Amendment 60 – Property Taxes

Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101 are lumped together in many fiscal analyses and by the pro and con campaigns.

Amendment 60 would cut in half over ten years local property tax rates currently going toward public schools’ operating funds and require the state to replace the lost revenue. As of January 1, it would repeal any previously voter-approved de-Brucing provisions applied to property taxes. It would require all future voter-approved property tax increases above the constitutional limit to expire within 4 years while those within the constitutional limit would expire within 10 years. It would require publicly owned enterprises such as colleges and the Denver International Airport to pay property taxes; the increased revenue from these new property taxes must be offset by a reduction in local property tax rates for others, but as the enterprises would need money to pay those new property taxes, they would likely pass on the costs to students, airplane travelers, etc. In addition, the state would be required to annually audit local governments for compliance at an estimated cost of $800,000 per year.

Some other provisions of Amendment 60 have less of a fiscal impact, but are still worth considering. Property tax elections could only be held in November and must be considered separately from bond issues. Citizens would be permitted to petition for lower property taxes at the county, school district and special district levels as well as at the city level. Finally, electors would be allowed to vote on all property tax issues wherever they own property, not just at their primary place of residence.

Recommendation: NO

Amendment 60 would cut property taxes except for enterprises, but at what cost? Public schools are currently facing threats of a mid-year rescission of previously promised state funds. There aren’t more state funds to make up the difference if local property taxes are cut, especially if Proposition 101 passes.

TABOR has put state and local governments in financial handcuffs, but at least it allowed for voter-approved de-Brucing provisions. Douglas Bruce is no doubt unhappy with the prolific use of this loophole. He supports Amendment 60 and 61 and Proposition 101, and many suspect he is the mysterious brainchild behind them.

Douglas Bruce tried in 1988 and 1990 to get voters to approve TABOR before finally succeeding in 1992. Let’s hand Mr. Bruce such a resounding defeat on Amendment 60 that he sees no hope of succeeding with such an amendment in the future.


Website for the Yes side (CO Tax Reforms)
http://limitpropertytax.com/

Website for the No side (Coloradans for Responsible Reform)
http://www.donthurtcolorado.com/


Approved Ballot Language

Amendment 60 (CONSTITUTIONAL)

Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning government charges on property, and, in connection therewith, allowing petitions in all districts for elections to lower property taxes; specifying requirements for property tax elections; requiring enterprises and authorities to pay property taxes but offsetting the revenues with lower tax rates; prohibiting enterprises and unelected boards from levying fees or taxes on property; setting expiration dates for certain tax rate and revenue increases; requiring school districts to reduce property tax rates and replacing the revenue with state aid; and eliminating property taxes that exceed the dollar amount included in an approved ballot question, that exceed state property tax laws, policies, and limits existing in 1992 that have been violated, changed, or weakened without state voter approval, or that were not approved by voters without certain ballot language?

Yes _____ No _____


Full text of Amendment 60
CO Constitution
addition to Article X, Section 20 (Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights)
Property Taxes
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/filings/09-10/Original12-0910.pdf