HELENA -- The ballot measure to limit state spending in Montana suffered another legal knock-down Tuesday, as a state judge said the measure itself is unconstitutional.

District Judge Thomas Honzel of Helena said Constitutional Initiative 97 improperly amends more than one part of the constitution and therefore is invalid, and that votes on the measure will not be counted in the Nov. 7 election.

Honzel's ruling comes one week after a state judge in Great Falls ordered CI-97 and two other measures removed from the Nov. 7 ballot, citing widespread fraud during the signature-gathering process to qualify them for a vote.

Now, it's up to the Montana Supreme Court to decide whether the lower court decisions will stand and whether votes will be counted on any of the measures this November.

Supporters of CI-97 said Tuesday they plan to appeal Honzel's ruling to the Supreme Court.

The ruling that tossed CI-97 and the other measures from the ballot is already before the high court, which has given attorneys until Oct. 3 to submit arguments.

CI-97 would amend the state constitution to limit the growth in state spending to no more than the state's population growth and the rate of inflation. It would apply only to state general fund spending, which is about 40 percent of the overall budget.

Honzel said CI-97 violates the constitutional rule that says a proposed amendment can change only one section of the state constitution.

Honzel noted that the 1,200-word spending-cap initiative would make multiple changes to the state constitution, but cited only one change that causes the problem.

That section says that while CI-97 imposes limits on state spending, a judge in Montana would still have the power to rule that a new "spending category'' can be exempt from the cap, and thereby adjust the spending-cap formula.

This judicial decision would be incorporated into the state constitution, Honzel said, essentially giving a judge the power to amend the constitution.

"The courts of Montana do not have the authority to amend the constitution,'' he wrote. "To give them that authority would require a separate constitutional amendment.''

Jackie Boyle, coordinator for the campaign against CI-97, said Tuesday that Honzel's ruling sends the same message as the order tossing CI-97 and the other measures from the ballot.

"It says in order to pass an initiative in Montana, you have to do it correctly,'' she said. "You have to follow the rules of signature-gathering and you have to follow the single-subject rule.''

Chris Gallus, a Helena attorney representing CI-97 supporters, said the measure was "meticulously drafted'' to avoid accusations that it amends multiple parts of the state constitution.

The section allowing a judge to adjust the spending formula is not amending the constitution, he argued. Rather, it gives the formula the flexibility to change along with changes in the law and constitutional rulings, Gallus said.

Judy Beck, spokeswoman for Attorney General Mike McGrath, said his office is considering whether to appeal Honzel's ruling as well. The state is a defendant in the case along with the supporters of CI-97.

Honzel ruled on a lawsuit brought by the opponents of CI-97, known as Not in Montana: Citizens Against CI-97.

The group includes AARP-Montana; MEA-MFT, which is the state's largest employee union; and many other organizations who say the spending cap is not necessary.

The state constitution already requires a balanced budget, and placing arbitrary caps on state spending could force reductions in needed services like public schools and health care, they've argued.

Supporters of CI-97 say the Legislature increased overall spending by $1 billion last year, or about 13 percent, and that such spending levels are more than can be sustained by taxpayers over the long term.