Say NO to Amendments 60 and 61 and Prop 101

Remember 2008? Just when you thought ballot issues couldn't get any worse...along come Amendments 60 and 61 and Prop 101. CEA opposes all three.

These ballot issues sound complicated and they involve a lot of money, but we'll put them to you plainly. They are already on the 2010 General Election ballot because their proponents secured sufficient signatures. They are job killers, school funding killers, economy-recovery killers.

PROPOSITION 101: PUBLIC SERVICE CUTS would amend state law. It intends to drastically reduce a wide range of state and local taxes and fees in Colorado. The measure repeals Referendum C, passed by voters in 2005, and imposes new, much lower limits on state and local spending by reinstating the TABOR ratchet effect that pushes state spending down after recessions. Prop 101 cuts State General Fund revenues by 20 percent -- approximately $1.2 billion in current dollars when fully implemented over 10 or more years -- by cutting the state income tax rate to 3.5 percent from 4.63 percent. It cuts future transportation funding by more than 33 percent ($465 million in current dollars). The measure eliminates funding for rural, disabled, and low-income telecommunications programs. It cuts city and county revenues by more than $600 million a year, including $500 million in specific ownership taxes by cutting them to $2 per new vehicle and $1 per used vehicle, plus $122 million in sales tax revenue on rental vehicles and exemptions of vehicle values.

AMENDMENT 60: LOCAL BUDGET CONSTRAINTS would amend the State Constitution. Its intent is to make huge changes to Colorado's property tax laws, changes that would significantly impact funding for K-12 education and local services. Amendment 60 cuts local support for schools in half over four years, and requires the state to make up the difference from the General Fund, which Proposition 101 will have cut by 20 percent. By requiring the state to backfill the lost local revenue, the measure would shift even more of the obligation of K-12 funding to the State Legislature, likely severely impacting all the other programs funding by the state.

The amendment sunsets all local "De-Brucing" elections affecting property taxes, meaning that a city or county whose voters have already voted to approve their government collecting and spending specific revenues could no longer keep and spend these revenues on public services. There have been hundreds of such elections since voters approved TABOR in 1992, and Amendment 60 would simply repeal all of them. Counties and school districts would have to reset their revenue limits based on 1992 levels. The Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute has estimated that the fiscal impact of re-imposing the original TABOR limits to be about $550 million.

The measure would limit future revenue retention votes under TABOR to four years and future tax increase votes to 10 years. The amendment also appears to reverse the 2007 state mill levy freeze that helps K-12 funding by keeping property tax rates from falling further in school districts where citizens have voted to retain the revnues. It would essentially reimpose on districts a state mandate that they automatically lower mill levy rates when they receive revenue above TABOR limits.

AMENDMENT 61: PUBLIC FINANCING BAN eliminates any kind of debt financing by the state, including Certificates of Participation for roads and buildings and short-term financing to manage cash flow, making sweeping changes in how state and local governments can use and issue debt. It bans the use of any debt by the State of Colorado (general obligation bonds, certificates of participation, revenue bonds, other notes), and Colorado would be the only state without the authority to issue debt. The proponents say lawmakers could not even borrow cash funds for the General Fund for cash flow problems or to balance the budget. It limits debt financing by local governments, requires all local debt to be approved by voters, and forces local governments to cut tax rates, as the debts are repaid, equal to the average, annual debt payments.

CEA officially opposes all three ballot issues. Many lawmakers at the state and local levels, many business people, and many community leaders are outspoken in their opposition to the three measures. Tom Clark, Executive Vice-president of the Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation (Denver Chamber of Commerce), said that if voters approve them, "We will be assured of climate change: the business climate. But it won't be warming." Governor Ritter said, "The cynical game the proponents are playing with our future would quite literally destroy the safety net and wipe out any hope of creating a better future for our children." And Sen. Josh Penry, minority leader in the State Senate Minority Leader (R-Fruita), added, "Those of us who support TABOR want to make clear that these initiatives are just bad public policy."

CEA is a member of Coloradans for Responsible Reform, the campaign to defeat 60, 61, and 101. Learn more from the campaign and find out how you can help defeat these measures -- and who else in Colorado is on our side in encouraging voters to say NO to 60, 61, and 101.