A unanimous Colorado Senate today turned down a sweeping property-tax hike proposed for schools by Gov. Bill Ritter even as the chamber’s Democrat leadership sought to head off the vote.

The freeze in property mill levies statewide – which would lead to higher tax bills as property values rise – was offered as an amendment to the annual School Finance Act in a surprise move by Republicans who opposed the hike but wanted a public debate on it.

Senate GOP chief Andy McElhany, one of the tax hike's outspoken foes, offered the amendment after repeated, unfulfilled promises by Democrats to attach the tax hike themselves to the school-funding measure.

“I’m moving (the amendment) for the purposes of debating it,” he said.

The tax plan was unveiled at a press conference by Ritter last week and headed for inclusion in the School Finance Act. It stalled almost immediately and went missing after getting the cold shoulder not only from Senate Republicans but even some Democrats. The tax hike’s lead proponent in the Senate, Democrat Education Committee Chair Sue Windels of Arvada, kept putting off the amendment to include the tax hike, saying it was undergoing revisions.

The latest plan was to let House members amend it in, skipping the Senate altogether. That tack incensed Senate Republicans.

“Gov. Ritter promised us a property-tax hike, and I came here prepared to debate a property-tax hike,” said Assistant GOP leader Nancy Spence, another opponent of the tax hike. “It is insulting to us senators to be told we won’t be able to comment as an elected body on the defining issue of this year’s School Finance Act until it comes back from the House.”

Other Senate Republicans echoed Spence's resentment at the attempt to dodge debate.

“This is a sweeping change of tax policy that deserves to be debated … in committee,” said Republican Sen. Josh Penry of Fruita, noting that the public didn’t have a chance to weigh in when the hike first was supposed to be presented in the Senate Education Committee. Penry serves on the committee.

“This will result in a real, dollar-for-dollar tax increase for most Coloradans,” Penry said of the Ritter property-tax hike.

Other Republicans drove home the point.

“It locks in high property taxes,” said Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield. “It increases money to the government, and it needs to be voted on by the people.”

Fitz-Gerald insisted the debate on the tax hike was premature and urged McElhany to withdraw the amendment because she said the Democrats’ own proposal along the same lines still was being vetted by legislative attorneys to address issues like constitutionality. McElhany declined her request, suggesting it made little sense for the Senate to approve the School Finance Act when one of its central – and most controversial – components had yet to be inserted.

“Everybody in the building knows this is being considered,” McElhany said.

McElhany succeeded in bringing his amendment to a floor vote, which he then urged all members to oppose. They did, turning thumbs down on a tax hike that their own party is still expected to propose in the House.

After the vote, all 15 Senate Republican signed and delivered a letter to Fitz-Gerald demanding that if a tax is amended into the School Finance Act in the House, it be reassigned to the Senate Education Committee when the bill returns to the Senate for concurrence. That way, the senators said, the public will have the opportunity it was denied earlier on to weigh in on the tax hike in the upper chamber.

In a related development, Spence succeeded in blunting an attempt by Democrat Windels to shortchange charter schools in the School Finance Act. Backed by key Senate Democrat supporters of charters, including Senate President Pro tem Peter Groff, Spence successfully offered several amendments heading off Windels’ attempt to cut capital funding and at-risk student funding for charters.