Bruce, right, speaking with reporters in September about his opposition to ballot measures.
In his typical bombastic style, Douglas Bruce argues against El Paso County's motion to dismiss his lawsuit over what he considers the illegal collection of about $900,000 for the sheriff's tax in 2013.
Bruce calls government officials "lying politicians" and says there's no ambiguity in the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, which he wrote, "except in [county commissioners'] latest dreams."
At issue is the ballot language and TABOR notice for the sheriff's tax, saying "approximately $17 million" would be raised in its first year. TABOR requires a specific dollar figure. After voters gave a nod to the tax, the county collected nearly $17,900,000 in 2013. The excess above $17 million must be refunded to voters, Bruce argues, because no subsequent election was held to get permission to keep the extra money.
Read about the case here
Bruce says in the answer, filed on Jan. 25, that he "could have given governments a 'weasel clause' of 'good faith,' which is easy to allege and impossible to disprove, but he did not. He could have given lying politicians leeway by excusing false statements of up to 5% (here, up to $850,000, which was truly $900,000), but he did not. During the campaign and in later testimony, he told voters and legislators that the only option was to tell the truth."
Referring to the county's motion to dismiss, Bruce writes:
On page 6, defendant strikes a noble pose and says it is is “upholding the will of the electorate—” the electorate DEFENDANT DECEIVED. If this court buys a TV for for the advertised price of $400, but the salesman enters a credit card invoice for $500, and keeps the extra $100 for himself, was that transaction “the will of the consumer?”
Read Bruce's motion, which seeks a hearing for oral arguments, here:
See related PDF