Update: Here's the yes and no with respect to Referendum A. Thanks to CJ's Bullhorn for the link to the Rocky Mountain Progressive Network.

Update: Here's the link to the .pdf of the Colorado Blue Book explaining the State ballot issues. Downloads in .pdf show an inclusive attitude on the part of the State IT people since Acrobat is cross-platform.

Voting for or against the repeal of Quick Wins Two on your mail-in ballot won't matter since a judge ruled yesterday that the signature collection process was invalid, according to the Denver Post [September 25, 2003, "Judge halts Nov. zoning vote"]. Both sides in a lawsuit are contemplating their next steps after the ruling. From the article, "Quick Wins Two affects homeowners who want to add to their homes and those who buy lots in established neighborhoods, then tear down the existing houses and build new ones. Under the rules, developers cannot build a structure more than 17 feet high on the rear 35 percent of a lot. In addition, 60 percent of the space in the back portion of a lot must be kept as open space. Ballots for the November election are already being printed, so it is impossible to remove the question from the ballots, Broadwell said. If Wednesday's ruling stands, votes cast on the measure won't count, said Lori Potter, attorney for the Denver residents who filed the lawsuit." Here's the coverage from the Rocky Mountain News [September 25, 2003, "Initiative off city ballot"].

The Rocky has created a ballot builder application on their website. You enter your city and school district and it shows you the ballot issues that you'll be voting for. The proposed ballot is organized into sections for City, School Board, and State issues. You can click on each issue heading and read the wording. It looks like they'll be aggregating some of the pros and cons for each issue between now and the election. Very cool.

Of course the best way for Denver voters to research the pros and cons for the November 2003 ballot is to go back through the Coyote Gulch archives for the election and Charter changes.

Here's an opinion piece from the Denver Post [September 25, 2003, "Ref. A is a ready-made boondoggle"] arguing against Referendum A and Amendment 33. Referendum A is the ballot issue that'll set aside $2 billion in funds for water projects. Amendment 33 if passed would allow Video Lottery Terminals at 5 Front Range race tracks.

The Denver Post is running a letter to the editor in support of Amendment 33. From the essay, "Gambling certainly brings out ambivalent emotions - yet, in Colorado, by vote of the people, gambling has provided support for historic preservation, open- space conservation, Great Outdoors Colorado, parks, wildlife protection and other worthy public programs, including public school maintenance. We tend to forget that the Colorado Lottery has been in productive and scandal-free existence since 1983. Amendment 33 invites the voters to approve a strictly limited extension of the lottery to five Colorado racetracks and the mountain casino towns, in order to provide a reliable revenue stream for tourism promotion." There's a side to the argument that hasn't been raised, that is, do we want more tourism in Colorado?
5:19:07 AM