In his October 11 column in The Denver Post, Al Knight baselessly asserted that in the 2006 Colorado ballot information booklet, known as the Blue Book, “one can find support for the suspicion that there will be future litigation aplenty” if Referendum I passes, due to “various couples and organizations seek[ing] to expand the rights bestowed” by the ballot measure. Knight also baselessly claimed that a statement in the Blue Book addressing potential costs caused by “legal challenges” or “potential changes in the number and complexity of other court cases involving same-sex couples” was a reference to “gay and lesbian activists” filing lawsuits. In fact, the Blue Book made no such suggestions.

Referendum I on the 2006 Colorado November ballot asks voters to enact the “Colorado Domestic Partnership Benefits and Responsibilities Act,” which would “extend to same-sex couples in a domestic partnership the benefits, protections, and responsibilities that are granted by Colorado law to spouses” if couples meet conditions and criteria to qualify for a domestic partnership license.

From Knight's October 11 Denver Post column:

But what will happen if Referendum I is approved? Will it end the cultural battle over gay rights? The state's Blue Book is about the only place one can find support for the suspicion that there will be future litigation aplenty as various couples and organizations seek to expand the rights bestowed by Referendum I.

The book says it is impossible to estimate the fiscal impact of “legal challenges” or “increases in the number and complexity of other court cases involving same-sex couples” -- a reference to the fact that gay and lesbian activists continue to file lawsuits on all manner of subjects.

While the Blue Book states that the estimated fiscal impact of the referendum “do[es] not include spending associated with legal challenges that may result from Referendum I,” the Blue Book does not suggest that such “legal challenges” would be filed by “gay and lesbian activists” or by “various couples and organizations seek[ing] to expand the rights bestowed by Referendum I.”

Knight also baselessly claimed that the Blue Book's statement about costs resulting from “potential changes in the number and complexity of other court cases involving same-sex couples” is “a reference to the fact that gay and lesbian activists continue to file lawsuits on all manner of subjects.” In fact, the Blue Book does not specify that such court cases would be related to gay and lesbian “activists” filing lawsuits, nor does it indicate the potential subjects of such court cases. Additionally, Knight erroneously stated that the Blue Book references the possible fiscal impact of “increases in the number and complexity of other court cases involving same-sex couples.” In fact, the booklet only references “potential changes in the number and complexity of those cases.”

From the 2006 Blue Book:

The state will charge $17 for domestic partnership certificates, resulting in new state revenues of $59,500 per year, based on an estimated 3,500 certificates annually. Annual state expenditures of $136,000 are expected to review and process civil rights complaints alleging discrimination on the basis of employment, housing, and public accommodation. These costs do not include spending associated with legal challenges that may result from Referendum I or from potential changes in the number and complexity of other court cases involving same-sex couples.