Are the ballot measures needed cuts or extortion?
Re: “Is end to property tax wars in sight?” Aug. 18 news story
Now we have a special session called by the governor, which I believe is not needed as the legislature passed a bill during the past session that set a reasonable solution to the problem of property taxes.
There is a long history of this taxation. Before 1982 the assessment rate was a flat 30% for all parties. Needless to say, there were lots of complaints. In 1982 a bill passed reducing the rate for businesses to 27% and for residential to 21%. Since that time residential has decreased dramatically.
Why do we pay property tax? First it is the main funding for schools, and often the only funding for fire departments, parks (which includes those swimming pools), local roads, police, counties, libraries, some cities and water and sewer, and a few other items I have forgotten. Did you know your insurance is higher when your response time for fire service is shorter? Your unrepaired roads cause more damage to your cars. The amount of tax you pay is important. No, we should not be excessive, but what is on the ballot this year will cost you personally in other ways.
The use of a ballot measure to cudgel the government into making more cuts by Michael Fields and a certain portion of the business community is appalling. A promise to remove the ballot issues if the legislature passes more reductions is ridiculous. They are not paying excessive property taxes currently. Look at history. It makes me wonder what has happened to their previous support of education as during the time I served. As to the issue of a 4% assessment rate as promoted by Mr. Fields, this would devastate our education system as well as any service we need as homeowners.
Please vote no at the ballot box on these initiatives and ask the legislature to say no to extortive practices.
Norma Anderson, Lakewood
Editor’s note: Anderson is a former state senator.
Gov. Jared Polis is in full panic mode over the possibility that property taxes could possibly be cut by a vote of the citizens.
He has called for a special session because he and the Democrats only want to cut taxes one-tenth of the amount the referendum calls for.
Stand firm, GOP, and let the voters decide.
Larry Fries, Aurora
Initiatives 50 and 108 are very appealing on the surface. However, the details make it clear that along with some property tax relief, we will get years of legal and legislative decisions and challenges that could cause us to say, “Be careful what you wish for.” The taxing bodies are shouting that the “Sky will fall” if 50 and 108 pass. I doubt it. But, let’s not take a chance. I urge the state legislature to quickly pass workable legislation to ensure that Colorado residents will not be taxed out of their homes and that the services and education that citizens count on will continue to be delivered to us.
Douglas G. Griffin, Golden
Gov. Jared Polis called another special session to try to head off two citizen initiatives to reduce property taxes. Property taxes that business owners, renters and homeowners pay. Since the Gallagher Amendment was repealed in 2020, the democratic majority has failed to reduce property taxes. Proposition HH was the first bad idea and it was defeated by voters and by a huge margin. The steps the Democrats have taken thus far are completely inadequate. And now Gov. Polis and his fellow Democrats are screaming that the world will end if these ballot measures pass. Baloney. Due to Bidenomics and the Colorado Democrats’ own failed policies, taxpayers continue to have to do a lot more with a lot less. Well, our government can do the same. I say forget any deal and let’s pass initiatives 50 and 108.
Jeff Jasper, Westminster
Op-ed pieces and front-page stories about the horrors of Initiatives 50 and 108. And, given The Post’s editorial board’s frequent support for more taxpayer revenue for governments, I am sure more “the sky is falling” stories are to come. The so-called fix to property taxes in the last session of the General Assembly was a joke. It locked in the, on average, approximately 40% increase in assessed valuation across the state. So besides the hit we already took this year, future property tax bills will just keep compounding on that 40% increase.
It is beyond me why governments think they are entitled to such a significant two-year increase in property tax revenues. What a windfall! And, at least in Centennial, no taxing district reduced its mill levy from last year.
The services provided by governments do not increase because of increases in assessed valuation. More teachers and police officers do not need to be hired because property values go up. Nor do roads need more maintenance. Governments are claiming Initiatives 50 and 108 will cripple their ability to provide essential services. Yet somehow, they were able to provide those services before the huge windfall in property tax revenues this past year. And at the state level, most of the recently enacted revenue measures were just a redistribution of income to the favored marginalized group de jour, and had little to do with essential services.
I hope the proponents of the Initiatives keep them on the ballot in November.
Kurt Kaufmann, Centennial
No choice? Voting for Harris to oppose MAGA movement
Re: “To save conservatism from itself, I am voting for Harris,” Aug. 18 commentary, and “Conservative support for Harris/Walz,” Aug. 17 letter to the editor
Sunday’s Perspective featured an editorial from a pro-life attorney lamenting the evils of the Trump-led Republican party, and concluding with his stated intent to vote the Harris/Walz ticket. Perspective also contained a letter from a GOP “conservative,” similarly concerned by the “hijacking” of the Republican party by narcissists, clearly referring to former President Donald Trump. That letter writer also indicated that he would vote for Harris/Walz and encouraged “fellow elephants” to follow his lead.
While I can understand their motivations to withhold their vote from Trump, neither presents a rational case for voting for Vice President Kamala Harris instead. There are other alternatives to express their dissatisfaction with Trump than to cast a vote for a ticket that profoundly differs from their stated values. Particularly in Colorado, where it’s a no-brainer that our presidential electoral votes will go to the Democrats, undervoting (leaving the top line of the ballot blank) delivers a more appropriate message than voting for the opposite party.
Tom Kocialski, Centennial
I recently wrote a letter listing some tangible comparisons between MAGA and traditional fascism. David French’s column reminded me that the list could have been much longer. (I’ll never forget the 2020 news reports of armed people guarding a ballot drop-off box in Littleton.)
And yes, David, true conservatives won’t vote for Donald Trump. My dad was a WWII vet and a conservative. If he were here today, he’d point to Trump and say something to the effect of, “Hey buddy, you’re neither a conservative nor a patriot.”
We shouldn’t expect conservatives to vote for Kamala Harris. If I were a conservative, I’d not vote for president.
Scott Newell, Denver
Last week, The Denver Post published a commentary from David French, a writer for the New York Times. French announced that he was joining some other Republicans in voting for the Democratic ticket of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.
French writes, “Lying is wrong. I’m not naive; I know that politicians have had poor reputations for honesty since ancient Athens. But I have never seen a human being lie with the intensity and sheer volume of Donald Trump.”
I can’t argue that.
Further, French pens, “Political violence and threats of violence have no place in the American democratic process. Yet threats and intimidation follow the MAGA movement like night follows day.”
Again, I have no bone to pick with that point.
When I do have a problem is when he writes, “At each step, (the MAGA movement) has pushed Republicans further and further away from Reaganite conservatism.”
Not really. Current Republicans are trying to continue many Reagan-era libertarian/conservative values: big government is the problem, trickle-down Reaganomics works, privatization of schools is better. Hmm.
And then there’s the matter of presidential crime, about which French wrote zilch. The Iran-Contra shenanigans were clearly illegal for which Col. Oliver North largely took the blame. How did French miss the 34 felony counts for which former President Donald Trump was convicted in the city where he works?
David C. Mathews, Highlands Ranch
Mayor, here’s how to spend on housing and win
Re: “Denverites will vote on largest dedicated sales tax in city’s history,” Aug. 20 news story
I worked on affordable housing issues in Boulder, both in my 10 years as a city council member here and afterward. My strong suggestion is to spend most of the money on permanent investments in affordable housing, and not just on helping people pay for housing, where once the money is spent, it is gone.
For example, one way to do that is to give people down payment assistance to buy market-rate units they could not otherwise afford in exchange for permanently limiting future price increases on that housing. Or pay landlords to make certain units permanently affordable to people at some reasonable percentage of Area Median Income.
In addition, Denver would do well to mandate that a percentage of all units in new housing developments be permanently affordable. Boulder’s current requirement is 25%. That is about half of what is needed to maintain the population’s economic distribution, but way better than nothing.
For business development, implement a jobs-housing linkage fee, where commercial development pays for affordable housing for its workers who could otherwise not afford to live in the city. Boulder’s is currently $30 per square foot for office space, which is just a fraction of what’s needed, but, again, better than nothing.
Steve Pomerance, Boulder
The changes to the Sunday funnies
Re: “Changes today to our comics pages,” Aug. 18 note to readers
As an admirer of satire, I’m pleased to see Doonesbury back in The Denver Post — evidently no longer considered too controversial. I’m sorry to see the deletion of Macanudo, which takes the prize for originality, but I suppose it was too eccentric. Good call, you all!
James Aubrey, Denver
I am happy to see the elimination of Marmaduke and could easily say adios to Fred Basset. And I will admit to initially disliking Macanudo when it replaced Adam@Home. Over time, I have learned to really appreciate Macanudo, and I am sorry it has been removed. The artwork is phenomenal and various plot lines are interesting. I have my favorites (the girl and her cat, the witches) and not-so-favorites (Olga), but I had come to anticipate and enjoy it each day. Liniers, the author, demonstrates intelligence, different perspectives, and creativity. It would be great if The Denver Post reconsidered its removal.
Mariann Storck, Wheat Ridge
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
