Read the entire article at The Colorado Independent:  Dems blast bill that would make dramatic changes to Governor’s Energy Office.

Created upon receiving yet another mailing from Colorado’s Futures asking participants to support SCR11-001, a bill that would completely change citizen’s abilities to put amendments on the ballot.

An Open Letter to Senator Shaffer,

I feel very strongly that the foundation on which this bill (SCR-11 001) was founded is absolutely unethical, and the “result of hard work by you and many others” consisted of a strategically-designed process with only one outcome in mind — selling the concept behind an already constructed bill and falsely claiming there was “real consensus” from the public.

Things were presented as “facts” that were simply not true.  The claim that there were over 100 initiatives pending to the Colorado Constitution at the Title Board, was true ONLY because the 20 or so initiatives that were there all had an average of 5 versions of their wording, some more than 10, but that wouldn’t really serve as an argument for convincing the public that changes needed to be made, so that part was left out.  A lot was left out, and not accidentally.

I attended the Community Forum in Boulder, the results of which were discounted, as they had a “computer glitch” which actually consisted of many folks at the meeting not buying the premise and not coming up with the “right answers” — see my article on the topic.

To add insult to injury, those Community Forums attendees were asked to LOBBY for the bill, as part of the consensus-gathering process, and comments such as “we think TABOR kept us in better financial shape than the rest of the country”  were never allowed to be made, nor were folks allowed to create any questions, nor were the questions themselves handed out so everyone could read them and see the patterns in the presentation.  This was a process with few real ethical hooks, and a lot of manipulation, and the resulting bill should not be passed.

Colorado’s Future is a group I’ve looked closely at, and I consider it (among several others) an attempt by Colorado’s corporate elite to keep the state government flush with tax funds for their own purposes.  I’ve always considered Democrats folks that support the people against corporate interests.  I was a Democrat for most of my life before becoming a Libertarian, and I find it ironic that Libertarians have to remind Democrats that tax dollars are there for the people, not for tax-increment financing for developers, transportation projects that bring all kinds of goodies for the builders of “transit villages” and on and on.

I know the state has problems financially.  They’ve dug many holes for themselves by hard-wiring programs (esp. the “it’s for the Children” Amendment 23 which has been sucking the life out of the budget since it was passed) without creating checks and balances to prevent those funds from ever being cut — a flaw of the legislative process.   If there is a place to change the amendment process it is in making those creating amendments clearly show how their funding would affect the state’s future financial health.   Amendment 23 was a Democratically-supported initiative, so that side of the coin, sadly,  was not looked at too closely.

I am NOT a person who believes there should never be any taxes, although many conservatives would disagree with me, but I do believe the HOW speaks volumes about the Legislature’s tendency to serve corporate interests, rather than those of the people.  This particular bill was created and sold to the public with a campaign that would make a used car salesman proud (don’t look under the hood, believe me, it’s great!).

I would hope you’d look to the people rather than to a group of developers and their cronies to “ensure Colorado’s leaders have the tools to make sound decisions.”  I’m getting less and less hopeful by the day, although there was a ray of hope when you had to rebuke Sen. Heath, the creator of this bill,  on the Senate floor the other day for not believing the rules applied to him.  I wish everyone had the courage to do so on the important things that really matter.

Colorado State Capitol circa 1910

The City of Boulder enjoyed substantial success in last year’s session of the Colorado General Assembly, Carl Castillo, policy advisor for the city asserted at a PLAN-Boulder County forum on January 14, but this year it will probably concentrate more on “playing defense” to try to block bills that it finds troubling. Among these harmful bills, Castillo said, were “Arizona-style” immigration measures and proposed legislation to repeal increases in fees approved last year and also to renew certain tax exemptions that were eliminated by the last session of the General Assembly.

The forum, which focused on the city’s legislative agenda and the actions that the  Colorado General Assembly is expected to take in this session, also featured State Senator Rollie Heath and State Representative Deb Gardner as panelists.

Although the city is likely to assume a more defensive posture in the General Assembly, Castillo explained that this session it will also promote four legislative priorities that have been established by the Boulder City Council:

• legislation that would enhance the ability of local governments to develop and implement effective energy strategies, such as, perhaps, “community choice aggregation.”
• legislation that would grant in-state status at Colorado institutions of higher learning to certain undocumented young people who have graduated from high school.
• legislation that would encourage waste reduction and diversion efforts, such as recycling of electronic equipment, collecting information on diversion rates by cities over 25,000 in population,  and establishing economic development zones for recycling operations.
• legislation that would require federal transportation funding beginning in 2012  to be allocated by the state to projects which would result in the smallest increases, or greatest decreases, in vehicle miles travelled (VMT), rather than continuing the current allocation scheme which essentially ignores VMT.

Castillo said that the city’s positions on about 90 percent of the bills of interest in the General Assembly are represented by the Colorado Municipal League.  Approximately 700 bills are introduced in every session, he said, and about 100 usually affect municipal interests and precipitate lobbying by the Municipal League. He recognized that Boulder’s goals sometimes conflict with those of the League. Such a conflict emerged in the last session, when the city, along with some other jurisdictions such as Boulder County and the City of Louisville, backed a bill which the League opposed to limit the use of tax-increment financing to build urban renewal projects on greenfields.

Castillo said he counted the passage of the tax-increment financing bill as one of the city’s major legislative successes in the last session. The others that he mentioned as major victories were approved bills that authorized “community solar gardens,” reformed “payday lending,” and imposed new regulations on the owners of mobile home parks.

Castillo noted that the city also lobbies the federal government. Congressman Jared Polis and Senator Mark Udall have warned the city that earmarked funds will not be appropriated this year. Castillo claimed that one casualty of that new policy is $250,000 for a bike sharing program that the city had expected to receive from the federal government.

Castillo commented that a common reaction to Boulder from federal officials is that it already is showered with lots of federal money and that grants and loans should go to less favored communities.  However, Castillo said that the city is trying to counteract that attitude by presenting itself to federal officials as a valuable learning laboratory for sustainability, where federal funds can have maximum impact. He revealed that a congressional field trip to Boulder has been scheduled for August.

Gardner and Heath predicted that at least some legislation will attract bi-partisan support, including a plan to re-district Colorado’s congressional seats, a bill that would change the way state funds are allocated to institutions of higher education on the basis of the number of degrees granted, rather than the numbers of students, a bill to tighten the requirements for amending the Colorado constitution, and a bill to encourage more recycling of asphalt.

Gardner reported that she is a co-sponsor of a bill to collect data on waste diversion rates by cities over 25,000 in population, as a pre-cursor to possible future legislation to set recycling goals and incentives for cities. She also is working to devise legislation to create recycling enterprise zones, such as Utah already has established. She observed that her constituents had told her when she was campaigning for election last fall that their major concerns were jobs and education. She claimed that more recycling and waste diversion would create jobs.

Heath, who co-chairs the General Assembly’s bi-partisan, re-districting committee, continued to express alarm about the fiscal condition of Colorado. He noted that Colorado is last in the nation in per capita funding for higher education funding and  for mental health.  He said that state spending on roads and bridges is half what is needed for adequate maintenance. Colorado’s level of state and local taxation is the 47^th lowest. Yet it is the seventh wealthiest state on a per capita basis, he claimed. The state faces a $1 billion budget “shortfall” this year.

He observed that a comprehensive tax study, conducted by an assembled panel through the University of Denver and  funded by private donations, will  come to the Colorado General Assembly before February 1. He voiced hope that it will conclude that the fiscal status quo is not acceptable. Heath said that an additional $2 billion a year in revenues would be needed for Colorado to reach the average level of state spending in this country and that $9 billion more a year would be needed for it to attain the top ten percent.

Heath asserted that returning the Colorado income tax from the current 4.63 percent rate to the former 5.0 percent would raise $350 million a year, and restoring the state’s sales and use tax rate to the former 3.0 percent from the current 2.9 percent would raise another $300 million a year. He ventured that taxes on services may be needed and noted that various states tax 27 different services. He also noted that the Gallagher Amendment, in combination with TABOR, imposes a disproportionate, and arguably unfair, amount of the burden of property taxes on commercial properties.

Heath called for a change in the common perception of taxes to a crucial investment, rather than a waste, or as a growing segment of the right wing claims, a theft.  He foresees the possibility that the broad-based, political coalition which decisively defeated proposed Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101 last fall will be regenerated in 2012 to help pass a comprehensive referendum or initiative increasing and re-structuring state taxes.  He admitted, however, that he doubts that the General Assembly would refer such a measure to the voters, so it would probably appear before  the public as an initiative, arising from grass-roots activity.

This article was corrected to clarify that the comprehensive tax study is a privately funded study.

Senator Mark Udall (D-Colo) sent out an e-mail to his supporters earlier this morning about tagging him into the ring to power slam the filibuster.

For those of you who haven’t been paying attention to how little the Senate was able to actually accomplish this year, the reason is because of the filibuster: a practice that allows any senator to hold a bill and stall a vote. Weird thing though – the senator these days just has to merely threaten a filibuster for it to usually work. Showing up is sort of a moot point for someone who has a guaranteed job for six years.

Read the entire article at New Era News:  Udall Power Slams Filibuster. Mitch McConnell Recoils in Fear.

Colorado State Senator-elect Kent Lambert, R-Colorado Springs, told The Colorado Independent Monday that he will introduce legislation early in the next session that would be nearly a carbon copy of Arizona’s SB 1070.

“We will introduce a series of bills that have to do with illegal immigration. We plan to run a 1070-type bill,” he said, adding that the legislation will be ready to go right away when the session opens.

Lambert said he is not concerned about litigation. “We are very confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the Arizona law as it was written.

“The issue is not to try and write a bill in such a way that you can avoid litigation. It will be litigated one way or the other,” Lambert said. “Groups that oppose measures like this will litigate no matter how you write it.”

He said that polls show that a majority of Americans support legislation like Arizona’s. “I don’t care if it is litigated,” he said. “It is clearly something the people want. The will of the people has been ignored by Democrats for too long.”

Read the entire article in the Colorado Independent:  Lambert to introduce Arizona-style immigration legislation for Colorado

Eighty-one percent of Latino voters in Colorado voted for Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet. Split the Latino vote down the middle between Bennet and Republican Ken Buck and Buck wins easily. Even if Buck had only received 30 percent of the Latino vote, he would have won the election.

As it was, Buck barely out-polled gubernatorial candidate and anti-immigration hardliner Tom Tancredo among Hispanics.

Read the entire article at the Colorado Independent:  Numbers show Hispanic voters carried the day for Colorado Democrats

from http://www.namastesolar.com

Released today, a new survey from Environment Colorado and the Colorado Solar Energy Industries Association indicates Colorado is sixth in the nation in solar-related jobs and is expected to increase that number by 23 percent in 2011.

Entitled “National Solar Jobs Census 2010: A Review of the U.S. Solar Workforce (pdf),” the new survey doesn’t just rely on economic forecasting, instead asking solar companies to report on their actual hiring histories and projections for the coming year.

Read the entire article at the Colorado Independent:  Survey: Colorado leading nation in solar energy jobs growth

Amendments 60 and 61 and Proposition 101 (the “Ugly Three”) would be most devastating to local school districts, but they would also significantly damage local governments, non-profit corporations and local businesses according to non-profit and government leaders at a press conference on October 5.

Ken Roberge, president of the Boulder Valley School District Board, stated that Amendment 60 would reduce its property tax revenues by about half to $60 million a year, that Amendment 61 would make it almost impossible to manage cash flow and to build new schools or renovate new ones due to the high costs of 10 year-long loans, and that Proposition 101 would slash state revenues by up to 24 percent and cost the BVSD about $9.5 million a year in lowered revenues. Roberge claimed that the compound effect of the “Ugly Three” would be to cut the BVSD’s revenues by about half, or $3,300 per student per year.

l to r: Bob Hullinghorst, John Creighton, John Cody, Dickie Lee Hullinghorst, Ken Roberge, Rollie Heath, Josie Heath, Susan Osborne, Frances Draper, Susan Andre

John Creighton, the president of the St. Vrain Valley School District Board, asserted that all together the “Ugly Three” would chop $42 million from the district’s $200 million general fund budget. He predicted that, if the measures pass, the wealthier students would all transfer to private schools, and the remaining ones would receive a dismal education.

Boulder’s mayor, Susan Osborne, forecast that Amendment 60 would cost the city between $5 and $11 million the first year and between $8 and $15 million a year when fully implemented. She also stated that it would cost the city’s utilities between $7.6 and $35 million a year in property taxes and lead to rate increases to customers of between 22 and 104 percent. She further projected that Amendment 61 would reduce city revenues by $3 million the first year and from $1 million to $1.7 million per year when fully implemented. The mayor also claimed that Proposition 101 would chop $6.2 million from the city’s revenues the first year, and $7.9 to $8 million a year when fully implemented. All together, she said that the “Ugly Three” were expected to cut the city’s budget by 15 percent.

State Senator Rollie Heath warned that if the “Ugly Three” were enacted, and the state of Colorado funded K through 12 education at current levels, as Amendment 60 would require, only $35 million would be available in the state’s budget for all its other services.  Heath also commented that, apart from the Ugly Three, a long-term solution needed to be found to the state’s chronic fiscal shortages. He observed that Colorado’s tax revenues are the seventh lowest in the United States. He said he is hopeful that the recommendations in November of a coalition of business, labor, non-profit and government leaders formed to help pass Referendum C several years ago, plus a report in January from the University of Denver, would lead to feasible, long-term, structural reforms.

While canvassing for New Era Colorado this past Saturday in Fort Collins, spreading the word about the ‘bad 3′, I had some intersting conversations with a few individuals that genuinely feared the effects of the ballot measures.

Read the entire article at New Era News: No Party Parents for The ‘Bad 3′ Amendments 60, 61 and Proposition 101

The Midterm Elections are around the corner and the voter registration deadline is approaching. Have you moved recently and need to update your address? Want to request a mail-in ballot? Or are you a late bloomer and still need to register to vote for the first time? Just a word of warning: your first time can make you nervous, but don’t be surprised when it all happens quicker than you expected. Registering takes just a minute and you can now do it all online if you live in Colorado.

New Era Colorado just launched our Online Voter Registration website where you can take care of everything in one spot. If you’ve got a Colorado Driver’s License or ID you can even use the site just to check your registration to make sure it’s all accurate and good to go.

Do it now. I bet you can even manage to do a yoga pose while you’re at it.

And if you think you don’t know enough about the issues on the ballot, join us at the Boulder Drafthouse at Spruce and 13th on Wednesday, Sept. 15th at 5:30 to learn about the ballot measures this year. Some of them are kinda scary. More info at the Facebook event here.