If you see this on your ballot, you are voting for a TAX INCREASE!
“Ballot titles for tax or bonded debt increases shall begin, “SHALL (DISTRICT) TAXES BE INCREASED (first, or if phased in, final, full fiscal year dollar increase) ANNUALLY…?” or “SHALL (DISTRICT) DEBT BE INCREASED (principal amount), WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF (maximum total district cost), …?”
https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/info_center/laws/COConstitution/ArticleXSection20.html
Hi Kid @HiKidHey asked this on X (Twitter): “So what does that mean for voters? Who is ultimately responsible for the TABOR violation? The local county clerk or the district’s designated election official? Genuinely curious.”
It’s not easy to find information on the judges appearing on your Colorado ballot. Rebecca Sopkin is a Constitutional Attorney and TABOR Foundation Board Member.
In this video, she is sharing her methodology for determining who to vote for, some resources for voters to use, and her picks for this year’s ballot. Links from the video https://freestatecolorado.com/sopkin/
The District doubled its property tax in 2019 without holding a public approval vote as required by Colorado’s Constitution.
The decision is a win for Colorado taxpayers statewide and will strengthen Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). The National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF)’s Taxpayer Defense Center, in conjunction with Advance Colorado, represented Aranci and other taxpayers in the case.
“TABOR means what it says, and so a local government cannot double the property tax rate without a vote of the people,” NTUF Senior Attorney Tyler Martinez said. “We’re glad the Colorado Supreme Court declined to review this case further and left in place the unanimous decision by the Court of Appeals.”
NTUF’s Taxpayer Defense Center advocates for taxpayers’ rights across the country. The organization’s in-house team of attorneys challenge overzealous and unfair tax administration. Because of lawsuits brought by the Taxpayer Defense Center, individuals and businesses nationwide have benefitted from fair, equitable policy and victories worth tens of millions of dollars.
“We are grateful for the Taxpayer Defense Center taking up the case,” Chuck Miller, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said. “We wanted to stand up for all taxpayers in the district and protect our TABOR rights.”
For more information on the Taxpayer Defense Center’s victory for taxpayers in Colorado or to discuss the case with NTUF’s legal team, please contact NTUF Marketing Director Courtney Manley at courtney.manley@ntu.org.
EDITORIAL: Salute our state’s constitution this Colorado Day
On Thursday, the state of Colorado turns 148 — and Coloradans no doubt can think of many good reasons to celebrate.
Among them of course are the Centennial State’s unmatched natural wonders. There’s also the state’s exquisite climate; its vast, wide-open spaces, and its abundant resources — from oil and gas underground to the wind and sunshine all around — that heat our homes, power our automobiles and light the way.
One blessing that’s more directly connected to the advent of Colorado’s statehood itself is our founding charter — our state’s constitution — which shares the same birthday. Drafted in March of 1876 and approved by territorial voters on July 1 of the same year, the Colorado Constitution formally took effect Aug. 1, 1876, when Colorado was admitted to the union.
There’s good reason to celebrate the state’s constitution, as well, on Colorado Day.
Like any constitution, ours isn’t without foibles. At times it has left itself wide open to interpretation, and activist courts have been happy to oblige. Yet, on the balance, Colorado’s constitution has served its citizens pretty well — including by way of some well-timed and well-placed amendments to the document over the generations. Continue reading
June 16, 2024 3:56 pm ET
California Gov. Gavin Newsom speaks at a rally in support of Freedom to Marry, a ballot measure to remove Proposition 8 from the state Constitution, Friday, June 7, 2024, at Manny’s at 16th and Mission streets in San Francisco. (Jessica Christian/San Francisco Chronicle via AP) PHOTO: JESSICA CHRISTIAN/ASSOCIATED PRESS
We’ve told you about California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s lawsuit to block a citizen initiative from this November’s ballot that would make it harder to raise taxes. Now his Legislature is trying to sabotage another initiative that would toughen penalties for theft and drug crimes. Why do Democrats fear voters?
Law enforcement, businesses and local elected officials across the Golden State are campaigning to roll back parts of Prop. 47. That’s the 2014 initiative that made misdemeanors of drug possession and theft of less than $950 in goods. Supporters including Mr. Newsom said it would save money by reducing incarceration.
The George Soros-backed initiative cut the state prison count, but Californians are paying a high price. Organized criminals exploit the law’s lax penalties. District attorneys say Prop. 47 prevents them from leveraging the penalty of jail time to induce addicts into treatment. Police often don’t arrest thieves or drug users because the crimes go unpunished. Retail theft, vagrancy and open-air drug use have spiked.
Thus the citizen initiative, which would toughen penalties for shoplifters and drug dealers. Someone with two prior convictions for theft could be charged with a felony on the third offense no matter the amount. The value of stolen property from multiple thefts could be combined for a felony charge. Continue reading
The National Taxpayers Union Foundation (NTUF) continues to fight for residents in Northern Colorado. Back in March, in a major victory for taxpayers, a unanimous panel of the Colorado Court of Appeals agreed with us that a doubling of the property taxes in a few Northern Colorado counties violated the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). But the case continues, because the Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District has now sought review from the Colorado Supreme Court. We recently filed our brief in opposition.
The case, Aranci v. Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District, involves residents challenging a tax increase by the water district, arguing it violates TABOR. The controversy arose when the district doubled its mill levy in 2019 without seeking voter approval. The residents filed a class action lawsuit, asserting that this increase violated the TABOR requirement that governments must ask voter consent for any tax rate increases, as well as seeking a refund for what was illegally collected.
The district court initially ruled in favor of the water district, finding no violation of TABOR under a narrow exception articulated in Huber v. Colorado Mining Association, which was about a ministerial tax adjustment based on inflation. However, the court of appeals unanimously reversed that ruling, declaring the mill levy increase was not ministerial and holding for the residents on five independent grounds. Continue reading
by Tyler Martinez May 29, 2024
Our Taxpayer Defense Center continues to fight for residents in Northern Colorado. Back in March, in a major victory for taxpayers, a unanimous panel of the Colorado Court of Appeals agreed with us that a doubling of the property taxes in a few Northern Colorado counties violated the Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR). But the case continues, because the Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District has now sought review from the Colorado Supreme Court. We recently filed our Brief In Opposition.
The case, Aranci v. Lower South Platte Water Conservancy District, involves residents challenging a tax increase by the Water District, arguing it violates Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). The controversy arose when the Water District doubled its mill levy in 2019 without seeking voter approval. The residents filed a class action lawsuit, asserting that this increase violated TABOR, which requires prior voter approval for any tax rate increases, and seeking a refund for what was illegally collected.
The District Court initially ruled in favor of the Water District, finding no violation of TABOR under a narrow exception articulated in Huber v. Colorado Mining Association, which was about a ministerial tax adjustment based on inflation. However, upon appeal, the Court of Appeals unanimously reversed, declaring the mill levy increase was not ministerial and holding for the residents on five independent grounds. Continue reading
If you have seen headlines on this problem, you may or may not have noted a discrepancy in the dollar amounts. Some articles say $67 million, some say $34. Both are right, but the semantics are important. The total owed is $67 million: $33 million for this year and $34 million for the past couple years of overpayments. If I return to my analogy from before, you could liken the $34 million to the $240 you’d owe your employer, the $33 million to the $20 loss on your current check, and the loss of that $20 per month in the future to the problem the state has in trying to figure out how to fund the enterprise fully going forward.