Colorado Property Tax Act, Amendment 32 (2003)
From Ballotpedia
Contents |
The Colorado Property Tax Act, Amendment 32 was on the November 4, 2003 ballot in Colorado as an initiated constitutional amendment, where it was defeated.
- Yes: 203,449 (22.4%)
- No: 702,829 (77.6%)
Amendment 32 concerned the ratio of valuation for taxation of real residential properties, meaning homes and apartments. It also would have killed the adjustment, put in by the Gallagher Amendment, to the ratio of taxable property values between residential and everything else, from strip malls to high-rise offices. [1]
Ballot title
The official ballot question was:
- Shall there be 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.
History behind Amendment 32
The Legislative Council of the Colorado General Assembly issued a voter guide explaining Referendum A which incorporated this information:
This year, the residential assessment rate was set again by Colorado's General Assembly, making residential property 47 percent of all taxable property. Commercial real estate, including residential vacant land, will pay as 53 percent. Since 1998 the residential assessment rate fell from 21 percent to today's 7.96 percent. Amendment 32 proposes fixing that at 8 percent. Commercial's assessment rate of 29 percent of value is not affected under Amendment 32.
Half of $4.4 billion gathered through property taxes in Colorado went to schools this year. The tax difference to each homeowner if the amendment passes varies by the property's value. Under current law, a homeowner with a property valued at $220,800 must pay $1,213 for 2005 property tax. Three years later, with a projected gain of $27,700 in value on that house, the homeowner doles out $19 more. That's not enough to support quality of life, say local realtors, a core issue for any residential market. And the $132 more in taxes for the same gain in value under Amendment 32 is not enough to discourage a buyer of a quarter-million-dollar home, they say.[1]
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."
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."
Under Gallagher, school funding shifted more to state funds, Scott aruged. This year it was 60 percent. By budget year 2007-2008 under Amendment 32, state aid to schools decreases about $27 million, and property taxes contribute $27 million more. There isn't much discretionary income left for the state today for higher education and transportation. It's very dangerous. It's like a creeping cancer. It's bad for jobs and bad for the economy, Scott says.
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."[1]
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.
Her opposition group would rather look at other tax reforms and supports a bipartisan committee now looking for solutions.[1]
External links
- Details of Proposed Amendment 32
- 2003 Blue Book Information about Amendment 32
- Secretary of State's 2003 ballot measure contact information
- Campaign contributions to the Amendment 32 campaigns, pro and con
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 BNET Business Network: Colorado businesses, schools work for passage of Amendment 32
You can improve this article by adding information about campaign spending and donors  |
