Round two of executive session and still no clear outcome on whether the State Board of Education will sign on to Democrat Gov. Bill Ritter’s appeal of a Denver District Court ruling that a mill levy freeze amounts to an unconstitutional tax increase.
SucklaFTS File Photo
Taxpayer advocates are hoping that a party-line decision, based on a 4-3 Republican majority, will dampen Ritter's hope of a successful appeal, but history has taught them not to be so confident. Previously, Republicans Randy DeHoff of Littleton and Chairwoman Pamela Suckla of Slickrock, sided with Democrats and supported defending the mill levy lawsuit. It is once again these two who will decide the Board’s fate.
DeHoff was out of town for Thursday’s executive session, but Peggy Littleton, R-Colorado Springs, speculated that if he were present the board would likely have made a decision, Though she was unable to say what that decision would have been.
A personal email from March reveals DeHoff was conflicted over defending what he believed was a possible unconstitutional tax increase, writing, “It is a constitutional issue that the courts need to resolve.”
Clarity now exists, now coming from Denver District Judge Christina Habas, who concluded that the mill levy freeze violates a provision of the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights requiring voter approval of any change in tax policy that results in a net increase of government revenue.
Suckla denied repeated requests by Vice Chairman Bob Schaffer to hold a public vote about whether the board supported the lawsuit in the first place. Interestingly enough, Suckla does express some hesitation in an email to her board that the money “seems that it is for anything and everything.” She was right to worry. With no stipulation earmarking the revenue for education, Ritter would be free to use it on any number of public projects.
Given the above evidence we are left wondering what is holding up the board’s Republican majority from deciding not to appeal. The likelihood is that Suckla or DeHoff are hesitating, and we can only hope that when it comes time to make a decision - in the third round of executive session - they will be true to their oath of office and uphold the state’s Constitution.