The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About961491 RESOLUTION RE: SETTING OF TITLE FOR A LOCAL BALLOT ISSUE CONCERNING SITING OF CORRECTIONAL OR DETENTION FACILITIES BY WELD COUNTY BALLOT ISSUE TITLE BOARD WHEREAS, pursuant to provisions of§ 1-40-106(2), C.R.S., and pursuant to separate Resolution of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, dated December 5, 1994, the Board of County Commissioners and the Weld County Clerk and Recorder are designated as the "Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board" for the purpose of setting titles for local ballot issues in Weld County, Colorado, after their submittal, and WHEREAS, on July 29, 1996, the Weld County Clerk and Recorder received a request to set a ballot title from John T. Coppom, for The Villa at Greeley, Inc., concerning siting and location of correctional or detention facilities as required by the Weld County Home Rule Charter, a copy of said request and proposed language being attached hereto collectively as "Exhibit A," and WHEREAS, on August 19, 1996, the Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board convened for the purpose of setting the title for said local ballot issue, said date being the first regularly scheduled meeting of the Board of County Commissioners twelve days after the receipt by the Weld County Clerk and Recorder of the request for the title setting and proposed language (Exhibit A). WHEREAS, written argument was received from John E. Hayes, representing the Citizens Action Committee of Southwest Weld County, with alternative language to be considered by the Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board, a copy of said written argument being attached hereto as "Exhibit B". NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board, that the title for a local ballot issue concerning siting and location of correctional or detention facilities, as required by the Weld County Home Rule Charter for Weld County, Colorado, based upon the request and the information contained in the attached information, is as follows: TITLE: SHALL A PRIVATE PREPAROLE FACILITY BE LOCATED AND SITED AT A LOCATION AND SITE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS THE INTERSECTION OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 24.5 AND THE 1-25 FRONTAGE ROAD IN WELD COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS PART OF THE SW'/. OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO? BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board that the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, is hereby directed to notify the title requestor, John T. Coppom, of the title as set forth above. 961491 CR0012 RE: SETTING BALLOT TITLE PAGE 2 The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made and seconded, adopted by the following vote by the Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board on the 19th day of August, A.D., 1996. BALLOT ISSUE TITLE BOARD 1 , I Lam, WELD COUNTY, COLORADO it7),3 i-S Lie/��eEi%tw �r'Li`lvc(i_J. / 'iiii- c'_.�te' ��Ir,t Barb J. Kirkmeyer Chair.a�� ty Clerk to the Board ' (n �� -eBaxter, P o-T / � �94r Deputy Cler to the Board 1 Dalale-K. Hall, / < 1 1V AS O M: ( -��ti� 6�4 6i Constance L. HarbgrtCommissio, Conermmissioner ofinty At or ey (A / /if Lia W. a st r, ommissio r 1/ A. "Suki" Tsukamoto, Clefl�and Recorder CR0012 HAYES LANGUAGE ADDING LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHALL A PRIVATE PREPAROLE FACILITY BE LOCATED AND SITED AT A LOCATION AND SITE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS THE INTERSECTION OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 24 1/% AND THE I-25 FRONTAGE ROAD IN WELD COUNTY, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS THE PART OF THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO? 961491 NOTICE DOCKET NO. 96-37 The Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board will convene at 1:30 p.m., on Monday, August 19, 1996, in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, First Floor, Greeley, Colorado, pursuant to Article XV, Section 15-5 of the Weld County Home Rule Charter, page 59 of the General Administration Section of the Weld County Administrative Policy Manual, and the Colorado Election Code. The purpose of said meeting is to consider the Request for Setting of Title for a Local Ballot Issue by the Villa, Inc., to be placed on the ballot for the November 5, 1996, general election. The Title and Ballot issue, as proposed by the Villa, is as follows: BALLOT TITLE: SHALL THE LOCATION OF A PREPAROLE FACILITY BE APPROVED, THEREBY ENSURING THAT NO MONETARY COMPENSATION IS PAID TO THE AFFECTED DEVELOPER FROM WELD COUNTY PUBLIC FUNDS AS A RESULT OF PERMANENTLY IMPAIRING THE VESTED RIGHT TO DEVELOP SAID FACILITY? BALLOT ISSUE: SHALL THE LOCATION OF A PREPAROLE FACILITY ON A SITE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS AT THE INTERSECTION OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 24.5 AND THE 1-25 FRONTAGE ROAD IN UNINCORPORATED SOUTHWESTERN WELD COUNTY BE APPROVED, THEREBY ENSURING THAT NO MONETARY COMPENSATION IS PAID TO THE AFFECTED DEVELOPER WITH WELD COUNTY PUBLIC FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT OF $505,787.00 AS ESTIMATED BY THE WELD COUNTY DISTRICT COURT, AS A RESULT OF PERMANENTLY IMPAIRING THE VESTED RIGHT TO DEVELOP SAID FACILITY? THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SAID SITE IS AS FOLLOWS: PART OF THE SW%OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO. Any person wishing to submit written argument regarding the proposed language who has not previously received notice of this hearing shall submit said written arguments no later than the 16th of August, 1996, to the Weld County Clerk to the Board. Should any interested party desire the presence of a court reporter to make a record of the proceedings, in addition to the taped record which will be kept during the hearing, the Clerk to the Board shall be advised in writing of such action at least five days prior to the hearing. The cost of engaging a court reporter shall be borne by the requesting party. Please contact the Clerk to the Board's Office at phone (970) 356-4000, Extension 4226, or fax (970) 352-0242 prior to the day of the hearing so that reasonable accommodations can be made if, in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, you require special accommodations in order to participate in this hearing as a result of a disability. BE IT ALSO KNOWN that copies of the proposed Ballot Title and Ballot Issue and any submitted written arguments regarding the proposal may be examined in the office of the Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners, located in the Weld County Centennial Center, 915 10th Street, Third Floor, Greeley, Colorado, Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. WELD COUNTY BALLOT ISSUE TITLE BOARD WELD COUNTY, COLORADO BY: DONALD D. WARDEN WELD COUNTY CLERK TO THE BOARD BY: Carol A. Harding DEPUTY CLERK TO THE BOARD DATED: August 5, 1996 PUBLISHED: August 8, 1996, in the North Weld Herald AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION STATE OF COLORADO NOTICE ss. DOCKET NO.98.37 COUNTY OF WELD The Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board will convene at 1:30 pm.,on Monday,August 19, I, Bruce J. Bormann,of said County of Weld,being duly in the Chambers of the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,Colorado,Web County Centennial Center,915 lath Street,First Floor,Greeley,Colorado,pursuant to Article sworn,say that I am Publisher of XV,Section 15.5 of the,Weld County Home Rule Charter,page 59 of the General Administra- tion Section of the Well Countydmtnletrative Policy Manual,and the Colorado Election Code. The purpose of said mesa*isto consider the Request for Setting of Title fora Local THE NORTH WELD HERALD Ballot Issue by the Villa,Inc„to be placed on the ballot for the November 5,1998,general election. The Title and Belot Issue,as proposed by the Villa,is as follows: a weekly newspaper having a general circulation in said BALLOT 7ift.B:SHALL THE LOCATION OF A PREPAR0LE FACILITY State,Published in the Town of Eaton, in said County and BE APPROVED,THEREBY ENSURING THAT NO MONETARY COM- PENSATION IS PAID TO THE AFFECTEDVEVELOPER FROM WELDCO Y COUnt and State;and that the notice,of which the annexed is INUGTHE VESTED RIGHT TO DEVELOP SAID FACILITY?NTY PUBLIC FUNDS AS A RESULT OF PERMANENTLY IMPAIR- a true copy,has been published in said weekly newspaper for ON A SITISSUE: GEEENERALLY DESCRIIBBED AS ATTION OF AHE INTERSECTION FACILITY O one successive week(s),that the notice was published WELD COUNTYeppo,21.5 AND THE I-25 AGE ROAD IN UN• in the regular and entire issue of every number of the paper INCORPORATED BDLlTHWESTERN WELD COUNTY BE APPROVED, 9 P P THEREBY ENSURING THAT NO MONETARY COMPENSATION IS PAID TO THE AFFECTED DEVELOPER WITH WELD COUNTY PUB- during the period and time of publication, and in the LIC FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT OF 787.00 AS ESTIMATED BY THE WELD COI1NTY DISTRICT COURT,AS A RESULT OF PERMANENTLY newspaper proper and not in a supplement,and that the IMPAIRING THE VESTED RIGHT O DEVELOP SAID FACILITY? publication of said notice: THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION O�__FF`SAID� SITE IS AS FOLLOWS: Docket No.96-37— PART OF THE SW 1/4 OF 96GTDN 2,TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH,RANGE Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board 88 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M.,,WELD COUNTY,'COLORADO. Any person wishing to submit writtenargument regarding the proposed language who has not was in said newspaper bearing the date(s) of: previously reosived notice of this hearing shall submit said written arguments no later than the 16th of August,1998,to the Weld County Clerk to the Board. Thursday,the 8th day of August,1996 Should any interested party desire the presence of a court reporter to make a record of the pro- ceedings,in addition to the taped record which-will be kept during the hearing,the Clerk 10 the Board shall be advised in writing of such action at least five days prior to the hearing. The Thursday,the day of August,1996 cost of engaging a court reporter shall be borne by the requesting party. Please contact the Clerk to the Board's Office at phone(970)358-4000,Extension 4225,or fax Thursday,the day of August,1996 (970)352-0242 ptior to the day of the hearing so Mat reasonable accommodations can be made If,in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities Act,you require special accom- modatlons in order to participate in this hearing as a rasa of a disability. - Thursday,the day of August,1996 BE IT ALSO KNOWN that copies at the roposed Ballot Title and Ballot Issue and any submit- ted written arguments rage:dkq the may be examined in the office of me Clerk to the and that the said THE NORTH WELD HERALD has been Board of County Commissioners, in the Weld County Centennial Center,915 10th Street,Third Floor,Greeley,Colorado,Monday throughFrday,8:00 a.m.to 5:00 p.m. published continuously and uninterruptedly for the period of 52 WELD COUNTY BALLOT ISSUE TITLE BOARD WELD COUNTY,COLORADO consecutive weeks,in said County and State,prior to the date BY: DONALD D.WARDEN of first publication of said notice,and the same is a newspaper WELD COUNTY CLERK TO THE BOARD within the meaning of an Act to regulate printing of legal BY: Carol A. CLERK Harding DEPUTY TO THE BOARD notices and advertisem ,approved May 18, 1931,and all DATED:August.5,1996 prior acts so far as in PUBLISHED:August 8,1998,In the North Weld Herald RU J.BORMANN, R Publication Cost:$ / 7 3 7 Subscribed and sworn to before me 'PAY pii`^;a. this /2tk day of August,1996 • �'' '••� �B ` EPIKA C. % BAGLEY ERIKA C.BAGLEY,NOTAFW PUi8LICJ©O My commission expires October 21,1999 4c*OF ca.° a eTO: Board of County Commissioners FROM: Bruce T. Barker, Weld County Attorney VI Ile DATE: August 15, 1996 RE: Ballot Title Board Hearing on August 19, 1996 COLORADO This Memorandum is intended to provide a summary of the proceedings for the hearing before the Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board(the "Title Board") on August 19, 1996, at 1:30 p.m. The hearing is pursuant to a request submitted by the Villa at Greeley, Inc. ("the Villa"), for a proposed ballot issue to be submitted to the electorate of Weld County at the November 5, 1996, general election. The Villa's request was made by John T. Coppom, by letter dated July 29, 1996. A response to the Villa's request and proposed language was submitted by John E. Hayes, attorney for Bud and Sharon Hopper, by letter dated August 5, 1996. At the hearing, the Title Board will have the responsibility of determining the wording of the "ballot title and submission clause"regarding the issue of the siting and location of the Villa's proposed pre-parole facility to be located in part of the Southwest Quarter of Section 2, Township 2 North, Range 68 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. Role of the Title Board The Title Board consists of the five county commissioners and the Weld County Clerk and Recorder. It was established pursuant to resolutions of the Board of County Commissioners. Procedures regarding the Title Board are included in on page 59 of the General Administration portion of the Weld County Administrative Manual. A copy of those procedures are included in this notebook. Request for Change of Venue of Hearing A written request for a change of venue for the Title Board hearing has been submitted by Stephanie Hayward, President, Weld County Council. The written request was received by the Board of County Commissioners on August 12, 1996. A Notice of the hearing was published in the North Weld Herald on August 8, 1996. Lee Morrison, Assistant Weld County Attorney, has researched whether or not the hearing could be moved to a different location. Lee concludes that the Title Board hearing is a continuation of the Board of County Commissioner's regularly scheduled meeting. In fact, the hearing will be shown as part of the Board's Agenda for August 19, 1996. Section 30-10-304, C.R.S., requires that regularly scheduled meetings of the Board of County Commissioners be held". . . at the Memo, Board of County Commissioners August 15, 1996 Page 2 County seat . . ." In a few cases in the past, the Board of County Commissioners has heard testimony at locations other than in Greeley; however, all of the Board's decisions in those cases have been made back in Greeley. Copies of Lee's Memorandum, Stephanie's letter, and the Notice of Hearing are included in this notebook. Key Issue It is the responsibility of the Title Board to establish what is known as the "ballot title and submission clause" for a local ballot issue. As Lee states in his Memorandum (a copy is included at the end of this notebook), the term"ballot title and submission clause" is somewhat misleading. It really is "The Question"which is submitted to the electorate and which will appear on the ballot taken into the voting booths. "The Question"must be presented in such a way as to provide for the electorate to vote either"yes" or"no". Both the Villa and Mr. Hayes have submitted proposed language for"The Question." Both proposals relate to the recent amendment to the Weld County Home Rule Charter, Article XV, Section 15-5.' The Villa's proposed language includes a clause referring to the recent ruling by the Colorado Court of Appeals requiring Weld County to compensate the Villa for the taking of its vested right if the electorate votes "no"to the proposed pre-parole facility. Mr. Hayes' proposed language leaves out any reference to the compensation issue. There are various legal arguments as to whether or not there should be reference to compensation in "The Question". These arguments are stated in both Mr. Hayes' letter and in Lee's Memorandum. Procedure for Hearing I believe the Ballot Issue Title Board should follow the following procedure at the hearing: Section 15-5 states: "Effective as of the date of adoption by the electors of Weld County of this Article XV, Section 15-5,no Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued by Weld County,or any department,employee or agent thereof,for the occupancy or operation of any building or other structure which will be occupied,used or operated as,and no person, corporation or entity shall occupy,use or operate any building or structure as a correctional facility,pre-parole facility,jail. prison or other place of incarceration,whether or not said building or structure is privately owned and/or operated,or is owned and/or operated by Weld County or,to the extent permitted by law,the State of Colorado,unless and until the location and siting thereof has been approved by a majority of the registered electors of Weld County voting at a regular or special election held on the question of said location and siting. This Section 15-5 is adopted in order to implement the provision of C.R.S.,Section 17- 2-401(d)relating to the authority of Weld County to maintain zoning and siting control over correctional facilities within the County,and this Section 15-5 shall survive any amendment or repeal of said Section 17-2-401(d),C.R.S. The provisions of this Section 15-5 shall be self-executing,shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the electors of Weld County,Colorado,and shall be applicable to any structure,building or facility which is not on the date of such adoption by the electors,occupied and in use as a detention facility,correctional facility,pre-parole facility,jail,prison or place of incarceration pursuant to a certificate of occupancy lawfully issued by Weld County,Colorado." Memo, Board of County Commissioners August 15, 1996 Page 3 1. The Board of County Commissioners' regularly scheduled meeting at 9:00 a.m. on August 19, 1996, should be continued at the end of the meeting to and until 1:30 p.m. for the Ballot Issue Title Board hearing. 2. At the hearing, the Title Board should first address the request for change of venue. If the Title Board decides to take testimony at another time and location, it should realize that the decision can only be made back in Greeley (the County seat). 3. The Board should announce to those persons present that two written proposals have been received. The proposed language for"The Question" from the Villa and from Mr. Hayes will be on an overhead for projection onto the screen in the hearing room. 4. A representative of the Villa should speak first. The representative should be asked if he or she has information to present in addition to that which the Villa submitted in writing. The representative could also provide rebuttal to the information and arguments contained in Mr. Hayes' written submittal. Likewise, Mr. Hayes should be given the same opportunity. He should be asked if there is any information or arguments that he would like to state which is in addition to that which he has submitted in writing. He may also make comments relative to the Villa's comments. 5. Finally, the hearing should be open for public comment. The Clerk to the Board will hand out cards to those persons who wish to speak. They will be asked to print their names and addresses on the cards. Those persons wishing to speak should be asked to comment only regarding the proposed language for"The Question." Specifically, they should be asked to comment regarding either the proposed language of the Villa or Mr. Hayes, or they may state proposed language on their own. They should be cautioned that this hearing is not one in which testimony will be taken regarding facts or opinions relative to the proposed pre- parole facility. The speakers should also be warned that they are not to give their personal opinions regarding how people should vote on"The Question". The purpose of this hearing is only to set the wording of"The Question" for the vote in November. 6. It seems to me that only those persons who are registered Weld County electors, attorneys for registered Weld County electors, or registered Weld County electors representing corporations or entities which own property within Weld County should be allowed to speak. Those are the persons and entities who will be Memo, Board of County Commissioners August 15, 1996 Page 4 affected by the outcome of the vote. I have asked Kathy Seiler of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder's Office to be present with her computer to check the names of those persons desiring to speak to determine if they are registered Weld County electors. � /' Mt-CC T. Barker Weld County Attorney BTB/db:Memo/BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS/ballot pc: Lee Morrison Don Warden • a OFFICE OF WELD COUNTY COUNCIL PHONE ('+70)356-4000 EXT.4780 915 Io1N ti1REGI" GREG LE1'.COLORADO 80631 COLORADO August 8, 1996 Ballot Title Setting Board c/o Board of County Commissioners P O Box 758 Greeley, CO 80632 • Dear Board Members: At the August 7, 1996 Weld County Council meeting a motion was passed unanimously to ask the Ballot Title Setting Board to make a change in venue for the August 19, 1996 Preparole Ballot Title Hearing. The Council requests that the August 19 Preparole Ballot Title Hearing be moved from Greeley to the Budget Host Motel, 3814 W. Highway 119 at 1-25; or that the Greeley hearing be recessed for continuance at the Budget Host Motel at 7:00 p.m. August 19, 1996. This request is made to enable and encourage more citizen participation in the hearing process. Thank you for your consideration of this request of Weld citizens via the Weld County Council. For the Weld County Council, Stephanie Hayward President • cc: Suki Tsukamoto, County Clerk and Recorder • nl : f cc , PL. ; 6/1 6 TO: Bruce T. Barker FROM: Lee D. Morrison, Assistant Weld County Attorney ' DATE: August 12, 1996 ORE: Place of Ballot Title Board Meeting • COLORADO The Board has been asked to move the meeting regarding the ballot title board to a motel in the Del Camino area. There are several legal and practical impediments. I would note that this issue is one which may end up before the District Court and, as a result, a clear record of what is arguably a quasi-judicial decision is required. Taping of the proceedings outside of the Commissioner hearing room is an uncertain endeavor, at best. The use of a court reporter is a possibility but again the acoustics would present a likely problem. The issue is already noticed so that it would have to be adjourned and then likely readjourned for the decision to be made in the Board chambers. The issue is narrow and goes simply to the fairness of the ballot title and issue and not particularly one for which extensive and diverse testimony is likely to be useful to the decision makers. The ability of the Board to conduct the proceedings outside of the county seat is a doubtful. C.R.S. § 1-40-106(2) provides for the conduct of ballot title board proceedings "at the regularly scheduled meeting of the governing board[ unless otherwise provided by charter or ordinance]". C.R.S. § 30-10-304 provides for regularly scheduled meetings " ... at the county seat...". The Weld County Home Rule Charter Art. III § 3-11 provides for regular meetings twice a week on days set by the Board by resolution(which the Board does annually) but makes no mention of the place of the meeting. There is no apparent conflict between the Charter and statute on the issue of where to hold regularly scheduled meetings or hearings of the ballot board so that it is my opinion that the ballot board may not meet outside of the City of Greeley as the law currently stands. This opinion does not extend to other forms of meetings such as fact- finding meetings as part of a legislative process for which no statutory provision appear to exist although a vote on a legislative proceeding needs to be conducted at regular meetings. .777: zc - ee D. Morrison Assistant Weld County Attorney M:\W PFILES\PLEADING\VILLA\BALMEET.W PD THE 1I�I lLEL 1750 6th Avenue • Greeley, Colorado 80631 • (970) 353-9263 John T. Coppom, Ph.D. Administrator July 29, 1996 Weld County Clerk & Recorder Attn: J.A. Judy Tsukamoto P.O. Box 459 Greeley, CO 80632 Re: Request For Setting of Title and Language For Local Ballot Issue by The Villa at Greeley, Inc. Dear Ms. Tsukamoto: On July 26, 1996, I tendered you a request regarding the captioned matter. I have subsequently changed the request, and now resubmit it to you herewith. Please therefore disregard the request previously submitted to you on July 26, 1996. Very truly yours, )cL7Cff ohn T. Coppom villa.ballot.dls xc: Bruce Barker, Weld County Attorney Donald Warden, Secretary to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County/Ballot Issue Title Board THE EITLA 1750 6th Avenue • Greeley, Colorado 80631 • (970) 353-9263 John T. Coppom, Ph.D. Administrator July 29, 1996 Weld County Clerk & Recorder Attn: J.A. Judy Tsukamoto P.O. Box 459 Greeley, CO 80632 Re: Request For Setting of Title and Language For Local Ballot • Issue by The Villa at Greeley, Inc. Dear Ms. Tsukamoto: Pursuant to the procedures for setting title and language on local ballot issues, The Villa at Greeley, Inc. ("The Villa"), submits the following draft of a proposed ballot title, language, and written argument. The Villa proposes that the following ballot issue be submitted to the electorate of Weld County on the ballot at the November 5, 1996, general election, to-wit: I: Ballot Title SHALL THE LOCATION OF A PREPAROLE FACILITY BE APPROVED, THEREBY ENSURING THAT NO MONETARY COMPENSATION IS PAID TO THE AFFECTED DEVELOPER FROM WELD COUNTY PUBLIC FUNDS AS A RESULT OF PERMANENTLY IMPAIRING THE VESTED RIGHT TO DEVELOP SAID FACILITY? II. Ballot Language SHALL THE LOCATION OF A PREPAROLE FACILITY ON A SITE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS AT THE INTERSECTION OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 241/2 AND THE 1-25 FRONTAGE ROAD IN UNINCORPORATED SOUTHWESTERN WELD COUNTY BE APPROVED, THEREBY ENSURING THAT NO MONETARY COMPENSATION IS PAID TO THE AFFECTED DEVELOPER WITH WELD COUNTY PUBLIC FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT OF $505,787.00 AS ESTIMATED BY THE WELD COUNTY DISTRICT COURT, AS A RESULT OF PERMANENTLY IMPAIRING THE VESTED RIGHT TO DEVELOP SAID FACILITY? Weld County Clerk & Recorder July 29, 1996 Page 2 THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SAID SITE IS AS FOLLOWS: PART OF THE SW '/ OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO. In support of the above, The Villa submits the following argument: 1 . On December 8, 1993, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County (the "County Board") approved The Villa's PUD Plan for the construction of a preparole release facility on real property located in Weld County. 2. On February 7, 1995, The Villa filed a complaint in Weld County District Court seeking declaratory judgment regarding the status of its vested property right with respect to its PUD Plan. 3. Subsequent to the filing of The Villa's complaint, certain orders were entered in the Weld County District Court. 4. On June 13, 1995, the Home Rule Charter of Weld County was amended by an affirmative election vote to provide that no certificate of occupancy may be issued for a correctional facility, such as a preparole release facility, without a prior affirmative election vote approving the siting of such facility. 5. Marvin Hopper, an intervenor in the Weld County District Court action, appealed the Weld County District Court orders to the Colorado Court of Appeals. In an opinion entered April 11 , 1996, the Court of Appeals reversed the orders of the Weld County District Court and ordered that the case be remanded to the Weld County District Court with directions. 6. In its opinion, the Court of Appeals directed the Weld County District Court as follows: a. On remand, the extent to which The Villa should be awarded compensation for the Charter Amendment's effect on its vested right "must be determined." Weld County Clerk & Recorder July 29, 1996 Page 3 b. On remand, the Weld County District Court should determine the approximate amount that will be due to The Villa, in accord with the vested Property Rights Act (C.R.S. § §24-68-101 , et seq.), should the Weld County electorate disapprove the siting of The Villa's preparole release facility. Once the court has determine the approximate amount of compensation, "This amount shall be deposited with the court to be used once the amount of just compensation has been finally determined or as further damages suffered if the preparole facility location is not ultimately approved." c. Pursuant to a hearing on June 4, 1996, Judge William West of the Weld County District Court entered an order requiring the County Board to segregate the sum of $505,787.00 to be used for just compensation or as further damages if The Villa's preparole facility location is not approved by the electorate. 7. It is The Villa's position that the ballot language must contain both the issue of approval of the location of the preparole facility as well as the intrinsically related issue of just compensation to be paid The Villa should the location not be approved by the electorate. Approval of the location of the facility and the payment of just compensation should the location not be approved are part and parcel of the same issue. Colorado courts have long held that more than one topic may be submitted to the voters in a single ballot title if the topics are so connected or dependent upon the general subject that it might not be desirable that one be adopted without the other. A proposed ballot title violates the single-subject requirement only if its text relates to more than one subject and has at least two distinct and separate purposes which are not dependent upon or connected with each other. The provision for just compensation to The Villa, should the electorate disapprove of the location of its facility, is required by the vested Property Rights Act and the clear language of the Court of Appeals' opinion in this matter. Intervenor Marvin Hopper, both in his Weld County District Court and Court of Appeals filings, repeated time and time again the argument that The Villa's previously approved PUD Plan may lawfully be affected by the Home Rule Charter amendment passed on June 13, 1995 so long as The Villa is afforded just compensation. Weld County Clerk and Recorder July 29, 1996 Page 4 The Court of Appeals' decision (referenced above in paragraph 6) outlines with great clarity the fact that The Villa is entitled to just compensation under the vested Property Rights Act and the opinion sets forth with specificity how the amount of that just compensation is to be determined and secured. The Villa anticipates that the opponents of its project will challenge the above proposed ballot language, claiming that it violates the single-subject requirement. Such a challenge is not only legally unsound, but reaches the heights of hypocrisy. The entire thrust of Marvin Hopper's arguments in Weld County District Court and the Court of Appeals was that The Villa may in essence be deprived of its right to construct its facility pursuant to the PUD Plan approved by the County Board, so long as The Villa is paid just compensation. As Weld County District Court Judge William West duly noted in his June 4, 1996 ruling, one of the purposes of setting an approximate amount of compensation is to advise Weld County voters of the potential cost to the taxpayers of this county by disapproving the location of The Villa's facility. In summary, the issues of approval of the location and payment of just compensation are necessarily and properly connected. Those issues are not disconnected or incongruous. These issues are properly presented as a single-subject in one ballot issue, and The Villa respectfully requests that the County Board, in considering this submission as the Ballot Issue Title Board, accept and approve the above ballot title and language and place it on the ballot for consideration by the electorate of this County on November 5, 1996. Very truly yours, � VVlis.Q7 ohn T. Coppom villa.ballot.dls xc: Bruce Barker, Weld County Attorney Donald Warden, Secretary to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County/Ballot Issue Title Board PUG 05 '96 04:19PM Hi ; PHILLIPS MAL0NEY P.2/8 HAYES, PHILLIPS & MALONEY, P.C. Attorneys at Law Suite 450, The Market Center 1350 Seventeenth Street Denver, Colorado 80202-1517 (303)825-6444 Telecopier: (303) 825-1269 John E. Hayes M. Susan Lombardi Herbert C. Phillips Bradley N. Shefrin James S. Maloney Corey Y. Hoffmann VIA FACSIMILE AND REGULAR MAIL August 5, 1996 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto Weld County Clerk and Recorder P.O. Box 459 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Ms. Tsukamoto: Enclosed you will find a written argument in support of the ballot title proposed by Marvin Hopper regarding the question of the location and siting of a pre-parole facility, to be submitted to the registered electors of Weld County on November 5, 1996 . This argument also responds to the title suggested by The Villa at Greeley, Inc. This submittal is intended to be considered by the Ballot Issue Title Board on August 19, 1996 at 1 : 00 p.m. Thank you for your attention to this matter and please call if you have any questions. Very truly yours, Corey Y. Hoffmann Enclosure c: Lee D. Morrison, [Via facsimile and regular mail] Asst . County Attorney (w/enc. ) 8/5/96-pss U:\USERS\HOPPER\COR\CYH\RECORD.L02 HUG 5 ' 96 16: 18 303 825 1269 PPGE . 002 AUG 05 '% 04 19P11 H S PHILLIPS MALONEY P.3/8 HAYES, PHILLIPS & MALONEY, P.C. Attorneys at Law Suite 450, The Market Center 1350 Seventeenth Street Denver, Colorado 80202-1517 (303) 825-6444 Telecopier: (303) 825-1269 John E. Hayes M. Susan Lombardi Herbert C. Phillips Bradley N. Shefrin James S. Maloney Corey Y. Hoffmann August 5, 1996 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto Weld County Clerk and Recorder P.O. Box 459 Greeley, CO 80632 Re: Request for the Setting of a Ballot Title Pursuant to the Weld County Administrative Manual Dear Ms. Tsukamoto: Please accept this letter as a request for the setting of a title for a local ballot issue on behalf of Marvin Hopper. Pursuant to theprocedures for setting a ballot title, as contained in the Weld County Administrative Manual, as revised June 10, 1996, this request contains a draft of the title proposed by Mr. Hopper, as proponent, and written argument in support of the draft ballot title. In addition, this request also contains argument regarding the blatant inappropriateness of the draft ballot title submitted by The Villa at Greeley, Inc. ("The Villa" ) . 1. Proposed Ballot Title SHALL A PRIVATE PRE-PAROLE FACILITY BE LOCATED AND SITED AT A LOCATION AND SITE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS THE INTERSECTION OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 243/6 AND THE I- 25 FRONTAGE ROAD IN WELD COUNTY? YES NO 2. Argument in Support of Draft Ballot Title The above ballot title is drafted co be in specific accordance with Article XV, Section 15-5 of the Home Rule Charter of Weld County, Colorado, which, as amended, provides as follows : 8/5/1996 — 11:1dem RECOAD.L01 AUG 5 ' 96 16: 19 303 825 1269 PAGE . 003 AUG 05 '96 04:2OPM H S PHILLIPS MRL0MEY P.4/8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 2 NEITHER WELD COUNTY, NOR ANY DEPARTMENT, AGENT OR EMPLOYEE THEREOF, SHALL ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY TO ALLOW THE OCCUPANCY OR USE OF, NOR SHALL ANY PERSON, CORPORATION OR ENTITY OCCUPY, OPERATE OR USE, ANY STRUCTURE OR BUILDING WITHIN WELD COUNTY AS A CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, PRE-PAROLE FACILITY, JAIL, PRISON OR OTHER PLACE OF INCARCERATION, WHETHER OR NOT THE STRUCTURE, BUILDING OR FACILITY IS OWNED OR OPERATED AS EITHER A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITY, UNLESS AND UNTIL THE LOCATION AND SITING OF SUCH CORRECTIONAL OR DETENTION FACILITY, JAIL, PRISON, PRE-PAROLE FACILITY OR OTHER PLACE OF INCARCERATION HAS BEEN APPROVED BY A MAJORITY OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF WELD COUNTY VOTING ON SUCH QUESTION AT A REGULAR OR SPECIAL ELECTION. [Emphasis added. ] The plain language of the above Charter provision requires the approval by the registered electors of Weld County of the "location and siting" of a pre-parole facility. The draft ballot title requests the approval of the registered electors for exactly the issue upon which their approval is needed under the Charter. The title as drafted refers to the general description of the location and siting of the pre-parole facility. If the Board believes the ballot title would be clearer with the specific legal description contained in the title itself, Mr. Hopper would not be opposed to modifying the ballot title above to include the legal .description. In addition to being consistent with the language of the Charter, the above title is not confusing or misleading. Ballot titles, submission clauses and summaries must be clear and not confusing or misleading. See e .q. , In the Matter of Ethic, Tax Refund, 823 P. 2d 1353, 1355 (Colo. 1991) . Brevity is also an important consideration. Id. As the Colorado Supreme Court summarized in a recent decision regarding certain "tenets" that should direct title setting in the context of an initiative : [T] he language . . . must be brief, unambiguous, and direct . . . , and as such, it should reference only the central points of the above measure. . . Along these same lines, 8/5/1996 - 11,14am RECORD.L01 AUG 5 ' 96 16 : 19 303 825 1269 PRGE . 004 AUG 05 '96 04:21PM Hf ; PHILLIPS MALONEY P.5/8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 3 the Board is not required to include every aspect of a proposed measure in the title and submission clause, . . . provide specific explanations of a proposal, . . . or discuss every possible effect of an initiated measure. [Citations omitted. ] In the Matter of Petition on Campaign and Political Finance, 877 P.2d 311, 313 (Colo. 1994) . Further, the Weld County Administrative Manual provides that the Ballot Issue Title Board follow the procedures and requirements set forth in Colo. Rev. Stat. § 1-40-101, et seq. , and specifically § 1-40-106 (3) (b) . Section 1-40-106 (3) (b) provides in pertinent part : In setting a title, the title board shall consider the public confusion that might be caused by misleading titles and shall, whenever practicable, avoid titles for which the general understanding of the effect of a "yes" or "no" vote will be unclear. The title for the proposed law . . which shall correctly and fairly express the true intent and meaning thereof, . . . The proposed ballot title is consistent with the well-settled tenets of setting ballot titles in the State of Colorado, as it is clear, brief, and contains the explicit request for approval required by the Charter of Weld County. Consistent with § 1-40- 106 (3) (b) , the proposed title provides a clear understanding of a "yes" or "no" vote consistent with the vote now required under the Charter. Accordingly, Mr. Hopper respectfully requests the Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board approve the above ballot title and place the same on the November 5, 1996 ballot for the consideration of the Weld County electors. 3 . The "Ballot Title" and "Ballot Language" Requested by The Villa at Greeley Inc. is Blatantly Inappropriate Proponent Hopper is also in receipt of the proposed ballot title submitted by The Villa at Greeley, Inc. (the "Villa") . What follows is a brief summary of the clear inappropriateness of the proposed ballot title submitted by The Villa. 8/5/1996 - 11NIam RECORD.L01 AUG 5 ' 96 16: 20 303 825 1269 PRGE . 005 AUG 05 '96 04:21PM H. _5 PHILLIPS MALONEY P.6/8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 4 First, and most significantly, the proposal by The Villa is inconsistent with Article XV, Section 15-5 of the Home Rule Charter of Weld County, Colorado. The Charter requires approval of the location and siting of a pre-parole facility by the registered electors of Weld County. The attempted incorporation of language that resulted from an opinion of the Colorado Court of Appeals regarding just compensation that may be awarded to The Villa if the electorate does not approve the location and siting of the facility is argumentative, and irrelevant. Under the Charter provision mandating this election question, the result of the court case referred to in The Villa' s argument has literally no connection to the question to be submitted to the voters, nor to their ultimate decision. In addition, The Villa is attempting to insert its campaign language into the ballot title. It is beyond dispute that argumentative language and campaign rhetoric should not be included in a ballot title . In fact, such argumentative language may not even be allowed in the summary of a ballot issue. Section 1-40- 106 (3) (a) , regarding summaries of the proposed law, requires that such summaries "be true and impartial and shall not be an argument, nor likely to create prejudice, either for or against the measure. " Accord, In re Proposed Initiative 1996-4 , 916 P.2d 528, 532 (Colo. 1996) . If a summary may not be prejudicial, it is even more clear that the ballot title itself may not contain argumentative language. Similarly, in Matter of Proposed Initiated Constitutional Amendment, 873 P.2d 718, 720 (Colo. 1994) , the Colorado Supreme Court discussed in a slightly different context whether a ballot title should "speculate about the possible effect" of a vote on an initiative question. The Petitioners argued that the ballot title should "warn voters" that certain language would have a certain future effect. Id. In rejecting the argument, the court stated: [T]here is no requirement that the title, ballot title, and submission clause or the summary state the effect an initiative may have on other constitutional and statutory provisions. The Board in this case correctly declined to speculate about the possible effect of a proposed constitutional amendment on other parts of the constitution. 9/5/1996 - 11214am RECORD.1,01 AUG 5 ' 96 16: 21 303 825 1269 PAGE . 006 AUG 05 '96 04:22PM H. S PHILLIPS MALONEY P. //8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 5 Id. [citations omitted] . Here, the title as drafted by The Villa requires the speculative effect of the approval or disapproval of the location and siting of the pre-parole facility to be considered. Including the speculative effect of the approval or disapproval is fundamentally inconsistent with the Charter and contrary to Colorado law. In addition to being argumentative, The Villa' s proposed ballot title impermissibly seeks to include more than one subject in the ballot title in violation of the so-called "single-subject" requirement of Article V, § 1 and Article XIX, § 2 of the Colorado Constitution, as codified at Colo. Rev. Stat . § 1-40-106 .5. As the Colorado Supreme Court aptly stated: The single-subject requirement is designed to protect voters against fraud and surprise and to eliminate the practice of combining several unrelated subjects in a single measure for the purpose of enlisting support from advocates of each subject and thus securing the enactment of measures which might not otherwise be approved by voters on the merits of those discrete measures. In the Matter of Petition for Amendment to Constitution, 907 P.2d 586, 589 (Colo. 1995) ; accord, In re Proposed Ballot Initiative on Parental Rights, 913 P.2d 1127, 1130-31 (Colo. 1996) ; In re Proposed Initiative 1996-4, 916 P. 2d 528, 532 (Colo. 1996) . Here, once again, The villa's proposed ballot title fails because it seeks to include an unrelated subject in order to enlist the support of advocates of other issues. More particularly, the proposed ballot title seeks to include consideration of a financial impact unrelated to the intent of the Charter provision which requires submission of this issue to the electorate. The Charter amendment requires voter approval of the location and siting of a pre-parole facility, and nothing more. Including a financial impact that arose based on a specific set of unique circumstances allows those in favor of the pre-parole facility to conceivably obtain support from those with financial interests unrelated to the location and siting of the facility. Such a result is contrary to the Charter, and contrary to the single-subject requirement. 8/5/1996 - ll:l4em RECORD.IOl AUG 5 ' 96 16: 21 303 825 12E9 PHGE . 007 AUG 05 '96 04:23PM F S PHILLIPS MALONEY P.8/8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 6 In conclusion, the vehicle for discussing the Court of Appeals decision that is attempted to be referenced in The Villa's proposed ballot title is the campaign in support of approval of the location and siting of the pre-parole facility. Including such a reference in the body of the ballot title is contrary to the language of the Charter, and violates the Colorado Constitution and the Colorado statutory scheme addressing the setting of ballot titles. Instead, Mr. Hopper respectfully requests the Ballot Issue Title Board select the ballot title as submitted herein, because it reflects the intent of the Charter, and it fairly and accurately indicates to the electorate the issue upon which their approval is required. V r ours, E. Hayes C : Marvin Hopper 8/5/1996 - 11:14m RECORD-1.01 PUG 5 ' 96 16 : 22 303 825 1269 PPGE . 008 6 TO: Board of Weld County Commissioners FROM: Lee D. Morrison, Assistant Weld County Attorney NigDATE: August 13, 1996 C RE: Ballot Title Setting Board COLORADO Introduction Some explanation of nomenclature used by the Courts in these matters may be helpful. The Ballot Title Setting Board at the state level has three roles: set the title, set the submission clause and set a summary. At a local level a summary is not set. What confuses matters is that the State Board calls the submission clause the "ballot title and submission clause" and the heading is simply called the title and the two, by practice, use the same verbiage except that the Ballot Title and Submission Clause is in the form of a question prefaced by "shall" or"should". The other component is the actual operative language containing the verbatim changes or additions to the law sometimes known as "the measure". The Villa appears to have submitted what could be the measure accompanied by a ballot title and submission clause which has been contested by the Hoppers as to the title and submission clause. This current process does not involve a petition so some of the components may be surplusage. The most recent charter amendment to add Article XV, § 15-5 included the operative language verbatim as the proposed measure on the petition but only the ballot title and submission clause were on the ballot and I have confirmed with elections department that the ballot title and submission is all that appears on the ballot. The Hoppers have objected on essentially two basis. The first is that the title and submission clause is misleading. This is based on the language of the title and submission provision itself. The single issue rule applies to the ballot title and submission as well as the operative language although it does not appear to be how the Hoppers phrased their objection. Applicability The County has accepted the applicability of the "misleading standard"to this issue by using the ballot title setting procedure under C.R.S. § 1-40-106, specifically § 1-40-106(3)(b) and the language appears to have broad applicability to adoption of"laws". However, much of the statutory and constitutional law which is cited regarding the single issue rule is not, strictly speaking, applicable to the Villa issue. The provisions of the Colorado Constitution Art V Page 1 of 5 Pages § 1(5.5)', § 2(3) of Article XIX and C.R.S. § 1-40-106.52 apply to initiated measures and referred constitutional amendments at a State-wide election but not expressly to local issues of any type. The legislative findings attached § 10-40-106.5 C.R.S. note that the rule has been applied to bills proposed in the legislature, Art V § 21 of the Colorado Constitution, and that cases interpreting the legislative restriction are to be applicable to § 11 -40-106.5 C.R.S. The Villa issue may not technically be a referendum or initiative as it comes under a special provision of the Charter similar to certain revenue limit relief provisions similar to a Board referred matter. The Charter initiative and referendum provisions do not address the single issue rule in the same way as does the state. However, Article XV § 15-4(1)(b) of the Charter provides for no more than one ordinance or resolution per initiative and Article III, § 3-14(3) says all Colorado Constitution Art V, § 1 (5.5)reads as follows: No measure shall be proposed by petition containing more than one subject,which shall be clearly expressed in its title; but if any subject shall he embraced in any measure which shall not be expressed in the title, such measure shall be void only as to so much thereof as shall not be so expressed. If a measure contains more than one subject,such that-a ballot title cannot be fixed that clearly expresses a single subject,no title shall be set and the measure shall not be submitted to the people for adoption or rejection at-the polls. 2 § 1-40-106.5. Single-subject requirements for initiated measures and referred constitutional amendments--legislative declaration. (1)The general assembly hereby finds,determines,and declares that: (a)Section 1(5.5)of article V and section 2(3)of article XIX of the state constitution require that every constitutional amendment or law proposed by initiative and every constitutional amendment proposed by the general assembly be limited to a single subject,which shall be clearly expressed in its title. (b) Such provisions were referred by the general assembly to the people for their approval at the 1994 general election pursuant to Senate Concurrent Resolution 93-4. (c)The language of such provisions was drawn from section 21 of article V of the state constitution, which requires that every bill,except general appropriation bills, shall be limited to a single subject,which shall be clearly expressed in its title. (d)The Colorado supreme court has held that the constitutional single-subject requirement for bills was designed to prevent or inhibit various inappropriate or misleading practices that might otherwise occur, and the intent of the general assembly in referring to the people section 1(5.5)of article V and section 2(3)of article XIX was to protect initiated measures and referred constitutional amendments from similar practices. (e)The practices intended by the general assembly to be inhibitedby section 1(5.5)of article V and section 2(3)of article XIX are as follows: (I)To forbid the treatment of incongruous subjects in the same measure,especially the practice of putting together in one measure subjects having no necessary or proper connection,for the purpose of enlisting in support of the measure the advocates of each measure,and thus securing the enactment of measures that could not be carried upon their merits; (II)To prevent surreptitious measures and apprise the peopleof the subject of each measure by the title,that is,to prevent surprise and fraud from being practiced upon voters. (2)It is the intent of the general assembly that section 1(5.5)of article V and section 2(3)of article XIX be liberally construed, so as to avert the practices against which they are aimed and,at the same time,to preserve and protect the right of initiative and referendum. (3)It is further the intent of the general assembly that, in setting titles pursuant to section 1(5.5)of article V,the initiative title setting review board created in section 1-40-106 should apply judicial decisions construing the constitutional single-subject requirement for bills and should follow the same rules employed by the general assembly in considering titles for bills. Page 2 of 5 Pages ordinances "shall be confined to a single subject which shall be clearly expressed in its title". The County has applied the administrative-procedures to this issue in a way which presumes the applicability of the single issue rule. While the law does not directly compel compliance with the rule it is the better practice to review this question in accordance with the rule. Claim that Title is Misleading The Hopper's have submitted their own proposed ballot title which makes no reference to the compensation issue. The Hoppers are clearly correct that the words location and siting should both be used in the submission because that is what is found in the Charter. The local ballot title and submission clause for both local and state wide issues is to be prepared in accordance with § 1-40-106(3)(b).3 The goals set out in the statute require the title board to consider the public confusion that might be caused by misleading titles; avoid, where practicable,titles for which the general understanding of the effect of a"yes" or"no" will be unclear; create a title which correctly and fairly express the true intent and meaning; be brief and not in conflict with others previously filed for the same election; be in the form of a question which may be answered "yes" or"no"; and unambiguously state the principal of the provision sought to be added, amended or repealed. The case cited by Hoppers In the Matter of Proposed Initiative on Education Tax Refund, 823 P.2d 1353 (1991) further states the title setting process is to "insure that both persons reviewing an initiative petition and the voters are fairly and succinctly advised of the import of the proposed law. . . . the wording . . . should not mislead voters into voting for or against the proposition. The Board must also be cognizant of the need for brevity. . . . the Board is not requiredto described every nuance and feature of the proposed measure. (Citations omitted)" The Board's role is to evaluate the proposal in light of these standards of fairness and clarity. Single Issue Rule The evil sought to be avoided by a single issue rule was to avoid the practice of joining multiple subjects into a single initiative in the hope of attracting support from various factions in which may have different or even conflicting interests, a practice known as logrolling or christmas treeing. "Public Rights in Waters II, 898 P.2d 10760995). In order to violate the single-subject 3 § 1-40-106(3)(6)reads-as follows: In setting a title,the title board shall consider the public confusion that might be caused by misleading titles and shall,whenever practicable, avoid titles for whichthe general understanding of the effect of a"yes"or"no"vote will be unclear. The title for the proposed law or constitutional amendment,which shall correctly and fairly express the true intent and meaning thereof,together with the ballot title, submission clause, and summary,shall be completed within two weeks after the first meeting of the title board. Immediately upon completion,the secretary of the state-shall deliver the same with the original to the parties presenting it,keeping the copy with a-record of the action taken thereon. Ballot titles shall be brief, shall not conflict with those selected for any petition previously filed for the same election, and shall be in the form of a question which may be answered"yes"(to vote in favor of the proposed law or constitutional amendment)or"no" (to vote against the proposed law or constitutional amendment)and which shall unambiguously state the principle of the provision sought to be added,amended, or repealed. Page 3 of 5 Pages requirement,the text of the measure must "relate[] to more than one subject and [have] at least two distinct and separate purposes which are not dependent upon or connected with each other." In re Title, Ballot Title andSubmission Clause,and Surnmary Regarding Petition Procedures, 900 P.2d 104, 109 (Colo.1995) (hereafter Petition Procedures I); see "Public Rights in Waters II", 898 P.2d at 1078-79; People v. Sours, 31 Colo. 369, 405, 74 P. 167, 178 (1903). See footnote 2 herein. The single subject requirement is not violated if the "matters encompassed are necessarily or properly connected to each other rather than disconnected or incongruous." Amend Tabor 25, 900 P.2d at 125. This case is an example of when two or more issues are sought to be combined.° There appears to be no real debate as to the nature of the single issue as the cases cited by the Hoppers are not opposed to the above statement. The burden falls upon the Board, in the first instance, to make the determination if the single issue rule is violated. The fact thatmost directly supports the Hopper position is the plain language of the Article XV, § 15-55 which requires approval by the electorate of the location and siting of the facility before a certificate of occupancy could issue. Joining of the compensation issue is argued to be calculated to seek support from those who oppose spending public funds as well as those favoring the Villa ad those having two separate and distinct purposes. ° The initiative sought to add four new paragraphs to the constitution . Two concerned adoption of a public trust doctrine with one of those two dedicating water right use to the public. A third added an election requirement for changes water conservancy district boundaries or discontinuance andthe 4th required elections for directors. The Court rejected the argument that the election requirements,which provided the people a more direct voice to ensure policies including the public trust policies were implemented,-were necessarily connected to the public trust doctrine. The Court also found the characteristic that they all involved water to be too general just as the 46 sections involving monetary impacts in In re House Bill No. 1353,738 P.2d 371(Colo 1987)at 373 were found to have no common or unifying objective. 5 Effective as of the date of adoption by the electors of Weld County of this Article XV, Section 15-5,no Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued by Weld County,or any department,employee or agent thereof,for the occupancy or operation of any building or other structure which will be occupied,used or operated as,and no person, corporation or entity shall occupy,use or operate any building or structure as a correctional facility,pre- parole facility,jail,prison or other place of incarceration,whether or not said building or structure is privately owned and/or operated,or is owned and/or operated by Weld County or,to the extent permitted by law,the Sate of Colorado,unless and until the location and siting thereof has been approved by a majority of the registered electors of Weld County voting at a regular or special election held on the question of said location and siting. This Section 15-5 is adopted in order to implement the provision of C.R.S., Section 17-2-401(d)relating to the authority of Weld County to maintain zoning and siting control over correctional facilities within the County, and this Section 15-5 shall survive any amendment or repeal of said Section 17-2-401(d),C.R.S. The provisions of this Section 15-5 shall be self-executing, shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the electors of Weld County,Colorado,and shall be applicable to any structure,building or facility which is not on the date of such adoption by the electors,occupied and in use as a detention facility,correctional facility,pre-parole facility,jail,prison or place of incarceration pursuant to a certificate of occupancy lawfully issued by Weld County, Colorado. Page 4 of 5 Pages ► Supporting the Villa is the Court of Appeals which ties the issue of compensation to the results of the election, 917 P.2d 350, 355(Colo App 1996). The Court indicated that the developer has a vested right subject to divestment through exceptions including payment of just compensation. "Assuming compensation will be paid, we consider developer's statutory vested right as being only a right to complete development and occupy the pre- parole facility if its location and siting are approved by the electorate". The Court of Appeals validated the application of the Charter provision requiring an election to the Villa's vested right only because the Villa could be awarded just compensation by the Courts. This arguably makes the approval of the location and siting and the compensation necessarily and properly intertwined. Hoppers cite Fair Treatment of Injured Workers, 873 P.2d 718 which has language regarding deference to Board's decision and that the Courts role is to ensure that the title ballot, and submission clause fairly reflect the proposed initiative so that signers and electors will not be misled by reason of the words employed but that the Court does not determine if the language was the best possible. The Court, under this standard of deference to the Board, declined to require information regarding the effect the initiative may have on other constitutional and statutory provisions placed in the submittal. It supported the Board's refusal to speculate on the possible effect of the issue. The Court did not hold, as implied by the Hoppers, that information regarding the impacts of the measure was not allowed to be included on the ballot but that the decision not to include was within the Board's discretion particularly were the information is not speculative. e D. Morrison Assistant Weld County Attorney LDM/db:PleadNilla/singnote.db Page 5 of 5 Pages WELD COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE PHONE: (970) 356-4000, EXT. 4391 FAX: (970) 352-0242 915 TENTH STREET GREELEY, COLORADO 80632 COLORADO FACSIMILE MEMORANDUM CONFIDENTIAL THIS FACSIMILE IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED CONFIDENTIAL, AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS FACSIMILE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT NOR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE FACSIMILE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. This message consists of 9 pages plus this cover sheet. SENT: Date: August 15, 1996 Time: 3:15 p.m. From: Bruce Barker EXT: 4391 PLEASE DELIVER THE FOLLOWING PAGE(S) TO: John Hayes COMPANY: Hayes, Phillips & Maloney FAX#: (303) 825-1269 SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS: Memorandums of Bruce Barker, Weld County Attorney, and Lee Morrison, Assistant Weld County Attorney. tl]I]LIL& 1750 6th Avenue • Greeley, Colorado 80631 • (970) 353-9263 John T. Coppom, Ph.D. Administrator July 29, 1996 Weld County Clerk & Recorder Attn: J.A. Judy Tsukamoto P.O. Box 459 Greeley, CO 80632 Re: Request For Setting of Title and Language For Local Ballot Issue by The Villa at Greeley, Inc. Dear Ms. Tsukamoto: On July 26, 1996, I tendered you a request regarding the captioned matter. I have subsequently changed the request, and now resubmit it to you herewith. Please therefore disregard the request previously submitted to you on July 26, 1996. Very truly yours, ur v`''' John T. Coppom villa.ballot.dls xc: Bruce Barker, Weld County Attorney Donald Warden, Secretary to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County/Ballot Issue Title Board EXHIBIT a THE 1750 6th Avenue • Greeley, Colorado 80631 • (970) 353-9263 John T. Coppom, Ph.D. Administrator July 29, 1996 Weld County Clerk & Recorder Attn: J.A. Judy Tsukamoto P.O. Box 459 Greeley, CO 80632 Re: Request For Setting of Title and Language For Local Ballot Issue by The Villa at Greeley, Inc. Dear Ms. Tsukamoto: Pursuant to the procedures for setting title and language on local ballot issues, The Villa at Greeley, Inc. ("The Villa"), submits the following draft of a proposed ballot title, language, and written argument. The Villa proposes that the following ballot issue be submitted to the electorate of Weld County on the ballot at the November 5, 1996, general election, to-wit: I: Ballot Title SHALL THE LOCATION OF A PREPAROLE FACILITY BE APPROVED, THEREBY ENSURING THAT NO MONETARY COMPENSATION IS PAID TO THE AFFECTED DEVELOPER FROM WELD COUNTY PUBLIC FUNDS AS A RESULT OF PERMANENTLY IMPAIRING THE VESTED RIGHT TO DEVELOP SAID FACILITY? II. Ballot Language SHALL THE LOCATION OF A PREPAROLE FACILITY ON A SITE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS AT THE INTERSECTION OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 241/2 AND THE 1-25 FRONTAGE ROAD IN UNINCORPORATED SOUTHWESTERN WELD COUNTY BE APPROVED, THEREBY ENSURING THAT NO MONETARY COMPENSATION IS PAID TO THE AFFECTED DEVELOPER WITH WELD COUNTY PUBLIC FUNDS IN AN AMOUNT OF $505,787.00 AS ESTIMATED BY THE WELD COUNTY DISTRICT COURT, AS A RESULT OF PERMANENTLY IMPAIRING THE VESTED RIGHT TO DEVELOP SAID FACILITY? Weld County Clerk & Recorder July 29, 1996 Page 2 THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SAID SITE IS AS FOLLOWS: PART OF THE SW '/a OF SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 2 NORTH, RANGE 68 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., WELD COUNTY, COLORADO. In support of the above, The Villa submits the following argument: 1 . On December 8, 1993, the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County (the "County Board") approved The Villa's PUD Plan for the construction of a preparole release facility on real property located in Weld County. 2. On February 7, 1995, The Villa filed a complaint in Weld County District Court seeking declaratory judgment regarding the status of its vested property right with respect to its PUD Plan. 3. Subsequent to the filing of The Villa's complaint, certain orders were entered in the Weld County District Court. 4. On June 13, 1995, the Home Rule Charter of Weld County was amended by an affirmative election vote to provide that no certificate of occupancy may be issued for a correctional facility, such as a preparole release facility, without a prior affirmative election vote approving the siting of such facility. 5. Marvin Hopper, an intervenor in the Weld County District Court action, appealed the Weld County District Court orders to the Colorado Court of Appeals. In an opinion entered April 11 , 1996, the Court of Appeals reversed the orders of the Weld County District Court and ordered that the case be remanded to the Weld County District Court with directions. 6. In its opinion, the Court of Appeals directed the Weld County District Court as follows: a. On remand, the extent to which The Villa should be awarded compensation for the Charter Amendment's effect on its vested right "must be determined." Weld County Clerk & Recorder July 29, 1996 Page 3 b. On remand, the Weld County District Court should determine the approximate amount that will be due to The Villa, in accord with the vested Property Rights Act (C.R.S. § §24-68-101 , et seq.), should the Weld County electorate disapprove the siting of The Villa's preparole release facility. Once the court has determine the approximate amount of compensation, "This amount shall be deposited with the court to be used once the amount of just compensation has been finally determined or as further damages suffered if the preparole facility location is not ultimately approved." c. Pursuant to a hearing on June 4, 1996, Judge William West of the Weld County District Court entered an order requiring the County Board to segregate the sum of $505,787.00 to be used for just compensation or as further damages if The Villa's preparole facility location is not approved by the electorate. 7. It is The Villa's position that the ballot language must contain both the issue of approval of the location of the preparole facility as well as the intrinsically related issue of just compensation to be paid The Villa should the location not be approved by the electorate. Approval of the location of the facility and the payment of just compensation should the location not be approved are part and parcel of the same issue. Colorado courts have long held that more than one topic may be submitted to the voters in a single ballot title if the topics are so connected or dependent upon the general subject that it might not be desirable that one be adopted without the other. A proposed ballot title violates the single-subject requirement only if its text relates to more than one subject and has at least two distinct and separate purposes which are not dependent upon or connected with each other. The provision for just compensation to The Villa, should the electorate disapprove of the location of its facility, is required by the vested Property Rights Act and the clear language of the Court of Appeals' opinion in this matter. Intervenor Marvin Hopper, both in his Weld County District Court and Court of Appeals filings, repeated time and time again the argument that The Villa's previously approved PUD Plan may lawfully be affected by the Home Rule Charter amendment passed on June 13, 1995 so long as The Villa is afforded just compensation. Weld County Clerk and Recorder July 29, 1996 Page 4 The Court of Appeals' decision (referenced above in paragraph 6) outlines with great clarity the fact that The Villa is entitled to just compensation under the vested Property Rights Act and the opinion sets forth with specificity how the amount of that just compensation is to be determined and secured. The Villa anticipates that the opponents of its project will challenge the above proposed ballot language, claiming that it violates the single-subject requirement. Such a challenge is not only legally unsound, but reaches the heights of hypocrisy. The entire thrust of Marvin Hopper's arguments in Weld County District Court and the Court of Appeals was that The Villa may in essence be deprived of its right to construct its facility pursuant to the PUD Plan approved by the County Board, so long as The Villa is paid just compensation. As Weld County District Court Judge William West duly noted in his June 4, 1996 ruling, one of the purposes of setting an approximate amount of compensation is to advise Weld County voters of the potential cost to the taxpayers of this county by disapproving the location of The Villa's facility. In summary, the issues of approval of the location and payment of just compensation are necessarily and properly connected. Those issues are not disconnected or incongruous. These issues are properly presented as a single-subject in one ballot issue, and The Villa respectfully requests that the County Board, in considering this submission as the Ballot Issue Title Board, accept and approve the above ballot title and language and place it on the ballot for consideration by the electorate of this County on November 5, 1996. Very truly yours, a VV John T. Coppom villa.ballot.dls xc: Bruce Barker, Weld County Attorney Donald Warden, Secretary to the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County/Ballot Issue Title Board AUG 05 '96 04:18PM HAYES PHILLIPS MAL0NEY P.L S HAYES, PHILLIPS & MALONEY, P.C. Attorneys at Law Suite 450, The Market Center 1350 Seventeenth Street Denver, Colorado 80202-1517 (303) 825-6444 Telecopier: (303) 825-1269 John E. Hayes M. Susan Lombardi Herbert C. Phillips Bradley N. Shefrin James S. Maloney Corey Y. Hoffmann FACSIMILE COVER SHEET DATE: August 5, 1996 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto (970) 353-1964 Weld County Clerk and Recorder Lee D. Morrison (970) 352-0242 Assistant Weld County Attorney TO: FROM: Herbert C. Phillips, Esa. NO. OF PAGES (including this cover sheet) : 8 OUR TELECOPY NUMBER: 825-1269 TRANSMITTING TO: IF YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEMS, PLEASE CONTACT Peggy AT 825-6444 . CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This facsimile transmission and any accompanying documents contain information belonging to the sender which may be confidential and legally privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom this facsimile transmission was sent as indicated above. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, or action taken in reliance on the contents of the information contained in this facsimile transmission is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please call us collect to arrange for the return of the documents to us at our expense . Thank you. EXHIBIT RUG 5 ' 96 16: 18 303 825 1269 Po 6-3 AUG 05 '96 04:19PM HAYES PHILLIPS MAL0NEY P.2/8 HAYES, PHILLIPS & MALONEY, P.C. Attorneys at Law Suite 450, The Market Center 1350 Seventeenth Street Denver, Colorado 80202-1517 (303) 825-6444 Telecopier: (303) 825-1269 John E. Hayes M. Susan Lombardi Herbert C. Phillips Bradley N. Shefrin James S. Maloney Corey Y. Hoffmann VIA FACSIMILE AND REGULAR MAIL August 5, 1996 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto Weld County Clerk and Recorder P.O. Box 459 Greeley, CO 80632 Dear Ms. Tsukamoto : Enclosed you will find a written argument in support of the ballot title proposed by Marvin Hopper regarding the question of the location and siting of a pre-parole facility, to be submitted to the registered electors of Weld County on November 5, 1996. This argument also responds to the title suggested by The Villa at Greeley, Inc. This submittal is intended to be considered by the Ballot Issue Title Board on August 19, 19% at 1 : 00 p.m. Thank you for your attention to this matter and please call if you have any questions . Very truly yours, � W--- Corey Y. Hoffmann Enclosure o: Lee D. Morrison, [Via facsimile and regular mail] Asst . County Attorney (w/enc. ) 8/5/96-pos Ul\USERS\HOPPER\COR\CYH\RSCORD.LO2 AUG 5 ' 96 16: 18 383 825 1269 PRGE . 002 AUG 05 '96 04:19PM HAYES PHILLIPS MAL0NEY P.3/8 HAYES, PHILLIPS & MALONEY, P.C. Attorneys at Law Suite 450, The Market Center 1350 Seventeenth Street Denver, Colorado 80202-1517 (303) 825-6444 Telecopier: (303) 825-1269 John E. Hayes M. Susan Lombardi Herbert C. Phillips Bradley N. Shefrin James S. Maloney Corey Y. Hoffmann August 5, 1996 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto Weld County Clerk and Recorder P.O. Box 459 Greeley, CO 80632 Re: Request for the Setting of a Ballot Title Pursuant to the Weld County Administrative Manual Dear Ms. Tsukamoto: Please accept this letter as a request for the setting of a title for a local ballot issue on behalf of Marvin Hopper. Pursuant to the procedures for setting a ballot title, as contained in the Weld County Administrative Manual, as revised June 10, 1996, this request contains a draft of the title proposed by Mr. Hopper, as proponent, and written argument in support of the draft ballot title. In addition, this request also contains argument regarding the blatant inappropriateness of the draft ballot title submitted by The Villa at Greeley, Inc . ("The Villa") . 1. Proposed Ballot Title SHALL A PRIVATE PRE-PAROLE FACILITY BE LOCATED AND SITED AT A LOCATION AND SITE GENERALLY DESCRIBED AS THE INTERSECTION OF WELD COUNTY ROAD 24)4 AND THE I- 25 FRONTAGE ROAD IN WELD COUNTY? YES NO 2. Argument in Support of Draft Ballot Title The above ballot title is drafted to be in specific accordance with Article XV, Section 15-5 of the Home Rule Charter of Weld County, Colorado, which, as amended, provides as follows : 8/5/1996 — 11,l4am PBCOAD.L01 AUG 5 ' 96 16: 19 303 825 1269 PAGE . 003 AUG 05 '96 04:20PM HRYES PHILLIPS MAL0NEY P.4/8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 2 NEITHER WELD COUNTY, NOR ANY DEPARTMENT, AGENT OR EMPLOYEE THEREOF, SHALL ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY TO ALLOW THE OCCUPANCY OR USE OF, NOR SHALL ANY PERSON, CORPORATION OR ENTITY OCCUPY, OPERATE OR USE, ANY STRUCTURE OR BUILDING WITHIN WELD COUNTY AS A CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, PRE-PAROLE FACILITY, JAIL, PRISON OR OTHER PLACE OF INCARCERATION, WHETHER OR NOT THE STRUCTURE, BUILDING OR FACILITY IS OWNED OR OPERATED AS EITHER A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE FACILITY, UNLESS AND UNTIL THE LOCATION AND SITING OF SUCH CORRECTIONAL OR DETENTION FACILITY, JAIL, PRISON, PRE-PAROLE FACILITY OR OTHER PLACE OF INCARCERATION HAS BEEN APPROVED BY A MAJORITY OF THE REGISTERED ELECTORS OF WELD COUNTY VOTING ON SUCH QUESTION AT A REGULAR OR SPECIAL ELECTION. [Emphasis added. ] The plain language of the above Charter provision requires the approval by the registered electors of Weld County of the "location and siting" of a pre-parole facility. The draft ballot title requests the approval of the registered electors for exactly the issue upon which their approval is needed under the Charter. The title as drafted refers to the general description of the location and siting of the pre-parole facility. If the Board believes the ballot title would be clearer with the specific legal description contained in the title itself, Mr. Hopper would not be opposed to modifying the ballot title above to include the legal description. In addition to being consistent with the language of the Charter, the above title is not confusing or misleading. Ballot titles, submission clauses and summaries must be clear and not confusing or misleading. See e.q . , In the Matter of Educ. Tax Refund, 823 P. 2d 1353, 1355 (Colo. 1991) . Brevity is also an important consideration. Id. As the Colorado Supreme Court summarized in a recent decision regarding certain "tenets" that should direct title setting in the context of an initiative : [T] he language . . must be brief, unambiguous, and direct . . . , and as such, it should reference only the central points of the above measure. . . Along these same lines, 8/5/1996 - 11+14am RECORD.£01 PUG 5 ' 99 16: 19 303 825 1269 PRGE . 004 AUG 05 '96 04:21PM HRYES PHILLIPS MALONEY P.5/8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 3 the Board is not required to include every aspect of a proposed measure in the title and submission clause, . . . provide specific explanations of a proposal, . or discuss every possible effect of an initiated measure. [Citations omitted. ] In the Matter of Petition on Campaign and Political Finance, 877 P.2d 311, 313 (Colo. 1994) . Further, the Weld County Administrative Manual provides that the Ballot Issue Title Board follow the procedures and requirements set forth in Colo. Rev. Stat . § 1-40-101, et seq. , and specifically § 1-40-106 (3) (b) . Section 1-40-106 (3) (b) provides in pertinent part: In setting a title, the title board shall consider the public confusion that might be caused by misleading titles and shall, whenever practicable, avoid titles for which the general understanding of the effect of a "yes" or "no" vote will be unclear. The title for the proposed law . . which shall correctly and fairly express the true intent and meaning thereof, . . . The proposed ballot title is consistent with the well-settled tenets of setting ballot titles in the State of Colorado, as it is clear, brief, and contains the explicit request for approval required by the Charter of Weld County. Consistent with § 1-40- 106 (3) (b) , the proposed title provides a clear understanding of a "yes" or "no" vote consistent with the vote now required under the Charter. Accordingly, Mr. Hopper respectfully requests the Weld County Ballot Issue Title Board approve the above ballot title and place the same on the November 5, 1996 ballot for the consideration of the Weld County electors. 3 . The "Ballot Title" and "Ballot Language" Requested by The Villa at Greeley. Inc. is Blatantly Inappropriate Proponent Hopper is also in receipt of the proposed ballot title submitted by The Villa at Greeley, Inc. (the "Villa") . What follows is a brief summary of the clear inappropriateness of the proposed ballot title submitted by The Villa. 8/5/1996 - 11,24am RECORD.L01 AUG 5 ' 96 16: 20 303 825 1269 PAGE . 005 AUG 05 '96 04:21PM HRYES PHILLIPS MALONEY P.6/8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 4 First, and most significantly, the proposal by The Villa is inconsistent with Article XV, Section 15-5 of the Home Rule Charter of Weld County, Colorado. The Charter requires approval of the location and siting of a pre-parole facility by the registered electors of Weld County. The attempted incorporation of language that resulted from an opinion of the Colorado Court of Appeals regarding just compensation that may be awarded to The Villa if the electorate does not approve the location and siting of the facility is argumentative, and irrelevant. Under the Charter provision mandating this election question, the result of the court case referred to in The Villa's argument has literally no connection to the question to be submitted to the voters, nor to their ultimate decision. In addition, The Villa is attempting to insert its campaign language into the ballot title. It is beyond dispute that argumentative language and campaign rhetoric should not be included in a ballot title. In fact, such argumentative language may not even be allowed in the summary of a ballot issue. Section 1-40- 106 (3) (a) , regarding summaries of the proposed law, requires that such summaries "be true and impartial and shall not be an argument, nor likely to create prejudice, either for or against the measure. " Accord, In re Proposed Initiative 1996-4, 916 P. 2d 528, 532 (Colo. 1996) . If a summary may not be prejudicial, it is even more clear that the ballot title itself may not contain argumentative language. Similarly, in Matter of Proposed Initiated Constitutional Amendment, 873 P.2d 718, 720 (Colo. 1994) , the Colorado Supreme Court discussed in a slightly different context whether a ballot title should "speculate about the possible effect" of a vote on an initiative question. The Petitioners argued that the ballot title should "warn voters" that certain language would have a certain future effect. Id. In rejecting the argument, the court stated: [T]here is no requirement that the title, ballot title, and submission clause or the summary state the effect an initiative may have on other constitutional and statutory provisions. The Board in this case correctly declined to speculate about the possible effect of a proposed constitutional amendment on other parts of the constitution. 8/5/1996 - 11Nlam AECORD.L0i PUG 5 ' 96 16: 21 303 825 1269 PRGE . 006 AUG 05 '96 04:22PM HRYES PHILLIPS MALONEY P.7/8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 5 Id. [citations omitted] . Here, the title as drafted by The Villa requires the speculative effect of the approval or disapproval of the location and siting of the pre-parole facility to be considered. Including the speculative effect of the approval or disapproval is fundamentally inconsistent with the Charter and contrary to Colorado law. In addition to being argumentative, The Villa' s proposed ballot title impermissibly seeks to include more than one subject in the ballot title in violation of the so-called "single-subject" requirement of Article V, 5 1 and Article XIX, § 2 of the Colorado Constitution, as codified at Colo. Rev. Stat . § 1-40-106 .5. As the Colorado Supreme Court aptly stated: The single-subject requirement is designed to protect voters against fraud and surprise and to eliminate the practice of combining several unrelated subjects in a single measure for the purpose of enlisting support from advocates of each subject and thus securing the enactment of measures which might not otherwise be approved by voters on the merits of those discrete measures. In the Matter of Petition for Amendment to Constitution, 907 P.2d 586 , 589 (Colo. 1995) ; accord, In re Proposed Ballot Initiative on Parental Rights, 913 P. 2d 1127, 1130-31 (Colo. 1996) ; In re Proposed Initiative 1996-4, 916 P. 2d 528, 532 (Colo. 1996) . Here, once again, The Villa's proposed ballot title fails because it seeks to include an unrelated subject in order to enlist the support of advocates of other issues. More particularly, the proposed ballot title seeks to include consideration of a financial impact unrelated to the intent of the Charter provision which requires submission of this issue to the electorate. The Charter amendment requires voter approval of the location andsiting of a pre-parole facility, and nothing more. Including a financial impact that arose based on a specific set of unique circumstances allows those in favor of the pre-parole facility to conceivably obtain support from those with financial interests unrelated to the location and siting of the facility. Such a result is contrary to the Charter, and contrary to the single-subject requirement. 8/5/1996 - 11:14am HBCORD.LOI PUG 5 ' 96 16 : 21 303 825 1269 PHGE . 007 RUG 05 '96 04:23PM HRYES PHILLIPS MALONEY P.8'8 J.A. Judy Tsukamoto August 5, 1996 Page 6 In conclusion, the vehicle for discussing the Court of Appeals decision that is attempted to be referenced in The Villa's proposed ballot title is the campaign in support of approval of the location and siting of the pre-parole facility. Including such a reference in the body of the ballot title is contrary to the language of the Charter, and violates the Colorado Constitution and the Colorado statutory scheme addressing the setting of ballot titles. Instead, Mr. Hopper respectfully requests the Ballot Issue Title Board select the ballot title as submitted herein, because it reflects the intent of the Charter, and it fairly and accurately indicates to the electorate the issue upon which their approval is required. V r fou .) /J E. Hayes c: Marvin Hopper 8/5/1996 - 11214am RECORD.L01 AUG 5 ' 96 16: 22 303 825 1269 PRGE . 008 s cta ," OFFICE OF THE CLERK TO THE BOARD T PHONE (970) 356-4000, EXT.4225 lipe, FAX: (970) 352-0242 915 10TH STREET P.O. BOX 758 GREELEY, COLORADO 80632 COLORADO August 19, 1996 Ms. Virginia Scheel 2331 "C" Street, N.W. Greeley, CO 80634 Dear Ms. Scheel: In response to your question today regarding the correct name for "The Villa". In checking the file of this land-use case, I find correspondence and references from Planning staff, The Villa staff, a number of citizens, etc. refering to "The Villa" as a shortened version of its name. The entire name, which is included on the Final PUD Resolution dated December 8, 1993, is The Villa at Greeley, Inc. I have enclosed a copy of the first ancHast pages of the above-mentioned resolution for your verification. If you have questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at (970) 356-4000, Extension 4218. Very truly yours, Lu K TO T E BO RD , d 1,14 Donald D. Warden BY: (71. 1.4--7_1,-/a Carol A. Harding Deputy Clerk to the Board DDW/ch Hello