cci is a non-profit, membership association whose purpose is to offer ... - county...

Summer Issue 2016

County Lines

In This Issue Page 7 Urban Renewal

Page 8 Child Welfare

0 Marijuana Impacts

Pages 11-14 District Meetings

Focusing on critical issues that impact Colorado’s citi-

zens and communities, over 200 members of Colorado

Counties, Inc. (CCI) participated in the CCI Founda-

tion’s Summer Conference in the Routt County city of

Steamboat Springs on June 6-8, 2016.

The conference presented a wide range of educational

programs designed to help county leaders make good

decisions in such important areas as child welfare, natu-

ral disaster mitigation, urban renewal, marijuana legaliza-

tion, and providing services for the state’s aging popula-

tion.

County leaders heard a report from the Strategic Action

Planning Group on Aging (SAPGA) that was created

during the 2015 legislative session to develop a compre-

hensive strategic action plan on aging in Colorado

through the year 2030. SAPGA Chair Jim Riesberg said

the initial plan would be presented to the Governor in

November 2016 and be updated in 2018 and 2020. For

more on SAPGA, see the article on Page 6.

Routt County proved a gracious host for the event, co-

ordinating field trips to the Yampa Valley Regional Air-

port, Hayden Generating Plant and downtown Steam-

boat Springs. Routt County Commission Chair Cari

Hermacinski welcomed delegates to the opening session,

which featured two dynamic keynote presentations by

National Association of Counties Executive Director

Matt Chase and political pollster Floyd Ciruli.

After being introduced by NACo President and El Paso

County Commissioner Sallie Clark, Chase presented a

powerful case on “Why Counties Matter” to policy-

makers in Washington, DC and across the nation. “We

have an incredible story to tell,” said Mr. Chase. “In

America, counties own 45 percent of the roads, 38 per-

cent of the bridges, 27 percent of public transit systems,

and 30 percent of airports. Counties spend $70 billion a

year on hospitals, health departments, and nursing

homes, and another $70 billion on justice and public

safety. Once people process those facts, they open their

minds up to our legislative and regulatory proposals.”

Mr. Ciruli captivated the audience with his timely analy-

sis of the race for the White House as well as his assess-

ment of Congressional and General Assembly contests

and ballot initiatives that would amend the Colorado

Constitution. For more on his remarks, see the article on

Page 4.

During the Summer Conference, CCI engaged its members in a strategic plan-

ning process being led by, left to right, President Keith Goodwin, consultant

Randy Scott, Executive Director John (Chip) Taylor, and President-elect Lew Gaiter III. For details, see Page 4.

During the conference, CCI honored the Department of

Local Affairs (DOLA) for its 50 years of service to Col-

orado’s local governments and citizens and CCI also

provided the venue for the Colorado Department of

Human Services to present its C-Stat Awards recogniz-

ing 14 counties for distinguished performance.

The CCI’s Foundation’s Winter Conference is set for

November 28-30, 2016, in Colorado Springs.

County Leaders Sharpen Their Skills at Summer Conference

C O U N T Y L I N E S

Business Meeting Report:

CCI Will Oppose Ballot Proposal Creating Single-Payer Health Plan Under the leadership of CCI President Keith Goodwin, an Otero County Commissioner, the association’s Sum-mer Conference business meeting was held on June 7, 2016, in Steamboat Springs. Goodwin thanked this year’s district officers for their service and noted that the 2016-2017 district Presidents and Vice Presidents would be elected at their respective district meetings the following day. As a result of those elections, the new officers for the coming year are: Eastern: Terry G. Hart, Washington, President and

Rod Pelton, Cheyenne, Vice President Front Range: Nancy Sharpe, Arapahoe, President

and Sam Taylor, Broomfield, Vice President Mountain: Dan Gibbs, Summit, President and

Merrit Linke, Grand, Vice President Southern: Jason Anderson, Saguache, President and

Peter Dawson, Baca, Vice President Western: Tom Jankovsky, Garfield, President and

Ben Tisdel, Ouray, Vice President Pitkin County Commissioner Rachel Richards deferred her proposed discussion on the CCI Steering Commit-tee Travel Policy to be part of CCI’s strategic planning initiative. Jeanne Nicholson, representing proponents of Amend-ment 69 (creation of the Colorado Care Health Pay-ment System) and M. Michael Cooke, representing the opponents of Amendment 69, made presentations to the membership. After much discussion, a motion to postpone the discussion and a vote on a call for the question, ultimately a motion for CCI membership to oppose Amendment 69 passed overwhelmingly. Commissioner Richards presented her proposed resolu-tion regarding the Transfer of Public Lands to the States. Commissioners discussed the aspects of mem-bership taking a position on the resolution, the varying amounts of public lands in counties and the amount of information that is still unknown without extensive

CCI used the occasion of the Summer

Conference to salute the Colorado

Department of Local Affairs

(DOLA) on its 50th anniversary.

DOLA Executive Director Irv

Halter (left) accepts the honor from

CCI Executive Director John (Chip)

Taylor.

study. A motion to form a subcommittee of interested counties to research and report back to the member-ship failed. A motion to support the proposed resolu-tion opposing the Transfer of Public Lands to the States Movement also failed.

Public Lands Steering Committee:

Dues Proposal for 2017 Focuses On Minimum, Maximum Levels Members of CCI Public Lands met at a pre-conference session on June 6, 2016, to discuss adop-tion of the budget and dues for 2017. Commissioner Shawn Bolton (Rio Blanco) reviewed the draft budget, which is very similar to the budget for 2016, as well as the current status of the group’s finances. Commis-sioner Bolton pointed out that more counties paid their dues than anticipated so revenues are also slight-ly higher than expected. The group then turned its attention to the dues pro-posal for 2017, which included a minimum dues level of $50 and a maximum of $4,000. The other major variation from the current dues schedule is the use of all federal payment programs, as reported on the state’s Statement of Federal Lands Payments, instead of using only payment in lieu of taxes (PILT) amounts to calculate each county’s share. These other payment programs include federal mineral lease (FML), secure rural schools, and grazing payments. This is signifi-cant because many counties get much more federal payment revenue than PILT and many federal pay-ments made to counties are deducted from a county’s PILT entitlement.

Continued on next page


Discussion of the dues proposal focused on two major issues, whether the minimum and maximum dues lev-els should be adjusted and whether payments to FML Districts should be included in calculating a county’s share of dues. Commissioner Bolton said he was trying to prepare a dues structure that would fairly allocate payments and also ensure that no county would be as-sessed more than they receive in federal payments. An extensive discussion ensued concerning the bene-fits of participating even with a small federal payment stream, whether any county could not afford a higher minimum dues level, whether FML districts should participate, and the propriety of Public Lands paying all of Colorado’s dues to the Western Interstate Re-gion. Some members asked for a restatement of the group’s accomplishments over the past year. Ultimate-ly, the members voted to revise the dues proposal to exclude FML district payments from a county’s share and to apply dues limits of $150 and $4,000. Although this was done by motion, it was not approval of the 2017 budget and dues, which is likely to be resubmitted to CCI Public Lands members in July for final approv-al. During the last portion of the meeting commissioners who attended the WIR Conference reported on the sessions they attended, including the BLM 2.0 listening session, a report by BLM Director Neil Kornze, and various reports on the evolution of cooperation and coordination between counties and federal agen-cies. Several counties also noted that they were im-pacted by the state BLM office’s recent decision to rea-lign districts. Staff will research whether there is more information available and whether anything can be done to mitigate concerns about the realignment.

Natural Resources Programs:

DOLA Director Irv Halter Reviews Impacts of Court Action on Counties One of the breakfast programs offered during the con-

ference was a briefing and conversation with Irv Halter,

the executive director of the state Department of Local

Affairs.

Director Halter opened by noting the wide range of non-natural resource services that the department pro-vides, including technical assistance, HUD funding, gaming impact and other services that are critical to helping local governments manage the population growth that is anticipated in the next 25 years. Director Halter then turned to the natural resources programs and a map of the state that shows how over $900 million in direct distributions and grants have been allocated in the last eight years, with the majority going to communities where oil and gas extraction ac-tivity occurs. Halter also noted how natural resource revenues tend to be cyclical and that the state is com-ing out of an “up” time and facing the double wham-my of lower projected revenues, as much as 60 percent less, and the impacts of the BP America decision re-cently announced by the state Supreme Court. The BP America decision, which allows additional tax deductions by oil and gas companies, was a surprise to everyone as it overturned both the Department of Revenue’s interpretation, as well as several lower court decisions. It could have application to numerous com-panies and to several past years of taxes paid. Director Halter said that the estimated repayment liability is es-timated to be between $40 million and $120 million and that, without the late bill approved by the General Assembly, the entire amount would have come from the severance tax fund. The bill implemented a freeze on a portion of the local energy funds and the portion of the energy funds paid to the Department of Natural Resources that are not needed as a state TABOR re-serve. The bill also provided for use of some state rainy day fund money that will have to be repaid next year. In addition, the Department of Local Affairs plans to scale back the amount of energy impact grants to $18 million per grant cycle but the JBC will be meeting on June 20 to discuss options. Halter noted with some relief that the JBC did protect $6 million in emergency relief money for DOLA to use for local disasters and emergencies. In discussions following his remarks, Director Halter

was asked about direct distributions and changes to

grant program matching requirements.



He said that he did anticipate about $30 million in direct distribution payments would be made and that there would be approximately $18 million in grants for each of the next three cycles. He also committed to including locals more in discussion of things like changing grant program matching requirements and noted that DOLA does make an effort to include organizations like CCI, CML and SDA when they are pursuing legislative changes. Halter was also asked about prioritization of broadband grants. He said that $20 million was set aside for this program, with a small part for regional planning. He said that applicants for these funds are not required to be in a COG but do have to be part of a plan that includes maintenance and operations provisions and have to try engage private industry, though private industry does not have to be part of the final plan. Finally, Director Halter was asked about the numer-ous times the state has used energy impact money to balance the state budget in lean times. Specifically, one commissioner remembered that locals were giv-en a “$200 million severance tax IOU” and asked about that being restored. Halter reported that he has heard this and that it probably will happen again. He also said that he was somewhat reassured that the funds were frozen, not taken, this time. Everyone in the Governor’s office gets the local sensitivity but he asked commissioners to stay engaged with legislators so they understand the con-sequences of their latest bright idea for alternative uses of energy-related revenues.

Strategic Planning Process:

Member Survey Provides Feedback As CCI Charts Path to Bright Future On the final morning of the Summer Conference, CCI’s strategic review consultant, Randy Scott, walked commissioners through the process being used to inform this wide-ranging organizational re-view. After going over the timeline for actions, which will be revised to ensure an opportunity to consider any proposed by-laws changes at CCI’s Winter Conference, Mr. Scott reminded everyone of the importance of completing the survey and that all responses would be kept completely confidential.

This session inspired a significant amount of discussion among the attendees. Mr. Scott noted the broad in-volvement of a large oversight committee that includes not only the Board of Directors but also the chair and vice-chair of each steering committee and the president and vice-president of each regional district. This large group will review the summary of survey responses in July and also identify the action areas on which to focus during the latter portion of the summer. Ultimately, the full membership will be briefed and have an opportunity to decide which recommendations will be implemented by changes to the by-laws or by chang-es to other CCI policy documents. As of this session, it is still very early in the review pro-cess and the deadline for completing member surveys had not yet passed so members were encouraged again at the end to complete their surveys to submit any fur-ther thoughts or comments that come to them after they complete the survey to Mr. Scott directly.

Floyd Ciruli Analysis:

Unpopular Candidates for President Make It Interesting Year in Politics Colorado has always been a great place to watch an elec-tion – and this year is no different, according to pollster Floyd Ciruli, who spoke at the opening session of the CCI Summer Conference. We have consistently been a battleground state and there will be some high-profile contested races come this November. Additionally, both parties have presidential candidates that are not particularly popular – making this an interesting year in politics. Mr. Ciruli noted that Colorado has a history of “outsiders” winning elected office. He rattled off names like Pat Schroeder, Ben Nighthorse Campbell, Gary Hart, Tom Tancredo and John Hickenlooper. As Donald Trump continues his historic rise and prepares to face Hilary Clinton in the general election, both can-didates are dealing with fairly high unfavorable ratings and will not have an easy time at their own conventions.



He also noted that Europe and parts of South America are having a similar cultural revolution, with several “Trump-like” candidates coming to the fore. Much of this phenomenon in Europe is being fed by the immigration crisis – which is only getting worse by the week. German Prime Minister Angela Merkel – who only a year ago was Time magazine’s Person of the Year – saw her approval ratings plummet after pledging to take in more refugees. Here in Colorado, the US Senate race is watched closely by party insiders in D.C. Sen. Michael Ben-nett will have a race on his hands, and it will likely be impacted by the presidential race. Mr. Ciruli guessed that almost all of the Colorado Congressional races will have an element of the national race factoring into them. He also suggested that the next demo-cratic candidate for governor will be Congressman Ed Perlmutter, former Interior Secretary Ken Sala-zar or former state treasurer Carrie Kennedy. Mr. Ciruli finished with an assessment of some of the potential ballot measures that could be before the voters in November. Amendment 69 (single-payer issue) is already losing in the Metro area, ac-cording to his poll numbers. There are likely to be a couple of oil and gas measures on the ballot, but they are not nearly as “white hot” as they were in the recent past. Ciruli believes this is partly due to the downturn in the industry and partly attributable to the fact that the issue is just not a priority for voters the way it was a couple of years ago.

Lightning Round Topics:

‘Raise the Bar’ Ballot Initiative, Workforce Innovations Explained Commissioner Dan Gibbs (Summit County) and Greg Brophy and provided an update on a ballot measure to make it harder to amend the state consti-tution and also require more out-state signatures to get a measure on the ballot. If the measure gets on the ballot and passes, “Raise the Bar – Protect Our Constitution” would require that petition-gatherers get signatures in each of the state’s 35 senate dis-tricts, ensuring that rural areas have a voice in what

goes before the voters. It would also “raise the bar” on the necessary voter threshold for passage of constitu-tional amendments from a simple majority to 55 percent support. The coalition that Gibbs and Brophy repre-sent is looking for help, and interested county commis-sioners are invited to e-mail [email protected] or call 720.326.8612 for more information. Commissioner Steve Johnson (Larimer County) made a presentation on a number of innovations that the Lar-imer County Workforce Center has implemented to help its at-risk population. The first was “Your Virtual Path to Success,” an online interactive participant/coach technology platform that can help TANF families reach attainable goals like housing and employment. The second innovation was a study into ways to in-crease reporting and submittal of Monthly Contact Sheets. Finally, Larimer County is one of three pilot communities in the US that is looking at the WOOP (Wish, Opportunity, Obstacle and Plan) Process as a strategy for TANF participants. The WOOP Process is a research-based positive thinking method that the county believes can help motivate at-risk individuals who struggle with feeling optimistic and positive about making a change in their lives.

Sales Tax 101:

Experts Pyatt, Kellogg Help Counties Understand Often-Confusing Process When it comes to the collection, administration and en-forcement of county sales taxes, it pays to understand the process. This was the key message that session pan-elists LuAnn Pyatt, Local Liaison with the Colorado Department of Revenue (CDOR), and Helen Kellogg, Finance Specialist with Douglas County, shared with conference attendees. Ms. Pyatt began her presentation by explaining that there is roughly a two month delay between when retail-ers collect sales taxes from customers and when those dollars are distributed back to the county of origin. A January return, for example, was due to CDOR on Feb-ruary 20, 2016. CDOR collects all returns filed and dis-tributes the money on the sixth working day of the next month. In this example, CDOR distributed money to



counties on March 18, 2016. Counties can monitor the sales tax activity in their communities via the monthly reports they obtain from the CDOR's RevenueOnline website (https://www.colorado.gov/revenueonline). These reports con-tain confidential CDOR data. Each county designates one person who has access to these reports. Monthly reports can be used to verify vendors are filing returns, look for missing vendors, compare vendor filings from one month to the next and from year to year, verify a vendor's location and ensure vendors are not omitted from the report. Ms. Kellogg explained how Douglas County uses CDOR's monthly reports to identify where they might be losing sales tax dollars. Douglas has flagged instanc-es where vendors are not listed in CDOR monthly re-ports and notifies the Department of this omission. Vendors have also been identified who are remitting to the wrong jurisdiction. Douglas County has expanded on CDOR's monthly reports by developing their own framework that helps them track the county's sales tax share back to their municipalities. Combined, both tracking tools help the county calculate their budget for the upcoming year and identify their likely sales tax growth. Ms. Pyatt concluded by inviting counties to let her know when a special event is occurring in their com-munity. CDOR can add this information to their web-site to help vendors participating in the event know that they need to be filing returns. Additionally, Ms. Pyatt visits counties at least once a year and offered to assist counties with any questions they might have ([email protected] or 720.989.5792). Finally, for counties who are interested in the sales tax rates and exemptions adopted by their fellow local governments, go to the CCI website (www.ccionline.org) to access the Colorado Sales and Use Tax Rates document.

LuAnn Pyatt (left) and Helen Kellogg shared their insights on DOR’s sales tax pro-tocols with delegates at the conference.

Colorado’s Aging Population:

Workforce Training, Family Security Among Key Issues for Older Adults The Strategic Action Planning Group on Aging (SAPGA) was created during the 2015 legislative session to develop a comprehensive strategic action plan on ag-ing in Colorado through the year 2030. Jim Riesberg, Chair of the SAPGA, updated attendees on the group's work to date as they prepare to submit an initial plan to the Governor by November 2016. Plan updates are also required in 2018 and 2020. Mr. Riesberg began by sharing a number of statistics with the audience. For example, life expectancy in Colorado is 80.4 years and 13.2 percent of Coloradans are 65 years and older. He continued by highlighting the huge impact on public resources that chronic disease accounts for. Between 70 and 80 percent of all chronic disease is due to bad habits and can be addressed by quitting smoking, exercising more, and eating better. The SAPGA is in the process of identifying policy rec-ommendations to address key issues that are facing Colo-rado's aging population. Some of those issues include workforce development and family economic security. When it comes to workforce development, many older adults are planning to change jobs and/or delay retire-ment. This will create new demands on workforce devel-opment programs and job training opportunities. In regards to family economic security, many older adults are relying on social security to support their retirement. Social security pays an average of $1,200 a month. Some 53 percent of all workers have inadequate funds to main-tain their lifestyle when they retire. Mr. Riesberg encouraged counties to get involved with SAPGA. The group meets twice a month and has sub-committees that meet to support the work of SAPGA. Pitkin County Commissioner Steve Child serves as the county representative on the SAPGA.


https://www.colorado.gov/revenueonline

https://www.colorado.gov/revenueonline

mailto:[email protected]


Commissioners are encouraged to share their feedback and comments with him regarding the group's work ([email protected]) Meeting information and support documents can be found at www.colorado.gov/agingstrategy. Finally, copies of the draft SAPGA reports will be shared with CCI's member-ship for their review and comment prior to submitting the report to the Governor in November.

Among the expert speakers on the urban renewal panel at the

Summer Conference were attorney Carolynne White (left) of

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Shreck and municipal finance spe-

cialist Dee Wisor of Butler Snow.

Urban Renewal Partnerships That Work:

Private, Public Partners Explain How To Make Smart Projects Successful Recent statutory changes provide an enhanced role for county commissioners in new urban renewal projects. A panel of public and private partners highlighted various considerations and sensitivities commissioners should be aware of when presented with a new or revised urban renewal opportunity. Katherine Correll, Executive Director of Downtown Colorado, Inc. (DCI) and John Batey, Assistant Town Manager for Parker, provided an “on the ground” per-spective of urban redevelopment. Ms. Correll offered DCI as a resource for commissioners who are seeking a “Tax Increment Financing (TIF) 101.” DCI is offering an Urban Renewal Authority board training on August 2, 2016. Commissioners are encouraged to attend this event. Mr. Batey explained that while real estate devel-opment is challenging, redevelopment is much harder.

Therefore, it really needs to be incorporated into a community's long range community planning and vi-sioning and should ideally be a part of a community's master plan. Carolynne White provided an overview of four types of urban renewal plan structures. The “traditional plan” usually occurs in a downtown and TIF is authorized for an entire area. Increment reve-nue is generally used for streetscape improvements. The “single project” plan is often used when the pro-ject is known at the time of plan adoption. The “chocolate chip cookie” plan typically has multiple TIF areas within an urban renewal plan and each TIF area is on a separate “clock.” The “phase or rolling” plan consists of a single urban renewal plan but may consist of multiple TIF areas with designated future dates for the commencement of each TIF clock. This type of plan is currently the subject of litigation. Ms. White explained that there are many policy decisions elected officials need to make when it comes to urban renewal activities. These include whether or not a pro-ject is worthy of TIF, does the project include extraor-dinary costs that serve as a barrier to market participa-tion and whether or not requirements should be es-tablished for developers. Dee Wisor, Butler-Snow LLP, and Sam Sharp, D.A. Davidson, then spoke to the financial and bonding considerations that occur when a project is supported with TIF revenues. From a financing standpoint, elected officials need to decide which revenue stream to commit to the project. It could be incremental city sales tax, city lodging tax, property tax, project specific property tax through special districts or project specif-ic public improvement fees. From a bonding stand-point, a key consideration pertains to who will take the risk that the required funds will materialize. The developer can take the risk but will want to be com-pensated for doing so. Alternatively, cities and coun-ties may choose to take the risk. Finally, Ron Carl, Arapahoe County Attorney, spoke of the new rights counties, schools and special dis-tricts have when it comes to urban renewal. Those include representation on the urban renewal board and the right to negotiate a share back agreement that addresses the impact of the redevelopment on county services.

mailto:[email protected]

http://www.colorado.gov/agingstrategy


Child Welfare Initiatives:

Funding Issues, C-Stat, Prevention All Impact the Protection of Children Conference attendees were treated to an update on child welfare funding and system changes in a session that was led by county commissioners from across the state. Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer (Weld) began by highlighting the top issues local leaders need to know about child welfare funding. One of those issues in-cludes the fact that a county's TANF reserves are re-plenishable and can be used to fund child welfare and child care services. Many counties rely on TANF trans-fers between counties to help build up their reserves for these purposes. Another point that was raised is the fact that there is roughly $12-24 million in the IV-E waiver program available for counties to use on kinship care, respite services, mental services and other child welfare needs. Counties must apply to use the funding and are strongly encouraged to do so. Commissioner Kirkmeyer concluded by reminding attendees that the state is con-tinuing to invest in additional child welfare staff. CDHS will be surveying counties to identify how many case-workers are needed to help address child welfare work-load needs. Commissioner Nancy Sharpe (Arapahoe) provided an overview of the recent child welfare initiatives that have been implemented over the years. These include the im-plementation of C-Stat, expansion of differential re-sponse, the redesign of the training academy, the launch of the child welfare hotline, and the IV-E waiver pro-gram. She also spoke to the work of the Child Welfare Executive Leadership Council (CWELC). The CWELC consists of leaders around the state who have been ap-pointed by CDHS Executive Director Reggie Bicha to help guide the implementation of child welfare initia-tives. The CWELC also brings state, county and com-munity stakeholders together to share with one another the work they are doing to serve children in Colorado. Commissioner Kelly Dore (Elbert) concluded by providing an overview of the state's prevention initia-tives. With a background in social work, Commissioner Dore explained that communication and collaboration

are key when it comes to accomplishing goals in hu-man services. She provided an overview of the three state programs available to counties throughout the state. These include the nurse family partnership, Safe Care Colorado, and the Community Response Pro-gram. Commissioner Dore highlighted the work of the Baby Bear Hugs program which is offered in eight eastern counties. This program provides free parenting education and support services to interest-ed families with children 0-3 years of age. Commis-sioner Dore concluded by stating that the biggest hurdles to providing services include access to trans-portation and the stigma associated with receiving services.

Updating Landfills:

CDPHE Listens to Counties On Confusing Regulatory System Landfill mitigation and compliance continue to be a large concern and obstacle for county commission-ers. For the last decade, inconsistent enforcement of regulations has led to systematic non-compliance, as well as confusion surrounding acceptable mitigation practices. In an effort to bring county-run landfills into com-

pliance with state and federal laws, Joe Schieffelin,

manager of the Solid Waste and Hazardous program

and his team have put together a statewide listening

tour. This tour is gathering feedback and comments

from stakeholders across the state regarding current

enforcement practices, cost concerns in relation to

Presenters at the landfills workshop were (left to right) Solid Waste

and Hazardous program manager Joe Schieffelin, Prowers County

Land Use Administrator Keith Siemsen, and State Representative

Tim Dore.


landfill closures, the need for regional training and local planning assistance, and the potential for regionalization and implementation of transfer stations. Once the tour has concluded, these comments will be evaluated and compiled into a report by an outside consulting compa-ny. The report will be made available to the public July 1, 2016. While the report will provide an analysis and rec-ommendations to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) on the cost of com-pliant operations, waste diversion programs, as well as recycling opportunities for operations, the report itself will not create any new regulations. While Schieffelin recognizes the relationship between CDPHE and counties is lukewarm at best, he hopes that in addition to the recommendation made by the report, CDPHE can begin to help develop plans with local gov-ernments – helping them to identify how much attaining compliance will cost, or if a closure is their best option. However, Schieffelin noted that this decision will be en-tirely up to the local government to make. Once the lo-cal government has made their final determination, CDPHE will assist, giving additional time based on each case to the local government to implement that decision. In addition to plan development, the department will also provide technical assistance to those updating their operations or moving towards closure. Finally, CDPHE will also be pursuing available money through the legisla-ture to help assist local governments cover the cost of closures. Acknowledging the challenges faced by small landfills, especially those found in rural areas of the state, Keith Siemsen, Land Use Administrator for Prowers County, noted that inconsistent enforcement and non-compliance has led to complacency on behalf of local governments. While the lack of consistent enforcement is frustrating and often times misleading to local govern-ments, Siemsen noted that the power to become compli-ant is not restricted to just CDPHE, but also rests with local governments as well. Opportunities for local governments to become compli-

ant with regulations include a change and update in de-

sign operations and plans, exploring the opportunity to

share jurisdictions with other local governments, enter-

ing into cooperative agreements to jointly purchase

equipment that can be shared among local jurisdic-

tions, entering into public-private partnerships,

sharing experiences and options with one another.

In his experience, Siemsen explained that a simple

change in mindset and an update to design plans,

coupled with a willingness to work with CDPHE,

helped to bring his local operations into compli-

ance.

Rounding out the discussion, State Representative

Tim Dore suggested that some rural operations

would love to become compliant but are unable be-

cause of a lack of resources as well as an uncertainty

in expectations. Frustrations are further exacerbated

by the expectation that one plan should be applica-

ble to all landfill operations. Rather, Representative

Dore argued, compliance should make sense and be

appropriate to the operation in question. Financial

assistance should be made available to local govern-

ments including regional training and certification.

Making trainings and certifications available region-

ally will alleviate burdensome travel that often times

is costly to the local government. Finally, Repre-

sentative Dore contended open lines of communi-

cation between CDPHE and local governments are

imperative to effective and efficient compliance.

Mitigating Natural Hazards Risks:

Land Use Planning May Reduce Impact of Severe Weather Events Colorado counties are likely to experience many dif-ferent natural hazards including wildfires, floods, tornados, and expansive soil. Knowing this, it be-comes increasingly important to create an effective long-term plan to address natural disaster mitigation and prevention. One of the tools that is most effec-tive is well thought-out land use planning. Through long-range land use planning, counties can help re-duce the impact of severe weather events like bliz-zards, floods and wildfires. In 2015, through the efforts of the Department of Local Affairs and the Colorado Office of Resiliency



and Recovery, the Colorado Resiliency Framework was adopted by Governor Hickenlooper. This report, as well as the newly established office, provides local govern-ments the tools to identify and evaluate potential hazard-ous risks, update building codes, consider the interrelat-edness of hazards, identify collaborative approaches to disaster recovery and mitigation, avoid development in areas that are especially vulnerable to natural disasters, and update comprehensive plans to best reflect the needs of the local community. In addition to providing local governments with tools to accurately identify potential hazards, the Framework also provides model code language and examples of best practices from other jurisdictions. Walking commission-ers through the online tool, Anne Miller, Senior Planner with the Community Development Office noted that this tool will also provide guidance to help identify the role of the local government and the responsibility of a homeowner in cases like wildfire mitigation. Finally, the online tool also provides planners the opportunity to compare various approaches to preventative measures used in development plans. Over the last several years, Colorado has experienced a number of devastating wildfires and Jim Weber, Emer-gency Manager from Boulder County has been charged with managing the emergency response in Boulder County. In his experience, Weber notes that several fac-tors are key to wildfire mitigation and that often wildfires are thought of in terms of homes and acreage lost and not the political support for mitigation funding that is necessary to help prevent these types of events. Weber also noted that often the best approach to wildfire miti-gation is not a one-solution-for-one-problem approach, but rather more á la carte, picking the best solution for each issue. With this á la carte approach, local govern-ments now have the flexibility to enter into public-private partnerships with various groups such as private firefighters and insurance companies. This approach also allows local governments and homeowners to equally have active, responsible roles in wildfire mitigation. When discussing natural disaster mitigation it is im-

portant to remember the geological nature that is inher-

ent in each disaster. Jill Carlson with the Colorado Geo-

logical Survey is all too familiar with the many hazards

that all of Colorado faces, but are often times dismissed

because they are often viewed as less dramatic.

Among some of these hazards are radon, erosion, expansive clay soils and bedrock, and shallow un-derground water. The impacts of these geological hazards, however, are far reaching and can result in severe damage. Carlson noted that, like wildfire mit-igation, updated comprehensive plans and prevent-ing development in vulnerable areas can help reduce if not eliminate some of these damaging results.

Finally, Carlson remarked that consulting with Geo-

logical Survey early in the planning process can help

commissioners create a land use review process that

will help mitigate the impacts of hazards and natural

disasters in their counties.

On the hot topic of marijuana impacts, speakers included, left to right, legal expert Christian Sederberg, DOR’s Ron Kammerzell, and Eagle County attorney Bryan Treu.

Marijuana Legalization Impacts:

Counties Walking a Fine Line Between Health, Individual Rights Commissioner Sal Pace (Pueblo County) moderat-ed a session on recent developments in marijuana regulation in Colorado. Commissioner Pace has worked on marijuana regulation as both a state rep-resentative and a county commissioner. He served on the legislative interim committee two years ago that put forward SB15-14, which established addi-tional regulatory oversight of the marijuana care-giver community. As a policy-maker in Pueblo County, he has overseen a number of important land use policy changes, including the implementa-tion of plant caps on home grows and regulations on marijuana clubs.


Ron Kammerzell, Senior Director of Enforcement in the Colorado Department of Revenue, kicked things off with a legislative and rulemaking update. There were 18 different bills introduced last session that dealt with marijuana, and 12 of them passed and were signed by the Governor. Kammerzell touched on two bills that are of interest to counties across the state, including: HB16-1064. Creates a new optional local govern-

ment license for medical marijuana testing facilities. Recreational marijuana testing facility licenses were authorized in 2013.

SB16-80. Requires that all medical marijuana home

grows (by patients or caregivers) be conducted in a locked and enclosed space. Recreational marijuana home grows are already subject to the locked and enclosed space requirements.

The Marijuana Enforcement Division (MED) will begin rulemaking over the course of the summer and fall to implement many of the bills that passed, as well as on the issue of pesticides. Kammerzell also provided some updated numbers on licensing and tax revenue statewide. There are currently 421 recreational marijuana stores in the state, and over 500 recreational marijuana cultivation operations. To date, the state of Colorado has collected over $220 mil-lion in excise and sales tax on marijuana. Bryan Treu, Eagle County Attorney, talked about local land use authority and the interplay between constitu-tional rights under Amendment 64 and the duty of elect-ed officials to protect the rights of others. Treu noted that almost all county land use regulations are a “taking” in some form or another but that the courts have recog-nized the necessary use of local police power to protect the greater good. Eagle County has instituted a cap of 36 plants for medical marijuana caregivers and 18 plants for recreational home grows. Eagle County did a lot of outreach to citizens and the caregiver community in ad-vance of adopting their regulations. Huerfano County Administrator John Galusha gave a

brief presentation on his county’s experiences with im-

plementing and collecting a new excise tax on the six

retail marijuana grow operations in the county.

Huerfano County voters passed a 5 percent excise tax and the county expects to collect $520,000 in taxes this year alone. The money will go to paying the debt service on a new county justice center that is currently being built. Huerfano County is one of just four Colorado counties to enact an excise tax on retail marijuana so far (the other three being Ouray, Park and Pueblo). Several more counties are expected to put an excise tax question on this fall’s ballot. Christian Sederberg, partner in the law firm of Vi-cente Sederberg, talked broadly about a number of topics, including public health issues and the need to balance governmental control with the growth in the industry. Sederberg was one of the authors and chief proponents of Amendment 64, but has also argued for stricter governmental controls on the production and sale of recreational marijuana. He said that at its heart, Amendment 64 was a local control measure. His personal philosophy is that good government should trump the desires of the industry every time.

Eastern District Meeting:

CSU Sponsors September Meeting To Share Innovative Initiatives Congratulations to Washington County Commis-sioner Terry Hart and Cheyenne County Commis-sioner Rod Pelton on their reelection as CCI's East-ern District President and Vice President, respec-tively. Thank you for your continued service to the Eastern District! Following the district election, Kathay Rennels, CSU's Director of Economic Development, ex-tended an invitation to commissioners to visit CSU and learn more about the initiatives that are under-way at the university. Ms. Rennels asked the district to think about what they might be interested in see-ing. The 3D printer lab? The “Power House” where CSU's Energy Specialists are housed? CSU will be sponsoring CCI's September 16, 2016 Eastern Dis-trict Meeting in Akron and will continue to gauge interest in a tour of the University's initiatives. Continued on next page


Ashley Campbell, Community Outreach Coordinator with the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, spoke about the state of oil and gas in Colorado. While oil prices are rising slowly and are now around $50/barrel, this is still too low for most producers. Generally speak-ing, commodity prices need to be around $60/barrel before Colorado is likely to see more rigs coming back online. Natural gas prices are also low and hovering around $2.50/MMBtu. In part, this low price is due to a mild winter across the nation. Producers are hoping the price increases to $3.50/MMBtu in the months ahead. Finally, the Eastern District heard from representatives of the Colorado Department of Human Services (CDHS) Office of Early Childhood regarding the child care trends in eastern Colorado. Erin Mewhinney, Di-rector of CDHS's Division of Early Care and Learning, explained that while eastern Colorado is seeing a decline in the number of home providers, the available child care slots remains stable. In other words, the licensed capacity of larger facilities is increasing and offsetting the decline in home care providers. This trend is not unique to eastern Colorado. It can be seen across the state. The department also explained that they plan to hire a researcher to comb through the state's rules for home providers and identify those that are stricter than facility rules. A careful examination over the next year will iden-tify which rules can be relaxed without jeopardizing safety. Finally, the department reminded the Eastern District that they have an appeals and waiver process that providers should pursue. Many examples were giv-en to illustrate instances in which waivers have been granted over the years.

Front Range District Meeting:

Preventing Human Trafficking Spurs a Call for New Legislation Front Range District President and Adams County Commissioner Steve O’Dorisio noted there was 100 percent attendance by district members. Commissioner O’Dorisio then conducted the election

of new officers for the Front Range District for the

coming year. Elected President, by nomination and acclamation was Commissioner Nancy Sharpe, Arapahoe County. Elected Vice President was City and County of Broomfield Councilmember Sam Taylor. Commissioner O’Dorisio then proceeded to open a discussion about the District’s position regarding any survey results the strategic planning consultant may receive from Denver and Boulder. After a brief discussion by the members there was a vote to include those surveys in the report to be prepared by the consultant. With the formal business concluded the District proceeded to a presentation by Jefferson County DHS Director, Lynn Johnson. Director Johnson is very involved in the Human Trafficking problem and has taken a strong position in urging legislation in Colorado to revise the statutes for the protection of these victims. The presentation was a graphic and often disturbing video and PowerPoint that included statements by former victims, as well as the entire process of vic-timization. She covered the important points that county officials need to be familiar with, including delinquency, run-away behavior, and other clues to the likely victimization of young girls and boys. Many of the characteristics of what we used to call “status offenses” are found to be direct clues to identifying potential high risk children.

Mountain District Meeting:

Affordable, Senior Housing Among Major Issues Impacting the Region District President and Summit County Commission-

er Dan Gibbs presided over the CCI Mountain Dis-

trict Meeting. Representatives from nine of the thir-

teen counties in the district were present at the

meeting. Commissioner Gibbs began the meeting

with a moment of silence for Mountain District

Vice President Tom Hayden, who passed away un-

expectedly this past February. Commissioner


Hayden was an outstanding public servant and an even better friend, and his absence was keenly felt by all at the meeting. Commissioner Gibbs was reelected as Mountain Dis-trict president and Commissioner Merrit Linke (Grand County) was elected to succeed Commissioner Hayden as district vice president. During a county roundtable, commissioners gave short updates on current issues in their counties. Issues dis-cussed included: the challenge of providing affordable and senior housing; broadband infrastructure improve-ments and proposed ballot questions to override SB05-152 restrictions; local economies and tourism and in-creased sales tax revenues; landfills; the closing of the Henderson Mine and economic impacts on local com-munities; concerns about district attorney (DA) salaries; ballot questions on both extending open space taxes and expanding their use; marijuana regulation; and con-tinued concerns over the spiraling cost of healthcare. Commissioners suggested that sessions on affordable housing and DA salaries might be good topics for the next Mountain District meeting. The next CCI Mountain District meeting will be held on August 25, in Eagle County.

Southern and Western District Meetings:

Benitez Touts Outdoor Recreation As Driver of Tourism, Economy Meeting jointly, the Southern and Western districts en-joyed an encore presentation from Luis Benitez, Direc-tor of the Colorado Outdoor Recreation Industry Of-fice. Created just 11 months ago, Benitez’s office focuses on

outdoor tourism as one of the largest and growing eco-

nomic sectors in the state. Currently, Colorado sees

approximately $34.5 billion in consumer spending, $994

million in state and local taxes, and $4.2 billion in sala-

ries and wages. As a result of this expansive growth and

the growing population of the state, Benitez noted that

a proper balance between “utilizing and protecting pub-

lic lands and waters while sparking sustainable

economic growth” is key to continuing to promote this growing economy. In addition to tourism, Benitez and his office help attract business owners to Colorado who have found innovative solutions to outdoor recreation. By driving innovation throughout the state, not only are healthy outdoor lifestyles cultivated, but so too, is an invest-ment in workforce and education. In his closing remarks, Benitez reminded commis-sioners that the state will certainly face challenges as the population continues to grow. Increased growth in both urban and rural areas will present challenges to wildlife and outdoor resources, but will also pro-vide opportunity to new segments of the population to learn about and engage with the state. Western District Report: President and Mesa County Commissioner Rose

Pugliese called the meeting to order and asked if any-

one wished to comment on any issues. A general dis-

cussion ensued about the CCI strategic planning pro-

cess and the opportunity it presents to look at a num-

ber of issues that impact the association and its per-

formance, including the governance structure, the of-

ten wide diversity of opinions, and the partisan poli-

tics that can negatively impact discussions, debates,

and member participation in the decision-making pro-

cess. There was consensus that even when members

disagree, they should treat each other with respect.

There was then a general discussion about consensus and agreements on issues not based on party affilia-tion. A brief tribute was given for Elaine Fisher due to her passing. She was honored as a great commissioner and artist. Elaine was memorialized as a model for respect and dignity and being a wonderful commis-sioner and politician. Ms. Pugliese then called for election of Western Dis-trict president and vice president. A motion was made to elect Tom Jankovsky, Garfield County, as president and Ben Tisdel, Ouray County, vice president. They were elected by acclamation.



Southern District Report: District President and Prowers County Commissioner Wendy Buxton-Andrade called the meeting to order. Commissioner Buxton-Andrade alerted commissioners to the 2017 CCI Legislative Issue form and reminded them that forms will be due to CCI no later than July 1, 2016. District Vice President Jason Anderson called for elec-tion of the new district president and vice president. A motion was made to elect Commissioner Anderson (Saguache) as president and Commissioner Pete Daw-

son (Baca) as vice president. Both were elected by accla-

mation.

CCI President Keith Goodwin (Otero) requested that

the district have a brief discussion and make a determi-

nation as to include Boulder and Denver’s responses to

the member survey being conducted as part of the stra-

tegic planning process. All commissioners agreed that

the survey responses from Denver and Boulder are an

important part to the review and should be considered

but not aggregated with the rest of CCI membership

results. Commissioners agreed that knowing the specific

responses from Boulder and Denver may better inform

the overall results and solutions. A motion to include

Denver and Boulder survey results but make separate

was made and passed unanimously.

SUMMER CONFERENCE PHOTO HIGHLIGHTS

SAVE THE DATES

CCI Foundation Winter Conference

November 28-30, 2016

El Paso County/Colorado Springs

SPECIAL NOTICE

Presentations and Handouts From the CCI Foundation Winter Conference

Educational Programs are available at:

www.ccionline.org

NACo Executive Director Matt Chase (left)

was one of the keynote speakers at the CCI

Foundation Summer Conference, where he was

joined by over 200 CCI members and a special

guest, Kathie Wasserman, the Executive Direc-

tor of the Alaska Municipal League. In his

remarks, Chase saluted El Paso Commissioner

Sallie Clark for her exceptional leadership as

NACo President in 2016 and the CCI mem-

bers who participate on NACo Steering Com-

mittees.

Routt County rolled out the red carpet for the

CCI Foundation Summer Conference, welcom-

ing delegates from around the state and hosting

three educational field trips to the Yampa

Valley Regional Airport, the Hayden Gener-

ating Plant, and downtown Steamboat

Springs. Pictured are Routt County Commis-

sion Chair Cari Hermacinski (left) and Coun-

ty Manager Tom Sullivan. Special thanks also

goes to Routt County Commissioners Tim

Corrigan and Doug Monger.


CCI President Keith Goodwin (left), Otero County Commission-

er, and NACo President Sallie Clark (center), El Paso County

Commissioner, congratulate Kiowa County Commissioner Cindy

McLoud (right) during the CCI Foundation Summer Confer-

ence for her leadership role in bringing the NACo “Stepping Up

Initiative” to her county. Working in collaboration with Otero

and Prowers counties, Kiowa is drawing on NACo resources to

reduce the number of people with mental illnesses in county jails.

As part of CCI’s tribute to 50 years of service to Colorado local

governments by the Department of Local Affairs (DOLA),

CCI Policy Director Eric Bergman (left) congratulates DOLA’s

Division of Local Government Director Chantal Unfug (center)

and the Division’s Deputy Director Charlie Unseld. Bergman

recounted Unseld’s legacy as a local government advocate.

John (Chip) Taylor Executive Director Kristin Dunn Deputy Director Eric Bergman Policy Director Jeanne Dehaven Administrative Associate

Brandy DeLange Policy and Research Associate Megan Girard Administrative Associate Gini Pingenot Legislative Director Paul Thompson Outreach and Education Manager

CCI Staff at Your Service

Colorado Counties, Inc. 800 Grant Street, Suite 500 Denver, CO 80203 303-861-4076 www.ccionline.org

The Colorado Department of Human Services presented its 2015 C-Stat Distinguished Performance Awards to 14 counties during the CCI Foundation Summer Conference, including El Paso County, whose commissioners and human services special-ists are pictured above. Other counties saluted for their perfor-mances were Sedgwick, Washington, Jackson, Rio Blanco, Phillips, San Miguel, Boulder, Pitkin, Yuma, Crowley, Eagle, Douglas and Routt.

http://www.ccionline.org


Thank You to the CCI Summer Conference Sponsors

Company Participation Level

Aetna Bronze Conference Sponsor

Anthem/Blue Cross Blue Shield Fourteener Associate Member

BNSF Conference sponsor of WiFi

CCOERA Trailblazer Associate Member, Gold Conference Sponsor

Center for Relationship Education Program Advertiser

Colorado Barricade Pioneer Associate Member, Bronze Conference Sponsor

Colorado Gaming Association Silver Conference Sponsor

Colorado Geological Survey Bronze Conference Sponsor

Colorado Housing and Finance Authority Bronze Conference Sponsor

Colorado Oil & Gas Association Trailblazer Associate Member, Bronze Conference Sponsor

CPS HR Consulting Trailblazer Associate Member, Silver Conference Sponsor

CTSI Gold Conference Sponsor

DLR Group Trailblazer Associate Member, Bronze Conference Sponsor

Election Systems and Software Bronze Conference Sponsor

Maddock Construction Equipment Bronze Conference Sponsor

Motorola Solutions Trailblazer Associate Member, Bronze Conference Sponsor

Multi-Bank Securities Pioneer Associate Member, Bronze Conference Sponsor

NACo/U.S. Communities Business Partner

Nationwide Retirement Solutions Fourteener Associate Member, Bronze Conference Sponsor

Rocky Mountain Microfilm & Imaging Trailblazer Associate Member, Bronze Conference Sponsor

SIPA Bronze Conference Sponsor

Special District Association Colorado Trailblazer Associate Member, Bronze Conference Sponsor

Tri-State Generation and Transmission Assn. Trailblazer Associate Member, Bronze Conference Sponsor

Colorado Sales/Use Tax RatesFor most recent version see www.taxcolorado.com

DR 1002 (12/23/15) COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE Taxpayer Service Division PO Box 17087 Denver CO 80217-0087

This publication, which is updated on January 1 and July 1 each year, lists Colorado Sales/Use Tax rates throughout the state. All state collected city/county sales taxes or rate changes may become effective only on January 1 or July 1. The total tax rate for any jurisdiction must be computed by adding all taxes applicable to that jurisdiction.

Retail Marijuana Sales Tax (RMS)The RMS tax rate is 10% with no exemptions. Use tax is not applicable. The Colorado Sales Tax Service Fee (also known as the Vendor's Fee) is 0%. Tax is remitted electronically only. Retail marijuana and retail marijuana products are taxable.

State Sales TaxThe state sales/use tax rate is 2.9% with exemptions A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, K, L, M, N, O. Additional state sales/use tax exemptions can be found at www.TaxColorado.com. The Colorado sales tax Service Fee rate (also known as the Vendor's Fee) is 0.0333 (3.33%). Tax is remitted on the DR 0100, "Retail Sales Tax Return."

ExemptionsCounty, Municipality, and Special District Sales/Use Tax Exemptions Options: If an exemption is not listed, state-collected local jurisdictions do not have that exemption option.A Food for home consumption G Food sold through vending machinesB Machineryandmachinetools(asdefinedonformDR1191) H Low-emitting vehicles (over 10,000 lbs.)C Gas, electricity, etc. for residential use K Renewable energy componentsD Occasional sales by charitable organizations L Beetle wood productsE Farm equipment M School-related salesF Pesticides. Effective July 1, 2012 sales of pesticides are consid-ered wholesale sales and are not subject to state or state collected local sales or use taxes. These sales will be reported on the DR0100 Deductions and Exemptions Schedule Line 2b (8).

N Biogas production system componentsO Propertyusedinspaceflight

Regional Transportation District (RTD)RTD sales tax is remitted in the special district column on the DR 0100, "Retail Sales Tax Return." RTD use tax is remitted on the DR 0173, “Retailer’s Use Tax Return” or on the DR 0252, “Consumer Use Tax Return."

BoundariesSales Tax Rate

Service Fee

AllowedExemptions

Use Tax Rate

CountiesofDenver,Boulder,andJefferson.Generally,BroomfieldCounty(exceptcertainareasimmediately adjacent to I-25 and Highway 7 interchange), Adams County (west of Box Elder Creek), Arapahoe County (south of I-70, generally west of Picadilly Rd. to Jewell, then west of Gun Club Rd. to Quincy, then generally west of Monaghan Rd., including Arapahoe Park and Aurora Reservoir), and Douglas County (northern portion consisting of the original city of Lone Tree, the town of Parker, all annexed areas of Lone Tree and the Acres Green area, plus Highlands Ranch), and parts of Weld County that have been annexed by the city of Longmont and the town of Erie since 1994. The area within the boundaries of the town of Castle Rock does not have RTD sales/usetax.Forspecificaddressinformation,contactRTDatwww.RTD-Denver.comor303-299-6000.

1% 3.33% (For timely returns submitted on or after July 1, 2014)

A, B, C, D, E, G, H, K, L, M, N, O

1%

Football Stadium District (FD)The FD sales/use tax expired on December 31, 2011. The only sales/use tax that should be collected is for leases that are stillineffectafterDecember31,2011orlatetaxfilingsforperiodspriortoJanuary1,2012.FDisremittedontheDR0200"Special District Sales Tax Return Supplement."

Scientific and Cultural Facilities District (CD)CD sales tax is remitted in the special district column on the DR 0100, "Retail Sales Tax Return." CD use tax is remitted on the DR 0173, “Retailer’s Use Tax Return” or on the DR 0252, “Consumer Use Tax Return."

BoundariesSales Tax Rate

Service Fee Allowed ExemptionsUse Tax Rate

All areas within the county boundaries of Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Jefferson, Denver and Broomfield. It also includes all of DouglasCounty except within the boundaries of the town of Castle Rock and Larkspur.

0.1% 3.33% (For timley returns submitted on or after July 1, 2014)

A, B, C, D, E, G, H, K, L, M, N, O

0.1%

Mass Transportation System Tax (MTS)MTS sales tax is remitted in the county/MTS column on the DR 0100, "Retail Sales Tax Return.”

MTS Boundaries Sales Tax Rate Service Fee Allowed Exemptions Use Tax Rate Use Tax AppliesEagle County Eagle County limits 0.5% 3 1/3% A, B, C, K NonePitkin County Pitkin County limits 0.5% 0 0.5% Motor Vehicles,

Building MaterialsSummit County Summit County limits 0.75% 3 1/3% None

Regional Transportation Authority (RTA)RTA sales tax is remitted in the special district column on the DR 0100, “Retail Sales Tax Return." RTA use tax is remitted on the DR 0173, "Retailer’s Use tax Return."

RTA Boundaries Sales Tax Rate

Service Fee

AllowedExemptions Use Tax

Rate

Baptist Road A portion of the city of Monument and adjacent areas of unincorporated El Paso County

1.0% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M,N,O 1%

Gunnison Valley Gunnison County except the towns of Marble, Ohio, Pitkin and Somerset

1% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M,N,O None

Pikes Peak El Paso County limits except the municipalities of Calhan, Fountain, Monument, Palmer Lake and the Commercial Aeronautical Zone in the City of Colorado Springs

1.0% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M,N,O 1%

Roaring Fork Basalt and New Castle city limits 0.8% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M,N,O 0.8%Carbondale and Glenwood Springs limits 1.0% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M,N,O 1%Aspen and Snowmass Village city limits, unincorporated Pitkin County

0.4% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M,N,O 0.4%

Areas of unincorporated Eagle County in the El Jebel area and outside the city limits of Carbondale

0.6% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M,N,O 0.6%

South Platte Valley Sterling city limits 0.1% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M,N,O 0.1%

Multi-Jurisdictional Housing Authority (MHA)MHA sales tax is remitted in the special district column on the DR 0100, “Retail Sales Tax Return." MHA use tax is collectedatthetimeoftitling/registrationatthecountymotorvehicleoffice.

MHA Boundaries Sales Tax Rate Service Fee Allowed Exemptions Use Tax RateSummit Combined Housing Authority

Summit County Limits 0.125% 3 1/3% A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M,N,O 0.125% (Vehicles Only)

Local Improvement District Tax (LID)LID sales tax is remitted in the city/LID column on the DR 0100, "Retail Sales Tax Return." Use tax is not applicable. Exemptions are: Telephone and telegraph service, gas and electricity for residential and commercial use.

LID BoundariesSales Tax Rate

Service Fee Allowed

Boulder County Old Town Niwot and Cottonwood Square 1% 0Douglas County Lincoln Station 0.5% 0Southeast Jefferson County Within designated areas of Southeast Jefferson County 0.5% 3 1/3%Southeast Jefferson County within Lakewood City limits

Within designated areas of Southeast Jefferson County within Lakewood City limits

0.43% 3 1/3%

BroomfieldCityandCounty FlatironsCrossingMallareaCollectedbyBroomfield 0.01%BroomfieldCityandCounty AristaCollectedbyBroomfield 0.2%Mesa County Gateway Within designated areas of unincorporated Mesa County 1% 0Mesa County Whitewater Within designated areas of unincorporated Mesa County 1% 0

Public Safety Improvements (PSI)PSI sales tax is remitted in the special district column on the DR 0100, “Retail Sales Tax Return." Use tax is not applicable.

PSI Boundaries Sales Tax Rate Service Fee Allowed (Sales Tax Only) Exemptions

Montrose County Montrose County limits 0.75% 3 1/3% 0

Metropolitan District Tax (MDT)MDT sales tax is remitted in the city columns on the DR 0100, "Retail Sales Tax Return except for the Southwest Plaza MDT which will be remitted in the Special District column on the DR 0100.

MDT Boundaries Sales Tax Rate

Service Fee Exemptions Use Tax

RateAspen Park In a portion of Conifer in Jefferson County 0.50% 3.33% A, B, C, D, E, G, H, K, L, M, N, O 0Bachelor Gulch In a portion of Eagle County near Avon 4% 3.33% A, B, C, D, E, G, H, K, L, M, N, O 0Southwest Plaza In a portion of Jefferson County near Littleton

(Southwest Plaza Mall)1.50% 3.33% A, B, C, D, E, G, H, K, L, M, N, O 0

Two Rivers In a portion of Eagle County near Gypsum 4% 3.33% A, B, C, D, E, G, H, K, L, M, N, O 0

(continued on page 4)

Health Services District (HSD)HSD sales tax is remitted in the special district column on the DR 0100, “Retail Sales Tax Return.” HSD use tax is collected atthetimeoftitling/registrationatthecountymotorvehicleoffice.HSDusetaxonbuildingmaterialswillbecollectedbythecounty. In 2009, the Health Services District was formed through HB 09-1342.

HSD Boundaries Sales Tax Rate

Service Fee Allowed Exemptions Use Tax

Rate

Montezuma Hospital District Montezuma County Limits .40% 3.33% A, B, C, D, E, G, H, K, L, M, N, O.40%

Motor Vehicles, Building Materials

County Lodging District Tax (CLD)CLD tax is remitted quarterly on the DR 1485, "County Lodging Tax Return." County Lodging Tax applies to lodging services including hotels, motels, condominiums and camping spaces.

CLD Boundaries CLD Tax Rate

Service Fee

Alamosa County Alamosa County limits 1.9% 0Archuleta County Archuleta County limits (Pagosa Springs omitted) 1.9% 0Bent County Bent County limits 0.9% 0Chaffee County Chaffee County limits 1.9% 0Clear Creek County Clear Creek County limits 2% 0Conejos County Conejos County limits 1.9% 0Costilla County Costilla County limits 1.9% 0Custer County Custer County limits 2% 0Delta County Delta County limits 1.9% 0

Short-term Rental Tax (STR)The Douglas County Short-Term Rental Tax expired December 31, 2012. The only short-term rental tax that should be remitted after this date is for late tax filing for periods prior to January 1, 2013. STR tax is remitted on the DR 1480, “County Short-Term Rental Tax Return." STR applies to property rented for thirty days or less (excluding motor vehicles).

STR Boundaries STR Tax Rate Service Fee Exemptions

Douglas County Douglas County limits 1.0% 0 Excludes Motor Vehicles

Local Marketing District Tax (LMD)LMD tax is remitted on the DR 1490, "Local Marketing District Tax Return."

LMD Boundaries LMD Tax Rate Service Fee Applies to:

Alamosa County Alamosa County limits 4% 0 Hotel and motel rooms

Estes Park Estes Park and its surrounding area including Drake and Glen Haven 2% 0 Rooms and accommodations

Gunnison County Gunnison County limits 4% 0 Rooms and accommodationsMoffat County Moffat County Limits 4% 0 Rooms and accommodations

Steamboat Springs

Steamboat Springs City located in the mountain community north of Walton Creek Rd and along Hwy 40 corridor inside the city limits. Contact City for location determination at (970) 871-8233.

2% 0 Rooms and accommodations

Vail Vail town limits 1.4% 0 Rooms and accommodations

(Continued on page 5)

State-Collected City Sales Taxes

City County in which City is Located (see p. 7)

City Sales

Tax Rate

Service Fee

AllowedExemptions

Use Tax Rate

Use Tax (paid to city or county) applies to:

Aguilar Las Animas 3% 1.5% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsAkron Washington 2.5% 3 1/3% B,C,K 2.5% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsAlma Park 3% 3 1/3% NoneAntonito Conejos 4% 3 1/3% NoneAult Weld 3% 0 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsBasalt Eagle, Pitkin 3% 3 1/3% NoneBayfield La Plata 3% 3 1/3% NoneBennett Adams, Arapahoe 4% 3 1/3% 2% Building MaterialsBerthoud Larimer, Weld 3% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsBlanca Costilla 3% 3 1/3% B,C,K NoneBlue River Summit 2.5% 2% NoneBrush Morgan 4% 3 1/3% 4% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsBuena Vista Chaffee 2.5% 3 1/3% NoneBurlington Kit Carson 2% 3 1/3% A,B,C,E,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsCalhan El Paso 3% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsCastle Pines Douglas 2.75%5 3 1/3% A,C,D 2.75%5 Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsCedaredge Delta 2% 3 1/3% C,D 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsCenter Rio Grande, Saguache 2% 3 1/3% C NoneCheyenne Wells Cheyenne 2% 3 1/3% A,B,C,D,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsCollbran Mesa 2% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K NoneColumbine Valley Arapahoe 3% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsCraig Moffat 2.25% 3 1/3% NoneCrawford Delta 2% 3 1/3% NoneCreede Mineral 2% 3 1/3% NoneCrestone Saguache 3% 0 NoneCripple Creek Teller 2.3% 0 A NoneDe Beque Mesa 2% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 2% Building MaterialsDel Norte Rio Grande 2% 3 1/3% NoneDillon Summit 2.5% 0 NoneDinosaur Moffat 2.1% 3 1/3% C,D NoneDolores Montezuma 3.5% 0 NoneDove Creek Dolores 2% 3 1/3% C 1% Motor Vehicles

County Lodging District Tax (CLD) Continued

CLD Boundaries CLD Tax Rate

ServiceFee

Fremont County Fremont County limits 2% 0Grand County Grand County limits (Winter Park omitted) 1.8% 0Hinsdale County Hinsdale County limits 1.9% 0Huerfano County Huerfano County limits 2% 0Jackson County Jackson County limits 2% 0La Plata County La Plata County limits (Durango omitted) 1.9% 0Lake County Lake County limits 1.9% 0Lincoln County Lincoln County limits 2% 0Logan County Logan County limits (Sterling omitted) 1.9% 0Mineral County Mineral County limits 1.9% 0Moffat County Moffat County limits 1.9% 0Montezuma County Montezuma County Limits (Cortez omitted) 1.9% 0Morgan County Morgan County Limits 1.9% 0Prowers County Prowers County Limits 2% 0Rio Blanco County Rio Blanco County Limits 1.9% 0Rio Grande County Rio Grande County Limits 1.9% 0Saguache County Saguache County Limits 1.9% 0San Juan County San Juan County Limits 2% 0San Miguel County San Miguel County Limits (Mountain Village omitted) 2% 0


State-Collected City Sales Taxes (Continued)


City Sales

Tax Rate

Service Fee

AllowedExemptions

Use Tax Rate


Eads Kiowa 2% 3 1/3% 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsEagle Eagle 4% 3 1/3% 4% Building MaterialsEaton Weld 3% 3 1/3% 3% Building MaterialsElizabeth Elbert 4% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsEmpire Clear Creek 3% 0 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsErie Boulder, Weld 3.5% 3 1/3% B,C,D,K 3.5% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsEstes Park Larimer 5% 3 1/3% 2% Motor VehiclesFairplay Park 4% 3 1/3% A NoneFirestone Weld 3%5 0 A,B,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsFlagler Kit Carson 2% 3 1/3% B,C,K NoneFleming Logan 2% 2.22% B,C,D, E, G, H, K, L, M NoneFlorence Fremont 2.5% 3 1/3% 2.5% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsFort Lupton Weld 4% 3 1/3% 4% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsFort Morgan Morgan 3% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsFountain El Paso 3.75% 0 A,B,C,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsFowler Otero 3% 3 1/3% B,C,K 2% Motor VehiclesFoxfield Arapahoe 3.75% 0 A,B,C,K 3% Building MaterialsFraser Grand 5% 0 4% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsFrederick Weld 2.5% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 2.5% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsFruita Mesa 3% 3 1/3% A,E 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsGarden City Weld 3% 3 1/3% NoneGeorgetown Clear Creek 4% 0 3% Motor VehiclesGilcrest Weld 4% 3% 4% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsGranada Prowers 2% 3 1/3% 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsGranby Grand 4% 3 1/3% L 4% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsGrand Lake Grand 4% 3 1/3% 4% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsGreen Mountain Falls El Paso, Teller 3% 2% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsHaxtun Phillips 2.5% 3 1/3% 2.5% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsHayden Routt 4% 3 1/3% 2% Building MaterialsHolly Prowers 3% 3 1/3% NoneHolyoke Phillips 1.5% 3 1/3% 1.5% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsHooper Alamosa 2% 0 C NoneHot Sulphur Springs Grand 4% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K NoneHotchkiss Delta 2% 3 1/3% NoneHudson Weld 4% 3 1/3% A 4% Building MaterialsHugo Lincoln 2% 3 1/3% B,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsIdaho Springs Clear Creek 4% 0 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsIgnacio La Plata 2% 3 1/3% NoneJohnstown Larimer, Weld 3% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsJulesburg Sedgwick 1% 3 1/3% 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsKeenesburg Weld 3% 3 1/3% A 3% Building MaterialsKersey Weld 3.6% 3 1/3% 3.6% Building MaterialsKiowa Elbert 1.5% 3 1/3% 1.5% Building MaterialsKit Carson Cheyenne 2% 3 1/3% 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsKremmling Grand 4% 3 1/3% NoneLakeside Jefferson 2.1%5 0 NoneLa Jara Conejos 3% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsLa Salle Weld 3.5% 3 1/3% 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsLa Veta Huerfano 3.5% 3 1/3% NoneLas Animas Bent 3% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsLimon Lincoln 2% 3 1/3% D,E,M 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsLochbuie Adams, Weld 4% 0 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsLog Lane Village Morgan 3% 0 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsLyons Boulder 3.5% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsManassa Conejos 1% 3 1/3% NoneMancos Montezuma 4% 0 NoneManitou Springs1 El Paso 3.9% 0 3.8% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsManzanola Otero 2% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 2% Motor VehiclesMarble Gunnison 2% 3 1/3% NoneMead Weld 2% 0 A,B,C,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building Materials

State-Collected City Sales Taxes (Continued)


City Sales

Tax Rate

Service Fee

AllowedExemptions

Use Tax Rate


Milliken Weld 2.5% 3 1/3% 2.5% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsMinturn Eagle 4% 0 NoneMoffat Saguache 2% 3 1/3% C,D,E,G,H NoneMonte Vista Rio Grande 2% 3 1/3% NoneMontezuma Summit 2% 3 NoneMonument El Paso 3% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsMorrison Jefferson 3.75% 3 1/3% 3.75% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsMountain View Jefferson 4% 0 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsNaturita Montrose 4% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsNederland Boulder 3.75% 0 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsNew Castle Garfield 3.5% 3 1/3% 2% Building MaterialsNorwood San Miguel 3% 3 1/3% C NoneNucla Montrose 4% 3 1/3% 2% Motor VehiclesNunn Weld 2% 0 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsOak Creek Routt 3% 3 1/3% NoneOlathe Montrose 4% 3 1/3% 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsOrdway Crowley 2% 3 1/3% 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsOtis Washington 2% 3 1/3% 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsOuray Ouray 4% 3 1/3% NoneOvid Sedgwick 1% 3 1/3% 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsPalisade Mesa 2% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K NonePalmer Lake El Paso 3% 3 1/3% A 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsPaonia Delta 2% 3 1/3% NoneParachute Garfield 3.75% 0 3.75% Building MaterialsPierce Weld 2% 3 1/3% B,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsPitkin Gunnison 3% 0 NonePlatteville Weld 3% 3 1/3% 2% Building MaterialsPoncha Springs Chaffee 2% 3 1/3% 2% Building MaterialsRed Cliff Eagle 3% 3 1/3% NoneRico Dolores 5% 0 NoneRocky Ford Otero 4% 3% E 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsRomeo Conejos 1% 3 1/3% NoneSaguache Saguache 3% 3 1/3% NoneSalida Chaffee 3% 0 NoneSan Luis Costilla 3% 3 1/3% A NoneSawpit San Miguel 3% 0 3% Building MaterialsSedgwick Sedgwick 1% 0 B,C,K NoneSeibert Kit Carson 2% 3 1/3% B,C,D,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsSeverance Weld 3% 3 1/3% C 3% Building MaterialsSilt Garfield 3% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsSilver Cliff Custer 2% 3 1/3% 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsSilver Plume Clear Creek 3% 3 1/3% NoneSilverton San Juan 1% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M NoneSimla Elbert 4% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K NoneSouth Fork Rio Grande 2% 3 1/3% C NoneSpringfield Baca 2% 3 1/3% NoneStratton Kit Carson 2% 3 1/3% A,B,C,D,K NoneSuperior Boulder, Jefferson 3.46% 3.33%7 3.3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsTrinidad Las Animas 4% 3 1/3% 4% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsVictor Teller 3% 0 A,B,C,K NoneWalden Jackson 1% 3 1/3% NoneWalsenburg Huerfano 3% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsWalsh Baca 3% 3 1/3% NoneWard Boulder 2% 3 1/3% NoneWellington Larimer 3% 3 1/3% C 3% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsWestcliffe Custer 2% 3 1/3% NoneWiggins Morgan 2% 3 1/3% NoneWray Yuma 2.5% 3 1/3% 2.5% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsYampa Routt 2% 3 1/3% A,D,E,H 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsYuma Yuma 3% 3 1/3% 3% Motor Vehicles, Building Materials

State-Collected Colorado County Sales TaxBroomfieldandDenverareself-collectedcounties.Ifacountyisnotlisted,thatcountydoesnothaveasalestax.

CountyCounty

Sales Tax Rate

Service Fee

AllowedExemptions Use Tax

RateUse Tax (paid to city or county)

applies to:

Adams 0.75% 0 A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K NoneAlamosa 3% 3 1/3% None Arapahoe 0.25% 0.5% A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,M 0.25% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsArchuleta 4% 3 1/3% NoneBent 1% 0 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsBoulder 0.985% 0 A,B,C,K 0.985% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsChaffee 2.5% 3% E NoneClear Creek 1% 0 NoneCostilla 1% 0 NoneCrowley 2% 3 1/3% 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsCuster 2% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsDelta 2% 3 1/3% E,F NoneDouglas 1% 2 1/3%4 A,B,C,D,E,G,K,L,M 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsEagle 1.5%2 3 1/3% A,B,C,K NoneElbert 1% 3 1/3% A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsEl Paso 1.23% 0 A,B,C,K 1.23% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsFremont 2.5% 3 1/3% A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,M 2.5% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsGarfield 1% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K NoneGrand 1% 3 1/3% NoneGunnison 1% 3 1/3% NoneHinsdale 5% 3 1/3% 4% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsHuerfano 2% 3 1/3% NoneJackson 4% 3 1/3% NoneJefferson 0.5% 3 1/3% NoneLake 4% 3 1/3% L NoneLa Plata 2% 3 1/3% D,E,H,K,L,M NoneLarimer 0.65% 2.22% A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K 0.65% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsLincoln 2% 3 1/3% 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsLogan 1% 0 E,M 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsMesa 2% 3 1/3% A,B,C,D,E,G,H,K,L,M 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsMineral 2.6%3 3 1/3% 2% Building MaterialsMoffat 2% 3 1/3% E, K, L, M NoneMontrose 1% 3 1/3% 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsOtero 1% 3 1/3% A,B,C,E,K 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsOuray 2% 3 1/3% NonePark 1% 3 1/3% A,B,C,D,K NonePhillips 1% 3 1/3% E 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsPitkin 3.6%2 0 0.5% 8 Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsPitkin (in Basalt) 2.6%2 0 0.5%8 Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsProwers 1% 3 1/3% 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsPueblo 1% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 1% Motor VehiclesRio Blanco 3.6% 3 1/3% C,D,E,M 3.6% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsRio Grande 2.6%3 3 1/3% NoneRoutt 1% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 1% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsSaquache 1% 0 A,B,C,E,K NoneSan Juan 5% 3 1/3% NoneSan Miguel 1% 3% A,B,C,K 1% Building MaterialsSedgwick 2% 3 1/3% A,B,D,E,G,H 2% Motor Vehicles, Building MaterialsSummit 2.75%2 3 1/3% NoneTeller 1% 3 1/3% A,B,C,K 1% Motor VehiclesWashington 1.5% 3 1/3% A,B,D,E,G,H,K 1.5% Motor Vehicles, Building Materials

Footnotes for State-Collected Cities and Counties1 Contract city: For information regarding exemptions and use tax, contact the city directly.2 Rate includes 0.5% Mass Transit System (MTS) in Eagle and Pitkin Counties and 0.75% in Summit County3 Rateincludes0.6%HealthServiceDistricttax.4 Cap of $200 per month on service fee.5 Reduced sales tax rate of purchases from certain areas subject to a Public Improvement Fee.6 Use tax rate is allocated as Mass Transit Tax (MTS) only.7 Cap of $1,250 per month on service feeCorrections or changes since January 1, 2016 in bold.

Home Rule Cities For Which The State Does Not Collect Local Sales Tax

City Address Phone NumberCounty in which City is Located

(see p. 7)

City Sales Tax

Rate

Service Fee Allowed

License Fee

Alamosa PO Box 419, 300 Hunt Ave. Alamosa,CO 81101 719-589-2593 Alamosa 2%6 2%4 $15.00

Arvada 8101 Ralston Rd. Arvada, CO 80002 720-898-7100 Adams, Jefferson 3.46% 3%4 0

Aspen 130 S. Galena St. Aspen,CO81611 970-920-5043 Pitkin 2.4%

2.1%6 3.3%4,6 W

Aurora 15151 E Alameda Pkwy, 1st Floor Aurora, CO 80012 303-739-7800 Adams, Arapahoe

Douglas 3.75% 0.5% W

Avon PO Box 975 Avon,CO81620 970-748-4055 Eagle 4%5 0 0

Black Hawk3 POBox68Black Hawk CO 80422 303-582-2283 Gilpin 5.5%

4%6 0 W

Boulder 300 Hunt Ave Boulder,CO80306 303-441-3050 Boulder 3.86% 0 $25.00

Breckenridge POBox168 Breckenridge, CO 80424 970-453-2251 Summit 2.5% 0 W

Brighton 500 South 4th Ave. Brighton,CO80601 303-655-2041 Adams, Weld 3.75% 3 1/3%4 $15.00

Broomfield One DesCombes Dr. Broomfield,CO80020 303-464-5811 Broomfield 4.15% 3%4 0

BroomfieldFlatironImprovement District

One DesCombes Dr. Broomfield,CO80020 303-464-5811 Broomfield 0.01% 0 0

BroomfieldAristaImprovement District

One DesCombes Dr. Broomfield,CO80020 303-464-5811 Broomfield 0.2% 0 0

Canon City POBox1460 CanonCity,CO81215-1460 719-276-5252 Fremont 2% 3 1/3%4 $20.00

Carbondale 511 Colorado Ave. Carbondale,CO81623 970-510-1204 Garfield 3.5% 3 1/3%4 $25.00

Castle Rock 100 North Wilcox Castle Rock, CO 80108 303-660-1397 Douglas 4% 3 1/3%4 $10.00

Centennial 13133 E Arapahoe Rd. Centennial, CO 80112 303-325-8000 Arapahoe 2.5% 3%4 $25.00

Central City Box 249 Central City, CO 80427 303-582-5251 Gilpin 4% 3 1/3% $35.00

Cherry Hills Village 2450 E Quincy Cherry Hills Village, CO 80110 303-789-2541 Arapahoe 3%6

3.5% 0.5% W

Colorado Springs PO Box 1575 MC225 Colorado Springs, CO 80901 719-385-5903 El Paso 3.12% 0 W

Commerce City 7887E60thAve. Commerce City, CO 80022-4199 303-289-3628 Adams 4.5%8 2%4 $20.00

Cortez 210 E Main St. Cortez, CO 81321 970-564-3402 Montezuma 4.05% 1.3% $10.00

Crested Butte PO Box 39, 507 Maroon Ave Crested Butte, CO 81224 970-349-5338 Gunnison 4.5% 1.5% 0

Dacono 512CherryAvePOBox186,Dacono, CO 80514 303-833-2317 Weld 3% 3 1/3% W

Delta POBox19,360MainSt. Delta,CO81416-0019 970-874-7908 Delta 3% 0 $10.00

Denver 201 W Colfax Ave. Denver, CO 80202 720-913-9400 Denver

3.65% 4%1

7.25%30 W

Durango 949 2nd Ave. Durango, CO 81301 970-375-5010 La Plata 3%1 3 1/3%4 $2.50

Edgewater 2401 Sheridan Blvd. Edgewater, CO 80214 303-238-7803 Jefferson 3.5% 2% $50.00


Englewood 1000 Englewood Pkwy. Englewood, CO 80110-2373 303-762-2409 Arapahoe 3.5% .25% $25.00

Evans 1100 37th St. Evans,CO80620 970-475-1109 Weld 3.5% 3 1/3%4 $25.00

Federal Heights 2380 W 90th Ave. FederalHeights,CO80260 303-428-3526 Adams 4% 0 $15.00

Fort Collins PO Box 580 Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 970-221-6780 Larimer 3.85%

2.25%2 0 0

Frisco PO Box 4100Frisco, CO 80443 970-668-9127 Summit 2% 3 1/3%4 $75.00

Glendale 950 S Birch St. Glendale,CO80246 303-639-4706 Arapahoe 3.75% 0 W

Glenwood Springs 101 W 8th St. GlenwoodSprings,CO81601 970-384-6420 Garfield 3.7% 0 $25.00

Golden 911 10th St. Golden, CO 80401 303-384-8000 Jefferson 3% 0 $20.00

Grand Junction 250 N 5th St. Grand Junction, CO 81501 970-244-1521 Mesa 2.75% 3 1/3% $10.00

Greeley 1000 10th St. Greeley,CO80631 970-350-9733 Weld 4.11% 0 0

Greenwood Village 6060SQuebecSt. Greenwood Village, CO 80111-4591 303-486-8299 Arapahoe 3% 0 $10.00

Gunnison PO Box 239 Gunnison, CO 81230 970-641-8162 Gunnison 4% 4% $10.50

Gypsum PO Box 130 Gypsum,CO81637 970-524-1753 Eagle 3%

3%6 3 1/3% 0

Lafayette 1290 S Public Rd. Lafayette,CO80026

303-665-5588X3314 Boulder 3.5% 2.5%4 0

La Junta PO Box 489 La Junta, CO 81050 719-384-5991 Otero 3% 3% 0

Lakewood 480 S Allison Pkwy. Lakewood,CO80226-3127 303-987-7630 Jefferson 3%5 0 $15.00

Lamar 102 E Parmenter St. Lamar, CO 81052 719-336-1370 Prowers 3% 3 1/3%4 $10.00

Larkspur PO Box 310Larkspur, CO 80118 303-681-2324 Douglas 4% 0 $25.00

Littleton 2255 W Berry Ave. Littleton, CO 80120 303-795-3768

Arapahoe Douglas Jefferson

3% 2.5%4 0

Lone Tree 9220 Kimmer Dr, Ste 100 Lone Tree, CO 80124 303-708-1818 Douglas 1.8125% 0 $10.00

Longmont 350 Kimbark St. Longmont, CO 80501 303-651-8672 Boulder 3.275% 3%4 $25.00

Louisville 749 Main Louisville, CO 80027 303-335-4514 Boulder 3.5% 0 $25.00

Loveland 500 E 3rd St., Ste 320 Loveland, CO 80537 970-962-2698 Larimer 3%5 2%4 $20.00

Montrose PO Box 790 Montrose, CO 81402 970-240-1400 Montrose 3.3% 1.33% $35.00

Mt. Crested Butte PO Drawer 5800 Mt. Crested Butte, CO 81225-5800 970-349-6632 Gunnison 5%

3%6 3 1/3% W

Mountain Village 455 Mountain Village Blvd, Ste A Mountain Village, CO 81435 970-369-6407 San Miguel 4.5% 3 1/3% W

Northglenn 11701 Community Center Dr. Northglenn, CO 80233 303-450-8729 Adams, Weld 4%

3%2 1% $15.00


Home Rule Cities For Which The State Does Not Collect Local Sales Tax (Continued)


(see p. 7)

City Sales Tax

Rate

Service Fee Allowed

License Fee

Parker 20120 E Mainstreet. Parker, CO 80138-7334 303-805-3228 Douglas 3% 3 1/3%4 $20.00

Pueblo PO Box 1427Pueblo, CO 81002 719-553-2659 Pueblo 3.5% 0 $50.00

Ridgway PO Box 10 Ridgway, CO 81432-0010 970-626-5308 Ouray 3.6% 2 1/3% $25.00

Rifle PO Box 1908RifleCO81650 970-625-2121 Garfield 4.25% 0 $12.00

Sheridan 4101 S Federal Sheridan, CO 80110 303-762-2200 Arapahoe 3.5% 0

$10.00 $215.009 $65.0010

Silverthorne PO Box 1309 Silverthorne, CO 80498 970-262-7300 Summit 2% 2 1/3%4 $75.00

Snowmass Village PO Box 5010 SnowmassVillage,CO81615 970-923-3796 Pitkin 3.5% 0 $85.00

Steamboat Springs POBox772869 SteamboatSprings,CO80477-2869 970-871-8233 Routt 4.75% 0 $25.00

Sterling PO Box 4000Sterling, CO 80751 970-522-9700 Logan 3% 0 0

Telluride PO Box 397Telluride,CO 81435 970-728-2152 San Miguel 4.5% 1.35% 0

Thornton 9500 Civic Center Dr. Thornton, CO 80229 303-538-7400 Adams 3.75% 3%4 0

Timnath 4800 Goodman St.Timnath, CO 80547 970-224-3211 Larimer 3% 3 1/3% $25.00

Vail 75 S Frontage Rd W Vail,CO81657 970-479-2125 Eagle 4% 0 0

Westminster 4800 W 92nd Ave. Westminster, CO 80031 303-658-2065 Adams

Jefferson 3.85% 0 0

Wheat Ridge 7500 W 29th Ave. Wheat Ridge, CO 80033-8001 303-235-2820 Jefferson 3% 2%4 $20.00

Windsor 301 Walnut Windsor, CO 80550 970-674-2486 Larimer

Weld 3.95%2 2.33%4 $10.007, 8

Winter Park PO Box 3327 Winter Park, CO 80482 970-726-8081 Grand 7% 0 $60.00

Woodland Park PO Box 9045 WoodlandPark,CO80866-9045 719-687-9246 Teller 3%

1%6 0 $50.00

Footnotes for Home Rule CitiesDirect contact with these home rule cities is suggested to receive up-to-date information concerning their tax rates, exemptions, license fees and procedures.

Corrections or changes since January 1, 2016 in bold.1 Sales tax on food & liquor for immediate consumption.2 Food for home consumption.3 Automobile rentals for less than 30 days.4 Cap at a certain amount.5 Sales tax rate is reduced if purchases are made from certain areas subject to either a Public Improvement Fee (PIF) and/or Retail

Sales Fee (RSF). All PIFs/RSFs imposed by home-rule cities are not listed in this publication. Contact the respective home-rule city for more details.

6 Use tax7 Business license for businesses within city limits.8 Business license for businesses outside city limits that do business within the city limits.W Contact the city directly.

Home Rule Cities For Which The State Does Not Collect Local Sales Tax (Continued)


(see p. 7)

City Sales Tax

Rate

Service Fee Allowed

License Fee

cci is a non-profit, membership association whose purpose is to offer ... - county...

Documents