Witnesses split on SB135: advocates back amended mechanics, critics call ballot title deceptive
During testimony on SB135, witnesses representing education stakeholders supported the amended bill's mechanics while other witnesses raised concerns that the ballot title and summary lacked transparency about where retained revenue would come from and about TABOR implications and permanency.
The full story
Four witnesses spoke during the SB135 hearing. Natalie Menton raised transparency concerns about the ballot question and said there was "not transparency in regards to where the money is actually coming from," urging clearer presentation on the ballot title. Remote witness Brandon Wark said the ballot title was deceptive, that the measure would forfeit TABOR refunds and that the title implied a ten‑year measure when the bill is permanent.
Sign up to keep reading.
Your free newsletter brings you what your city council, county, and school board discussed and decided.
Keep reading for free
Create a free account to finish this story and see the video, transcript and key details.
Continue with GoogleContinue with emailAlready have an account? Log in