If the amendment passes, only the Colorado General Assembly would be authorized to allocate custodial funds. All custodial funds would go in a newly formed state Custodial Fund Transparency Account, and the Colorado General Assembly would dole out the money following a public hearing. The state estimates this change would increase annual state spending by $1 million or more because of the additional staffing needed to review state agencies’ proposed spending of custodial money.

How it got on the ballot: By citizen initiative. The measure’s designated representatives are Michael Fields, executive director of Colorado Rising Action, and former deputy Secretary of State Suzanne Taheri. Colorado Rising Action is dedicated to “advancing conservative principles and holding Colorado liberals accountable,” according to its website.Īrguments for and against: Advocates call this a transparency measure that will create a more forward-facing process for public input on the state’s spending. Opponents say the measure could cause funding delays while injecting partisanship into spending decisions historically left to program experts and independent commissions. Major donors: Unite for Colorado is funding the committee backing the amendment.

It’s an issue advocacy organization that supports “smaller, more accountable government,” according to its website. The organization has previously donated to efforts to reduce the state income tax, require voter approval on certain state fees and reject Colorado’s involvement in the National Popular Vote compact.Īnything else? A group filed a lawsuit in September arguing that this amendment should be removed from the ballot because it isn’t sufficiently related to TABOR.

None su2serial port problem