Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.

Colorado Proposition 123, Dedicate State Income Tax Revenue to Fund Housing Projects Initiative (2022)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Colorado Proposition 123
Flag of Colorado.png
Election date
November 8, 2022
Topic
Housing
Status
Approveda Approved
Type
State statute		Origin
Citizens

Colorado Proposition 123, the Dedicate State Income Tax Revenue to Fund Housing Projects Initiative, was on the ballot in Colorado as an initiated state statute on November 8, 2022. The measure was approved.

A "yes" vote supported creating the State Affordable Housing Fund and dedicating one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of state income tax revenue to fund housing programs, including:

  • providing grants to local governments and loans to nonprofit organizations to acquire and maintain land for the development of affordable housing;
  • creating an affordable housing equity program to make equity investments in multi-family rental units to ensure that rent is no more than 30% of a household's income;
  • creating a concessionary debt program to provide debt financing for low- and middle-income multi-family rental developments and existing affordable housing projects;
  • creating an affordable home ownership program providing down-payment assistance for homebuyers meeting certain income requirements; 
  • creating a grant program for local governments to increase capacity to process land use, permitting, and zoning applications for housing projects; and
  • creating a program to provide rental assistance, housing vouchers, and other case management for persons experiencing homelessness.

A "no" vote opposed creating the State Affordable Housing Fund and dedicating one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of revenue collected from the federal income tax to fund housing programs.


Election results

Colorado Proposition 123

Result Votes Percentage

Approved Yes

1,269,816 52.61%
No 1,143,974 47.39%
Results are officially certified.
Source


Overview

What did Proposition 123 do?

See also: Measure design

The initiative created the State Affordable Housing Fund (SAHF) and dedicated one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of state income tax revenue to fund affordable housing programs and projects. The initiative created the Affordable Housing Support Fund to receive 40% of funds in the SAHF and the Affordable Housing Financing Fund to receive 60% of funds in the SAHF.[1]

Under Proposition 123, affordable housing was defined as rental housing that is "affordable to a household with an annual income of at or below 60% of the area median income, and that costs the household less than 30% of its monthly income," and "for-sale housing that could be purchased by a household with an annual income of at or below 100% of the area median income, for which the mortgage payment costs the household less than 30% of its monthly income."[1]

Funds were set be used to:[1]

  • provide grants to local governments and loans to nonprofit organizations to acquire and maintain land for the development of affordable housing;
  • create an affordable housing equity program to make equity investments in multi-family rental units to ensure that rent is no more than 30% of a household's income;
  • create a concessionary debt program to provide debt financing for low- and middle-income multi-family rental developments and existing affordable housing projects;
  • create an affordable home ownership program providing down-payment assistance for homebuyers meeting certain income requirements;
  • create a grant program for local governments to increase capacity to process land use, permitting, and zoning applications for housing projects; and
  • create a program to provide rental assistance, housing vouchers, and other case management for persons experiencing homelessness.[2]

How was Proposition 123 expected impact the state's TABOR limits?

See also: Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR)

The Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) requires voter approval for all new taxes, tax rate increases, extensions of expiring taxes, mill levy increases, valuation for property assessment increases, or tax policy changes resulting in increased tax revenue. TABOR limits the amount of money the state of Colorado can take in and spend. It limits the annual increase for some state revenue to inflation plus the percentage change in state population. Any money collected above this limit is refunded to taxpayers unless the voters allow the state to spend it.

For fiscal year 2022-23, $135 million was estimated to be allocated to the State Affordable Housing Fund. For the first full fiscal year, FY 2023-24, the Colorado Legislative Council Staff estimated that $270 million would be transferred from the state general fund to the State Affordable Housing Fund.[3]

The initiative authorized the state to retain and spend these funds as a voter-approved revenue change above the state's TABOR limits, which it would otherwise be required to refund to taxpayers.

Who was behind the campaigns surrounding Proposition 123?

See also: Support and Opposition

Coloradans for Affordable Housing Now led the campaign in support of the initiative. The committee raised $6.6 million. Top donors included Gary Ventures Inc., National Association of Realtors, Bohemian Companies, Caring for Colorado Foundation, Colorado Low Income Housing Campaign, and Community First Foundation. Mike Johnston, former Democratic state senator and current CEO and President of Gary Community Ventures said, "[This is the] first time housing's been on the ballot in Colorado. What we know is we're going to need a permanent stable revenue source committed to keeping housing affordable in this state if we're going to solve that problem. Right now we know voters believe housing is the single most important issue in the state. We know they believe they want the state to do more about it. This gives them a chance to vote on that. What this will get us is 10,000 more affordable units every year in Colorado that teachers and nurses and firefighters and people can have a place to live. One of the things that this can do is help build more of those permanent supportive housing units that people have as their first transition off the streets."[4]

Michael Fields of Advance Colorado Action said, "There is nothing 'affordable' about taking $300 million of our TABOR tax refunds for a flawed housing measure. To fix our state's housing crisis, we need to build more, not tax more. Coloradans are struggling — and they want their full TABOR refund in upcoming years." Natalie Menten, TABOR Foundation board member, said, "If this passes, the number on that TABOR refund check is going to be smaller. And potentially in some years, there won't be a check coming to you because this will take all of it. ... Many of us don't want to live in downtown. But what this measure is driving us to do is get more high-density housing and that is not what I want to see more of, frankly."[5]

Reactions

The following is a list of reactions from supporters, opponents, and other commentators regarding the approval of the measure:

  • Michael Fields, said, "there’s a big test for this coming up: Does it follow through on the promises of building units, driving down costs and helping homeless people?"[6]

Measure design

The initiative created the State Affordable Housing Fund (SAHF) and dedicated one-tenth of one percent (0.1%) of state income tax revenue to fund affordable housing programs and projects. Under the initiative, affordable housing was set to be defined as rental housing that is "affordable to a household with an annual income at or below 60% of the area median income, and that costs the household less than 30% of its monthly income," and "for-sale housing that could be purchased by a household with an annual income of at or below 100% of the area median income, for which the mortgage payment costs the household less than 30% of its monthly income."[1]

Funds in the State Affordable Housing Fund (SAHF) were set to be allocated to two funds: 60% to the Affordable Housing Financing Fund and 40% to the Affordable Housing Support Fund. Click [show] to see how money in each the funds was set to be spent.

By November 1, 2023, a local government seeking funds under the measure or seeking to make affordable housing projects within its boundaries eligible for funding under the measure need to file a commitment specifying its plan to increase affordable housing units in its boundaries through November 2026 by 3% each year. The baseline number used to calculate the percentage increase of affordable housing units was set to be based on the American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates as published by the U.S. Census Bureau and reset every third year coinciding with the publication of updated American Community Survey census reports.

For fiscal year 2022-23, $135 million was estimated to be allocated to the State Affordable Housing Fund. For the first full fiscal year, FY 2023-24, the Colorado Legislative Council Staff estimated that $270 million would be transferred from the state general fund to the State Affordable Housing Fund. The initiative authorized the state to retain and spend these funds as a voter-approved revenue change above the state's TABOR limits, which it would otherwise be required to refund to taxpayers.[7]

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:[2]

“ Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning statewide funding for additional affordable housing, and, in connection therewith, dedicating state revenues collected from an existing tax of one-tenth of one percent on federal taxable income of every individual, estate, trust, and corporation, as defined in law, for affordable housing and exempting the dedicated revenues from the constitutional limitation on state fiscal year spending; allocating 60% of the dedicated revenues to affordable housing financing programs that will reduce rents, purchase land for affordable housing development, and build assets for renters; allocating 40% of the dedicated revenues to programs that support affordable home ownership, serve persons experiencing homelessness, and support local planning capacity; requiring local governments that seek additional affordable housing funding to expedite development approvals for affordable housing projects and commit to increasing the number of affordable housing units by 3% annually; and specifying that the dedicated revenues shall not supplant existing appropriations for affordable housing programs?[8] ”

Full text

The full text of the initiative is below:[1]

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2022

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The state board wrote the ballot language for this measure.

The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 24, and the FRE is -13. The word count for the ballot title is 157.


Support

Make Colorado Affordable, also known as Coloradans for Affordable Housing Now, led the campaign in support of Proposition 123. The campaign provided a full list of endorsements, which is available here.

Supporters

Officials

Organizations

  • African American Trade Association
  • Boulder Housing Partners
  • Caring for Colorado
  • Children's Hospital Colorado
  • Civitas Resources
  • Colorado Children's Campaign
  • Colorado Forum
  • Colorado Low Income Housing Campaign
  • Colorado Nurses Association
  • Colorado Realtors Association
  • Community First Foundation
  • ECHO Colorado
  • Gary Ventures Inc
  • Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver
  • Healthier Colorado
  • Housing Colorado
  • Issues Mobilization Committee
  • League of Women Voters of Colorado
  • Maiker Housing Partners
  • NAACP Denver
  • National Association of Housing & Redevelopment Officials of Colorado
  • National Association of Realtors
  • Neighborhood Development Collaborative
  • New Era Colorado
  • Rocky Mountain Communities
  • Rocky Mountain Mechanical Contractors and Unions
  • Urban Land Conservancy
  • Young Invincibles


Arguments

  • Brian Rossbert, executive director of Housing Colorado: "The people of Colorado have spoken, and they want to make Colorado affordable. Too many Coloradans can no longer afford to live in the neighborhoods where they set down roots. That’s forcing families to make difficult relocation decisions, robbing our communities of essential services and intensifying our homelessness crisis. This measure is desperately needed if we want future generations of Coloradans to thrive."
  • Mike Johnston, former Democratic state senator and current CEO and President of Gary Community Ventures: The first time housing's been on the ballot in Colorado. What we know is we're going to need a permanent stable revenue source committed to keeping housing affordable in this state if we're going to solve that problem. Right now we know voters believe housing is the single most important issue in the state. We know they believe they want the state to do more about it. This gives them a chance to vote on that. What this will get us is 10,000 more affordable units every year in Colorado that teachers and nurses and firefighters and people can have a place to live. One of the things that this can do is help build more of those permanent supportive housing units that people have as their first transition off the streets."
  • Jackie Millet, mayor Lone Tree in Denver: "We’ve reached a tipping point and we cannot continue to wait on the sidelines and hope that something happens."


Official arguments

The following is the argument in support of the measure found in the Colorado Blue Book:[9]

  • Colorado Blue Book Official Arguments: "1) The measure creates a source of funds to tackle housing issues without raising tax rates, and gives local communities the flexibility to respond to their specific needs. The state and local governments are not doing enough to keep Colorado affordable. 2) Colorado’s housing prices make it too hard for many households to afford rent or to buy their own home. The new programs help Coloradans participate in the housing market now and in the future. Creating more homes will allow residents and essential workers to remain in their communities."

Opposition

Opponents

Individuals


Arguments

  • Natalie Menten, TABOR Foundation boardmember: "If this passes, the number on that TABOR refund check is going to be smaller. And potentially in some years, there won't be a check coming to you because this will take all of it. I oppose this on multiple levels. Many of us don't want to live in downtown. But what this measure is driving us to do is get more high-density housing and that is not what I want to see more of, frankly."
  • Michael Fields of Advance Colorado Action: "There is nothing 'affordable' about taking $300 million of our TABOR tax refunds for a flawed housing measure. To fix our state's housing crisis, we need to build more, not tax more. Coloradans are struggling — and they want their full TABOR refund in upcoming years."


Official arguments

The following is the argument in opposition to the measure found in the Colorado Blue Book:[10]

  • Colorado Blue Book Official Arguments: "1) Many of these programs do not address the underlying causes of high housing costs. Pumping money into the market may distort it further, and the real beneficiaries will be landlords and housing developers. This is neither the role of government nor the best use of public resources. 2) The measure is unnecessary and will reduce Coloradans’ future TABOR refunds. The state already provides resources to support affordable housing, including over $1 billion in federal stimulus funds allocated in recent years. This measure diverts money away from the state’s budgeting process—money that goes toward priorities as determined by the legislature through deliberation and consultation with stakeholders and constituents—and instead sets aside money in a fund with fixed uses."

Media editorials

See also: 2022 ballot measure media endorsements

Ballotpedia lists the positions of media editorial boards that support or oppose ballot measures. This does not include opinion pieces from individuals or groups that do not represent the official position of a newspaper or media outlet. Ballotpedia includes editorials from newspapers and outlets based on circulation and readership, political coverage within a state, and length of publication. You can share media editorial board endorsements with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.

Support

  • Durango Herald Editorial Board: "Proposition 123 would not raise taxes. Instead, it sets aside some revenues. Nothing is free and taxpayers would see a cost to their Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights refunds with money coming from this pool. For example, our TABOR refund this summer was $750. With Proposition 123, we could expect that check to be $707. Not bad, if this means our workers and seniors could afford places to live."


Opposition

  • Colorado Springs Gazette Editorial Board: "The ballot proposal’s plan for throwing a lot of money at the problem in wide-ranging ways is too unfocused to make meaningful progress. Its reach into Colorado taxpayers’ pockets for such an unrealistic agenda can’t be justified. ... And for the money 123 would pump into further stoking the demand side of the state’s superheated housing economy, it would do nothing to address the limited supply of housing that drives up prices in the first place. That involves a separate undertaking — reassessing the state and local statutory and regulatory hurdles to housing construction. Colorado’s affordable-housing problem is real; Prop. 123 isn’t up to the challenge. Vote no."
  • Denver Post Editorial Board: "Just like school lunches, we want to support this program, but the state has a finite tax base and has struggled to convince voters in the past to invest in even the most core services. We fear these external measures will siphon off the tax base and make voters unwilling to approve measures – whether it’s a tax increase or a reduction in TABOR refunds – in the future that will boost our general fund and float all essential services in this state."
  • Denver Gazette and Colorado Springs Gazette Editorial Boards: "It would ding taxpayers’ surplus-revenue refunds — $145 million in the first year and about $290 million a year thereafter — to fund an assortment of housing-related programs through the state bureaucracy. Down a rabbit hole, in other words."


Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Colorado ballot measures
The campaign finance information on this page reflects the most recent scheduled reports that Ballotpedia has processed, which covered through December 8, 2022.


Coloradans for Affordable Housing Now registered to support the initiative. The committee raised $6.6 million. The committee reported expenditures totaling $6.6 million.[11]

Path 2 Zero registered to support Propositions 121, 124, 125, 126, and Amendment E; and registered to oppose Propositions 123, GG, FF, and Amendment F. It is impossible to distinguish between funds spent on each individual measure. The committee reported $10,430.70 in in-kind contributions from Independence Institute.[12]

Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Support $6,570,100.00 $57,147.00 $6,627,247.00 $6,570,100.00 $6,627,247.00
Oppose $0.00 $10,430.70 $10,430.70 $0.00 $10,430.70
Total $6,570,100.00 $67,577.70 $6,637,677.70 $6,570,100.00 $6,637,677.70

Support

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in support of the initiative.

Committees in support of Proposition 123
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Coloradans for Affordable Housing Now $6,570,100.00 $57,147.00 $6,627,247.00 $6,570,100.00 $6,627,247.00
Total $6,570,100.00 $57,147.00 $6,627,247.00 $6,570,100.00 $6,627,247.00

Donors

The following table includes top donors to the support committee.

Donor Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions
Gary Ventures Inc $2,000,000.00 $57,147.00 $2,057,147.00
Gary Advocacy, LLC $750,000.00 $0.00 $750,000.00
Action Now, Inc $500,000.00 $0.00 $500,000.00
Bohemian Companies $500,000.00 $0.00 $500,000.00
National Association of Realtors $276,323.00 $0.00 $276,323.00

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in opposition to Proposition 123.[11]

Committees in opposition to Proposition 123
Committee Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions Cash Expenditures Total Expenditures
Path 2 Zero $0.00 $10,430.70 $10,430.70 $0.00 $10,430.70
Total $0.00 $10,430.70 $10,430.70 $0.00 $10,430.70

Donors

Independence Institute provided all of the funds to Path 2 Zero.[11]

Donor Cash Contributions In-Kind Contributions Total Contributions
Independence Institute $0.00 $8,923.96 $8,923.96

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Background

Colorado income tax

As of 2022, Colorado had a flat income tax rate of 4.55% of federal taxable income. The rate was 4.63% until voters approved Proposition 116 in 2020, which reduced the rate to 4.55%. An initiative on the 2022 ballot was designed to lower the rate from 4.55% to 4.40% for tax years commencing on or after January 1, 2022.[13]

The following table shows the history of Colorado's individual income tax rates.[13]

Colorado individual income tax revenue

For fiscal year 2022-23, $135 million was estimated to be allocated to the State Affordable Housing Fund. For the first full fiscal year, FY 2023-24, the Colorado Legislative Council Staff estimated that $270 million would be transferred from the state general fund to the State Affordable Housing Fund.[14]

The following table shows income tax revenue in Colorado from 1999-2000 through 2019-2020.[13]

Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR)

See also: Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR)

The Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) requires voter approval for all new taxes, tax rate increases, extensions of expiring taxes, mill levy increases, valuation for property assessment increases, or tax policy changes resulting in increased tax revenue. The Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights was passed by voters in 1992 as Initiative 1. The measure was approved by a vote of 54% to 46%. The measure was sponsored by Douglas Bruce (R), former Deputy District Attorney and former member of the Colorado General Assembly.[15][16]

TABOR limits the amount of money the state of Colorado can take in and spend. It limits the annual increase for some state revenue to inflation plus the percentage change in state population. Any money collected above this limit is refunded to taxpayers unless the voters allow the state to spend it.

Referendum C of 2005

Referendum C, approved by voters in 2005, authorized the state to retain and spend all of the money it collected above the TABOR limit on healthcare, public education, transportation projects, and local fire and police pensions for five years beginning with fiscal year (FY) 2005-06. During these five years, Colorado residents did not receive the refunds they would have otherwise received under TABOR. After the five-year period, referred to as "the timeout period," Referendum C authorized the state to permanently retain and spend revenue up to a cap, referred to as "the Referendum C cap" (equaling FY 2007-08 revenues adjusted by inflation plus population growth), beginning in FY 2010-11.[17][18][19]

When state voters approve a tax increase or other revenue change, the resulting revenues are exempt from the TABOR limit on fiscal year spending. Below is a chart by the Colorado Legislative Council Staff detailing revenue limits under TABOR:[20]

TABOR ballot measures

Since 1992, when TABOR was adopted, through 2021, Colorado voters have decided on 25 statewide ballot measures that would have increased revenue for the state, which required voter approval under TABOR.

  • Seven measures asked voters if the state could retain revenue as a voter-approved revenue change that would have otherwise been refunded to taxpayers under TABOR;
  • Five measures asked voters to adopt a new tax;
  • Two measures asked voters to eliminate a tax exemption (thereby raising state revenue);
  • Nine measures asked voters to adopt a tax increase;
  • One measure asked voters to adopt a tax increase and new tax; and
  • One measure asked voters to adopt a tax increase and eliminate a tax exemption.

Six (24%) of the 25 measures were approved while 19 (76%) were defeated.

The six measures that were approved are as follows:

In addition to the above measures, Referendum C, approved by voters in 2005, authorized the state to retain and spend all of the money it collected above the TABOR limit on healthcare, public education, transportation projects, and local fire and police pensions for five years beginning with fiscal year (FY) 2005-06.

Colorado statewide ballot measures during even-numbered election years, 2000-2020

A total of 105 measures appeared on the statewide ballot in Colorado during even-numbered election years in the 20-year period between 2000 through 2020. Of the 105 measures, 48 were approved (45.71%) and 57 were defeated (54.29%). From 2000 through 2020, the number of measures on the even-year ballot ranged from three to 14.

Colorado statewide ballot measures during even-numbered election years, 2000-2020
Years Total number Approved Percent approved Defeated Percent defeated Annual average Annual median Annual minimum Annual maximum
2000-2020 105 48 45.71% 57 54.29% 10 10 3 14


Reports and analyses

Note: The inclusion of a report, white page, or study concerning a ballot measure in this article does not indicate that Ballotpedia agrees with the conclusions of that study or that Ballotpedia necessarily considers the study to have a sound methodology, accurate conclusions, or a neutral basis. To read a full explanation of Ballotpedia's policy on the inclusion of reports and analyses, please click here.

The Common Sense Institute published a report on Proposition 123 in September 2022. The Common Sense Institute describes itself as "a non-partisan research organization dedicated to the protection and promotion of Colorado’s economy" with a mission to "examine the fiscal impacts of policies, initiatives, and proposed laws so that Coloradans are educated and informed on issues impacting their lives [by employing] rigorous research techniques and dynamic modeling to evaluate the potential impact of these measures on the Colorado economy and individual opportunity."[21]



The full report can be read here.

Path to the ballot

See also: Signature requirements for ballot measures in Colorado and Laws governing the initiative process in Colorado

The state process

In Colorado, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiated state statute for the ballot is equal to 5 percent of the total number of votes cast for the office of Colorado secretary of state in the preceding general election. State law provides that petitioners have six months to collect signatures after the ballot language and title are finalized. State statutes require a completed signature petition to be filed three months and three weeks before the election at which the measure would appear on the ballot. The Constitution, however, states that the petition must be filed three months before the election at which the measure would appear. The secretary of state generally lists a date that is three months before the election as the filing deadline.

The requirements to get an initiated state statute certified for the 2022 ballot:

The secretary of state is responsible for signature verification. Verification is conducted through a review of petitions regarding correct form and then a 5 percent random sampling verification. If the sampling projects between 90 percent and 110 percent of required valid signatures, a full check of all signatures is required. If the sampling projects more than 110 percent of the required signatures, the initiative is certified. If less than 90 percent, the initiative fails.

Details about this initiative

  • Vilan Odekar and Luke Teater filed the initiative on April 8, 2022. Ballot language was given for the measure on April 21, 2022.[2]
  • The initiative was cleared for signature gathering on May 13, 2022, with petitions due by August 8, 2022.[2]
  • Proponents submitted 230,748 signatures for the measure on August 4, 2022.[2]
  • On August 19, 2022, the Colorado Secretary of State's office announced that the initiative qualified for the ballot. Through random sample verification, 149,072 were projected to be valid.[22]

Sponsors of the measure hired Landslide Political and Blitz Canvassing to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $2,195,000.00 was spent to collect the 124,632 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $17.61.


How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Colorado

See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Colorado.

How to vote in Colorado


See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Colorado Secretary of State, "Initiative 108 final text," accessed August 22, 2022
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 Colorado Secretary of State, "Initiative Filings, Agendas & Results," accessed April 26, 2022
  3. ↑ Colorado Secretary of State, "Initiative 108 fiscal summary," accessed August 22, 2022
  4. ↑ CBS News, "Housing initiative makes it on the ballot," accessed November 15, 2022
  5. ↑ Westword, "Colorado ballot initiative seeks to earmark 300 million for affordable housing," accessed November 15, 2022
  6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 Colorado Public Radio, "Colorado voters approve Proposition 123, dedicating $300 million annually to affordable housing," accessed November 19, 2022
  7. ↑ Colorado Secretary of State, "Initiative 108 fiscal summary," accessed August 22, 2022
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  9. ↑ Colorado Secretary of State, "Official Voter Information Guide," accessed October 28, 2022
  10. ↑ Colorado Secretary of State, "Official Voter Information Guide," accessed October 28, 2022
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 11.2 Colorado TRACER, "COLORADANS FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING NOW," accessed September 6, 2022
  12. ↑ Colorado TRACER, "Path 2 Zero," accessed November 1, 2022
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 Colorado Legislative Council Staff, "Individual Income Tax," accessed August 14, 2020
  14. ↑ Colorado Secretary of State, "Initiative 108 fiscal summary," accessed August 22, 2022
  15. ↑ Colorado Statesman, "Springs Council rethinks TABOR repeal," January 16, 2009
  16. ↑ Colorado State Legislative Council, "Ballot History," accessed February 20, 2014
  17. ↑ Blue Book: "2005 State Ballot Information Booklet," accessed June 21, 2019
  18. ↑ Colorado.gov, "Colorado Legislative Council Staff: July 6, 2009, memorandum concerning TABOR and Referendum C," accessed September 9, 2019
  19. ↑ Colorado.gov, "Colorado Legislative Council Staff: November 29, 2018, memorandum concerning the TABOR revenue limit," accessed September 0, 2019
  20. ↑ Colorado Legislature, "TABOR," accessed August 9, 2018
  21. ↑ Common Sense Institute, "2022 Colorado State Ballot Proposition 123," accessed September 21, 2022
  22. ↑ Colorado Secretary of State, "Proposed Initiative #108 (“Dedicated State Income Tax Revenue for Affordable Housing Programs”, Qualifies For 2022 General Election Ballot," accessed August 20, 2022
  23. ↑ Colorado Secretary of State, "Mail-in Ballots FAQs," accessed August 6, 2025
  24. ↑ LexisNexis, "Colorado Revised Statutes, § 1-7-101," accessed August 6, 2025
  25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 Colorado Secretary of State, "Voter Registration FAQs," accessed August 6, 2025
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 Colorado Secretary of State, "Colorado Voter Registration Form," accessed August 6, 2025
  27. ↑ Colorado Secretary of State, "Go Vote Colorado," accessed August 6, 2025
  28. ↑ Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
  29. ↑ Colorado Secretary of State, "Acceptable Forms of Identification," accessed August 6, 2025
v • e
2022 ballot measures
I&R States
 • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Florida • Idaho • Illinois • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Mexico • North Dakota • Ohio • Oregon • South Dakota • Utah • Washington • Wyoming
Non I&R States
 • Alabama • Connecticut • Georgia • Hawaii • Iowa • Kentucky • Kansas • Louisiana • New Hampshire • New York • Rhode Island • South Carolina • Tennessee • Texas • Vermont • West Virginia
Political topics
Abortion policy • 

Absentee and mail voting •  Administrative organization •  Administrative powers and rulemaking •  Age limits for officials •  Agriculture policy •  Alcohol laws •  American Indian issues •  Ballot measure process •  Ballot measure supermajority requirements •  Banking policy •  Bond issues •  Business regulations •  Business taxes •  Campaign finance •  Citizenship voting requirements •  Civil and criminal trials •  Civil service •  Collective bargaining •  Constitutional rights •  Constitutional wording changes •  County and municipal governance •  Crime victims' rights •  Criminal trials •  Death penalty •  Drug crime policy •  Early childhood education •  Early voting •  Election administration and governance •  Environment •  Ethics rules and commissions •  Executive official term limits •  Federal government issues •  Firearms policy •  Gambling policy •  Healthcare governance •  Higher education funding •  Highways and bridges •  Housing •  Immigration policy •  Impeachment rules •  Income taxes •  Initiative and referendum process •  Insurance policy •  LGBTQ issues •  Law enforcement •  Law enforcement funding •  Law enforcement officers and departments •  Local government officials and elections •  Local wages and pay •  Marijuana laws •  Military service policy •  Minimum wage laws •  Open meetings and public information •  Parks, land, and natural area conservation •  Primary election systems •  Private health insurance •  Property •  Psychedelic substances laws •  Public assistance programs •  Public economic investment policy •  Public education funding •  Public education governance •  Public health insurance •  Public transportation •  Race and ethnicity issues •  Ranked-choice voting •  Recall process •  Redistricting policy •  Religion-related policy •  Revenue allocation •  Revenue and spending limits •  Right-to-work laws •  Salaries of government officials •  Sex and gender issues •  State National Guard and militia •  State and local government budgets, spending, and finance •  State constitution ratification •  State constitutional conventions •  State executive branch structure •  State executive elections •  State executive official measures •  State executive powers and duties •  State judicial selection •  State judiciary •  State judiciary structure •  State legislative authority •  State legislative elections •  State legislative processes and sessions •  State legislative structure •  State legislative term limits •  Tax and revenue administration •  Taxes •  Telecommunications infrastructure •  Tobacco laws •  Transportation •  Utility policy •  Vehicle and driver regulations •  Veterans policy •  Voter ID policy •  Water •  Wildfire management

Other
Flag of Colorado
v • e
State of Colorado
Denver (capital)
Elections

What's on my ballot? | Elections in 2025 | How to vote | How to run for office | Ballot measures

Government

Who represents me? | U.S. President | U.S. Congress | Federal courts | State executives | State legislature | State and local courts | Counties | Cities | School districts | Public policy

Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Colorado_Proposition_123,_Dedicate_State_Income_Tax_Revenue_to_Fund_Housing_Projects_Initiative_(2022)&oldid=9028285"