In the Matter of the Title, Ballot Title and Submission Clause for 2013-2014 90. Mizraim S. Cordero and Scott…

Summary

The court affirmed the Title Board's decisions concerning two proposed constitutional initiatives that would expand local-government authority to regulate oil and gas development more restrictively than state law. It held that the initiatives contain a single subject and that their titles fairly reflect their purposes without misleading voters, including by omitting certain details and the word "prohibit" from one title. Chief Justice Rice, joined by Justice Hobbs, dissented, arguing that the initiatives improperly combined local regulatory authority with a distinct limitation on takings protections and that the titles could mislead voters.