Well, it is a new year, so it is time for another big government assault on the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR). The latest attempt comes from Colorado Springs where a panel known as the "Sustainable Funding Committee" advised the Colorado Springs City Council to place a TABOR override on the April Ballot.
The measure to repeal the city's TABOR amendment could be the most contentious, [ Chairman Dan ] Stuart said. Colorado Springs voters approved the amendment in 1991, a year before voters statewide approved a similar amendment to the state Constitution that bears the same name.
"This is not an assault on TABOR. State TABOR remains in place," Stuart said. "What we're addressing here is the redundancy of having two sets of rules to address the same issues."
It is quite Orwellian to suggest that an assault on TABOR is not an assault on TABOR. Perhaps the city TABOR model needs tweaking to match the Colorado model, but an all-out repeal removes the taxpayer protections in case of a statewide recall. In any event, the rest of the article shows that the true purpose of these measures is simply to increase spending.
The property tax extension got a mixed reception. It would raise about $3 million annually that the Sustainable Funding Committee recommends spending on attracting and retaining businesses. (snip)
The final measure, to let the city keep up to $1.2 million in excess revenue, stirred no apparent controversy. The money was originally estimated at $800,000, but budget officials advised asking voters for a larger amount to hedge against a rise in the final amount of the excess. The money would be used for a building project, so far unspecified.
One wonders what the original purpose behind the property tax was, as the purpose of the tax extension is to give money to bring new businesses to the city. Presumably, these businesses will compete with others who do not have a public subsidy.
The final measure to keep money for an "unspecified building project" seems even more dishonest. Surely, Colorado Springs has a list of "priorities" for governmental building projects. If this money is for a new bridge on Powers Boulevard, a new dog park at the Garden of the Gods or merely adding to a "rainy day" fund, voters should have that important spending information. Otherwise, the vote is merely for a blank check for wasteful government spending.
The purpose of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights is to protect the taxpayer by limiting the growth of government. As shown in these examples from the Sustainable Funding Committee, there is never a shortage of those wishing to spend more taxpayer dollars and remove these protections. Even well-meaning government officials can believe that increasing government spending is the answer.
Of course, every dollar that the government takes is one less spent in the private sector. Allowing the property tax to lapse would allow taxpayers to keep more of their money during these tough economic times. Allowing the government to keep additional revenue instead of returning it to the taxpayers is merely a stealth tax increase. However, this instance shows that TABOR works effectively: government can grow, but it just needs to ask the voters to allow it to grow first.
by Civil Sense
Comments