Category Archives: Legal Issues

Aug 12

As Colorado’s governor, lawmakers target tax breaks, a program that covers 75% of the state’s land could be in the crosshairs

Posted on by
Colorado has awarded $7.6 million in Enterprise Zone tax credits to Comanche Solar PV in Pueblo County. The 156-megawatt Comanche solar array, shown here on Jan 20, 2019, is the largest solar project in the state of Colorado. (Mike Sweeney, Special to The Colorado Sun)

As Colorado’s governor, lawmakers target tax breaks, a program that covers 75% of the state’s land could be in the crosshairs

A Colorado Sun analysis of $223 million in tax credits awarded from 2013 to 2018 found that the state is often doling out taxpayer dollars without much evidence that each tax credit is producing economic activity that wouldn’t have occurred otherwise

Brian Eason

Special to The Colorado Sun

In the grand scheme of public subsidies for professional sports teams, the $19,306.19 the state gave the Colorado Rockies in 2013 probably isn’t enough to get worked up about.

Neither is the $948.57 credit claimed in 2014 by a Walgreens for $31,000 invested in a Pueblo pharmacy. Or the $529 McDonald’s received in 2016 through its restaurant in Greeley.

But when upwards of 75% of the state’s land is classified as an economic development zone, a hundred dollars here, a thousand dollars there adds up. And while the vast majority of the 16,000-plus tax credits claimed through the program in the last few years were worth less than $10,000, at least 42 companies have been awarded more than $1 million each in public subsidies through the program since July 2013.

As Gov. Jared Polis and the Colorado General Assembly conduct the state’s first broad review of tax breaks in recent memory, there’s perhaps no program that better illustrates the heated debate over tax incentives than the Enterprise Zone program. The sprawling economic development initiative was designed to spur investment in the state’s most needy areas but has expanded to the point that even some supporters question whether it’s fulfilling its intended purpose.

A Colorado Sun analysis of $223 million in tax credits awarded from July 2013 to June 2018 found that the state is often doling out taxpayer dollars without much evidence that each tax credit is producing economic activity that wouldn’t have occurred without public subsidies. In some cases, the state is also pursuing conflicting goals, explicitly incentivizing renewable energy in order to fight climate change on the one hand, while giving nearly twice as much to the fossil fuel industry that cleaner energies are meant to replace.

To read the rest of this story, click (HERE):

Aug 10

AG Weiser requests extension of deadline to defend TABOR; motion granted

Posted on by
Please note that Sherrie Peif has issued an update to her story; the AG did request an extension of the appeal but his office had failed to respond to Sherrie’s repeated requests for information.
See her new story below.
 

AG Weiser requests extension of deadline to defend TABOR; motion granted

 By 

“The Attorney General has said he will defend the constitution and that’s what he will do,” Pacheco said by email Thursday morning.

Complete Colorado attempted to get hold of Weiser through Pacheco before the story published; however, Pacheco did not return phone calls or email requests until after the story published. Weiser was also aware prior to publication that Complete Colorado was attempting to get hold of him through a series of Tweets with Complete Colorado.

Regardless, Complete Colorado regrets the original error.

DENVER — Although he campaigned on a promise to defend the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) despite his personal opinion of the nearly three decades old constitutional amendment, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser made his first move in the opposite direction by letting a deadline pass to argue an ongoing TABOR case in federal court.

Weiser had until Tuesday to ask that the entire circuit court hear the case after a 3-judge panel from the Tenth  Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s ruling. The lower court had ruled that local governments do not have the right to sue.

Aug 08

AG Weiser fails to appeal TABOR decision in federal court

Posted on by
Colorado Democrat Attorney General “Idiot” Phil Weiser lied to you. He said he would defend #TABOR.
Typical liberal modus operandi
Shame on any one who voted for this buffoon.

DENVER — Although he campaigned on a promise to defend the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) despite his personal opinion of the nearly three decades old constitutional amendment, Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser made his first move in the opposite direction by letting a deadline pass to argue an ongoing TABOR case in federal court.

Weiser had until Tuesday to ask that the entire circuit court hear the case after a 3-judge panel from the Tenth  Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court’s ruling. The lower court had ruled that local governments do not have the right to sue.

“It’s disappointing that AG Weiser is not fully following through on his campaign promises,” said Michael Fields, Executive Director of Colorado Rising Action. “The rubber will hit the road when the merits of the TABOR case are heard, and he actually has to defend the constitution.”

Fields added that everyone should be concerned that Weiser chose not to defend the state’s constitution knowing he is not a TABOR supporter.

Aug 01

Basalt wrestles with Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights violations

Posted on by

Basalt wrestles with Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights violations

 By 

TABOR is a constitutional amendment passed in 1992 that, among other things, requires voter consent for new or increased taxes and debt, as well as  limiting government revenues to a formula of population growth plus inflation. Under TABOR, governments in Colorado are required to refund excess revenue back to taxpayers, or get voter approval to keep it.

In 1994, two years after TABOR was enacted, Basalt residents voted 220 to 42 in favor of lifting TABOR revenue limits, thus allowing the town to keep any excess revenues it brings in over the regular revenue restrictions in TABOR. Numerous taxing authorities in Colorado have asked voters to do this to avoid having to pay out refunds when revenues exceed expectations.

To read the rest of this story, click (HERE):

 

Jul 31

Appellate briefs started in Donor Disclosure

Posted on by

TABOR Supporters,

The “Donor Disclosure” lawsuit is about the City of Denver’s ordinance to cause any organization to become an issue committee for speaking out about a Denver ballot measure.  Our two organizations (TABOR Committee and the CUT Foundation) are the plaintiffs.  We are represented by the Goldwater Institute.  We lost on the issue of standing in District Court on February 5, 2019.  Our attorneys have met the deadlines for an appeal.

This message is to let you know of progress made. Our brief was submitted timely on July 12th.  The Defendant (City of Denver) has until August 16 to file its opening brief.  The step after that will be our Reply brief, which will be due September 16.

Plaintiffs’ Opening Brief_7.12.19 on Scribd

Jul 29

Colorado’s Attorney General Candidates Weigh in on Six Key Issues

Posted on by
This is from September, 2018.
Now to find out if AG Weiser is a man of his word or did he lie to Colorado?
 
On TABOR:
Weiser says: “You have a job to be a leader, to work with people to solve problems, and to suggest how the law can be improved. With respect to TABOR, there is a clear need to improve.”
 
The takeaway:
Like Brauchler, Weiser will defend the law.
But if the Colorado General Assembly or governor wants to (legally) work around TABOR or fight to repeal it, he’d probably be OK with that.
 
Jul 28

Semantics ploy could undermine TABOR

Posted on by

COLUMN: Semantics ploy could undermine TABOR

  • By: Mike Rosen
Rosen_0249 (copy)
What’s your opinion of Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution? I suspect the reply of the overwhelming majority of Coloradans to that question would be: “Huh?” But hold that thought.

If you’re a Colorado taxpayer, you better get a firm grip on your wallet. Once again, the forces of unlimited government and the folks who know how to spend your money better than you do are after it. The dragon they want to slay for the umpteenth time is commonly known as TABOR, The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.

This was an amendment added to the state constitution via a ballot question by a direct vote of the people in the general election of 1992. It limits spending by all levels of government under a formula that considers population growth and inflation. It also requires approval by the voters for tax increases.

While still in the ballot-question womb and from the moment of its birth, TABOR has been generally supported by Republicans and opposed by Democrats. To circumvent TABOR, Democrat governors and legislators have sometimes gotten away with the charade of disguising tax increases as new “fees.”

To read the rest of this story, click (HERE):

 

Jul 23

10th Circuit reverses TABOR ruling, says lawsuit can challenge Colorado law’s constitutionality

Posted on by

10th Circuit reverses TABOR ruling, says lawsuit can challenge Colorado law’s constitutionality

Federal judge previously had found lawsuit’s plaintiffs lacked standing to sue

 

By ANNA STAVER | astaver@denverpost.com | The Denver Post

PUBLISHED: July 22, 2019 at 3:18 pm | UPDATED: July 22, 2019 at 5:43 pm

A sidelined legal challenge to the constitutionality of Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights is back on again, following a decision by a federal appeals court Monday that found some plaintiffs in the case have a right to sue.

“We have been dealing for eight years with threshold procedural issues,” said David Skaggs, an attorney for the plaintiffs. “Now I hope we will be heading back to district court to finally get to the merits.”

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision reverses a 2017 ruling by a federal judge in Denver who said the plaintiffs lacked what’s called standing — meaning they could show they would be subject to actual or threatened damages — and therefore couldn’t sue.

The lawsuit itself dates to 2011 when Sen. Andy Kerr and House Speaker Dickey Lee Hullinghorst challenged TABOR in federal court.

They argued that giving the final say on all tax increases to voters — as TABOR mandated after its approval by Colorado voters in 1992 — violated the Guarantee Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which is a line in Article IV, Section 4 that promised every state a republican form of government. TABOR, they argued, transformed the state into a direct democracy.

To rest the rest of this story, click (HERE):

Jul 18

TABOR Repeal Supporters Don’t Want To Call It That

Posted on by

Gee, we wonder what they’re trying to hide?
Why are they being so sneaky?
Don’t lose your #TABOR Rights.
Vote NO on whatever they call it in 2020

TABOR Repeal Supporters Don’t Want To Call It That

By Nathaniel Minor

July 17, 2019

A 2013 ballot and voter blue book.Megan Verlee/CPR News
A 2013 ballot and voter blue book.

The Colorado Title Board on Wednesday approved key language for a possible 2020 ballot initiative that would repeal a highly consequential part of the state constitution.

But which part, exactly? If you ask repeal proponents, it’s Article X, Section 20. If you ask repeal opponents, it’s the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR. How the ballot question is presented to voters is just the latest high-stakes skirmish in a long war over TABOR, a controversial constitutional amendment passed in 1992 that’s limited government growth in the state.

Both sides presented arguments to the title board, a three-member panel with representatives from the Secretary of State’s office, the state Attorney General and the Office of Legislative Legal Services, that decides if ballot measures meet all requirements and how they should appear on the ballot.

The Full Story Behind TABOR: Read & Listen To The Taxman Podcast

The liberal-leaning Colorado Fiscal Institute is backing the repeal effort, which won a significant victory at the Colorado State Supreme Court last month allowing it to inch closer to the 2020 ballot. Carol Hedges, the group’s executive director, said using the specific term, “Article X, Section 20,” is the most clear, neutral way possible to refer to the amendment.

To read the rest of this story, click (HERE):

 

Jul 09

Q&A with Penn Pfiffner | On standing up for freedom, and TABOR

Posted on by

Q&A with Penn Pfiffner | On standing up for freedom, and TABOR

·         Dan Njegomir, Colorado Politics

The TABOR Foundation’s Penn Pfiffner addresses the Reagan Club of Colorado earlier this year. (Photo courtesy the TABOR Foundation)

 

Even if you don’t move in Penn Pfiffner’s center-right political circles, you’re probably familiar with his name as the media’s go-to guy for comment on the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights whenever it comes up in the news. And it comes up a lot, of course. 

The groundbreaking taxing and spending limits — venerated by some and vilified by others — have been stirring debate ever since being enacted into Colorado’s Constitution by voters in 1992. Better known by its acronym TABOR, the constitutional provision has prompted lawsuits, legislation and more ballot issues by wide-ranging interests hoping to elude or at least ease its restraints on state and local budgets. 

The perennial back-and-forth over TABOR also spawned the TABOR Foundation, which, along with its advocacy counterpart the TABOR Committee, emerged with the help of Pfiffner and other resolute TABOR supporters to stand up for the policy.

Pfiffner, who served as a Republican state representative from Lakewood in the 1990s, has become as distinctive a voice for TABOR over the years as he has for the advocacy of limited government in general.

He expounds on both of those endeavors and more — as always, in his characteristically eloquent and respectful way — in today’s Q&A.

Colorado Politics: Let’s start with a recent headline. The state Supreme Court ruled June 17 that a pending ballot proposal to repeal TABOR in its entirety may proceed — despite a constitutional “single-subject” stipulation on ballot issues that was long believed to have blocked precisely such an all-in-one-shot repeal.

In a public statement from the TABOR Foundation condemning the ruling, you said, “The court has become dangerously unmoored from the clear meaning of the state constitution.” The statement also said the court ”appears to take sides.”

Recap for us what was fundamentally at issue in the case before court — and why you feel the court missed the mark.

Penn Pfiffner: The recent direction of the Colorado courts on constitutional matters should trouble any citizen. Our American system relies on an honest judicial branch to impartially interpret the law. We have seen an absolutely consistent antipathy from the courts towards the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.

It’s an understatement to say that the justices from trial level to the Colorado Supreme Court have appeared to argue backwards from predetermined outcomes. Some of the arguments appeared to me to be even juvenile, like an adolescent trying too hard to argue the impossible.

The central finding in the Bridge Enterprise case that the TABOR Foundation brought is an example. Years from now, I surmise historians of Colorado’s system will be amazed and disgusted that it became so partisan during these recent years. Good, experienced attorneys today are urging the TABOR Foundation not to bring any more constitutional issues to the judicial branch — it’s that futile, and all that we end up with is setting bad precedent. In the case you raise, the court explicitly threw out a generation of precedent. It’s as if they never opened the section on TABOR to read all the different pieces in this comprehensive constitutional measure.

A dissent from the bench pointed out that some activist could now substitute Colorado’s extensive “Bill of Rights” for “Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights” (in a ballot proposal) and in one vote overturn all citizen protections. A leftist court looks ready to use its personal political views to put a thumb on the scales of justice.

Penn Pfiffner

  • Chairs the board of directors for the TABOR Foundation and the TABOR Committee, since 2009. The two entities, respectively, educate and advocate on behalf of TABOR.
  • Owner, Construction Economics LLC, since 1983; provides financial and managerial consulting to architects, engineers and contractors.
  • Senior fellow in fiscal policy at the Denver-based Independence Institute, 2001-2014.
  • Served as a Republican state representative from Jefferson County in the Colorado House, 1993-2001.
  • Current board member and past president of the Colorado Union of Taxpayers.
  • Chaired “Too Taxing for Colorado,” an issue committee to defeat the unsuccessful Proposition 103 tax increase on the 2011 statewide ballot.
  • Holds a master’s degree in finance from the University of Colorado Denver and bachelor’s degrees in economics and political science from CU Boulder.

 

CP: Give us your elevator speech on TABOR’s role, and value, in our state constitution.

To read the rest of this story, click (HERE):