What needs to be fixed to comply with Colorado's Constitution Article X Section 3.5?

CLICK FOR BRIEFING PACKAGE

Easy. Everyone swore an oath to uphold the Constitution and we can count on our public servants to correct legislation offensive to the Constitution. Their oaths, plus the clear knowledge that inaction by the Legislature fails Colorado's disabled veterans by denying us our Constitution's protection, make the Legislature's duty obvious.

Easy because it is so very clear. Current defective statutes addressing Article X Section 3.5 so clearly offend the Constitution we can easily summarize what's needed.

Corrective Action:

1. Military service total disability retirements must have enabling statute
2. All barriers to VA's total disability individual unemployability (TDIU) permanent ratings must be removed, but do not need corrective legislation. Regulatory correction suffices because each element of TDIU already satisfies constitutional requirement NOTE: RECOMMENDED: correct the defect in the entire program's failure to accommodate widows of service members who die on active duty, without a chance to qualify for veteran's status 

Justification:

1. Military service total disability retirements are clearly specified in Article X Section 3.5 and must be made acceptable to CDMA
2. The electorate exercised its power to amend the Constitution and approved Referendum E. Voter guidance from Colorado Legislative Council described unemployable disabled veterans, and each specific in Article X Section 3.5 as well as subsequent legislation detailed "permanent, service-connected, 100% total" as qualifying elements. The US Department of Veterans Affairs Veterans Benefits Administration confirmed each element is also an element of the VA permanent TDIU disability rating, and VA has offered to brief CDMA and other Colorado agencies.

DISCOVERED – A 2010 DOLA Reference to "Unemployability"

DOLA brochure           

Days and days have been spent trying to pin down how the state's basis for its current barrier to VA permanent and total disabled unemployability (TDIU) ratings and just how it grew into policy. Perhaps one such source document was found this evening, published in 2010 by the Department of Legislative Analysis (DOLA.) But nothing so far any earlier than 2010.

We learned that the 2006 Referendum E voter summary specifically described unemployability issues for the electorate to approve in this constitutional amendment. ("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.") That's what the voters were asked to consider. They approved, but the Legislature dropped from statutes along with military 100% disability retirements. Ge3.5t the point? The Legislature in effect changed the Constitution by statues which failed to encompass the full range of Article X Section, leaving CMDVA unable to follow the Constitution's provisions and stuck with the flawed statute instead.

Article X Section 3.5 simply mentioned "permanent, 100% service connected, total disability" VA ratings with nothing at all to eliminate or somehow disqualify TDIU. We learned that CDMVA said the department had "legislative guidance" to exclude VA TDIU, despite the Constitution and the subsequent enabling legislation passed in 2007. In the 2006 ballot information, voters were told Referendum E was to address vets who were "100-percent permanently disabled when a mental or physical injury makes it impossible for the average person to hold a job." The voters did not vote to bar unemployability ratings but specifically to include that rating for property tax exemption.

Did the legislators decide to override the electorate after Article X Section 3.5 was added to the Constitution? Why did CMDVA end up with its rules being 180º away from what voters approved? How did the Constitution's provision for CDMVA to recognize military service total disability retirements disappear from subsequent statute ?

Exemption application forms, county web pages and various unofficial sources mention that VA unemployability awards were unacceptable to CMDVA, but nothing on a state form. CallinguCMDVA yields the same negative answer - "not acceptable." We found nothing else from the State Until this evening, discovered on the Colorado Legislative Council web page.

Tonight, the earliest info we've been able to dig up is a 2010 DOLA-published two-page flyer titled "PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR DISABLED VETERANS IN COLORADO." Now, there's nothing official about this and it is an information-only type document, and it came out four years after the Constitution's change.

DOLA wrote, "VA employability awards do not meet the eligibility requirements." This 2010 brochure is the earliest document we can find addressing unemployability, and the only state document. We've found nothing more official on which CMDVA policy was based.

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.

Colorado's Legislative Council – did they let veterans down on Referendum E?

I'm learning so much as I follow the trail of Colorado's disabled veteran property tax exemption, the 2006 Referendum E.

What I've learned about is Colorado's legislative process. Reading about it I've got a better picture about the history of our disabled vet property tax exemption and problems now surfacing.

The steps begin with the Legislature sending the language of a referendum to the Legislative Council to insure its legality, compliance with style and format. That means the property tax exemption was carefully worded by the Legislative Council for the specific words by which the Constitution would be amended, and also the words by which the electorate would be guided to an understanding of the referendum adequate to have an informed opinion when voting.

You can see what they did below in the referendum's plain-language description. Attention is drawn to the highlighted words in the "who qualifies for the tax deduction" section. Consider...this was written by the Legislature's "experts"??

"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."

After the voters approved Referendum E by 78% and by it, created Article X Section 3.5 of the Colorado Constitution, it became the job of the Legislature to craft enabling legislation. Once done, that headed over to the Colorado Legislative Council for the same reasons...legal clarity, compliance with the Constitution, form and style. This is where serious problems popped up. Legislation did not match the newly-amended Constitution! The electorate was duped.

What the Legislative Council approved for the Referendum E'/Article X Section 3.5 enabling statute drifted far from what the electorate were told they'd voted for. Struck from the statute was a very important group of veterans the state now cites statute to deny the exemption, even though this category of disabled vet is spelled out in tht Cinstitution. Vets whose injuries leave them unable to work are termed "permanent and total service connected unemployability" ratings. That's bad because the Legislative Council blocked about half of the veterans the electorate voted to help! From the 2006 Blue Book:

"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."

Disabled veterans with VA's unemployability disability rating were specified as what the voters were helping, became in the administration of the statute by CMDVA a group specified as unqualified.

That's a complete 180º shift away from the Constitution, enough to disappoint this veteran! 

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.

Solution? Good hearts in CDMVA and the Legislature?

There's hope in Colorado!

Legislative leadership, CDMVA expertise and United Veterans Committee support might craft a solution to the descriptions between the Colorado Constitution's Article X Section 3.5 and the 2007 statute defining "eligible veteran."

If so, more disabled Colorado veterans can be protected by the disabled veteran property tax exemption.

Thanks to all who care about us!