Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page. News Release MEDIA CONTACT: 303-860-6903 Julia Sunny
Education tax measure makes the ballot DENVER, Aug. 9, 2018 — Colorado Secretary of State Wayne Williams announced today that a proposed constitutional amendment that boosts income taxes to raise money for education made the ballot.
Initiative 93 is the first citizen-initiated ballot measure to make the Nov. 6 general election ballot. It involves a complex formula for raising income taxes among the state’s top earners to raise money for education. Colorado law requires that ballot-measure backers turn in 98,492 valid voter signatures — 5 percent of the total of votes cast for all candidates in the last Secretary of State general election, which was in 2014. In addition, the voter-approved Amendment 71 in 2016 changed the requirements for proposed constitutional amendments. The education measure must pass with a 55-percent majority rather than a simple majority in November, and supporters were required to collect 2 percent of their signatures in each of the state’s 35 Senate district. The attachment shows the breakdown in each Senate district. Six other initiatives are still under review. The Secretary of State’s office received five initiative petitions on Monday and one on Aug. 3. The results of the review must be announced by Sept. 5. To examine the measures, go to the Initiative Filings, Agendas & Results link on the Secretary of State web page and the first set of measures marked “signature line review.” When you click on each measure, there will be a link marked “hearing result.” Click on that link and the ballot titles will say whether it is a proposed change to the Colorado Constitution or state statute. ###
SUBSCRIBER SERVICES:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
This ballot issue would amend sub-section (8) of TABOR. Please tell me that I am not the only person who has noticed this yet. The anti-consolidation clause of (3)(a) created a prohibition on amending the constitution and requesting a tax increase in the same ballot issue. That prohibition was watered down in the Bickel case. That opinion may leave room to hold that (8) can be amended in the same ballot issue that actually creates separate income tax rates. However, the other two constitutional amendments ( Gallagher and budget restrictions) are clearly separate and distinct from the purpose of a tax increase and should be stricken from this ballot issue.
I hope I am not the only person attention here. No proposed amendment to Article X section 20 should evade scrutiny.