Colorado Union of Taxpayers Positions on Denver and Other Special District 2024 Ballot Measures

Colorado Union of Taxpayers Board Member Mary Janssen and Colorado Union of Taxpayers Secretary Wendy Warner authored the following positions on behalf of the Colorado Union of Taxpayers.

Ballot Question 2Q: Sales Tax Increase (0.34%) to Support Denver Health

Vote No: Although we all appreciate the work done at Denver Health, this tax increase must be opposed for the following reasons:

1. The hospital authority is the safety net hospital for the metro region, providing services regardless of ability to pay. Medical facilities in the towns and cities surrounding Denver refer indigent and uninsured patients to Denver Health. These other communities need to share the cost of providing safety net services – it should not be on the shoulders of Denver residents alone.
2. The City and County of Denver need to step up to the plate and prioritize support for Denver Health in its budget instead of increasing the taxpayer burden. Nationwide, safety net hospitals get an average of 11% of their funding from local government. Denver contributes only 2.39% of Denver Health’s budget.
3. Denver’s Sanctuary City status has added to the problem of uncompensated care. Last year, the hospital provided over $10.5 million in uncompensated care to over 8,500 undocumented immigrants. It is irresponsible of the City to promote the Sanctuary City policy without budgeting for the associated costs.
4. This measure adds another cost-of-living increase on all Denver residents at a time when they are already coping with soaring property taxes, new fees for sidewalks, and trash fees. Sales taxes have already increased by 30% since 2018.
5. This measure has a sneaky provision to exempt this tax from the TABOR cap, which means Denver Health will get far more than the original $70M/year when retail spending increases. Denver Health should ask the voters before taking more than the original proposed revenue and demonstrate the increased need for funds.
6. This tax and the other proposed sales tax increase will together cause Denver to have one of the highest sales taxes in the state. Businesses will suffer as residents will shop in suburbs to avoid these high taxes.

Ballot Question 2R: Half Percent (0.5%) Tax Increase for Affordable Housing

Vote No: This additional cost burden on Denver residents is the wrong solution for the following reasons:

1. It adds another cost-of-living increase on all Denver residents at a time when they are already coping with soaring property taxes, new fees for sidewalks, and trash fees. (All these taxes and fees have also contributed to increased rents.) Enough!
2. A sales tax is a regressive tax – it hurts low-income and fixed-income residents more. While this measure aims to help low-income home seekers, it actually makes it harder for all low-income and fixed-income persons to afford to live in Denver.
3. This sales tax will produce $100 million per year forever with only general categories of uses named. Give taxpayers a detailed and specific plan before asking for so much money!
4. This measure has a sneaky provision to exempt this tax from the TABOR cap, which means the city will get far more than $100M/year when retail spending increases. Where is the accountability for this increase? The city should ask the voters before taking more than the original $100M/year.
5. Denver will have one of the highest sales taxes in the state. Businesses will suffer as residents will shop in Glendale or other suburbs to avoid these high taxes.
6. Denver should seek other solutions before raising taxes. It is widely acknowledged that the Construction Defects Law is responsible for a 76% reduction in new condo builds – and condos are the lowest-cost starter homes. There has been an 84% decrease in the number of condo and townhome developers. The Construction Defects Law substantially increases litigation risks and insurance costs for developers. Why isn’t the city actively pressuring the State Legislature to adopt balanced approaches to construction defects that have been proposed by various organizations?

Ballot Question 308: Fur Ban

“Would ban the display, distribution, manufacture, and sale or trade of ‘certain’ animal fur products. Animals slaughtered for their fur ‘endure tremendous suffering,’ and the ‘demand for fur products does not justify the unnecessary killing and cruel treatment of animals,’ the ballot item reads. This item was put forward by the same residents as the slaughterhouse ban.”

Vote No: This proposed ordinance singles out and prohibits a single type of business and category of products. This will put furriers out of business and will impact the Western Stock Show (which opposes it). This not only outlaws the sale of fur coats, but it also impacts such products as cowboy hats and fish lures that use animal fur. We should not limit or prohibit these traditional western businesses. This is anti-free enterprise!

Ballot Question 309: Slaughterhouse Ban

“Would prohibit slaughterhouses in the city limits and beginning Jan. 1, 2026, the construction, maintenance, or use of existing slaughterhouses.”

Vote No: This proposed ordinance specifically seeks to put Superior Farms, an employee-owned slaughterhouse, out of business. This business supplies 15-20% of all lamb products in the United States. This ordinance impacts a wide net of farms and businesses, and it is estimated it may eliminate up to 2,160 jobs. Metro Denver might lose $760 million in output and could cause agricultural disruption throughout the state. The sponsors of this measure see this as the first step in eliminating the entire meat processing industry in this country. This is a major attack on private enterprise!

Ballot Question 4A: Denver Public Schools $975 Million Bond Issue

Vote No: While we all want to support our public schools, this gigantic $975 million bond issue is too big and prevents suffering taxpayers from getting a tax rate decrease they need. We should oppose Issue 4A for these reasons:

1. While not increasing tax rates, this initiative extends taxes approved in six different elections that otherwise would have expired. The property taxpayers could have used a decrease in taxes after the tremendous hike due to property value increases.
2. This bond issue is too big – the $975 million bond issue will actually cost $1.9 billion after interest is paid. Many of the items included in this bond should have been paid out of the regular budget. Denver schools received a windfall property tax increase due to increased property values, yet instead of using that windfall for maintenance and upgrades, the schools are asking for more money. Denver residents have suffered too high an increase in cost of living already. Enough!
3. As they are extending previously approved taxes, this bond money and associated taxes are not subject to the TABOR cap on total revenues generated. If consumer spending increases, the school district gets an increase in tax revenues without asking the taxpayers. Every time property values go up, the schools get a windfall increase to their budget while taxpayers are faced with higher tax bills. This is exactly what caused the uproar over increased property tax bills in this last year. The total tax revenue should be capped and not allowed to increase, with tax rates being decreased if property values go up so that the total revenue remains the same.
4. In the fine print at the end of the issue, this ballot issue allows the increase in mill tax rate on property if needed to cover the cost of the bond, without further vote of the people.
5. There has actually been an ongoing decrease in school enrollment. Why isn’t the Board consolidating the school population into already updated buildings?

Ballot Question 6A: Downtown Denver Development Authority

“The measure asks to take on $570 million in debt with a total repayment not to exceed $847 million for use by the Downtown Denver Development Authority. The purpose of the funding would be to finance costs of public facility and other improvements, infrastructure, and improvements to public or private property.”

Vote No:

1. Financial and Economic Risks: The expansion of the Denver Downtown Development Authority involves taking on $570M in debt with a total repayment cost of $847M, potentially leading to increased financial burdens for residents and businesses through higher taxes or operational costs if economic projections don’t pan out.
2. Governance and Transparency Issues: The proposal’s implementation raises questions about transparency, accountability, and decision-making processes. There’s a risk of funds being misallocated or used inefficiently for projects that might not serve the broader public interest or economic development goals, potentially leading to wasteful spending or favoring specific interests over the city’s economic welfare.
3. Long-term Commitment: Committing to debt repayment for decades ties future generations and administrations to current financial decisions, which might not align with evolving economic conditions or priorities.

Ballot Question 7A: RTD Request to Be Removed from TABOR Limits

Vote No: This ballot proposal should be opposed for the following reasons:

1. With this ballot proposal, RTD seeks to be released from the TABOR cap on total revenues collected, thereby subjecting Denver taxpayers to further property tax increases, as recently experienced from the City and schools. One of the primary requirements of TABOR is that a governmental entity cannot collect and spend any more revenue than it did the previous year, adjusted for population growth and inflation. If the government collects too much, it must be returned to the taxpayer either directly or via a decrease in the tax rate. If this passes, RTD will be released from the cap, and every time property values increase, RTD will get windfall revenue without having to explain to taxpayers how it will be used.
2. RTD has a record of continual over-expenditure and underperformance. It still hasn’t completed all the rail lines promised from a previous tax increase. Total train ridership has been stagnant, especially with a decrease in downtown as a work hub. RTD should not be allowed increased revenue until it has tighter plans and a proven record of performance.

Lakewood Ballot Issue 2A

“Without increasing current taxes or adding any new tax, shall the City of Lakewood, Colorado, be authorized to collect, retain, and spend the full amount of city taxes and all other revenue collected from all sources in 2026 and each year thereafter, in excess of the revenue and spending limitations in Article X, Section 20, of the Colorado Constitution, and shall such excess revenue be spent only as follows:

• One-third for parks, recreation, and open space;
• One-third for public safety-related equipment, services, and/or personnel; and
• One-third for the maintenance and improvement of streets, sidewalks, paths, and infrastructure.

And shall all such excess revenues be maintained and presented in a separate budget or account of the City of Lakewood, Colorado, to provide for oversight by the citizens of Lakewood to ensure the excess funds are used solely for the purposes described above?”

Under TABOR, the Taxpayer Bill of Rights, a 1992 constitutional amendment limits how the state and local governments can raise and spend money collected from the taxpayers. TABOR also makes the government ask the voters if they want to raise taxes and for what purpose.

Ten years ago, the City of Lakewood asked the voters to keep TABOR refunds, and that passed; it is set to sunset in 2025. Now, Lakewood 2A wants to keep taxpayer refunds indefinitely with this ballot measure.

Vote No:

1. Lakewood 2A is a sneaky way to get Lakewood citizens to give up their TABOR rights and refunds forever.
2. Property owners in Lakewood should vote no because 2A will eliminate TABOR refunds and any property tax caps from the recent special legislative session. This will increase property tax.
3. Renters should vote no on 2A because landlords will pass these property tax increases on to them, making housing harder to afford.
4. Consumers should vote no because increased property taxes affect local businesses and will increase the prices of products and supplies.