Proposals for Changes to Amendment 23:

What are people thinking about doing to change Amendment 23?

Colorado Attorney General Ken Salazar: As a part of a ballot measure that would not only revise Amendment 23, but also significantly alter TABOR, the Attorney General has proposed:

• Colorado change Amendment 23 to excuse funding for kindergarten through 12th grade education under the Amendment 23 formula in years when economic conditions cause a decline in general fund revenues. However, kindergarten through 12th grade funding would remain stable. In no event would funding for schools dip below the funding level for the previous year. [“Attorney General Ken Salazar proposes constitutional changes to TABOR and Amendment 23 to address the state’s fiscal straitjacket,” News Release, Department of Law, March 10, 2003

Colorado State Treasurer Mike Coffman:  According to Treasurer Coffman, his proposal for comprehensive reform would:

• Preserve Amendment 23's goal of ensuring that education remains a top priority in the state by dedicating a minimum of 44% of annual General Fund spending towards K-12 education.  The proposal further requires the General Assembly to increase annual spending in per-pupil education at a formula of inflation plus student population growth, and allows the General Assembly to tap the Rainy Day Fund (that has been proposed by Coffman) to meet any short fall in the General Fund for this purpose.

The st1:place>Rocky Mountain News:  In December, 2003 The Rocky Mountain News editorialized in favor of changing Amendment 23.  According to the proposal, voters would be asked to:o:p>

• “Postpone funding increases in K-12 education mandated by Amendment 23 during years when general fund revenues fail to keep up with some measure such as inflation – or even the TABOR spending limit.  When we say ‘pospone funding increases,’ we mean at least the mandated 1 percent increase above inflation and preferably some portion of the inflation adjustment as well – all to be paid back in flusher times from the TABOR surplus.
• The need for this should be obvious.  Three years ago Amendment 23 backers assured voters that the robust revenue growth and budget surpluses needed to help fund their initiative would continue indefinitely; they were wildly wrong.  Surely voters now understand that no sane policy requires spending boosts in one major program during years when they come entirely at the expense of other critical categories.” [“Step 1 for voters:  a rainy day fund,” Rocky Mountain News Editorial (December 13, 2003)]