Property tax hardship on Colorado residents doesn’t have to mean a windfall for government
Re: “Local elected officials have the power to provide property tax relief,” March 22 editorial
The Post’s editorial on property tax reform fully recognizes that the current system of property tax assessments is an onerous one. While the need to fund public services is essential, the burden of Colorado’s property taxes on homeowners borders on the repressive. Critically, it affects the ability to purchase a home and maintain a reasonable standard of living.
Every year, the PITI (Principal, Interest, Taxes, and Insurance) calculation increases at an exponential rate. It is not only property taxes, but insurance rates, maintenance costs, and energy rates that continue to spiral out of control. What is affordable today will no longer be affordable within 5 years. If you are retired and on a fixed pension income, you soon will be trying to find ways to stay in your home and meet expenses while your income base shrinks.
The government has the power to ease the tax burden, but appears totally reluctant to address the “sacred cow” of property taxes. In 2024, a citizens’ initiative to freeze property taxes would have been on the ballot for Colorado voters. But political pressure and Gov. Jared Polis, as well as the lack of termity of the initiative’s sponsors, doomed its inclusion on the ballot, and it was removed. The entire process smacked of the typical backroom political deal.
Unfortunately, the only way to reform Colorado’s arcane property tax system will be by citizen initiative or constitutional amendments submitted directly to the voters. Neither the governor nor the Colorado Legislature have the political fortitude to genuinely face the problem and develop viable solutions to ease the burden of Colorado’s property taxes.
Mark Boyko, Denver
The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy provides resources to understand property taxes, including how to reduce the mill levy when property valuations go up. ()
The problem seems to be a lack of transparency and understanding about how property taxes work at each local jurisdiction. Who is responsible for adjusting the various mill levy rates? When are they adjusted? What happens for taxes passed through a bond issue (do they get more money even though the voters voted on a specific mill levy?
Overall, a doubling of property valuation should not automatically result in a doubling of property taxes, but instead, mill levy rates should be adjusted to increase property taxes by a reasonable amount.
Steve Malers, Fort Collins
The Post editorial points to the portability of the senior and veteran Homestead Property Tax Exemption as a partial relief valve for those who qualify for it. But, what happens when the General Assembly fails to fund the program due to ongoing deficits like the $1.5 billion hole it is inexpertly trying to fill this year?
Seniors who have become accustomed to this annual property tax break will be shocked when they get their next bill in January 2027, as they learn that the legislature will defund this program, which reimburses Colorado counties for the amount granted to affected taxpayers. Don’t take my word for it – just call your state representative and/or senator for confirmation.
Jim Bensberg, Colorado Springs
Headlines paint a dry picture
I watered my sagebrush recently. I’ve never needed to do that before, since it’s well adapted to hot, dry conditions. While pondering its survivability, recent headlines in the Denver Post came to mind — ” ,” “Mountains are likely at peak snowpack,” and “Property-tax jumps shock homeowners“, etc. What’s the common thread? Global warming. But it’s not just a problem for my sagebrush, or Colorado, or the American Southwest.
Domestic migration into the Sun Belt states is declining, due in part to off-the-chart heat waves, devastating storms, once-in-a-century floods, and year-round fire seasons — along with the consequential costs, such as unaffordable homeowners’ insurance and destroyed livelihoods. These migrants will move to places with fewer of these global-warming-caused problems — like Colorado — and we will feel the effects of which we are not prepared.
My sagebrush is sending us all a warning. It’s the same warning that the climate scientists have been making for decades — expect to see a lot more Denver Post articles about the costs of global warming, and much sooner than you expected.
Joe McGloin, Sheridan
How many property tax delinquencies will follow change in tax bill notices?
Re: “We want our property tax bill in the mail,” March 20 letter to the editor
We echo the letter writer’s opinion that we want our property tax bill mailed out. The postcards sent out this year clearly said “This is not a bill” and therefore went straight into our recycling. Only because of The Denver Postap article last month did we realize this was indeed our property tax bill!
Is a mailed postcard so much less expensive than a mailed bill? The Denver Treasury can save money by not sending out hardcopy bills to those who have a mortgage on their property, as the mortgage company effectively pays the taxes to the city on behalf of the owner. We own our property outright and need to receive a bill so that we can promptly pay our taxes easily via return envelope.
While we can figure this new system out, my mom certainly cannot. She has a smartphone and not a computer. Please write a follow-up article on how many property tax delinquencies ensue this year.
Joanna and Chris Johnson, Denver
Trump should remember Putin is the enemy
Re: “Putin is not our ally,” March 22 commentary
Trudy Rubin’s op-ed was superb. Without any provocation, Russian leader Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine and has killed tens of thousands of innocent civilians. He is a war criminal, and as Ms. Rubin clearly and concisely explains, Putin has never had a better lap dog and useful sycophant than President Trump.
Rick Tedesco, Lakewood
Voting documentation should be within reason and obtainable in a timely manner
It is difficult to understand how requiring that only United States citizens vote in U.S. elections has become controversial.
Recent Senate debate over voter legislation highlights a deeper issue. Supporters emphasize election integrity, while opponents warn about potential barriers to participation. Both concerns matter. But one principle should not be negotiable: Federal elections are for citizens.
There is room for reasonable discussion about how to implement verification without burdening eligible voters. That is where thoughtful leadership is needed. However, rejecting the goal of citizenship verification altogether risks weakening public confidence in the system. A healthy democracy depends on both access and integrity. We should not have to choose between the two.
This should not be a partisan question. It is a matter of basic civic responsibility.
Ken Johnson, Aurora
As debate grows around requiring proof of citizenship to vote, there is a straightforward principle that should guide policy: if the government requires it, the government should provide it.
As a Colorado resident who has long voted by mail, I have seen firsthand how a system can be both secure and accessible. That balance is not theoretical. It is already working here.
Requiring proof of citizenship may be intended to strengthen election integrity. But without universal access, it risks creating new barriers for eligible voters. Nearly half of Americans do not have a valid passport. Obtaining one can cost more than $150, not including fees for birth certificates, time off work, or travel to application centers.
A requirement that is not easily attainable is not a neutral safeguard. It is a filter.
If policymakers are serious about election integrity, the solution is simple. Make proof of citizenship free and easy to obtain. Expand access through post offices, DMVs, and mobile units. Ensure every eligible voter can comply without unnecessary burden.
Colorado shows that access and security can coexist. National policy should follow that example.
If you require it, you provide it.
Carole Buyers, Englewood
The March 23 “Today in history stated, “1933: The German Reichstag adopted the Enabling Act, which effectively granted Adolf Hitler dictatorial powers.”
Today’s version could be called the “.”
Wake up, America, before it’s too late.
Richard (Dick) Emerson, Denver
Data centers could be boon to state coffers and struggling communities
Re: “No corporate welfare for data centers. Big Tech can pay its fair share,” March 15 commentary
Krista Kafers’s recent column is yet another in the Post’s line of one-sided anti-data-center opinions. While all have been poorly informed, hers is excessively so. She reports that a sales and use tax exemption would reduce Colorado general fund revenue by tens of millions of dollars. That’s only true if the data centers were to be developed regardless of the tax exemption … which is nonsensical. As she notes, 38 other states offer exemptions — the development will go there.
Colorado won’t claim tax revenue on business that never arrives.
Moreover, she ignores the substantial benefits that lead politicians to entice data center development. These include property, income, payroll, and local taxes. Employment growth is also important. She cites low-estimate staff per data center while ignoring permanent security and maintenance staff. These sites also fund hundreds of construction jobs that last 5-10 years or more until the facility is complete. Even then, technology changes drive regular retrofit work and upgrades. These combined benefits are a boon to struggling towns and cities, of which Colorado has its fair share.
Anyone familiar with data center regions like northern Virginia, eastern Oregon, and central Washington knows that such areas have seen appreciable improvements in roads, utilities, schools, government services, and population and economic growth. Approval of will allow Colorado to compete with other states while implementing reasonable guardrails to manage such developments.
Brad Rehak, Denver
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
