[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6265648,"mediaKeyId","3089332-cd5b9725117e9cb4b1239a39a646afdf","parentId",3089332,"title","League raises constitutional and equity concerns about Colorado vacancy‑election bills that would limit electorate and candidates","audioSeconds",489,"startMs",4238000,"endMs",4727000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3089332-cd5b9725117e9cb4b1239a39a646afdf&start=4238&end=4727","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3089332-cd5b9725117e9cb4b1239a39a646afdf/thumbnail_4238000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6265648/Colorado/League-raises-constitutional-and-equity-concerns-about-Colorado-vacancyelection-bills-that-would-limit-electorate-and-candidates","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6265648-8e6c696bd4a63b15142d95bf3e4245e9/orig.mp4?Expires=1771201265&Signature=HmGsmLIP~8Iee5-2Oq5hpoUVEW4xvgIOdRM3FVgY0gIFS6GiG5Z7MbpqyXosECLhXLxtBQlxlh4kLy-YFpTr4gJvmNkA0pUDhLd7qqaUVJkA8gcQysXfefCtA0aDYB77s7DFhn8t8OGpBqFUi2MklqwjMYc9BmxGpTFRZgjiPie5xK-bzihA~YSLWpyGZuc8GzoDGFQsR0RRu7nm52m6bSLqreSl7K2q0EAaOO72AhWLoMdq2NgvR~NjGKMxzxxkSkXv9c9zt4uVCEd8ki3Kkzn-LdLH9nRCIefNiARiHhGL5GjozEkpuetx8zBZiFB7tORTei3NH7XdlUmeT3026A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","League of Women Voters of Colorado","date","2025-04-23T05:38:56.96Z","article","Members of the statewide task force discussed two bills in the Colorado legislature that would change how vacancies are filled for state legislative seats and county commissioner seats and expressed concern about restrictions that limit who may run and who may vote in the follow‑up elections.

Task force facilitator Celeste Landry summarized the proposal: the bills would preserve vacancy committee appointments (party committees that pick interim replacements) but require an election in the next coordinated November (an odd‑numbered year) when a vacancy occurs before July 31 of that year. Under the bills as described at the meeting, only candidates belonging to the same party as the departing officeholder could run in the special election and the electorate would be limited to that party’s registered voters plus unaffiliated voters—an arrangement task force members described as similar to a restricted primary rather than an open special election.

Landry said the League supports enabling voter participation but opposed the limitations as drafted and put forward three proposed amendments: (1) allow every eligible elector to vote in the vacancy election; (2) allow any eligible candidate to run regardless of party; and (3) use a voting method that avoids vote‑splitting (for example, approval voting or another method) in case multiple candidates of the same party appear on the ballot.

Landry noted election‑administration and budget considerations: a fiscal note attached to the bills projected costs “more than $300,000” for the election change; she said most of that cost stems from the way the bills restrict the electorate. Task force members argued that allowing all electors to vote in the coordinated November contest would reduce administrative costs associated with a more complex, limited electorate.

Participants raised constitutional concerns. Mark Vonhorst pointed to the Colorado Constitution’s vacancy provision requiring that the person appointed to fill the vacancy “shall be a member of the same political party” as the departing legislator and said that this state constitutional command constrains what the legislature can change about interim appointments. Celeste Landry and others also raised a potential U.S. Constitution Fourteenth Amendment, Section 2 argument: limiting who may vote in a vacancy election could “deny or abridge” the right to vote for members of the public, and several attendees said they had researched whether other states use similarly restricted vacancy elections and found none that matched Colorado’s draft.

Landry said the bills had passed House State Affairs and Appropriations and were “laid over till tomorrow” at the committee level; no final votes were recorded at the meeting. The League issued a press release summarizing its three proposed amendments and saying it would push for more open special elections rather than restricted partial‑electorate contests.

Ending

Task force members urged rapid action by advocacy groups and recommended circulation of the League’s proposed amendments to legislators and legal counsel; members noted the legislative calendar made quick follow‑up necessary if the bills were to be amended before the legislature’s adjournment.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","2025 04 21 Alternative Voting Methods","oneSentenceSummary","Task force members reviewed two Colorado bills that would hold coordinated November special elections with limited electorate and candidate eligibility after party vacancy appointments; the League proposed three amendments to open candidacy and voting and raised a possible Fourteenth Amendment and Colorado Constitution issue.","taxTitle","Colorado Voter Access Modernized Elections Commission, Governor's Boards and Commissions, Organizations, Executive, Colorado","taxId",28158,"location","Colorado","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6265653,"Denver proposal to use ranked ballots for single‑winner offices draws debate over proportional alternatives",296,3723000,4019000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3089332-cd5b9725117e9cb4b1239a39a646afdf&start=3723&end=4019","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3089332-cd5b9725117e9cb4b1239a39a646afdf/thumbnail_3723000.jpg","/articles/6265653/Colorado/Denver-proposal-to-use-ranked-ballots-for-singlewinner-offices-draws-debate-over-proportional-alternatives","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6265653-01c8cb14e18f744bb6d95f8c8347e0df/orig.mp4?Expires=1771201265&Signature=WmSP0lpHBLbP1Mu~8DMvp6b0~ba8j-cadcKczUD8t~L64VilsK4e6D-qnM314dcRJyYhPfAa5G8ZCefOA08BXxUwmUuhIrNqZRl6rzTzjsGFtKT-p4Npj~SaYd4LJ7DLubw~x4Cvf01ghTFSNnGQPdYQFqU86zISUJeKcXv7PnUnsj3e4PKuG~V~DbXh4UJSYxxjJVboXhmGCDrm2HPXn7HcxxtC9SqXYDA-dEH5XbpSxmYjujugsLIJwelPvw0Dz9hCAzYWe7wUKpmPR7UA5VPCbSek~p8ovXpyZTFA25UWOj-bHtcwbmOSfMV~2dJ-oi0mzyA5hNnQ~YdXKHXh3Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A draft proposal circulating in Denver to change single‑winner contests to instant‑runoff voting (IRV) prompted task force discussion about whether the city should pursue IRV now or adopt a multi‑member proportional model.

Celeste Landry, facilitator for the statewide task force, summarized the draft: the proposal would use IRV for single‑winner offices—mayor, auditor, clerk and recorder—and for 11 of 13 city council district seats currently elected in single‑winner contests. Two at‑large council seats that elect two winners would not change under the draft. Landry said a packet of letters from advocacy organizations had been delivered to Denver City Council urging the proposal be placed on the November ballot.

Task force members who follow proportional representation urged Denver to consider the Portland model as a template for multi‑member districts and proportional voting. \"Why not consider proportional representation?\" Celeste Landry asked, noting Portland and Denver have similar council sizes and that copying Portland’s approach could be “save 1 council member and, you know, copy it.”

Not all members agreed that IRV is a step toward proportional representation. Jesse Kuman directly challenged the argument that IRV typically yields proportional outcomes: “no 1 can ever come up with an example where an IRV system has turned into a proportional system. It just doesn't happen, and it's a false claim,” he said. Several presenters and members reiterated that multi‑member districts plus a proportional counting method are required to achieve proportional representation.

Advocates for IRV said it has political momentum in Denver and may be more immediately achievable than a multi‑member overhaul. Some participants noted a staged approach—adopt IRV first, pursue proportional changes later—has been proposed in other campaigns but was disputed by those who said the trajectory from IRV to proportional systems is rare.

Task force members discussed practical ballot and counting implications: under IRV only first‑choices are counted in the first round and subsequent preferences are examined only if a candidate is eliminated; under proportional systems multiple winners are elected in a single contest and counting produces results proportionate to vote share.

No formal action or vote on Denver’s draft proposal was recorded at the meeting; task force members pledged to continue monitoring local coalition activity and to consult with Denver advocates and city council members.

Ending

The discussion left Denver advocates weighing near‑term political feasibility against long‑term proportional goals; several task force members offered to contact local organizers and city council members to discuss alternative models and coalition strategy.","Task force members discussed a draft Denver proposal to replace top‑two runoffs with instant‑runoff voting (IRV) for mayor, auditor, clerk and 11 council districts; participants urged consideration of multi‑member proportional models and questioned whether IRV typically leads to proportional systems.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6265657,"League presenters outline history, mechanics and arguments for proportional representation and multi‑member districts",1743,997000,2740000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3089332-cd5b9725117e9cb4b1239a39a646afdf&start=997&end=2740","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3089332-cd5b9725117e9cb4b1239a39a646afdf/thumbnail_997000.jpg","/articles/6265657/Colorado/League-presenters-outline-history-mechanics-and-arguments-for-proportional-representation-and-multimember-districts","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6265657-06c51a20604715e40525b2242e0d1958/orig.mp4?Expires=1771201265&Signature=I5M95IcWW0HV6ldPWZdPw95Y3UKH28zRAkrwUt6qNt7UW8wdD0NvvLnsPdmeFT-XXlDpmT-85RAhkpq24GOIlUWgbdzzsYd2awBvjzh0jdHt8AzpKjYz-c1T2eSZzcSbjx57UmHsPVRWcaRQ~J1UXuO7ZtaWcMLFmyo5qxlnGgJU5LyXBc0SON5NnrSpx81kGDhlfqnRCKtPiBJUlwFHvKTnS1aOZkK9xWIuFuPEoZ918RxkycIYdwPt1iOUolikoa1FBoB8pad4nAVDWhynnoctwxVQ0WdWHkNOv~HpQtgBJ9d~LasvA7-TDKbqj~IwXoS~P-x4sHsKTSlHRts2DA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A group of presenters from the League of Women Voters’ proportional representation affinity group told a statewide task force on alternative voting methods that proportional representation (PR) requires multi‑member districts and proportional voting methods to produce representative outcomes.

The presenters, who described themselves as members of a national grassroots affinity group (PRAG), walked task force members through the League of Women Voters’ position supporting electoral systems that “proportionately reflect the people they represent,” the historical record of U.S. multi‑member districts and recent municipal adoptions such as Portland, Oregon.

The presentation explained the basic mechanics: a multi‑member district elects two or more representatives in a single contest, and “when multiple positions are being elected at the same time, voters will have to make multiple choices from a single larger list of candidates,” the presenters said. They contrasted single‑winner contests—where the largest voting bloc can routinely win every seat—with multi‑winner, proportional contests that “allow each sizable minority to elect a candidate of their choice.”

Presenter Kit Milman described the affinity group as “a grassroots group of league members from around the country interested in proportional representation,” and said the group often gives similar slide presentations to build member understanding. Paula Lee cited a 1921 quotation from Carrie Chapman Catt recorded in League archives: “they will say that you will never get women in office until you get it,” a line presenters used to illustrate an early argument that PR expands representation.

Presenters reviewed U.S. history of multi‑member systems, including Illinois’ use of three‑member legislative districts (1870–1980) and the city examples in Ohio and New York, and noted that many jurisdictions later repealed proportional systems amid political backlash. They highlighted Cambridge, Massachusetts, which has elected its nine‑member city council at large using proportional counting since 1941 as a continuing U.S. example.

The presenters also discussed current developments: the League of Women Voters of Maine was conducting a study on proportional ranking methods and a federal bill known as the Fair Representation Act—cited by speakers as having Colorado Representative Joe Neguse among co‑sponsors—would implement proportional districts for the U.S. House if enacted.

Speakers identified potential advantages and drawbacks. Advantages cited included broader minority representation, increased inter‑party cooperation (the presenters pointed to historical accounts from Illinois), and reduced incentives for partisan gerrymandering. Disadvantages discussed included potential growth of third parties (characterized as an advantage or disadvantage depending on perspective), larger geographic districts that may change campaigning patterns, and the risk that multi‑member districts without proportional voting can perpetuate winner‑take‑all outcomes.

Presenters encouraged education and local pilot efforts. The Boulder County League reported collecting almost 600 petition signatures—exceeding a 500‑signature goal—to ask the Boulder city council for a study session on proportional representation. The affinity group offered to provide its slide presentation and to adapt it for local meetings.

Task force members asked practical questions about campaign storytelling and voter outreach; presenter Betsy McBride said campaigns often struggle to articulate concrete, everyday benefits beyond more diverse representation and recommended gathering local narratives from jurisdictions that have adopted PR.

The presentation concluded with an offer of additional resources and follow‑up: the affinity group made a resources page and offered to present to local leagues and city groups.

Ending

Presenters and attendees agreed the topic merits local education and piloting; the task force moved on to other agenda items but left room for additional workshops and requests for the group’s slide deck.","Members of a League of Women Voters affinity group gave a 90‑minute instructional presentation on proportional representation, reviewed historical U.S. examples and urged local education and pilot efforts; presenters and participants stressed that multi‑member districts require proportional voting methods to yield proportional outcomes.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

League raises constitutional and equity concerns about Colorado vacancy‑election bills that would limit electorate and candidates

Denver proposal to use ranked ballots for single‑winner offices draws debate over proportional alternatives

League presenters outline history, mechanics and arguments for proportional representation and multi‑member districts