But underlying all of the spending and tax arguments is another powerful current: Initiative 1 opponents, particularly Republican legislators and taxpayer advocates, fear that passage of the ballot measure will unleash a new wave of citizen-generated referendums in the Beehive State. Initiative-happy California has been mentioned more than once as the direction Utah is headed if the initiative should pass.

"It's a major concern, and over the long term it's probably our biggest concern," says Mike Jerman, vice president of the Utah Taxpayers Association, which has become Initiative 1's most relentless critic during the fall campaign.

"Initiatives are no longer run at the grass roots, by folks gathered around the kitchen table," he says. "Instead, they've been taken over by the national groups with deep pockets, paid signature gatherers and high-priced P.R. firms. That's certainly what's happened in California. And it is what has happened here with Initiative 1. What we're afraid of is, what's next?"

The problem with that argument, say Initiative 1 supporters, is that Utah isn't California. Of the 24 states that allow citizen-led referendums, Utah has among the toughest - if not the toughest - ballot-qualifying thresholds for referendums.

In addition to requiring that 10 percent of the state's registered voters sign petitions, Utah also includes a new distribution requirement that mandates initiative sponsors gather 10 percent of registered-voter signatures in 26 of the state's 29 Senate districts, with each signature verified by county clerks. The previous distribution threshold was 20 of 29 counties; before that, it was 15 of 29 counties.

By comparison, neighboring Colorado requires just 5 percent of the voters who cast ballots for Secretary of State in the last election, with no distribution requirement. Signatures are verified by random sampling. In California, the signature threshold is 8 percent of registered voters, again with no distribution requirement and random sampling to verify signatures.

It's tougher in Wyoming, which requires that 15 percent of registered voters sign petitions, with the Secretary of State verifying all signatures. But its distribution requirement calls for 15 percent of registered voters in only two-thirds of the state's counties.

"Whoever says it's too easy to get an initiative on the ballot in Utah has never done one here," says Maura Carabello, vice president of Utahns for Clean Water, Clean Air and Quality Growth, the sponsors of Initiative 1. "It's the hardest thing we've ever done. It's remarkably difficult to get on the ballot in Utah."

Initiative 1 sponsors gathered 133,000 signatures last summer, well above the required 76,000. They were initially rejected by the Lieutenant Governor's Office for failing to meet the Senate district threshold, falling two districts shy. But Utahns for Clean Water appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court, and were upheld when justices ruled that county clerks wrongly rejected signatures in two districts and ordered a recount.

Initiatives also have faced a tough slog in Utah historically.

According to Beth Garrett of the Initiative and Referendum Institute at the University of Southern California, only 18 initiatives have made the ballot since the Legislature passed a law implementing citizen referendums in 1917. And of that number, just four have passed.

"That's a success rate of 22 percent, well below the national rate of 45 percent," said Garrett. "And because Utah has made it more difficult and created the new distribution requirement, I doubt it will ever have a real robust initiative process."

Initiative 1 opponents argue, however, that the referendum game has changed. Taxpayers Association vice president Jerman points out that initiative backers have spent $1.1 million to finance their campaign, reeling in numerous large contributions from out-of-state conservation groups.

By comparison, initiative opponents have spent a pittance - just over $20,000, though additional funds have been spent by PACs, such as one in Utah County that is taking out full-page newspaper ads.

"Utah is more susceptible to this because it's a small state; it's much cheaper to get on the ballot than it is in California," said Jerman. "A well-funded group like the Nature Conservancy can outspend all the local groups we have in Utah. We don't have those kinds of deep pockets."

Dave Livermore, director of the Nature Conservancy's Utah chapter, doesn't dispute that Initiative 1 has been well funded by its sponsors. But he does take exception to the notion that out-of-state money is behind the push.

"This is a 100 percent grass-roots effort," says Livermore. "It's a gross mischaracterization to say that [initiative supporters] like Jake Garn and LaVell Edwards are somehow the product of out-of-state interests. We haven't taken one dime from the national [Nature Conservancy] organization. There have been some donations from out of state, but we've raised the money all ourselves."

jbaird@sltrib.com