Ballots are out by mail this week, so it is time to make a whole host of important decisions on candidates and issues. While all of these decisions are important, there is one proposed amendment to the Colorado Constitution that must not pass: Amendment 74.

I have been trying to think of analogies to describe this proposal: a lie wrapped in a fib? A stalking horse menacing local governments? A gun to the head of Colorado cities and counties? None of these quite do justice to the dreadful situations that would arise if Amendment 74 passes this fall.

I’ll start by describing what the measure does. It inserts a few critical words into the state constitution that would be very difficult to remove. Here is the proposed amendment in context in Article II, Section 15, of the Colorado Constitution (proposed addition italicized): “Private property shall not be taken or damaged, or reduced in fair market value by government law or regulation for public or private use, without just compensation.” The deception here is subtle but very powerful: This section already requires just compensation for the taking of property, that is its very purpose. Any condemnation of private property requires a board or a jury to award just compensation from the condemning party to the party whose property was taken. Fair enough, right? So why add those words?

Well, the $8 million that the oil and gas industry has spent supporting this measure so far probably gives a clue. Say that a local government imposes operating rules on oil and gas drilling that reduce the amount of profits that could be extracted in order to protect human health and safety. That company would sue the government for the lost profits due to regulation, and the local government would have to pay. Say a local government has zoning regulations that prevent a developer from locating a slaughterhouse next to residential neighborhoods. A property owner could claim that the zoning rules reduced the value of their land, and sue the city for lost value.

The list of these types of impacts from Amendment 74 go on and on. Local zoning of all types would be at risk, many safety regulations that are straight common sense would be challenged, transportation planning, building codes, height and viewshed regulation, energy efficiency requirements, state renewable energy requirements, and climate protection actions all become potential subjects for frivolous and costly lawsuits — every manner of sensible government regulation that protects, you know, people rather than profits, especially oil and gas profits.

Who opposes Amendment 74? An enormous nonpartisan coalition says vote no on 74. The Colorado Municipal League, the nonpartisan organization supporting local municipal governments, and Colorado Counties Incorporated, the association of Colorado counties, both oppose 74. The Colorado Association of Realtors. The Colorado Education Association. Colorado Professional Firefighters. Conservation Colorado. The Denver Chamber of Commerce. The Fraternal Order of Police. The Natural Resources Defense Council. Planned Parenthood Colorado. The Rocky Mountain Farmers Union. Club 20. Colorado AFL-CIO. The League of Conservation Voters. And 50 other groups — you do not see these names singing in political unison every year; they are often on opposite sides of ballot measures.

Then there are the Colorado cities and counties that oppose individually. Cities opposed: Boulder, Denver, Colorado Springs, Bayfield, Brush, Centennial, Cherry Hills, Delta, Fort Collins, Golden, Wray and 72 others, large and small. Again, many of these cities usually take opposite positions on issues, which is a clear signal that 74 is a terrible proposed law that would crush local governments and their ability to keep their cities and counties livable, safe and thriving.

Proposed Amendment 74 is unnecessary since private property condemnation already requires fair compensation. In this era of the roll-back of federal environmental and human safety protections, it is more important than ever to have cities, counties and states able to protect their citizens by local regulation. Amendment 74 would intentionally and maliciously gut these local regulatory functions and more.

Passage of Amendment 74 would be instantly regretted. How do we know? Oregon passed such a measure in 2004, and had $20 billion in lawsuits filed in three years against local governments, resulting in $4.5 billion in payments. Oregon citizens ultimately effectively repealed the measure three years later to avoid crippling its schools, cities, counties and the state itself. I expect Colorado voters will be smart enough to learn from the mistakes made in Oregon.

Vote no on Amendment 74 and tell all your friends and neighbors to join you.

Sam Weaver is a member of the Boulder City Council.