Colorado Union of Taxpayers Foundation, Petitioner v. City of Aspen; Steve Skadron, Adam Frisch, Ar — Hood, J…

Summary

Justice Hood, dissenting, would have treated Aspen's paper-bag charge as a tax subject to voter approval under TABOR because its primary purpose was to fund broad waste-reduction programs rather than defray services provided to the customers paying the charge. He would have applied the post-TABOR primary-purpose test requiring a close relationship between the charge and services provided to those charged, rather than the majority's broader regulatory-charge approach. Justice Coats, dissenting and joined by Justice Boatright, likewise would have concluded that the charge was an impermissible revenue-raising measure requiring voter approval.