top of page

APEP supported HB21-1295 -

but it was defeated in the House Education Committee

This bill concerned the reasons a school district could reject a charter school's initial application or renewal and required that the charter school address those reasons in its appeal to the State Board of Education.

A4PEP believes that current law fails to address the fact that charter schools can have a negative impact on traditional public schools, especially those in declining-enrollment districts.

We support the proposed requirement that the success of existing schools and the fiscal health of the school district should be an integral part of a charter application.

Read HB21-1295 and our Position Paper.

Status:  House Education Committee - "Postponed Indefinitely"

coffee cups at capital.jpg
Tote-HB-1294_01 (2).jpg

A4PEP supported HB 21-1294,

Audit of State Accountability/Accreditation System

Colorado's current public education accountability system was adopted over a decade ago with the intent that it lead to improved student's test scores.  HB21-1294 asks for an audit of this accountability system to determine if it has done as intended. 

Read HB21-1294 and our Position Statement.

StatusPassed and signed by the Governor.

Proposition 119

Warning: Look before you L.E.A.P.

Proposition 119 (formerly Ballot Initiative 25), Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress (L.E.A.P.) Program, is a corporate grab for education tax dollars dressed up as mom and apple pie. A4PEP asked that people not sign the petition to get it on the ballot.

L.E.A.P. proposed to do good things for children by funding after-school programming, but it would have created an independent, unregulated organization within the Colorado Department of Education with no oversight, public input, or recourse for mismanagement or fraud.

To help you understand the flaws in this bill, Advocates for Public Education Policy has done an analysis of the ballot initiative and issued a Position Statement.

You can also read the text of the ballot initiative and the Legislative Council’s Fiscal Summary. Read more about Proposition 119 here

StatusDefeated by the voters:

701,467 (45.75%) Yes

831,668 (54.24%) No


Wolf in Sheep c istockphoto-476958697-61

Proposition 120

Proposition 120: Property Tax Assessment Rate Reduction and Voter-Approved Revenue Change

This ballot proposal would have reduced the residential property tax assessment rate from 7.15% to 6.5% and the non-residential property tax assessment rate from 29% to 26.4%.  To make up for the lost property tax revenue to school districts, the measure would have required an increase in state expenditures by at least $257.7 million per year beginning in budget year 2022-23.  The measure would have resulted in cuts to many state programs and services. 

See our Position Paper.

Status: Defeated by the voters:

652,380 (42.96%) Yes

866,194 (57.04%) No


Amendment 78

Amendment 78 (Initiative 19), Requirements for Spending Custodial Money


This ballot proposal would have transferred the power to appropriate “custodial funds” (money received by the state that is provided for a particular purpose and originated from a source other than the state taxes ) from the executive branch (Governor, State Treasurer, and heads of departments and agencies) to the State Legislature. Because the Legislature is in session only 120 days of the year, this amendment would have led to a disruption of services or federal payments.  In order to access custodial funds in a timely manner, the part-time Legislature would have had to be called back into numerous special sessions at a cost of $25,000/day; otherwise, the money in the custodial fund would remain inaccessible and unspent until the following January when the Legislature would reconvene.

See our analysis of Amendment 78.

Status: Defeated by the voters:

646,979 (43.03%) Yes

856,703 (56.97%) No


bottom of page