WHAT NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS NEED TO KNOW ABOUT FLORIDA

AMENDMENT 3

PRESENTED BY THE FLORIDA NONPROFIT ALLIANCE

Special Guest Presenters

Deirdre Macnab, President, League of Women Voters of Florida

Mark Turner, Public Policy Director, Colorado Nonprofit Association

Constitutional Amendments on 2012 Ballot

11 constitutional amendments on the 2012 ballot

Require a 60% margin to become law

All were generated by the Florida Legislature within the last 2 years

No citizen initiatives on the ballot this year

Florida’s Tax Revenue in Comparison

Florida is the 4th largest state in the Union. Here is where Florida ranks in terms of overall tax burden:

46 other states have higher taxes as a percentage of personal income (1)

42 other states have higher tax revenue per person (1)

38 other states have a higher corporate tax rate (2)

Public Spending in Florida

Here is where Florida ranks in terms of Elementary-Secondary per pupil spending:

On average, the U.S. as whole spends $10,499 per pupil. Florida, on the other hand, spends $8,760, which puts us behind 37 other states. (3)

Florida’s government workforce has shrunk over the last decade, and is now the smallest and the cheapest in the country on a per-capita basis. (4)

Amendment 3: State Government Revenue Limitation

An attempt to impose a new formula for calculating the state’s revenue cap

The Colorado Example: TABOR

Colorado adopted a similar provision in 1992. However, after state funding fell for schools, public safety, healthcare and transportation, Coloradoans voted to suspend TABOR in 2005. At this time, over 30 states have considered similar measures, but no other state has passed it.

A Vote YES on Amendment 3 would:

Replace the existing state revenue limitation based on personal income growth with a new, more restrictive limitation based on changes in population and inflation

Restrict government revenue (taxes, licenses, fees, fines, or charges for services) in good and poor economic times

Limit the Legislature’s ability to increase revenue beyond what the formula allows

A Vote NO on Amendment 3 would:

Maintain the existing state revenue limitation based on personal income growth

Protect the state’s ability to provide the current level of government services

Preserve the Legislature’s current flexibility in responding to budgetary concerns and changing economic conditions

Be Ready to Vote in 2012!3 Ways to Vote: By Mail, Early or on Election Day

Check your voter status at: www.BeReadyToVote.orgYou can update your:

Address Name Political party Absentee ballot request Signature

Help educate your friends and familyBook the League to speak to your community, civic,

religious or political organization

Questions for Deirdre?

Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR)

Mark TurnerDirector of Public

Policy

Colorado Nonprofit Association455 Sherman St. Suite 207, Denver CO 80203 - 303-832-5710

www.ColoradoNonprofits.org

“TABOR” • A constitutional tax and

expenditure limit approved by CO voters in 1992.

• Written by Doug Bruce, Colorado Springs lawyer and real estate developer

• Passed in 1992 with 53% of the vote after three previous attempts.

Colorado “TABOR” – 1992• Requires voter approval of any

state or local tax, debt, mill levy or other “net revenue” increase

• Revenue limit: previous year’s revenue times growth in the inflation rate + population rate

• Revenue above the limit is “rebated” to taxpayers

Colorado “TABOR” – 1992

• Requires voter approval to weaken existing state spending limits

• “Ratchet effect”- revenue limit based on lesser of actual previous year revenues vs. revenues allowed by the formula.

Colorado “TABOR” – 1992• ‘90-’01 General fund revenue boom-

7.8% growth per year on average, from $2.6 to $9.4 billion

• Between ‘96 and ’01, Colorado rebated $3.2 billion in “TABOR surplus” to taxpayers

• Legislative Council ‘93 report-–”TABOR's contribution to the

state's economic prosperity, if any, cannot be statistically quantified.”

Colorado “TABOR” – 1992• 2001-2003 recession - $1.1

billion in cuts, no TABOR surplus• Ratchet: limits based on lower

revenue base• 2004-2005: Economy recovering

but Colorado had both a shortfall and a TABOR surplus

NONPROFIT COLORADOThe Effects of Colorado's Economic Downturn

76% of nonprofits funded by the state experienced reduced budgets in 2004

(85% project reduced budgets in 2005)

Revenue reduced, 76%

(source: Colorado Assn. of Nonprofit Organizatons survey)

NONPROFIT COLORADOThe Effects of Colorado's Economic Downturn

58% of nonprofits funded by the state experienced increased demand in 2004

(56% project increased demand in 2005)

Demand for services

increased, 58%

(source: Colorado Assn. of Nonprofit Organizatons survey)

Nonprofit Colorado: Economic Impact

• 67% increased requests to foundations in 2004 (Colorado Nonprofit Assn. Survey)

• 54% increased individual donor requests (Colorado Nonprofit Assn. Survey survey)

• Colorado ranked 43rd in the nation in charitable giving (Catalogue for Philanthropy)

Governor Bill Owens (R) 2005 “State of the State”

“General Fund dollars available under TABOR – after paying required Amendment 23 and Medicaid

expenses – will not keep pace with the demands on the budget. As a result,

we cannot take the steps we must take to build a brighter future for all of Colorado, and particularly

our children.”

Colorado’s 2005 Referendum C

• Compromise between Governor and D legislature• Suspended TABOR revenue limits from 2005-2010

allowing the state to keep all revenues collected• No effect on existing tax rates • Eliminated the ratchet, reset the revenue base • 85% of Colorado cities and counties have voted to

“de-bruce” – i.e. suspend local revenue limits on property tax revenues

• TABOR surplus may return around 2014

Nonprofit Voice Project

Demand for services has grown.Revenues haven’t kept pace.

Governor Hickenlooper FY 2012-2013 Proposed Budget to JBC

General Fund

State Park Visits

K-12 Education

Higher Education

Children's Health Plan

Medicaid Enrollment

-5%

7%

7%

21%

19%

72%

Changes Since FY 2007-2008

24

Colorado’s Tax Burden Is Low(compared to other states)

Legislative Council High Average Colorado Low$0.00

$20.00

$40.00

$60.00

$80.00

$100.00

$120.00

$140.00

$160.00

$180.00$163.89

$58.50

$40.89 $37.50

Colorado State Taxes per $1,000 of Personal IncomeCompared to Nation

49 of 50

25

Colorado Invests Less in Public Services(compared to other states)

Colorado Fiscal Policy Institute, 200926

Total

(47t

h)

K-12

Educa

tion

(48t

h)

Highe

r Edu

catio

n (4

8th)

Med

icaid

(49t

h)

Highw

ays

(48t

h)$0.00

$20.00

$40.00

$60.00

$80.00

$100.00

$120.00

$140.00

$160.00 $140.52

$50.67

$7.16$27.74

$8.87

$106.49

$41.16

$3.52$13.11

$5.44

Spending per $1,000 of Personal IncomeColorado v U.S. Average

US AverageColorado

Changes in Funding of CO Public Services

27

Agriculture

Nat'l Resources

Higher Ed

Human Services

Local Affairs

K-12 Per Pupil

Corrections

Health Care

-40.0% -30.0% -20.0% -10.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0%

- 28.8%

- 21.2%

- 16.6%

- 4.8%

- 3.7%

- 2.6%

+ 2.9%

+ 20.1%

% Change in CO 2007- 08 to 2011-12

JBC Staff Documents; Ed News Colorado

TABOR and Colorado’s Future

• Colorado’s still a growing state but revenues aren’t keeping pace with demand

• Voters have the final say on increasing revenues and amending the constitution

• TABOR’s CPI (inflation) + population formula does not capture growth in costs of public services. – CPI measures what consumers buy not

what governments buy

Thank you…

Mark TurnerDirector of Public

PolicyColorado Nonprofit Association

455 Sherman St. Suite 207, Denver CO 80203 - 303-832-5710www.ColoradoNonprofits.org

Questions for Mark?

Additional ResourcesCenter for Budget and Policy Priorities Report on Florida

Amendment 3: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3831

PICO United Florida “ NO on 3 Campaign”: http://www.picoflorida.org/events/no-on-3

Center for Lobbying in the Public Interest: http://www.clpi.org/

Nonprofit Vote: http://www.nonprofitvote.org/