Category Archives: TABOR news story

Oct 19

Beware the seven county-wide property tax hike, Question 7G

Posted on by

Beware the seven county-wide property tax hike, Question 7G

October 19, 2018

By Karl Honegger

Almost 60% of Colorado’s population, roughly 2.8 million people, live within the seven county Urban Drainage and Flood Control District (UDFCD). If you are a voter within this district, you will see question 7G on your ballot, the first question ever referred by the district since its creation in 1969.  The ballot language asks voters to approve a $14.9 million property tax increase, and to exempt that new money from the revenue limits in the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR).  They deceptively claim this really isn’t a tax increase, but rather just a full restoration of their taxing authority.

If you are like me and want your community protected from flooding, and also love spending time near your local pond or stream, then why would you want to vote against such a proposal?

The answer has to do with two things, common sense and government entitlement.

Any voter with common sense would want to find out how the money is to be spent and what kind of oversight mechanisms are in place. Unfortunately, the Flood District has never held an election that allows citizens to choose their board of directors. Instead, 20 of the 22 directors of the District are politicians appointed by local city councils or county commissioners. For example, the Mayor of Broomfield was appointed to the board by Broomfield City Council.  These politicians then appoint two professional engineers to serve with the Board Continue reading →

Oct 10

Debate on county TABOR ballot issue

Posted on by

Debate on county TABOR ballot issue

  • By CHARLES ASHBY

Mesa County Commissioner Rose Pugliese and Grand Junction resident Dennis Simpson will debate each other Wednesday on why voters should approve or reject a measure to exempt state grants the county receives from revenue limits set by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.

Pugliese has said passing Ballot Issue 1A next month would give the county more flexibility in its annual budget, and allow the county to act as the fiscal agent to help nonprofits get state grants.

Simpson, however, has said the county doesn’t need to exempt that money, which amounts to about $21 million of the county’s $165 million annual budget. He said the county already has the ability to accept money on behalf of nonprofits, and if there are issues with state grant revenues coming up against the TABOR cap, the county can ask voters each time, as the constitutional amendment allows.

Under TABOR, any revenue — a fee or tax — state or local governments bring in unless otherwise exempted is subject to the amendment’s revenue cap, which limits year-over-year growth. Some of the money the state collects is given to local governments in the form of grants, money that already is counted under the state’s TABOR cap.

TABOR exempts federal money that the state and local governments receive, but it doesn’t exempt money local governments get from the state.

TABOR only specifies that pass-through money isn’t counted under a local government’s cap when that money is collected by one government and goes to another, such as property taxes collected by a county that goes directly to a city, town or school district within its boundaries. Oftentimes, state grants to nonprofit groups require those groups to use a local government to act as a fiscal agent for pass-through money, but TABOR is silent on whether that money should be counted under the TABOR cap.

According to Colorado Counties Inc., a statewide lobbying and advocacy group, voters in 51 of the state’s 64 counties have approved blanket TABOR revenue limit waivers.

Voters in several other counties have approved TABOR exemptions for specific programs, such as revenues that fund their human services departments, or for specific projects, such as water resources or transportation projects. Still others have exempted specific revenue sources, such as non-tax money.

Overall, only one county — Weld — has never passed any form of TABOR exemption. Other counties have passed specific exemptions for specific projects, including one in Mesa County. In 2001, voters here approved exempting $3 million the county received in a railroad grant to build the 30 Road underpass.

If voters approve the ballot measure, Mesa County would be the first in Colorado to exempt only state grants.

http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/western_colorado/debate-on-county-tabor-ballot-issue/article_b20e6c8a-cb83-11e8-811e-10604b9f6eda.html

Sep 21

Most Coloradans aren’t getting a TABOR tax refund – for now – according to latest revenue forecast

Posted on by

Most Coloradans aren’t getting a TABOR tax refund – for now – according to latest revenue forecast

The state collected $37.5 million more than it’s allowed under TABOR

By  | astaver@denverpost.com | The Denver Post
PUBLISHED:  | UPDATED: 

Most Coloradans won’t get a TABOR tax refund next spring even though the state collected millions more dollars than it’s allowed to keep, according to the quarterly revenue forecast presented to lawmakers Thursday.

The Taxpayer Bill of Rights, or TABOR, limits how much money Colorado can collect from residents each year. Whatever comes in above the limit has to go back to the people. And for the fiscal year that ended in June, that’s a total of about $37 million.

However, a 2017 law requires the first refunds go to the state-administered senior homestead exemption and disabled veterans property tax exemption before they go to everyone else.

Exceeding the TABOR limit is a sign of the Colorado economy’s continued growth — even beyond the expectations of just a few months ago. In the last quarterly report, in June, state forecasters thought revenue would come in under the TABOR cap by $93 million.

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

Sep 13

Little-known flood-control district asks Denver metro voters for first tax hike

Posted on by

Little-known flood-control district asks Denver metro voters for first tax hike

Urban Drainage and Flood Control District proposes tax-restoration measure on Nov. 6 ballot

Andy Cross, The Denver Post

Greenway Foundation educator Kate Ronan, right, checks Annalena Tylicki’s net for bugs and other living creatures she collected in the South Platte River during a SPREE day camp at the restored Johnson-Habitat Park on June 9, 2015. The restoration, which included improvements to reduce flood risk, was paid for partly by the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District.

By JON MURRAY | jmurray@denverpost.com | The Denver Post

September 13, 2018 at 6:00 am

 

In an election season full of proposed tax hikes, one of the less familiar ballot measures facing voters across the Denver metro area this fall comes from a regional district that aids dozens of cities and counties in flood control.

The little-known Urban Drainage and Flood Control District hasn’t asked for an increase in its property tax since its formation nearly five decades ago. That means it has actually lost ground, with its tax rate falling by 44 percent since the early 1990s under revenue growth limits in the voter-passed Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.

On the Nov. 6 ballot, the district’s Ballot Issue 7G asks voters across its jurisdiction for permission to restore its full taxing authority, as many cities, counties and other special districts have done. The district covers 1,600 square miles across Denver and all or part of Boulder, Broomfield, Jefferson, Adams, Arapahoe and Douglas counties.

Next year, a partial increase is expected to generate $14.9 million. Further increases within the restored limit would be left up to the district’s board, made up of elected officials from around the region, the UDFCD says.

Once that happens, the full tax increase would raise an estimated $24 million a year, doubling the current funding level for projects and programs. The hit for the owner of a $400,000 home would be an extra $13 a year.

The flood-control district faces no organized opposition to its proposed tax increase, but it does face a big challenge: Most voters don’t know what the district is or what it does.

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

 

Sep 10

Hospital Provider lawsuit Sept 2018 development

Posted on by

The TABOR Foundation may have seen the final task for one of our lawsuits completed last Thursday, at least at the District Court level.  Our supporters will undoubtedly remember that we are suing the State government about how it implemented a new $600 million/year bed tax without first obtaining voter approval, as required by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights.  The money is funding the Hospital Provider program.  The Foundation had to enhance the scope of the lawsuit after SB17-267 passed.  That egregiously bad legislation moved the Hospital Provider program off the books, as well as cobbling together transportation plans, changing Medicaid reimbursement, sale & leaseback of state buildings, a net $400 million increase in the fiscal spending cap, increasing State debt by $2 Billion  and more (so much for the single-subject mandate).

 

What happened last week, and where does the lawsuit stand?

 

All written arguments and counter-arguments have been submitted (“the case is fully briefed”) for the Summary Judgment phase.  The Judge still owes a ruling on the Motion to Dismiss made by the State’s attorneys.

 

Although not a standard action in Colorado, we had a formal Hearing last week for both sides to present their arguments for the Summary Judgment.  Each side was given roughly an hour to present its arguments, and there were questions from Judge Buchanan.  Lee Steven, the lead attorney from Cause of Action Institute, was the legal representative from our side there.  The Foundation’s Chairman, Penn Pfiffner, was present to represent the Plaintiffs.

 

Because it is not common to have oral argument for Summary Judgment, no clear Order was issued well in advance and as of just 10 days (+/-) before at least one of the attorneys for the Hospital Association was not sure that the Hearing had indeed been scheduled.  That’s why formal notice came up so soon before the scheduled court date.

 

The important development is that both Plaintiffs and Defendants agreed that the ruling will be on the constitutionality and on interpretation of facts already in evidence.  Therefore, it is more likely than not that the Judge will reverse (“vacate”) his Order for a five-day trial which is now scheduled to start on October 29.  He promised to make this case a high priority.  Given the circumstances, Judge Buchanan likely will release his ruling on the Motion to Dismiss and issue a final ruling on the case without any further action on the part of either Plaintiffs or Defendants.  We can be reasonably certain that the losing side will appeal.

 

At this point, all of us – Defendants, Plaintiffs, attorneys – are set for a waiting game until we learn what Court wants to do about the scheduled trial, and then for the rulings.

Penn

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sep 05

Amendment 73 property tax changes detrimental to non-school district taxing authorities

Posted on by

Miller: Amendment 73 property tax changes detrimental to non-school district taxing authorities

 By 

There would be four additional income tax brackets on top of the current 4.63 percent single rate for individual filers, with a top rate of 8.25 percent, along with a 30 percent increase in the corporate income tax.

To stabilize school district property tax revenues, the writers of the amendment went into the property tax laws and did some embellishing there, too. They should have stopped with the income tax.

The Gallagher Amendment, passed in 1982, is the foundation of our property tax system. Gallagher specifies that 45 percent of all property taxes paid statewide are paid on residential properties and that 55 percent are paid on nonresidential properties. That 45:55 proportion is the “Gallagher ratio”.

Continue reading →

Aug 30

Nonprofit leaders back TABOR ballot issue

Posted on by

Nonprofit leaders back TABOR ballot issue

County would reap benefits, they say

  • GABRIELLE PORTER
Nonprofit leaders back TABOR ballot issue

Carol Skubic, secretary and treasure, left, and Sharon Raggio, CEO of Mind Springs Health and West Springs Hospital, right, answer questions about the county’s proposed TABOR exemption outside the West Springs Hospital on Tuesday.

Chancey Bush

A ballot measure that would allow Mesa County to accept state grants as a revenue stream outside strict governmental growth limits could open potential funding sources for local projects, ranging from a psychiatric hospital facility to a new space for a nonprofit that services developmentally disabled adults, advocates said at a Tuesday press conference.

Leaders of Mind Springs Health, the Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce and other local organizations called the event Tuesday morning, the day after the Mesa County Commission voted to place Issue 1A on the November ballot.

The ballot issue involves Mesa County’s relationship with the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, which limits governmental income, including grants, unless an exception is made. Mesa County voters in November will decide whether the county can permanently make that exception for state grants, which are often applied for by nonprofits using the county government as a pass-through agency.

The still-under-construction Mind Springs Health psychiatric hospital project became a case study on the legal tangle last year when the county decided not to apply for a $5 million grant that could have made a major dent in the group’s fundraising goals in anticipation of going over TABOR limits.

“Had we been able to partner with the county as well as other communities in being able to secure some TABOR funds, that would have really put us over the top (of fundraising efforts),” said Mind Springs President and CEO Sharon Raggio at the event outside the facility.

HopeWest President and CEO Christy Whitney said she hopes voters will agree.

“There’s a lot of state money available to make some amazing things happen in Mesa County, but we have just fundamentally not been able to access it because of the really outdated view of the TABOR law,” Whitney said.

Diane Schwenke, president and CEO of the Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce, said both her organization and the Grand Junction Economic Partnership are behind the measure, in part because they believe that local nonprofits provide important services that serve the workforce, that the ballot measure is in “the spirit”of TABOR, and that state grants are partially funded by severance taxes that local businesses pay.

“It’s only right that those dollars can come back and help the nonprofits that are doing the good work,” Schwenke said.

http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/western_colorado/nonprofit-leaders-back-tabor-ballot-issue/article_ca9261ce-ab50-11e8-9dbe-10604b9f7e7c.html

Aug 30

Arvada, Lakewood each put spending measures on November ballot that avoid tax increases

Posted on by

Arvada, Lakewood each put spending measures on November ballot that avoid tax increases

Measures would fund transportation improvements, open space purchases

By JOHN AGUILAR | jaguilar@denverpost.com | The Denver Post

PUBLISHED: August 28, 2018 at 6:11 pm |

Suburban voters west of Denver will weigh in on more than $100 million in municipal spending proposals on this fall’s ballot, with Arvada residents set to vote on two major road projects and residents in Lakewood ready to decide whether the city can hang on to extra revenues to fix roads, buy open space property and purchase law enforcement equipment.

Each ballot measure was sent to the Nov. 6 ballot Monday night by a vote of the city council in its community. Neither would raise taxes.

Lakewood’s measure asks voters if the city can retain and spend $12.5 million in revenues it collected in 2017 that exceed what the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, or TABOR, permits governments in Colorado to keep. The measure also asks if the city can do the same with any excess money it collects through fiscal year 2025. Continue reading →

Aug 30

Candidates traveled different paths to Treasurer’s office race

Posted on by

Candidates traveled different paths to Treasurer’s office race

 By 

As a member of the Joint Budget Committee for the past four years, retired math teacher and term-limited State Representative Dave Young has had a front row seat to how every department of the state functions.

As a self-made entrepreneur and CEO of an investment firm, Brian Watson has spent most of his career managing other people’s money.

Despite two very different paths to the Colorado Treasurer’s office, both men believe they have the skills necessary to do the job.

As different as their experience is, what they’ll do when they get there is equally different, in everything from the role the Treasurer should play on the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) board, state policy formation, and the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR).

“The Treasurer sits on several boards, the big one being the PERA board,” said Young, the Democrat nominee. “Having sat on the joint budget committee, I see the financial crisis the state is in. We a have a deep hole in every aspect of our budget, and it’s because we have the most restrictive tax and expenditure provision in our constitution of any state in the union. The collision of TABOR and Gallagher — they are working against us.”

The Gallagher Amendment is a provision in the Colorado Constitution passed by voters in 1982 that made major changes to property tax assessments in Colorado, including lowering the tax burden immediately on certain types of property and exempting certain property (such as household furnishings, non-business personal items, business inventory, livestock, and farm or ranch equipment, to name a few). Most importantly, perhaps, is Gallagher limits how fast the assessed value can grow on residences. Because residential property value has grown much faster than commercial property, residential assessment rates have dropped from 21 percent in 1982 to 7.20 percent today.  Over the same time period, however, inflation adjusted property tax revenues have risen from $1.35 billion in 1982 to nearly $9 billion in 2017.

TABOR is another amendment to the Colorado Constitution. It was passed by voters in 1992. It limits the growth of government to the annual inflation rate and population change. It requires government entities to take all new debt and tax increases to voters.

“I will use my business experience to help the legislature be a positive force in addressing the budget issues the state has,” said the Republican nominee Watson about working under Gallagher/TABOR restrictions. “I will meet with them as well and work with them.  I think the people of Colorado have made clear their priorities.”

Continue reading →

Aug 30

Poudre Valley Fire Protection District, Community Meetings Aug. 30/Sept. 4

Posted on by

Poudre Valley Fire Protection District, Community Meetings Aug. 30/Sept. 4

August 29, 2018 Theresa Rose News 0
The PVFPD stands to lose at least $860,000 per year, on an ongoing basis starting in 2020.
Poudre Fire Authority Logo

Madeline Noblett, Public Affairs and Communication Manager

Residents and owners of property within the Poudre Valley Fire Protection District are invited to two upcoming public meetings at which officials will provide information about a possible ballot question voters may be asked to consider for November’s mid-term election.

The meetings are 6:30 to 7:30 p.m. and open to the public. The first meeting is Aug. 30 in Laporte at Station 7, 2817 N. Overland Trail. The second meeting is Sept. 4 in Timnath at Station 8, 4800 Signal Tree Drive, in the station’s community room. There is no need to RSVP.

The Poudre Valley Fire Protection District Board is considering a ballot question that would ask district residents and property owners to annually adjust the District-assessed mill levy – a term referring to the property tax rate – so the district may maintain its current level of funding. City of Fort Collins residents would not vote on the possible question.

The Poudre Valley Fire Protection District, or PVFPD, encompasses the Town of Timnath, the communities of Laporte and Bellvue, Horsetooth Reservoir, Redstone Canyon, and areas of unincorporated Larimer and Weld counties. Poudre Fire Authority was established in 1981 through an Intergovernmental Agreement between the PVFPD and the City of Fort Collins. Simply put, PFA’s firefighters provide services to people within Fort Collins and the PVFPD.

Because of a collision between the Gallagher Amendment and the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, or TABOR, the PVFPD stands to lose at least $860,000 per year, on an ongoing basis starting in 2020. At this time, the PVFPD can’t specify how this would impact the District; that’s ultimately up to the PVFPD Board to decide. However, board members would likely have to consider a range of options that could include closing a fire station or eliminating positions. To learn more about the intersection of TABOR and Gallagher, watch this video from the nonprofit non-partisan Colorado Fiscal Institute: http://youtu.be/BXbrsdQQrZ8

Approved in 1992, TABOR demands that Colorado voters approve all tax increases. The Gallagher Amendment stipulates that residential property taxes are capped at 45 percent of the state’s total property tax revenue, while non-residential property taxes comprise the other 55 percent. Non-residential property is taxed at 29 percent of its value. Residential property is currently taxed at 7.2 percent, but the residential rate can fluctuate to maintain the 45-55 split. It may go down to 6.11 percent, which could lead to the loss in revenue for the PVFPD.

http://northfortynews.com/poudre-valley-fire-protection-district-community-meetings-aug-30-sept-4/