or fiscal note in any initiative tide setting process (summaries and estimates of fiscal impact are presently prepared for state ballot issues). V Requires that challenges to ballot tides,or to initiatives on single-subject grounds,be appealed to the “Supreme Court only”within five days of title setting;requires that such challenges shall be finally decided within 21 days of the appeal and “broadly construed to aid initiatives”. Petition forms/petition circulation/fees and charges V Requires districts to print and deliver petition forms to proponents within seven days of either a final decision on a title challenge or single-subject challenge,or a request for a referendum petition.The government may charge up to $1 per 100 entry petition form.(Currently,petition proponents arrange for printing of their own forms;taxpayers have no obligation to pay any printing costs,as they would under this measure if costs exceed $1.00/form.) V Requires districts to “adapt”the 1988 state petition forms “with no space or listing required for a county”(presumably,on the signature lines of the petition). V Provides that errors in petition forms or ballot tides “shall not affect petitions”. V Requires that peaceful petitioning on district owned property that is open to the public “shall not be limited”. V “Prohibits any petition process fee,card,badge,bond,licensing or training for petition agents or circulators”except for the $1 per petition form charge. H-2 r V Provides that use of paid circulators shall not create “extra legal duties”. V Requires that petitions be filed initially within nine months of delivery of the forms by the government to petition proponents.(Currently,proponents have 180 days following provision of notice to circulate a municipal initiative petition, and six months following title setting to circulate a statewide initiative petition.) Referendum V Provides that no more than nine legislative measures passed in a given year “without a binding referral to district voters at the next ballot issue ejection shall be excepted from possible referendum petition’.(There is presently no limitation on the number of “emergency”measures,which are excepted from the referendum,that state or municipal governments may adopt in a year.) V Requires that excepted measures receive a 3/4 vote of all members of the local board or of each house of the General Assembly. V Provides that appropriations “for district support”are exempt from referendum petitions. V Requires that local measures not excepted from possible referendum petitions shall take effect 91 days or more after post-passage publication;such state measures shall take effect 91 days or more after the General Assembly finally adjourns.(Presently,unless otherwise provided,municipal ordinances generally take effect 30 days after post-passage publication;most statutes contain a “safety clause,”which permits them to take effect upon the Governor’s signature,or on July 1 following General Assembly adjournment). V Provides that if a measure is rejected at a referendum election,voter approval is required if the measure is to be “fully or partly enacted”within the following eight years (no such limitation exists in current law). V Specifies the form a referendum ballot title and provides that no tide setting hearing,appeal,or single-subject challenge is permitted. Elections/election timing/ballot information books V Provides that all local petitions are TABOR,Section 20(3)“ballot issues”.(The effect of this provision would be to confine ~ji initiative and referendum votes to the election dates permitted for “ballot issues”in TABOR;i.e.,the reguiar biennial local government election date and a specified November date in each H-3 year.Presently,this TABOR election timing mandate applies only to ballot issues concerning certain government fiscal matters). V Requires that state petitions be voted on at any state ballot issue election. (Presently,state statutes permit only fiscal matters covered by the TABOR amendment to be submitted to voters at the November election in odd numbered years;other issues must await the General Election in November of even numbered years.) V Permits “petition agents”for state ballot issues to “file up the 500 words for ballot information booklets,which shall be sent to addresses of all active registered electors”.(Currently,as to fiscal issues covered by ‘LABOR, proponents and opponents can file written comments with the election officer, who then distills the comments into 500 word summaries;proponents are not entitled to have their comments distributed directly to voters at taxpayers expense.)The number of words filed by petition proponents shall determine the maximum length of the summary of comments filed in opposition to the proposal. V Limits ballot information booklet analysis to written comments filed by 45 days before the election,and other information required by section (3)(b)of the TABOR amendment,“which information shall apply to all petitions”. V Provides that a petition shall be approved by a simple majority of those voting on the issue.(This provision is in response to a measure referred to the 1996 ballot by the General Assembly which would require,if approved by voters,that constitutional amendments receive 60%of the votes cast in order to be adopted.) Signatures and signature protests V Provides that the number of signatures required on a petition shall not exceed 5%of votes cast within the jurisdiction for all candidates for Secretary of State in the last general election for that office.(While this is not a change from current requirements insofar as statewide initiatives are concerned,it is a dramatic change in the number of signatures required on municipal petitions; under current laws,unless otherwise specified by charter or ordinance,5%of the registered electors of the municipality are required to sign an initiative or referendum petition.) V Provides that signatures on petitions later notarized or verified shall be presumed to be those of district registered electors making valid petition entries “until disproven beyond a reasonable doubt”. H-4 r V Requires that technical defects and minor variations (presumably,in signatures) shall be “broadly construed to aid petitions”. V Requires that protests shall be filed within seven days of petition filing,and may not be amended.Hearings on protests shall be public and limited to the reasons itemized in the protest.“Judicial rules of evidence and procedure”shall apply,and the protest shall be concluded within 14 days of filing. V Provides that random sampling or machine reading of petition entries shall be “inadmissible”. V Provides that petitioners may,within the seven days “after all validation procedures and appeals”,file “corrections and new petitions entries made at any time”.Third filings are barred. V Requires that petitions receive a ballot number and ballot placement upon initial filing;the ballot number and ballot placement shall remain in place during all “procedures and appeals”. H-5 0 r r State Land Board V An initiated constitutional amendment to sections 3,9 and 10 of article IX of the Colorado Constitution. V Authorizes the General Assembly to assist public schools by enacting legislation authorizing the state treasurer to utilize the public school fund to 1)invest the fund in bonds of school districts,2)use all or any portion of the fund or its income to guaranty school district bonds,or 3)make loans to school districts. V Provides that distributions of income for the benefit of public schools pursuant to article IX of the Constitution shall be in addition to and not a substitute for other moneys appropriated by the General Assembly for such school purposes. V Modifies and provides for the composition,compensation and qualifications of the state board of land commissioners. V Requires the General Assembly to annually appropriate from the income from the trust lands sufficient moneys for the Board to perform its duties and to give deference to the Board’s assessment of its budgetary needs. V Provides that the Board shall serve as the trustee for lands granted to the state in public trust by the federal government,lands acquired in lieu of such lands, and other lands held by the Board in public trust in accordance with the purposes for which the lands were granted and the provisions of the constitutional amendment,and subject to the terms and conditions provided by law that are consistent with the Constitution. V Authorizes the Board to undertake non-simultaneous exchanges of land. V Establishes the principles that 1)the state school lands are an endowment of land assets held in perpetual trust for the support of public schools,which should not be significantly diminished;2)the disposition and use of such lands should benefit public schools including local school districts;and 3)the economic productivity of all lands held in public trust is dependent on sound stewardship,including protecting and enhancing the beauty,natural values, open space,and wildlife habitat of the land for the current and future generations;and in recognition of these principles requires the Board to be governed by standards set forth in section 10 of the amendment. V Adds to the Board’s duty to provide for the location,protection,sale,or other disposition of trust lands the prudent management or exchange of such lands. K-i 0 V Changes the goal of the Board’s trusteeship of public trust lands from securing the maximum value to the production of reasonable and consistent income over time. V Requires the Board to determine prior to the lease,sale,or exchange of land for commercial,residential or industrial development that the income from such lease,sale,or exchange can reasonably be anticipated to exceed the fiscal impact of the development on local school districts and state funding of education from increased school enrollment associated with the development. V Requires the Board to protect and enhance the long-term productivity and sound stewardship of the trust lands by 1)establishing and maintaining a long- term stewardship trust of up to 300,000 acres of land that the Board determines through a statewide nomination process to be valuable primarily to preserve long-term benefits and returns to the state;which trust shall be held and managed to maximize options for the continued stewardship,public use,or future disposition,by permitting only those uses that will protect and enhance the beauty,natural values,open space,and wildlife habitat of the land;2) including in agricultural leases terms,incentives,and lease rates that will promote sound stewardship and land management practices,long-term agricultural productivity,and community stability;3)managing the development and utilization of natural resources in a manner which will conserve the long- term value of such resources,as well as existing and future uses,and in accordance with state and local laws and regulations;and 4)selling or leasing conservation easements,licenses and other similar interests in land. V Requires the Board to comply with valid local land use regulations and plans. V Requires the Board to allow access by public schools without charge for outdoor educational purposes so long as such access does not conflict with uses previously approved by the Board for such lands. V Requires the Board to provide opportunities for the public school districts within which such lands are located to lease,purchase,or otherwise use such lands as are necessary for school building sites at an amount determined by the Board which shall not exceed the appraised fair market value,with the amount to be paid over time. ‘~By Genevieve Anton Gazette Teiegraph DENVER —Sen.Ray Powers wants Coloradans to vote against a petition-reform initia tive in November,even though it is a product of his own creation. The Colorado Springs Republi can says his original intent when Introducing the measure In 1996 was to limit the number of amendments to the state consti tution —which has about 100 pages —by encouraging people to amend statutes instead. However,a last-minute provi sion added by the House would actually make it harder to pass any initiative by requiring a 60 percent majority at the polls. to And Powers has decided he can’t support It anymore. “This makes the balance of power uneven and unlike any other government entity,”he said at a news conference Thurs day called by 50 Plus One,a co alition of organizations that op pose the petition-reform mea sure.“Citizens should have the same right of majority rule as public officials.” Other opponents,including various citizens rights groups, argued that a 60 percent re quirement would guarantee that any future attempts to reform government would fail.It is like “setting the constitution in con crete,”said coalition directora Dwight Williams.. iinitiative The group says the initiative is being backed by lobbyists and special-Interest groups that want to defend the status quo and limit citizen involvement. But they also blame legislators for voting to put it on the 1996 ballot in the first place. Powers told reporters this is not an electIon year change of heart.The senator pointed out that he withdrew his sponsor ship of the amended measure a year ago and urged the Senate to reject It. “There was a lot of lobbying going on in the halls,”Powers said.“It was a real machine on the roll and very difficult to turn around.So it passed and all J could do was remove myname.” By CARL HILUAm) The Associated Press DENVER —Legislative Council members voted Monday to retain language in voter in formation booklets that sug gests schools would lose $25 million if the Colorado Land Board is overhauled despite ob jections by Gay.Roy Romer. Romer told the panel Monday he “could just see the television ads saying it will be a $25 mil lion loss to public schools”and added it could kill the proposed constitutional amendment “deader than a doornail.” The governor came into the meeting at mid-morning as the council’s executive committee, made up of the majority and mi nority leaders of both houses — but dominated by Republicans —discussed the issue. He listened in silence from his seat in the audience as the group discussed the ballot pro posal he is spearheading,but then,without being recognized, said:“Pd like to testi~’on that subject” But Chairman Tom Norton, R-Greeley,president of the Sen ate,ignored Romer’s request for the next 10 minutes until Sen. Bob Martinez,a Democrat from Commerce City,noted that the governor must be on a tight schedule and that he would like to hear what Romer was sug gesting. ‘131 recognize the governor as soon as all of the committee members get their questions asked,”Norton replied. Romer then was allowed to make his pitch against the re tention of the $25 million figure in the %lue books,”which are infonnation booklets prepared by the council and distributed to about 1.5 million households where there are registered voters. Romer said the analysis is misleading and could under mine voter confidence in his ini tiative.He has said that re structuring the board will pre serve open space,primarily. Romer left the meeting before the vote was taken and later, when advised of the vote,said he believed members still mis understood what was in the~ proposal.Of the committee’s in sistence on retaining the dollar figure,he told reporters:“It just isn’t true.It?s just not true.” Initiative critics,including Colorado Fann Bureau mem bers,who lease land from the board,say the ballot issue would politicize the board,un dennine school fimds and open tn3st lands to special interests. The three-member land board,appointed by the gover nor and paid about $50,000 an nually,would be expanded to a five-member board still ap pointed by the governor but serving on a volunteer,no- salary basis. The board now raises about $25 million annually for schools through grazing,oil and min eral leases,and interest from a $200 million permanent find. The 6-5 party line vote that would keep the $25 million loss possibility language in the pro posal was criticized by Sen. Mike Feeley,D-Lakewood,com mittee member. He said the loss figure is a “blatant misrepresentation of the facts as we know them.” “They’re sticking it to the gov ernor,”said former Rep.Ruth Wright,D-Boulder,former House minority leader who is helping with the drive. 1 Powers urges defeat Romer,land board amendment suffer setback in voter booklet •e(~.~ee(secIee(•ecee(seq 0 0