El Paso Faces "Unspeakable" Cuts

Yawn.

This tactic was used for years by the Jeffco Schools, including the threat to stop running busses at all.  The problem, the voters finally stopped taking the BS seriously because even though mill levies were defeated, the Board found some way of not following through with it threats.  Once the Board finally got it and started selling its requests on the merits, the public responded and passed mill levies.

My advice to El Paso, if its really so bad, and you don't get your money, you better have the balls to make the cuts.  And oh, by the way, don't only cut poor people's services, they're voting for the increase already.  Cut services that affect real people, like recreation centers, ball field maintenance, soccer field maintenance, road maintenance,the treasurer's office, the clerk & recorder's office, the sheriff's department.  If you just keep cutting services for the people who are already voting for increases, you will accomplish nothing.  Besides, your right wing masters will just say: "Cut services for the poor? Sounds like a great idea.  Those guys don't deserve the money anyway. Close nature centers?  Great, that land should never have been in public hands anyway, let's develop it."

Get a grip

---

by: Craig @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 12:13:53 PM CDT

Run the sewage pumps....

...in rich neighborhoods on an every other day basis.

"Collective fear stimulates herd instinct and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd." -Bertrand Russell

---

by: parsingreality @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 13:05:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

or the county residents can just go use the bathrooms in Doug Bruce's house

---

by: One Queer Dude @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 17:46:11 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No can do

Doug Bruce's place is already full of Bullshit.

---

by: Danny the Red (hair) @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 18:06:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

ROTFLMAO, Danny!

---

by: bob ewegen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 18:26:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just not the bathrooms

in his real estate empire. Those are already clogged.

---

by: RedGreen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 18:07:58 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sounds like Grover Norquist's Paradise.

Those bodies in the gutter sure get in the way, though.  

"Collective fear stimulates herd instinct and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd." -Bertrand Russell

---

by: parsingreality @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 13:06:08 PM CDT

Dead on

Outstanding post, Craig.

---

by: rocco @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 13:10:06 PM CDT

Any county budget experts out there?

I was curious why El Paso County seems to be in such dire straits, compared with other, similar counties in Colorado. They all face pretty much the same mandates.

I compared Arapahoe and Jefferson counties, which are roughly the same population as El Paso and have a similar mix of urban/suburban and rural. From what I could find, El Paso gets the vast majority of its revenue from sales tax at roughly the rate the other two charge, while Arapahoe and Jeffco get the same sales tax revenue while collecting vastly more in property taxes than El Paso.

Is this disparity historic (Doug Bruce) or structural (military bases don't provide the revenue but still require expenditure to serve the population)? El Paso has a number of prominent non-profits, which would cut into the revenue, but that can't have that dramatic an effect countywide, can it?  

---

by: RedGreen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 14:33:11 PM CDT

We have a winner...

Aren't the counties affected by Gallagher?

If El Paso went on a tax rate cutting spree in the past (not unlikely), they're bound by Gallagher and the rest of our state's budgeting mess and cannot effectively recover.  It's easier to justify a sales tax increase than it is to go asking for higher property taxes...

"I have come to the conclusion that the making of laws is like the making of sausages-the less you know about the process the more you respect the result."  -- Anonymous IL State Rep. circa 1878

---

by: Phoenix Rising @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 14:47:30 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think Gallagher hits the counties directly

I'm not so good on Gallagher, I'm interested on Bob's take.

I think it caps residential taxes at 45% of total collected.  If a bunch of property is tax exempt it diminishes the commercial tax which diminishes the total pool, which further discounts the the amount that can be collected from residential.

I think 75% of total property value in the state is residential, but that the distibution of residential/commecial is very choppy.

---

by: Danny the Red (hair) @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 15:09:33 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Property tax the key?

the majority of funding for counties comes through property taxes and if El Paso's is minimal and voters aren't willing to pay then sales tax revenues won't cut it (especially in the economic downturn).

You mentioned nonprofits and that wouldn't have a significant impact.  I would think those nonprofits funded by state/federal/private dollars are designed to implement some health programs the county has farmed out or is unable to afford.

El Paso county has tried to debruce 15x from '95-'04 and only three ballot measures passed (one for a nature center, one for roads and transit and one general retention of revenues).

Craig summed it up well, if the county must cut services, cut services that will impact the budget and the voters.  

---

by: Car 31 @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 14:50:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

majority of funding for counties comes through property taxes

Not in El Paso County. Not by a long shot. (See figures below.)

My take on nonprofits is purely anecdotal, but I'm not talking about hospitals and day care. In Colorado Springs, sometimes it seems the entire economy is run on nonprofits -- the military, megachurches, the Olympics, and museums and halls of fame for everything under the sun. Those are all tax exempt. I can't imagine that has a huge impact, but it must have some.

---

by: RedGreen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 15:18:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Here's some figures

Let's compare El Paso and Jefferson counties. Close in size, similar rural/urban/suburban mix.

U.S. Census Bureau state and county quick facts shows
El Paso County 2006 estimated population 576,884
Jefferson County 2006 estimated population 526,994

The El Paso County budget summary has this revenue breakdown:
2007 El Paso County revenue
Property tax $11,128,530 9.8%
Sales tax $72,556,420 63.8%

The Jefferson County budget in brief shows this:
2007 Jefferson County revenue
Property tax $167,728,788 49.2%
Sales tax $37,0292,328 10.9%

---

by: RedGreen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 15:14:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

yes, your numbers illustrate

what I was thinking.

El Paso's reliance on sales tax revenue hurts them in slow economic times.  Two of the three DeBrucing ballot measures approved were in '04, coming on the tail of another economic downturn.  They chose to increase the sales tax (for transportation) and 'collect, retain, and spend all revenues' (typical DeBrucing ballot language).

---

by: Car 31 @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 15:25:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Excellent comparison

Real numbers - what a bonus.

The difference is stark; even all of the Federal property in El Paso can't account for that discrepancy.

"I have come to the conclusion that the making of laws is like the making of sausages-the less you know about the process the more you respect the result."  -- Anonymous IL State Rep. circa 1878

---

by: Phoenix Rising @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 16:46:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

That is amazing

They have ½ the money as JeffCo. I'm amazed they aren't already on life support.

Tom Tancredo Interview

---

by: DavidThi808 @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 17:41:56 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Those aren't the only sources of revenue

just the largest ones. The way the two counties present their budgets, it's not a straight-across comparison (including or not including employee transfers, intracounty transfers, etc.). Jeffco doesn't spend twice as much as El Paso when all is figured. Vehicle registration fees and state-federal pass-throughs are beyond their control. But property and sales tax are rates set by the county.

---

by: RedGreen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 18:07:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Both Gallagher and TABOR beset El Paso

As several have noted, The Gallagher amendment restricts residential property tax to 45 percent of the total. But this is a statewide figure, which is translated into specific assessment ratios that apply to all counties.
as I wrote in a 2007 piece:

  The Gallagher amendment stipulated that business would forever pay
55 percent of the property taxes in Colorado while residential
property paid 45 percent. That measure has today produced a
business property tax that is about three times as high as the
residential tax on property of equal value. But for the first 10
years of its existence, it didn't hurt state or local government
budgets since cuts in residential property taxes were offset by
increases in business taxes.

  Then came the 1992 Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, which forbade even
revenue-neutral increases in mill levies without a vote of the
people. The combination of TABOR and Gallagher then began reducing
local revenues, especially to schools.

0
El Paso further loses because it has so much tax exempt federal property. There is a payment in lieu of taxes program, but its chickenfeed.
finally, El Paso has not "de-Bruced" which means it can't even keep the revenue its existing tax rates produce if they are above the magic TABoR formulas.
Thus, you have continuous cuts in tax rates coupled with rising road repair and construction costs, jails and the rest.
  Arapahoe, if memory serves, did DeBruce. Jeffco did not.  But it seems like the interaction of Gallagher and Bruce, plus the high proportion of non-taxable federal property, that is el Paso's special curse.  In General, counties in Colorado are much worse off than municipalities, because the latter have, a, mostly deBruce and B, rely primarily on sales taxes which, almost by definition, keep pace with economic growth including inflation.

---

by: bob ewegen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 15:36:57 PM CDT

correction

assuming Car 31 is accurate, El Paso did deBruce in 2004. But by then you had 12 years of Gallagher and TABor working together to reduce the tax base. DeBruceing only stops further cuts, it doesn't rerstore lost tax bases.

---

by: bob ewegen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 15:39:04 PM CDT

clarification

2004 was a limited DeBrucing measure specifically for County Dept of Health and Environment.  

---

by: Car 31 @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 15:44:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

every county except two have done some form of DeBrucing

Weld and Huerfano do not have any DeBrucing measures in place.  All other counties have done some kind of focused or general spending limit waiver/DeBrucing in the past.

---

by: Car 31 @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 15:47:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Still a pain

If El Paso didn't have high property tax values when TABOR went into effect, or if they cut property taxes during TABOR's reign, then they're going to be forever up the creek without a proverbial paddle until they vote in some replacement revenue.

Also, how many tax incentives has El Paso given out to corporations for moving into town?  Gallagher ties residential tax rates to the amount of income collected from commercial properties, so a business-friendly policy is also a self-defeating policy (more so than in states without Gallagher).

There are oh so many ways to get screwed by the budget rules, and it sounds like El Paso County's found most of them.

"I have come to the conclusion that the making of laws is like the making of sausages-the less you know about the process the more you respect the result."  -- Anonymous IL State Rep. circa 1878

---

by: Phoenix Rising @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 16:43:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Not quite, Pr.

  Gallagher ties residential tax rates to the amount of income collected from commercial properties.
That's only  true on a statewide basis.  In any given county, Gallagher provides a fierce incentive to recruit commercial or industrial property.

Gallagher
mandates that business and commercial property will forever pay 55
percent of the total property tax bill in Colorado while
residential taxpayers pay the other 45 percent. To preserve that
ratio, the assessment rate for business properties is set in stone
at 29 percent. Every two years, the state calculates the statewide
valuations of both business and residential property and floats the
residential assessment to whatever level is needed to preserve the
sacred 45 percent share. Currently, residential assessments, which
started out at 21 percent of actual value in 1982, have plummeted
to 7.96 percent.   As a result, a business with a market value of $200,000 now pays
more than 3.5 times as much property tax as a $200,000 home.
Whether that's good or bad depends on whether you own a business or
a home...
 In short, you're wrong to suggest that a business friendly policy is short-sighted for a county, in terms of gallagher.  If is only self-defeating on a statewide basis. I often compare gallagher and its application of statewide averages to counties , schools and districts that don't reflect that average to the man who drowned in a river with an average depth of six inches.  

---

by: bob ewegen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 18:33:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks for the correction on that point

Ah, the wonders and complexities of Colorado's tax system.

Argh!

"I have come to the conclusion that the making of laws is like the making of sausages-the less you know about the process the more you respect the result."  -- Anonymous IL State Rep. circa 1878

---

by: Phoenix Rising @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 18:54:51 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good!

It serves them right!

---

by: One Queer Dude @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 17:44:47 PM CDT

Further proof that Colorado is mad.

In regard to PRs notion that the counties do themselves a disservice by giving tax incentives to business, I have to add that the situation is far more insane than that.
 Most of the Tax Increment Financing Schemes I have seen are voted in by city councils, not counties. But most Colorado cities have only a few mills in property taxes, relying heavily on sales taxes.
Yet, the property tax is the usual vehicle earmarked for Tax Increment Financing Schemes. So you have the authority for tax breaks vested with a body, the city council, that suffers virtually no loss of Revenue.  The city may waive 5 mills, while the county loses 40 and the school district 50! And neither the county nor the school has a place at the table when the tax breaks are voted. Cities, of course, reap a bonanza from the sales and taxes generated by the new businesses. I have raged against this divorce between power and accountability for most of my 36 years at The Post. I guess it just proves one should never get a masters in economics and then go cover politics. At least when I was a sportswriter with UPI, the games I covered made sense!  

---

by: bob ewegen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 18:46:46 PM CDT

Seriously?

Cities can enter into agreements with businesses that give away county and school district taxes? How is that even legal?

---

by: RedGreen @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 18:59:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

And now we know...

I've thought Colorado's governmental organization was screwed up since I moved here.  Out East, cities (and townships, towns, villages, hamlets, thorps, and shires) are all incorporated within the county - and thus the county has some control over the city's decisions.  Here, they're completely divorced; every time a city is born, a little piece of the county becomes completely independent of the county's rules and regulations.

Add to it the state's insane tax regulations, and you're right - it's totally mad.

"I have come to the conclusion that the making of laws is like the making of sausages-the less you know about the process the more you respect the result."  -- Anonymous IL State Rep. circa 1878

---

by: Phoenix Rising @ Wed May 28, 2008 at 19:21:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]