For the past two years, Colorado’s legislative leadership on each side of the aisle launched the annual General Assembly opening with promises to make property tax reform their number one priority. Yet, no such bill reached the floor until the final week of both sessions — too late for thorough public hearings or adequate floor debate. With overpowering majorities in the House and Senate, Democrats had to accept responsibility for their inexplicable delays.

Alleging difficulty organizing meetings with stakeholders — a dubious excuse, since many of the most obvious stakeholders complained they were never consulted — 2023 produced ballot question HH. What was proffered to voters as tax relief consisted of rebates funded from TABOR, tax surpluses already scheduled for return to taxpayers — a three-card monte scam moving money from one pocket to another and then claiming it was newly discovered revenue.

I happened to run into state Sen. Chris Hansen, one of the architects of the HH referendum at the Capitol shortly after the close of the 2023 session. I suggested to him Colorado homeowners were likely to kick his butt up between his shoulders come November. He protested some of the best fiscal minds in the governor’s office helped design his Rubik’s Cube solution. Proposition HH was crushed at the ballot box and the percolating property tax mess got even messier and more urgent. In a repeat effort, the 2024 bill arrived even later, requiring House Speaker Julie McCluskie to choke off debate and ram the legislation through the House with just Democratic votes. Because of a subsequent court decision, Gov. Jared Polis had to call a special session during the summer to re-rewrite the legislation. With time running out for tax relief, the amended bill delivered a patch but not a cure.

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

This year, bipartisan leadership promised to reduce the cost of living for Coloradans, reducing prices across the state. Don’t hold your breath. Gov. Polis was elected in 2018 on a promise to save voters money on their health care — a pledge expanded to include virtually every initiative launched from the governor’s office. The results have been health care continues to grow more expensive, although perhaps not as much as in other states, housing has become more expensive, and grocery bills continue to climb while more than 20% of our restaurants have vanished as the remaining menus have doubled in cost. Colorado is a small state, buffeted by globalization and national market pressures. There is no path to a deflationary oasis where good intentions will save our paychecks.

The notion an economic elephant can be steered by grabbing its tail is pure fantasy. Better if the legislature focuses on its immediate budgetary challenge. Joint Budget Committee Chair Jeff Bridges points out the billion-dollar cut that must be made in Colorado general fund expenditures is a product of the TABOR amendment handcuffs placed on the budget process. He doesn’t explain how the moving parts interact because the “TABOR rationing cap” beggars easy comprehension. The general fund is expected to balance out this year at about $16.5 billion. This represents only about half of total state expenditures, with the remainder occurring off the TABOR ledger — federal funds, TABOR enterprises, certificates of participation (don’t ask) and fee income. This latter category has Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen exercised. His caucus plans to run a repeal of fee-based programs.

If the debate is whether it is good public policy to fund government with fees, the answer is almost certainly no. It’s not. Nonetheless, it is also necessary. Placing TABOR, or any other spending and revenue edicts in the state constitution, is premised on the belief the economy will never change — that it’s never subject to evolution of any kind. The Colorado economy of 1992, when TABOR squeaked to victory on its third attempt, looked vastly different than the economy of today. TABOR imposed budgetary rules that deny legislators the flexibility to adapt to these changed circumstances. The various and ingenious mechanisms crafted to escape TABOR restrictions have complicated budgeting while creating a feudal infrastructure of funding silos dedicated to support worthy ends. They swiftly migrate out of reach of the legislature.

Bridges writes, “I’m confident the budget we end up with, though arbitrarily limited by outdated parts of TABOR, will come together through the combined talents of an incredible bipartisan team working diligently to create a state budget that reflects Colorado values.” It is indeed encouraging to hear his optimism, but it is well past time to challenge the delusion Doug Bruce received TABOR tablets before a burning bush. Not a single other state has chosen to adopt a similar set of fiscal rules, although several have considered them. In 2009, an interim Legislative Committee on Long Term Fiscal Stability took public testimony. I testified as follows, “Whatever one believes about the adequacy of state revenues or the appropriate size of Colorado’s government, restoration of full control over the state budget is a goal that can and should be supported by both Republican and Democratic legislators.”

This can be achieved without abandoning the heart of TABOR which requires voter approval for tax increases. Meanwhile, the Joint Budget Committee and taxpayers would benefit from the restoration of a reasonable margin for discretionary adjustments and a reduction in the budgetary clutter of fee-based financing. Sen. Lundeen is correct: there is a certain lunacy to the current situation. At the root of this predicament is TABOR, which is no longer a solution to any problem but has itself nurtured the dysfunction voters detest.

Miller Hudson is a public affairs consultant and a former Colorado legislator.