The Colorado Government Pension System Introduction and Basic Organization
IB-B-2013 (April 2013)
Author: Joshua Sharf
PDF of full Issue Backgrounder
Introduction:
Colorado’s Public Employee Retirement Association (PERA) is the State’s largest pension plan, with more than 483,000 members as of 2011. Government contributions exceeded $1 billion in FY2011.
A Thumbnail Guide to Colorado State Government’s Spending Problem
IB-A-2013 (February 2013)
Author: Linda Gorman
PDF of full Issue Backgrounder
Introduction:
Colorado state government has a spending problem. Although inflation-adjusted per capita personal income in Colorado is still below its 2003 level, state spending has risen every year since 1999. State tax revenue has risen, but it cannot keep up with the spending.
Aurora Food Tax Changes Respect TABOR Restriction
IB-2012-B (August 2012)
Author: Bob LeGare
PDF of full Issue Backgrounder
Scribd version of full Issue Backgrounder
Introduction:
The City of Aurora amended its sales tax regulations related to candy and soft drinks, as a response to concerns raised by Aurora grocery retailers. The 2012 ordinance amendment has the appearance of a tax increase but further analysis concludes the tax policy change is likely to be “revenue neutral,” And therefore does not require voter approval under TABOR.
An Analysis Of Proposition 103
IB-2011-D (October 2011)
Author: Penn Pfiffner
PDF of full Issue Backgrounder
Scribd version of full Issue Backgrounder
Introduction:
Colorado’s Proposition 103 will raise state taxes $532 million in the first year and about $2.9 billion in the first five years. It proposes to raise the income tax rate on individuals and families, as well as small businesses, and simultaneously to raise the state sales tax rate. Proposition 103 is the only state issue on this fall’s ballot.
Colorado Bridge Enterprise: A Case Study in Contravening Colorado’s Constitution
IB-2011-C (May 2012)
Author: Tom Ryan
PDF of full Issue Backgrounder
Executive Summary:
In 2009 the General Assembly passed Senate Bill 09-108, more commonly known as FASTER. Signed by Governor Bill Ritter, the bill relies on distortions and deliberate misdirections to subvert Colorado’s Constitution and silence the voice of the people. The bill depends on continued silence for its provisions to move forward. Under FASTER, Colorado families are being forced to pay an unconstitutional tax of almost $100 million annually. This tax hits everyone who registers a vehicle in the state squarely in the pocketbook—a tax that was enacted directly by the legislature without a vote of the people.
How Colorado Has Raised $300 Million in Debt Without Asking Its Citizens: The Colorado Bridge Enterprise
IB-2011-B (May 2011)
Author: Richard Sokol
PDF of full Issue Backgrounder
Sribd version of full Issue Backgrounder
Executive Summary:
Colorado’s citizens are supposed to have a final say before our state can borrow money. But the 2009 FASTER law subverted citizens’ rights to vote on tax and debt issues. The law allows an unelected group of bureaucrats to appoint an unelected administrator and together borrow whatever amounts of debt can be backed by FASTER funds. On December 1, 2010, they did just that. And now Colorado’s citizens are burdened with $300 million of newly issued debt—with the promise of more to come. Because of the borrowed money, it is unlikely a future legislature can ever repeal the FASTER tax. All this, and we weren’t asked!
Debt Detective
IB-2009-E (May 2009)
Author: Luke Jackson
PDF of full Issue Backgrounder
Sribd version of full Issue Backgrounder
Executive Summary:
Our research found that information on local government debt is available to the public … on two conditions. First, citizens must have Sherlock Holmes-like instincts. Information about local debt can be found, but plan on digging for it. And, second, the results of your search may yield information that is considerably outdated.
What Is At Stake In The Current Battle Over Colorado’s Tax and Spending Limits?
IB-2009-C (March 2009)
Author: Barry W. Poulson
PDF of full Issue Backgrounder
Scribd version of full Issue Backgrounder
Executive Summary:
This year the Colorado legislature is debating a bill, (SB228) that would eliminate the Arveschoug-Bird Amendment. That Amendment was enacted by the legislature in 1992, a few months before the voters of Colorado enacted the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) Amendment. Arveschoug-Bird caps the growth of general fund spending at 6 percent per year. With the 6 percent cap in place, surplus revenue above this limit is transferred into the Highway Users Trust Fund and to capital construction.
There are several reasons why this bill would be fiscally irresponsible. The bill would eliminate what has proven to be a very effective constraint on the growth in general fund expenditures, and also on how state revenues are allocated between transportation and capital projects, and other expenditures. The bill also raises constitutional issues and the role of the initiative and referendum process in amending the constitution.
State Budget Scrutiny Reveals Ref C Shuffle
IB-2007-E (August 2007)
Author: Mark Hillman and Amy Oliver
PDF of full Issue Backgrounder
Scribd version of full Issue Backgrounder
Executive Summary:
Two years ago, lawmakers asked for a “timeout” from the spending restrictions of the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR) in order to allow the state budget to rebound from the recession of 2001-2002. Referendum C, approved by a narrow 52 percent to 48 percent margin, erased the tABOR spending limits for five years and permanently increased the spending caps thereafter. Voters were assured by Ref C proponents that K-12 education, colleges and universities, and health care would split the lion’s share of the resources if the measure passed. But a funny thing happened after Ref C passed. Spending on programs that rarely were identified with Ref C has grown at more than twice the rate of spending on education and health care. Now, some of the key players in convincing voters to pass Ref C are dissatisfied, and voters have cause to believe they were sold a bill of goods.
Implicit Compensation for Career Public Employees
IB-2007-D (May 2007)
Author: Michael Mannino and Elizabeth Cooperman
PDF of Full Issue Backgrounder
Scribd version of full Issue Backgrounder
Executive Summary:
The Colorado Division of Human Resources (DHR) conducts an annual compensation survey to support a state policy that provides competitive total compensation to ensure a qualified and competent workforce. Because this survey is significantly flawed in its estimation of retirement compensation, the comparison between private and public sector compensation is distorted. In particular, DHR substantially understaes retirement compensation for career public employees in Colorado. To indicate the magnitude of understatement, our study of PERA retirement benefits provides an historical baseline from which to evaluate retirement compensation. Improved estimates of implicit retirement compensation would allow a more realistic comparison between private and public sector compensation, and would support better decision making about allocation of scarce tax dollars for public employee compensation.
