Wednesday, April 25, 2007

      Lawyers within the Colorado Attorney General’s office said they have significant concerns about the constitutionality of Gov. Bill Ritter’s proposed freeze of property tax rates that House lawmakers approved Monday.

      Nate Strauch, spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office, said state lawyers are reviewing Ritter’s proposed mill-levy freeze, but the prognosis is not good.

      “It’s safe to say our office has significant concerns about the constitutionality of whether the measure meets the constitutional requirements of (the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights) as to whether it qualifies as a tax-policy change,” Strauch said. “That being said, we continue to explore the issue.”

      Under the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights voters are required to approve any change in tax policy that could result in an increase in revenues to the state.

      Ritter’s proposal would prevent mill levies in the majority of Colorado school districts from ratcheting down because of an interaction of the 1994 School Finance Act and various constitutional provisions that keep local tax revenues stable.

      Thus, the freezing of mill levies effectively would maintain property-tax rates even as property values rise, resulting in an increase in property-tax bills.

      Strauch said no one has requested that Attorney General John Suthers look into the matter, but lawyers nonetheless are studying the issue.

      He said lawyers hope to have a legal opinion completed by the time Senate Bill 199 has its final floor votes in the House and Senate.

      Attorneys within the governor’s office and with Legislative Legal Services, a nonpartisan agency serving the General Assembly, have analyzed the mill-levy freeze and declared it constitutionally sound.

      Republican lawmakers, including Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Yuma, hinted at Suthers’ uneasiness during Monday’s committee hearing on Senate Bill 199, the 2007 School Finance Act, but a representative of Suthers’ office never showed up.

      The bill’s House sponsor, Rep. Jack Pommer, D-Boulder, said if Suthers’ office was worried about the measure’s constitutionality, it would have sent a representative.

      In an attempt to address TABOR concerns, Rep. Tom Massey, R-Poncha Springs, attempted to refer the mill-levy freeze to voters. Democrats killed his amendment in a 8-5 party-line vote.

      Massey vowed at the close of the Monday evening hearing to try to refer the mill-levy freeze to voters during Senate Bill 199’s next floor debate.