Concerning a temporary decrease in the statutory limits on the amount of property tax revenue that a taxing entity is allowed to raise.
HB26-1209 would temporarily lower several Colorado statutory property tax revenue growth limits from 5.5% to 4% for certain taxing entities. The reduced cap would apply to property tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2027, and before January 1, 2033, and would then sunset in 2037. The bill amends the general levy limitation for counties, cities and towns, and special districts, as well as the separate property tax limit formulas that apply to jurisdictions that have waived the general limit and to school districts.
The measure also clarifies that existing voter authorizations to exceed or waive property tax limits continue to apply under the temporary 4% framework unless the ballot question says otherwise. It preserves the current exclusions and exceptions for items such as bonded indebtedness, certain contractual obligations, reappraisal expenses, and other existing statutory carveouts, while adjusting the growth-rate calculations used in the property tax limit statutes during the temporary period.
If enacted, the bill would reduce the amount of property tax revenue growth allowed under Colorado law for affected local governments, special districts, waived jurisdictions, and school districts during the specified 2027-2032 period. It would amend sections 29-1-301, 29-1-1703, and 29-1-1705 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, changing the operative growth percentages used in property tax limit calculations and making conforming changes so the temporary cap applies across the relevant statutory schemes. The bill would not alter the underlying voter-approval structure or the existing statutory exceptions, but it would likely constrain annual property tax revenue increases for many taxing entities during the temporary window.
The available record suggests limited formal debate in the materials provided, but the bill did not advance out of its first committee and was postponed indefinitely in the House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee. That outcome indicates the proposal did not generate enough support to move forward, even though the bill’s stated purpose is a temporary and time-limited reduction rather than a permanent overhaul of property tax law. Overall, the sentiment appears cautious or unfavorable among the committee members who acted on it, with no recorded votes or transcript excerpts showing broader support.
The central point of contention is the policy choice to lower property tax revenue growth limits, which would reduce revenue growth for local governments, special districts, and school districts during the temporary period. Supporters would likely view the bill as a property-tax restraint measure that provides taxpayer relief and slows local revenue growth, while opponents would likely worry about reduced funding for local services, schools, and other taxing entities. Another potential issue is the interaction with existing voter-approved overrides and waivers: the bill preserves those authorizations unless ballot language says otherwise, but it still changes the baseline against which revenue growth is measured, which could affect entities that rely on those limits.