Amendment 87: The Graduated Income Tax
This constitutional amendment would replace Colorado’s long-standing flat 4.4% income tax with a graduated, or progressive, system. A 'yes' vote supports creating new tax brackets, where tax rates increase as income rises. Supporters say this change would provide a tax cut for 97% of Coloradans while raising over $2 billion in new revenue for K-12 education, healthcare, and early childcare by asking the wealthiest to pay more. Opponents argue that nearly doubling the top marginal rate would hurt Colorado's economic competitiveness, drive high earners and businesses to other states, and penalize small business owners who file as individuals. There is a competing measure, Proposition 136, which seeks to cap the income tax rate at its current 4.4%.
Proposition NN: Increased K-12 Education Funding
This statutory measure aims to boost funding for public K-12 schools without raising taxes. A 'yes' vote would allow the state to retain and spend more money above its current revenue limit under the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR), specifically for education. The proposal calls for a 2% annual increase in K-12 investment for ten years, with the funds dedicated to increasing teacher pay, reducing class sizes, and expanding career and technical education. Proponents argue this is a necessary fix to address chronic underfunding that has left Colorado's teacher pay and school resources lagging. Opponents of similar measures in the past have often raised concerns about altering TABOR's revenue caps and the growth of state spending.
Proposition 137: Funding Conservation with Sporting Goods Taxes
This initiative would direct sales tax revenue from the sale of sporting goods to a new fund for environmental projects. A 'yes' vote supports using this existing tax money—estimated at $175 million annually—for water conservation, land protection, forest health, and wildfire mitigation, rather than having it count toward potential TABOR refunds. Supporters, including water boards and conservation groups, say this provides a dedicated funding stream to protect critical water supplies and reduce wildfire risk without new taxes. Some opponents express concern that the measure prioritizes certain types of projects, like logging, over other conservation strategies such as home hardening.
Amendment 82: A Constitutional 'Right to Natural Gas'
This citizen-initiated constitutional amendment would establish a right for consumers to purchase and use natural gas and for utilities to sell it. A 'yes' vote would effectively block local governments from banning natural gas hookups in new construction, a policy some municipalities have explored to promote electrification and fight climate change. Supporters argue it protects consumer choice and energy affordability. Opponents, including environmental groups, contend the measure would lock in fossil fuel infrastructure, hinder climate goals, and create legal challenges for future energy and safety regulations.
Amendment 84: New Mail Ballot ID Requirements
This measure proposes adding new identification requirements for voting by mail. If it passes, voters would need to include the last four digits of their Social Security number or driver's license number on their mail ballot envelope. A 'yes' vote enacts this change. Proponents frame it as a common-sense step to enhance election security. Opponents argue that it creates an unnecessary barrier to voting in a state with a secure and successful mail-in ballot system, potentially disenfranchising eligible voters who make minor errors and adding administrative costs.
Amendment 86: Rules for Mid-Decade Redistricting
This constitutional amendment would set new rules for any attempt to redraw congressional district maps between the decennial censuses. A 'yes' vote requires that any mid-decade map be approved by both the independent redistricting commission and the Colorado Supreme Court, and prohibits maps drawn to purposefully favor one political party. This measure is a response to mid-decade redistricting efforts seen in other states. Supporters say it safeguards the non-partisan process Colorado voters previously approved. Opponents of similar measures often argue they can limit the legislature's flexibility.
