After more than seven hours of debate that stirred partisan tensions, the Senate on Monday night was still debating a bill that would lift a key constraint on the state budget.
The end was near, though. By 9:30 p.m., majority-holding Democrats had voted to cut off debate after another hour, despite Republican objections that Senate rules were being abused.
Named after the lawmakers who sponsored it in 1991, the Arveschoug-Bird provision limits growth in the state’s general fund to no more than 6 percent a year. Money collected beyond that limit goes to roads and other construction needs.
Senate Bill 228, sponsored by Sen. John Morse, D-Colorado Springs, would repeal the 6 percent limit as well as the automatic transfers of money above the limit to roads and other projects.
“We have to restore some flexibility to the state’s budgeting process,” Morse said.
The Senate first took up the bill Friday. Republicans made it clear they would delay it by any means necessary, first asking that the 38-page piece of legislation be read in its entirety. Democrats then postponed the rest of the debate until Monday.
Earlier Monday, Senate Majority Leader Brandon Shaffer, D-Longmont, said he thought five hours was plenty of time for debate. He also said the Senate wouldn’t take up the bill until nearly the close of business, debating the legislation into the evening.
That set off complaints from Republicans, who said Democrats were trying to avoid news coverage of the issue by having the bill debated past press deadlines.
Sen. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, called it a “midnight charade,” and Senate Minority Leader Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, said Democrats were up to “shenanigans.”
“I’m not trying to ram anything through,” Shaffer said, adding that he was trying to manage the Senate’s schedule effectively.
The biggest problem with the provision, opponents say, is that in years when revenues fall, it resets the general fund at a new, lower total. For example, if the state’s general-fund spending were $100 in one year and fell to $80 the next year, the 6 percent limit would mean spending could grow to only $84.80 the next year.
Critics say the limit has “ratcheted down” the general fund, which pays for most of the ongoing costs of government including schools, colleges and prisons, by more than $1 billion over the past decade. Defenders of the limit say it can be changed only by a constitutional amendment submitted to Colorado voters.
Morse and other foes of the 6 percent limit point to a recent legal opinion that said Arveschoug-Bird is not a “spending limit” as defined in the state constitution by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR. Rather, opponents of the limit argue, it is an “allocation strategy” that merely says how money is spent, not how much is spent.
Republican Sen. Greg Brophy of Wray mocked that assertion. He played audio portions of a legislative debate from 1991 during which lawmakers repeatedly referred to the provision as a spending limit.
Under the present system, roads received nearly $1.2 billion in funding from 2005 through 2007, while other construction needs received $243 million during the same period. But in the current fiscal year that ends in June, revenues have plunged so far that there has been no extra money for roads or construction, and the same scenario is predicted for next year.
Mitchell and others said the legal opinion that Democrats are relying on is bunk, though it was written by former Colorado Supreme Court Justice Jean Dubofsky.
“You are ignoring the constitutional text in pursuit of more money,” Mitchell said.
Republicans also pointed out that Arveschoug-Bird contains a provision allowing lawmakers to override the 6 percent limit with a two-thirds vote. That has never occurred.
Republicans argued Monday that the legislation would amount to the largest funding cut for road construction in state history. They offered dozens of amendments, including efforts to delay the repeal of the limit until after various bridges, roads and other construction projects had been completed. All the attempts failed.
GOP efforts to send the bill back to committee or require that voters approve the measure were defeated.
Tim Hoover: 303-954-1626 or thoover@denverpost.com
