Topics
Code Section
colorado > Colorado Electoral Code > Election Judges

1-6-103. Recommendations by county chairperson

Overview of Statute

By the last Tuesday of April in even-numbered years, the county chairperson of each major political party in the county must certify to the county clerk and recorder a list of names and addresses of registered electors recommended to serve as election judges for each precinct in the county. The chairperson, or a commiteeperson if necessary, will rank these names according to preference, and the county clerk and recorder will choose election judges according to these preferences. The county clerk and recorder may only choose judges from this list or additional names recommended by the county chairperson if need be.

Statute

(1) (a) No later than the last Tuesday of April in even-numbered years, the county chairperson of each major political party in the county shall certify to the county clerk and recorder the names and addresses of registered electors recommended to serve as election judges for each precinct in the county.

(b) Repealed.

(2) The county chairperson, or, if there is no county chairperson, the committeepersons who submitted the list of registered electors in accordance with section 1-6-102 (2) shall designate the order of preference of the names of the registered electors recommended to serve as election judges for each precinct. The county clerk and recorder shall select election judges from each precinct list in the county chairperson’s, or, if there is no county chairperson, the committeeperson’s, order of preference.

(3) In recommending registered electors as election judges, the county chairperson may select only names from the list submitted by the precinct committeepersons. However, the county chairperson may recommend additional registered electors to the county clerk and recorder if the precinct committeepersons do not provide enough names to the county chairperson.

(4) and (5) (Deleted by amendment, L. 98, p. 576, § 3, effective April 30, 1998.)

 

Source: L. 92: Entire article R&RE, p. 724, § 8, effective January 1, 1993.L. 98: Entire section amended, p. 576, § 3, effective April 30.L. 2002: (1) amended, p. 134, § 6, effective March 27.

Editor’s note: (1) This section is similar to former § 1-5-107 as it existed prior to 1992.

(2) Subsection (1)(b)(II) provided for the repeal of subsection (1)(b), effective July 1, 2002. (See L. 2002, p. 134.)
 
ANNOTATION

Annotator’s note. The following annotations include cases decided under former provisions similar to this section.

Section applies to municipal elections. The right of the elector to be safeguarded in the exercise of his franchise – a right conferred by the sovereign authority of the state – carries with it the corresponding duty, on the part of the state, to furnish all needed protection; this is of public concern, therefore, even municipal elections are within the provisions of this section requiring the county chairman to submit a list of names to serve as election judges. Mauff v. People, 52 Colo. 562, 123 P. 101 (1912) (decided under former law).

Requirement that persons serving as election judges must be affiliated with one of two major political parties does not violate right to freedom of speech and association or right to equal protection since the statute is rationally related to the legitimate ends of efficiently running an election by pairing Democrats and Republicans as election monitors to provide the appearance of propriety. MacGuire v. Houston, 717 P.2d 948 (Colo. 1986).

Applied in Nichol v. Bair, 626 P.2d 761 (Colo. App. 1981).
Definition [Political party]

Any group of registered electors who, by petition or assembly, nominate candidates for the official general election ballot. “Political party” includes affiliated party organizations at the state, county, and election district levels, and all such affiliates are considered to be a single entity for the purposes of this article, except as otherwise provided in section 7. Section 2(13) of article XXVIII of the state constitution.

Definition [State]

A state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, or any territory or insular possession subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. C.R.S. § 1-8.3-102.

Definition [Person]

Any natural person, partnership, committee, association, corporation, labor organization, political party, or other organization or group of persons. Section 2(11) of article XXVIII of the state constitution.

Definition [Election]

Any election under the “Uniform Election Code of 1992” or the “Colorado Municipal Election Code of 1965”, article 10 of title 31, C.R.S. C.R.S. § 1-7.5-103.

Definition [Committee]

The committee of signers described in section 1-12-108(2). C.R.S. § 1-12-100.5.

Cases

colorado Cases

Case Name: Mauff v. People

Citation: 123 P. 101 (Colo. 1912)

Year: 1912

Case PDF: Mauff v. People

Case Summary: We affirmed the lower court's decision. Article XX gave municipalities only the power of self-government over matters of local concern. However, the regulation, control, and management of elections was of governmental state import and character. Those election laws and the Colorado constitution were in force in that territory prior to the adoption of article XX, and unless we find something therein setting them aside they are still so in force.. The only special power given the city and county of Denver regarding elections besides permitting an automatic voting register, was to fix office terms.

Case Name: MacGuire v. Houston

Citation: 717 P.2d 948 (Colo. 1986)

Year: 1986

Case URL: https://www.ravellaw.com/opinions/c6f1a38338c9a332b2efa45ac15ba940

Case Summary: The district court ruled that the statute restricting the opportunity to serve as an election judge to persons who have affiliated with one of two major political parties did not violate the plaintiff's freedom of speech and association or her right to equal protection of the laws. We affirm the ruling of the district court.  

Case Name: Nichol v. Bair

Citation: 626 P.2d 761 (Colo. 1981)

Year: 1981

Case URL: https://www.ravellaw.com/opinions/4a0e2814c74d612d4db34bfe751228e1?query=626%20P[...]

Case Summary: The appellate court held that it had no jurisdiction to hear dispute in which captain and co-captain of a captaincy district were removed from their positions, because the state central committee by statute had full power to determine all controversies concerning the organization of the party.

Out-of-State Cases

Federal Cases

Regulations & Guidance