Colorado Taxable Value of Residential Property, Initiative 32 (2003)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Voting on Taxes
Taxes.jpg
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Colorado Constitution
800px-Flag of Colorado.svg.png
Preamble
Articles
IIIIIIIVVVIVIIVIIIIXXXIXIIXIIIXIVXVXVIXVIIXVIIIXIXXXXXIXXIIXXIIIXXIVXXVXXVIXXVIIXXVIIIXXIXSchedule

The Colorado Taxable Value of Residential Property Initiative, also known as Initiative 32 was on the November 4, 2003 ballot in Colorado as an initiated constitutional amendment, where it was defeated. The measure would have setting the ratio for valuation for assessment for taxation of residential real property at eight percent of actual value for property tax years commencing on or after January 1, 2004. It also would have eliminated the annual adjustment of the ratio that insures that the percentage of the total statewide assessed value attributable to residential real property remains the same as it was in the previous year.[1]

Election results

Colorado Initiative 32 (2003)
ResultVotesPercentage
Defeatedd No702,82977.55%
Yes 203,449 22.45%

Election results via: Colorado State Legislative Council, Ballot History

Text of measure

The language appeared on the ballot as:[1]

An amendment to section 3 (1) (b) of article X of the constitution of the state of Colorado, concerning the ratio of valuation for assessment for taxation of residential real property, and in connection therewith, setting the ratio at eight percent of actual value for property tax years commencing on or after January 1, 2004, and eliminating the annual adjustment of the ratio that insures that the percentage of the total statewide assessed value attributable to residential real property remains the same as it was in the previous year.[2]

Supporters

Jackie McGee, governmental affairs director at the Pikes Peak Association of Realtors, advocated on behalf of Amendment 32 by saying it would "act to help our economy be business-friendly and make a stronger local economy."[3]

The Colorado Springs Economic Development Corporation also supported Amendment 32. Rocky Scott, executive director of the CSEDC, said, "The property tax burden is getting shifted to business more and more. It's a job killer. It's not helpful to anyone's household income if you lose your job."[3]

Under Gallagher, school funding shifted more to state funds, Scott argued. In 2003 it was 60 percent. By budget year 2007-2008 under Amendment 32, state aid to schools was set to decrease about $27 million, and property taxes contribute $27 million more. There was not much discretionary income left for the state in 2003 for higher education and transportation. it was very dangerous. it was like a creeping cancer. it was bad for jobs and bad for the economy, Scott said.[3]

Colorado Springs Chamber of Commerce spokesman Jeff Crank said, "If it passes, it is still not going to fix the system as it stands - not right away - but it would stop the continuing slide. It's not going to level the playing field; it's only going to keep it from getting worse and worse."[3]

Opponents

Tax raises have been equitable, according to opponent Lara Hullinghorst, spokesperson for Coloradoans for Fairness in Taxation, headquartered in Longmont. Amendment 32 has no guarantees there will be more money for schools, nor does it help business much, she says. Most mid-size businesses won't see a lot of benefit from this - it is the big businesses that are behind it.[3]

Her opposition group would rather look at other tax reforms and supports a bipartisan committee now looking for solutions.[3]

See also

BP-Initials-UPDATED.png
Suggest a link

External links

References