On November 5, Americans will help decide whether Kamala Harris or Donald Trump will win what is widely projected to be an extremely close presidential race. But for those in the Centennial State, the question of who they want in the Oval Office for the next four years will merely be the first of many choices they’ll face this election cycle.

Whether voting in-person or by mail, Coloradans will weigh in on 14 statewide ballot measures covering topics ranging from same-sex marriage to abortion to the ballot itself. Of the 14 issues, seven propose changes to the state constitution (which require at least 55 percent of the vote to pass), five affect state statutes, and two are questions referred to the voters by the state legislature.

So many initiatives to research can feel overwhelming. To help, here’s a guide to every question that will appear on your state ballot.

Jump Ahead:

Amendment 79: Constitutional Right to Abortion

What you’ll see: “Shall there be a change to the Colorado constitution recognizing the right to abortion, and, in connection therewith, prohibiting the state and local governments from denying, impeding, or discriminating against the exercise of that right, allowing abortion to be a covered service under health insurance plans for Colorado state and local government employees and for enrollees in state and local governmental insurance programs?”

What it means: Abortion access and rights have been a defining issue nationally since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022. Though a 2022 state law protects the right to an abortion in Colorado, Amendment 79, if passed, would take it a step further by making it a constitutional right in Colorado and allowing public funds to pay for abortions. If that happens, efforts from state or local governments to prevent a citizen from getting the procedure would be outlawed.

Early outlook: Historically, Coloradans have supported efforts to safeguard access to abortion. When a 22-week abortion ban was on the ballot back in 2020, it failed—earning only 41 percent of the vote. Proponents of Amendment 79 have raised more than $13 million in contributions. Opponents have raised just over $100,000.

Amendment 80: Constitutional Right to School Choice

What you’ll see: “Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution establishing the existing statutory rights to school choice for children from kindergarten through twelfth grade in the Colorado constitution?”

What it means: If it meets the aforementioned vote threshold, Amendment 80 would create a constitutionally protected right to school choice for K-12 students and their parents. That choice includes public schools, private schools, home schools, charter schools, and “any future innovations in education.”

While Colorado law already guarantees a free public education and allows parents to choose what school they send their child to (even if it’s outside their home district), enshrining it in the Colorado constitution would ensure that right could not be stripped away by future legislatures. Opponents, like the Colorado Education Association and the ACLU of Colorado, argue that by defining “school choice” to include private schools, the amendment lays the groundwork for future private school vouchers. Proponents, like advocacy organization Advance Colorado, believe it simply protects parents’ desires to educate their children in the way they see fit.

Amendment G: Modify Property Tax Exemption for Veterans with Disabilities

What you’ll see: “Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the expansion of eligibility for the property tax exemption for veterans with a disability to include a veteran who does not have a service-connected disability rated as a one hundred percent permanent disability but does have individual unemployability status?”

What it means: This amendment would expand the number of disabled veterans who qualify for a state property tax exemption, which currently is only given to veterans deemed to have a service-related disability that’s “100 percent permanent.” Amendment G would stretch that definition to include veterans with one service-connected disability rated at 60 percent or two service-connected disabilities with a combined disability rating of at least 70 percent. The VA uses a rating system, ranging from 0 percent to 100 percent and in increments of 10 percent, to measure the severity of a veteran’s disability. A rating of 70 percent typically indicates that a veteran suffered multiple serious injuries or mental conditions, like musculoskeletal disorders or post-traumatic stress disorder. The proposed amendment would affect an estimated 3,700 Colorado veterans.

Early outlook: The amendment was passed by the state legislature unanimously, showing a broad base of support and bipartisan appeal. There are no known opponents to this measure.

Amendment H: Judicial Discipline Procedures and Confidentiality

What you’ll see: “Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning judicial discipline, and, in connection therewith, establishing an independent judicial discipline adjudicative board, setting standards for judicial review of a discipline case, and clarifying when discipline proceedings become public?”

What it means: Approved by the state legislature in 2023 following several scandals involving Colorado judges, this amendment would create an independent review board to preside over judicial ethical misconduct hearings if passed with at least 55 percent. The board would be made up of four district court judges, four attorneys, and four members of the public, all appointed by the Colorado Supreme Court and governor, then confirmed by the Senate. This differs from the current system where misconduct hearings are handled by a panel of judges selected by the Colorado Supreme Court. Amendment H would also make these misconduct cases public as soon as formal proceedings begin, rather than after the case is closed.

Early outlook: There was bipartisan support for this reform measure in the state legislature, where it earned affirmative votes from 95 of 100 lawmakers. There are no known opponents to this measure.

Amendment I: Constitutional Bail Exception for First Degree Murder

What you’ll see: “Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning creating an exception to the right to bail for cases of murder in the first degree when proof is evident or presumption is great?”

What it means: Under this amendment, judges could deny bail to those charged with first-degree murder should they determine the “proof is evident or presumption is great that the person committed the crime.” Currently, almost everyone is guaranteed a right to bail unless they’ve committed a capital offense, but, since the state legislature abolished the death penalty in 2020, no crime is considered a capital offense in Colorado. This amendment would close that loophole.

Early outlook: Only four Democrats and one Republican, out of a possible 100 state legislators, voted against the measure. Historically, Coloradans have supported initiatives to deny bail to violent offenders. In 1994, 77 percent of voters supported an amendment to prohibit post-conviction bail for violent felons.

Amendment J: Repealing the Definition of Marriage in the Constitution

Jason Woodrich, left, and Ben Hauth share a kiss after signing their marriage license at the Denver County clerk’s office where they began issuing same sex marriage licenses July 10, 2014. Photo by John Leyba/The Denver Post via Getty Images

What you’ll see: “Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution removing the ban on same-sex marriage?”

What it means: Nearly 10 years after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Obergefell v. Hodges ruled that same-sex couples had a right to marry, Colorado’s constitution still includes a passage that states, “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.” Amendment J would remove that sentence from the state constitution.

Though Colorado’s ban hasn’t been enforced since the state legalized same-sex marriage in 2014, passage of this amendment would protect the right from future legal challenges (if Obergefell was overturned à la Roe, for instance). Since it would be eliminating a portion of the state constitution rather than adding to it, the amendment needs only a simple majority to pass.

Early outlook: A 2019 poll from the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute found that 77 percent of Coloradans supported laws that protected the LGBTQ community from discrimination. This particular marriage equality measure has also received support from state religious leaders.

Amendment K: Modify Constitutional Election Deadlines

What you’ll see: “Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado constitution concerning the modification of certain deadlines in connection with specified elections?”

What it means: The 2024 ballot even includes questions about the ballot itself. Amendment K would make deadlines one week earlier for citizens who want to submit petition signatures for future ballot initiatives and for judges who want to file for another term on the bench. It would also require nonpartisan legislative staff to publish the official text and titles of ballot measures 30 days earlier than they currently do. The Colorado County Clerks Association pushed for this measure because as ballots continue to get longer, clerks are requesting more time to ensure they’re accurate.

Early outlook: The measure had only one naysayer in the state legislature, and there are no formal opponents.

Proposition JJ: Retain Additional Sports Betting Tax Revenue

What you’ll see: “Without raising taxes, may the state keep and spend all sports betting tax revenue above voter-approved limits to fund water conservation and protection projects instead of refunding revenue to casinos?”

What it means: As sports betting becomes more mainstream—it was legalized in Colorado in 2020—this proposition would allow the state government to keep all of the tax revenue it collects from those activities. Currently, gambling taxes in Colorado go toward water projects and conservation efforts, but any revenue surpassing $29 million is refunded to casinos and sports gambling operators. That’s estimated to be around $5.2 million for the 2024-’25 fiscal year. This initiative would let the state keep all the funds from sports betting for its water and conservation projects.

Early outlook: The final yes-no tally on the measure from the state legislature was 92-3. Coloradans have supported similar ballot measures in the past. Voters passed a tobacco tax retention measure in 2023 and a marijuana tax retention in 2015.

Proposition KK: Firearms and Ammunition Excise Tax

What you’ll see: “Shall state taxes be increased by $39,000,000 annually to fund mental health services, including for military veterans and at-risk youth, school safety and gun violence prevention, and support services for victims of domestic violence and other violent crimes by authorizing a tax on gun dealers, gun manufacturers, and ammunition vendors at the rate of 6.5% of the net taxable sales from the retail sale of any gun, gun precursor part, or ammunition, with the state keeping and spending all of the new tax revenue as a voter-approved revenue change?”

What it means: This proposition would implement a 6.5 percent excise tax (an indirect tax on specific goods and services) on guns and ammunition sales. The tax would be paid by gun dealers, gun manufacturers, and those who sell ammunition; sellers who bring in less than $20,000 in annual sales are exempt from the tax. That extra revenue would be used to fund gun violence prevention, crime victim support services, school safety programs, and mental health services for veterans and youth. The measure is expected to generate up to $39 million in its first full year in effect.

Early outlook: In stark contrast to many other measures on this year’s ballot, Proposition KK barely got out of the state Senate, passing by an 18-15 margin with only Democratic support. Under Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), voters have to approve any increase to state revenue. Since TABOR was implemented in 1992, Coloradans have weighed in on 38 statewide measures to increase revenue—only 12 have been approved.

Proposition 127: Prohibit Bobcat, Lynx, and Mountain Lion Hunting

A mountain lion in the Rocky Mountains. Getty Images

What you’ll see: “Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning a prohibition on the trophy hunting of mountain lions, lynx, and bobcats, and, in connection therewith, defining ‘trophy hunting’ as the intentional killing, wounding, pursuing, entrapping, or discharging or releasing of a deadly weapon at a mountain lion, lynx, or bobcat; creating exemptions from this prohibition including for the protection of human life, property, and livestock; establishing ‘trophy hunting’ as a class 1 misdemeanor; and increasing fines and limiting wildlife license privileges for persons convicted of this crime?”

What it means: Hunting bobcats and mountain lions is currently legal in Colorado, though hunters are required to have specific licenses and certificates. Colorado Parks and Wildlife also has to inspect any harvested bobcats or mountain lions to ensure ethical hunting practices and prevent waste. Proposition 127 would ban the hunting of those two big cats entirely. (Lynx hunting is already prohibited by state because of the species’ federal protected status.) Additionally, the measure would remove mountain lions from a list of “big game” species that also includes bears, moose, and bighorn sheep, among others. Landowners who incur property or livestock damage due to big game are eligible for government reimbursement; this proposition would remove mountain lions from this reimbursement program. Supporters of the proposition—which include actor Robert Redford, zoologist Jane Goodall, and Carole Baskin of Tiger King fame—believe this kind of “trophy” hunting is an unnecessary practice that causes pain and trauma to animals. Opponents assert that it interferes with state wildlife officials’ ability to make their own science-based decisions.

Early outlook: In an August 2024 study conducted by the Society of Conservation Biology, researchers found that roughly 78 percent of Coloradans disapproved of trophy hunting for mountain lions.

Proposition 128: Parole Eligibility for Crimes of Violence

What you’ll see: “Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning parole eligibility for an offender convicted of certain crimes, and, in connection therewith, requiring an offender who is convicted of second degree murder; first degree assault; class 2 felony kidnapping; sexual assault; first degree arson; first degree burglary; or aggravated robbery committed on or after January 1, 2025, to serve 85 percent of the sentence imposed before being eligible for parole, and requiring an offender convicted of any such crime committed on or after January 1, 2025, who was previously convicted of any two crimes of violence, not just those crimes enumerated in this measure, to serve the full sentence imposed before beginning to serve parole?”

What it means: Proposition 128 would require individuals convicted of certain violent crimes like second-degree murder, first- or second-degree sexual assault, aggravated robbery, first-degree assault, kidnapping, and arson to serve at least 85 percent of their prison sentence before becoming eligible for parole or being released for good behavior. Currently, such prisoners can apply for discretionary parole after 75 percent of their sentence has been completed.

Proposition 129: Establishing Veterinary Professional Associates

Stephanie Hinkle, left, Betsy Stringer, front right, and a veterinary team examine a Linne’s two-toes sloth at the Helen and Arthur E. Johnson Animal Hospital of Denver Zoo. Getty Images

What you’ll see: “Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes creating a new veterinary professional associate profession, and, in connection therewith, establishing qualifications including a master’s degree to be a veterinary professional associate; requiring registration with the state board of veterinary medicine; allowing a registered veterinary professional associate to practice veterinary medicine under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian; and making it a misdemeanor to practice as a veterinary professional associate without an active registration?”

What it means: With the passage of Proposition 129 would come the creation of a new career: veterinary professional associate. These professionals would provide care alongside vets and vet technicians, though they wouldn’t require eight or more years of education (like a vet). Veterinary professional associates would be required to have a master’s degree in veterinary clinical care or an equivalent degree. Proponents argue it would expand access to veterinary care, particularly in underserved, rural communities. To learn more about this measure, read our June 2024 story about how this might help Colorado’s vet shortage.

Early outlook: A 2023 survey from the American Association of Veterinary State Boards found that a majority of nearly 14,000 North American vets and vet technicians were against creating a new veterinary professional associate position. Instead, they support making better use of existing credentialed veterinary technicians to address worker shortages.

Proposition 130: Funding for Law Enforcement

What you’ll see: “Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning state funding for peace officer training and support, and, in connection therewith, directing the legislature to appropriate 350 million dollars to the peace officer training and support fund for municipal and county law enforcement agencies to hire and retain peace officers; allowing the fund to be used for pay, bonuses, initial and continuing education and training, and a death benefit for a peace officer, police, fire and first responder killed in the line of duty; and requiring the funding to supplement existing appropriations?”

What it means: Crime was one of the central issues in last year’s mayoral race, and under this proposition, the state would be directed to spend $350 million to help recruit, train, and retain local law enforcement officers. This money would be used to offer the families of officers killed in the line of duty a one-time $1 million benefit; increase law enforcement officers’ salaries; offer one-time hiring, recruitment, and retention bonuses; hire additional officers to patrol specific geographic areas or types of crime; and provide ongoing training. The measure would require that $350 million to come from the state’s general budget, not from raising taxes.

Proposition 131: Establishing All-Candidate Primary and Ranked Choice Voting General Elections

What you’ll see: “Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes creating new election processes for certain federal and state offices, and, in connection therewith, creating a new all-candidate primary election for U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representatives, governor, attorney general, secretary of state, treasurer, CU board of regents, state board of education, and the Colorado state legislature; allowing voters to vote for any one candidate per office, regardless of the voter’s or candidate’s political party affiliation; providing that the four candidates for each office who receive the most votes advance to the general election; and in the general election, allowing voters to rank candidates for each office on their ballot, adopting a process for how the ranked votes are tallied, and determining the winner to be the candidate with the highest number of votes in the final tally?”

What it means: This proposition would institute several significant changes to Colorado’s elections. Instead of party primaries, all qualified candidates would be placed on a single ballot for the primary, with the top four vote-getters, regardless of their party affiliation, advancing to the general election. For the general election, voters would rank those four candidates, rather than choosing a single one, with the winner determined by a process known as “instant runoff voting.” If implemented, it would affect elections for the U.S. Senate, U.S. House of Representative, governor, secretary of state, treasurer, attorney general, state legislature, state board of education, and the Colorado University board of regents.

Early outlook: Earlier this month, the Colorado Democratic Party voted to oppose Proposition 131, with party chair Shad Murib noting that the group is fighting to ensure that “the ultra-wealthy don’t undermine our democracy.” The proposition has received support from wealthy donors like Kent Thiry, the former CEO of DaVita Dialysis.

Craig Meyer
Craig Meyer
Craig Meyer is a Denver-based freelance writer. Before moving to Colorado in June 2022, he spent the previous 10 years as a sports writer with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, primarily covering college basketball and football.