Sterling Colorado’s 1% sales tax for roads
**Edit on 9/1 at 8AM: I had a bit of all-caps placeholder text in there awaiting an answer from City Manager Sheldon. That answer did not come as of today. I fixed the text to indicate that. I will also update when and if I hear.
As promised yesterday, today I want to take up Sterling’s proposed sales tax for roads.
With the official ballot language now finalized, we can look at it in detail. That is the first link below.
If you missed them, yesterday’s newsletter contained a couple references which I thought would be helpful in coming to a decision on this ballot measure. That newsletter is linked second below. The material there offers some insight into the city’s financials.
I have alluded a couple times now to rumors about this sales tax and part of today will to get as far as I can in figuring out whether the rumors are true or not.
Lastly, I am going to go ahead and share with you the comment I sent to be included in the Grey Book (the local equivalent of the state’s Blue Book for ballot issues). There is, by the way, still time for you to be involved in adding comment to your own grey book whether you live in Sterling or not. I invite you to get involved. The first link below contains details about how to submit your comment to be included (under the heading “TABOR Election Notice Pro/Con Statements”).
This was a tough ballot measure to decide on. The roads in this town are crap. They’re bad and no denying it. At the same time, every day I turn around and someone’s got their hand out wanting more of the money I work hard to earn. I don’t mind paying for things I use. I don’t want to pass a problem on to someone else (even if it’s a problem I had only a small hand in fixing). You can only wring so much out of a sponge, however.
The rumors that I am hearing about this ballot measure are that if it passes, some of the money now used for roads will get repurposed elsewhere, in particular to salaries (more in particular, for police). This is not a full court press on road repair, they say, this is simply asking for more on a sympathetic issue so that a tight budget category can loosen others up.
In the interest of fairness, I put that question via email to the city council, the mayor, and the town manager. Would they, if this passes, simply repurpose current street funding?
I got the following in an email from City Manager John Sheldon:
“Should the proposed tax increase pass, existing funding dedicated to road maintenance (Highway User Tax) would be redirected from the General Fund to the new fund providing additional revenue for that new fund. It would not be used for ‘upping’ police salaries.”
Following up on what Mr. Sheldon said, (and I’ll leave it to you to come to your own thoughts on why) he’s right that the city put $0 into road surface construction and repair in the 2026 budget. More detail in that newsletter linked first below if you want it.
Zooming out on his answer, I want you to note that it relates to pass-through money from the state. The city also has its own funds that it puts into roads. I want to know about them too. I followed up asking Mr. Sheldon “Will any money in the line item ‘Streets’ in the city budget (now or in future FY) be put somewhere else in the budget if this measure passes?”
As of this posting, I’ve not heard.
I also, am hearing rumors about how Sterling’s wages are higher than Logan County’s and thus this could be an area to trim. I also looked at Sterling’s wages compared with Logan County’s in the newsletter linked first below. I did find some evidence in the payrolls that this was true.
Let’s assume it’s not, however. I put the following question to you. Sacrifice is a hell of a lot easier to take when you look over and see that it’s shared; I don’t want to make do with less while the person that asked me to still eats high off the hog. I’m not saying the City of Sterling has a lot of pork in their budget, but I believe they could do some trimming. I believe that they should if they want more tax money for roads.
You might agree or disagree and you’re welcome to put your thoughts in the comments as long as they’re civil, but ultimately, after stacking the good against the bad, I decided that I will vote in favor of the tax and then watch the city carefully.
If I see road budgets crater and salaries go up, I will not vote for an extension past 5 years.
If I don’t see the city reprioritize its budget toward the basics, I will not vote for an extension past 5 years.
If I don’t see marked improvement, I will not vote for an extension past 5 years.
If I get asked for more money for something else, I will not vote for an extension past 5 years.
In the interest of fairness, I put a link to the City of Sterling’s FAQ page on the road tax third below. Do your due diligence and give it a read.
Lastly, my PRO statement, the one I am sending the city clerk to be included in the Grey Book copied below.
My PRO statement:
I am a cautious PRO for this ballot measure because, compared to the original versions I was hearing about and compared to last election’s version, I believe the city council has made enough changes to make it acceptable. I don’t like having to pay for past decisions that have put us where we are with terrible streets. I don’t like the burden that this city, this county, and this state government heap on my back. That said, I also am not one to leave a problem for my child to fix. Let’s therefore put aside how the city has been managing roads until now and focus on the future. The tax the city council is referring to us is not perfect. In looking through it, I do not see any indication that the city is shouldering some of the burden by tightening their belts. They should—even if there’s not enough room in the budget for economizing to fix the roads on its own--but they are not. I also have to wonder whether the city will do what other governments have done: they’ll put a special tax in for roads and then use the current street budget for other things.
I balance these concerns against the fact that the city has put a rather short sunset window on this tax. You and I are basically giving the city 5 years to show us what they can do, at which point we get to grade them. Also, I don’t know if you were aware, but as things sit now in city ordinances, the property owner is responsible for any sidewalk and gutter repair that needs to happen in front of their property. This measure puts that burden back on the city and the new tax starts to take the place of any particular homeowner having to redo his or her own gutters.
I am not happy about a new tax. I am not happy that the city is not sharing in the sacrifice it asks of us. On balance, however, I am willing to give the city a trial run with this new tax. I urge you to join me in voting for the measure and then to watching the city like a hawk.
https://www.sterlingcolo.com/departments/city_clerk/tabor_election_notice_pro_con_statements.php
https://coloradoaccountabilityproject.substack.com/p/before-talking-about-sterlings-proposed
https://www.sterlingcolo.com/departments/city_clerk/proposed_sales_tax_information.php
Related:
I wanted to put up Eaton, CO's plan regarding road repair funding by way of contrast with Sterling's approach.
Their plan is linked below.
Similar to Sterling, Eaton posed a 1% sales tax for roads to fund needed repairs. Unlike Sterling (yet?), Eaton is back to ask approval to use the sales tax funds to pay off a bond which would let the construction happen now, at today's prices, instead of over a longer period of time. The gamble is, of course, that inflation continues and is raising prices faster than the bond interest piles up.
Quoting from that link:
HOW IT WORKS WITH A BOND
Voters approve the bond this November, no new tax is created. The Town simply borrows against the 1% transportation sales tax residents already approved in 2023, rather than saving up for years. Eaton completes all three priority road projects (four segments) in 2027 instead of stretching them out to 2033 and 2039. Using the existing sales tax, the Town then repays the bond at a fixed $380,000 a year for 20 years, while still budgeting roughly $470,000 annually for maintenance and repair. Routine upkeep and rehabilitation continue alongside the payments.
THE END RESULT IF BOND IS APPROVED: All three of Eaton’s worst roads (four segments) are rebuilt at today’s prices, years sooner, without a new tax, and without letting regular maintenance lapse in the meantime.
vs. (again quoting):
IF WE CONTINUE UNDER PAY-AS-YOU-GO
The Town keeps setting aside money from the existing 1% transportation sales tax with no new debt and no bond repayment. But because the three priority projects cost about $5 million combined, the Town can’t tackle them all at once and still fund everyday maintenance. Instead, 10th Street moves forward in 2027, while Christensen/CR 39 and Cheyenne wait until roughly 2033 and 2039. In the years the Town is saving for those bigger projects, regular maintenance funding drops to free up budget.
END RESULT OF PAY-AS-YOU-GO: No new debt, but two of the three worst roads stay in poor condition for another decade or more, and construction costs keep climbing the longer the Town waits.
Keep in mind, this is written by the people pushing the bond, so you don't get any counterpoint.
Presented here for contrast and, perhaps, a look at Sterling's future.
https://www.eatonco.org/public-works-engineering/page/2026-transportation-bond
Sage Pointe still needs help**
Let’s round out the burst of local stories lately with one more. I have written in the past about a small subdivision just outside of Sterling called Sage Pointe.
They have their own water and sewer system and, well, they’ve had problems with it. Lots of problems. This led to the formation of a metropolitan district (see the first link below) to help fund the necessary fixes/improvements.
While putting big assessments down on top of residents (and it should be noted that it’s not greed driving this, the fixes are mandated and have to be paid somehow), the metro district and residents both have been reaching out anywhere they can to get help.
The Sterling Journal Advocate story linked second below details the latest. I’ll leave it to you to read the article, but in brief, the Sage Pointe Metro District is asking Logan County for the rough equivalent of a co-sign on a loan to get good terms on a loan which would enable them to get permanent water infrastructure in place.
As an interesting wrinkle on this story, an Amazon warehouse which is in the district seems to be skirting rules with their wastewater. Rather than connecting to Sage Pointe (and paying in to help fund the current rental sewer treatment) they are supposedly pumping their waste into a tank and then having it hauled off by truck. This, of course, raises the natural question mentioned in the article: if Amazon can do this, why couldn’t residents. It would be a hell of a lot cheaper than sending the waste down Sage Pointe’s pipes, something residents are required by law to do.
Interesting story. If you’re local (even if you’re not) provides a look at city services that we often take granted because it’s not something we intersect with daily. Take for granted that is, until a giant assessment on your property taxes hits to pay off a big problem.
Sterling itself had one a few years back with our city sewer treatment. I remember (after a failed attempt to get a bond) that the city effectively doubled its sewer price.
It’s not sexy, but if you don’t like big surprise bills, you might consider looking into how your own city is doing regarding its funding and repairs for water and sewer. You would be doing a big service to your fellow residents to start opening a discussion PRIOR to a major problem.
**If you live in the Sage Pointe Metro District, please take a look at “Relate” below for an important news about your district’s budget.
https://sagepointemetro.colorado.gov/
HEADS UP SAGE PONTE RESIDENTS!!!!!
From the Logan County Public notices: a public hearing on a budget amendment!
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSED 2025 BUDGET AMENDMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a proposed 2025 amended budget has been submitted to the SAGE POINTE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT for the fiscal year 2025. A copy of such proposed 2025 amended budget has been filed in the office of Seter, Vander Wall & Mielke, P.C., 7400 E. Orchard Road, Suite 3300, Greenwood Village, Colorado, where same is open for public inspection. Such 2025 amended budget will be considered at a regular meeting of the Sage Pointe Metropolitan District to be held at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday, September 1, 2026. The meeting will be held by hybrid means, virtually via Microsoft Teams video/teleconference at https://teams.microsoft.com/meet/2502660594587?p=n1dSwekedhDTHpA30p; Meeting ID: 250 266 059 458 7; Passcode: HtN8NP6; Phone: 1-469-848-0234 with Conference ID 521633905# and physical location at CSU Northeast Regional Engagement Center, 304 Main Street, Sterling, CO, 80751. Any interested elector within the Sage Pointe Metropolitan District may inspect the 2025 amended budget, and file or register any objections at any time prior to the final adoption of the proposed 2025 amended budget. BY ORDER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS: SAGE POINTE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT By: /s/ SETER, VANDER WALL & MIELKE, P.C. Attorneys for the District Published: South Platte Sentinel August 27, 2026 - 2183372
It appears from the paywall that the Journal-Advocate is owned by Alden Global Capital. My condolences.
Where has all the money gone to?