Opt‑out mail‑ballot proposal draws sharp pushback; SB 106 postponed

Senate Bill 106 would permit registered electors to elect not to receive a mailed ballot packet. Sponsor Senator Zamora Wilson framed the bill as voter choice and state and local cost savings: proponents (including county clerks) said roughly 8% of voters in recent statewide elections vote in person, producing a recurring printing cost for unused mailed ballots and that an opt‑out could reduce waste and save counties and the state money.

El Paso County Clerk Steve Schleicher and other county clerks testified in support, describing local examples in which many in‑person voters brought an unused mailed ballot to a vote center. Schleicher estimated substantial recurring savings at scale. The county clerks asked for implementation guardrails and for the Secretary of State to set opt‑back‑in deadlines to protect notice requirements.

The Department of State and voting‑access groups opposed the bill. Caleb Thornton (Dept. of State) said Colorado’s universal mail‑ballot system is a national model that treats every voter equally, and argued creating an opt‑out would cause confusion, increase costs for in‑person services and voter education, and risk undermining turnout. Common Cause and the AFL‑CIO warned about possible voter confusion and inadvertent disenfranchisement if electors opt out and later forget that choice.

Sponsors offered two implementation amendments to protect statutory notice and reimbursement formulas, require system testing and vendor validation, and prevent automatic reimbursement reductions for voluntary opt‑outs. Those amendments were adopted. A motion to send the bill to appropriations failed on roll call; the vice chair then moved to postpone the bill indefinitely, and the committee postponed SB 106 by reverse roll call.