Ritter hopes to both even out the share discrepancy and generate more money for schools by freezing mill levy rates, which wouldprevent them from decreasing. By keeping property taxes, which are based on mill levies, from falling, schools could net anywhere from $50 million to $65 million in the first assessment, and millions more thereon as property values rise.
This proposal sounds logical. Trouble is, by launching the proposal late into the legislative session and failing to fully communicate this idea to Coloradans, it will appear to be nothing more than a veiled tax hike.
Ritter is careful not to use that phrase - tax hike - but freezing the mill levy could very well mean property owners will pay more.The governor's office has received a legal opinion stating the change could be made without voter approval, but this is a tax hike.
The governor started this processfrom the wrong constituency.
Rather than approach lawmakers, Ritter would have been more effectiveby communicating withColoradans how important it isto properly fund K-12 education, and how the current process has left the general fund strapped and incapable of supporting other state needs, such as higher education.
This is an entree into a conversation about how wrong-sided the state's entire tax policy is, including the Gallagher Amendment.
Sure, many taxpayers will consider their personal interests first, and this is a complicated matter. ButRitter shouldhave taken his proposal to the people first, and then the Legislature.
As it stands,Coloradans will see atax hike long before they see the reasoning behind a valid need to fund K-12 education.