Proposition 137: Retain Sporting Goods Sales Tax Revenue for Conservation and Wildfire Prevention Fund Initiative

The DMCC Board voted to support Prop 137, which will statutorily dedicate approximately $175 million in existing annual sales-tax revenue associated with sporting goods to wildfire mitigation, forest health, conservation efforts, and outdoor recreation infrastructure with no increase in sales tax rates.

The growing economic impacts of catastrophic wildfires on businesses, utilities, tourism, insurance premiums, and water infrastructure are necessary to provide targeted investment in risk reduction and long-term economic resilience.

As Coloradans, we take pride in our outdoor spaces. Proposition 137 allows the state to keep statewide sales taxes from sporting goods and transfer the money to specified outdoor and environmental funds, but what sounds good might not be in our best interest. We recommend voting NO on this proposition. - Prop 137 transfers approximately $175 million from the state General Fund and assigns the money for a single narrow purpose. This action would also reduce budget flexibility for many years to come. - Prop 137 specifically gives the money to funds that have special interests and limited accountability to the voters or the legislature. - Prop 137 limits our elected legislators’ ability to respond to new conservation best practices and state needs in the years to come. Prop 137 takes control away from our elected legislators by earmarking specific sales tax revenues, reducing the strained General Fund and opening up special interest spending with limited oversight.

Proposition 137 would direct approximately $175 million per year in existing sales-tax revenue from sporting goods toward conservation, wildfire mitigation, outdoor recreation and related purposes by exempting the revenue from TABOR limitations.

Why Vote NO?

Conservation and wildfire mitigation are legitimate priorities. The question is who controls the money.

Proposition 137 would take an estimated $175 million annually out of the revenue stream subject to TABOR calculations and prevent that money from being available for potential taxpayer refunds or ordinary state budgeting.

This is not primarily a question about whether conservation is worthwhile. It is a question about whether government should be permitted to carve revenues out of TABOR protections one program at a time.

Colorado should prioritize conservation and wildfire mitigation through the normal appropriations process while preserving the taxpayer protections voters established in TABOR.

Position: Support conservation, but do not weaken TABOR to fund it. Vote NO.

Another nitpicking sales tax. We have too many of those already.