2026 Denver Ballot Measures

  What a Yes or No Vote Means

 

Referred Initiatives 2H: Clarify Workplace Rights Law Enforcement by the Auditor’s Office

Background: The primary function of the Auditor’s Office is to conduct independent audits of city agencies to help mitigate identified risks, enhance efficiency and effectiveness, reduce costs, and improve the quality of services.

Since 1950, the Auditor’s Office has also enforced the prevailing wage ordinance even as the structure and function of the office has evolved. The prevailing wage is defined as the average or standard wage, benefits, and overtime paid to similarly employed workers in a specific occupation and geographic area to ensure fair compensation and prevent local wages from being undercut.

The changes that have been made to the Auditor’s Office operations over the last decades include:

• 2006 - amended to make the office independent
• 2016 - updated to enforce prevailing wage, minimum wage and wage theft plus operational process improvements
• 2020 - began enforcing minimum wage ordinance based on complaints
• 2022 - gained authority to conduct proactive and agency-initiated investigations into high-risk industries wage issues

The office has a critical function to protect workers from exploitation and abuse, collects restitution for workers, and enforces the rights of workers.

Major Provisions: This bill updates the Charter language to expressly clarify that the Auditor’s Office may continue to enforce wage laws, worker protection laws, and other workplace rights laws in accordance with ordinances passed by City Council.

Those in favor say: 

• It adds language making it clear that the Auditor’s duties include enforcement of wage, worker protection, and workplace rights, as the Council requires by ordinance.
• This is a good governance measure to ensure the charter is easy to understand and includes the most accurate representation of Denver’s government.
• It creates legal stability by clarifying the Auditor’s role in preserving the minimum wage, investigating civil wage theft, and the office’s enforcement authority.

There is no known opposition to this charter change.

A YES vote means the Auditor’s Office will continue to perform the duties as described by the Denver City Council. The charter language will be updated to reflect all current obligations.

A NO vote means the Auditor’s office will continue to work as the Denver City Council has mandated, but the Charter will not clearly reflect its duties and obligations.

Referred Initiatives 2I: Two-year Budget Process for Denver

Background : This amendment to the Charter of the City and County of Denver was initiated by City Council members and referred to the voters. While the Colorado Constitution requires local governments to have an annual budget, several Colorado cities have moved to a two-year budget cycle while still incorporating an annual budget approval process.

The mayor’s office is responsible for developing the city budget. The Charter defines dates for the mayor to submit preliminary and final budgets to the City Council for its review, feedback, and proposed budget amendments. Currently the process begins by May 1 and requires Council to approve the budget by its second regularly scheduled council meeting in November.

Major Provisions:

• Allows the City Council, in consultation with the mayor’s office, the option of adopting a two-year budget cycle rather than the current annual budget. It would incorporate a mid-cycle review, which may include budget adjustments. This process satisfies the requirements of both an annual budget and submission of the budget to the state.
• Modifies the timeframe for budget preparation, requiring the mayor’s office to submit preliminary and final budgets to the City Council earlier in the budget cycle. The vote to approve the budget would still be held at the second regularly scheduled council meeting in November.
• Implements a financial reporting process at quarterly intervals during the budget year and defines actions to be taken when revenue does not meet anticipated levels or expenditures exceed the planned budget.
• Provides increased opportunities for community input on the budget and the city’s priorities for a budget term.
• Adoption of this amendment would require City Council to pass an ordinance to implement the new process.

Those in favor say: 

• The option for a two-year budget cycle gives partners and the city the ability to better plan for long-term projects and the ability to revert to a one-year budget cycle in times of economic uncertainty.
• The changes provide more opportunity for community feedback and input on the city’s projects and priorities and how resources are allocated.
• The changes incorporate fiscal reporting to the council, so actions can be taken in the event of a revenue shortfall.

Those opposed say:

While there is no known organized opposition to this proposal, Council members who were opposed to referring this to the voters made the following comments:

• There is no advantage to a biennial or two-year budget that can’t be done in a one-year budget, an annual budget.
• A two-year budget would increase budgeting unpredictability. The decision to implement a two-year budget process would be made in January the year prior to the budget dates, for example January 2027 for the fiscal years 2028 and 2029.
• With general economic uncertainty, it could be difficult to forecast revenue and expenditures for 3 years into the future.

A YES vote means the charter amendment would go into effect including changes in the budget timeline, required fiscal reporting, incorporating the definitions of General Fund Contingency Fund and General Reserve Fund in budgets, increased community engagement, and the option of implementing a two-year budget,

A NO vote means the city would continue to use the annual budget cycle, keeping the current timeframe for budget preparation and review.

Referred Initiatives 2J: Modernizing the Civil Service Commission

Background: The Denver Civil Service Commission (CSC) is an independent agency overseen by a five-member civilian Board of Commissioners and governed by the City Charter and Commission rules. A staff implements the day-to-day operations of the Commission including investigations. The Commission’s duties include:

• Maintaining a merit personnel system for the classified service of the Denver Police and Fire Departments;
• Examining, screening and certifying applicants for original appointments and promotional appointments for the Classified Service within the Police and Fire Departments;
• Hearing disciplinary appeals of classified members and investigating matters involving the administration and enforcement of Charter and Commission Rules.
• Oversight of the Public Safety Cadet program, which is an entry-level, preparatory employment program to help young adults pursue careers in the Denver Police or Fire Departments.

A City Council Workgroup reviewed Charter Sections on the Civil Service and Classified Service. They proposed several changes with an emphasis on applying an equity lens to guide City programs and policies.

Major Provisions:

• Move certain operational details from Charter to Ordinance or Civil Service Commission rules.
• Update the City Charter with gender-neutral language.
• Remove the citizenship requirement to serve on the Commission.
• Move the Public Safety Cadet Program to the Manager of Safety section of the Charter.
• Extend timelines for disciplinary review and suspension pending investigation.
• Allow probationary periods to be extended for approved leave.
• Remove command staff caps for fire and police divisions to support future staffing needs.

If passed, City Council will vote to move the operational details out of Charter and into municipal code.

Those in favor say: 

• By moving some of the operational changes from the Charter to Ordinance or CSC rules, City Council would be able to confer rights, duties and privileges at the Commission’s’ request, allowing routine procedural adjustments without a Charter Amendment.
• Removing the citizenship requirement for Commissioners will promote inclusivity, expanding access to qualified candidates, and respecting the diversity of our community.
• Updating the Charter with gender-neutral language supports equity and helps build public trust by ensuring that the Charter aligns with current standards of respectful and inclusive language.
• Relocating the Public Safety Cadet Program provisions from the CSC section to the Manager of Safety aligns recruitment with the department that directly oversees the program.

There is no known opposition to this charter change.

A YES vote means there will be amendments to the Denver Charter to update and revise certain roles and information on the Civil Service Commission.

A NO vote means the current Charter requirements for the Civil Service Commission will remain in place.

Referred Initiatives 2K: Franchise Agreement with Xcel Energy to Provide Utilities to Denver

Background: The City and County of Denver’s franchise agreement with Xcel Energy governs the utility’s use of public rights-of-way for electric, natural gas, steam, and related infrastructure. The current agreement is set to expire at the end of 2026, and any new franchise requires voter approval under Denver’s charter.

The proposed renewal would run for 20 years and intends to provide city revenue, coordinate infrastructure work, continue undergrounding investments, and establish a companion energy partnership focused on affordability, reliability, and clean-energy goals.

This agreement renews the previous 20-year Franchise Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Xcel Energy and would provide an estimated $34 million annually for Denver’s General Fund along with $5 million for the energy assistance program. Under this agreement, Xcel Energy will continue covering utility relocations costs tied to city projects.

The City has negotiated a companion agreement to establish ongoing commitments to collaborate on energy and infrastructure projects to advance energy reliability, affordability, and sustainability.

Major Provisions:

• The agreement would dedicate a portion of electric gross revenues to city-directed undergrounding projects. Xcel Energy would contribute to the cost of projects that would otherwise be paid for by the city.
• The franchise preserves Xcel Energy’s formal ability to access rights-of-way for maintenance, repairs, and emergency response, reducing uncertainty for critical utility operations.
• The companion energy partnership includes proposed bill-payment assistance, income-qualified programs, Energy Resource Navigators, and a community advisory structure.

An ordinance to provide utility services at Denver International Airport has been passed by City Council and will go into effect if this agreement passes.

Those in favor say: 

• The agreement strengthens city oversight and negotiation position by giving the city leverage to assure that Xcel Energy projects are compatible with local neighborhoods, dedicating portions of gross revenue to undergrounding projects.
• It supports service reliability and emergency coordination, preserving access to rights-of-way for maintenance, repairs, and emergency response.
• Creates affordability and community-benefit commitments with bill payment assistance.

Those opposed say:

• The agreement does not go far enough on affordability as the amounts for bill assistance and income-qualified programs are small relative to rising utility bills and household energy burdens.
• Funds for undergrounding and substation design improvements may not automatically reach the neighborhoods with the greatest need unless allocation criteria are transparent and enforceable.
• Approving this agreement may make alternatives such as municipalization, stronger public ownership models, or more aggressive distributed-energy strategies less politically likely in the near term.

A YES vote means Xcel Energy will continue to have a franchise with the City and County of Denver for another 20 years.

A NO vote means the current franchise will expire, and negotiation and possible litigation will be required for each individual infrastructure project.

Initiated Ordinance 311: Prohibit the Force-Feeding of Birds

Background: This is a citizen-initiated proposal by animal welfare advocates that seeks to eliminate production and sale of force-fed products from the Denver marketplace with a change in city ordinance. There is currently no local production of foie gras, though some Denver restaurants serve this product.

Major Provisions:

• Prohibits the practice of force-feeding birds for the purpose of producing foie gras. Prohibits any facility from producing foie gras.
• Prohibits retail food establishments in Denver from purchase, sale and distribution of this product.
• Anyone who violates this ban would be subject to a civil penalty. The ban would be enforced by the Denver Department of Public Health and Environment, with fines from $1000 to $5,000 for violations.

Those in favor of say:

• The process of force-feeding domestic ducks and geese is cruel and can cause injury to the animals. It causes their livers to grow up to 10 times the normal size.
• Only a few Denver restaurants offer foie gras as a single, seasonal luxury menu item and selling it is not a major revenue source for any Denver business.
• The veterinarians who have endorsed this initiative are concerned about the treatment of the animals.
• Other cities that have prohibited this practice include Pittsburgh, NYC, Portland, Washington DC, and the state of California. More than 20 countries, including 85% of the EU, prohibit this practice.

Those opposed say:

• Setting up limits on which foods or products restaurants can serve limits independent creativity and flexibility.
• Limits the ability of a small business to manage costs while meeting consumer demand
• A ban or mandate on a particular product can create burdensome regulations by adding costs to the business.
• A ban in one city will not keep people from eating foie gras as they can go to the surrounding towns to dine.

A YES vote means that no one is allowed to produce or sell foie gras in Denver, and violators will be subject to fines.

A NO vote means there will be no prohibition of the force feeding of birds. Restaurants and other retail establishments can choose to sell foie gras in Denver.

Denver Public Schools Issue 4A: $44 Million Mill Levy Override

Background: The DPS Board of Education is asking voters for a $44 million increase in mill levy funds. A mill levy override (MLO) is an increase in the previous voter-approved property tax rate (mill levy), with one mill equal to $1 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation. The Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) requires voter approval for any increase in taxes.

An MLO allows K-12 school districts to collect additional money from property taxes for ongoing expenses. Unlike money generated from a bond, which can only be used for capital expenses such as construction and renovation of buildings, major repairs, and vehicles, mill levy revenue can be used for ongoing operating expenses such as salaries and benefits, instructional programming, and technology.

The total number of students in DPS is declining, resulting in loss of state per pupil funding. However, due to inflation, necessary ongoing costs are increasing.

Denver Public Schools held community meetings in April and May of this year to seek input from the community on how to spend potential override revenue. An advisory committee prepared and presented the recommendations to the Board of Education.

Major Provisions:

The mill levy for property within the Denver Public School District would increase by 4 mills. Property taxes would increase about $72 per year for a Denver home valued at $624,800, the median home price in the city. The mill levy override would raise $44 million of revenue per year to be used as follows:

• $25.8 million for employee raises giving full-time DPS employees a $1,750 raise. Part-time employees would get a prorated amount
• $4 million for career and technical education. In 2024, Denver voters passed a bond issue that included $51 million to build career and technical education classrooms. This money would pay for programming, staffing, equipment, and transportation for those classes.
• $2.9 million to expand student mental health support and $2 million for special education services.
• $9.3 million for the district’s charter schools. State law requires that school districts share mill levy override revenue with district charter schools, which are publicly funded but independently run by nonprofit organizations.

Those in favor of say:

• This mill levy override would raise base pay for every DPS educator and support staff member by $1,750 a year, giving the district competitive salaries to help DPS to retain experienced teachers and attract new talent, as well as recruit and retain Education Support Professionals, including office staff, custodians, cafeteria workers, paraprofessionals, and bus drivers.
• Housing and health premium costs have significantly outpaced both salaries and inflation. Since 2000, housing costs in Denver have risen 261%, and health premiums have risen 249%.
• Dedicates $4 million annually to expand career and technical education, giving more students real pathways into good-paying jobs and skilled trades.
• Some of this money will go toward student wellbeing and support for students with special needs by hiring more counselors and mental health professionals.

Those opposed say:

• Property taxes have increased significantly, and there is concern that people will be taxed out of their homes. Property tax revenue increased from $7.18 billion in 2015 to nearly $15.3 billion collected in 2024. There is plenty of money with no new MLOs or new debt.
• We are not getting the educational results that are expected from our public education system. Colorado’s 2025 test results reported that 55% of children are not proficient in English Language Arts and 65% of children are not proficient in Math.
• Enrollment in Colorado public schools is down by about 10,000 students since last year, so there should not be an increase in taxes for declining enrollment.
  
• The override follows closely on the heels of a massive nearly $1 billion school bond approved by Denver voters in 2024.

A YES vote means increasing Denver property taxes by increasing the mill levy for Denver Public Schools and raising $44 million per year to finance educational costs.

A NO vote means the mill levy for Denver Public Schools will stay at the current amount and will not raise $44 million for educational costs.

Ballot Issue 7A: Front Range Passenger Rail District Tax Increase

Background: The Front Range Passenger Rail District was created as a new public agency by the Colorado General Assembly in 2021 to establish and operate passenger rail connections between the Colorado Front Range population centers. The Rail District is governed by a Board of Directors with 17 voting and 7 non-voting members. Some are appointed by the Governor; others are representatives of Regional Council Governments of the cities included in the Rail District.

The Rail District includes cities in which at least 20% of their population is within five miles of one of the train’s planned stations.

The passenger rail system, called the Colorado Connector, will use mostly existing tracks that are part of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe with a 25-year access agreement to run passenger service between Denver and Fort Collins. RTD owns the rail corridor to be used between Denver and Westminster. Union Pacific will host the railroad on the corridor south of Denver. Stops in Denver will include Union Station, the Denver Broncos and Denver Summit sports stadiums, and one in the South Broadway area. Amtrak is the planned starting operator, contributing crews, ticketing, maintenance, and federal safety compliance from its national platform.

RTD and CDOT are providing funding for the Front Range Passenger Rail District to begin service from Denver to Fort Collins with six stops in between.

Major Provisions:

• This measure would create a 0.333% sales tax, equal to 33 cents on every $100 which will be spent in the communities included in the Rail District.
• No tax would be collected on gasoline, food, residential electricity and gas, prescription drugs, or medical supplies.
• It would raise $295 million a year for the Front Range Passenger Rail District to develop and operate the Colorado Connector train service.
• It would raise Front Range Passenger Rail District’s debt $580,000,000, with a repayment cost of $785,000,000.
• The money raised would be used to extend passenger rail service south from Denver to Littleton, Sterling Ranch, Colorado Springs, and Pueblo and to add more frequent round-trip service from Denver to Westminster, Broomfield, Louisville, Boulder, Longmont, Loveland, and Fort Collins.
• Greeley, Lone Tree, Monument, and Castle Rock are exempt from charging the tax.

Those in favor of say:

• Developing Front Range passenger rail service is supported after years of planning by CDOT, RTD, the Governor, and the General Assembly.
• It would connect Front Range residents to employment centers, colleges, sports arenas, and entertainment hubs all along the Front Range.
• We need an alternative to I-25, which is often congested because of traffic, construction, and weather. The Colorado Connector would reduce highway congestion by replacing over 1,000 car trips per day.
• Operating the Colorado Connector on existing tracks would help avoid extensive new permitting and construction costs and schedule requirements.
• Adding new transportation infrastructure now will prepare our Front Range region to maintain our quality of life during continued population growth over the next decades.

Those opposed say:

• This new sales tax would burden all rail district residents to benefit a much smaller number of rail passengers.
• Rail systems typically cost more than projected, take longer to implement than planned, and attract fewer riders than estimated. The estimated borrowing cost may not be realistic in today's interest rate environment.
• Taxpayers who live in the RTD tax district and the Front Range Passenger Rail tax district would be responsible for taxes in both districts.
• The Front Range Passenger Rail District is controlled by a board of political appointees who have the power to levy taxes through ballot measures that must be approved by the voters. The board is not directly accountable to taxpayers.
• The Colorado General Assembly removed from the tax district the more conservative Front Range communities of Greeley, Lone Tree, Monument, and Castle Rock to increase the chances this measure would pass. Those population centers would have access to a system paid for by others.

A YES vote means increasing sales taxes by 0.333% in the communities that are part of the Rail District. The tax revenue will be used to extend passenger service to more communities and increase round-trip frequency.

A NO vote means that sales taxes would remain at their current levels with no additional funding for Front Range passenger rail. Limited round-trip rail service from Denver to Westminster, Broomfield, Louisville, Boulder, Longmont, Loveland, and Fort Collins would continue without additional funding.

Reference Websites for the Denver Ballot Measures
Coming Soon