A proposal for the three-day special session that starts on Aug. 26 would ask voters for a constitutional change to block any further statewide ballot measures that would limit property tax revenue.
The bill, in its draft form, isn't going over well in some circles, with several sources warning that it could blow up the deal crafted among lawmakers, Gov. Jared Polis, and proponents of two ballot measures that would cut property taxes further than what lawmakers approved earlier this year.
The concurrent resolution is being shopped around by Rep. Mike Weissman, D-Aurora, who is running to succeed Democratic Sen. Rhonda Fields in November. Sen. Chris Hansen, D-Denver, would be its prime sponsor in the Senate.
The idea isn't new.
Former state Rep. and Secretary of State Bernie Buescher and Ann Terry from the Special District Association floated an idea for a constitutional ballot measure in 2022. Proposition 55 said any voter initiative that affects the property taxes of a local government — whether a city, county, school, or special district — could be decided only in a local election by those entitled to vote in that election.
The measure never reached the petition phase, and proponents eventually withdrew it.
Weissman told Colorado Politics that the premise is based on local control of local government taxation.
When the state gets involved in property taxes, he said, it isn't dealing with state money, as property taxes are local dollars.
So, the argument goes, why should Douglas County voters have any say on property taxes charged in the San Luis Valley, for example?
An Aug. 18 draft obtained by Colorado Politics says the ballot measure arising from the resolution would be placed on the November 2024 ballot.
The draft says that, as of Jan. 1, 2025, initiative powers reserved for the people of Colorado do not include the power to propose any statewide initiative, whether a constitutional amendment or statutory, that would impose a property tax limit.
The proposal, in effect, limits people's ability to change property tax laws statewide.
The concurrent resolution also states that citizens in cities, towns, and municipalities would have the power to propose legislation limiting local government property, stax revenue.
The draft resolution only affects initiatives generated outside of the state Capitol, meaning the General Assembly would still have the authority to limit property taxes through its existing referral process.
As a constitutional question, the concurrent resolution would need a two-thirds vote of approval in both chambers. That's 44 votes in the House, which is controlled 46-19 by Democrats. It's in the Senate that the resolution could run into its biggest hurdle.
Democrats hold 23 seats, but one Republican would need to vote for it to reach the magic number of 24.
Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen of Monument said his caucus does not take positions but that he would vigorously oppose the proposed resolution and encourages his colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do the same.
State Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, R-Brighton, said she believes the resolution infringes on constitutional rights, and allowing citizens to do it locally would result in different assessment rates across the state. People are apprehensive and upset about property taxes, she said, adding her mortgage payment went up $800 a month at her home due to increased values and property taxes.
"That's what people are focused on," she said.
One of the big questions is how it fits — or doesn't — into the deal finessed by lawmakers, the governor and backers of Propositions 50 and 108 that led to the special session.
It's not going over well with those who support the two propositions.
Spokesperson Karen Crummy, who represents the issue committee Alliance for Citizens' Tax Cut and on behalf of Colorado Concern, said Tuesday, "Supporters of 108 and 50 are at the negotiating table in good faith and believe a meaningful agreement is at hand. The governor and majority of legislators in both parties are sincerely working to provide real relief to Coloradans, but some politicians in the state Capitol want to keep every cent of revenue generated by the highest property tax increase of all time, even though it is crushing families and small businesses."
"If those few succeed in derailing the negotiations, Colorado voters will pass the ballot measures," she added.
As for the Weissman-Hansen measure, Crummy said, “A constitutional amendment that prohibits a statewide tax cut but allows the legislature to increase property taxes by reclassifying property types is so disingenuous that it could only have come from the same politicians who created this property tax mess in the first place.”
"It's a deal-breaker," Kirkmeyer told Colorado Politics.
Polis spokesperson Shelby Wieman said the governor is committed to the agreed-upon-compromise.
“Governor Polis is committed to the agreed upon framework to end the property tax wars, which would save Coloradans money, provide certainty, and remove the risky ballot measures, 108 and 50, that would threaten critical funding for Colorado schools and other services. He looks forward to signing legislation that will cut property taxes once the ballot initiatives are pulled and protect funding for our schools and local government,” Wieman said.
Advance Colorado and Colorado Concern, the backers of the two propositions, pledged to withdraw them as part of the deal. The deadline for that withdrawal is Sept. 6, just over a week after the end of the special session. Ballots must be certified by the following Monday, Sept. 9.
Proposition 108 seeks to reduce assessment rates to 5.7% for residential and 24% for commercial properties. Proposition 50, a constitutional amendment, would cap tax revenue growth to 4% and require voter approval for local government to retain dollars above the limit.
The two groups have said the compromise:
• Cuts the effective residential property tax rate to 6.3% or 6.4%, depending on assessment growth
• Reduces the commercial property tax rate to 25%
• Caps growth to 5.25% for local governments and 6% or inflation growth, whichever is greater, for school districts
• Ensures a "clear and non-biased ballot language" in the required vote of the people to opt out of the local cap
According to the two groups, combined with legislation already enacted earlier this year, the deal yields nearly $1.6 billion in annual tax savings.
"If the agreed-upon bill is signed into law, the groups will withdraw their two-initiative package from the November ballot," the two groups said in a news release on Aug. 15. "Because the agreement offers a permanent solution to Colorado’s property tax crisis, Advance Colorado and Colorado Concern will not bring similar ballot measures in the future — provided that the legislative, executive or judicial branches do not go back on the provisions of the agreement in the years ahead."
The Denver Gazette's Deborah Grigsby contributed to this report.
Local Colorado State
Most Popular
Comments / 0