UVC Identifies 2022 Veterans' State Legislative Objectives

At today's executive committee meeting of the United Veterans Coalition, leaders identified Gold Star Spouses' property tax exemption as our Number One state legislative objective for the 74th General Assembly of the Colorado legislature. 

Colorado's Total Disability for Individual Unemployability (TDIU) veterans' property tax exemption was selected as the coalition's Number Two goal going into the next legislative season!

Both objectives deal with Colorado's Constitution, Article X Section 3.5 and the small partial property tax exemption presently offered seniors, totally and permanently disabled veterans, and their survivors.

The Colorado Bar Association had already indicated its support for both objectives.

Co-chairs Shelly Shelly Kalkowski and Robbie Robinson presented their state legislative committee 2022 general goals and specific objectives, finalized just prior to this morning's executive committee gathering. 

Thank you, UVC!

Disabled Veteran Property Tax Exemption: What A Convoluted History!

Amazing! And pretty disappointing, too, with what's been done to our veterans and
their survivors. 

Let's review the confusing history of this mess. Just follow the explanation of how we've tried but only partly succeeded in protecting our disabled veterans.

In 2014 the Colorado legislature passed HB14-1373 to include survivors of totally disabled veterans with the veterans and seniors over age 65 for the small, partial disabled veteran property tax exemption. This was a blatant modification of the state constitution without first bothering the voters for our okay. 

Please understand: We voters first created our state constitution and then authorized constitutional amendments. Years later the legislature took it on themselves (yes, for good reasons, of course) to make changes they felt useful by passing HB14-1373. Regardless of intent or outcome, this was a no-no and an unconstitutional action by the legislature: the legislature has no power to modify or change the constitution. The estimated cost was around $100,000.

They simply did it. Folks involved at the time today agree it "abused" the constitution but hey – they did it anyway.

Regardless of procedure, that was a good thing with a very small footprint, not likely to invite any challenge: Indeed, there has been none. I can't find any notice ever made about this "extra-constitutional" legislative action that added a few hundred widow(ers) to a program already attracting attention for its cost. I make mention of it only because it was done and it should be done again!

You see, the legislature passed SCR06-001 in 2006, then presented it to Colorado voters as Referendum E. We approved it overwhelmingly, extending the senior property tax exemption to a few thousand totally and permanently disabled veterans. The original version of that tax exemption covered only seniors and its genesis was HB00-1002. The legislature passed that in 2000 for presentation to the voters as Referendum A. It passed, with an estimated cost of just over a million dollars.

Those two referenda – A in 2000 and then E in 2006, made totally and permanently disabled veterans and seniors as the two categories of homeowners qualified for the property tax exemption. Then HB14-1373 added the veterans' survivors.

Let's review:
1. 2000, Referendum A + HB00-1002 = the senior exemption, apparently also including survivors
2. 2006, Referendum E + SCR06-001 + HB07-1251 = the disabled veteran exemption
3. 2014, HB14-1373 = the disabled veteran's survivor exemption
4. 2016, HB16-1444 = aligned the statute with the constitution, adding disabled military retirees' exemption 

HB21-1002: We must note the dastardly action by the senate in June 2021 rejecting the unanimous house bill for a referendum adding Gold Star Spouses to the disabled veteran property tax exemption. 

Survivors of military personnel lost in the line of duty are presently denied the exemption by a stupid and illogical technicality: The exemption recognizes only survivors of veterans who die while in receipt of the exemption. Dying in combat very obviously prevents a veteran from returning to Colorado to qualify for the exemption, so we deny it to the widow. Dumb in the extreme.

The senate's unpatriotic rejection dishonored Colorado but "saved" the state about $95,000.

COLORADO LEGISLATURE & GOVERNMENT: "TDIU VETS ARE ON THEIR OWN"

 Colorado voters approved Referendum E in 2006, not knowing that the legislature had already defined "qualified veteran" so as to exclude vets with the VA "total disability for individual unemployability," (TDIU.) 

Colorado's legislators and government officials chose to interpret the requirement for the "VA 100% rating" so as to exclude totally and permanently disabled veterans who are compensated at the 100% level...because they are in fact totally and permanently disabled. The only difference being, 

TDIU veterans have a totally disabling injury, worse than standard VA tables are meant to recognize, that is in fact totally and permanently disabling. These are the same totally and permanently disabled veterans – one honored by Colorado with a small property tax exemption and the other totally ignored. Are they less somehow than worthy in the eyes of our mostly non-veteran legislators?

Actually, to be completely correct, TDIU vets haven't been truly ignored. That's because the only attention given TDIU veterans by
Colorado's legislature and government has been opposition to extending to these vets, totally and permanently disabled in the line of duty, the small property tax exemption.

That's the extent of their efforts. Less than zero, because it was years of "absolutely not" instead of "let's find a way." That has meant years of being denied the specific constitutional benefit voters were told we approved as Article X Section 3.5 for all of Colorado's veterans with honorable service who became permanently and totally disabled in the line of duty. 

Have we abandoned thousands of Colorado's TDIU veterans?

How Colorado (mis)treats thousands of our totally and permanently disabled veterans - refuses TDIU vets Colorado's disabled veteran property tax exemption

 Colorado extends its small, partial property tax exemption only to veterans with the VA 100% disability rating, but REFUSES the exemption to every totally and permanently disabled veterans with the VA "total disability for permanent unemployability" (TDIU) rating. Same total disability in the line of duty, but TDIU vets have injuries that are WORSE than standard tables.

Colorado DAV asked to lead the way on TDIU property tax exemption effort

The Colorado Department of the Disabled Veterans of America has been asked to lead the effort to get the Colorado Disabled Veteran Property Tax Exemption for our TDIU veterans (total disability for individual unemployability.)  CLICK to read the brief sent their state commander.

Doesn't ANYBODY in Colorado care about TDIU Veterans?

I've found encouragement about veterans with TDIU (total disability for individual unemployability) only from the Colorado Bar Association's Military and Veterans Affairs Committee, and the United Veterans Coalition.

Outside of those two worthy organizations who "really get it"...zero interest among Colorado's citizens for the needs of the state's totally and permanently disabled veterans of honorable service who are rated "TDIU."

Not your problem, right? You're probably not a vet although perhaps the child or grandchild of one. You're probably not the father of a young man or woman in service. So...simply not your problem.

TDIU veterans make up about 30-40% of Colorado's totally disabled veterans. VA has two categories: 100% rated, for vets whose injuries are typical for the type injury suffered, and TDIU, for vets whose injuries are worse than typical for the type injury suffered.

Colorado permits the 100% rated vets our too-small partial property tax exemption, and specifically refuses it to TDIU veterans.

Are these veterans any different than each other? Yes, because the TDIU vet is specifically evaluated as having a worse-case type injury rather than "typical," and is thereby totally and permanently disabled and never able to work again.

Why do we treat them differently? Ask your legislator if they can explain...I can't. I care, but only a rare handful in the legislature seem to care.

Not their problem. They really don't care.

 

The legislature hid their cards from us with Referendum E in 2006

 In 2006 the legislature referred an issue to the public for a small property tax
exemption for totally and permanently disabled veterans. This was done via SCR06-001. But the legislature hid some of their cards, not telling us all the details, so what we approved was not what we got!

This issue reached the voters as Referendum E in 2006 and was then overwhelmingly approved. Colorado voters believe in protecting our disabled veterans with such important benefits!

The legislature then created "enabling legislation" in the form of HB07-1251 to set into our statutes the provisions of the newly-approved Referendum E.

That sums up the trouble we now have in our state's small disabled veteran property tax exemption.

You see, we were asked to vote on a straightforward text the legislature gave us in the Blue Book:

"AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 3.5 OF ARTICLE X OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, CONCERNING THE EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR QUALIFYING SENIORS TO ANY UNITED STATES MILITARY VETERAN WHO IS ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PERMANENTLY DISABLED DUE TO A SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITY."

We didn't see the cards the legislature hid behind up their sleeves (or is it behind their backs?) They didn't show us anywhere in the Blue Book that SCR06-001 also had a description of the qualified disabled veteran that, in effect, eliminated almost half of Colorado's veterans who'd been totally and permanently disabled in the line of duty. They didn't tell us anything about their description in what we approved, but they certainly put their hidden cards into Article X Section 3.5 and the enabling statute HB07-1251:

(1.5) For purposes of this section, "disabled veteran" means an individual who has served on active duty in the United States armed forces, including a member of the Colorado national guard who has been ordered into the active military service of the United States, has been separated therefrom under honorable conditions, and has established a service-connected disability that has been rated by the federal department of veterans affairs as one hundred percent permanent disability through disability retirement benefits or a pension pursuant to a law or regulation administered by the department, the department of homeland security, or the department of the army, navy, or air force

The words in highlighted yellow cut thousands of Colorado's totally and permanently disabled veterans, injured in the line of duty and with honorable service, from the property tax exemption we thought we approved for them. We never saw and we never approved those words or anything like them!

The VA has two types of disability ratings for veterans who are totally and permanently disabled in the line of duty. One is called "100% rated" and the other is "Total Disability for Individual Unemployability," or TDIU.

Both ratings are based on the fundamental concept in the VA for compensation based the degree of an injury's impact on the veteran's ability to earn a wage after service: 

• The "100% rated" is based on standard tables for the average earning loss caused by the average injury.

• "TDIU" is based on the actual earning loss caused by a worse-than average injury. A TDIU veteran has been individually assessed by VA as having an especially worse-than-average injury rendering him/her actually unable to ever work again.

Colorado's voters thought we were voting for, as the Blue Book put it for us to better understand:

"Veterans are rated 100-percent permanently disabled when a mental or physical injury makes it impossible for the average person to hold a job and the disability is lifelong"

Colorado's legislators and administrators would have us accept that 100% is not the same as total. That the amendment and the statute exclude TDIU veterans with total and permanent disabilities but accept 100% veterans with total and permanent disabilities.

Folks, the legislature simply hid their cards....or did they have them up their sleeves? 

We didn't get what we voted for. We didn't protect all the veterans we thought we were protecting with Referendum E!

Colorado says thousands of our vets (TOTALLY & PERMANENTLY DISABLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY) aren't our right kind of vets (TOTALLY & PERMANENTLY DISABLED IN THE LINE OF DUTY) to deserve benefits

 I recently exchanged correspondence with a very courteous state official. The point I wanted to make is that when veterans were granted the small partial property tax exemption for totally and permanently disabled veterans via SCR06-001 that led to Referendum E in 2006, what we voted approval for clearly wasn't what ended up as the wording of the constitution's Article X Section 3.5. 

Did we get snookered? Did the legislature pull a fast one to keep from wasting too much money on disabled veterans?

The official's correspondence and expertise was very kindly offered to me and I appreciate it, but he just didn't address my point and instead stressed, the law is what the law is, and for changes visit your legislator. He wrote, "In Colorado, the factors that affect the determination as to whether a veteran is a "qualifying disabled veteran" who is eligible for the property exemption are:

"(1) the eligibility requirements set forth in the Colorado Constitution; and (2) Most significantly for the purposes of this response, the purpose for which the federal government has determined a veteran to be "totally" disabled."

I do understand. I'm not the official's client but the state government is his actual client so he steps forth in support, despite the oath of office to the national and state constitutions that one must take for public service. I tried to make the point that I agree with his second point, that "total disability for individual unemployability" (TDIU) is a VA classification for....totally and permanently disabled Colorado veterans injured in the line of duty. My point was that total and 100% are the same words, and we follow the "plain meaning" of words in our state.

Here is what the people of Colorado were told we voted for when we read the text of the referendum in the 2006 Blue Book:

"AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 3.5 OF ARTICLE X OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, CONCERNING THE EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR QUALIFYING SENIORS TO ANY UNITED STATES MILITARY VETERAN WHO IS ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PERMANENTLY DISABLED DUE TO A SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITY."

I've made the point already that "one-hundred-percent" and "total" as in TDIU mean the same; voters made no distinction and weren't asked to do so...we approved 100% which is the same as total. However, here's the version of what we ended up as Article X Section 3.5 of the constitution once administrators and legislators reworded what they sent us to vote on and what we voted for into what they wanted for us. We got the text of the referendum, but the legislature had in SCR 06-001 their very restrictive definition of a "qualified veteran" that we voters didn't get to see:

(1.5) For purposes of this section, "disabled veteran" means an individual who has served on active duty in the United States armed forces, including a member of the Colorado national guard who has been ordered into the active military service of the United States, has been separated therefrom under honorable conditions, and has established a service-connected disability that has been rated by the federal department of veterans affairs as one hundred percent permanent disability through disability retirement benefits or a pension pursuant to a law or regulation administered by the department, the department of homeland security, or the department of the army, navy, or air force.

We didn't get to see the part highlighted in yellow although it was in SCR06-001 and it also ended up in the constitution as Article X Section 3.5. We do know that the legislature wasn't all that concerned about its own wording because when they did the enabling statute for the referendum once it was approved they decided, without regard for the constitution they'd just given to us to approve, that they'd leave out the text highlighted in yellow.

"(3.5) ‘Qualifying disabled veteran’ means an individual who has served on active duty in the United States armed forces, including a member of the Colorado National Guard who has been ordered into the active military service of the United States, has been separated therefrom under honorable conditions, and has established a service-connected disability that has been rated by the United States department of veterans affairs as one hundred percent permanent and total disability pursuant to a law or regulation administered by the department.

That's right. HB07-1251, the statute the legislature passed didn't have the part about totally disabled military retirees, so for the next fifteen years Colorado taxed these veterans, despite their constitutional entitlement to the property tax exemption:

I spotted the problem in 2014 and worked with my state senator to fix it. In May 2016 the legislature passed HB16-1444 to put those constitutional words protecting totally and permanently disabled military retires back into the statute, but Colorado has ever since ignored that law by simply not providing any form with which those qualified veterans can apply. No form = no exemption, despite the nagging minor detail of these veterans having the benefit enshrined in our hallowed constitution. I refer back to the oaths these folks take upon assuming office to support the state constitution...but it seems not of any importance if things like this aren't of interest to them.

Is there any real value to the Disabled Veteran Property Tax Exemption?

Is the Disabled Veteran Property Tax Exemption actually worth anything?

Easy answer: not as much as when voters approved it back in 2006.
The US dollar has dropped in value by other a third. Our 2006 dollar has lost 35 cents, while the exemption has remained static (half of the first $200,000 in assessed value) since creation in 2006.

We see the opposite in property values. Denver's average home sale in 2006 was $288,000, and by 2021 had more than doubled to $612,000.

What voters sought for our disabled veterans back in 2006 cut 34% of an average home's tax bill. Today, the exemption covers less than 15% of the home's taxes; this drop in real value means the exemption is worth less than half when first authorized.

The value of the exemption voters approved for disabled veterans is worth much less today. While property values, property taxes and other expenses keep going up each year, the real value of the property tax exemption for disabled veterans, seniors and their survivors, is worth less and less each year as we watch the dollar deflate. And property taxes in real dollars keep going and up

The 2020 cost to Colorado for all categories of the property tax exemption was about $159,000,000. Disabled veterans and their survivors are only 2% of that.

Colorado isn't especially generous in our exemption. Nineteen other states exempt 100% of a totally disabled veteran's property taxes. No other state restricts TDIU veterans from their exemption.

"They just did it." Used statute to modify Article X Section 3.5 & added survivors

GOLD STAR WIVES:

HB14-1373 added surviving spouses of seniors and disabled veterans to the property tax exemption in Article X Section 3.5. 

That means the legislature modified a provision in the Colorado constitution without bothering with an amendment!

Oops.

That is "extra-constitutional." But it was done. Can we do the same "extra-constitutional" approach to add Gold Star Wives (spouses) to the survivors?

TDIU vs 100% Disabled Veterans & CO Property Tax Exemption. Perhaps we ALREADY approved TDIU?

A justification for inclusion of TDIU veterans can be based on what the legislature passed in 2006 with SCR06-001 to present to the voters for approval as Referendum E. That asked whether disabled veterans should be added to the original senior exemption. 

I believe voters approved Article X Section 3.5 with the plain meaning of the text's words to include TDRU. Here is the actual text of the amendment from the Blue Book:

"​AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 3.5 OF ARTICLE X OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, CONCERNING THE EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR QUALIFYING SENIORS TO ANY UNITED STATES MILITARY VETERAN WHO IS ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PERMANENTLY DISABLED DUE TO A SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITY.​"​

According to DOLA, when the enabling legislation was crafted (HB07-1251, Section 39-3-203[1.5], C.R.S) "some legislators" then set up their definitions to fine-tune what voters thought we wanted.

Here's the legislators' "modification" of what the people voted for:

 "...A SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITY THAT HAS BEEN RATED BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS AS ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PERMANENT AND TOTAL DISABILITY PURSUANT TO A LAW OR REGULATION ADMINISTERED BY THE DEPARTMENT."

Background: It might help that we have HB16-1125 to​ align Colorado veteran-related terminology with the VA's. In 1925, the​ VA​ Schedule for Rating Disabilities provided the first definition of total disability. Total disability was defined as "an impairment of mind or body that is sufficient to render it impossible for the average person to follow a substantially gainful occupation". 

That's what we have today, only VA has evolved two systems of rating tables for various injuries, percentages of which reflect an impairment in the ability to work. A certain injury, or group of injuries, reflects a work impairment in percentages up to 100%, or what is typically a total inability to work. A 100% disabled vet might possibly still work and is encouraged to do so for financial and mental health.

TDIU is absolutely no different in concept – it is also a percentage based on tables for average injuries and how they cost the vet ability to work. However, TDIU is "rounded-up" to the 100% compensation step to addresses situations where an injury or group of injuries is uniquely worse than typical​, ​constituting the ​actual​ total inability to work. 

A TDIU vet who is someday able to return to work forfeits VA compensation, but the 100% vet is encouraged to work if possible and keeps the compensation. TDIU qualification is with full mental or physical disability, just as with Social Security Disability. Often the TDIU is evaluated first by state rehab agencies or a Certified Rehabilitation Counselor in addition to VA exams. 

VA's Inspector General describes TDIU as VA's solution for VA own "inadequate rating tables." Denying a totally and permanently disabled who VA determines has injuries worse than VA's "inadequate" rating is certainly not something ​voters expected to do in approving Referendum E. However, for some illogical reason, Colorado has ended up with that interpretation penalize our TDIU​ vets.

One would have to read the text and make an effort to exclude TDIU​ – and we've done that in our state.

Certainly, if an interpretation is to be made reading the referendum and its explanation, the general sense of inclusion for TDIU is far stronger than its exclusion. Because there was no further qualification or explanation​ in the amendment's text or explanation, no fine-tuning​ as to military veteran​s​totally and permanently disabled due to a service-connected disability – it includes both categories. 

​So, are we left wondering only about the difference between ​“100%” ​and​ “Total?” Did the electorate read the text to include or to exclude either, especially after reading the Blue Book analysis?​ ​Ask a lawyer​ or an English teacher (in one of my former lives, I was an English teacher with a California Community Colleges Lifetime Credential.)​ 

Colorado ​has​ put​ much​ too-fine and illogical a distinction between "100%​"​ and ​"​total" TDIU veterans with permanent awards. Colorado even has our statute, section 2-4-101, C.R.S., that supports the Plain Meaning Rule: "Words and phrases shall be read in context and construed according to the rules of grammar and common usage." I imagine that is especially so with foundational documents such as the constitution.

A. The plain meaning of total includes 100%, complete, containing the whole, an entirety, absolute, perfect, unconditional, and pure. 

B. The plain meaning of one-hundred-percent includes total, complete, full, all, perfect, whole, all inclusive, absolute, an entirety.

Either way, Colorado has one of our citizens to care for, an honorable veteran who volunteered for service and came home totally and permanently disabled ​as well as actually unable to ever work ​due to terrible line of duty injuries, classified by VA as TDIU.

But Colorado refuses even this small tax benefit. Our legislature said our totally and permanently disabled TDIU vet isn't totally and permanently disabled enough, per its preference for one VA total disability category over another, even when VA means them to be the same in protection of the same totally and permanently veterans? Even though Colorado overwhelmingly approved the benefit when we voted for "ANY UNITED STATES MILITARY VETERAN WHO IS ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PERMANENTLY DISABLED DUE TO A SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITY.​"​

Here's another thought. There should be no need for a constitutional amendment to address TDIU. Two arguments for that are:

A. We already approved all totally disabled veterans in Referendum E, or

B. Because the legislature defined "qualifying disabled veteran" it can easily do so again to clarify inclusion of TDIU rather than exclusion

Here is how one law firm explains the issue: 

What are the differences between 100% and permanent total disability ratings?

The main difference is why you obtain the rating. If you receive a 100% rating, it is because your disabilities totaled this amount on the Combined Ratings table. If you receive a permanent total disability rating, it is because you received a 100% rating and your conditions are not expected to improve. Veterans can receive a 100% rating or TDIU without the permanent and total disability VA benefits rating attached to it.

“Total” means that all your disabilities equal a 100 percent veterans benefits rating. “Permanent” means the VA expects the veteran’s disability to continue throughout their life without significant improvement. 

 Are Individual Unemployability benefits considered permanent total disability ratings?

First, you should understand that Individual Unemployability benefits, 100% ratings, and permanent total disability ratings are different things. First, Individual Unemployability does not require you to obtain a 100% rating, but they pay the same. Like a 100% disability rating, Individual Unemployability is not necessarily permanent. If you return to work you lose your TDIU. However, veterans can receive a 100 percent rating while working full-time. TDIU is restrictive and an actual determination of the inability to work.

Veterans can receive permanent TDIU ratings while they receive Individual Unemployability benefits if VA determines the line-of-duty conditions preventing you from working are not expected to improve."

​Note: Both groups can ha​​ve temporary categories, but we're only concerned about ​​VA permanent ratings.
​

For reference, here's Referendum E's text from the 2006 B​lue Book:

"​AN AMENDMENT TO SECTION 3.5 OF ARTICLE X OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, CONCERNING THE EXTENSION OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR QUALIFYING SENIORS TO ANY UNITED STATES MILITARY VETERAN WHO IS ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PERMANENTLY DISABLED DUE TO A SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITY.​"​

The Colorado Property Tax Reduction for Disabled Veterans Referendum, also known as Referendum E, was on the November 7, 2006 ballot in Colorado as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment, where it was approved. The measure extended a property tax exemption for qualified senior citizens to all U.S. military veterans living in Colorado who are 100% disabled due to a service-related disability​.​

Who qualifies for the tax deduction? Homeowners who have served on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces and are rated 100-percent permanently disabled by the federal government due to a service-connected disability qualify for the tax reduction in Referendum E. Colorado National Guard members injured while serving in the U.S. Armed Forces also qualify. Veterans are rated 100-percent permanently disabled when a mental or physical injury makes it impossible for the average person to hold a job and the disability is lifelong. Nationally, less than one percent of veterans have a 100-percent permanent disability rating. About 2,200 veterans are expected to qualify for the property tax reduction in Colorado.