A last-minute squabble over earmarking of transportation funds is threatening to derail the bipartisan budget compromise crafted by Gov. Bill Owens and legislative leaders last month.
If approved by voters in November, the compromise, known as the Colorado Economic Recovery Act, would let the state keep all the revenue collected by its existing taxes for five years – about $3.1 billion more than the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights would otherwise allow the state to keep.
That plan to lift the draconian TABOR ratchet effect is embodied in House Bill 1194, which would go to voters this fall as Referendum C. The bill has already received final action in the Senate and is awaiting final approval in the House. While that approval once seemed automatic, political infighting has now erupted on a companion measure that would earmark $100 million a year for principal and interest on about $1.3 billion in highway bonds, part of an overall $1.7 billion bonding package known as Referendum D.
Some House Democrats are threatening to hold up Referendum D unless at least 10 percent of the bond proceeds are earmarked for mass transit projects. Worse, the proposed language is so restrictive it would bar the use of such funds for highway needs that directly support transit programs – even including high occupancy vehicle lanes.
The Post is an ardent supporter of rapid transit. But we oppose the proposed funding mandates because they would shortchange rural Colorado, undermine the planning process and might even turn voters against the budget compromise itself. It’s good to remember that another transportation funding measure already on the books, known as Senate Bill 1, will eventually earmark as much as $25 million a year for mass transit if Referendum C passes. Owens supports that transit funding as part of a compromise he reached with Democratic Senate President Stan Matsunaka in 2002. However, the governor rightly opposes this 11th-hour attempt to hijack the normal transportation planning process. These last-minute demands also amount to a political ambush of Owens, who braved attacks from his own party’s right wing to support the budget compromise.
It’s not as if transit projects will be shut out of Referendum C if it passes without the mandates. If voters OK the measure, the Colorado Department of Transportation will sit down with city and county officials and come up with a list of high priority projects. They may well include transit systems or those highway projects necessary to make transit work effectively. Remember, almost nobody rides a train from his or her front door to their office. Roads, interchanges and parking facilities are almost always necessary to make transit systems work. Yet the proposed mandates for Referendum D are so restrictive that funds couldn’t even be used for crucial transit components like RTD park-n-Rides.
The House should pass the highway bonding plan without the mass transit mandates. If House Democrats insist on trying to embarrass the Republican governor with this foolish stunt, we trust that cooler heads in the Senate will return to the original bipartisan plan.
