2026 Colorado Election 
Ballot Measures

Amendment 81

Amendment 81 is about communication between Colorado law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. Current Colorado law allows them to work together in certain criminal matters, but limits law enforcement’s role in civil immigration enforcement.

 

A YES vote would change the Colorado Constitution. It would require Colorado law enforcement to make a reasonable effort to find out whether someone is in the country legally when that person is charged with a crime of violence. This requirement would also apply to someone charged with any crime if that person has a prior felony conviction.

 

If law enforcement cannot establish that the person is in the country legally, they would have to notify the federal Department of Homeland Security within seventy-two hours after charges are filed.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing rules without adding these requirements.

​

 

Amendment 82

Amendment 82 is about buying and selling natural gas for cooking and heating. Colorado currently regulates natural gas through state laws and regulations. The Colorado Constitution does not specifically give consumers a right to buy natural gas or suppliers a right to sell it.

 

A YES vote would add those rights to the Colorado Constitution. Consumers would have the right to buy natural gas for cooking or heating in homes and businesses. Utilities and distributors would have the right to sell it.

 

This could limit the ability of state or local governments to enforce current or future rules related to natural gas. The measure would not require anyone to use natural gas or set the price they would pay.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing laws and regulations without adding these rights to the Colorado Constitution.

​

 

Amendment 83

Amendment 83 is about hunting, fishing, and wildlife management. Colorado currently allows hunting and fishing under state and federal laws and wildlife regulations.

 

A YES vote would add the right to hunt and fish using traditional methods to the Colorado Constitution. The measure does not define what “traditional methods” means. This could make some future restrictions harder to put in place or enforce.

 

It would also make hunting and fishing the preferred ways to manage wildlife populations. That preference is already in state law, but not in the Colorado Constitution.

 

The state could still set rules to conserve wildlife, protect public safety, and preserve hunting and fishing opportunities for the future. The right would not apply to nongame species, endangered species, or species that federal law prohibits hunting.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing hunting, fishing, and wildlife management rules without adding these rights and provisions to the Colorado Constitution.

​

 

Amendment 84

Amendment 84 is about identification requirements for mail ballots in future elections. Colorado currently checks voters’ signatures to verify mail ballots.

 

A YES vote would add a new requirement to the Colorado Constitution. Voters returning a mail ballot in a state or federal election would need to provide their signature and the last four digits of one of three numbers: their Social Security number, Colorado driver’s license number, or Colorado identification card number.

 

If that information is missing or incorrect, voters would have a chance to fix the problem. They could also do so by providing another accepted form of identification. Their ballot would not be counted unless the problem was fixed.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing mail-ballot verification rules without adding this identification requirement.

​

 

Amendment 85

Amendment 85 is about how questions on the ballot are written. Colorado currently requires plain language, but does not set a specific reading level.

 

A YES vote would add a requirement to the Colorado Constitution. State and local ballot questions would have to use plain language at no higher than an eighth-grade reading level.

 

For measures proposed by voters, state laws could not require wording that conflicts with these standards.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing ballot-language rules without adding this requirement to the Colorado Constitution.

​

  

Amendment 86

Amendment 86 is about changing the boundaries of Colorado’s congressional districts. These districts determine who represents voters in the U.S. House of Representatives. Colorado’s independent congressional redistricting commission draws the boundaries every ten years.

 

A YES vote would add rules to the Colorado Constitution for changing those boundaries between the regular ten-year updates.

 

Before any changes could be approved, the commission would have to hold at least three public meetings. Both the commission and the Colorado Supreme Court would have to approve the changes.

 

Changes could not unnecessarily split communities with shared interests or intentionally give one political party an advantage. These rules would apply to districts for the U.S. House of Representatives, not the Colorado state legislature.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing rules without adding these requirements for changes between the regular ten-year updates.

​

 

Amendment 87

Amendment 87 is about Colorado’s state income tax. Colorado currently requires one income-tax rate, regardless of taxable income.

 

A YES vote would replace that system with different tax rates for different portions of income. Higher rates would apply only to the portion of income above certain amounts—not to all of a taxpayer’s income.

 

Many taxpayers would pay less, while those with the highest taxable incomes would pay more. The changes would apply to individuals and corporations.

 

The additional money would fund kindergarten through twelfth-grade education, health care, and early childhood care and education.

 

The state could keep and spend that additional money instead of refunding it under Colorado’s constitutional revenue limit, known as TABOR. Other TABOR refunds would not be eliminated.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing requirement for a single income-tax rate.

​

  

Proposition NN

Proposition NN is about state funding and taxpayer refunds. Under Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, known as TABOR, the state generally must return money it collects above its revenue limit.

 

A YES vote would permanently raise that limit based on how much the state spends on public schools, from kindergarten through twelfth grade. The state could keep more money without increasing tax rates. This could reduce or eliminate future TABOR refunds.

 

The measure calls for state funding for public schools to increase two percent each year for ten years. An independent audit would be released each year to show how the additional money is spent.

 

For the first ten years, the money would support public schools and programs serving children, such as childcare and preschool. After that, lawmakers could also use it for other state purposes.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing revenue-limit and refund rules without adopting this funding plan.

​

  

Proposition 132

Proposition 132 is about criminal penalties for fentanyl and certain similar synthetic opioids. Current Colorado law treats some cases involving possession of small amounts as misdemeanors. Penalties for selling or distributing these drugs depend on the amount involved.

 

A YES vote would make illegal possession of any amount a felony. Selling, transferring, or sharing any amount would require a prison sentence of eight to thirty-two years.

 

The measure would also limit or remove some options for reduced penalties. It would require treatment for some people convicted of possessing small amounts. Completing that treatment could allow their felony conviction to be reduced to a misdemeanor.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing penalties and the current options for reduced penalties in qualifying cases.

​

  

Proposition 133

Proposition 133 is about child sex trafficking. Colorado already makes trafficking someone under eighteen for sexual exploitation a felony. The prison sentence ranges from eight to forty-eight years, followed by mandatory parole, or supervision after release.

 

A YES vote would expand the crime to include knowingly trading money or anything worth money to buy or sell sexual activity with someone under eighteen.

 

Anyone convicted of this crime would have to serve life in prison without the possibility of parole or release. Judges could not impose a shorter sentence.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing definition and penalties without adding the mandatory life sentence.

​

 

Proposition 134

Proposition 134 is about who can participate in school and college sports. Schools, school districts, and athletic associations currently set participation rules under state and federal law.

 

A YES vote would require public and private school and college sports teams to be designated male, female, or coed. This would include intramural sports, where students compete within the same school.

 

Participation on male and female teams would be based on biological sex as defined by the measure. It defines females by reproductive systems organized to produce eggs, and males by reproductive systems organized to produce sperm. Under these definitions, transgender girls and women could not play on female teams.

 

Female athletes could join a male team only if no female team is available for that sport. Schools would have to adopt policies to carry out these rules.

 

The measure would also prevent government agencies and certain organizations from investigating or penalizing a school for keeping female-only teams.

 

A NO vote would allow schools, districts, and athletic associations to continue setting participation rules under existing law, without adding these statewide requirements.

​

  

Proposition 135

Proposition 135 is about certain surgeries for people under eighteen. Current Colorado law protects access to gender-transition surgeries for minors with parental consent. Some medically necessary procedures may be covered by health insurance.

 

A YES vote would prohibit these surgeries for anyone under eighteen, even with parental consent.

 

It would also prohibit government funding and health insurance from paying for those surgeries.

 

There would be exceptions for male circumcision and treatment of certain medical conditions affecting sex development or physical or chemical abnormalities.

 

The measure would not prohibit counseling, hormone treatment, or puberty blockers.

 

A NO vote would keep the existing access and insurance rules without adding these restrictions.

​

 

Proposition 136

Proposition 136 is about Colorado’s state income-tax rate. The current rate for individuals and corporations is 4.4 percent.

 

A YES vote would make 4.4 percent the maximum income-tax rate for individuals and corporations under state law. It would not put that limit in the Colorado Constitution.

 

A NO vote would keep the current rate without adding this new limit to state law. Voting NO would not itself increase incometaxes.

​

 

Proposition 137

Proposition 137 is about how Colorado uses sales-tax money from sporting goods. That money currently goes into the state’s general budget and is subject to Colorado’s revenue limit, known as TABOR.

 

A YES vote would set aside money from existing sporting-goods sales taxes for conservation, wildfire prevention, and outdoor recreation.

 

The state could keep and spend that money instead of returning it to taxpayers under TABOR. This could mean smaller taxpayer refunds. The measure would not increase the sales-tax rate.

 

The amount set aside could be reduced if needed to protect certain tax credits for families.

 

A NO vote would keep the money in the state’s general budget under the existing spending and refund rules.