Title, Ballot Title, & Submission Clause for 2011-2012 45 v. Hamilton, 2012 CO 26

Respondents Hamilton and Phillip Doe proposed Initiative 45 to amend Article XVI, §6 to broaden public control over all water in Colorado.
Initiative 45 would delete 'unappropriated' and 'natural stream' limits, creating a public-dominant water estate and new regime for water use.
Proposed subsections (2)-(6) address returning water unimpaired, public stewardship by state government, citizen standing, and potential further legislation.
The Title Board designated the Titles and the Ballot Title/Submission Clause reflecting a single subject: 'public control of waters.'
Kemper filed a Motion for Rehearing contesting the single-subject and title conclusions; the Board denied the motion.
The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed, holding Initiative 45 contains a single subject and that the Titles satisfy the clear title requirement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Single subject analysis	Kemper alleges multiple subjects.	Board found a cohesive single subject: public control of waters.	Initiative 45 has a single subject.
Clear title requirement	Kemper asserts the titles are misleading or insufficient to convey the single subject.	Board's titles fairly reflect the single subject and are not misleading.	Titles satisfy the clear title requirement.

Pub. Rights in Waters II, 898 P.2d 1076 (Colo. 1995) (single-subject analysis for water-related initiatives; dangers of omnibus measures)
In re Title, Ballot Title, Submission Clause for 2009-2010 No. 45, 234 P.3d 642 (Colo.2010) (standard of review and single-subject/scope analysis)
In re Proposed Initiative 1996-6, 917 P.2d 1277 (Colo.1996) (narrow public interest in state waters supports single subject)
Kansas v. Colorado, 206 U.S. 46 (U.S. Supreme Court 1907) (equitable apportionment of benefits in interstate water disputes)
In re Proposed Initiative 2001-02 No. 43, 46 P.3d 441 (Colo.2002) (Sours test; dangers of omnibus provisions in initiatives)