,

The fight for your Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) is back on the ballot again.

The Democrats pushed through two more referred measures to chip away at TABOR. Our friends at the Independence Institute ([link removed]) have explained in detail the case against MM and LL in Complete Colorado ([link removed]) . We wanted to share that article with you.

No on LL & MM: There’s still no such thing as ‘free’ school lunch

Coloradans only have two statewide ballot measures ([link removed]) to consider this year in the November election, both of which pertain to the state’s financially failing Healthy School Meals for All (HSMA) program.

The first, Proposition LL, would allow the state to retain and spend excess revenue collected from the 2022 Proposition FF “free” school lunch tax hike, to help bail out the program.

The second, Proposition MM, would increase state income taxes for certain higher income Coloradans to boost funding for the HSMA program and increase state funding to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), more commonly known as food stamps.

We urge a NO vote on both of these measures. Together they are the worst kind of policy making: a scattergun approach to a narrowly defined problem, built on a foundation of flawed economics and class resentment.


** Origins of universal ‘free’ school lunch
------------------------------------------------------------

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, approximately 41 percent ([link removed]) of students in Colorado were eligible for free or reduced lunch. In real terms, of Colorado’s 912,000 PK-12 student population, 300,000 students were eligible for free lunches, and 71,000 were eligible for reduced lunches. However, even students who were only eligible for reduced lunches according to federal guidelines could receive free lunches ([link removed]) because the state filled the gap.

During the pandemic, the federal government covered the entire cost of providing free school lunches to all students, regardless of family income, in the 2020-21 and 2021-22 school years.

However, instead of reverting to pre-pandemic funding for at-need students after the pandemic, the state legislature committed to continuing to cover the cost of school lunches for all students regardless of household income with the passage of Proposition FF, which created the HSMA program.

To fund the increased expenses, Proposition FF raised taxes on Coloradans earning over $300,000 by capping state deductions at $12,000 for single filers and $16,000 for joint filers. This amounts to around 200,000 (or 6 percent) of state tax filers ([link removed]) . Initial estimates anticipated that the measure would increase state income tax revenue by $100.7 million ([link removed]) in the 2023-24 budget year. The program was expected to cost between $71.4 million and $101.4 million once fully operational.

The costs of the HSMA program were drastically underestimated, despite warnings that many parents would predictably opt their children into “free” school lunches. Enrollment far exceeded expectations, and by March 2024, legislators were informed that program costs were were going to blow past estimates by $56.1 million in just ([link removed]) the first year of operation.

Because the HSMA program proved an almost immediate fiscal debacle, lawmakers introduced a bill during the 2025 legislative session to refer two new measures to the ballot, aiming to rescue the beleaguered program. The ultimately passed House Bill 25-1274 ([link removed]) birthed Proposition LL and Proposition MM. ([link removed])


** Proposition LL
------------------------------------------------------------

Proposition LL, would allow the state to keep and spend overcollected “free” lunch tax revenue funds that would otherwise be returned to taxpayers.

The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights ([link removed]) (TABOR) is a constitutional provision that among other things limits a portion of the state budget to a formula of population plus inflation, with any excess revenue returned to taxpayers. For new taxes, any revenue collected that exceeds the initial estimate must also be returned to taxpayers, unless voters approve the state keeping the money.

Proposition LL is such a measure. The 2022 Blue Book ([link removed]) estimated that Proposition FF would increase revenue by $100.7 million in fiscal year 2023-24. However, the program collected $112 million, or $11.3 million more than initially estimated. Proposition LL, then, asks voters to allow the state to retain and spend the $12.4 million in tax revenue (and interest earned) that was over-collected from taxpayers in year one. However, Prop LL also fully “deTABORs” Proposition FF revenue moving forward. This means it retains extra tax revenue not only from fiscal year 2023-24 but also from all future years.

Aside from allowing the retention of program funds, Prop LL enables the state to maintain current deductions at 2025 levels for those earning over $300,000 annually, which would otherwise be increased next year to mitigate overcollection. The measure would increase state spending ([link removed]) by $33 million in fiscal year 2025-26 and $67 million in fiscal year 2026-27.


** Proposition MM
------------------------------------------------------------

Proposition MM, would increase taxes on those Coloradans already funding the HSMA program to close its budget shortfall.

Proposition FF initially funded the “free” lunch program by taxing households with annual incomes exceeding $300,000. Proposition MM would increase taxes on those households again by reducing the state deduction limit to $1,000 for single filers and $2,000 for joint filers, raising an estimated additional $95 million per year for the program.

It is worth noting that, according to the Colorado Department of Revenue ([link removed]) , Coloradans earning over $200,000 annually (just 8.4 percent of households) already paid 48 percent of the state’s income tax in 2020, before the HSMA was even created.

Legislators also added an amendment to Proposition MM during the state’s 2025 special session to direct some of the HSMA funding to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps, in light of program changes caused by the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act ([link removed]) (OBBBA).

OBBBA’s changes to the SNAP program were expected to immediately reduce enrollment and increase costs if the state chose to maintain current obligations to the program. The changes to SNAP that most significantly impact the state budget ([link removed]) include increased state administrative costs and a higher state benefit share, both due to the program’s high payment error rate.

Because the $95 million expected to be raised by MM would exceed the current program’s $56 million shortfall, it is unsurprising the legislative Democrat majority would desire to spend extra funds to cover the increasing costs associated with SNAP.


** Tax hikes on autopilot
------------------------------------------------------------

It is crucial to note that Proposition FF ([link removed]) never indexed the income threshold for those Coloradans paying the “free” lunch taxes to inflation or any other growth mechanism. Because the cutoff is not indexed, inflation and wage growth over time will cause more households to cross the $300,000 threshold, expanding the number of households affected by the tax hike without any additional legislative action or new voter approval.

This tax base creep has already become apparent since the program’s creation. According to the Proposition FF analysis from 2022, the measure would only affect about 5 percent of Colorado income tax filers. According to the Prop MM analysis ([link removed]) , the new measure would affect about 6 percent of tax filers.

It is understandable that, over time, incomes increase, and more households will earn over $300,000. However, due to inflation, Coloradans earning $300,000 in 2025 have less buying power than those who were making $300,000 in 2022. In fact, those earning $300,000 in 2025 have the same buying power ([link removed]) as those making $274,253 in 2022 due to inflation, meaning its tax base is already broader in real terms.

This “bracket creep” will inevitably worsen over time. For example, in ten years, those earning $300,000 in nominal income will only have a purchasing power of approximately $190,000 in 2025 dollars, assuming a 3 percent inflation rate ([link removed]) and a 1.7 percent growth in real incomes ([link removed]) (Colorado’s historical averages).

Proposition FF was sold to voters as only affecting a small, very wealthy portion of the state. However, should Prop MM pass, an increasing number of Coloradans will see their taxes increase over time to pay for the program.


** The contingency plan
------------------------------------------------------------

State lawmakers during the 2025 legislative session also passed Senate Bill 25-214 ([link removed]) as a contingency in case LL and MM fail at the ballot box. The bill would scale back the HSMA program only for eligible students if the total program funding, including both new and retained funds, does not exceed $150 million. Thus, funding for school lunches would return to pre-pandemic obligations, meaning that low-income students in need of subsidized school lunches would continue to receive them.


** Just say NO
------------------------------------------------------------

Propositions LL and MM ask voters and taxpayers to rescue a universal school meal program that was unsustainable from its inception. Instead of returning to a targeted approach focused on serving students in need, the measures seek to increase taxes without TABOR limits or inflation protection, expand state spending, and entrench a new middle-and upper-class entitlement program.

Importantly, a rejection of Propositions LL and MM would not jeopardize free or reduced lunches for eligible students. It would simply restore the program to fiscal reality and reaffirm Colorado’s commitment ([link removed]) to tax fairness.

View email in browser ([link removed])
Colorado Republican Committee . P.O. Box 4585 . Greenwood Village, CO 80112 . USA
update your preferences ([link removed]) or unsubscribe ([link removed])