Prop 109 and Prop 110 approach funding transportation needs in very different ways.
Prop 109 would direct the state to sell bonds in order to borrow up to $3.5 billion. In 2017 and 2018, Colorado committed $2.5B for transportation projects, but Prop 109 would replace these financial commitments, resulting in only $1B in additional transportation funds but much more debt.
Colorado would be required to repay the $3.5B in debt within 20 years without raising taxes or fees. The state would have to identify a source of funds from which to repay the debt.
Prop 109 identifies 66 highway projects to fund with a total estimated cost of $5.6B – in other words, $2.1B more than the $3.5B debt under Prop 109. The Dept of Transportation and the Transportation Commission would have to prioritize transportation needs.
Recommendation: NO/AGAINST
Prop 109 would put “Damn” in state statute, but that is not the reason to vote against it. Prop 109 is financially reckless, tasking the state to take on debt but not creating a funding source to repay the debt. Even TABOR author Douglas Bruce opposes the measure, saying that the CO constitution prohibits state debt.
If Prop 109 passes, other state needs will go unfunded or be drastically worse funded in order to pay for highway projects, or the state legislature will need to alter Prop 109 to make it viable.
Prop 109 and Prop 110 would fund some different projects. If both measures pass, they would have to duke it out over the projects list. Another bone of contention – the current financial commitments that Prop 109 would eliminate are maintained under Prop 110.
Website for the Yes Side – Fix Our Damn Roads
http://fixourdamnroads.com/
Website for the No Side – Let’s Go Colorado
https://www.letsgocolorado.com/
Approved Ballot Language
Proposition 109 (STATUTORY)
SHALL STATE DEBT BE INCREASED $3,500,000,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF $5,200,000,000, WITHOUT RAISING TAXES OR FEES, BY A CHANGE TO THE COLORADO REVISED STATUTES REQUIRING THE ISSUANCE OF TRANSPORTATION REVENUE ANTICIPATION NOTES, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, NOTE PROCEEDS SHALL BE RETAINED AS A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE AND USED EXCLUSIVELY TO FUND SPECIFIED ROAD AND BRIDGE EXPANSION, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND REPAIR PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE?
YES/FOR _______
NO/AGAINST _________
Prop 109 initiative language filed with the Secretary of State
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2017-2018/167Final.pdf
Prop 109 would direct the state to sell bonds in order to borrow up to $3.5 billion. In 2017 and 2018, Colorado committed $2.5B for transportation projects, but Prop 109 would replace these financial commitments, resulting in only $1B in additional transportation funds but much more debt.
Colorado would be required to repay the $3.5B in debt within 20 years without raising taxes or fees. The state would have to identify a source of funds from which to repay the debt.
Prop 109 identifies 66 highway projects to fund with a total estimated cost of $5.6B – in other words, $2.1B more than the $3.5B debt under Prop 109. The Dept of Transportation and the Transportation Commission would have to prioritize transportation needs.
Recommendation: NO/AGAINST
Prop 109 would put “Damn” in state statute, but that is not the reason to vote against it. Prop 109 is financially reckless, tasking the state to take on debt but not creating a funding source to repay the debt. Even TABOR author Douglas Bruce opposes the measure, saying that the CO constitution prohibits state debt.
If Prop 109 passes, other state needs will go unfunded or be drastically worse funded in order to pay for highway projects, or the state legislature will need to alter Prop 109 to make it viable.
Prop 109 and Prop 110 would fund some different projects. If both measures pass, they would have to duke it out over the projects list. Another bone of contention – the current financial commitments that Prop 109 would eliminate are maintained under Prop 110.
Website for the Yes Side – Fix Our Damn Roads
http://fixourdamnroads.com/
Website for the No Side – Let’s Go Colorado
https://www.letsgocolorado.com/
Approved Ballot Language
Proposition 109 (STATUTORY)
SHALL STATE DEBT BE INCREASED $3,500,000,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF $5,200,000,000, WITHOUT RAISING TAXES OR FEES, BY A CHANGE TO THE COLORADO REVISED STATUTES REQUIRING THE ISSUANCE OF TRANSPORTATION REVENUE ANTICIPATION NOTES, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, NOTE PROCEEDS SHALL BE RETAINED AS A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE AND USED EXCLUSIVELY TO FUND SPECIFIED ROAD AND BRIDGE EXPANSION, CONSTRUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND REPAIR PROJECTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE?
YES/FOR _______
NO/AGAINST _________
Prop 109 initiative language filed with the Secretary of State
http://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2017-2018/167Final.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your comments. Please only make comments that add to a fruitful discussion.