Colorado Proposition HH, Property Tax Changes and Revenue Change Measure (2023)

Colorado Proposition HH
Election date November 7, 2023
Topic Property and Taxes
Status d Defeated
Type State statute	Origin State legislature

Colorado Proposition HH, the Property Tax Changes and Revenue Change Measure, was on the ballot in Colorado as a legislatively referred state statute on November 7, 2023. Proposition HH was defeated.

A "yes" vote supported making various changes to state property taxes and revenue limits, including: reducing property tax rates; allowing the state to retain and spend revenues that it would otherwise be required to refund to residents under the Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR); creating a new, increased cap on state revenue, allowing the state to retain and spend additional revenue each year up to the Proposition HH Cap; allocating revenue to local governments to make up for decreased property tax revenues; and creating a limit on local government property tax revenue.

A "no" vote opposed making changes to property taxes and state revenue limits.

Aftermath

Following the rejection of Proposition HH, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) called a special session of the Colorado State Legislature to address property tax relief. The legislature passed and the governor signed legislation to reduce the residential property tax assessment rate from 6.765% to 6.7% and increased the amount of home value that is exempt from taxation from $15,000 to $55,000. The legislation also expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit and made TABOR refunds a flat rate for all taxpayers rather than based on tiers according to income brackets.

Legislation was also passed to establish a Property Tax Task Force, which will convene by June 15, 2024, and meet at least five times in the first year and eight times in each year after. The task force was designed to be responsible for submitting reports to the general assembly by October 15 for the purpose of studying and developing a "permanent and sustainable property tax structure for the state."

State Rep. Javier Mabrey (D-1) said, "Our state’s tax code is broken. It’s an upside-down tax code. This matters. It helps renters. It helps homeowners who are retired."

State Rep. Kenneth DeGraaf (R-22) said, "This is taking money from one person to another, this is legislating money from one person to another."

Election results

Colorado Proposition HH
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		682,667	40.69%
No		995,259	59.31%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What would Proposition HH have done?

Proposition HH would have made various changes to state property taxes and changes to state revenue limits, including:

• reducing the residential property tax assessment rate and subtracting a set amount of money from a property's taxable value before applying the assessment rate;
• creating two new subclasses of residential property effective in 2025;
• providing funds to local governments to make up for decreased property tax revenues, referred to as backfilling;
• creating a limit on local government property tax revenue; and
• creating a new cap on state revenue (Proposition HH Cap) allowing the state to retain revenue up to the newly created cap, that it would otherwise be required to refund to residents under the Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR).

Why was this measure on the ballot?

This measure required voter approval under TABOR since it would have increased state revenue.

In Colorado, a legislatively referred state statute must be passed by a simple majority vote in each chamber of the state legislature. Legislatively referred measures do not need to be signed by the governor. Due to the Colorado TABOR, statewide voter approval is required to enact any legislation to increase government revenue at a faster rate than the combined rate of population increase and inflation. To read about the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, click here.

The measure was introduced as Senate Bill 23-303 on May 1, 2023. After amendments, on May 8, 2023, the measure was passed in the House by a vote of 44-2 with three members absent and in the Senate by a vote of 23-12. The measure was passed along partisan lines with Democratic members in favor and Republican members opposed. Governor Jared Polis (D) signed the bill on May 24, 2023.

What did supporters and opponents say about this measure?

See also: Support and Opposition

Colorado Governor Jared Polis (D) said, "Because of the very strong economy and very strong TABOR surplus, we are able to do both, we are able to not jeopardize or cut funding for our schools and provide important property tax relief today." Senate President Stephen Fenberg (D) said, "That is the revenue that goes to support fire districts, to support libraries, to support schools. And that’s a core part of making sure that we do this responsibly, rather than just saying property taxes are too damn high, so let’s cut them and not think about the impact that has downstream to our local services."

State Rep. Mike Lynch said, "We’ve seen this movie before, Governor Polis and his friends in the Democrat-controlled Legislature have looked to raid TABOR to solve economic problems they’ve usually created. In 2019, the governor and Democratic lawmakers ran Proposition CC that would have allowed the state to keep citizens’ TABOR refunds for schools, and it was rejected by seven percentage points. Hopefully, Coloradans will see through this new effort to extort their constitutionally guaranteed TABOR refunds." Michael Fields, president of Advance Colorado Institute and leading plaintiff in a lawsuit arguing that Proposition HH violated the state's single-subject rule and contained misleading ballot language, said, “The repeal of the Gallagher Amendment was supposed to make things better, but I opposed it because it would inevitably lead to huge increases in property taxes for Colorado families. That is exactly what we are seeing across the state. The legislature created this problem. They said they would come up with a solution and they didn’t. Now, the governor and legislature want us to give up our TABOR tax refunds for a tiny bit of property tax relief. It’s another bad idea."

What changes were made to Colorado property tax law in recent years?

See also: Background

Amendment B, approved by voters in 2020, repealed the Gallagher Amendment of 1982, which limited the residential and non-residential property tax assessment rates so that residential property taxes equaled 45% of the total share of state property taxes and non-residential property taxes equaled 55% of the total share of state property taxes.

The legislature passed a companion bill, Senate Bill 20-223, which took effect alongside the constitutional amendment. Senate Bill 223 froze the then-current rates of 7.15% for residential property and 29% for non-residential property in state statute. SB 223 allowed the legislature to reduce the assessment rate in state law.

The state legislature passed Senate Bill 22-238 in 2022 that reduced property tax assessment rates for 2023 and 2024, reducing the assessment valuation of nonresidential property (excluding agricultural and renewable energy production nonresidential property) from 29% of the actual value of the property to 27.9% of the actual value of the property. It reduced the residential property assessment valuation from 7.15% to 6.765% of the actual value.

Measure design

Proposition HH was designed to make various changes to state property taxes and changes to state revenue limits, including:

• reducing property tax rates;
• creating two new subclasses of residential property effective in 2025;
• providing funds to local governments to make up for decreased property tax revenues, referred to as backfilling;
• creating a limit on local government property tax revenue; and
• creating a new cap on state revenue (Proposition HH Cap) allowing the state to retain revenue up to the newly created cap, that it would otherwise be required to refund to residents under the Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR).

Residential property tax classes and rates

Proposition HH would have created two new subclasses of residential property for owner-occupied primary residences and qualified-senior primary residences. Property owners would have needed to file an application with local county assessors to qualify for the subclass.

Proposition HH would have reduced the assessment rates for residential property classes and increase the dollar amount of the valuation reduction (a dollar amount subtracted from a property's market value before the assessment rate is applied).

This table shows the proposed property tax assessment rates and valuation reductions under Proposition HH compared to current law without Proposition HH shown in parentheses and italics. Both under current law without Proposition HH and under Proposition HH, the assessment rate was set to be 7.15% in 2033 and after.

Residential Property Assessment Rates and Valuation Reductions under Proposition HH
Property Type	2023	2024	2025-2032	2033 and later
Owner-Occupied Primary Residence	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $50,000 (current law: 6.765% and $15,000 reduction)	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $40,000 (current law: 6.976% for single family, 6.8% for multifamily)	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $40,000 (current law: 7.15%)	Assessment rate: 7.15%
Senior Owner-Occupied Primary Residence	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $50,000 (current law: 6.765% and $15,000 reduction)	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $40,000 (current law: 6.976% for single family, 6.8% for multifamily)	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $40,000 (current law: 7.15%)	Assessment rate: 7.15%
Other Multifamily	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $50,000 (current law: 6.765% and $15,000 reduction)	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $40,000 (current law: 6.8%)	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $40,000 (current law: 7.15%)	Assessment rate: 7.15%
Other Residential	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $50,000 (current law: 6.765% and $15,000 reduction)	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $40,000 (current law: 6.796%)	Assessment rate: 6.7% Valuation reduction: $40,000 (current law: 7.15%)	Assessment rate: 7.15%

Nonresidential property tax rate changes

This table shows the proposed nonresidential property tax assessment rates under Proposition HH compared to what the rates were set to be under current law without Proposition HH.

Nonresidential Property Assessment Rates under Proposition HH
Property Type	2023	2024-2026	2027-2028	2029-2030	2031-2032
Lodging and Other Improved Commercial Property	Proposed rate: 27.85% Rate under current law: 27.9%	Proposed rate: 27.85% Rate under current law: 29%	Proposed rate: 27.65% Rate under current law: 29%	Proposed rate: 26.9% Rate under current law: 29%	Proposed rate: 26.9% or 25.9% Rate under current law: 29%
Other Commercial, Industrial, Natural Resources, State Assessed	Proposed rate: 27.85% Rate under current law: 27.9%	Proposed rate: 27.85% Rate under current law: 29%	Proposed rate: 27.65% Rate under current law: 29%	Proposed rate: 26.9% Rate under current law: 29%	Proposed rate: 26.9% or 25.9% Rate under current law: 29%
Vacant Land	Proposed rate: 27.85% Rate under current law: 27.9%	Proposed rate: 29% Rate under current law: unchanged	Proposed rate: 29% Rate under current law: unchanged	Proposed rate: 29% Rate under current law: unchanged	Proposed rate: 29% Rate under current law: unchanged
Agricultural, Renewable Energy Producing Property	Proposed rate: 26.4% Rate under current law: unchanged	Proposed rate: 26.4% Rate under current law: 29%	Proposed rate: 26.4% Rate under current law: 29%	Proposed rate: 26.4% Rate under current law: 29%	Proposed rate: 26.4% or 25.9% Rate under current law: 29%
Renewable Energy Agricultural Land (new class created under bill)	Proposed rate: 26.4%	Proposed rate: 21.9%	Proposed rate: 21.9%	Proposed rate: 21.9%	Proposed rate: 21.9%

Backfill payments to local governments for reduced property tax revenues

Proposition HH would have authorized the state to reimburse local governments for lost property tax revenues through 2032. For the 2023 property tax year, backfill payments would have been made using TABOR surplus revenue. Backfill payments for the property tax years 2024 through 2032 would have been made through a one-time transfer of $128 million from the state General Fund to the Local Government Reimbursement Cash Fund in the fiscal year 2023-24 and up to 20% of TABOR surplus revenue under the Proposition HH cap through 2032. Backfill payments would have been reduced if they would have caused a district to exceed its revenue limit. Starting in the tax year 2024, local government entities in counties with a population over 300,000 would have become ineligible to receive backfill payments if their assessed valuation increased by more than 20% from the 2022 level.

Local property tax revenue limits

Proposition HH would have limited the amount of property tax revenue that local governments could collect. The limit would have gone into effect in 2023 and would have applied to all local governments except school districts and home-rule cities and counties.

The amount of revenue that a local government could collect over the previous year's property tax revenue would have been limited to the rate of inflation in the Denver-Aurora-Lakewood area as measured by the Consumer Price Index.

Revenue generated from new construction, changes in classification, annexations, refunds, oil and gas activities, producing mines, and bonds and other contractual obligations would not have been subject to the limit.

If a local government planned to exceed the limit, it would have needed to provide notice and allow for public testimony. The local government would have also needed to adopt a resolution or ordinance to exceed the limit. If a local government exceeded the limit without following the required procedures, it would have been required to refund the excess amount to taxpayers.

Proposition HH Cap

Proposition HH would have allowed the state to retain and spend revenue in excess of the existing limit, known as the Referendum C cap. The new limit, known as the Proposition HH cap, would have been calculated like the Referendum C cap, but with an additional growth factor of one percentage point per year. The Proposition HH cap would have been adjusted annually for inflation, population growth, qualification and disqualification of enterprises, and debt service changes.

For example, the FY 2023-24 Proposition HH cap would have been calculated based on the FY 2022-23 Referendum C cap, adjusted for inflation, population growth, qualification and disqualification of enterprises, debt service changes, and the one percentage point additional growth factor. The FY 2024-25 Proposition HH cap, and the cap for subsequent years through FY 2031-32, would have been equal to the prior year's Proposition HH cap, adjusted for the same factors, including an additional one percentage point growth factor each year.

State revenue retained above the Referendum C cap, up to the Proposition HH cap, would have been deposited into the Proposition HH General Fund Exempt Account, with revenues to be used to first reimburse local governments (backfill) for lost property tax revenue. Secondly, 5% or $20 million, whichever was less, would have been transferred to the Housing Development Grant Fund. Remaining revenue after local government reimbursements and the transfer to the Housing Development Growth Fund would have been transferred annually to the State Education Fund.

TABOR refund impacts

The following tables show the projected impact of Proposition HH on TABOR refunds under the six-tier refund mechanism in tax years 2023, 2024, and 2025 for single and joint filers.

2023

The state legislature passed House Bill 1311, designed to provide for changes to the TABOR refund mechanism for fiscal year 2022-23, if Proposition HH had been approved. In 2023, Proposition HH would have required an estimated $94.3 million that would otherwise be refunded via the six-tier sales tax refund mechanism to instead be refunded via property tax reductions, paid via reimbursements to local governments.

2023 TABOR Refunds under Proposition HH and HB 1311

Adjusted Gross Income	Current Law Refund Estimate (Single / Joint)	Proposition HH and HB 1311 Refund Estimate (Single / Joint)	Change in Refund Estimate (Single / Joint)
Up to $50,000	$628	$898/ $1,796	+$270
$50,001 to $100,000	$838	$898/ $1,796	+$60
$100,001 to $157,000	$964	$898/ $1,796	-$66
$157,001 to $219,000	$1,146	$898/ $1,796	-$248
$219,001 to $279,000	$1,233	$898/ $1,796	-$335
$279,001 and up	$1,984	$898/ $1,796	-$853 / -$1086

2024 and beyond

Under Proposition HH, the state would have retained the following amounts that would otherwise be refunded to taxpayers:

• $166.6 million for FY 2023-24;
• $358.6 million for FY 2024-25; and
• larger amounts in subsequent fiscal years through at least FY 2031-32.

TABOR refund impacts under Proposition HH (tax year 2024)

Tax Year	Adjusted Gross Income	Current Law Refund Estimate (Single / Joint)	Prop HH Refund Estimate (Single / Joint)	Change in Refund Estimate (Single / Joint)
2024	Up to $52,000	$352 / $704	$320 / $640	-$32 / -$64
	$52,001 to $103,000	$469 / $938	$427 / $854	-$42 / -$84
	$103,001 to $164,000	$540 / $1,080	$491 / $982	-$49 / -$98
	$164,001 to $227,000	$642 / $1,284	$584 / $1,168	-$58 / -$116
	$227,001 to $291,000	$690 / $1,380	$628 / $1,256	-$62 / -$124
	$291,001 and up	$1,111 / $2,222	$1,011 / $2,022	-$100 / -$200

TABOR refund impacts under Proposition HH (tax year 2025)

Tax Year	Adjusted Gross Income	Current Law Refund Estimate (Single / Joint)	Prop HH Refund Estimate (Single / Joint)	Change in Refund Estimate (Single / Joint)
2025	Up to $54,000	$294 / $588	$227 / $454	-$67 / -$134
	$54,001 to $106,000	$392 / $784	$303 / $606	-$89 / -$178
	$106,001 to $168,000	$452 / $904	$348 / $696	-$104 / -$208
	$168,001 to $233,000	$537 / $1,074	$414 / $828	-$123 / -$246
	$233,001 to $299,000	$577 / $1,154	$446 / $892	-$131 / -$262
	$299,001 and up	$929 / $1,858	$717 / $1,434	-$212 / -$424

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot question for the measure was as follows:

“

SHALL THE STATE REDUCE PROPERTY TAXES FOR HOMES AND BUSINESSES, INCLUDING EXPANDING PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FOR SENIORS, AND BACKFILL COUNTIES, WATER DISTRICTS, FIRE DISTRICTS, AMBULANCE AND HOSPITAL DISTRICTS, AND OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND FUND SCHOOL DISTRICTS BY USING A PORTION OF THE STATE SURPLUS UP TO THE PROPOSITION HH CAP AS DEFINED IN THIS MEASURE?

”

Full text

The full text of the measure can be read below.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2023

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 legislature wrote the ballot language for this measure.

The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 26, and the FRE is 8. The word count for the ballot title is 55.

Fiscal note

The fiscal note prepared by the Legislative Council Staff is available here.

Support

Property Tax Relief Now (Yes on HH) led the campaign in support of the measure.

Supporters

Officials

• Gov. Jared Polis (D)
• State Sen. Stephen Fenberg (D)

Political Parties

• Democratic Party of Colorado

Organizations

• Bell Policy Center

Arguments

• Former State Rep. Joe Salazar (D): "Prop HH is such an important ballot initiative for Colorado. K-12 education is wildly underfunded. Prop HH provides additional funding for our kids. Repubs will claim someone is taking something from you. In truth, they just don’t want to educate our kids."
• Colorado Governor Jared Polis (D): "Because of the very strong economy and very strong TABOR surplus, we are able to do both, we are able to not jeopardize or cut funding for our schools and provide important property tax relief today."
• Senate President Steve Fenberg (D): "That is the revenue that goes to support fire districts, to support libraries, to support schools. And that’s a core part of making sure that we do this responsibly, rather than just saying property taxes are too damn high, so let’s cut them and not think about the impact that has downstream to our local services."
• Bell Policy Center: "Proposition HH meets the needs of our schools in two ways. Because any reduction in property tax revenues also reduces the local share component of school funding, HH increases the state share to compensate local school districts for the loss in revenue. ... For nearly 30 years, residential property owners’ property taxes were artificially reduced under the Gallagher Amendment. Colorado Voters repealed it for two reasons. First, communities nearly completely reliant on residential property tax desperately needed new revenue for fire, safety, and schools. Second, commercial property taxes were artificially increased by absorbing the increase in property values across our state. By gradually stepping down commercial assessment rates and using TABOR surplus dollars, we can fill the hole left behind when we reduce commercial property tax. There are definitely different ways to meet the moment we’re in. Proposition HH is one of a few different responsible solutions to a big challenge for our state. Unfortunately, superficially simple, yet dangerous, approaches are out there."

Official arguments

The following was the argument in support of the measure found in the Colorado Blue Book:

Colorado Blue Book Official Arguments: "1) With Colorado facing a historic increase in residential property values, Proposition HH provides long-term property tax relief for homeowners and businesses. In doing so, the measure also limits the impact on local services, makes Colorado a more competitive environment for businesses, and allows seniors to downsize or move without losing the benefits of their homestead exemption. 2) The new property tax limit makes local taxing entities more accountable to their constituents. By requiring a public process to waive the limit, Proposition HH gives people a say in how much they are taxed while providing flexibility for local governments to retain revenue needed to provide important services. 3) By allowing the state to retain additional revenue, the measure benefits public schools. The state’s spending cap has limited Colorado’s ability to fully fund education for years. Proposition HH provides a funding source for at least ten years, using money the state already collects. 4) Proposition HH benefits low- and middle-income people, many of whom are renters, by providing a more equitable distribution of TABOR refunds in 2023. With recent high inflation and housing costs, this puts more money in the pockets of those who need it most."

Opposition

Five committees were registered to oppose the measure: Tabor Coalition (RejectHH.Com), No on HH, Taxpayers for a Better Deal, Americans for Prosperity Colorado Issue Committee, and HH-NO.com.

Opponents

Officials

• State Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer (R)
• State Sen. Paul Lundeen (R)

Political Parties

• Republican Party of Denver

Organizations

• Advance Colorado Institute
• Colorado River District

Individuals

• Michael Fields (R) - President of Advance Colorado Institute

Arguments

• The Common Sense Institute Executive Director Kelly Caufield: "The bottom line is renters are the biggest losers of Proposition HH. So [renters] are paying for this, but they get no benefit. They will not receive a reduction in property taxes because they don't pay property taxes. We appreciate that some dollars are going toward rental assistance. But when you divide by the numbers of renters in the state, it’s not significant dollars."
• State Rep. Mike Lynch: "We’ve seen this movie before, Governor Polis and his friends in the Democrat-controlled Legislature have looked to raid TABOR to solve economic problems they’ve usually created. In 2019, the governor and Democratic lawmakers ran Proposition CC that would have allowed the state to keep citizens’ TABOR refunds for schools, and it was rejected by seven percentage points. Hopefully, Coloradans will see through this new effort to extort their constitutionally guaranteed TABOR refunds."
• Sage Naumann, vice president of communications of 76 Group and former spokesman for the Colorado Senate Republicans: "[Proposition HH is] a 'property tax reduction' of 0.06% in exchange for a confusing modification to the TABOR refund mechanism. Adding 1% to the TABOR cap each year may not seem like a big deal, but compounding year over year means within just a few years, TABOR refunds could be eliminated forever. It was completely unnecessary for the legislature to even broach the subject of TABOR refunds, but they simply couldn’t help themselves."
• Michael Fields, president of Advance Colorado Institute: “The repeal of the Gallagher Amendment was supposed to make things better, but I opposed it because it would inevitably lead to huge increases in property taxes for Colorado families. That is exactly what we are seeing across the state. The legislature created this problem. They said they would come up with a solution and they didn’t. Now, the governor and legislature want us to give up our TABOR tax refunds for a tiny bit of property tax relief. It’s another bad idea.”
• Abe Laydon, Douglas County Commissioner Chair: "Anyway you slice it, SB23-303 and Proposition HH do not prevent residential property owners in Douglas County from experiencing what will be the largest property tax increase in state history."
• Mesa County Board of Commissioners: "Borrowing $20 from taxpayers and then giving back $10 is not the intent of TABOR. It is alarming that local governments were not consulted on the bill or Prop HH. We believe strongly in local solutions that are designed for local problems. However, under the guise of lowering property tax, this is an underhanded and confusing attempt to work around TABOR. In addition, the proposition itself violates the single subject rule established to protect voters in Colorado."
• Kim Monson, president of the Colorado Union of Taxpayers: "Coloradans are facing a historic increase in residential property values which will result in significantly higher property taxes for homeowners and businesses. Proposition HH purports to provide property tax relief. It is really a bait and switch at the expense of Coloradans’ TABOR refunds. Forever. Renters, in particular, lose out because their “refunds” will be used for short term and small amounts of property tax relief for others. By allowing the state to retain additional revenue (our TABOR refunds), it hurts the everyday, hardworking people of Colorado because the state keeps more of our money and we have less of our money. Prop HH is a hastily proposed, convoluted, 48-page measure that further complicates our property taxes. It is time for REAL property tax simplification and reform for Coloradans."
• Colorado Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen (R-9): "Proposition HH [allows] the state government to keep more of your tax dollars year after year, eventually whittling away your Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR) tax refunds until they’re potentially eliminated forever. But, no surprise, you won’t hear about that fine print in any of the proponents' campaign materials. Coloradans have experience in defending TABOR, but Denver politicians are getting more and more clever with how they attempt to dismantle it. Thankfully, even liberals in support of the measure can’t quite figure out how to be deceptive about the measure’s effects."

Official arguments

The following was the argument in opposition to the measure found in the Colorado Blue Book:

Colorado Blue Book Official Arguments: "1) Proposition HH essentially increases taxes by reducing or eliminating future TABOR refunds, potentially growing the state budget by up to $2.2 billion per year by 2032. The measure removes important taxpayer protections and gives the state legislature the power to extend the new revenue cap forever without asking voters. 2) Property tax relief should not come at the expense of TABOR refunds. While the measure provides some limited property tax relief, the loss to taxpayers from the reduction or elimination of TABOR refunds is likely to exceed the property tax savings over time. The measure is also costly for renters, who do not directly benefit from property tax relief and will receive lower TABOR refunds in the future. 3) Property taxes are a local issue, best handled by local communities. Proposition HH pushes state priorities and an unnecessary new revenue limit onto local governments and their residents, rather than letting them find solutions that work locally. 4) Proposition HH adds unnecessary complexity to an increasingly confusing property tax system, with new classes of property and an additional administrative burden for homeowners, seniors, county assessors, and potential homebuyers. As a result, the measure makes it harder for people to access their tax benefits and navigate the housing market, opening the door to unintended consequences."

Media editorials

See also: 2023 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

• Denver Post Editorial Board: "The trade-off made in Proposition HH — a small decrease in TABOR refunds for a larger break in property taxes — is not simple but it is essential. Looking at the measure holistically, we have found – without question – that the significant reduction in the pending property tax increases, which are due in March, outweighs the slight increase in taxes and fees retained by the state that will occur with the increased TABOR cap: an additional 1% of the revenue collected every year under the TABOR formula. ... The good news is that Proposition HH presents an eloquent solution to a thorny fiscal balance in this booming state with an irregular tax structure."
• Grand Junction Daily Sentinel Editorial Board: "Where do renters fall in all of this? If HH doesn’t pass and property taxes increase by 40%, it’s a safe bet that landlords will pass those costs to renters in the form of higher rents, further straining housing affordability in Colorado. Prop HH isn’t perfect. It gives the state Legislature the power to extend the new revenue cap forever without asking voters — as long as the Legislature extends property tax reductions equal to or greater than those in the measure. t’s a complicated measure and we urge voters to study their Blue Books. But there are two factors that have us supporting it. If HH pulls in more money than the state needs to pay back local districts, the money goes to the State Education Fund. Assuming there will be years with no surpluses, the state will need reserves to cover the backfill. But the best argument for HH is that it averts a crisis. If it doesn’t pass, the resulting 40% increase in property taxes will be felt by everyone. But it also sets the table for something much worse. Already there’s a proposal to lock in a statewide solution in the state Constitution. HH’s failure would likely make the alternative palatable, even if it pushed Colorado back into another fiscal thicket."

Opposition

• Denver Gazette Editorial Board: "If Prop. HH passes, it’ll be a windfall for the state government. It likely will be hauling in an additional $2.2 billion that otherwise would go back to taxpayers over the coming decade. For taxpayers, on the other hand, Prop. HH is a raw deal. They will lose far more over time by giving up their refunds than they’ll gain in modest property tax relief. Indeed, any tax relief won’t come close to offsetting the soaring tax bills that are expected to rise up to 50% for some homeowners when tax bills go out next spring. In short, Prop. HH wouldn’t just force taxpayers to pay for their own property-tax relief, it would overcharge them — to grow government. Unconstitutional? It’s unconscionable."
• The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board: "The coming tax hazard is known as Proposition HH, a referendum that Coloradans will vote on in November. It proposes two policy changes that work in opposite directions. The first would curb property-tax growth modestly by lowering the assessment rate. That would save about $4,600 for an average homeowner through 2032, according to the Common Sense Institute. The kicker is the second part. The same ballot measure would raise the amount the state can spend by about 25% a year, depriving taxpayers of refunds to which they’re currently entitled. That change would cost each household about $5,100 over nine years, swallowing the savings from the property-tax cut. The changes could cost taxpayers an estimated net $21 billion through 2040."
• Colorado Springs Gazette Editorial Board: "Total state property tax revenue paid next year under Proposition HH is forecast to be $15.3 billion even under HH, with its temporary decrease in the statewide property assessment rate. That’s $1.77 billion above what it would have been had property taxes grown at their historic annual rate of 5.9%. That works out to an additional $742 per Colorado household. The overall economic impact: a loss in personal income of $425 per household and of more than 14,000 jobs, the institute concluded. To repeat, that’s even if HH’s purported property tax relief were to be in place. In other words, Prop. HH doesn’t offer much relief when it comes to Coloradans’ property taxes — even as it gouges those same taxpayers by making them give up their refunds of surplus revenue collected above the state’s constitutional spending limits. Coloradans need property-tax relief that doesn’t force them to foot the bill. Instead, they should be required to fork over less money for their homes in the first place. No subterfuge is required."

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 7, 2023.

Property Tax Relief Now registered to support the measure. The committee reported $2.97 million in contributions and $2.89 million in expenditures.

Five committees registered to oppose the measure: Tabor Coalition (RejectHH.Com), No on HH, Taxpayers for a Better Deal, Americans for Prosperity Colorado Issue Committee, and HH-NO.com. Together, the committees reported $2.46 million in contributions and $2.46 million in expenditures.

	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Support	$2,803,265.00	$164,806.85	$2,968,071.85	$2,735,168.59	$2,899,975.44
Oppose	$2,034,639.26	$425,242.56	$2,459,881.82	$2,029,966.25	$2,455,208.81
Total	$4,837,904.26	$590,049.41	$5,427,953.67	$4,765,134.84	$5,355,184.25

Support

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

Committees in support of Proposition HH
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
Property Tax Relief Now	$2,803,265.00	$164,806.85	$2,968,071.85	$2,735,168.59	$2,899,975.44
Total	$2,803,265.00	$164,806.85	$2,968,071.85	$2,735,168.59	$2,899,975.44

Donors

The five top donors to the support campaign were as follows:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Sixteen Thirty Fund	$600,000.00	$0.00	$600,000.00
Education Reform Now Advocacy Inc	$460,000.00	$0.00	$460,000.00
Boldly Forward	$391,875.00	$0.00	$391,875.00
Gary Advoccy LLC	$350,000.00	$0.00	$350,000.00
Pat Stryker	$100,000.00	$0.00	$100,000.00

Opposition

The following table includes contribution and expenditure totals for the committee in opposition to Proposition HH.

Committees in opposition to Proposition HH
Committee	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions	Cash Expenditures	Total Expenditures
No on HH	$2,014,900.00	$0.00	$2,014,900.00	$2,013,332.26	$2,013,332.26
Americans for Prosperity Colorado Issue Committee	$0.00	$404,917.25	$404,917.25	$0.00	$404,917.25
Taxpayers for a Better Deal	$1,000.00	$20,253.14	$21,253.14	$0.00	$20,253.14
TABOR Coalition	$18,739.26	$72.17	$18,811.43	$16,633.99	$16,706.16
HH-NO.COM	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00
Total	$2,034,639.26	$425,242.56	$2,459,881.82	$2,029,966.25	$2,455,208.81

Donors

The five top donors to the opposition committees were as follows:

Donor	Cash Contributions	In-Kind Contributions	Total Contributions
Advance Colorado Action	$1,150,000.00	$0.00	$1,150,000.00
Defend Colorado	$600,000.00	$0.00	$600,000.00
Americans for Prosperity	$0.00	$375,028.75	$375,028.75
Ready Colorado	$150,000.00	$0.00	$150,000.00
William Witter	$50,000.00	$0.00	$50,000.00

Methodology

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

Polls

See also: 2023 ballot measure polls

Are you aware of a poll on this ballot measure that should be included below? You can share ballot measure polls, along with source links, with us at editor@ballotpedia.org.

Colorado Proposition HH, Property Tax Changes and Revenue Change Measure (2023)
Poll	Dates	Sample size	Margin of error	Support	Oppose	Undecided

The Detroit News	06/21/2022-07/07/2023	662 LV	± 3.81%	54%	34%	12%
	Question: "Following is the ballot language for Proposition HH. After reading it, please indicate if you would vote yes and approve it or vote no and reject it. SHALL THE STATE REDUCE PROPERTY TAXES FOR HOMES AND BUSINESSES, INCLUDING EXPANDING PROPERTY TAX RELIEF FOR SENIORS, AND BACKFILL COUNTIES, WATER DISTRICTS, FIRE DISTRICTS, AMBULANCE AND HOSPITAL DISTRICTS, AND OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND FUND SCHOOL DISTRICTS BY USING A PORTION OF THE STATE SURPLUS UP TO THE PROPOSITION HH CAP AS DEFINED IN THIS MEASURE? If an election were being held today, would you vote yes and approve, or vote no and reject Proposition HH?"

Note: LV is likely voters, RV is registered voters, and EV is eligible voters.

Background

Property taxes in Colorado

Property tax revenue in Colorado is collected by local governments and funds county government, public schools, junior colleges, and special districts. At the time of the election, Colorado had not had a statewide property tax since 1964. The state sets assessment rates and local governments set the tax rate (mills) that are levied on the assessed value of the property. For example, for a $100,000 home, the 2023 assessment rate of 6.765% means that $6,765 is taxable. The local government's tax rate would apply to the $6,765. For example, a tax rate of 100 mills (equal to mills/1,000) would mean that $676.50 would be owed for property taxes on the house.

Amendment B of 2020, Gallagher Amendment Repeal

See also: Colorado Amendment B, Gallagher Amendment Repeal and Property Tax Assessment Rates Measure (2020)

Amendment B repealed the Gallagher Amendment of 1982, which limited the residential and non-residential property tax assessment rates so that residential property taxes equaled 45% of the total share of state property taxes and non-residential property taxes equaled 55% of the total share of state property taxes.

Non-residential property: Under the Gallagher Amendment, property tax assessment rates were set in the state constitution to be 29% for non-residential property. The rate was fixed at 29% in the state constitution and could only be changed through a constitutional amendment. Amendment B repealed the 29% non-residential assessment rate. Non-residential property includes commercial property and oil and gas property.

Residential property: Under the Gallagher Amendment, the assessment rate for residential property was required to be adjusted before each 2-year reassessment cycle so as to maintain the 45%-55% split between the total share of property taxes paid between the two types of property. The residential assessment rate was initially set as 21% under the Gallagher Amendment but decreased over time to maintain the 45%-55% split. The residential property tax assessment rate for 2019-2020 was 7.15%. As of 2020, residential property in Colorado made up about 80% of the assessed value of all property in the state.

The legislature passed a companion bill, Senate Bill 20-223, which was set to take effect alongside the constitutional amendment. Senate Bill 223 froze the then-current rates of 7.15% for residential property and 29% for non-residential property in state statute. SB 223 allowed the legislature to reduce the assessment rate in state law. Under the Gallagher Amendment, property tax assessment rates were expected to continue to decrease at the reassessment set to occur 2021 and going forward. Therefore, repealing the Gallagher Amendment and freezing property tax rates at current levels was expected to result in higher residential assessment rates than under the Gallagher Amendment. Due to the Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR), the legislature could not increase assessment rates without a statewide vote of the people.

Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR)

This measure required voter approval under TABOR since it would have increased state 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.

To read about the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, click here.

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.

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:

TABOR refund mechanisms

TABOR allows the state to provide for refunds using "any reasonable method." The state legislature has provided for a variety of refund mechanisms over the years. Two methods are permanent methods: refunding revenue through homestead exemptions for seniors and veterans with a disability and the six-tiered tax refund mechanism, which uses state general fund sales tax revenue and refunds it to taxpayers through income taxes based on six income tiers. TABOR refund obligations remaining after refunds are paid through other mechanisms are refunded through the six-tier tax refund mechanism.

TABOR ballot measures

Since 1992, when TABOR was adopted, through 2022, Colorado voters decided on 27 statewide ballot measures that would have increased revenue for the state, which required voter approval under TABOR.

• Eight 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);
• One measure asked voters to reduce income tax deduction amounts;
• 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.

Eight (29.6%) of the 27 measures were approved while 19 (70.3%) were defeated.

The eight measures that were approved are as follows:

• Colorado Tobacco Tax Increase for Health-Related Purposes, Initiative 35 (2004);
• Colorado State Business Income Tax Deduction Limit, Referendum H (2006);
• Colorado Proposition AA, Taxes on the Sale of Marijuana (2013);
• Colorado Marijuana TABOR Refund Measure, Proposition BB (2015);
• Colorado Proposition DD, Legalize Sports Betting with Tax Revenue for Water Projects Measure (2019);
• Colorado Proposition EE, Tobacco and E-Cigarette Tax Increase for Health and Education Programs Measure (2020);
• Colorado Proposition FF, Reduce Income Tax Deduction Amounts to Fund School Meals Program Measure (2022); and
• Colorado Proposition 123, Dedicate State Income Tax Revenue to Fund Housing Projects Initiative (2022).

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.

Path to the ballot

The state process

In Colorado, a legislatively referred state statute must be passed by a simple majority vote in each chamber of the state legislature. Legislatively referred measures do not need to be signed by the governor. Due to the Colorado TABOR, statewide voter approval is required to enact any legislation to increase government revenue at a faster rate than the combined rate of population increase and inflation.

The measure was introduced as Senate Bill 23-303 on May 1, 2023. After amendments, on May 8, 2023, the measure was passed in the House by a vote of 45-17 with three members absent and in the Senate by a vote of 23-12. The measure was passed along partisan lines with Democratic members in favor and Republican members opposed. Governor Jared Polis (D) signed the bill on May 24, 2023.

Vote in the Colorado House of Representatives May 8, 2023
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 22  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	45	17	3
Total percent	69.23%	26.15%	4.62%
Democrat	45	0	1
Republican	0	17	2

Vote in the Colorado State Senate May 8, 2023
Requirement: Simple majority vote of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 18  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	23	12	0
Total percent	65.71%	34.29%	0.00%
Democrat	22	0	0
Republican	1	12	0

Lawsuit

Lawsuit overview
Issue: Whether the measure violates the state's single-subject rule; whether the ballot language is misleading
Court: Denver County District Court and Colorado Supreme Court
Ruling: Dismissed in Denver District Court; appealed to Colorado Supreme Court, which affirmed that Colorado courts lack jurisdiction to rule on single subject requirements until measures have been approved by voters
Plaintiff(s): Advance Colorado and Englewood City council member Steven Ward	Defendant(s): Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D) and Secretary of State Jena Griswold (D)

  Source: Denver Post

Advance Colorado and Englewood City Council member Steven Ward filed a lawsuit on May 15, 2023, in Denver County District Court, challenging the measure. The lawsuit claimed that the measure violated the state's single-subject rule and that the ballot language was misleading. Michael Fields, president of Advance Colorado, said, "All of the stuff in there shows this is multiple subjects. We’re talking about TABOR refunds going to education, we’re talking about money going to renters, we’re talking about long-term changes to TABOR formula, and we’re talking about limited property tax relief in the same measure. They’re clearly trying to pair something that is unpopular with something that is popular to pass it."

State Senate President Stephen Fenberg (D) said in a statement, "It’s unfortunate that Republican special interest groups are trying to prevent Coloradans from lowering their property taxes, but we are confident SB23-303 was crafted within the confines of the law, and we look forward to proving its constitutionality so that every Colorado family can enjoy immediate relief while protecting critical funding for services like schools, libraries, and fire departments our communities rely on."

On May 24, 2023, twelve counties including Douglas, El Paso, and Mesa joined the lawsuit. The Mesa County Board of Commissioners said, "Borrowing $20 from taxpayers and then giving back $10 is not the intent of TABOR. It is alarming that local governments were not consulted on the bill or Prop HH. We believe strongly in local solutions that are designed for local problems. However, under the guise of lowering property tax, this is an underhanded and confusing attempt to work around TABOR. In addition, the proposition itself violates the single subject rule established to protect voters in Colorado."

On June 9, Denver District Court Judge David H. Goldberg rejected hearing the case, stating he felt it was not within his jurisdiction, but added that Proposition HH's ballot language did not appear to be misleading or violate the single-subject rule.

Plaintiffs appealed to Colorado Supreme Court, which ruled on August 22, 2023, that Colorado courts lack jurisdiction to rule on single-subject requirements until measures have been approved by voters. The court wrote, "we conclude that the district court did not have, and we do not have, subject matter jurisdiction to review either SB 303 or Proposition HH for compliance with our constitution’s single subject requirement unless and until those measures have been approved by Colorado voters. We further conclude that although we have jurisdiction to consider petitioners’ clear expression challenges to Proposition HH, at least to the extent that any defects in the title are amenable to judicial reformation, petitioners have not carried their burden of establishing that Proposition HH violates the applicable clear expression requirement."

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

Poll times

In Colorado, polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. local time for those who choose to vote in person rather than by mail. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.

Registration

Check your voter registration status here.

In Colorado, an individual can pre-register to vote if they are at least 15 years old. Voters must be at least 18 years old to vote in any election. A voter must be a citizen of the United States and have established residence in Colorado to vote.

Colorado voters can register to vote through Election Day. However, in order to automatically receive a absentee/mail-in ballot, a voter must register online, through the mail, at a voter registration agency, or driver's license examination facility at least eight days prior to Election Day. A voter that registers through a voter registration drive must submit their application no later than 22 days before the election to automatically receive an absentee/mail-in ballot. A voter can register online or submit a form in person or by fax, email, or mail.

Automatic registration

See also: Automatic voter registration

Colorado automatically registers eligible individuals to vote through the Department of Motor Vehicles and certain other state agencies.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

Colorado has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

See also: Same-day voter registration

Colorado allows same-day voter registration for individuals who vote in person.

Residency requirements

Colorado law requires 22 days of residency in the state before a person may vote.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Colorado does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual applying to register to vote must attest that they are a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury.

All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters.

Verifying your registration

The site Go Vote Colorado, run by the Colorado Secretary of State office, allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

Colorado requires voters to present non-photo identification when voting in person. If voting by mail for the first, a voter may also need to return a photocopy of his or her identification with their mail-in ballot. Click here for more information.

The following list of accepted forms of identification was current as of August 2025. Click here for the most current information, sourced directly from the Office of the Colorado Secretary of State.

“

The following documents are acceptable forms of identification: A valid Colorado driver’s license or valid identification card issued by the Colorado Department of Revenue. (Note: documents issued to not lawfully present and temporarily lawfully present individuals under Part 5 of Article 2 of Title 42, C.R.S. are not acceptable forms of identification.) A valid U.S. passport. A valid employee identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector issued by any branch, department, agency, or entity of the U.S. government or of Colorado, or by any county, municipality, board, authority, or other political subdivision of Colorado. A valid pilot’s license issued by the federal aviation administration or other authorized agency of the U.S. A valid U.S. military identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector. A copy of a current (within the last 60 days) utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the elector. A Certificate of Degree of Indian or Alaskan Native Blood. A valid Medicare or Medicaid card issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. A certified copy of a U.S. birth certificate for the elector. Certified documentation of naturalization. A valid student identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector issued by an institute of higher education in Colorado, as defined in section 23-3.1-102(5), C.R.S.. A valid veteran identification card issued by the U.S. department of veterans affairs veterans health administration with a photograph of the eligible elector. A valid identification card issued by a federally recognized tribal government certifying tribal membership. Any form of identification listed above that shows your address must show a Colorado address to qualify as an acceptable form of identification. The following documents are also considered acceptable forms of identification for voting: Verification that a voter is a resident of a group residential facility, as defined in section 1-1-104(18.5), C.R.S. Verification that a voter is a person committed to the department of human services and confined and eligible to register and vote shall be considered sufficient identification of such person for the purposes of section 1-2-210.5, C.R.S. Written correspondence from the county sheriff or his or her designee to the county clerk indicating that a voter is confined in a county jail or detention facility.

”

• Note: SB 1, signed into law on May 12, 2025, specified that tribal IDs issued by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian Health Service, or another federal agency were also valid identification.

See also

2023 measures

• 2023 ballot measures
• Taxes on the ballot
• Property on the ballot
• 2023 petition deadlines

Colorado

• Colorado ballot measures
• Colorado initiative laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls
• Ballot measure signature costs

External links

• Full text
• 2023 Blue Book