"No" on Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101 Resource Center

Click here to read the complete ballot language for all six initiated measures appearing on the 2010 Ballot

Colorado State Treasurer Cary Kennedy's Analysis of the Measures

AMENDMENT 60
Amendment 60 would roll back local votes overriding TABOR’s limits. Since TABOR passed in 1992, local voters around the state have granted flexibility to their school districts, library districts, and other local service providers to meet local needs. This proposal would override local voters’ wishes and re-impose TABOR’s limits, forcing even more cuts in schools, road maintenance, public safety and other basic local services.

AMENDMENT 61
Amendment 61 would prevent the state and local governments from financing infrastructure projects such as school buildings, higher education facilities, hospitals and clean-energy projects.  Under this measure, important projects such as the Anschutz medical campus in Aurora that boost economic growth, and essential public buildings, like the new academic science buildings at Auraria and the University of Colorado in Colorado Springs, would no longer be possible. Further, the state would no longer be able to finance school construction in Colorado’s poorest school districts.  Colorado is currently repairing and upgrading aging school buildings throughout the state under the new Building Excellent Schools Today program. This program saves local taxpayers money and promotes rural economic development. Amendment 61 would halt these projects.

PROPOSITION 101
Proposition 101 would create a structural deficit in the state’s general fund, threaten our state’s strong credit, and eliminate funds needed to repair Colorado’s structurally deficient bridges. Colorado currently has 128 structurally deficient bridges on the state highway system, and our transportation infrastructure is eroding faster than current revenues can maintain it. Vehicle registration fees are a critical component to keeping our roads safe.

Sign Treasurer Kennedy's Petition By Clicking Here 

Comments by Elected Officials and Candidates

Colorado Governor Bill Ritter
"...three of the most backward-thinking ballot measures this state has ever seen."

"[They] would shut down colleges and prisons, increase class sizes, put thousands of teachers out of work and prevent the repair of unsafe roads and bridges. If these measures pass, the state could never again support building another public school, library or rec center." (From his State of the State Address, reported in the Denver Post, February 22, 2010)

Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, Candidate for Governor
Amendment 60: "Oppose. If passed, Amendment 60 would wipe away decisions that voters have made to fund schools and other essential services such as police officers and fire stations. While it is dressed up as an effort to empower voters to decide local revenue questions, it will undo what voters have already decided and create financial chaos for our schools and communities."

Amendment 61: "Oppose. Amendment 61 is a real jobs killer at a time when we need more construction and economic development. It doesn't make good business sense. If we pass this proposed amendment, we'll cripple Colorado's ability to attract investment and capital for the major infrastructure challenges we have."

Proposition 101: "Oppose. We ought to look at a sunset for FASTER, and while I am not opposed to lower income or tax rates down the line, Proposition 101 doesn't make good business sense, either. It would prevent work we desperately need to complete repairs for 128 unsafe bridges throughout Colorado and would hurt our ability to improve transportation. This proposal is also a jobs killer." (Denver Post, February 22, 2010)

Chris Nevitt, Denver City Councilman
"This is a catastrophe, wrapped in a disaster, garnished in insanity." (The Denver Post, July 19, 2010)

Michael Hancock, Denver City Councilman
"These initiatives threaten to devastate our economy, kill jobs and drive business out of our state just at a time when we can least afford it." (Guest Commentary, The Denver Post, July 19, 2010)

Carol Boigon, Denver City Councilwoman
“The combination of action will put a city and county like Denver out of business. We will not be able to take care of our citizens, or our people.

“Truly, this is a measure that was designed by Mr. Douglas Bruce to put government out of business. And these three together would do it.” (Denver Daily News, July 19, 2010)

Dan Maes, Candidate for Governor
"...universal passage of all three would be very detrimental to our current budget situation."

Amend 60: Support

Amend 61: Oppose.

Prop 101: "I oppose the vehicle-tax portion, but support the income- tax and telecommunication tax sections." (Denver Post, February 22, 2010)

Scott McInnis, Former Candidate for Governor
Amendment 60: Oppose. "...I do think it is wrong for the state government to dictate to school districts and local governments how to conduct their business.

Amendment 61: Oppose. "Certificates of Participation allow the state to leverage its assets to build large-scale projects such as roads, bridges, and buildings, including the Anschutz Medical Campus in Aurora. A COP is to the state what a home equity loan is to a family: a creative way to tap into equity to make improvements without new debt. By using COPs responsibly the state can avoid raising taxes to meet infrastructure need, and this is a tool that should be preserved."

Proposition 101: Oppose. "...parts [of this proposal], such as lowering the vehicle registration fee to its level from the year 1919, go too far and are unrealistic. Transportation is a critically important function of state government, and this provision alone would devastate Colorado's ability to maintain safe roads and bridges." (Denver Post, February 22, 2010)

Resolution

Democratic Party of Denver Executive Committee's Resolution in Opposition to Ammendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101

News Stories and Editorials

30 Mayors Say How 60, 61, and 101 Would Hurt Colorado Cities
(Denver Business Journal, October 6, 2010)

Colorado Republicans Come Out Against Tax-Slashing Measures
23 of 27 Republican State Representatives signed a letter urging defeat of the measures.  (The Denver Post, September 13, 2010)

Governing a State of Ruins
Editorial taking Tancredo and Maes to task for supporting fully or in part a trio of ballot measures that would "cripple state and local government."  (The Denver Post, September 4, 2010)

Colorado Guv Candidates Vary Widely on Tax [Revenue] Slashing Amendments
Hickenlooper, Maes, and Tancredo answer questions about fiscal initiatives in first gubernatorial debate.  (The Colorado Independent, September 3, 2010)

Only Crazies Back Proposition 101
The hard reality behind Prop 101's candy-coated attempt to fool voters.  (The Colorado Springs Gazette, August 1, 2010)

War Chest for Fighting Proposals Swells to $2.6 Million
Good news--opposition to the financial ballot measures is outpacing the sponsors in fundraising.  (Westword, July 22, 2010)

Denver Leaders Urge Voters To Reject Ballot Measures Limiting Property Taxes, Debt
City Council poised to pass proclamation in opposition to financial ballot measures.  (Denver Post, July 19, 2010)

Vote On Anti-Tax Measure
Denver City Council Will Vote on Proclamation Opposing Proposition 101 and Ammendments 60 and 61 (Denver Daily News, July 19, 2010)

The Campaign for Amendments 60 and 61 and Prop 101 Sounds Bad, But It Could Work
Doug Bruce's tax-slash campaign relies on old formula to entice unwitting voters.  (The Colorado Springs Independent, July 15, 2010)

Ballot Proposals Could Cost Jobs, Lengthen Downturn
Details of a study projecting losses of over $6 billion in revenue and 73,000 jobs.(Denver Business Journal, July 9, 2010)

Ballot Item Could Cripple Colorado
Dangerous measures would prevent state and local governments from providing basic infrastructure.  (The Denver Post, July 7, 2010)

Amendment 61 Would Put Tough Limits on Government Borrowing For Projects
One of three tax-slashing and government-limiting measures on the ballot, Amendment 61 would prohibit the state from borrowing and would limit local governments to borrowing only with voter approval.(The Denver Post, July 6, 2010)

Ballot Questions and What They Mean
A brief summary of the financial measures on the November ballot, including the actual ballot language.  (The Denver Post, February 24, 2010)

Taxes, Spending: Reaction Sharp to Colorado Ballot Issues
A preliminary look at the ballot measures and comments from gubernatorial candidates on the initiatives.  (Denver Post, February 22, 2010)

A Partial List of Organizations Opposing Ammendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101

AARP • Action 22 • CH2MHILL • Club 20 • Coloradans for Responsible Reform• Colorado Corn Growers Association • Colorado Competitive Council • Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry • Colorado Concern • Colorado Counties, Inc. • Colorado Education Association • Colorado Municipal League • Colorado Rural Electrical Association • Colorado Ski Country • Colorado Space Coalition • Denver City Council • Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce • Denver Public Schools • Economic Development Council of Colorado • Jefferson County Economic Development Council • Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce • Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District • NAIOP- National Association of Industrial and Office Properties • National Education Association • State Board for Community Colleges and Occupational Education • Visit Denver Visitor and Convention Bureau

Links to Other Resources

Coloradans for Reasonable Reform - www.donthurtcolorado.com

Looking Forward Colorado - www.lookingforwardcolorado.com/

Great Education Colorado - www.greateducation.org/

ProgressNow Colorado - www.stopthebad3.com