It looks like Colorado voters won’t know for sure until after the Nov. 7 election whether the ballot’s Proposition HH – the Legislature’s massive money grab, masquerading as “property tax relief” – is constitutional. And even then, the determination will be made only if the measure passes. That’s the upshot of a ruling this week by the Colorado Supreme Court.

Meaning, come Election Day, we’ll all have to make a call on a ballot question that might not even hold up in court.

It’s all the more reason to vote “no” on Prop. HH – as if voters needed another reason to turn down the misleading and fiscally reckless proposal.

The Colorado Constitution requires ballot proposals to limit their scope to a single subject. Citizens opposed to Prop. HH challenged the proposal in court earlier this year, contending it attempted to address several distinct policy areas, in violation of the state constitution.

Stay up to speed: Sign-up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

But as The Gazette reported Monday, the state’s highest court ruled that when a proposal like Prop. HH comes from the Legislature – rather than via a “citizens initiative,” which is petitioned onto the ballot by rank-and-file voters – the court does not have “subject matter jurisdiction” to assess its constitutionality until and unless it is enacted by voters. Justice Richard L. Gabriel, writing for the court, noted that if voters were to enact Proposition HH in November, courts could then review the law for its constitutionality and void any non-compliant features.

Whether or not it squares with the state constitution, HH is just plain bad policy.

The entire proposal is really about growing government. It seeks to piggyback on the public’s rightful outrage over skyrocketing property tax bills, but its purported property-tax “relief” – which is only a part of the dizzyingly complicated scheme – is a decoy.

The measure’s real agenda is to hoodwink Colorado voters into letting the state keep and spend billions of dollars in surplus tax revenue that otherwise would have to be returned to the public by law. Make no mistake, the property-tax relief in Prop. HH is a con. The proposal actually would make voters pay for the relief out of their own pockets – using some of the excess tax collections they’re supposed to get back. And the state would keep the rest.

Prop. HH’s nominal tax relief involves lowering the statewide assessment rate slightly for residential and commercial property for 10 years. That would only marginally reduce what will still be increasing property-tax revenue flowing to local governments. HH would pay for that modest reduction with the surplus revenue collected by the state above constitutional spending limits.

If Prop. HH passes, it’ll be a windfall for the state government. It likely will be hauling in an additional $2.2 billion that otherwise would go back to taxpayers over the coming decade.

For taxpayers, on the other hand, Prop. HH is a raw deal. They will lose far more over time by giving up their refunds than they’ll gain in modest property tax relief.

Indeed, any tax relief won’t come close to offsetting the soaring tax bills that are expected to rise up to 50% for some homeowners when tax bills go out next spring. In short, Prop. HH wouldn’t just force taxpayers to pay for their own property-tax relief, it would overcharge them – to grow government.

Unconstitutional? It’s unconscionable.

Denver Gazette Editorial Board