Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Special Districts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee clears bill letting special districts skip uncontested director ballots
Summary
The committee unanimously recommended Senate Bill 172, which would allow special districts that use director district voting to avoid mailing ballots for uncontested director seats, aligning that process with at‑large election rules and reducing administrative costs.
The House State Civic Military and Veterans Affairs Committee on a unanimous vote moved Senate Bill 172 to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation. The bill seeks to align the way special districts that elect directors by geographic director districts treat uncontested races with existing rules for at‑large elections.
Vice Chair Clifford, who presented Senate Bill 172, said the measure responds to a request from South Metro Fire Protection District and would prevent sending ballots “for something that is a guaranteed question” when a director seat is uncontested. He said the district asked for the change because director district voting can create situations where one director district is contested and others are uncontested within the same election.
Mike Dela Fano, assistant chief of South Metro Fire Rescue, and Bob Cole, an attorney with Collins, Cole, Wynne & Ulmer who represents special districts, testified in support. Cole explained the technical problem in current law: at‑large special district elections can be concluded if by the 65th day before the election there are not more candidates than offices and no other questions on the ballot, but a later section of code prevents canceling an election in part. That produces the current mismatch for districts that elect by director districts after the 2021 change to allow director district voting.
Cole described the practical effect: even when a director district has a single candidate who would be deemed elected, the district still must send a ballot that contains that uncontested name if any other director district in the election is contested. The bill would allow concluding uncontested director districts without mailing ballots when no other ballot question affects that director district.
Committee members asked clarifying questions. Representative Espinosa asked how write‑in candidates would be affected; Vice Chair Clifford and Cole replied that write‑in candidates must notify intent in the same way as other candidates and would not be affected by the change. Representative Luck asked hypotheticals about ballots that include both a ballot question and an uncontested candidate; witnesses confirmed that if a ballot question remains in a district, the single candidate would still appear on that ballot, and the district could withdraw a ballot question up to 25 days before the election to conclude the election in whole.
Vice Chair Clifford moved the bill and it passed on a roll call with all committee members voting yes. No amendments were adopted during the committee hearing.
Ending: The bill now advances to the Committee of the Whole for additional consideration.
