As the National Western Stock Show drew to a close today, many of Colorado’s ranchers and farmers in attendance were unaware that one of the guests of honor (Governor Bill Ritter), along with many in the Colorado legislature, was taking pot shots at their livelihood - aided and abetted by what amounted to a declaration of “open season” by the Colorado Supreme Court.

Although a coalition of business groups opposed to being targeted for elimination of tax credits and exemptions have already expressed concern about the impact of increasing tax burdens on struggling businesses, thus far little organized opposition appears to have coalesced against two of the thirteen (13!) tax exemptions targeted for elimination that will directly impact Colorado farmers and ranchers:

• Suspending for three years a sales tax exemption for pesticides. ($2.9M)
• Suspending for three years a sales-tax exemption for animal vaccines, hormones, animal drugs, bull semen and other compounds used in agriculture. ($1.5M)

Prior to last year’s notorious “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court, however, these tax credits and exemptions could not have been targeted for elimination in the first place - since, under the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR), a “tax policy change directly causing a net tax revenue gain to any district” (whether by directly increasing taxes, or by eliminating an existing tax exemption) must first be approved by a vote of the people.

It’s no bull - you CAN exercise YOUR right to vote “NO” on the four ‘unjust justices’ of the Mullarkey Majority (Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your homes and business from seizure by rapacious governments, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, instead of rule by an oligarchy of activist, agenda-driven “justices.”  Help to Support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!), your contributions, and your “NO” vote on retaining these unjust justices this November!

Clear The Bench Colorado welcomes you to the Halloween Special edition of the Friday Funnies - and it’s a very special edition, indeed, as Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey shows her true colors in response to the grassroots movement to restore accountability to the Colorado judiciary.

Chief Justice Mullarkey’s hostility to Article X, Section 20 of the Colorado Constitution (TABOR) is no secret, as is her disdain for the constitutional rights (under TABOR and other constitutional articles) of Colorado citizens - your right to vote on tax increases and new taxes, your right to not be “tricked” by the “treat” of taxes masquerading as “fees“, your right for your home or business to be safe from unjust seizure, and your right to have policy decisions made by your elected - and accountable - representatives, not unelected, activist judges.

Chief Justice Mullarkey - and her cronies and henchmen of the radical left (such as the radical left-wing group “Democratic Underground” rising up to rally around “our folks in the judiciary“) - are beginning to take note of the growing, grassroots movement to hold our justices accountable to the law - the very Colorado Constitution they are sworn to uphold - and they’re beginning to lash out.

Why, just the other day I received this disturbing, scary message (I’m not sure who it’s from, but…)

My little dog, too? I mean, it’s bad enough that the Mullarkey Majority is aiding and abetting the Colorado Legislature in playing “Grinch” by imposing new “fees” on everything in sight and cutting back on canine car rides with the Colorado Car Tax - but that’s just plain mean.  We’ve got to draw the line somewhere - don’t let unjust justices make Colorado puppies sad, let’s have a Happy Halloween.

There are few things more frightening than what the Mullarkey Majority has done to the Colorado Constitution - and to your constitutional rights. Exercise your rights (while you still have them) - hold the unjust justices of the Mullarkey Majority accountable to the Colorado Constitution and the rule of law. Exercise YOUR right to vote “NO” on retaining the four unjust justices of the Mullarkey Majority (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your rights: your right to have policy decided by elected, accountable legislators (not unelected judges); your right to vote on tax increases; your right to defend your homes and business from seizure by rapacious governments; and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, not rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.”  Support Clear The Bench Colorado with your voice (Sound Off!), your contributions, and “NO” vote on retaining these unjust justices in 2010!

An alert reader (hat tip to Live Free Colorado) brought the Colorado Springs Gazette editorial criticizing the tax and “fee” ‘bait and switch’ tactics employed by the current administration - thanks to the Mullarkey Majority’s unconstitutional ruling last November - to my attention this morning.

The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights clearly says that voters have to approve any new tax in Colorado. Many jurisdictions, including the state and Colorado Springs, have danced around this requirement by instituting fees to cover costs that should rightly be funded with taxes. This allows those governments to get what they want - and in all fairness sometimes what they need to serve the public - without the bother of asking permission. The Colorado Supreme Court has been complicit in allowing this, ruling many times that these fees aren’t really stealth taxes. That fact has unfortunately emboldened new abuses of fees, and the latest example is Gov. Bill Ritter’s August raid of the state’s fee-funded tire cleanup fund to help balance the budget.

The Gazette editorial is yet another example of what seems to be a groundswell of opinion critical of the Mullarkey Majority’s outrageous rulings - brought to the forefront by last week’s ruling usurping the power of the legislature to make policy on school funding that kicked off a virtual storm of commentary by some of the most prominent observers of political events in Colorado. (Mike Rosen’s Denver Post column Thursday, Mark Hillman’s excellent article Wednesday, Vince Carroll’s superb commentary Sunday, and - not least -  Independence Institute’s expert analyst on Education Policy (and frequent online commentator)  Ben DeGrow (who’s big - but “not as big as Rasmussen”) Taking on the Colorado Supreme Court last Sunday, too).

The Gazette editorial correctly calls Governor Ritter to account for resorting to ”the ol’ bait and switch” - moving funds collected by fees for a specific purpose (in this case, the tire waste fund) - into the general fund in order to “balance the budget”:

Any time a fee is imposed by government, the legislation setting up the fee provides for how the money is to be spent. A fee should address a specific issue to be addressed with that revenue. The tire waste fund comes from a $1.50 fee the state charges when you buy a new tire and leave the old one at the dealer. It is supposed to be used to subsidize tire recycling efforts in the state. The subsidy is needed because, according to a recent Denver Post report, the demand for recycled tires isn’t high enough to make recycling profitable, and Colorado has the largest stockpile of old tires in the nation. Ritter’s actions exacerbate the problem. Worse, though, his raid on the waste tire fund created what is essentially a new tax on tires.

The Colorado high court disagrees, saying, in essence, that as long as revenue from a fee goes into the fund for which it was intended, it’s still a fee, regardless of what it’s spent on. Additionally, the court says that because the revenue is already in the state coffers, it’s not new revenue if it is moved to the General Fund. Using the court’s rationale, the Legislature could charge a fee to, say, offset damage to state roads from large pickup trucks and SUVs. It could then raid that fund to pay for capital improvements or maintenance to public school buildings.

Any way you slice it, that’s underhanded and a breach of the public trust.

 The Mullarkey Majority’s semantic shenanigans - playing fast and loose with the letter of the law, the very Constitution they are sworn to support and uphold - have aided and abetted numerous underhanded, unconstitutional legislative sleights of hand and breaches of the public trust.

DON’T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT!  Exercise your rights (while you still have them) - hold the unjust justices of the Mullarkey Majority accountable to the Colorado Constitution and the rule of law.  Exercise YOUR right to vote “NO” on retaining the four unjust justices of the Mullarkey Majority (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your rights: your right to have policy decided by elected, accountable legislators (not unelected judges); your right to vote on tax increases; your right to defend your homes and business from seizure by rapacious governments; and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, not rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.”  Support Clear The Bench Colorado with your voice (Sound Off!), your contributions, and “NO” vote on retaining these unjust justices in 2010!

Welcome to another edition of the Clear The Bench Colorado Friday Funnies - this week, a change of pace from the August “Dog Days of Summer” series (featuring cute & cuddly Colorado canine spokespup Nola) with a view from inside the courtroom.

Although the casual viewer may dismiss this clip as a mere farcical parody of real courtroom procedure, the judges in this sketch display about the same level of legal logic and respect for the rule of law as our own Colorado Supreme Court’s “Mullarkey Majority” in many of their recent decisions.

How else to explain the clear violation of the Colorado Constitution’s explicitly worded prohibition of tax increases without a vote of the people in the notorious “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” case just last March, justified with ridiculous re-wording, tortured terminology and semantic shenanigans?

And just as “nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition“, nobody expected - or even much noticed, at the time - the Mullarkey Court’s “November Surprise” ruling that allowed new taxes to be re-designated as “fees” in order to bypass TABOR (and that pesky requirement to allow people to have a say in tax increases).  Like the late arrival of the inquisitors in this sketch, it’s taken some time for the implications of that case to “make the scene” - but the quadrupling of the “marriage fee”, substantial increase in “vehicle registration fees” along with punitive (and unconstitutional) “late fees” due to the “FASTER” Colorado Car Tax, and of course Governor Ritter’s recent proposal to impose a new Gun Tax as part of his plan to “balance the budget” - are certainly torturing Colorado wallets.

Colorado, it’s time to get up out of the “comfy chair“ and exercise YOUR right to vote “NO” on retaining the four unjust justices of the Mullarkey Majority (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) who need YOUR approval to continue taking away your constitutional rights: your right to vote on tax increases, your right to defend your homes and business from seizure by rapacious governments, and your right to enjoy the benefits of the rule of law, not rule by activist, agenda-driven “justices.”  Support Clear The Bench Colorado with your comments (Sound Off!), your contributions, and your “NO” vote on retaining these unjust justices in 2010!

Welcome to another belated edition of the Friday Funnies (hey, our graphics guy is on vacation - and artistic talent is NOT tied to the Y chromosome in my family) for the latest in our continuing cavalcade of canine & kitty clips…

The last week has brought even more additions to the litany of backdoor taxes (er, “fees”) being foisted on Colorado citizens.  Apparently unconcerned with widespread opposition to the Colorado Car Tax, Governor Ritter picked a showdown with Colorado gun owners by proposing more new taxes (sorry, “fees“) on gun sales and concealed-carry permits to “balance the budget.”  Hmmm, and I thought that “fees” were supposed to be related to the cost of providing a particular government service?  Oh, right - that quaint notion was swept aside (along with other constitutional protections against tax increases) by our activist Colorado Supreme Court.

Sooner or later, though, our governor and legislature will run out of people they can target for tax hikes - can going after kittens and puppies be far behind?

Don’t let the Mullarkey Majority unleash even more taxes (er, “fees”) by our rabidly spendthrift governor and legislature - support Clear The Bench Colorado and vote “NO” on these unjust justices before they can make even more Colorado puppies and kittens sad.

Well, that didn’t take long.

In Monday’s article predicting that new “fees“, not new taxes, would be the preferred approach of the Governor and the Colorado Legislature to address our state’s “fiscal crisis” (in reality more of a spending issue, not a revenue shortfall), I’d thought (paraphrasing Will Rogers) that my wallet was safe until the Legislature was back in session.  Although that’s still technically true (since the latest proposed “fee” increases still require legislative approval before going into effect), less than a day passed between my prediction and the first new “fee” proposal by Governor Ritter.

Ritter’s Colorado Gun Tax is the latest scheme to target a maligned minority group (gun-owners) to bear the burden of additional charges (pardon, “fees“) in order to exercise a constitutional right.  Under Ritter’s proposed budget plan, the state would levy “a fee increase for background checks on gun sales” as well as increasing the fee for Concealed-Carry Weapons (CCW) permits.

This follows on the heels of the 2009 Legislative Session’s Tobacco Tax increase, HB1342  (technically, an elimination of the long-standing Colorado state tax exemption for tobacco products).

Does anyone think that our governor and legislators will stop with targeting gun-owners and smokers?  Not by a long shot (pardon the pun); they’re just getting warmed up:

He [Governor Ritter] talked vaguely about “options other than budget reductions” for next year’s budget. Some Democratic leaders want to eliminate some of the nearly $2 billion in tax credits, incentives and exemptions in state law.

The “nearly $2 billion in tax credits, incentives, and exemptions in state law”- which includes exemptions on taxing groceries, internet access, gasoline, fuel for residential heat, etc.  (view the complete list) - was previously shielded from legislative raids on your wallet by TABOR, until the Mullarkey Court declared “open season” on these credits as part of the “Mill Levy Tax Freeze” ruling.

Ritter and the Colorado Legislature were similarly prohibited from bypassing TABOR - and TABOR’s requirement for a vote of the people on tax increases - by raising taxes disguised as “fees” until the Mullarkey Court’s “November Surprise” ruling in the Barber v. Ritter case.

The Mullarkey Majority has been aiding and abetting the sticky fingers of state government in YOUR wallet.  It’s high time to hold them accountable - vote “NO” on retaining these unjust justices in 2010.

Let’s Clear The Bench, Colorado!

In a little-noticed ruling issued November 3rd, 2008 (yes, great time to avoid attention, don’t you think?) the Mullarkey Majority on the Colorado Supreme Court quietly handed down an extremely far-reaching decision designed to permanently end-run TABOR and undermine the Colorado Constitution.  Like most people, I missed the significance of this case (Barber vs. Ritter) both at the time (my attention, like most Americans, was focused elsewhere) and even after launching Clear The Bench Colorado.

However, recent expressions of citizens outrage in response to massive increases in vehicle registration fees and exorbitantly punitive late fees - all part of the so-called FASTER bill (SB 108) passed by the Colorado Legislature and signed into law by Governor Bill Ritter, who continues to defend the increased fees - have turned the spotlight on the issue of fees vs. taxes.

Fees vs. Taxes - what’s the difference?

A fee is a charge for use of a service or amenity - the amount of which is related to the cost of providing that service or amenity.  Thus, licensing fees for hunting and fishing help fund game wardens, forestry service personnel, equipment, and property, etc. while fees for visiting state parks similarly help provide for personnel, property, upkeep, and the like.  The key feature of fees is that the user of a given good or service pays, and the funds collected are related to the purpose of providing the good or service.

A tax, on the other hand, while it may be applied to a particular good or service or more generally to the population at large, is collected to raise general purpose revenues.  Taxes collected may be unrelated, or completely disproportionate, to expenditures.  Thus, taxes on sales of goods (alcohol, clothing, etc.) or services (restaurants, dry cleaning, etc.) are not necessarily related to the cost of providing, regulating (e.g. health & safety inspections) or protecting (police, fire, courts, etc.) the goods or services taxed.  Government can spend tax revenues on anything it wants.  That’s why taxes go into the “General Fund” and expenditures are allocated by the legislative budgetary process.

Back in the days when the Colorado Supreme Court apparently still believed in upholding the law instead of engaging in creative exercises of convoluted argumentation to circumvent it (Mullarkey apparently had yet to hit her stride), decisions reflected these definitions and principles.  The 1989 Bloom v. City of Fort Collins decision (mangled almost beyond recognition in the Barber v. Ritter ruling) was clear:

A fee is distinct from a tax in that, “[u]nlike a tax, a special fee is not designed to raise revenues to defray the general expenses of government, but rather is a charge imposed upon persons or property for the purpose of defraying the cost of a particular governmental service.”

Morphing Taxes into Fees - the Mullarkey/Ritter shell game

Governor Ritter, the Colorado Legislature, and the Mullarkey Majority find the requirement to first ask before raising taxes (as required by TABOR) to be rather tiring - and restricting their power to accomplish their goals with your money.  What to do, what to do?  Simple - creatively define their way out of the restrictions; impose fees, instead of raising taxes - no need to ask the voters first; then just transfer the collected revenue (the ol’ shell game) into the general fund, so as to avoid those pesky restrictions on spending the money only on the “particular governmental service” for which the fee was collected.

But these semantic shenanigans can’t be legal, right? That’s what the plaintiffs in the Barber v. Ritter case thought - and they had good legal precedent (Bloom v. City of Fort Collins) on their side, too.  However, they failed to reckon with the logic-bending and creative writing skills of the Mullarkey Court.

Starting with Bloom’s premise that a fee “might be subject to invalidation as a tax” when the “principal purpose” is to raise general revenues, the Mullarkey Majority went on to declare that to find “principal purpose” and legislative intent, “we look to the language of the enabling statute for its expression.”

If the language discloses that the primary purpose for the charge is to finance a particular service utilized by those who must pay the charge, then the charge is a “fee.” On the other hand, if the language states that a primary purpose for the charge is to raise revenues for general governmental spending, then it is a tax. Moreover, the fact that a fee incidentally or indirectly raises revenue does not alter its essential character as a fee, transforming it into a tax. (Barber, p. 26)

Ergo, as long as legislators remember to say that a “fee” is for a particular purpose when drafting legislation, it makes no difference if in practice the “fee” is collected and spent for purposes entirely unrelated to the enabling statute.  Legislators can now avoid the dreaded “ask first” TABOR restrictions on taxes by simply calling it a fee and remembering to specify a particular purpose - say, “restore crumbling bridges” - one can always shift the collected revenues to one’s pet project later.

So what’s the bottom line? Well, the good news is that thanks to the Mullarkey Majority on the Colorado Supreme Court, you probably won’t see the Colorado Legislature increase taxes much next year - as long as they haven’t completely killed TABOR, they would have to ask your permission first (well, in theory, anyway).  The bad news is that thanks to the Mullarkey Court, they won’t have to raise taxes - they’ll just increase or add new “fees” instead.  Now doesn’t that make you feel better?

Of course, if you’d rather not suffer an increase in either fees or taxes - at least not without being asked specifically first, as is your right under the Colorado Constitution - you have one last chance to DO something about it.  Ditch the Mullarkey Majority - vote “NO” on unjust justices before they can tax you again in 2010!  Let’s Clear The Bench, Colorado!

Today’s Denver Post headline trumpets the “loosening” of “Colorado’s fiscal knot” with the governor signing into law the repeal of the 1991 Arveschoug-Bird statute that had limited out-of-control legislative spending by capping the growth of the general fund at a reasonable rate of 6%/year.

However, political reporter Lynn Bartels (formerly of the late and lamented journalistic counterweight Rocky Mountain News) inadvertently gave the game away with her lead-in to the article:

Gov. Bill Ritter signed a landmark budget reform bill Wednesday, with supporters promising it is the start (to fixing a constitutional mess) that has Colorado headed toward a California kind of economic pickle.

OK, I added the parentheses around the dangling participle - to illustrate the point that Governor Ritter and the bill’s supporters have indeed promised that this bill does have Colorado “headed toward a California kind of economic pickle.”  Can’t say they didn’t warn you…

Spending limits such as TABOR - the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights - and the Arveschoug-Bird measure are the only things that kept Colorado from sliding into the deep fiscal hole and “economic pickle” that is the state of California’s budgetary woes.  As Bartels points out towards the end of the article, “California is struggling to close a $24.3 billion deficit.”  Note that deficits don’t magically appear due to declining revenues - they are a direct result of the kind of unrestricted spending that TABOR and the Arveschoug-Bird measure were designed to prevent (or at least limit).

It is the natural inclination of politicians to promise the moon - anything to please constituent interest groups, in order to get elected - particularly when it comes to spending other peoples’ money.  Establishing spending limits (as any parent knows) is the only way to introduce some measure of control to protect the taxpayer’s wallet.

These measures are not only good policy - they are locked in to our state constitution, the highest law of the land (subject only to the U.S. Constitution).  At least, that was the case, until our out-of-control Colorado Supreme Court decided otherwise, substituting their word over written law.

The majority ruling in the Mill Levy Tax Freeze case only this Spring (16 March 2009) signaled loud and clear to Governor Ritter and the Democrat-contolled Colorado Legislature that it was open season on any provisions of the Colorado Constitution (such as TABOR) or statutory law incorporated into TABOR’s constitutional limits (such as the Arveschoug-Bird measure) that had previously shielded Colorado taxpayers from increased taxation and government spending.  It was only AFTER the current majority on the Colorado Supreme Court had cleared the way with this ruling (in March) that an emboldened Governor Ritter and his accomplices in the legislature moved to repeal Arveschoug-Bird through SB-228 (in April). (See my post at the time: Ritter, Legislators Assault Constitutional Spending Limits… Again)

So while it’s appropriate to be critical of Governor Ritter and the Colorado Legislature for acting to increase spending, it’s kind of the nature of the political beast; spending is what they do.  However, they could not do so without restraint until aided and abetted by the current majority on the Colorado Supreme Court.  As noted in the Post article,

House Majority Leader Mike May, R-Parker, opposed the change: “In essence, it’s like removing the spending limits on a credit card.”

May and other opponents also argue that the 6 percent limit was included in the voter-approved 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR, so it can’t be repealed without a vote of the people.

The Colorado Supreme Court once again aided and abetted in taking away YOUR right to a vote on this policy - in violation of the Colorado Constitution, and further undermining the rule of law.

The supposed adults in the room - the Colorado Supreme Court - have just handed over YOUR credit card to the shopaholic teenagers that are Colorado’s statewide executives and legislators.

Are you cool with that?  ‘Cause I’m not…

Don’t allow the current majority on the Colorado Supreme Court to continue taking away your rights (and your money). Vote “NO“ on retaining these “unjust justices” in office in 2010.

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold interviewed by Jimmy Sengenberger of SengCenter radio on the importance of impartial justices, judicial philosophy, and upholding the rule of law against the backdrop of President Obama’s nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court and the failure of the “Mullarkey Majority” on the Colorado Supreme Court to live up to the standards of jurisprudence demanded of justices at the highest level.

Matt discusses some of the reasons that Colorado voters should “clear the bench” in 2010 by voting “NO” on four “unjust justices” of the Mullarkey Majority (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, Nancy Rice, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) and how the Sotomayor nomination provides a teaching moment on the attributes, qualities, and standards expected of judges.

Listen to the interview (which starts at about halfway through the show, @29 minutes)

Our lawmakers are poised to make liars and knaves out of former school board members all over the state. They’re about to make fools out of state education officials of the past two decades. They’re about to make chumps out of local voters from one corner of Colorado to another.

And Gov. Bill Ritter is likely to endorse their high-handed political maneuver, known as Senate Bill 291.

But do not worry: This double cross, which passed the Senate and a first reading in the House this week, is being conducted in the name of the children, so of course it’s all OK.

Ah yes - it’s for the children.  The subterfuge of scurrilous scoundrels since time immemorial…

However, our lawmakers and scoundrel-in-chief-executive Gov. Bill Ritter would be powerless to perpetrate the passage of this double-cross if not aided and abetted by the unjust justices of the Colorado Supreme Court.  Recall that it was the Mullarkey ruling on the Mill Levy Tax Freeze case that enabled the legislature to seize over $117 million in tax payments (and counting) from Colorado voters - without asking them first, as required by the plain language of the Colorado Constitution.

Bill Ritter, of course, praised the court’s decision: “But the real winners today are Colorado’s children…” despite the fact that “none of the funds are actually earmarked specifically for schools. The extra revenue from the mill levy rate freeze flows directly into the state’s general fund.”

The high court, you see, was also determined to help the children - so to heck with the constitution.

 So why is this a double-cross?

First, a little background: When a large majority of school districts in the 1990s asked voters if they could keep all of the tax revenue they were then collecting rather than return surpluses under the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, they were careful to assure homeowners that the change would not trigger a long-term escalation in property taxes.

Absolutely not, district officials promised. As the assessed value of property continued to rise, they added, mill levies would tick downward as they had before.

Those officials had every reason to believe they were telling the truth, too, since literally no expert contradicted them. To the contrary. The state repeatedly reinforced the same position. …

“Since your voters are NOT voting to change state law, the de-Bruce election outcome . . . will have NO effect on your district’s school finance mill levy.“

The Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling - and subsequent actions by the governor and the majority in the state legislature - has retroactively made liars out of honest, honorable public servants.  Many of them have already expressed outrage - it was, after all, the Mesa County board who were the named plaintiffs in the suit challenging this travesty of a law - and many others are quietly seething.  ALL of them have suffered a loss of trust with the voters they represent…

NOW the state legislature - with the assumed complicity of the governor and Colorado Supreme Court - is acting to block any attempt by local officials to salvage their good name, honor, and integrity by going back to the voters to allow them to have a say on their original intent:

SB 291 now closes the circle. It punishes any district that wants to reverse its decision to keep the TABOR surplus should its voters now fear a future of ever-rising property taxes. The bill doesn’t actually prevent voters from reversing course, but it ensures that their children will pay a price if they do.

The bill is written and supported by the same people who for two years have insisted that they changed the law on property taxes only because voters had given the green light. “All we were doing was giving voice and respecting the will of the voters,” the governor claimed earlier this year.

Really?  Ensure that your legislators (the House is hearing the bill this week) and Governor Bill Ritter hear your voice and know your will as a voter in opposing this end-run around your rights.

And in 2010 - DON’T GIVE YOUR APPROVAL to the Colorado Supreme Court majority that made this possible.  Vote “NO” on retaining the four “unjust justices” - Mullarkey, Bender, Martinez, and Rice -  who have conspired to take away your constitutional rights.