Fremont County Voting Locations
24-Hour Drop Boxes
Walmart
3105 E. U.S. 50
Canon City, CO 81212
Oct. 29- Nov. 6, 2018
Cotopaxi School (handicapped accessible)
345 County Rd. 12
Cotopaxi, CO 81223
BOXES WILL BE CLOSED at 7 p.m. Election Day, Nov. 6
Fremont County Administration Building (Mail ballots available/drop off box for ballots, handicapped accessible)
615 Macon Ave. Room 102
Canon City, CO 81212
Monday-Thursday, Oct. 15-Nov. 5, 2018
7:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.
Election Day, 7 a.m. -7 p.m.
Florence City Hall (Ballot drop box only, handicapped accessible)
600 W. 3rd St. Florence, CO 81226
Mon – Fri, Oct. 17th – Nov. 5, 2018
8:30 a.m.- 4:30 p.m.
Election Day, 8:30 a.m. -4:30 p.m.
In Person Voting, Mail Ballot Replacement, and Ballot Drop Boxes
Fremont County Garden Park Building
201 N Sixth St.
Canon City, CO 81212
Monday – Friday, Oct. 22- Nov. 5, 2018, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.
Sat. Oct. 27 and Nov. 3, 2018, 9 a.m.-1 p.m.
Election Day, 7a.m. – 7 p.m.
Florence City Hall
600 W. Third St.
Florence, CO 81226
Election Day, 7 a.m. – 7 p.m.
Howard Volunteer Fire Dept.
8274 U.S. 50
Howard, CO 81233
Election Day, 7 a.m. – 7 p.m.
If they have not already, Coloradans probably will be quoting the political TV ads for various election candidates and initiatives in the coming weeks. Mail-in ballots go out this week and 13 state issues sit on the 2018 Colorado ballot, ranging from fracking rules to funding for public education.
Here’s a look at what’s at stake for those wanting to complete their ballots early. If not, don’t forget to vote on Election Day, Nov. 6.
Amendment A
The amendment would change a phrase of the state constitution that allows slavery and involuntary servitude as punishment for crimes. Section 26, Article II says, “There shall never be in this state either slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.”
Amendment A would remove the phrase, “except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.”
Amendment V
Amendment V seeks to lower the age requirement for a state legislator or senator to 21 from 25 years old. Colorado, Utah and Arizona have the highest minimum age in the country for state legislators and supporters find the age restriction unnecessary, wanting voters to decide the maturity and competence of a candidate, according to Ballotpedia.
But opposition argues that younger candidates may not be mature enough to serve.
Amendment W
This amendment would reformat the section of the ballot that asks voters about judge or justice retention. Right now, the ballot includes the question, “Shall Justice (Judge) … of the Supreme (or other) Court be retained in office?” before each judge or justice’s name. The voter is then asked to mark “yes” or “no” for each judge.
The ballot under Amendment W would include the question, “Shall the following Justices (Judges) of the Supreme (or other) Court be retained in office?” only once, followed by a list of all judges and justices up for retention. Voters would still be asked to mark “yes” or “no” for each official.
Proponents say the change will shorten the ballot. There is no organized opposition to Amendment W, but an opposition argument in the 2018 Colorado Blue Book says the change is unnecessary and could cause confusion among voters as to whether they are voting in a multicandidate election or for each individual judge.
Amendment X
Amendment X would remove the definition of industrial hemp from the state constitution and require it to have the same definition as federal law. Hemp has low levels of THC and is used to create a myriad of products, from paper to cosmetics.
Sponsors of the amendment say the definition change would allow Colorado legislators to more easily adapt to changes in federal law expected to sway in favor of more hemp cultivation, according to Ballotpedia. Opponents argue that the measure may deviate from Colorado voters’ original intent to define hemp under Amendment 64.
Amendment Y
This amendment would create a 12-member commission made up of members of the state’s two largest political parties and unaffiliated members. The commission would be responsible for approving district maps for Colorado’s congressional districts with additional support from the Colorado Supreme Court.
In the current system, a committee with members from both chambers of the Colorado General Assembly present district maps to the entire body. Maps require majority approval and can be vetoed by the governor.
Those in favor say the independent commission takes partisan politics out of the redistricting process. Those opposed have a series of arguments such as a convoluted commissioner selection process and that members of the unelected commission would not be held accountable to Colorado voters, according to Ballotpedia.
Amendment Z
Similar to Amendment Y, Amendment Z would create a 12-member commission for redistricting, but for state legislative districts instead of congressional districts. Right now, an 11-member reapportionment committee is in charge of redistricting state legislative districts, says Ballotpedia.
Amendment 73
Amendment 73 seeks to raise Colorado corporate taxes and personal income taxes on those earning more than $150,000 a year to create more than $1.6 billion a year for preschool through 12th grade public education, according to the Denver Post.
Supporters say the additional funding would create a sustainable source of revenue for schools that have not received funding since the Great Recession. The opposition campaign insists that the taxes are too high and that the funding does not guarantee results.
Amendment 74
The amendment supports an initiative that requires property owners be compensated for any reduction in property values caused by state laws or regulations, says Ballotpedia. Under the current standard, the government only compensates in cases of total loss in property value or use. Supporters argue that the measure will hold the government accountable if it harms citizen property. The opposition argues that the measure is too vague, could create frivolous lawsuits and that taxpayers will ultimately be responsible for paying for the loss in property value.
Amendment 75
The measure would allow candidates to receive five times the normal campaign contribution if a competing candidate spends more than $1 million to help their own campaign. Amendment 75 is an attempt to make elections fair for those who may not have substantial funding. But the opposing argument in the 2018 Colorado Blue Book says the amendment fails to truly address financial disparities among candidates.
Proposition 109
The proposition would authorize $3.5 billion for statewide transportation projects including bridge expansion, construction, maintenance, and repairs and requires the state repay the debt from the general fund without raising taxes, according to Ballotpedia. Supporters say that this will provide a needed boost to the state’s crumbling highway infrastructure. Opponents assert that the state does not have enough revenue to repay the debt and that the list of projects may be outdated by the time the government receives the funding.
Proposition 110
A slight variation from Proposition 109, 110 would authorize $6 billion in bonds for transportation projects, establishing the Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes Citizen Oversight Committee. Instead of using state revenue to pay the incurred debt, the state would raise the sales tax rate starting Jan. 1, 2019, from 2.9 percent to 3.52 percent by Jan. 1, 2039. Those opposed to the initiative are not a fan of increased taxes, but supporters say the change is not meant to be permanent.
Proposition 111
The proposition would lower the annual payday loan rate to 36 percent and eliminates all other finance charges and fees associated with payday lending beginning Feb. 1, 2019. Currently, payday lenders can charge an annual interest rate of 45 percent in addition to other fees. Capping interest would help families in dire financial straits, according to supporters. Those against say the measure could eliminate payday lending in the state altogether.
Proposition 112
The proposition would require new oil and gas development projects to be at least 2,500 feet from occupied buildings and areas deemed vulnerable. The setback requirement would not apply to federal lands. Current restrictions specify that wells must be 1,000 feet away from high occupancy buildings, 500 feet from occupied buildings and 350 from outdoor areas like playgrounds.
Supporters of the proposition say the new setback rule would alleviate public health concerns caused by toxic fracking operations. Opponents say the measure would stifle the economy, wipe out jobs and cost taxpayers millions of dollars in lawsuits.