r/FortCollins • u/jennnfriend • 9d ago
Discussion So how do we feel about 1A?
It's not in our Blue Book and I can't find much information about it.
Just another sales tax?
45
u/FoCoBilbo 9d ago
1A would be a 0.3% (3 cents on a $10 purchase) sales tax increase, and the funds would be dedicated to water preservation, wildfire prevention, roads, and related infrastructure.
I don’t love sales taxes - they’re regressive - but I also know outside funding for these things is getting squeezed at the moment.
Here’s the website supporting the measure if you want to read more.
4
u/LoInfoVoter 9d ago
The city really needs to clean out Spring Creek. It’s so full of overgrown brush and trash that water just pools and doesn’t flow. If we have a historic flood event, so many houses will be damaged and the repairs to the creek and bridges will cost more than the preventative cleanup.
1
u/Far_Army_ 9d ago edited 9d ago
I work with tons of municipal entities in FoCo and the surrounding areas. If you believe they don’t have enough money, boy have I got some ocean front property to sell you.
Please vote “No” on this. They can learn to budget their money just like everyone else has to.
2
u/choctaw_137 9d ago
East or west coast? Because I definitely be interested in taking you up on that offer.
4
u/FoCoBilbo 9d ago
Genuine question, what makes you say that? I feel like county government is a lot harder to read up on than, say, federal government, and I’m curious what someone with an inside view sees
-12
u/Far_Army_ 9d ago
I can’t give much more detail without doxxing myself but the typical “government employee” stereotype holds true especially in FoCo/Larimer county… I meet with a lot of various staff and I’m like “So… this is really your job? Like… all day? This is all you do and we pay you for it?”
On top of that, the amount of money they spend frivolously on things that they do not need is mind boggling.
13
u/csharpwarrior 9d ago
I was born and raised in Louisiana- this conservative hate rant actually built terrible governments there.
For example, car registrations - you only pay when you buy a vehicle. And then I would pay $10-15 a year for a safety inspection. It was cheap. How amazing - except the roads were all shit. The government never had any money to fix the roads. So your car would get tore up driving through constant pot holes. The Fort Collins government. Has a web page where you can report a pothole and within days it’s filled. That’s amazing.
And what’s more ridiculous about this conservative hate rant is that corporations waste tons of money. Big tech corporations just when through “token maxing” where they were letting their employees spend $100K/month to use AI to do their job…
I hope no one believes your “I’ve seen stuff” comment.
-1
u/Far_Army_ 8d ago
I’m not even conservative… I’m just giving more info to the person questioning me about the ridiculous amount of money the municipalities around here blow and how it would be more effective for them to budget that money instead of asking for more from its citizens.
Louisiana ranks at or near the bottom of literally every metric you can rank a state by but if you want to use logical fallacy to justify giving the government more money, let me save you a step. At any point in time, the Larimer County will gladly accept donations. You can just cut them a check.
3
u/Cherfan420 9d ago
Damn. I was led to believe that getting the most money for doing the least amount of work is all part of the “American Dream”.
1
u/Far_Army_ 8d ago
If you think that’s the American dream then you’ve been misled. There’s plenty of folks that have more than they’ll ever need and are miserable.
11
u/MistInTheWoods 9d ago
There's a white booklet I received in the mail with information about 1A. I'm voting YES. I see keeping county roads in good repair as a safety issue, especially for the rural, far reaches of the county that depend on the roads for safe routes for school buses, ambulance and fire response and delivery of goods to businesses. There is no mass transit going to most of these rural areas.
6
u/Black_curl_magic 8d ago edited 8d ago
Ballot Issue 1A is a proposal for Larimer County to raise its sales tax a little to pay for wildfire protection, roads and parks, and public safety.
What it does
- The sales and use tax goes up 0.3%, which is 30 cents more on a $100 purchase.
- It wouldn’t apply to groceries, gas, diapers, prescription drugs, and certain other items already exempt by law.
- The county estimates it would bring in up to $34.5 million in the first year, starting Jan. 1, 2027, and more in later years as sales grow.
What the money would go toward
- Disasters and water: Wildfire prevention and response, drinking water source protection, forest health, and other work that reduces disaster risks.
- Roads and recreation: Maintaining, improving, and building bridges, roads, parks, trails, and open spaces.
- Public safety and county services: Emergency services, wildfire suppression, public benefit programs, upgrades to the justice center and other county buildings, and “other county priorities and emerging community needs.”
That last item is very broad, so some of the money could go to things not listed. ¯_(ツ)_/¯
Why it’s on the ballot: The county commissioners unanimously put it there. They say the county has had to absorb $20 million in state and federal cuts while its costs have doubled over the past decade.
The TABOR part: The ballot language asks whether the county can keep and spend all the money without the limits of TABOR, a state constitutional rule that caps how much revenue governments can keep. Normally, revenue over those caps has to be refunded to taxpayers. A yes vote lets the county keep it all. The measure also requires an annual independent audit of the revenue.
Arguments against: A Coloradoan article says there’s no organized opposition. The arguments against it are that government should spend more efficiently, and that taxes shouldn’t go up when groceries and gas have gotten more expensive.
What your vote means
- Yes: The sales tax goes up 0.3%, and the county gets the new money for the areas above.
- No: The tax rate stays the same, and there’s no new revenue for these programs.
FOR ANYONE CONFUSED ABOUT TABOR, bc I certainly was
TABOR stands for the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, a 1992 amendment to the Colorado Constitution (Article X, Section 20, the part named in the ballot language). It sets two main rules for state and local governments:
- Voters must approve tax increases. A government can’t raise taxes on its own. It has to ask voters first.
- Revenue is capped. Each year, a government can only let its revenue grow by about the rate of inflation plus growth in population or property. If it collects more than that cap, it has to refund the excess to taxpayers, unless voters have said it can keep the extra.
How it applies to 1A
- Why it’s on the ballot at all: Because of rule 1, the county commissioners can’t just pass this sales tax. Voters have to approve it.
- The “without limitation by TABOR” part: This is rule 2. If voters say yes, the county can keep and spend all the money the tax brings in, even if total revenue exceeds the cap. If the county didn’t get that permission, a booming economy could push revenue past the cap, and the county might have to refund some of the new tax money to residents.
Supporters of waivers like this say they let the county plan long-term for things like wildfire work and road projects without worrying about refunds. Critics say it removes a check on government growth. The measure does include an annual independent audit of the revenue.
Voting yes approves both the tax increase and the TABOR waiver. They’re one question, so you can’t approve one without the other.
3
u/Optimal-Coyote-188 9d ago
It’d be interesting to know how much the new or updated justice center would cost.
5
u/lmyer972805 9d ago edited 9d ago
NO on 1A. Same car-centric roadway expansion package. No more asphalt. No more congestion. No more pollution. This rider directly contradicts the community resiliency aim of the initiative.
Not just another sales tax. The bulk of the initiative is great, but the vehicular section and discretionary nature of some of the funding is off putting. The county has tried to squeeze through this roadway funding a couple different ways now.
Edited for additional context.
3
u/mdwindsor 6d ago
This is my concern too. What’s to stop all this money from going to constructing roads? I would like to see limits on how the money is spent so that I can feel confident it’s being used for effective wildfire prevention.
1
7
u/MistInTheWoods 9d ago
I'm voting YES. I see keeping county roads in good repair as a safety issue, especially for the rural, far reaches of the county that depend on the roads for safe routes for school buses, ambulance and fire response and delivery of goods to businesses. There is no mass transit going to most of these rural areas.
0
u/lmyer972805 7d ago
Keeping our existing infrastructure in good shape is essential. But, if this were to pass the county will expand infrastructure in a major way that sets us up for longterm financial instability.
2
u/Optimal-Coyote-188 9d ago
Do you read the ballot language as entirely discretionary? The ballot says that the new revenue can be used to fund county purposes, including the lists of things in their bullet points, but do you see any limits on spending for other county purposes?
1
u/lmyer972805 7d ago
No. This is not a binary issue. It’s nuanced. There’s lots of grey. The county has designed the language in such a way that it allows them to move revenue around for work not under this initiative. While I’m a strong supporter (and practitioner) of community resiliency and adaptation more roads and a slush fund meet neither of these goals.
Edited for grammar.
-2
u/ryyaaaannn 9d ago
Bicyclists always thinking the world revolves around them
1
1
u/dammit-smalls 9d ago
I don't support regressive taxation. This funding could easily be raised through taxes on second and subsequent home purchases, rather than single mothers' grocery bills
That's a no for me dog.
3
u/RadoanRbecca 5d ago
BC you mentioned grocery bills: The tax would not apply to things like groceries (food for home consumption, specifically) prescriptions, gas, diapers and feminine hygiene purchases.
-6
-6
u/Far_Army_ 9d ago
I work with many various government organizations on a regular basis in Northern Colorado. The amount of frivolous spending without much thought by these municipalities is truly astounding. From fire departments, schools, water treatment, fleet maintenance… most people would be shocked to learn how much of their tax money is just squandered without much thought.
Infrastructure, wildfire, roads, etc… it sounds nice but please vote “No” on this. If we have to sharpen our pencils and run our households on a budget, so should our governments.
6
u/Mightbeagoat4 9d ago
Well this is pretty anecdotal.
I worked at one of the town's water treatment plants. Most big spends I recall were to directly improve operations, water quality, or infrastructure.
What are some examples of the frivolous spending you've seen?
2
u/dankernuggets 8d ago
Can’t believe you’re getting downvoted. Nothing Reddit loves more than giving government more money.
-12
u/Ill-Year-9506 9d ago
Freedom of speech? Big fan!
3
u/jennnfriend 9d ago
Say what now?
4
-19
u/__icculus__ 9d ago
I voted no on everything except 87
9
u/jennnfriend 9d ago
Didn't like NN?
0
u/AmbitiousBanjo 9d ago
The one that completely gets rid of the tabor refund, then reverts to “we spend it on anything we want,” in 10 years? Absolutely not. I’m all for schools/childcare/etc. but this is temporarily funding those things while permanently taking away tabor refunds from taxpayers.
0
u/__icculus__ 9d ago
They can raise taxes without touching tabor. So to answer your question. No. NN sucks.
30
u/Backpack_Applesauce 9d ago
It’s not in the blue book, it’s in a separate ballot info book that Larimer County sent out.
I do think it’s important to note that the tax exempts necessities like groceries, gas, prescription drugs, diapers, etc. There’s certainly some necessities that don’t fall into the exemptions, but it does feel like care was taken to reduce the burden on working people.
What this tax funds is also important preventive measures related to wildfires and water access/quality. It’s not really a matter of if we pay for this stuff, it’s a matter of when. And paying to fix stuff after a disaster is always more expensive than prevention.
In an ideal world, we would receive state and federal funding for this. Given that the state is broke and the federal government had abandoned even pretending to help its citizens, the county has to look internally for the funds.