WHAT VOTERS APPROVED IN 2006 FOR DISABLED VETERAN PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION

BUT WE DIDN'T GET IT!

Will Politics Play a Role Against Veterans' Needs?

Maybe the question should be – will legislators find a way to use veterans' rights and needs to attack the opposing party? With veterans' issues founded in the Constitution, we think not. Especially not, because we've seen leaders in the Senate and the House, from opposite parties, push for late bills.

Folks in the know about Colorado politics remind us that corrections in our disabled veteran property tax exemption face hurdles, especially if legislation is involved rather than a constitutional challenge at the Supreme Court.

Too often, perfectly worthy bills are assigned to committees which have nothing to do with the bill so that failure is certain. For instance, automobile safety bills assigned by the president of the Senate or the speaker of the House to the Committee on State, Veterans and Military Affairs. That's known as referring bills to a "kill" committee.

So, not only do we have to hope leadership in Denver will obey their oaths of office to support the Constitution and bring statues into accord with it, but we have to hope they don't find in the process a way to attack the opposite party and use "kill" committees. Finally, we have to hope the Legislature views veterans' rights under Article X Section 3.5 to be something they will permit us to finally enjoy by passing essential legislation. Too much to hope for? Perhaps.

The problem is felt heavily by the electorate. Bills might be important problem-fixers, but legislative in-fighting makes it far more important for parties to find ways to hurt each other rather than serve the electorate. The worst of these abuses comes when really important legislation is introduced by one party but blocked by the other only to keep the introducing party from getting credit for good legislation.

Finally, the problem can be that this is the veterans' problem, not our legislators'. Their disinterest might just leave us abandoned.

What is the value of Colorado's disabled veteran property tax exemption?

Very simply, a totally disabled veteran's property is given a $100,000 exemption from the appraised value. A veteran's widow(er) also receives the exemption if the veteran was receiving the exemption before death. Sadly, no combat deaths qualify because the servicemember wasn't receiving the benefit at death, obviously.

Referendum E was explained to voters as an effort to thank Colorado's veterans whose service left them 100% permanently and totally disabled, about one percent of all veterans.

Vets still pay property tax but that burden is lessened on average about $466. Total cost to the state was estimated at $1,000,000 for extending the benefit to an estimated 2000 veterans.

There is also a benefit to the entire state in encouraging and supporting voluntary military service.

Referendum E, which became Article X Section 3.5 of our state constitution, is Colorado's largest benefit for qualified disabled veterans, although not to be compared to other states like New Hampshire or New Jersey where all property taxes are excused. The public expressed the intent of a little tax help so that totally disabled veterans might get and keep their homes, although the benefit applies only to homeowners. Other states provide different property tax relief. Oregon, for instance, exempts only $18,000 of the assessed value. Connecticut and a few other states offer 100% tax exemption. Colorado wrongly considers itself "somewhat above average" in disabled veterans' benefits. Remember: disabled veterans and military retirees are combat- proven good citizens and also economically beneficial to their states. Their pensions and retirements are huge injections of cash to local economies. Because of federal benefits, they are not burdens, and many states actively target these folks as new residents by offering such things as property and income tax relief.  Colorado can do so much more, especially with free state park camping, tax-exempt military retirement, and more significant property tax exemptions.

A little history - Colorado's Disabled Veteran Property Tax Exemption

Let's look at history...

"Unemployability" is specifically cited by CMDVA and the county governments as an unacceptable VA disability rating. While nothing in the Constitution or the 2007 enabling legislation bars VA unemployability ratings for permanent and total 100% service-connected veterans, CMDVA staff reports this has resulted from casual, unofficial legislative guidance after the statute was on the books. Today, the only written basis for barring unemployability ratings are some counties' application forms (hardly a legal foundation) and the CMDVA web site. It is barred because CMDVA says so, not because of any statute or Constitutional provision.

But history tells a fuller story. Colorado's referendum measures are described in detail by the Legislature at their web site, Colorado Ballot Analysis. Amazingly, there we read that unemployability was a substantive issue specifically provided for in the various drafts, the Blue Book and the final ballot analysis given the electorate to consider:

"Who qualifies for the tax reduction? 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.
What are the fiscal implications? Referendum E affects property taxes paid beginning in 2008. The average property tax savings for those who qualify will be about $466. The total reduction in property taxes is estimated to be about $1 million in the first year. The state is required to reimburse local governments for the reduction in property tax revenue resulting from Referendum E."

When Referendum E was finally referred to the electorate to vote on, there was no unemployability language like the voter summary contained, and Article X Section 3.5 simply mentioned the specific qualifiers. The words "100% percent (1) permanently (2) and totally service-connected disabled (3)" were used. These are what the Constitution's Article X Section 3.5 requires CMDVA to require of veterans seeking the disabled veteran property tax exemption. "Unemployability" does not appear in the Constitution and that VA rating doesn't conflict at all with the Constitution's specifications.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Benefits Administration confirmed that it has two such ratings. One is for 100% service-connected illnesses or injuries, and the other is for permanent and totally disabled 100% service-connected unemployability. VA generally refers to the latter as "TDIU" or "PDIU." Nothing in the Constitution or the subsequent statutes bars CMDVA from accepting claims of both groups but the state only accepts the first category. 

In doing this, about half of the eligible veterans are barred from the protection intended for them by the electorate who approved Referendum as Article X of the Constitution.

What the people approved should be the law of the land. If unemployability, or enlisted, or commissioned, or value of property, or age, or kind of injury, or type retired, or any other qualifier is to be applied in evaluating a veteran's application for the disabled veteran property tax exemption, that should be spelled out in law which reflects the Constitution. Only permanent, total, 100% service-connected and disabled are the words of our Constitution.

Permanent VA unemployability ratings were described by DOLA in the Blue Book for approval by the people and should not be disqualified by the state.

Finally – A comprehensive (though disappointing) answer about the conflict between Colorado's constitution and statutes on disabled vet property tax exemption

I asked...and she answered very completely. Now I have something to work with going forward.

From: Groff - DOLA, JoAnn <j>

Dear Mr. Carter: 

Renee Bridges and Stan Gueldenzopf on the staff here at the Division of Property Taxation, Department of Local Affairs have both contacted me about your concerns. To clarify, I understand your issue is that you have a different opinion of the wording of the Colorado Constitution from how it is interpreted by Colorado Statute and subsequently applied by the Division of Veterans Affairs in the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs. Renee Bridges suggested that you contact your legislators, but perhaps didn't offer enough explanation as to the "why" you should contact them. I hope to add some clarity here.

When there is a question regarding an interpretation of the constitutionality of statute there are two governing authorities. The first is the Colorado General Assembly. The presumption is that their interpretation through law IS constitutional. Subsequently, the Administrative staff who interprets and then enforces the statutes (read Division of Veterans Affairs, Division of Property Taxation and our respective Departments) does not have the authority to question whether the law is in conflict with the Constitution, we must assume all statutes are constitutional. If there is a question of whether a statute is constitutional, the second governing authority is the Colorado Supreme Court. If the Court says it is NOT constitutional then that part of the law becomes null and void and the General Assembly starts over. 

Short of bringing a lawsuit, individual legislators do have the ability to ask Legislative Legal Services, the office that acts as the attorneys for the General Assembly, for a legal interpretation of whether a part of the statute is constitutional. The legislators also can introduce legislation, even without an opinion of their lawyers, if the legislator feels the current statutory interpretation is incorrect, OR if they feel the language of the constitution might support a more broad interpretation than that which is currently in statute. 

For your circumstances, rather than initiating a costly and protracted legal review through the courts, my staff thought the best place to start is to see if your individual legislators agree with your argument and feel a change in the statute is appropriate. The interpretation you propose cannot be enacted independently by the administrative departments responsible for the program. I hope this offers clarity to our earlier response. 

All the best. JoAnn

JoAnn Groff 

Property Tax Administrator

P 303-864-7776  I  M 303-864-7777 I  F 303-864-7799

1313 Sherman St., Suite 419, Denver, CO 80203 

  I www.dola.colorado.gov/dpt

Overview & Support Materials – Disabled Veteran Property Tax Exemption Issue

Summarizing what we've learned in a couple months of investigation, this twenty page overview provides an orientation to the issue and the various details which leave us challenging the Colorado Department of Military and Veterans Affairs for improperly constricting the definition of "qualified veteran."

Their redefinitions have blocked two qualified groups of veterans, fully qualified per the Colorado Constitution Article X Section 3.5, for disabled veteran property tax exemption.