抖阴ap

GRAND JUNCTION — Supporters and opponents of four measures on the November ballot made their cases Saturday to some of the heaviest hitters in western Colorado.

It was all part of the fall meeting of Club 20, an organization representing 22 counties that bills itself as “The voice of the Western Slope.” The day included discussion of ballot initiatives and debates between candidates.

The sheer number of issues on the ballot this year — 18 — was offered as the argument for one measure: Referendum O. The measure would make it harder to amend the state constitution while offering incentives to change state law instead.

There were no opponents of Referendum O who spoke, and the two lawmakers who spoke in favor of it, Reps. Al White, R-Hayden, and Ellen Roberts, R-Durango, both had a hand in crafting it while serving on a special legislative committee earlier this year.

The Colorado Constitution is “replete with conflict and — irrelevancies” caused by an “overwrought populist movement,” White said.

The measure would require initiative petition organizers to get a portion of their signatures from registered voters in all seven of the state’s congressional districts, instead of just one spot — like standing in front of supermarkets in Denver — as allowed currently.

The measure would raise the number of signatures needed to amend the constitution from the current 76,047 to 93,497 while reducing the number needed to change state law to 62,331. In addition, lawmakers could not tamper with changes made to state law by initiatives for five years and then only with a two-thirds vote of the legislature.

Club 20, made up of locally elected officials and business and community leaders, has endorsed the measure.

The organization also initially endorsed Amendment 52, a measure supported by a group of Republican lawmakers that would shift a portion of the state’s severance-tax revenue to improvements for Interstate 70.

However, in a meeting Saturday afternoon, Club 20’s board reversed the organization’s stance and said it would oppose the measure.

A state analysis said the measure would add some $225 million to transportation improvements over four years, money that would come at the expense of water-improvement projects and other programs.

That’s wrong, said Jim Lochhead, former director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, who spoke against the measure during the debate.

“You’re hurting one thing to help another,” he said.

But Rep. Frank McNulty, R-Highlands Ranch, one of the measure’s chief proponents, disagreed.

“It (the amendment) is right for Colorado, because it re-prioritizes existing revenues without tolls and without a tax increase,” McNulty said.

Western Slope leaders also heard from House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver, who was promoting Amendment 59, which would create a rainy-day fund for schools while eliminating a constitutional requirement that the state increase education funding each year. It also would repeal a constitutional requirement that the state issue refunds to taxpayers when revenues exceed a growth lid under the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.

Sen. Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, argued against the measure, saying it was wrong to repeal the TABOR spending lid while earmarking surplus revenues just for schools. He said repealing the TABOR limits breaks faith with voters who enacted them.

But Romanoff said Amendment 59 would untangle a constitutional knot caused by conflicting provisions. He also said it was proper to save for education rather than having mandated spending increases.

Western Slope leaders also heard from proponents of Amendment 58, a ballot measure supported by Democratic Gov. Bill Ritter that would eliminate a property-tax credit for the oil and gas industry to fund college scholarships. Club 20, which represents many energy-rich counties, opposes the amendment.

Rep. Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, said the tax burden for the oil and gas industry in Colorado is lower than in surrounding states. The measure would help college students while not overburdening the industry, she said.

But opponent Rick Reiter, who heads Coloradans for a Stable Economy, said the measure would hurt counties’ local property-tax base by forcing energy producers to relocate from counties with high property-tax rates.

Tim Hoover: 303-954-1626 or thoover@denverpost.com