Category Archives: Legal Issues

Jul 25

Coming up next: three local tax questions

Posted on by

Coming up next: three local tax questions

  • JIM SPEHAR
“Death, taxes and childbirth! There’s never a convenient time for any of them.”

— Margaret Mitchell

We’ll soon see how far we’ve come as a community…whether the public safety tax and school bond and override successes last fall marked a welcome change in attitudes or were only a temporary aberration.

County residents will likely face in November a ballot question asking if the Mesa County can exclude state grants from revenue limits in the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). In Grand Junction, voters will likely get two bites at the apple — one a proposal in November to double the city’s lodging tax and another next April to increase the sales tax to fund construction and operation of a community recreation center.

Two of the three, the ones soonest on our ballots, fall easily into the category of “no-brainers” while the third, the community center proposal, will likely generate heated back and forth between now and the city election in April.

It makes no sense, all three county commissioners argued in a public session last week, for Mesa County to not be able to accept state and federal grants for infrastructure and other purposes without busting the TABOR revenue cap but to instead have to turn down such things as a $5 million award for Mind Springs. Ironically, some grants not applied for come from federal severance taxes which flow back through the state and become subject to TABOR when passed on to local governments.

Continue reading →

Jul 25

This is why repair projects in Colorado are stuck waiting for funding

Posted on by

This is why repair projects in Colorado are stuck waiting for funding

Despite 90-degree temperatures, you could feel the chill in the air as state lawmakers on both sides of the aisle got together to figure out funding for state improvement projects. The number one question from Democrats: Why wasn’t State Treasurer Walker Stapleton there?
Author: Marshall Zelinger
Published: 10:53 AM MDT July 24, 2018

The state Capitol has no air conditioning, yet there was a chilly feel during a Monday morning committee hearing on the funding of state improvement projects.

The Capital Development Committee met with the Deputy Treasurer to find out why funding isn’t in place yet for projects identified as a result of a bill signed into law in 2017.

Democrats on the committee requested that treasurer Walker Stapleton show up to answer questions.

“Why is the state treasurer not here? What does he have going on that is more important than this transaction?” asked State Rep. Chris Hansen, D-Denver.

“Since I’m the one with the details and I’m the one that’s been working on this, I’m the one that volunteered to be here today,” said Deputy Treasurer Ryan Parsell.

“I, for one, am not disappointed that the treasurer is not here. I’m glad that you are here,” said State Sen. John Cooke, R-Greeley.

Stapleton is running for governor against Congressman Jared Polis.

“What I’m hoping we’re not doing here is making this a political football for no apparent reason,” said Rep. Jon Becker, R-Fort Morgan.

To understand the concern with the treasurer’s office and decisions being made, you need to understand the law that created the funding mechanism for the state improvement projects.

In 2017, lawmakers passed SB 267, which removed the Hospital Provider Fee from the state’s general fund and created its own enterprise that does not count against the state’s TABOR limit. The Taxpayer Bill of Rights, which is in the state’s constitution, limits how much government can grow each year and requires the state to refund taxpayer money if it collects too much. Taking the Hospital Provider Fee out of the equation allowed the state to keep more money before hitting the limit.

SB 267 authorized the state to issue certificates of participation (COPs) to fund about $2 billion dollars in road construction projects and pay for other state building improvement projects.

COPs essentially mean the state is selling buildings it owns to get immediate funding, and then they buy the buildings back through a lease-purchase agreement.

A lawsuit challenging the legality of the Hospital Provider Fee, thus the COPs, is going to be heard in Denver District Court in October.

The COPs need to be issued between July 1 and June 30, 2019.

During a political stop last week, Stapleton was asked about not having the COPs issued as of July 1. He was quoted in Westword as saying:

“My paramount concern as the treasurer of Colorado is to make sure we’re not issuing bonds when there is economic uncertainty. Anybody in the capital markets can tell you that from an investment standpoint, when you’re issuing bonds and those bonds are being impacted by pending litigation, which we had nothing to do with, it makes investors skittish. I’m not going to issue bonds when it could negatively impact the credit of Colorado based on hair around the deal resulting from the lawsuit. It would be fiscally irresponsible for me to do so.”

Last week, a spokeswoman for the treasurer’s office told Next with Kyle Clark that the delay was because the office received bad advice from bond counsel, and finally replaced the counsel with a firm that was willing to proceed.

“Bond counsel continued to express uneasiness and discomfort with the pending litigation but asks for more time to research the issue. After that point, discussions largely occurred directly with the Attorney General’s Office and Bond Counsel. During that time, the Attorney General’s office and Treasury began to question whether Bond Counsel’s initial response was correct,” Parsell testified on Monday morning. “It became increasingly clear that bond counsel was not approaching this case with an open mind. Bond counsel was basing their viewpoint off of a 30-year-old case at the expense of precedent that had been set in the interim years. The Attorney General’s Office asked bond counsel to review newer precedent. Bond counsel refused. The Attorney General’s Office also offered Bond Counsel the opportunity to review the state’s defense of the lawsuit. Bond Counsel refused. The Attorney General’s office offered to discuss alternative legal tactics that may give bond counsel comfort. Bond counsel refused.”

List of projects to be funded with 2018-19 COPs:

The treasurer’s office plans to start issuing the COPs on Sept. 26.

‘The legislation gives the treasurer’s office the authority to issue the COPs between July 1 of 2018 and June 30 of 2019. We will meet that deadline with ample time to spare,” said Parsell.

Hansen responded that no one was suggesting the treasurer’s office was breaking the law, just that it was delaying projects 90 days that could cost the state more money.

One of the projects also expecting funding from the issuance of COPs is the widening of Interstate 25 from Castle Rock to Monument.

“Based on the communication that we’ve received from CDOT, the timeline that we have will not interrupt any construction project timing,” said Parsell.

CDOT plans to start the project in November.

What was not answered at the committee hearing was if any of the projects will start later than expected because of the funding delay, or if any of the projects will cost more because of the funding delay.

“It is difficult to ascertain whether any projects were delayed from starting since every funding recipient is aware that funding is contingent on the timing of the COP issuance. The advice I offered was to expect funding in August,” said Kori Donaldson, Legislative Council staffer for the Capital Development Committee. “We don’t have any data about costs associated with the projects starting in October rather than August.”

http://www.9news.com/article/news/local/next/this-is-why-repair-projects-in-colorado-are-stuck-waiting-for-funding/73-577000240

Jul 17

Bed tax law suit gets new life

Posted on by

Bed tax law suit gets new life

DENVER — Ongoing litigation against the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy & Financing, among others, over a 2009 program that raised taxes via a “hospital provider fee,” has new energy after Cause of Action Institute announced earlier this month it would take on the representation of the plaintiffs in the case.

Cause of Action is a Washington D.C.-based 501(c)(3) organization that according to its website advocates for “economic freedom and individual opportunity advanced by honest, accountable, and limited government.”

Plaintiffs, who were originally represented by Mountain States Legal Foundation, had 60 days to find new counsel after Mountain States withdrew for reasons not related to the case or the plaintiffs.

Lee Steven and James Valvo are the lead attorneys. The Colorado-licensed attorney is Michael Francisco, who while working in the Colorado Attorney General’s office helped to write the defense of Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) in Kerr vs. Hickenlooper, which claimed TABOR was a violation of the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of a republican form of government. That argument lost.

This case was initially filed in 2015. It asserts the state’s Hospital Provider Fee is actually a tax enacted in violation of the TABOR. Continue reading →

Jul 16

Protecting Taxpayers with Supermajority Requirements

Posted on by

Protecting Taxpayers with Supermajority Requirements

Cartoon workingman reluctantly paying taxes. (Photo: AdobeStock/PPD/Adiano)

CARTOON WORKINGMAN RELUCTANTLY PAYING TAXES. (PHOTO: ADOBESTOCK/PPD/ADIANO)

The best budget rule in the United States is Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights. Known as TABOR, this provision in the state’s constitution says revenues can’t grow faster than population plus inflation. Any revenue greater than that amount must be returned to taxpayers.

Combined with the state’s requirement for a balanced budget, this means Colorado has a de facto spending cap (similar to what exists in Switzerland and Hong Kong).

The second-best budget rule is probably a requirement that tax increases can’t be imposed without a supermajority vote by the legislature.

The underlying theory is very simple. It won’t be easy for politicians to increase the burden of government spending if they can’t also raise taxes. Particularly since states generally have some form of rule requiring a balanced budget.

Basically a version of “Starve the Beast.”

Anyhow, according to the National Council of State Legislatures, 14 states have some type of supermajority requirements.

And more states are considering this reform.

Continue reading →

Jul 16

High Court decision could send internet sales taxes to Durango

Posted on by

High Court decision could send internet sales taxes to Durango

New revenue would help, but not solve, city’s long-term budget deficit
By Mary Shinn City & health reporter

Sunday, July 15, 2018 7:30 PM
A U.S. Supreme Court decision on internet sales could bring the city of Durango additional sales tax revenue. But unanswered questions surround the new revenue.

JERRY McBRIDE/Durango Herald file

Continue reading →

Jul 16

Bed tax law suit gets new life

Posted on by

Ongoing litigation against the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy & Financing, among others, over a 2009 program that raised taxes via a “hospital provider fee,” has new energy after Cause of Action Institute announced earlier this month it would take on the representation of the plaintiffs in the case.

Cause of Action is a Washington D.C.-based 501(c)(3) organization that according to its website advocates for “economic freedom and individual opportunity advanced by honest, accountable, and limited government.”

Plaintiffs, who were originally represented by Mountain States Legal Foundation, had 60 days to find new counsel after Mountain States withdrew for reasons not related to the case or the plaintiffs. Continue reading →

Jun 14

Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) Should Be a Role Model for the Nation

Posted on by

Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) Should Be a Role Model for the Nation

June 12, 2018 by Dan Mitchell

A balanced budget requirement is neither necessary nor sufficient for good fiscal policy.

If you want proof for that assertion, check out states such as Illinois, California, and New Jersey. They all have provisions to limit red ink, yet there is more spending (and more debt) every year. There are also anti-deficit rules in nations such as Greece, France, and Italy, and those countries are not exactly paragons of fiscal discipline.

The real gold standard for good fiscal policy is my Golden Rule. And the best way to make sure government doesn’t grow faster than the private sector is to have a constitutional rule limiting the growth of government.

That’s why I’m a big fan of the “debt brake” in Switzerland’s constitution and Article 107 in Hong Kong’s constitution.

And it’s also why the 49 other states, assuming they want an effective fiscal rule, should look at Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) as a role model.

Colorado’s Independence Institute has a very informative study on how TABOR works and the degree to which it has been effective. Here’s a good description of the system.

Colorado voters adopted The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights in 1992. TABOR allows government spending to grow each year at the rate of inflation-plus-population. Government can increase faster whenever voters consent. Likewise, tax rates can be increased whenever voters consent. …The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights requires that excess government revenues be refunded to taxpayers, unless taxpayers vote to let the government keep the revenue.

And here are the headline results.

Cumulatively, TABOR refunds have been over $800 per Coloradan, or $3,200 for a family of four. …If Colorado government had continued growing at the same high rate (8.56% compound annual rate) as in 1983-92, the average Coloradan would have paid an additional $442 taxes in 2012. The cumulative two-decade savings per Coloradan are $6,173—or more than $24,000 for a family of four.

Continue reading →

Jun 13

The Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce hailed a court ruling a stormwater drainage fee is actually an unconstitutional tax.

Posted on by

Chamber hails drainage fee court ruling
Article date: Jun 12 2018

The Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce hailed a court ruling a stormwater drainage fee is actually an unconstitutional tax.
Drainage remains a problem, however, that will require a collaborative effort to solve, the chamber stated in a news release.
District Court Judge Lance Timbreza ruled a fee assessed by the Grand Valley Drainage District on property owners constitutes a tax imposed without a vote as required under state constitutional provisions. The chamber and Mesa County sued the district in 2016 to halt the fee following eight months of failed negotiations.

“This is a victory for every property owner within the Grand Valley Drainage District boundaries, including many of our business members,” said Diane Schwenke, president and chief executive officer of the chamber. “It upholds the principles of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights and requires the district to convince voters that additional funding is needed, as TABOR clearly intended.”

The district assessed homeowners $3 a month — or $36 a year. Businesses, churches and government entities were charged $3 a month for every 2,500 square feet of roofs and parking lots from which stormwater drains.

Many businesses were assessed annual fees of up to $10,000, Schwenke said.
The chamber remains willing to a play a role in addressing drainage problems, Schwenke said. Collaborative efforts will be required that involve not only the district, but other government entities in the Grand Valley, she said.

The chamber supports a process involving all entities responsible for drainage as well as an exploration of all funding models, she said.
Moreover, more accountability and transparency will be needed regarding how priorities are set for drainage projects, how funds are spent and how funds are leveraged with money from such other sources as grants.

The chamber remains opposed to an impact fee for business expansions, Schwenke said. Business growth improves the economy, creates jobs and adds to the tax base, she said.

http://thebusinesstimes.com/chamber-hails-drainage-fee-court-ruling/

Jun 12

Your TABOR Foundation is suing the State of Colorado

Posted on by

The TABOR Foundation is suing the State of Colorado over the bed tax termed a “Hospital Provider” charge, which was imposed without voter approval in strict violation of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.  Our lawsuit had to be substantially amended when Senate Bill 17- 267 further flaunted the constitution by increasing the tax limit by $400+ million, defining the hospital welfare program as an off-the-books government business, issuing $2 billion in debt and much else – all without any regard to the requirements in TABOR.

In late March, we learned that our attorneys at Mountain States Legal Foundation had to withdraw.  From our outside observation point, some internal reorganization appears to have been the reason.  From everything that I have seen and heard, neither the TABOR Foundation nor the other three Plaintiffs contributed to the difficult situation.

In early April, Judge Buchanan gave us 60 days to find replacement counsel.

This email is a happy announcement that the TABOR Foundation met that deadline to recruit new attorneys and the hand-off is just about complete.  Yesterday, the TABOR Foundation appeared at a new Hearing as ordered by Judge Buchanan.  With us were the outgoing attorneys and participating by telephone were our new attorneys.  One of the other Plaintiffs, Scott Rankin, also attended.  The Court approved the substitution.  We have pulled together another very strong team so the outlook is positive.  Our new legal representation is by Cause of Action Institute, with Lee Steven and James Valvo stepping into the lead roles.  Our Colorado-licensed attorney is Michael Francisco, who while working in the Colorado Attorney General’s office helped to write the defense of TABOR in Kerr vs. Hickenlooper.

Now that the legal activity may move forward, look for more communications about developments no later than the fall…..

Penn R. Pfiffner
Chairman

Jun 12

Potential TABOR Violation by the City of Lakewood

Posted on by

A TABOR fan emailed us:
“Lakewood city council wants to keep the $12 million due back to the taxpayers. Stealing is still illegal right?,”

Our President responded, “What was the source of the $12 million?
If collected by the City, what circumstances would it be due back to the taxpayers? Over-collection (that is above the TABOR limit) or something else?”

The response was, “It was on the channel 8 Lakewood City Council meeting last night. Over collection.”

Our response is as follows,
“You asked about a week ago if the TABOR Committee would look into the potential diversion of funds by the City of Lakewood. Continue reading →