e booklet with instructions for individual income tax (Colorado Department of Revnue Form 104) has a disclosure of Colorado Revenues and Expenditures on page 2. is disclosure was not done very well and the state government admits this themselves because on the revenue side, the total amount of revenue sums up to 102.8%. e state says this error is due to rounding. Regardless, this disclosure (which is in the form of a pie chart) is interesting because of what it tells you about revenue sources.

e largest form of revenue for the state of Colorado is from “Federal Grants and Expenditures.” at category totals 42%. Taxes total only 37.3%. Since the federal government is Colorado’s largest landowner someone must maintain the wilderness and park areas around the state and it would be reasonable to

A publication of

Call first: 27972 Meadow Dr., #320

Evergreen, CO 80439, 303-566-4100

Mailing Address: 750 W. Hampden Ave., Suite 225 Englewood, CO 80110

Phone: 303-566-4100

Web: ArvadaPress.com

To subscribe call 303-566-4100 presume that the federal government contracts with the state to maintain land holdings within the state and pays Colorado to maintain that land. is is but one example. Other unfunded mandates exist. ting other revenue sources like eliminating the individual income tax the retort was made, how will you make up the funding. at retort is short sighted because the retort presumes that all expenditures by Colorado state government are necessary and essential. ey are not. In a budget where 38.3 billion in government expenditures exist somewhere at least a few of those expenditures are not essential. would probably be raised across the board at all state supported institutions of higher learning. To summarize, there would be pain across the board and it would a ect all Coloradoans in one way or another.

Columnist

Land maintenance is probably just one of many things that Federal money accomplishes in our state. But an uncomfortable question needs to be asked. What if federal money were to disappear from Colorado revenue sources in part or compeletely for one reason or another? What then?

e question is important because when proposals were oated for cut-

LINDA SHAPLEY Publisher lshapley@coloradocommunitymedia.com

MICHAEL DE YOANNA Editor-in-Chief michael@coloradocommunitymedia.com

KRISTEN FIORE West Metro Editor kfiore@coloradocommunitymedia.com

RYLEE DUNN Community Editor rdunn@coloradocommunitymedia.com

When a family has a breadwinner thrown out of work cuts are made in the household budget until employment for operating the household is secured. Privations are endured. If Colorado were to completely or partially lose the federal government’s monetary input into our state budget cuts would be inevitable in some areas. Taxes would probably be raised on individuals and businesses to make up the shortfall. Tuition

ERIN ADDENBROOKE Marketing Consultant eaddenbrooke@coloradocommunitymedia.com

AUDREY BROOKS Business Manager abrooks@coloradocommunitymedia.com

ERIN FRANKS Production Manager efranks@coloradocommunitymedia.com at is because all budgets, whether at the family level or at the state level are ultimately precarious assumptions. ey are based on the plan that some source of revenue will always be there regardless of circumstance. Basing future plans on something that may disappear is reckless. Acknowledging that a source of revenue may disappear and planning in case it does disappear is the wiser course of action. It used to be called “saving money for a rainy day.” While the Colorado Reserve Fund or the “rainy day fund” does exist, I would argue that it is in-

Columnists & Guest Commentaries

Columnist opinions are not necessarily those of the Press. We welcome letters to the editor. Please include your full name, address and the best number to reach you by telephone.

Email letters to kfiore@coloradocommunitymedia.com

Deadline Wed. for the following week’s paper.

To opt in or out of delivery please email us at circulation@ coloradocommunitymedia.com