Amendment U to save counties more than they collect
Measure to eliminate property tax collection for certain businesses on government land gains ground
Amendment U may be flying under the radar, but proponents say it makes sense to save taxpayer money. The gist is that our counties are spending more to collect certain property taxes than they are receiving from them.
Here’s the official ballot language:
“Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning an exemption from property taxation for a possessory interest in real property if the actual value of the interest is less than or equal to six thousand dollars or such amount adjusted for inflation?”
Sen. Randy Baumgardner, R-Hot Sulphur Springs, sponsored the bill that put the measure on the ballot. He says it targets land leased from the government by individuals, typically for ranching, that has a tax bill of $6. He says the issue was brought up by his constituents, and county assessors testified in the legislature in favor of it.
“It’s something that’s been brewing for years,” says Baumgardner.
Rep. Ed Vigil, D-Fort Garland, sponsored the bill in the Colorado House of Representatives. Baumgardner notes that bipartisan support — two-thirds of both the State House and Senate — got it on the ballot.
“Nobody really has come out against it,” Baumgardner says. “It’s pretty common sensical.”
The Colorado Secretary of State’s website lists official supporters and opponents for each measure and there is no person or organization listed against Amendment U.
The official Blue Book of ballot measures states that the argument against is that Amendment U would provide “an unfair tax break for businesses and individuals who use government-owned land for their private financial benefit, and puts a greater tax burden on others to pay for local government services.”
The Blue Book argument in favor of it states that the majority of possessory interests in the state are for agricultural leases and are often charged less than $10 in property tax.
“The cost of administering this tax — mailing notices, maintaining tax rolls, and collecting and enforcing the tax — often exceeds this amount.”
Baumgardner, who serves State Senate District 8 in northwest Colorado, has some ranches in Grand County that would be affected by this, but points out the amendment caps at $6000 of possessory interest, which amounts to about $6 in property taxes.
The fiscal impact listed in the Blue Book states that the change would reduce property taxes statewide by up to $125,000 per year beginning in the 2018–19 budget year, but some county governments would see cost savings “as a result of fewer properties to assess and fewer tax notifications to mail and process.”
Baumgardner says he expects most of the “no” votes to come from people who aren’t paying attention or just vote “no” on all the measures — which he speculates is a possibility because there are so many constitutional amendments on the ballot this year.
