The only way to test this is to test it. Laws/bills are very often written in doublespeak; hence, the judge decides facts of law. This is an unique situation, but I believe a judge would rule favorably to my interpretation. Keep in mind, I 'absolutely' oppose the whole process and am merely speaking in an abstract context of a confusing issue.
I do not believe a judge would rule favorably to your interpretation. Have you reviewed the references that CO uses to craft legislation? "Doublespeak" would invalidate a law given the drafting standards required of legislation in CO.
Any 'confusion' in that statute is only in evidence if the drafting standards required of legislation are ignored.
First, can you respond to a specific question? Given 'rules of grammar and common usage,' do you agree that a series of items that are all equal and inclusive would be separated by commas, except for the last item in a series, which would be separated with 'and'? And, that 'and' means that each item in the series is in force?
So: "To drive a car, you are required to have a driver's license, a vehicle registration, AND proof of insurance" would be a list of three total requirements, EACH of which must be met? If any of those three is not available, you would not be legal to drive that vehicle, correct?
Or: "To fly upon commercial airlines, you must present a state-issued driver's license, a non-dl state-issued identification card, OR a federal issued identification such as a passport" would mean ANY ONE of those fits the requirement to board a flight?
To you , in the first example, you would only need either a driver's license OR a vehicle registration , AND a proof of insurance?
The CO statutes specify to use standard 'rules of grammar and common usage,' not some non-standard insertion of 'or' in a series for some odd reason.