It seems the DRMS has their own way of classifying these documents, and the Governor has another.
It looks to me that if you said "I support the approval of AM03" it was listed as a "support" letter. If you also said "I object to the process that the DRMS has followed in reviewing AM03, it gets cross filed under "objection to process".
Then there may be a letter that says "I object to the approval of AM03" it is filed as an "objection".
What makes the system even more confusing to us pedestrians is the letters are coming from Wallace Erickson's office, Ms. Pineda's office and Governor Hickenlooper's office. Each person is using different key words to classify the documents.
These key words seem to be dependent on what the office is focused on.
Erickson seems to be focused on the Amendment, as is Ms. Pineda's focus. The Governor is looking at the same letters as Pineda, and seems concerned with the "process of review".
Actually sending the same letter to the Governor with a copy to Pineda gets the message across that CGFI has gone through a process that was difficult at best, AND that you support the amendment's approval.
I see my letters were filed just that way. "support AM03" & "object to the process".
Evidently they are not calling any part of the Amendment a "process" for filing purposes.
Confused enough, rbl147?
Let's just hope that the file clerk gets them in the right places.
Just my observations.
Don't take my word for it, Do your own research! Then you will know it's true!
