Jun 19

PERA obligations still threaten Colorado’s future

PERA obligations still threaten Colorado’s future

Colorado is ranked one of the worst states in the US regarding the ability to pay state pensions. In October 2018, Bloomberg’s Danielle Moran tallied the total liabilities and the funded portion that applies to each state’s public employee pension funds, finding that five states had funded less than 50% of the cost needed to pay for their promised state public employee’s pension benefits: Kentucky (33.9%) New Jersey (35.8%) Illinois (38.4%) Connecticut (43.8%) and Colorado was the fifth-worst in the US (47.1%). The exorbitant real debt of PERA obligations is over twice the size of the entire state budget ($32 billion) when using a discount rate that the private sector has to use in calculating its debt obligations.

According to the Foundation of Economic Education, another way to measure the shortfall is to calculate the amount of money that each individual state resident would have to cough up to fully fund the cost of providing state government employees with the retirement benefits promised to them by state politicians. This analysis shows that the 2018 cost of unfunded state government employee pension liabilities per Colorado resident (man, woman, and child) is $9,722 the fifth-highest in the US.

Continue reading

Jun 18

TABOR Committee responds to Court ruling on TABOR repeal

TABOR Committee responds to Court ruling on TABOR repeal

 

Colorado’s Constitution contains a provision which requires that all matters proposed by ballot initiatives can address only one subject.  Yesterday, the Colorado Supreme Court allowed a ballot measure to proceed that would wipe out the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in its entirety.  The Court explicitly threw out a quarter-century of precedent.

The TABOR Committee adamantly condemns the Court’s determination.

“The Court has become dangerously unmoored from the clear meaning of the state constitution,” protested Penn Pfiffner, the Committee’s chairman.  The TABOR Committee points out that the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights includes not only the frequently-debated provisions for slowing the growth of government, but also for example

  • election provisions that call for, among other things, notification of the citizens by any Colorado government of any election,
  • requirements for emergency reserves at all levels of government
  • a state-wide prohibition on real estate transfer taxes ,
  • rules for property tax assessments
  • rights of local districts to resist state-imposed mandates.

Committee Board director Rebecca Sopkin observed, “It is strange that the Court found all of this to be one subject. The Court held that all of the above provisions and rights are ‘necessarily and properly connected,’ as though no one of them could exist without the others. We find that to be preposterous.”

In a scathing dissent, Justice Marquez pointed out that using the Court’s logic, a single measure could repeal the entire Colorado Bill of Rights.  Petitioners could simply substitute the Bill of Rights[1] for the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights[2].

 

The TABOR Committee finds it unsettling that the Colorado Supreme Court appears to take sides.  It specifically addresses[3] what seems to be at the heart of issue – that it would be difficult and expensive to repeal the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in a “piecemeal” manner.  Does the Court step into the political arena in an attempt to collaborate and cooperate with TABOR opponents? The Court should be impartial rather than act to relieve TABOR opponents of “expense and difficulty.”

 

The single subject issue arose as a ballot initiative in 1994. TABOR was very much part of the debate. The official summary (Blue Book) specifically noted that if the Single Subject Rule were to be passed, then it would not be possible to repeal TABOR in a single vote.  Instead, it would be necessary to address its provisions one at a time.  Citizens passed the measure.  The Court ignored the will of the people, history, established law, and common sense in its Opinion.

[1] Colorado Constitution Article 2

[2] Colorado constitution Article 10, Section 20

[3] Opinion, page 12

May 24

Colorado groups cry foul over misleading information about TABOR

Colorado groups cry foul over misleading information about TABOR

FILE - Colorado State Capitol
The Colorado State Capitol in Denver, Colorado.

TownNews.com Content Exchange

Voters will decide on Nov. 3 whether the state can keep excess revenues instead of refunding them to the taxpayer, and prevent voters from deciding on the matter in the future.

The legislatively referred state statute passed by a majority Democratic legislature and has the support of Democratic Gov. Jared Polis.

Among other things, the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) requires the state to refund excess revenue to taxpayers.

The lead sponsor of the amendment, Democratic Rep. K.C. Becker, says that Colorado’s strong economy gives the impression that “the state itself can make more investments, more improvements,” without raising taxes. But, she says, “We can’t because the state constitution prohibits the budget from growing with the economy.”

Click (HERE) to read the rest of the story

This article originally ran on thecentersquare.com.

May 22

Ending tax refunds, sports betting on ballot as Propositions CC and DD

Ending tax refunds, sports betting on ballot as Propositions CC and DD

Proposition CC is the more contentious of the two, asking Coloradans to permanently give up any future tax refunds under the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR.

TABOR is a constitutional amendment passed in 1992 that, among other things, limits the annual growth of a portion of the state budget to a formula of population growth plus inflation. The state is obligated to refund revenue in excess of that formula back to taxpayers, or get voter consent to keep and spend it temporarily.

So-called “enterprise” revenue is exempt from TABOR limits, and thus is already off limits for refunds.  Enterprises are essentially government-owned entities that provide goods or services and are funded through fees, and which have grown dramatically in Colorado. According to the  Legislative Council Staff, “Revenue to enterprises has grown significantly since the passage of TABOR, from $742 million in FY 1993-94, the first year TABOR was in effect, to $17.9billion in FY2017-18, the most recent year for which financial data are available.”

File photo – Todd Shepherd

But if approved by voters, Prop CC would eliminate what’s left of the TABOR limit, allowing the state to keep and spend any and all excess revenues that would otherwise be refunded back to taxpayers in perpetuity.

The second measure, Proposition DD, would both authorize and tax sports betting in Colorado.

The U.S. Supreme Court in 2018 struck down a federal law restricting commercial sports betting in the states to only Nevada, thus opening the door for Prop DD. If passed, the measure would allow sports betting through licensed casinos in Colorado, as well as enact a 10 percent tax on the profits to “fund implementation of the state’s water plan and other public purposes.”

The propositions are statutory changes, meaning that they need 50 percent plus one of the vote to pass, and that lawmakers can later amend the measures if enacted, as with any other state law.

Ending tax refunds, sports betting on ballot as Propositions CC and DD

May 20

Colorado voters to decide whether to dilute Taxpayer Bill of Rights

The Center Square analysis

Colorado voters to decide whether to dilute Taxpayer Bill of Rights

Bills that passed during the legislative session would permanently end TABOR-granted tax refunds if voters give their approval

FILE - Voting booth polling place election

Colorado Democrats were successful in passing legislation this session that could chip away at the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) if voters give the majority party what they want.

TABOR is a constitutional amendment that requires voters to approve all tax increases. In addition to being a check on tax and spending increases, TABOR requires voter approval of debt increases. The amendment also ensures taxpayers receive refunds when the government’s revenue increases faster than population growth plus inflation.

It’s also one of the most contentious and partisan issues at the Colorado capitol.

TABOR means that anytime legislators want to raise taxes, they have to seek voter approval at the ballot box. But referendums become expensive and require significant political capital, especially given Coloradans’ recent history of voting down tax increase proposals.

Click here to read more:

May 18

Sharf: The revolt of Colorado’s political elites

Sharf: The revolt of Colorado’s political elites

Laws outlining government powers frequently come with restrictions. (See the U.S. Constitution for an excellent example.) Sometimes, the laws are restrictions, and they include exceptions. And sometimes, people vote down expansions or loosening of those restrictions.

Described by one side as guardrails and the other as a straitjacket, such restrictions very quickly morph into obstacles to be overcome or, in extremis, ignored. That such arrogance is profoundly disrespectful to the people of Colorado hasn’t kept it from being the default position of far too many elected officials.

Examples are legion. In 2018, voters rejected a proposal for a half-mile setback for new oil and gas wells by a 10-point margin. Nevertheless, the current legislature has passed and the governor signed Senate Bill 19-181. That law would allow local governments to ban all new wells, and the state is drafting regulations permitting exactly the setback that voters decisively rejected. Continue reading