An effort to add 62 judges to the backlogged Colorado court system could be derailed by a partisan battle in the state Senate.
Senate Republicans are attacking the bill’s price tag – $105.2 million over the next five years – saying that it would siphon money away from roads.
The fight exposes one of the biggest budget issues in this year’s legislative session.
Republicans are trying to protect as much money as possible for roads, while Democrats are pushing an array of programs including a rainy-day fund, health care and public safety.
“They’re going to have to make some tough choices,” said Sen. Steve Johnson, R-Larimer County. “I don’t think they can find all their funding out of transportation.”
Road funding is projected to be a big pot of money over the next five years, but it gets there by a circuitous route.
With extra money flowing into the state because of Referendum C, a 2005 ballot issue that lets the state keep money beyond revenue limits in the state constitution, lawmakers are fighting over how to spend it.
Since 2002, state money for transportation has been scarce. From 2002 to 2006, $423.7 million in state funds was provided for roads – with $295.7 million of that coming last year.
Under current projections by nonpartisan legislative researchers, $2.1 billion in state funding will flow into road construction projects through 2011. Gov. Bill Owens’ final budget forecast in December showed $902 million going to transportation in that time.
But other programs are in line for funding before that money pours into road projects. The judges bill would get in that line.
The judges bill has landed in the middle of the fight because Senate rules give the Republican minority the power to block it. Any measure that increases the number of judges must pass with 23 votes. Democrats hold a 20-15 edge in the chamber.
Sen. Brandon Shaffer, D- Longmont, sponsor of the judges bill, said Republicans are playing politics instead of trying to unclog a crowded court system.
He said the bill cruised through the House, 60-5, with significant Republican support.
That’s because judicial districts throughout the state are strapped and understaffed. Some have not added judges in more than three decades, while caseloads have tripled in others.
Shaffer’s bill would cover the cost of adding new judges by diverting from the state’s general fund more of the fees, fines and penalties collected by courts. But pulling that money from the general fund means it would no longer spill over into a pool of money that helps pay for road projects.
And that’s where the Senate Republicans are jumping in.
“Members, this bill takes $7 million out of the General Fund this year, reducing transportation by over $5 million,” Johnson wrote in a note to his fellow Republicans.
Republicans are driving ahead on the issue even though the state Department of Transportation is not opposing the bill.
Herman Stockinger, legislative liaison for CDOT, said the department can use every cent it gets and would like to maintain its current funding until Gov. Bill Ritter’s blue-ribbon task force on transportation can make its recommendations.
By making road funding a rallying cry, some Senate Republicans are heading into rough terrain because they have already voted for other bills that divert money from road projects.
Sens. Ken Kester of Las Animas, Shawn Mitchell of Broomfield, Josh Penry of Grand Junction, Nancy Spence of Centennial and Jack Taylor of Steamboat Springs voted for a bill that takes $58.9 million out of roads over the next two years for health care programs and the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center.
Sen. David Schultheis, R- Colorado Springs, sponsored a bill to crack down on drunken drivers that would have reduced road funding by at least $12.5 million next year. That bill, which died in committee, increased court and prison costs by making drunken driving without a license a felony.
Another bill headed toward the Senate could put the Republicans in a tight spot. For years, Republicans have been calling on the state to save more money.
Now, House Bill 1302 would increase the size of the state rainy-day fund, but it would steer money away from roads to do it. Next year, it would divert at least $47.2 million.
For Johnson, the choice isn’t so tough. “That’s an easy question: not if it comes out of transportation,” he said. “I have people up north driving on I-25 every day. They want to see the road widened, not the state building a bank account at the expense of transportation.”
Staff writer Mark P. Couch can be reached at 303-954-1794 or mcouch@denverpost.com.
