YES

A YES vote changes current law or the way things are now. 

NO

A NO vote keeps current law the way it is.

CONSTITUTIONAL CHANGE

Changes the Colorado Constitution. Requires 55% of votes to pass. Hard to undo.

STATE LAW CHANGE

Changes state law, not the constitution. Requires more than 50% of votes to pass. Lawmakers can change it later.

LOCAL

 Changes taxes or rules for your city, school district, or special district. Requires more than 50% of votes to pass. Only on your ballot if you live there.

STATEWIDE · EVERYONE

81

Amendment 81: Law Enforcement Communication with Federal Immigration Authorities

Police must report some charged people to federal immigration officials

Constitution · 55%

82

Amendment 82: Constitutional Right to Purchase and Sell Natural Gas

Makes buying and selling natural gas a constitutional right

Constitution · 55%

83

Amendment 83: Constitutional Right to Hunt and Fish

Makes hunting and fishing a constitutional right

Constitution · 55%

84

Amendment 84: Mail Ballot Voter Identification

Adds an ID number to mail ballots

Constitution · 55%

85

Amendment 85: Plain Language Ballot Titles

Ballot questions must be written at an 8th-grade reading level

Constitution · 55%

86

Amendment 86: Requirements for Off-Cycle Congressional Redistricting

Limits redrawing U.S. House maps between censuses

Constitution · 55%

87

Amendment 87: Graduated Income Tax

Replaces the flat income tax with tiered rates

Constitution and State law ·  50%+

NN

Proposition NN: Keep and Spend Money for Education and Other Purposes

Lets the state keep TABOR refund money for schools

State law · 50%+

132

Proposition 132: Increase Penalties for Fentanyl Crimes

Tougher punishment for fentanyl

State law · 50%+

133

Proposition 133: Penalties for Human Trafficking of a Minor

Life in prison for child sex trafficking

State law · 50%+

134

Proposition 134: Male and Female Participation in School and Collegiate Sports

School and college sports teams based on biological sex

State law · 50%+

135

Proposition 135: Prohibit Surgery on Minors in Response to Perception of Sex or Gender

Bans certain surgeries for minors related to gender identity

State law · 50%+

136

Proposition 136: Income Tax Rate Limit

Caps the state income tax rate at 4.4%

State law · 50%+

137

Proposition 137: Direct Sporting Goods Sales Tax Revenue for Conservation

Uses existing sporting-goods sales tax for conservation and wildfire

State law · 50%+

BOTH COUNTIES · SOME VOTERS

7A

Front Range Passenger Rail District Ballot Issue 7A

Sales tax and borrowing for the Colorado Connector train

Local tax · 50%+

ADAMS COUNTY · SOME VOTERS

4A

Westminster Public Schools Ballot Issue 4A

Collect more of the school tax voters already approved

Local tax · 50%+

6E

Adams County Fire Protection District Ballot Issue 6E

1% sales tax for fire and ambulance service

Local tax · 50%+

7E

17th Judicial District Ballot Question 7E

Term limits for the district attorney

Term limits · 50%+

JEFFERSON COUNTY · SOME VOTERS

5A

Jefferson County School District R-1 Ballot Issue 5A

$73 million property tax for staff pay and career training

Local tax · 50%+

5B

Jefferson County School District R-1 Ballot Issue 5B

$60 million a year for school repairs, technology, and safety

Local tax · 50%+

6C

Arvada Fire Protection District Ballot Issue 6C

1% sales tax for fire and ambulance service

Local tax · 50%+

YES

Local and state law enforcement must notify federal immigration authorities, such as U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), within 72 hours after charging someone with a violent crime, or with any crime if the person has a past felony, when officers can't confirm the person is in the U.S. legally.

NO

Current law stays. It allows cooperation with federal immigration authorities such as ICE or DHS in some criminal cases, but limits state and local law enforcement involvement in immigration enforcement.

TRADE-OFF

Federal immigration authorities would be notified in more cases, at the time charges are filed, before trial. That could lead to more removals of people charged with serious crimes, but could also affect whether immigrant residents report crimes or come forward as witnesses. Changes to the constitution are hard to undo.

FACTS

Blue Book: It would create one statewide rule. Today local policies vary, from Denver, which limits cooperation, to El Paso County, which requires notification in some cases. Notification happens when charges are filed, not at arrest. Terms like “reasonable effort” and “lawful presence” aren’t defined. It applies to any crime for someone with a prior felony, no matter how old. Most of the added work falls on local police and district attorneys, and the measure doesn’t include funding for it. 

YES

All Coloradans would have a constitutional right to buy natural gas for cooking and heating in homes and businesses, and utilities would have a right to sell it.

NO

Current laws and rules about buying and selling natural gas stay the same. 

TRADE-OFF

Protects the choice to use natural gas in homes and businesses, including new buildings. But it could limit state and local efforts to cut emissions or require electric appliances, and governments may face added legal and rewriting costs. Changes to the constitution are hard to undo.

FACTS

Blue Book: Most Colorado households heat with natural gas. The measure doesn’t say which existing rules it would affect. It could conflict with the state’s plan for gas utilities to cut emissions 41% by 2035 and with local codes that limit gas in new buildings, such as Crested Butte’s. Cities with those codes may face legal costs and need to revise them. 

YES

Hunting and fishing by traditional methods become a right in the state constitution, and hunting and fishing become the preferred way to manage wildlife populations. The state can still regulate for science-based conservation, public safety, and future hunting and fishing opportunities.

NO

Hunting and fishing continue as allowed under current state and federal law.

TRADE-OFF

Hunting and fishing would be protected from future bans by voters or lawmakers. In exchange, wildlife rules could be harder to change, and courts may have to decide what some terms mean. Changes to the constitution are hard to undo.

FACTS

Blue Book: Nothing changes right away, and the state can still set hunting and fishing rules. 24 other states have a similar right. Hunting and fishing licenses pay for about a third of Colorado Parks and Wildlife’s budget (about $115 million a year). Terms like “traditional methods” aren’t defined, so courts may decide what’s covered, and future lawsuit costs can’t be estimated. It doesn’t change trespassing laws. 

YES

In federal and statewide elections, mail voters must write the last 4 digits of their Social Security number or their Colorado driver’s license or ID number on the ballot envelope, in addition to signing it. If it’s missing or doesn’t match, the voter has 8 days after Election Day to fix it, or the ballot won’t count.

NO

Mail ballots continue to be checked by signature only, as they are today. Identification would still be required when registering to vote.

TRADE-OFF

Adds a second identity check in addition to signature checks. Adds a step for every mail voter, and ballots with missing or mismatched numbers won’t count unless the voter fixes them in time, similar to current rules around signatures today. Changes to the constitution are hard to undo.

FACTS

Blue Book: Identification is currently required when registering to vote. Voters with certain disabilities and some elderly voters could use a wider range of IDs, and rules for voting in person don’t change. It would cost up to $2.7 million the first year and about $1.2 million a year after for staff, printing, and outreach. The state would repay counties about 45% of their costs, and business filing fees may go up to cover the state’s share. 

YES

All state and local ballot titles must be written in plain language at an 8th-grade reading level. For citizen-led measures, no law can require ballot wording that conflicts with this.

NO

Current law stays. It already requires plain language for ballot titles but doesn't set a specific reading level.

TRADE-OFF

Ballot questions could be easier for voters to understand, and lawmakers couldn’t add confusing wording to citizen-led measures. But some legal or tax details could be left out, and there could be more court challenges over whether wording meets the standard. Changes to the constitution are hard to undo. 

FACTS

Blue Book: An 8th-grade level means short sentences and familiar words that most people can easily understand. The measure doesn’t say who decides whether a title meets the standard. The rule against conflicting wording applies to citizen-led measures, not to questions lawmakers send to voters. Depending on how courts read it, it might conflict with current laws that require tax questions to include specific wording.

YES

Any redraw of Colorado’s U.S. House districts between the regular 10-year redraws must be approved by both the independent redistricting commission and the Colorado Supreme Court, after at least three public meetings. New maps can’t purposely favor a political party or split communities of interest.

NO

Current rules stay. Congressional maps are redrawn every 10 years after the census, and the constitution doesn't set a process for mid-decade changes.

TRADE-OFF

Keeps mid-decade map changes in the hands of the independent commission voters created in 2018, making partisan redraws harder and more expensive. But it also limits Colorado’s options if voters want new maps before the next census. Changes to the constitution are hard to undo. 

FACTS

Blue Book: It only matters if someone tries to redraw maps before the next census. Each off-cycle redraw would cost the state about $370,000. The measure’s summary and its ballot wording describe the rules slightly differently (“intentionally favor” vs. “purposefully favoring”), which could matter in court. Since 2025, at least 10 states have redrawn their maps mid-decade.

YES

Colorado replaces its flat 4.4% income tax with graduated rates from about 3.7% to 8.4% and the new rates have no end dates listed. People with taxable income under about $510,000 would pay a little less (up to $325 a year); people above that would pay more. The extra money, about $2 billion a year (up to $2.7 billion), goes to K-12 schools, health care, and early childhood programs and doesn't count against the state's TABOR limit.

NO

The constitution keeps requiring a single, flat income tax rate for everyone (currently 4.4%).

TRADE-OFF

Most taxpayers would pay slightly less, and schools, health care, and child care would get significant new money. But the highest earners would pay much more, which could push some of them or some businesses out of state, and removing the flat-tax requirement would make future rate changes easier. Changes to the constitution are hard to undo.

FACTS

Blue Book: Unlike the other amendments, 87 passes with a simple majority. About 97% of taxpayers would pay less. The $2.7 billion on the ballot is the high estimate; the middle estimate is about $2 billion. The new money must add to, not replace, current spending on those programs. The tax brackets don’t adjust for inflation, so more people could move into higher brackets over time. If 87 and Proposition 136 both pass, the Blue Book says it’s unclear what happens; lawmakers or a court would decide.

YES

The state can keep some or all of the money it would otherwise refund to taxpayers under TABOR, with no end date. That money first repays local governments for senior and veteran property tax breaks, then goes to K-12 schools and children's programs for 10 years. After that, lawmakers decide how to use it.

NO

TABOR refunds stay as they are, and funding for schools and children's programs stays at current levels.

TRADE-OFF

Schools would get more money for teacher pay, smaller classes, and career training without raising tax rates. But TABOR refunds would shrink for the next several years, and after 10 years lawmakers would decide how to spend the money beyond K-12. 

FACTS

Blue Book and state fiscal estimate: Refunds would shrink by about $330 million the first year and $521 million the next. School districts must post how they spend the money, and the state auditor reports on it. The estimates depend on the economy; a recession would change them. NN and 137 both use money above the TABOR limit; how they would interact if both pass isn’t spelled out. 

YES

Possessing any amount of fentanyl becomes a felony. Selling any amount means at least 8 years in prison. Some options to reduce penalties are removed, and some people would be ordered into treatment.

NO

Possessing a small amount of fentanyl stays a misdemeanor. Penalties for selling remain based on distribution amounts, and options to reduce penalties remain available for distribution and possession charges.

TRADE-OFF

Aims to deter fentanyl dealing and use with tougher penalties and required treatment for some offenses. But more people would be in prison longer, raising state costs, and judges would have less flexibility in individual cases.

FACTS

State fiscal estimate: About 1,000 more people would be in prison by 2031, costing about $142 million over five years, or up to $422 million if new prison space has to be built. The cost would come from the state’s general budget.

YES

Child sex trafficking is punished with life in prison without parole. Buying sexual activity with a minor would also count as child sex trafficking.

NO

Current penalties stay: 8 to 48 years in prison, plus required parole.

TRADE-OFF

Guarantees the harshest sentence and covers buyers as well as sellers. But judges lose flexibility in sentencing, which could affect plea deals in some cases.

FACTS

State fiscal estimate: The state estimates few people would be affected. Starting around 2041, about 3 more people a year would stay in prison for life who would otherwise be released. Initial spending would be $180,000 in 2041 and grow by $180,000 for several years thereafter. The estimate assumes the new "buying sexual activity" language won't add many new cases, which could turn out to be wrong. 

YES

Every K-12 and college team must be designated for males, females, or mixed, based on biological sex. Students may play only on the team matching their sex or a mixed team; girls may join a boys’ team if no girls’ team exists. Schools must adopt policies, and the state education commissioner enforces the rule for K-12.

NO

Schools, districts, and athletic associations keep setting their own eligibility rules under current state and federal law.

TRADE-OFF

Supporters say one statewide rule protects fairness and safety in girls’ and women’s sports. Opponents say it excludes transgender students from teams matching their gender identity. Schools could face legal costs if the state steps in.

FACTS

State fiscal estimate: Little cost to the state. School districts would need to update their policies and could face legal costs if the state takes action. Some terms, like what counts as an “equivalent female team,” aren’t defined.

YES

Surgery on anyone under 18 to change their biological sex characteristics, done in response to the minor’s perception of their sex or gender, is banned. Government money and health insurance can’t pay for it.

NO

Colorado law continues to protect access to these surgeries, and public and private insurance can still pay for them.

TRADE-OFF

Supporters say minors are too young to make irreversible surgical decisions. Opponents say these decisions belong to families and doctors. Non-surgical care is not affected.

FACTS

State fiscal estimate: There are exceptions, such as male circumcision and treatment for certain medical conditions. Non-surgical care is not restricted. Colorado’s three large children’s hospitals say they don’t currently do these surgeries on patients under 18. The wording could reach other surgeries if they’re seen as related to gender.

YES

The current state income tax rate of 4.4% becomes the highest rate allowed under state law, for both people and businesses.

NO

The rate stays at 4.4% for now, with no new legal cap.

TRADE-OFF

Nothing changes on tax bills now, and future rate increases would become harder. But it limits options for raising money later, and since it’s a regular law, not a constitutional change, lawmakers could change it.

FACTS

State fiscal estimate: No change to taxes now. If 136 and Amendment 87 both pass, it’s unclear which wins; lawmakers or a court would decide.

YES

Sales tax money the state already collects on sporting goods goes to land and water conservation, wildfire prevention, and outdoor recreation, and doesn’t count against the state’s TABOR limit. No new tax.

NO

That money stays in the state's general budget, under the TABOR limit. Lawmakers decide each year how to spend it, or it's refunded to taxpayers when required.

TRADE-OFF

Dedicated funding for conservation and wildfire prevention without raising taxes, but smaller TABOR refunds and less flexibility for lawmakers in the budget.

FACTS

State fiscal estimate: About $175 million a year would go to Great Outdoors Colorado, wildfire and forest grants, and water projects instead of refunds. It must add to, not replace, current funding, and it can be reduced to protect certain tax credits.

YES

A new 0.333% sales tax with no end date (about 33 cents per $100) in the district, about $295 million a year, plus up to $580 million in borrowing, to build and run the Colorado Connector passenger train from Fort Collins to Pueblo, with a stop in Westminster. Food, gas, home utilities, and medicine are exempt.

NO

No new rail sales tax or borrowing. District leaders have said limited Denver-to-Fort Collins service may still start, but the full route wouldn't have this funding.

TRADE-OFF

Supporters say it would give the Front Range an alternative to I-25 traffic and connect cities, jobs, and colleges. Opponents point to the cost: a new sales tax with no end date in the ballot question and major borrowing, with ridership and final costs still uncertain. Sales taxes take a bigger share of lower-income budgets, though food, gas, utilities, and medicine are exempt. 

FACTS

Official ballot text: Repaying the $580 million could cost up to $785 million with interest. An independent auditor and a group of local taxpayers would review the spending every year.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Various ballots incorrectly include this measure. Your ballot is still valid and should be used as normal, but if you are one of those impacted, your vote on this issue only will not be counted. All other votes will be counted from your ballot.  Arvada is inside the district, so Arvada votes on 7A count.

YES

Without a new tax, the district can collect more of the property tax voters approved in 1988, 2002, and 2018, up to a higher state limit (27% of its state funding instead of 25%). Its yearly limit rises from about $28.4 million to $30.4 million, about $2 million more a year, for safety, career and technical education, keeping teachers, and student achievement. The district can also keep and spend any interest it earns on this money. The ballot question doesn’t list an end date.

NO

Nothing changes. The district keeps collecting those taxes at the current 25% limit.

TRADE-OFF

More money for students without a new tax authorization, but property tax bills would still rise, by about 1.6 mills or roughly $4.70 a month on a $500,000 home, according to the district.

FACTS

Official notice: A 2024 state law (HB 24-1448) raised the limit from 25% to 27%, which is why this question is on the ballot. 

YES

A new 1% sales tax ($1 per $100) with no end date, about $11.7 million a year, to cut response times, keep first responders, replace equipment, and pay for training. Groceries, gas, prescriptions, and diapers are exempt.

NO

No new sales tax. The district keeps its current funding.

TRADE-OFF

The district says the money would speed up emergency response and help replace stations nearly 50 years old, with shoppers and visitors helping pay. But it’s a new sales tax with no end date, and sales taxes take a bigger share of lower-income budgets. 

FACTS

Official notice: The district hasn't asked for a tax increase in 17 years. Almost 6 in 10 calls are medical. A citizen board would review yearly audits. 

YES

The district attorney for Adams and Broomfield counties could serve up to three terms in a row instead of two, the same limit as other Adams County and Broomfield offices. 

NO

The district attorney's term limits stay as they are now, at two terms.

TRADE-OFF

Allowing a third term could provide continuity and more experience in the office, and lets voters keep a district attorney they want. The current two-term limit ensures more frequent turnover in an office with significant prosecutorial power. 

FACTS

Colorado Constitution: District attorneys serve four-year terms, so a third term would allow up to 12 years in a row.

YES

Property taxes go up about $73 million a year, with no end date, and the amount can grow over time up to a state limit. The money mainly raises pay for teachers, support staff, and school leaders and expands career and technical education. A citizen committee reviews spending, with yearly public reports.

NO

No new property tax. The district keeps its current funding.

TRADE-OFF

Supporters say higher pay would help keep teachers and open room for about 1,500 students waiting for job-training classes. Opponents note enrollment is declining and say the district should cut costs instead of raising property taxes. 

FACTS

Official notice: The $73 million is about 6.6% of the district’s estimated $1.1 billion yearly spending. District spending grew about 13% from 2022–23 to 2026–27. Supporters say Jeffco receives about $1,878 less per student than neighboring districts and would still be slightly behind even if 5A passes. Opponents say teacher pay rose 40% from 2022 to 2025 while district revenue rose 22%. 5A and 5B are separate votes. 

YES

Property taxes go up about $60 million a year, rising with inflation, with no end date, for roofs, plumbing, heating and cooling, technology, and security. It's a dedicated fund, not a loan, so there's no interest. A citizen committee reviews spending.

NO

No new property tax for building repairs. The district keeps its current funding for buildings.

TRADE-OFF

Supporters say it provides steady money to fix aging schools after years of put-off repairs, without borrowing. Opponents point to an audit of Jeffco’s last building program that found most projects went over budget, and note some under-filled schools may close. 

FACTS

Official notice: The $60 million is about 5.4% of the district’s estimated $1.1 billion yearly spending, and it grows with inflation. By law, it can only be used for buildings, technology, and maintenance. Supporters say the district’s 140+ schools have years of put-off repairs. Opponents point to an audit of the 2018–2025 building program that found 89% of projects went over budget, and note 23 schools are at two-thirds capacity or less. 5A and 5B are separate votes, so voters can pass one, both, or neither. 

YES

A new 1% sales tax ($1 per $100) starting in 2027, with no end date, about $23.1 million a year, for firefighter and paramedic staffing, vehicles, equipment, facilities, and firefighter health programs. Groceries, prescriptions, diapers, and other state-exempt items aren't taxed.

NO

No new sales tax. The district keeps relying mainly on property taxes. 

TRADE-OFF

Supporters say it provides steadier funding as emergency calls and costs rise, and that shoppers and visitors would share the cost. Opponents say it would push the total sales tax to about 9% in Arvada and Wheat Ridge, among the highest in the state, and that a property tax increase would be fairer. Because it’s a sales tax, anyone who shops in the district pays it, including people who live outside it, such as Arvada residents in Adams County, who are served by Adams County Fire. 

FACTS

Official notice: This sales tax is on top of the district's current property tax, not a replacement for it. It has no end date. Supporters note emergency calls rose more than 27% from 2016 to 2025 and that the district hasn’t asked for a tax increase since 2010.