Opinion ID: 1401746
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Duties of the Title Board and Applicable Standard of Review

Text: In order to facilitate the initiative process, the General Assembly assigned duties to the Title Board which include: (1) designat[ing] and fix[ing] a proper fair title for each proposed law or constitutional amendment, together with a submission clause, § 1-40-106(1); (2) prepar[ing] a clear, concise summary of the proposed law or constitutional amendment which shall be true and impartial and shall not be an argument, nor likely to create prejudice, either for or against the measure, § 1-40-106(3)(a); (3) consider[ing] the public confusion that might be caused by misleading titles and . . . whenever practicable, avoid[ing] titles for which the general understanding of the effect of a `yes' or `no' vote will be unclear, § 1-40-106(3)(b); (4) not permitting the treatment of incongruous subjects in the same measure, § 1-40-106.5(1)(3)(I); and (5) acting to prevent surreptitious measures and appris[ing] the people of the subject of each measure by the title in order to prevent surprise and fraud from being practiced upon voters, § 1-40-106.5(1)(e)(II). See In re Proposed Initiative for 1999-2000 No. 29, 972 P.2d at 260. Thus, the General Assembly has squarely placed the responsibility for carrying out the dual mandate of Article V, Section 1(5.5) on the Title Board. The Board's function is extremely important in light of this court's limited scope of review of the Board's actions. We will not address the merits of a proposed initiative, interpret its language, or predict its application. See In re Petition on Campaign & Political Fin., 877 P.2d 311, 313 (Colo.1994); In re Proposed Initiative on Fair Treatment of Injured Workers, 873 P.2d 718, 719-20 (Colo.1994); In re Proposed Election Reform Amend., 852 P.2d 28, 31-32 (Colo.1993). In conducting such a review, the actions of the Board are presumptively valid. See Say v. Baker, 137 Colo. 155, 159, 322 P.2d 317, 319 (1958); see also In re Proposed Initiative for 1997-1998 No. 105, 961 P.2d 1092, 1097 (Colo.1998); In re Proposed Initiative for 1997-1998 No. 75, 960 P.2d 672, 673 (Colo.1998); In re Proposed Initiative Automobile Insurance Coverage, 877 P.2d 853, 856 (Colo.1994) (noting that reviewing court is required to engage all legitimate presumptions in favor of the propriety of the Board's actions).