Monthly Archives: March 2024

Mar 24

Water district subject to TABOR vote requirement

Posted on by

Water district subject to TABOR vote requirement

Water districts are like all other government entities that are subject to the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights when it comes to voters approving tax increases, the Colorado Appeals Court ruled Thursday.

In a precedent-setting case out of Logan County in the northeast corner of the state, a three-judge panel overturned a lower court’s decision that the Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District that serves four Eastern Plains counties violated TABOR by doubling its mill levy starting in 2019 because it did so without voter approval.

The lower court had ruled in favor of the district, saying its raising of the levy from 0.5 mills to 1 mill did not violate that 1992 constitutional amendment because the water district was formed before TABOR was approved, and is required under the state’s Water Conservancy Act to set a mill levy based on a mandatory and non-discretionary formula.

The water district tried to argue that the Colorado Supreme Court, in Huber v. Colorado Mining Association, allows such mill levy increases because of that formula.

But a three-judge panel said that high court ruling applies to entities that aren’t making a legislative or governmental act for a tax-rate increase, but a non-discretionary duty under pre-TABOR taxing statutes, such as the Colorado Department of Revenue making legally required adjustments to severance taxes. Continue reading →

Mar 24

TABOR: The enduring success story empowering Colorado taxpayers

Posted on by

TABOR: The enduring success story empowering Colorado taxpayers

BY BARRY W. POULSON, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR – 03/22/24 7:00 AM ET

AP Photo/David Zalubowski

The dome of the State Capitol shines in the early morning sun Friday, May 28, 2021, in downtown Denver. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

 

Even as economists tout a soft landing for the U.S. economy, Americans are facing sticker shock at the grocery store, the gas pump, and fast-food restaurants, among other places.

After a long bout of double-digit inflation, not unlike that of the 1970s. We have learned once again that unconstrained growth in federal spending funded by borrowing and accommodative monetary policy eventually triggers high inflation.

In response to stagflation in the 1970s, Congress enacted statutory fiscal rules designed to balance the budget and stabilize debt. The Federal Reserve also pursued tighter monetary polies to stabilize prices. In the 1990s, a period referred to as “The Great Moderation,” the federal government achieved sustainable debt levels and low rates of inflation.

Unfortunately, over the last two decades, the federal government largely abandoned these fiscal and monetary policies. Federal spending has far outpaced the growth in national income, and federal debt has grown at an unsustainable rate. The statutory fiscal rules designed to constrain federal spending are routinely circumvented and suspended.

The Federal Reserve has again used monetary policy to accommodate these fiscal policies, resulting in wide swings in the rate of inflation. It is difficult to argue that we are experiencing a soft landing and that all is well. A more realistic forecast is that over the next decade we will again experience stagflation.

But there is a bright spot in this gloomy outlook.

In response to stagflation in the 1970s, citizens launched state and local tax revolts. Beginning with property tax limitations in California, citizens began to challenge profligate fiscal policies at the state and local level. Using the initiative and referendum, citizens enacted tax and expenditure limits to constrain fiscal policies. Continue reading →

Mar 22

A TABOR Lawsuit Victory

Posted on by

Residents in the northeast corner of Colorado contacted the TABOR Committee several years ago about a tax increase imposed without voter approval by their local Water Conservancy District.  Our organization kicked off the response with an attorney’s letter warning the District to reverse course.  It did not.  After other subsequent efforts, a lawsuit was filed by those residents.  Two public interest law firms have done the legal work.

Although a lower court allowed the District to increase taxes, the very good news is that the Colorado Court of Appeals recently ruled for the taxpayers!  The case still can be appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court, and if not heard there, the trial court must still resolve several questions, so the lawsuit will continue.

The importance here is that the Colorado court system has confirmed the primacy of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights and protected the taxpayers in that District.

 

Penn Pfiffner
Colorado TABOR

Mar 15

Menten: Open letter to the Colorado Commission on Property Tax

Posted on by

Dear members of the Commission on Property Tax:

The commission was tasked with providing property tax relief options before the temporary tax adjustments expire at the end of 2024.

The obvious  answer is to restore inflation and growth adjustable property tax revenue caps where they’ve been forfeited in prior elections. Good news – that’s already in the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) but it needs to be reinforced!

If that doesn’t happen, there will be a hard property tax cap on the 2024 ballot. That’s been clearly stated by two of the proponents of property tax caps if there was insufficient actions from the commission.

Taxpayers want tax caps whether they are hard or inflation adjustable. Taxpayers like me understand that government growth should be relative to the size of the local economy. That is rightly answered in the existing property tax limit contained in TABOR, paragraph 7c, which allows for such growth.

Having sat through all the commission meetings, there’s a few moments I want to highlight.

Bring back the tax caps

In this three minute video, the county assessor from Santa Clara, California described where that state sits now under the Proposition 13 property tax caps. His points illustrate why our Colorado TABOR is ideal. The assessor points out that local California governments didn’t appropriately reduce property taxes in 1978, even referring to property taxes as “money machines.” So, California voters used their right to petition to place a hard tax cap on the ballot, which became Proposition 13. Continue reading →