Coloradans voted on over a dozen ballot questions in the 2026 election, making consequential decisions on statewide tax policy, voting rights, immigration and other issues.

This year’s ballot featured 14 statewide questions, the most Colorado voters have faced in over a century, according to Westword.

The results are still unofficial but the likely winner was clear in most of the races as of Friday morning, with the Associated Press estimating 95% of votes have been tallied.

Taxes and spending

The election seems likely to bring major changes to the state’s tax and spending policies.

Voters approved Proposition NN, which will increase education spending by taking away taxpayer refunds.

Additionally, supporters claimed victory for Amendment 87, which would raise billions of dollars in new funding for schools and healthcare by cutting most people’s income taxes while raising them on the highest-earning people and companies.

Voters rejected a competing proposal, Proposition 136, that would have locked in Colorado’s current flat-rate income tax system.

Supporters also claimed victory for another tax question, Proposition 137, which would direct sports equipment taxes toward conservation, wildfire mitigation and outdoor recreation.

The battles over those proposals were among the most expensive of any of the ballot questions, with supporters and opponents spending millions of dollars to influence voters.

Voting and elections

Coloradans also faced several questions about the voting process itself, but largely chose to leave the current system intact.

The state’s voters – more than 90% of whom vote by mail – shot down Amendment 84, a proposal to change the state constitution to add new ID requirements for mail-in voting, despite “dark money” groups spending close to $6 million to back the measure.

Coloradans also voted down Amendment 86, another dark money-backed measure which would have added state constitutional barriers to redrawing congressional election maps.

A slim majority of voters backed Amendment 85, which would require ballot questions to be written at no higher than an eighth-grade reading level. But the measure still seems unlikely to reach the threshold of 55% voter approval that it needs to pass because it proposes adding language to the state constitution.

Law and order

The election also saw Coloradans back tougher penalties for some crimes while showing skepticism of federal immigration enforcement efforts.

Voters backed harsher punishments for small-time fentanyl crimes with Proposition 132, even though it could cost millions of dollars to implement and is unlikely to help Colorado reverse increasing opioid overdose deaths. Governor-elect Phil Weiser questioned the measure after his victory and said he would rather bolster addiction treatment than send more people to jail.

Voters also supported Proposition 133, which would require life sentences for people convicted of child sex trafficking. Victim advocates opposed this measure, saying it could have unintended consequences, and they have said they’ll lobby lawmakers to pass new laws to protect victims.

At the same time, voters rejected Amendment 81, which would have changed the state constitution to require local law enforcement to report certain criminal suspects to federal immigration authorities. Immigration was one of the top issues for voters in this election, so the fact that this measure failed is another clear sign that Coloradans don’t trust ICE.

Conservative values

There were mixed results for other ballot questions backed by conservative interests.

Voters rejected Amendment 82, which would have added a right to buy and sell natural gas to the state constitution, and Amendment 83, which would have established a state constitutional right to hunt and fish.

But two anti-trans measures look likely to pass.

One of those, Proposition 134, would ban trans kids from playing on school sports teams that align with their gender identity. Three other states passed similar measures in this election and half the states already had them in place before that.

The other anti-trans measure, Proposition 135, would ban doctors from performing surgeries “altering the biological sex characteristics” of children. Trans rights advocates and top medical groups opposed the measure, but it’s not yet clear how they’ll respond to its likely passage.

Here’s a round-up video I did yesterday before new data clarified some of the results mentioned above.

NEED TO KNOW

🛢️ Colorado is struggling to keep up with a growing number of so-called “orphan” oil and gas wells abandoned by their operators. The number of orphan wells is expanding faster than the state’s ability to clean up the sites, and funding challenges are on the horizon. Federal funding for orphan well clean-up is set to run out in 2030 and fees from a shrinking pool of active wells may not cover the growing workload. (Colorado Sun / Mark Jaffe)

🚔 Resource constraints are hindering Colorado law enforcement investigations. The Colorado State Patrol, which investigates highway crashes, acknowledged staff shortages have caused lengthy delays in some probes. (CBS Colorado / Karen Morfitt) A crime lab that serves several metro Denver counties is facing new funding concerns while already dealing with a substantial backlog. (CBS Colorado / Tori Mason)

⛑️ Colorado is pausing a plan to overhaul search-and-rescue management while it considers a county sheriff’s proposal to lead statewide operations. The original plan would have put Colorado Parks and Wildlife in charge of search and rescue statewide, replacing a system in which county sheriffs coordinate local operations with volunteers. (Colorado Sun / Jason Blevins)

COMING UP

🤔 Now that the election is over, I’ll be looking for new topics to report on. I’ve got a long list of my own story ideas, but I really want to hear from you about what you’re most interested in. Shoot me a message at theblanketnews@gmail.com or DM me on any of the apps if you have suggestions.

Tens of millions of dollars have poured into Colorado’s 2026 ballot measure campaigns, as issue committees that face no spending limits try to sway voters on a wide range of legal and policy questions.

Dozens of issue committees are supporting and opposing 14 statewide ballot questions this year, covering everything from taxes and public safety to transgender rights and conservation.

Issue committees in Colorado are allowed to collect and spend unlimited amounts as long as they follow election finance rules and report some basic information to the Secretary of State, which publishes the data on its website.

Statewide, issue committees have spent over $47 million on ballot questions this year, which marks the highest total since the 2020 election, according to Colorado Newsline.

The Biggest Spenders

Ten issue committees spent more than $1 million each this election cycle, and 10 more spent over $100,000 each.

A group called Yes for Colorado Kids was the biggest spender, dropping nearly $6.9 million to support Proposition NN, which would allow the state to keep tax money it would otherwise have to refund to taxpayers in order to spend it on education and other programs for kids. Yes for Colorado Kids is primarily funded by national and state-level teacher’s unions and a left-leaning, Colorado-based group called Gary Advocacy.

The next biggest spender was the Colorado Voter Trust Initiative, which doled out nearly $5.8 million to support Amendment 84. That measure would require Coloradans who vote by mail to write the last four digits of their social security, driver’s license or other state-issued ID number on the outside of their ballot envelope. The group’s contributors are all so-called “dark money” organizations that make it hard to trace the origins of their funding.

A group called Protect Colorado’s Land and Water, Prevent Wildfires was the third-biggest spender. It put $5.3 million behind Proposition 137, which would direct taxes from sports equipment sales and rentals toward conservation, wildfire mitigation and outdoor recreation. The group’s major funders are Colorado-based environmental organizations, The Nature Conservancy and Western Resource Advocates.

A coalition of consumer advocates, conservationists and left-leaning dark money groups called No Pollution in the Constitution came in fourth, spending more than $3.1 million to fight Amendment 82, which would add a right to buy and sell natural gas to the state constitution.

In fifth place, backing a slew of conservative ballot questions, was Brighter Colorado. The group receives most of its funding from conservative dark-money organizations linked to the Republican Party.

The Most Lopsided Issue Spending

Most of the ballot measure spending disproportionately came on one side or the other.

The backers of Proposition 137’s proposal to funnel sporting goods taxes to conservation spent nearly $850 for every $1 spent by their opponents.

The supporters of Amendment 84’s proposal to add ID requirements for mail-in voting spent about $63 for every $1 spent by the opposition.

Groups backing Amendment 85, which would require ballot questions to be written so an eighth-grader can understand them, outspent opponents 20-to-1.

A similar spending ratio was seen in favor of Amendment 83, which would add a right to hunt and fish to the state constitution.

Opponents of two anti-trans measures, Propositions 134 and 135, outspent supporters by a more than 10-to-1 ratio.

Only one ballot measure saw no spending in opposition: Amendment 86, which asks voters to change the state’s constitution to add obstacles to redrawing the districts that decide Colorado’s delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives.

NEED TO KNOW

😵‍💫 Colorado’s ballot questions this year are the most confusing in the country, according to an analysis from the election information site Ballotpedia. (Axios / Alayna Alvarez, see the analysis)

⚕️ Colorado healthcare officials are preparing to help Medicaid recipients navigate program changes that could affect their eligibility. The efforts include an online self-screener tool to determine if they are subject to new requirements and a page with answers to frequently asked questions about the changes. (Colorado Newsline / Sara Wilson)

🧑‍🧑‍🧒 Colorado’s child welfare system still has a disproportionate number of Black and Latino kids in foster care, though the disparities are decreasing. State officials have made efforts to build out support services and keep kids with relatives when possible. (Colorado Sun / Jennifer Brown)

🏔️ Avalanche season is starting again, and the Colorado Avalanche Information Center is working to keep people safe in the backcountry. The state-supported organization tracks avalanche conditions, issues forecasts and investigates accidents to learn about how to better prevent and respond to them. (Colorado Sun / Betsy Welch) At least one skiing party has reported getting caught in an avalanche already this year. (CBS News / Jennifer McRae)

COMING UP

🗳️ Election day is next Tuesday, November 3, and your ballot has to get to your county clerk by 7 p.m. or it won’t be counted. Mailing it now risks missing the cutoff. In this video, I explain how to find your nearest ballot dropbox or polling station to make sure your vote gets recorded:

Colorado voters will decide this election whether to add a right to hunt and fish to the state constitution, raising questions about how the proposal could affect the state’s wildlife management policies.

The measure, known as Amendment 83, would establish a constitutional right to hunt and fish using “traditional methods,” though that term isn’t defined in the law. The right to hunt would not cover non-game species, endangered animals or species that are illegal to hunt under federal law.

Additionally, Amendment 83 would make hunting and fishing “the preferred means” of managing fish and wildlife in Colorado. A state law already says effectively the same thing, but this proposal would put it in the state’s constitution, making it harder to change.

However, Amendment 83 also includes a clause that says lawmakers and government agencies can regulate hunting, fishing, and wildlife management in ways that are “necessary for sound scientific wildlife conservation and management, public safety, or to preserve the future of hunting and fishing opportunities.”

The proposal has been backed by nearly $3 million in spending by pro-hunting groups that have ties to firearms companies, sporting goods manufacturers and retailers, and conservative political activists.

That spending is almost 20 times more than the roughly $150,000 spent by opposition groups with ties to progressive-leaning environmental and animal welfar activists.

Proponents say Amendment 83 is needed to protect economically and culturally important activities amid declining participation and changing views among the general public.

But one of the primary concerns raised by opponents of Amendment 83 is that it could set off a wave of expensive lawsuits by hunters and fishers challenging policies they don’t agree with.

Two dozen states have adopted constitutional rights to hunting and fishing. All of those amendments were passed within the last 30 years, except Vermont, whose constitution has included hunting and fishing rights since 1777.

Those policies have sometimes led to litigation, like the case of a North Carolina hunter who unsuccessfully sued the state over laws banning hunting on Sundays. But courts have been reluctant to rule that “right to hunt” amendments override the ability of lawmakers and regulators to make policy.

“They usually come out saying the same things they would before – that the state has the authority to pass these regulations,” said Alex Erwin, a wildlife biologist and law professor at the University of Florida.

Supporters say legal fights are part of the democratic process and won’t cost taxpayers additional money.

“It’s no different than what’s currently done,” said Dan Gates, the executive director of the pro-hunting group Coloradans for Responsible Wildlife Management. “There’s litigation that goes along with wildlife policy throughout the country.”

Opponents of Amendment 83 also say it’s unfair to enshrine hunting and fishing in the state constitution because it creates a special status that wouldn’t exist for hikers, bikers, skiers and other outdoor recreationalists.

“To elevate one user group over everybody else in the Constitution is a pretty wild proposition,” said Mandy Culbertson, the communications director for Wildlife for All, a conservation group opposed to Amendment 83.

Proponents point out that the current wildlife management system in Colorado and the rest of the country uses hunting and fishing license fees as a primary funding source.

“It doesn’t mean that anything needs to be more important than one of the other activities,” Gates said. “But there has to be some consideration about, how do you obtain your objectives.”

It’s not necessarily unusual for state constitutions to include provisions that offer specific rights to relatively niche constituencies.

“State constitutions are just a littering ground for people’s pet projects that you can convince enough voters to vote on,” Erwin said.

But Amendment 83 may not change much in practice, he said.

“It’s pretty easy to justify a lot of hunting restrictions as long as the state can show that there’s some sort of conservation need to do it.”

NEED TO KNOW

🚆 The government body overseeing a major statewide rail project hired a new election chief after a communication breakdown led to 800,000 Colorado voters receiving ballots with a question about rail transportation taxes that they were not eligible to vote on. Former Jefferson County Clerk Pam Anderson took over from Brent E. Butzin, who resigned earlier this month. (Denver Post / Katie Langford) I spoke with Anderson about the ballot error before she took the job. (See last week’s newsletter)

🏫 Public school enrollment is dropping in Colorado largely because the state has fewer children, according to Terri Wilson, an education expert at University of Colorado Boulder. Wilson also highlighted how affordability and housing availability affect where families with children choose to live, and how that impacts local school enrollment numbers. (Rocky Mountain PBS / Cormac McCrimmon)

🍃 Colorado marijuana consumers could be at risk of consuming unsafe products due to lax oversight from state officials. A government audit of the state’s Marijuana Enforcement Division and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment found the agencies should improve oversight of private labs that test products and should act more swiftly when they identify product safety risks. The findings echo the conclusions of recent reports by ProPublica and the Denver Gazette. (Denver Gazette / Chris Osher, read the audit)

🧑‍⚖️ A state judge tossed an effort to nix a ballot measure that would implement a graduated income tax in Colorado. Opponents of the tax proposal, known as Amendment 87, said supporters used paid signature gatherers who weren’t properly registered to get their measure on the ballot. But the judge said that wasn’t serious enough to merit removing the question from voters’ ballots. (The Sum & Substance / Ed Sealover, read more about Amendment 87)

COMING UP

🎉 This week marked the 6-month anniversary of the launch of The Blanket, which means it’s once again time to consider what’s going well and what could be improved. As I mentioned in a recent video, one of the biggest challenges I’m facing right now is financial sustainability. I’m going to slow my production pace in the coming weeks and months to free up time and energy to pursue new funding opportunities and potential partnerships with traditional media outlets. I’ll still use this weekly newsletter as a space to curate accountability and solutions coverage from other outlets, but I really need to focus on how to better monetize my talents and efforts, so you may see less original reporting here in the near term. As always, please feel free to send me any comments or questions that you think might be helpful. Thanks for reading!

Coloradans will decide this fall whether to make it harder to redraw the state’s congressional election maps outside a process that voters approved in 2018.

The ballot question, called Amendment 86, asks voters to change the state’s constitution to add obstacles to redrawing the districts that decide Colorado’s delegation to the U.S. House of Representatives.

In 2018, voters greenlit an independent commission to draw up congressional election maps every ten years after the national census. The maps the commission drew after the 2020 census created four safe Democratic seats and four safe Republican ones.

But both parties wanted to ask voters this year to change those maps through ballot initiatives. Democrats backed a proposal that would have given them a chance to win seven of those eight seats, and the Republican counterproposal would have given that party a chance to win five of the eight.

The state Supreme Court, however, shot down those plans, saying they would violate a rule that limits ballot questions to a single subject. Since the proposals would have changed both the process for how the districts are drawn, as well as the actual boundaries of those districts, they didn’t meet that requirement.

And that’s likely the impetus for Amendment 86. The proposal specifically targets redistricting attempts like the ones rejected by the state Supreme Court.

If Amendment 86 passes, any proposed election maps would have to go through three public hearings, and then be approved by the independent commission that set the current maps as well as the Colorado Supreme Court.

Amendment 86 would also prohibit election maps that favor a particular political party or divide communities with shared interests.

The ballot question is backed by the conservative activist group Advance Colorado, which is behind several other ballot measures this election cycle.

Supporters say Amendment 86 would reinforce what Coloradans voted for in 2018: an independent commission tasked with drawing congressional maps.

Opponents say voters should be able to approve new maps without needing the sign-off of the commission that drew the current maps in the first place.

While redistricting may seem like a dry, technical process, it’s important because it determines who represents Coloradans in Congress, and it can shape how much influence the state has in the nation’s capitol.

Colorado has been trending more and more towards the Democratic Party over the past two decades, but the state’s representation in the U.S. House remains evenly split between Democrats and Republicans.

The national fight over election maps intensified this year after a major U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the issue, so further redistricting attempts here in Colorado could be coming.

NEED TO KNOW

🧊 Independent data sheds new light on ICE operations in Colorado. A coalition of pro-immigrant advocacy groups called the Colorado Rapid Response Network put out a report recently that’s based on data they’ve collected through a hotline that people can call if they’ve seen ICE operations taking place. My three big takeaways are that ICE has arrested several U.S. citizens, they seem to be increasingly using traffic stops, and questions remain about the agency’s adherence to policies against warrantless arrests. I explain more in this video:

⛓️‍💥 Rifle Correctional Facility is experimenting with giving more freedom and responsibility to incarcerated people who have little time left in their sentences. Inmates and staff say the program can keep inmates on track and prepare them for release by helping them develop work and life skills. (Colorado Sun / Olivia Prentzel, read more about prison reform in Colorado)

🍽️ Colorado food banks are being strained by increased demand as more people struggle to afford food due to rising prices and federal aid cuts. U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet highlighted the challenges in a roundtable this week at the Food Bank of the Rockies. (Colorado Newsline / Lindsey Toomer, CPR News / John Daley, read more about food insecurity in Colorado)

🐻 Car collisions with wildlife are down more than 90% on I-25 between Larkspur and Monument in the 10 months since a $15 million overpass opened. The overpass is the largest of its kind in North America. Colorado drivers will soon have the option of paying a $5 wildlife overpass construction fee to help fund such projects. (Colorado Sun / Olivia Prentzel)

FOLLOWING UP

🚆 In last week’s newsletter I mentioned a ballot printing error that led to nearly 800,000 Colorado voters receiving ballots with a question about rail transportation taxes that they are not eligible to vote on. This week I got some more information on how officials plan to handle vote-counting for the measure, known as 7A. The bottom line is that the process is going to be similar to when a candidate withdraws from a race after ballots get sent out. I explain more in this video:

Coloradans will decide on two ballot measures in the coming weeks that could change voter ID rules and how ballot questions are written in future elections.

Both of the measures – Amendment 84 and Amendment 85 – would change the state’s constitution, meaning they would need at least 55% approval to pass.

What would Amendment 84 do?

The measure known as Amendment 84 would require Coloradans who vote by mail to write the last four digits of their social security, driver’s license or other state-issued ID number on the outside of their ballot envelope.

If a voter doesn’t provide an ID number, or if an election judge can’t confirm the number, the voter would be notified and the ballot would not be counted until the person confirms their identity with election officials.

The measure would affect the vast majority of Colorado voters, more than 90% of whom have cast their ballots by mail in recent elections.

Current law requires voters to provide ID when they register to vote as well as the first time they vote by mail, in certain circumstances.

Current law also requires voters to sign their ballot envelopes. Election officials use machines to help them check those signatures against the signatures they already have on file. If there’s a problem, voters are notified and given an opportunity to verify their ballot so it can be counted.

The signature requirement would stay in place alongside the added ID number requirement if Amendment 84 passes.

Most states use signature verification for mail-in voting, but some have added extra ID requirements in recent years like those proposed by Amendment 84. Proposals similar to Amendment 84 are on the ballot this year in California, Arizona and Nevada.

The campaign in favor of Amendment 84 is funded by organizations that obscure the origins of their money. The measure’s registered representatives, Suzanne Taheri and Chuck Broerman, both have been active in Republican politics. They did not respond to requests for comment.

Supporters of increased voter ID requirements argue they improve trust in elections and prevent voter fraud, even though voter fraud is already very rare. Colorado has seen fewer than two dozen people convicted of voter fraud in the past two decades, according to a database compiled by the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank.

Beth Hendrix, the executive director of the League of Women Voters of Colorado, which opposes Amendment 84, called it “a solution looking for a problem.”

Opponents also say the measure poses privacy risks and could lead to ballot access issues for various communities.

“Older voters, voters with disabilities, rural voters – anyone without easy access to transportation or the internet to fix any clerical error – their votes may go uncounted,” Hendrix said.

The measure could cost a few million dollars to implement, with the costs split between counties and the state, according to nonpartisan legislative analysts.

What would Amendment 85 do?

The measure known as Amendment 85 would require ballot questions to be written so an eighth-grader can understand them, and it would ban laws that could interfere with that goal.

Ballot questions are written by officials on the state’s Title Board, which is required by current law to translate the underlying legal language of each proposal into a yes-or-no question accessible to a wide audience.

Despite the existing plain-language requirements, Colorado ballot questions are often notably complicated. CBS Colorado used a well-known readability test on this year’s ballot measures and found that most exceeded an eighth-grade reading level – including Amendment 85 itself, which scored at an 11th-grade level.

Supporters of Amendment 85 say setting the eighth-grade reading-level requirement would give the Title Board a clearer benchmark for determining what counts as plain language. They point out that the average adult in Colorado reads at about an 8th grade level and they argue that the average citizen should be able to understand what they’re voting on.

While readability requirements for ballot measures are common in other states, only a handful including Arkansas, Rhode Island and New York specify an eighth-grade reading level.

Opponents of Amendment 85 emphasize that they don’t oppose accessible ballot language. But they note that Coloradans already have access to easy-to-understand information about ballot initiatives in the form of voter guides produced by political advocates and media organizations, plus the official, nonpartisan descriptions contained in the “blue book.”

Putting the eighth-grade standard in the constitution and barring laws that might interfere with it could lead to more legal fights, opponents say.

“It ties the hands of our elected legislature and will likely increase the need for the courts to decide what certain language means,” said Hendrix of the League of Women Voters of Colorado, which opposes the measure.

Amendment 85 is backed by the conservative activist group Advance Colorado, which is supporting several other measures on this year’s ballot. The group did not respond to requests for comment.

Some centrist and progressive advocates have also gotten behind Amendment 85, though several prominent progressive groups oppose it.

NEED TO KNOW

🫢 A lack of communication among officials led to nearly 800,000 Colorado voters receiving ballots with a question about rail transportation taxes that they are not eligible to vote on. The measure, known as 7A, would raise taxes on communities near a planned rail project to help pay for it. Rail officials changed the boundaries that defined which communities would be asked to vote on the measure but failed to tell county clerks. It’s not yet clear exactly how officials plan to handle the error. (9News / Marshall Zellinger)

🫥 The head of the Colorado Department of Human Services, Michelle Barnes, resigned without explanation this week amid intensifying scrutiny of the agency, which provides services for vulnerable populations like children, older adults, and people with disabilities and mental health challenges. Agency employees have complained about poor leadership, discrimination and retaliation since Barnes took over as executive director in 2019, leading to nearly $3 million in payouts aimed at settling those claims. (Denver Post / Katie Langford)

🤑 Colorado’s Republican candidate for governor, Victor Marx, is appealing a fine of more than $57,000 for over 200 alleged campaign finance violations. An official handling the case called the scale of Marx’s alleged violations “without precedent” and said they were “intentional,” but Marx has denied wrongdoing and claimed the fine was politically motivated. (Colorado Politics / Marianne Goodland, read more about the allegations) Marx’s campaign also has reported some unusual, though not necessarily illegal, expenditures. (CPR / Ben Markus)

🧐 There are a few reasons to question claims by federal prosecutors that international leaders of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua were behind a violent 2024 kidnapping in Denver. Three men were sentenced this week to 20 years in prison after pleading guilty to the crime, but at least two of those men have denied being members of the gang. I explain more in this video report:

FOLLOWING UP

⚕️ I’ve gotten a lot of social media comments on my coverage about trans kids’ healthcare in Colorado, many of which have focused on the medical debate around gender-affirming care. This week, the Colorado Medical Society, the state’s largest doctors’ group, publicly stated its opposition to Proposition 135, which aims to ban gender surgeries for minors. The group acknowledged that doctors have different opinions about gender-affirming care, but it said the proposed ban conflicts with its view that doctors and patients should have the ability to make decisions that are “guided by medical expertise, science and the unique needs of each patient.” (Erin in the Morning / S. Baum)

Colorado voters will decide four ballot proposals related to taxes and spending this year that could have big impacts on the state budget, which is struggling to keep pace with rising costs and growing demands for public services.

All of the measures would affect how Colorado collects and spends taxes amid a years-long cycle of budget shortfalls related to TABOR, the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, which limits government spending and requires taxpayer refunds when the state collects taxes above the budget cap.

The costs of healthcare and other government programs have grown faster than anticipated in recent years, and reductions in federal funding have shifted more costs onto states. But Colorado’s budget hasn’t been able to accommodate those changes, because TABOR doesn’t allow spending to grow just because program costs go up.

TABOR limits the year-to-year growth of the budget by tying it to the state’s population growth and consumer inflation. So when program costs grow faster than the TABOR limits, lawmakers have to make cuts to stay within the constraints.

The cycle seems due to repeat again in the coming year, with recent projections estimating the state could face a shortfall of well over $1 billion.

What would Proposition NN do?

One of the ballot measures, Proposition NN, would allow the state to keep tax money it would otherwise have to refund under TABOR in order to spend it – at least initially – on education and other programs for kids.

It is the only measure that lawmakers voted to put on this year’s ballot. The campaign in favor is backed mainly by teachers unions and progressive activists.

The measure would create a new state fund for education and other children’s services. For the first 10 years, lawmakers could use the money only for those purposes, and the state and school districts would have to publicly report how the money is spent. After that, state lawmakers would have more discretion over how to spend it.

Supporters describe Proposition NN as a way to raise billions for schools, but there are a few caveats to that claim.

The measure would indeed raise the TABOR cap by billions of dollars, however for at least the next few years, the actual amount of additional money the state would get for education would likely be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. It’s hard to predict accurately beyond that, because it’s unclear how the economy might change and how those changes could impact future tax revenues.

The amount available for schools and kids in the near term could also be smaller if Proposition NN passes alongside Proposition 137, discussed below. The latter measure would direct tax money toward conservation and recreation, and exempt that money from TABOR limits, effectively reducing the amount available for the programs that Proposition NN would fund.

Supporters say the long-term benefits of giving more potential funding to education weigh in favor of passing Proposition NN, even if the initial increases in actual funding are modest.

“We support both, while acknowledging the imperfection of the system, in its current form,” said Joshua Mantell, the director of government affairs at the progressive Bell Policy Center.

Two separate, state-funded studies last year recommended Colorado increase spending by billions of dollars to meet its K-12 education goals. Six in ten Coloradans who responded to a poll last year said schools need more money to see improvements.

Critics of Proposition NN focus on the likelihood that it would reduce or eliminate TABOR refunds that could otherwise send hundreds of dollars a year back to each taxpayer.

Supporters counter that TABOR refunds are generally too small to solve broader affordability problems, and point to the well-established economic benefits of education spending.

What would Proposition 137 do?

The measure mentioned above, Proposition 137, would direct taxes from sports equipment sales and rentals toward conservation, wildfire mitigation and outdoor recreation. It would also make that money exempt from TABOR limits.

Conservation groups are the primary funders of the campaign in support of the measure, though it also has support from outdoor groups and businesses.

The measure would direct an estimated $175 million a year in existing sales tax revenue from sporting goods to conservation, wildfire mitigation, water protection and outdoor recreation. It would not raise the sales tax rate or directly increase prices.

Proposition 137 would also make that sales tax revenue exempt from TABOR. In years when total tax revenues are above the TABOR cap, the measure could reduce or eliminate taxpayer refunds. And, as explained above, it could cut into the additional money available for education under Proposition NN if both measures pass.

Learn more about the state budget

In years when the state collects less than the TABOR cap, the conservation money would come out of the state’s general fund. That could leave less for other programs, though the measure does explicitly protect tax credits for low-income households.

Supporters say Colorado needs more money for conservation, watershed protection and wildfire preparation as climate change brings hotter temperatures and increased risks to some of the state’s most valuable economic assets.

Opponents question the science behind wildfire prevention programs that cut down trees to manage fire risks, arguing money should be directed instead toward hardening structures. But supporters of Proposition 137 say it’s not an either-or choice, since some of the additional funding would go to hardening efforts as well.

Opponents also point to the possibility of reduced taxpayer refunds, but supporters say the programs Proposition 137 would support are worth the investment.

“Each is governed and audited by nonpartisan boards or has financial accountability directed by state law and is subject to state audit,” said “yes” campaign spokesperson Curtis Hubbard. “This guarantees the money directly supports vital water, land, and wildfire protection projects as well as efforts to bolster outdoor access.”

What would Amendment 87 do?

A third proposal, Amendment 87, would cut most people’s income taxes while making the highest-earning people and companies pay more. The tax hike on high earners would generate additional money for education, children’s programs and healthcare.

The campaign supporting Amendment 87 is backed by progressive activist networks, some of which support propositions NN and 137 as well.

Amendment 87 would replace Colorado’s flat 4.4% income tax rate with a graduated system that taxes income in bands. Each band would be taxed at a different rate, as shown in the graphic below.

People and businesses making less than $500,000 per year would see their taxes decrease by roughly $200-$300 per year. Income up to $25,000 would be taxed at 3.7%, while income between $25,000 and $100,000 would be taxed at 4.2%. The current 4.4% tax rate would stay in effect for income between $100,000 and $500,000.

Those earning more than half a million dollars per year could see their tax bills go up by thousands or tens of thousands of dollars. Tax rates on incomes between $500,000 to $750,000 would rise to 7.4%, incomes between $750,000 and $1 million would be taxed at 7.9%, and anything over $1 million would be taxed at 8.4%.

The measure is expected to raise about $2.7 billion a year in additional tax revenues. The money would be exempt from TABOR and directed toward K-12 education, healthcare and early childcare and education. And it requires an annual public audit of how the money is spent.

Supporters say the constitutional amendment would make the tax system fairer and help replace funding lost as federal tax and spending changes shift more responsibility onto Colorado. They argue that higher-income households and large corporations can and should contribute more.

Opponents have claimed raising rates on high earners could discourage investment, push wealthy residents and businesses to leave, or reduce job creation. But economic research disputes those claims, and supporters say the tax cuts for lower-income people will keep money in Colorado.

“Lower income people, middle-income people tend to spend all their money in the local economy,” said Chris Stiffler, a senior economist at the progressive Colorado Fiscal Institute. “So a dollar given to them … jump starts the spending multiplier better than say someone who’s taking that dollar and spending on a stock or buying a trip to Paris.”

Opponents of Amendment 87 also argue that the state should reduce waste and administrative spending before being trusted with more taxpayer dollars. Supporters acknowledge those efforts are worthwhile but say the savings would be too small to cover multibillion-dollar shortfalls for essential programs like healthcare and education.

“There’s not like a giant waste, fraud and abuse chunk of our pie,” Stiffler said.

What would Proposition 136 do?

The fourth measure, Proposition 136, wouldn’t actually change anything if it passes on its own, but it’s meant to interfere with Amendment 87 by limiting its impact if both measures pass.

Proposition 136 is backed by conservative activist groups behind several other measures on this year’s ballot.

The goal of the measure is to lock in Colorado’s individual and corporate income tax rates at the current flat rate of 4.4%. That would conflict with the graduated income tax system proposed by Amendment 87 described above.

When two conflicting measures pass in the same election, Colorado law says the one with the most votes in favor should prevail. But that scenario would likely result in a lawsuit or an intervention by state lawmakers to clarify any uncertainty.

* Correction: This version has been updated to remove an inaccurate description of the required share of votes needed for passage of Amendment 87. The measure requires a simply majority to pass.

NEED TO KNOW

🗳️ Voting rights groups plan to send around 1,000 nonpartisan monitors to polling places in Colorado, up from about 300 during the 2024 election. The volunteers will help voters, document ballot access issues, and report potential intimidation amid heightened fears about political interference and immigration enforcement near voting sites. Most Colorado voters mail their ballots; fewer than one in 10 went to the polls in person in the 2024 general election. (Colorado Newsline / Sara Wilson, Secretary of State press release)

🔌 Xcel electricity customers have been experiencing more frequent and longer power outages since 2024, according to a report from the state’s Public Utilities Commission. The regulator is still looking into the reasons behind the uptick. (Colorado Sun / Mark Jaffe)

⛈️ Scientists in Colorado are trying to better understand how to protect hail-prone communities from more destructive storms linked to climate change. (High Country News / Hannah Covington)

🪲 Jefferson County is expanding a program that helps private landowners clear pine beetle-infested trees to limit the spread of the bugs, which are devastating Front Range forests. (CPR News / Amanda Williams)

👥 State lawmakers are looking to cut funding for peer-led addiction counseling programs, which have cost far more than expected and raised questions about their efficacy. (Colorado Sun / Jennifer Brown)

⛓️ People held at the ICE detention center in Aurora say the privately run facility is rife with violence, inadequate medical care and other poor conditions, echoing numerous similar reports from that immigration jail and others across the country stretching back years. (Denver Post / Seth Klamann and Elizabeth Hernandez)

⚖️ The state is suing ICE over its plans to reopen a closed-down prison in Hudson, outside Denver, as Colorado’s second immigration jail. Two other lawsuits by private groups have already targeted the proposed facility, but the state brings additional legal firepower to the fight. I explain more in this video report.

COMING UP

🏀 It’s NBA basketball season and the Nuggets have their first preseason game this weekend. I don’t follow American football (sorry Broncos fans) but I do love hoops. I may use this section of the newsletter to occasionally focus my accountability lens on the on-court performance of the Nuggets players and their coaching staff. If you’re overwhelmingly against hearing my basketball takes, let me know, and I’ll consider sticking to hard news rather than hardwood analysis.

Colorado voters will decide in a few weeks whether to add a right to buy and sell natural gas to the state constitution, raising questions about the potential impacts of the vaguely-worded ballot measure.

The proposal, known as Amendment 82, would add two sentences to the state constitution:

“Consumers have the right to purchase natural gas for cooking or heating in homes or businesses throughout the state,” and “distributors and utilities have the right to sell natural gas for homes or businesses.”

The proposed constitutional amendment is one of several initiatives that conservative activist networks organized to place on this year’s ballot. The groups behind the measure, Brighter Colorado and Advance Colorado, did not respond to requests for comment.

A coalition of environmental and progressive advocacy groups called No Pollution in the Constitution opposes the measure.

“This is not about consumer benefit,” Katie Farnan, an opposition campaign spokesperson, told The Blanket. “What it’s actually about is whether you agree that one corporate interest should be able to have special rights in our constitution.”

What’s the point of Amendment 82?

Ostensibly, Amendment 82 is meant to protect Colorado consumers and businesses from the state’s efforts to phase out natural gas in the coming decades as it moves away from fossil fuels in favor of renewable energy sources.

Natural gas, which is mostly methane, is currently legal and widely available. There were roughly 2 million residential natural gas consumers in Colorado in 2024, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration – about one-third of the state’s population.

Residential usage accounts for about 31% of natural gas consumption in Colorado, while electricity generation accounts for about 34%, and industrial and commercial use accounts for about 36%, according to the EIA.

Natural gas is a significant contributor to climate change and state government programs have encouraged switching away from household appliances that use it. Some cities including Denver and Crested Butte have restricted gas appliances in certain buildings.

As more people switch to electric appliances, natural gas providers could lose customers, meaning the cost of supplying gas would be spread across fewer buyers, potentially increasing their bills.

But Amendment 82 doesn’t necessarily control prices, which are regulated by the state’s Public Utilities Commission, known as the PUC. And it doesn’t include any specific protections for consumers or businesses.

What are the concerns about Amendment 82?

Opponents say putting the right to buy and sell natural gas in Colorado’s constitution could invite wide-ranging interpretations, especially because the proposed amendment is so vague.

Other states have enacted proposals aimed at protecting natural gas users but none have added them to their constitution.

The main concern is that the measure could provide a basis for challenging state and local policies tied to climate goals.

“This constitutional change is basically this one size fits all mandate that supersedes that kind of local authority,” Farnan said. “It is intentionally misleading and will handcuff Colorado’s ability to hold corporate polluters accountable, because it basically gives them a new legal tool.”

Producers and consumers might argue also that the amendment requires the state to subsidize natural gas or otherwise intervene in the market.

Moreover, some political observers say the proposed amendment could set off a back-and-forth fight to decide energy policy at the ballot box, with various interest groups asking voters complicated regulatory questions that might be better handled by lawmakers and regulators with help from experts.

“I think that that is something for voters to consider, given that we are trying to move forward in this state and figure out ways to work together to meet the needs of all Coloradans,” Farnan said.

NEED TO KNOW

🧐 Colorado’s open-meetings law could adopt further reforms to improve government transparency, according to the state’s leading open-government group. The Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition is calling for several changes, including mandatory online posting of meeting notices and other information, livestreaming of public meetings, and letting people record meetings themselves. (Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition / Jeffrey A. Roberts)

🏢 Two advocacy groups are suing in federal court over plans to reopen a prison in Hudson as Colorado’s second ICE detention center. The groups claim the Department of Homeland Security violated federal environmental law by failing to study potential environmental impacts of the project. The case is separate from a state-court lawsuit seeking to force the town to enforce zoning requirements on the facility. (Colorado Newsline / Sara Wilson, read more about the Hudson facility)

💸 Individual health-insurance premiums in Colorado are expected to rise an average of 10% in 2027. State and federal subsidies could offset some of the increased costs for lower-income people. (Colorado Sun / John Ingold)

🏳️‍⚧️ The Trump administration’s threats against doctors have disrupted gender-affirming care for trans kids in Colorado. But the legal fight isn’t over. I explain more in this video report:

FOLLOWING UP

📊 In last week’s newsletter, I mentioned new forecasts related to Medicaid costs in Colorado. After that edition was published, further details came out about the possibility of another $1 billion-plus state budget shortfall next year. I dug into what’s behind the latest estimates and what it means for taxpayers:

Colorado voters will decide this election season whether to force local law enforcement to help federal immigration officials, as the Trump administration continues its unpopular mass deportation efforts.

The ballot measure, known as Amendment 81, would change Colorado’s constitution to require law enforcement to determine the immigration status of anyone charged with a violent crime and anyone charged with any crime if they were previously convicted of a felony.

If local cops can’t confirm that the person charged has lawful immigration status, they would have to report them to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the parent agency of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

Amendment 81 is backed by conservative activist networks that are behind a majority of this year’s ballot measures.

The backers have mounted virtually no public campaign to promote the measure, but Republican candidates and supporters are promoting it in their voting guides, according to Christina Adams, the president of the Eagle County Republican Women Club, which is one of the measure’s registered supporters.

“It’s because of all the people that have been murdered by illegal aliens,” Adams told The Blanket. “People want to be safe and secure.”

When pushed for specifics on the connection between crime and immigration, Adams tried and failed to look up supporting statistics while on the phone with The Blanket. She then recounted an anecdote of an assault she said one of her friends experienced before abruptly ending the call.

Research has consistently found that unauthorized immigrants do not increase crime rates.

An opposition campaign that launched last week has countered that Amendment 81 could harm rather than help public safety efforts.

“We’ve seen aggressive enforcement actions here in Colorado that impact everyone,” said Henry Sandman, the co-executive director of the Colorado Immigrant Rights Coalition, the main organization behind the opposition campaign along with the ACLU of Colorado.

Community concerns

Colorado appears to have little appetite for increased cooperation with ICE.

Two-thirds of Coloradans polled in March said that they worry ICE might be detaining the wrong people. That fits into a broader national sentiment of disagreement with the Trump administration’s deportation drive and distrust toward the federal immigration agency whose officers have killed several U.S. citizens this year.

Current law allows – but does not require – Colorado law enforcement to cooperate with ICE in criminal cases, though it restricts cooperation on civil immigration enforcement.

While some Colorado law enforcement agencies choose to cooperate with ICE, some have tried to distance themselves from the federal agency.

Denver Police Chief Ron Thomas said earlier this year that his officers would intervene if they saw ICE agents using excessive force. Gunnison County Sheriff Adam Murdie said last month that he would stop working with ICE after hearing concerns from community members.

Forcing law enforcement to work with ICE could degrade trust between communities and local authorities, Larimer and Jackson county District Attorney Gordon McLaughlin said at the opposition campaign launch last week.

“If victims in the community do not trust that we are fighting for them, they do not pick up the phone, they do not make that call, they do not come into court, they do not report their abuser. That means that law enforcement cannot do our jobs to support victims and keep our community safe,” McLaughlin said.

The statewide associations representing sheriffs and district attorneys have not taken an official position on the measure.

Cost concerns

Opponents of Amendment 81 also say it could increase costs for taxpayers.

Neither the opposition campaign nor analysts who work for the state government cite specific estimates, but both agree that local law enforcement would need additional resources to comply with the requirement to determine the immigration status of the criminal suspects covered by the amendment.

“I can’t imagine that this would not be a huge impact on municipalities,” said Ariane Frosh, policy counsel at the ACLU of Colorado.

Trump’s immigration agenda is already costing Colorado taxpayers thousands of dollars each due to a massive federal funding increase over the past two years, according to an estimate from the progressive Economic Policy Institute think tank.

But the benefits of that spending are far from clear.

Colorado’s relatively high violent crime rates declined last year, following long-term national trends. But only a small share of people recently arrested by immigration authorities have had violent criminal records, making it unlikely that ramped-up ICE activity under Trump contributed to the decrease.

The federal immigration enforcement drive is also disrupting labor supplies in some industries and removing economically productive immigrants from the country – undermining the administration’s arguments that deportations will help the economy.

NEED TO KNOW

⚕️ The rising cost of Medicaid is crowding out other public programs in Colorado’s state budget, meaning more cuts to healthcare aid are likely coming. Medicaid spent $158 million more than it budgeted for last year, and projections show that figure could increase to $443 million this year. (CPR News / John Daley, 9News / Marshall Zellinger, read our explainer on how the state budget works)

💸 Backers of two anti-trans ballot measures paid to gather signatures to get their measures on the ballot, but didn’t report those payments to state election authorities as the law requires, according to a complaint filed by opponents of the measures. (Colorado Times Recorder / Jamie O’Rourke, read our coverage of the ballot measures)

🧐 Supporters of a ballot measure to implement a graduated income tax in Colorado used paid signature gatherers who weren’t properly registered to get their measure on the ballot, according to a lawsuit filed by opponents. (The Sum & Substance / Ed Sealover)

🔥 Wildfire prevention and mitigation efforts could combine multiple strategies to improve their effectiveness, according to two Colorado-based researchers. Experts sometimes disagree over whether the “best” approach is to quickly suppress fires when they break out, prevent fires by clearing fuel, or manage fires to control how they burn. But the researchers say the various camps should work together to design more holistic strategies. (The Conversation / Tony Cheng and Matt Thompson)

⚖️ Colorado’s state Supreme Court is pausing mandatory livestreaming of criminal proceedings for 90 days while it seeks solutions for repeated intentional disruptions and misuse of the videos. State law dating back to 2023 requires courts to livestream criminal proceedings. But Chief Justice Monica Márquez said that the streams have been illegally recorded and posted on social media, and that viewers have harassed court participants, undermining the integrity of the judicial process. (Denver Post / Shelly Bradbury, read the Supreme Court directive)

🖊️ The Colorado secretary of state’s office is taking action on fraudulent business registrations under a law that went into effect in August. Officials marked nearly 13,000 entities as fraudulent and deleted more than 10,000 others over the last month, using expanded powers in the new law to target fraud networks using fake companies to cover their tracks. (Denver Gazette / Mark Samuelson, read the secretary of state’s press release)

FOLLOWING UP

🔍 I mentioned last week that I’d be doing more “ask me anything” videos. Here’s the latest installment. I’ve been getting a lot of questions about “bias” in my reporting, so I decided to lay out what I think about it. Let me know your thoughts!

Leave a comment

Colorado voters will decide on two ballot measures this fall that could impact trans kids’ ability to participate in sports and receive gender-affirming healthcare.

The measures, known as propositions 134 and 135, come as Colorado is fighting the Trump administration’s efforts to force schools to abandon trans-inclusive policies and hospitals to stop providing gender-affirming care for trans kids.

Both ballot measures would implement policies that are in line with the Trump administration’s agenda.

Colorado has high levels of support for pro-LGBTQ policies, suggesting the measures could face an uphill battle at the polls.

“They’re kind of anti-Colorado,” said Bruce Parker, the executive director of the non-profit advocacy group Rocky Mountain Equality, which is opposing the measures. “I’m just not interested in it and I don’t think the state is either.”

Watch the full interview with Parker below 👇

Who is behind the ballot measures?

The conservative activists Erin Lee of Protect Kids Colorado and Michele Austin of Protect Our Children are behind both anti-trans ballot measures.

Lee and Austin are also the backers of a third ballot measure that would require lifetime prison sentences for child sex trafficking convictions. The Blanket reported last week that tougher penalties may not be the best way to address that issue.

Neither Austin nor Protect Our Children maintain much of a public profile, but Protect Kids Colorado advertises that its mission is to “mobilize the people of Colorado and the Church to engage with biblical and biological truth.”

Lee said she shares her organization’s “biblical worldview” but denied the measures are inspired by Christian beliefs.

“I’m not ashamed of being a Christian, but I can’t emphasize enough that we are a we-the-people grassroots movement, where absolutely everyone is welcome,” she said.

Watch the full interview with Lee below 👇

How would Proposition 134 impact trans kids in sports?

All school sports in Colorado, from elementary through the collegiate level, would be impacted by proposition 134.

The measure would ban transgender girls from playing on girls sports teams, and it would only allow transgender boys to play on boys teams if there’s no girls team to play on. Co-ed teams would remain open to any student.

Schools would be required to adopt policies for determining athletes’ biological sex, which Lee suggested could include DNA testing in the form of a cheek swab.

“Any person who plays sports has to go through a sports physical,” she said. “This would be the least invasive part of that private sex test in the privacy of your doctor’s office.”

The supporters of the measure say it’s meant to ensure fairness and safety for athletes. But multiple studies in recent years have found little evidence of competitive advantages for trans athletes.

Opponents say excluding trans students from school sports puts kids who are already vulnerable to bullying and discrimination at even greater risk.

“It sends a message to their peers that they’re not equal and that they’re different – and it’s dangerous,” Parker said.

How would Proposition 135 impact trans kids’ healthcare?

Doctors would be banned from performing surgeries “altering the biological sex characteristics” of children, if proposition 135 passes. The measure contains exemptions for circumcision and people “born with a medically verifiable disorder of sex development.”

The measure’s backers point to a lack of consensus in the medical community about whether gender surgeries are appropriate for minors. But it is important to note that major medical associations agree that transgender youth should receive gender-affirming care short of surgery.

Gender surgeries for minors appear to be extremely rare in the United States.

Lee said her support for the ban on gender surgeries for minors is informed by her experience of her own child identifying as transgender.

“I have been bullied by medical professionals who said, if you don’t put your child on a medical pathway to transition, she will commit suicide. And that is an impossible position to put parents in,” she said. “I knew it was not right for my daughter.”

Opponents say the measure would interfere with decisions that should be made by families and their doctors, and some warn it could be a step toward further attacks on healthcare for trans people.

“I think that anyone who thinks that this is just about trans youth surgeries is not paying attention,” Parker said. “They’re going to go after the ability to make that decision for adults next.”

NEED TO KNOW

⏱️ Term limits for Colorado legislators implemented in the 1990s have prevented lawmakers from accumulating experience that could make them more effective. A data analysis, combined with a social science research review, found term limits here led to “a weaker legislative branch that is less capable of meeting the complex challenges that the state faces.” (Colorado’s Political Landscape / Brad Jones)

🍃 Colorado marijuana regulators are slow to take action on potentially harmful products, and retailers use loopholes to keep selling them after they’re identified. The state’s rules for ensuring the safety of marijuana products are also more lax than those in other states. (Denver Gazette and ProPublica / Christopher Osher and Evan Wyloge)

🌲 Coloradans are fighting back against the Trump administration’s ramped-up sales of land leases for oil and gas drilling. A pair of wilderness protection groups is suing the administration, and rural residents are banding together to pressure the federal Department of the Interior to stop or slow the sales. (Colorado Newsline / Chase Woodruff, Colorado Sun / Mark Jaffe)

🔬 Missy Woods, a former forensic scientist for Colorado’s state crime lab, was sentenced to ten years in prison on charges related to manipulating over 1,000 DNA tests over nearly three decades working with the agency. (See our previous coverage)

COMING UP

👋 The Blanket’s audience has been growing steadily over the past few months, so I’m taking the opportunity to reintroduce myself to all the new folks. In the video below, I give my two-minute local news reporter origin story. It’s part of an ongoing series of “ask me anything” videos where I answer your questions about how I do my work. Let me know if there’s something you want me to talk about in a future installment.

Coloradans will decide this fall whether to require lifetime prison sentences for child sex trafficking convictions, even though tougher penalties may not be the best way to address the issue.

Popular portrayals of child sex trafficking have reinforced stereotypes of victims as young girls kidnapped at random by strangers, but in reality traffickers often have close relationships with their victims, like family members or significant others. Many traffickers use social media to recruit and groom their targets.

Child sex trafficking and human trafficking may have increased in Colorado since the COVID-19 pandemic, according to data from the Colorado-based Laboratory to Combat Human Trafficking, the National Human Trafficking Hotline and law enforcement statistics reported to the FBI.

Sex trafficking accounts for the majority of human trafficking cases, and over three-quarters of sex trafficking victims in Colorado in the last ten years have been under the age of 20, according to the FBI data. Women and girls accounted for roughly nine out of ten victims.

A lot of human trafficking goes unreported, meaning the numbers are likely an undercount. On the other hand, an increase in reports might reflect greater public awareness or increased attention from law enforcement, rather than an actual increase in these crimes. Organizations also track data in different ways, which can make comparisons across data sets unreliable.

While it’s difficult to know whether child sex trafficking in Colorado is getting worse, a conservative activist group called Protect Kids Colorado argues that the state’s current laws are too lax. The group is promoting ballot measure 108, which would mandate life sentences for anyone convicted of child sex trafficking.

“Really the goal here is to be a deterrent – to make sure people know, perpetrators know that, you know, this is not a child trafficking friendly state,” the group’s co-founder, Erin Lee, said.

Watch the full interview with Lee 👇

What would the ballot measure do?

Ballot initiative 108 would require a life sentence without the possibility of parole for people convicted of child sex trafficking. The measure does not change the penalties for any other human trafficking crimes, including child labor trafficking.

The change would apply to only about three convictions per year, according to estimates by non-partisan analysts who work for the state legislature. Because of that small scale, the measure wouldn’t generate a significant cost to the state budget – an estimated $100,000 over the next 15 years.

Current law provides for sentences between eight and 24 years for child sex trafficking, though the actual time people spend in prison can be longer due to sentencing enhancements and multi-count convictions.

Boulder District Attorney Michael Dougherty emphasized his belief that human trafficking crimes deserve harsh punishments, and he said current laws already allow for sending perpetrators to prison for long stretches that are sometimes effectively life sentences.

“We’ve never had – not once – a human trafficking case where we’re able to secure conviction where we’re left thinking, this person, we wish we could have sent this person to prison for longer,” Dougherty said.

Lee and other supporters of the measure say the requirement for life sentences without parole would more strongly deter child sex trafficking. But research shows the perceived likelihood of getting caught and prosecuted for a crime plays a bigger role in deterrence than the severity of the eventual penalty.

“Merely upping criminal penalties to the maximum level like this bill does, doesn’t by itself effectively deter,” Denver District Attorney John Walsh said. “I’d rather prosecute a hundred 10-year-penalty cases in this world than two life-without-parole cases, because we’re going to have a bigger impact if we do.”

Concerns about the ballot initiative

Experts who work with victims and study human trafficking say measure 108’s severe penalties could be applied to victims who are forced or coerced into helping their traffickers recruit other people.

Current law says victims can use their victimization as a defense in court. Prosecutors also have the discretion to avoid bringing charges against victims, and the governor has the power to issue pardons.

But even if victims aren’t actually charged or convicted, traffickers may misrepresent the law to dissuade them from coming forward.

Amanda Finger, the co-founder of the Laboratory to Combat Human Trafficking, said her organization already deals with this issue.

“We’re hearing people’s experiences of exploitation but fear to report,” she said.

Watch the full interview with Finger 👇

Another concern is that measure 108 could face legal obstacles in its implementation based on the argument that it is unfair to treat child sex trafficking so much more harshly than other human trafficking crimes.

“That will get a challenge on equal protection grounds that, you know, we’re going to have to be litigating probably for years and will only throw further uncertainty into our ability to prosecute these cases,” Denver District Attorney Walsh said.

What works to fight human trafficking

Many traffickers take advantage of people with unmet economic and social needs, so reducing vulnerabilities like financial precarity, housing insecurity and family instability can help with prevention.

Expanding victim services and using trauma-informed practices can foster the conditions for people to feel safe coming forward and asking for help.

Finger and other advocates have been working to train healthcare workers, educators, law enforcement officers and prosecutors in Colorado on how to work together to help victims heal and seek justice while minimizing the chances of retraumatizing them.

Education can also help victims and their loved ones recognize trafficking and learn where they can get help.

“Every training we’ve done with youth, there’s been some disclosure of an attempt – of someone they knew or of themselves – who experienced exploitation that would rise to the level of labor or sex trafficking,” Finger said.

She said conversations like those can help people recognize exploitation and connect with support.

“That makes a difference when you can have the conversations and just know where to turn,” she said.

NEED TO KNOW

💸 Republican candidate Victor Marx’s campaign for governor is facing a potentially historic fine for alleged fundraising violations. State officials are seeking to fine the campaign over $50,000 for allegedly collecting contributions above legal limits. The campaign could also have to return the excess money or donate it to an unaffiliated charity. Marx has denied intentional wrongdoing and said he will fight the charges, which will be decided at a hearing this month. (9News, August 7 newsletter)

🏳️‍⚧️ Colorado and 20 other states are suing the federal government over a new rule meant to block federal funding for gender-affirming care. The states argue the feds don’t actually have the authority to enforce the rule and that it conflicts with laws requiring states to cover medically necessary treatments. (Erin in the Morning / Erin Reed, Colorado Attorney General’s Office, July 3 newsletter)

🤡 The most powerful conservative activist group in the state, Advance Colorado, dodged my attempts to interview them about a ballot measure they’re supporting, then stole a graphic from the article I published about it. I lay out the full story in this video.

🤓 I attended the Local News Solutions conference in the Denver area last week, and these are my biggest takeaways:

1.) High-quality journalism is not enough; local reporting has to be relevant and actionable in addition to being accurate and timely.

2.) Local reporting has to meet audiences where they’re at, in multimedia formats and styles that they prefer.

3.) There’s still a lot of resistance in Colorado local media to adapting to changes in audience preferences. Many recognize the need to try new things, but few seem to be willing to invest in bold experiments.

I explain my thoughts more fully in this video.

COMING UP

🗳️ Colorado voters will decide 13 ballot measures this fall, covering issues ranging from tax policy and public safety to transgender rights and conservation. Here’s a breakdown of what each measure proposes and who supports it.

The conservative activist group Advance Colorado is backing six of the measures.

Measure 85 would increase penalties for low-level fentanyl offenses. I reported last week on why it likely would not reduce overdose deaths in Colorado.

Measure 95 would require Colorado law enforcement agencies to notify federal immigration authorities when they charge an undocumented person with a crime. Some agencies, including the Gunnison County Sheriff’s Office, have said they do not want to cooperate with ICE, but this measure would leave them no choice.

Measure 177 would amend the state constitution to establish a right to buy and sell natural gas. Opponents say the initiative could undermine health and safety protections. I’m actively reporting on this one and will have more information soon.

Measure 234 would prohibit ballot measures from using language above an eighth-grade reading level. And measure 256 would prevent state officials from redrawing congressional districts to favor a particular political party. I’m still looking into these.

The sixth measure backed by Advance Colorado is measure 232, which would maintain Colorado’s income tax rate at 4.4% for all taxpayers. The initiative is intended to counter measure 195, which would create a graduated income tax system. Under initiative 195, taxes would decrease for Coloradans earning less than $500,000 per year and increase for individuals and businesses earning more than that. I covered measure 195, which is sponsored by the progressive group Protect Colorado’s Future, in a previous post.

Three other ballot measures are backed by the conservative activist group Protect Kids Colorado.

Measure 108, discussed in this newsletter above, would require judges to impose life sentences on anyone convicted of trafficking a minor.

Measure 109 would bar transgender girls from playing on girls’ sports teams, while Measure 110 would ban gender-affirming surgeries for minors. I’ll have a report on those measures in the coming weeks.

Coloradans for Responsible Wildlife Management is backing measure 302, which would amend the state constitution to establish a right to hunt and fish using “traditional methods.” Hunting and fishing are already legal in Colorado, and opponents say the measure could interfere with wildlife management.

Keep It Colorado is supporting measure 308, which would direct taxes from sports-equipment sales toward conservation. I don’t know much about these conservation issues, but I’ll see if I can squeeze in some reporting on them before the election.

The final initiative is measure 362, which is backed by conservative activists and would require Coloradans to verify their identities in order to vote by mail. Opponents say the measure would make voting more difficult without improving election security.

Stay tuned for more on these initiatives as we head toward the election.

Colorado voters will decide this fall whether to enact stricter penalties for possessing and distributing fentanyl, even though harsher punishments are unlikely to address increasing overdose deaths.

Colorado started seeing an increase in overdose deaths related to fentanyl and other synthetic opioid drugs in late 2024, even as overdose death rates at the national level continued a decline that started in 2023.

The factors behind the changing overdose rates are complex. The nationwide decline likely stems from a combination of decreased fentanyl production by organized crime, increased seizures by law enforcement, greater drug tolerance among users, and improved access to addiction treatment and overdose-reversing medications.

The reasons why Colorado is defying that national trend are murky. But the data – and the devastating human stories of fentanyl addiction and overdoses – have become talking points for the conservative, billionaire-backed advocacy group Advance Colorado, which is pushing the dubious idea that the stiffer penalties proposed by ballot initiative 85 would deter drug trafficking and drug use.

Advance Colorado did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

What is fentanyl?

Fentanyl was first developed in the mid-20th century as a painkiller, and for decades its use was mostly limited to legitimate medical settings.

In more recent years, however, criminal organizations figured out how to manufacture and traffic the drug illegally to meet a growing demand for opioids in the United States, spurred in part by overprescription of legal painkillers.

Illicitly produced fentanyl was a big driver of a spike in drug overdose deaths in the United States that started in the mid-2010s and continued until 2023.

Not only are synthetic opioids extremely potent, but the quality and purity of underworld drugs can vary greatly from batch to batch, making it difficult for users to administer consistent dosages. Moreover, fentanyl is sometimes mixed into other illegal drugs, so some users may not even be aware that they are consuming it.

The rapid and substantial increase in overdose deaths across the country in the 2010s and early 2020s contributed to the spread of misinformation about fentanyl and spurred many states including Colorado to enact harsher penalties for the drug. At the end of 2025, the Trump administration labeled illicit fentanyl a “weapon of mass destruction.”

What would the ballot measure do?

Ballot initiative 85 would increase the penalties for people who possess and distribute smaller amounts of fentanyl and other synthetic opioids, without increasing penalties for the most prolific traffickers.

Under current law, possession of less than a gram of fentanyl and other synthetic opioids is a misdemeanor and criminal charges for distribution get more severe for distributing larger amounts of the drug.

If voters pass initiative 85, it would change the current law and make it a felony to possess any amount of fentanyl. That could include drug users who aren’t even aware of fentanyl mixed into other drugs.

Initiative 85 would also apply the harshest trafficking charges available for the distribution of any amount of fentanyl. That would mean that someone who shared a single dose of fentanyl with a friend would face the same potential prison sentence of 8 to 32 years as a trafficker moving large amounts of the drug.

The measure does not provide any additional funding for prevention or treatment of fentanyl addiction and overdoses, though it does mandate treatment for people who are convicted on drug charges.

What could be the consequences?

The measure, if passed, likely would not reduce overdose death rates in Colorado.

A state-commissioned report published in 2024 found that a 2022 law that increased penalties for fentanyl possession in Colorado “did not change” drug overdose death rates. Moreover, those harsher penalties have failed to prevent the increase in overdoses observed since the study was published.

Some experts warn that ratcheting up penalties even more could cause overdose deaths to increase further, in part because users will be more afraid to reach out for help.

The measure could also cost Colorado millions of dollars per year, according to nonpartisan analysts who work for the state legislature.

The increased penalties for fentanyl possession and distribution would send hundreds more Coloradans to prison each year, the analysts estimate. Not only would that further stress a system that is already near capacity, it would also redirect more resources toward incarceration that could otherwise be used for programs to prevent and treat problematic drug use.

Many experts have argued for years that drug addiction and overdoses should be treated as a public health problem rather than as a criminal issue.

“If the war on drugs worked in the 80s and 90s, there wouldn’t be a drug problem,” said Kyle Giddings, the deputy director of the Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition. “We have learned from history that increasing penalties just doesn’t work.”

Watch the full interview with Giddings 👇

NEED TO KNOW

💧 Colorado will not face mandatory water restrictions under a new, short-term federal water management plan for the Colorado River. The federal government’s two-year plan released last week spared Colorado and the other “upper basin” states of Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico — where most of the river’s water originates — while imposing cuts on the “lower basin” states of Arizona, Nevada and California that use more water. The two groups of states have struggled to reach an agreement on how to manage the river, which some measurements show is at record lows after a historically hot and dry winter. (Colorado Sun / Shannon Mullane, Colorado Newsline / Chase Woodruff)

📚 Colorado’s most controversial education cooperative is dissolving after 13 years. Education reEnvisioned Board of Cooperative Educational Services, or ERBOCES, attracted scrutiny recently over its involvement in the launch of a “public Christian school” aimed at testing laws against public funding for religious education as well as its creation of dozens of homeschool enrichment programs that used public money to pay for a wide variety of activities including ski trips and sports camps. ERBOCES was one of 21 co-ops formed by school districts statewide to offer educational programs that a single district might not be able to provide. The co-ops need at least two members, and one of ERBOCES’ last two members voted last week to disband it. (Chalkbeat / Ann Schmike)

🏫 Colorado students showed improvements in math scores and mixed results in literacy on statewide standardized tests called the Colorado Measures of Academic Progress, or CMAS. Newly released data for 2026 showed math scores rose for elementary and middle school students, while fourth and fifth graders’ reading and writing scores increased and middle schoolers’ declined. The data also showed big racial disparities in the scores. The scores come with several caveats, including the fact that parents can opt out, so not all students take the tests. (Chalkbeat / Melanie Asmar, Colorado Sun / Erica Breunlin)

📱 Colorado will get about $615 million from a legal settlement with Facebook and Instagram’s parent company Meta over mental health harms allegedly caused by social media. The payout comes as part of a broader, $18 billion settlement with 47 states that had sued the company. The money will be used for programs to support youth mental health. As part of the deal, Facebook and Instagram will roll out new features designed to limit when and how long kids can use the apps, in addition to stronger filtering of potentially harmful content. (Denver Post / Meg Wingerter)

COMING UP

🏊🚴🏃 I’ve been busy this week getting ready for the Local News Solutions conference in the Denver area (in addition to preparing to compete in the Boulder Sunset triathlon this weekend). Ahead of the conference, I published a video asking for ideas about how to improve local news in Colorado, and I got some great responses. I think conversations about the future of journalism would benefit from more input from audiences, so I’m always open to comments, questions and criticism. Send me a message anytime. I’ll report back next week about what I learn at the conference.

This exclusive investigative reporting is made possible by your support. Please consider a subscription or one-time financial contribution to help us keep bringing you independent solutions and accountability news.

Colorado has updated its official data on complaints against insurance companies, correcting errors and adding missing information identified by The Blanket.

The state’s insurance regulator, the Division of Insurance of the Department of Regulatory Agencies, told The Blanket this week that it has fixed flaws in a public database containing statistics on complaints against health, auto, home and life insurance companies.

“Since you brought this to our attention, we took a look at the data comprehensively to make sure it was accurate,” the agency’s communications director Genna Morton said. “We recognize that some of the data had glitches and inaccuracies in it and we made efforts to correct it.”

The database lists annual statistics stretching back to 2006, showing how many complaints were made about each company in each sector and assigning each company an index score that shows how it compares to its competitors.

But the database has demonstrated shortcomings in terms of timeliness and reliability.

In April, The Blanket notified the Division of Insurance that data from 2020 had never been uploaded and that data from 2024 contained errors that affected the calculations of the index scores. In July, the agency updated the database to correct the 2024 data and add data from 2020 as well as 2025.

However, when the agency was notified that the 2025 data also contained errors, officials decided to go back and verify data from all previous years.

As of August 18, Morton said the agency is “not aware of any further issues at this time.”

What the data shows

The newly validated database provides information that could help consumers when shopping for insurance.

One of those data points is an index score that shows how companies compare with their competitors. An index score over 1 means a company got more complaints than average for a company its size.

For example, Rocky Mountain Health Plans, the worst-rated health insurer with more than 1% market share, had an index score of 4.88, meaning it got 4.88 times more complaints than average for a company its size. The company, a subsidiary of UnitedHealthcare, has a 3.4% market share.

In the auto sector, the worst-rated large insurer was Liberty Mutual Personal Insurance Company with a score of 1.6 and a market share of 1.19%. Another Liberty subsidiary, LM General Insurance Company, had a score of 1.01 and a 0.3% market share.

The worst-rated large home insurer was Nationwide Property and Casualty Insurance Company with a score of 1.53 and a 1.7% market share. Nationwide Insurance Company of America, another company belonging to the same insurance group, had a score of 1.84 and a market share of 0.46%.

The worst-rated large life insurer was Transamerica, belonging to the Aegon insurance group, with a score of 3.6 and a market share of 1.89%.

None of those companies responded to requests for comment. Insurance industry trade groups including the Rocky Mountain Insurance Association, the Colorado Association of Health Plans and the American Property Casualty Insurance Association also did not respond to requests for comment.

The Division of Insurance doesn’t appear to subject companies with worse scores to increased scrutiny. When asked about this, Morton, the agency spokesperson, responded that the purpose of the database is “to allow consumers to compare insurance carriers.”

A high index score could be a red flag for consumers when considering a particular company.

“Usually when somebody’s going out of the way to complain, it means they’ve had a pretty big problem,” said consumer advocate Danny Katz, the executive director of the Colorado Public Interest Research Group.

But the company with the lowest complaint score may not always be the best choice. Consumers should shop first by looking for companies that offer coverage that fits their specific needs, Katz recommended.

“Start by just being very clear on what you want,” Katz said. “You may use this [complaint data] later in the process when you start to circle around a couple of options.”

Watch the full conversation with Katz 👇

Limitations of the data

Beyond the errors identified by The Blanket, the database has additional shortcomings.

For one, the Division of Insurance doesn’t track the percentage of complaints that result in a favorable resolution for the consumer.

The database tracks only a single statistic of “confirmed complaints,” which includes complaints that result in a favorable resolution as well as complaints where the company is found to be at fault, even if the consumer doesn’t get a favorable resolution.

The agency publishes annual reports that provide summaries of its work investigating and addressing the thousands of complaints and questions it receives each year.

The agency says it has recovered more than $85 million for consumers since 2021. It also fields many consumer inquiries that resolve issues short of filing a complaint, and it offers consumer education resources.

Still, more data about how complaints are resolved could provide a clearer view of the agency’s effectiveness and companies’ responsiveness.

The database also doesn’t contain any information about the reasons for the complaints, so it’s not possible to determine how many were related to wrongful coverage denials, delayed or incorrect payments, or other allegedly improper business practices.

“Every detail will give us a little bit more information as a consumer to be able to make smart decisions and as a regulator to be able to identify, is there a consistent problem with a specific company,” Katz said.

How to improve the database

Even though Colorado’s insurance complaint database could be useful to consumers, few know about it.

The Division of Insurance typically doesn’t announce publicly when it posts new data, and it doesn’t actively promote the database beyond simply publishing it on its website.

“We are always happy for the support of journalists to help us promote this kind of data and information for consumers,” Morton, the agency spokesperson, said.

The Blanket was not able to find any other news reports mentioning the database.

In addition to raising awareness, another way to make Colorado’s database more useful would be to improve the user interface.

Currently, the data is only accessible in individual spreadsheets – one dataset per sector, per year. To see trend lines of how companies’ complaint scores change over time, the spreadsheets must be downloaded separately and manually combined into a new dataset for analysis and visualization.

“This would be an easy thing for the state to do,” Katz said.

The federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has maintained a public database of complaints against financial companies with data visualizations and narrative details about individual complaints, which keep the complainants anonymous. Katz pointed to it as a model that Colorado could follow.

But after Katz spoke with The Blanket, the CFPB announced last week that it will stop publishing the visualizations and narratives, calling them “misleading” and saying their publication “needlessly harms companies’ reputations.”

NEED TO KNOW

👀 New evidence suggests the Trump administration weaponized federal aid to put pressure on Colorado to release election denier Tina Peters from prison. Lawyers for the state say an internal White House email proves the administration coordinated efforts to freeze hundreds of millions of dollars in federal aid to Colorado over Peters’ case and Colorado’s election management more generally. Governor Jared Polis granted Peters clemency earlier this year, but he has consistently denied that pressure from the Trump administration had anything to do with his decision. (Denver Post / Seth Klamann, Denver Post / Seth Klamann)

🧑‍⚖️ Colorado can’t enforce part of law that targeted private immigration detention facilities with extra health and safety requirements, a federal judge ruled this week. The judge agreed with ICE contractor The GEO Group that the law improperly singles out immigration detention facilities. The judge left some parts of the law intact, but largely because they hadn’t actually come into force yet. And he said the block is only in place until GEO’s current contract with ICE runs out in October. A new contract could “alter the analysis significantly,” the judge said. (read the order)

⚕️ Colorado is suing The GEO Group to get information about an alleged tuberculosis outbreak at the Aurora immigration detention facility. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment had ordered GEO to provide information by this week, but the company failed to comply. GEO had also rejected a similar, previous order from Adams County officials. U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper visited the facility this week and told reporters that GEO employees had been instructed not to provide any information due to ongoing legal fights over the power of state and local officials to regulate federal immigration detention facilities operated by private companies. (Colorado Attorney General’s Office, Colorado Newsline / Sara Wilson, Colorado Sun / John Ingold)

👉 Learn more about the legal battles between state and federal authorities with respect to immigration enforcement

🧊 ICE owes UCHealth almost $4 million for care provided to people in immigration detention. The hospital – along with others across the country – hasn’t been able to get reimbursed by ICE since October last year, when a disruption affected the federal agency’s medical payment system. The agency blamed the problems on fights in the U.S. Congress over its funding. The hospital is continuing to provide care to people who are detained despite the disruption. (CPR / Allison Sherry)

⚡ Colorado’s biggest energy company Xcel won approval this week to increase electricity rates. The new rates will raise about $157 million for the company while the average residential bill will go up by about $5 a month. The increase is about half of what Xcel originally requested. The company, consumer advocates and large electric consumers could still request a rehearing from the Public Utilities Commission. (Colorado Sun / Mark Jaffe)

🍎 Colorado families missed out on more than $20 million in federal food aid last summer. Over a third of eligible students never used a one-time, $120 Summer EBT benefit to help their families buy groceries while kids are not getting subsidized meals at school. Families may not have known about the program since it was only in its second year, and benefits are issued on a separate card that may have been mistakenly discarded or sent to outdated addresses. Officials are trying to improve awareness about the program this year. (Chalkbeat / Melanie Asmar)

⛓️‍💥 A new statewide prison newspaper project is giving people incarcerated in Colorado a voice and providing them with information behind bars. The Messenger Quarterly seeks to publish creative writing as well as “solutions-based journalism” that can help make life inside better, in addition to letting incarcerated people know about support resources. (Rocky Mountain PBS / Carly Rose and Chelsea Casabona)

COMING UP

🤝 Next Thursday and Friday, I’ll be attending the Local News Solutions conference in the Denver area. I’m excited to be part of conversations about how we can better serve communities in Colorado with useful news and information. I’ll report back about what I learn. Say hi if you see me!

New restrictions on sports betting in Colorado took effect this week, highlighting the importance of addressing addiction and problematic wagering.

State lawmakers passed new sports betting limits earlier this year amid continued growth in gambling in Colorado.

The new law says gambling companies can no longer accept credit cards or more than six deposits from a single gambler within 24 hours. The law also bans gambling companies from advertising to people under the age of 21.

Sports gambling has exploded in Colorado since voters legalized it starting in 2020. Last year, Coloradans bet a record $6.3 billion on sports, up from less than $4 billion in 2021, according to data from the state’s Division of Gaming analyzed by researcher Brad Jones in his newsletter, Colorado’s Political Landscape.

That’s an average of well over $17 million per day – and that figure doesn’t count prediction markets, cryptocurrency investments, stock trading and other financial activities that can resemble betting.

“Everything in our world is becoming gamble-fied,” said Jamie Glick, a licensed social worker and the executive director of the Problem Gambling Coalition of Colorado, a nonprofit funded by the gambling industry.

As gambling has expanded, more Coloradans have been seeking help from Glick’s organization. But he says fewer than one in 10 people with a problem actually reach out.

“So if we’re seeing an increase, I think it’s only scratching the surface,” he said.

Many gamblers and people affected by problematic gambling think that quitting is simply a matter of willpower – a misperception that can be a barrier to reaching out for help.

“With an addiction, your brain becomes hijacked,” Glick said. “It’s not that easy to just stop.”

The Problem Gambling Coalition offers free services through its website and the 1-800-Gambler hotline, including financial counseling and education. But Glick says the organization’s most significant work involves connecting problem gamblers and their loved ones with support groups and communities that encourage their recovery.

A forthcoming study from the Butler Institute for Families at the University of Denver will examine the organization’s impact, Glick said.

But relying on the gambling industry to fund studies and responses to the issue can create perceptions of bias. Although Glick maintained that industry funding doesn’t affect his organization’s independence, he acknowledged that the current model could be improved.

“Unfortunately there’s not a lot of people standing in line to contribute to the cause of problem gambling,” Glick said. “I also think that there’s an obligation of the industry to contribute to intervention and prevention.”

Many critics of the gambling industry point out that a small fraction of highly active bettors account for most of the industry’s profits, giving companies little reason to try to curb those customers’ activity.

“You’re not going to find record profits year after year from recruiting a bunch of casual gamblers to make one bet and then never gamble again,” said Rob Minnick, a gambler recovering from addiction who runs a support organization. “This is just one type of industry where your most valuable customer is almost always the sickest person that you can find and take advantage of.”

Minnick said many gamblers aren’t aware of how gambling companies monitor and analyze data on individual bettors to target them with ads to encourage further wagering.

“People that are gambling have no idea that they’re using a dangerous and addictive product that’s tracking them and then being weaponized against them,” Minnick said.

While the new sports betting restrictions in Colorado may help mitigate some of the harms of problematic gambling, experts like Glick and Minnick say other measures should be considered – like further limits on advertising and push notifications, and encouraging doctors to screen for gambling addiction in standard medical check-ups.

“We just want to start normalizing these conversations,” Glick said.

NEED TO KNOW

🧑‍🚒 Colorado fire departments are overwhelmed and under-resourced, according to a new report from the state’s Division of Fire Prevention and Control. Departments across the state are facing rising costs for equipment and trained personnel, at the same time as firefighting demands are increasing due to wildfires and fires started by batteries for electric vehicles and other devices. Fire departments in Colorado are largely funded by property taxes, and some departments are planning to seek funding increases from the communities they serve. (Denver7 / Veronica Acosta, read the full report)

♻️ Colorado’s plan to expand free recycling statewide is facing a new, federal lawsuit backed by companies who would pay the fees to fund the program. The initiative is supposed to roll out later this year, but the lawsuit asks the judge to block it while the case proceeds. The recycling expansion was also challenged earlier this year in state court by a separate group of companies. In both suits, the companies argue the system doesn’t give them a fair say in how the fees are determined. (Colorado Sun / Michael Booth, read the court documents)

📵 State agencies should improve their management of employee cellphone programs, according to a recent audit. Information on employee cellphones is decentralized, making it hard to track costs and inventories at an agency-wide level. Unused cellphones might have cost the state $173,000 last year, though the auditors called that “a very rough estimate” and noted that some cellphones might go unused for good reasons – for example, if they are only for emergencies. (Colorado Politics / Marissa Ventrelli, read the full report)

🔎 A Colorado school board violated open meetings laws by hiding the true nature of a “public Christian school” and improperly appointing a person with ties to the school, a state judge ruled this week. The school, Riverstone Academy, closed earlier this year, but the court ruling could open the way for the state to claw back around $300,000 in public funding that it received. (Chalkbeat / Ann Schimke, July 31 newsletter)

🧊 Contrary to some reports, Glenwood Springs is not planning to sue the federal immigration agency ICE. The city is instead suing a private landlord that leases a property to ICE, which the agency has used to detain people. This video explains why the distinction between suing ICE and suing its landlord is important.

COMING UP

🗳️ I’m preparing a series of explainers related to the ballot initiatives that Coloradans will be asked to vote on this fall. (Here is a helpful list.) Send me your questions so I can make sure to find out what you need to know to help you decide. Ballots will be sent out starting in October, so don’t wait!

A Denver-area nonprofit is seeing a surge of interest in its mission to stop food waste, as an increasing number of Coloradans struggle to afford meals due to rising costs and aid cuts.

More than 33,000 Coloradans have lost access to federal funding for food assistance since last year due to cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), according to an analysis published this week by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities think tank.

Those cuts come as food insecurity is on the rise in Colorado’s biggest city. More than a third of adults in Denver reported shrinking or skipping a meal in 2025 due to the cost of food – double the rate measured in 2024, according to a city report published in March.

But the Colorado nonprofit We Don’t Waste sees a solution in recovering and redistributing food that would otherwise go to a landfill – which can be up to 40% of the total supply according to some estimates.

The organization operates “like a logistics company in disguise,” said senior communications and marketing manager Caroline Hissong.

We Don’t Waste partners with food suppliers like grocery stores and restaurants to recover usable food that would otherwise get thrown out. The organization then brings the food back to their facility to weigh and sort it before redistributing it.

“We’re keeping track of pretty much every pound of food that’s coming in and out,” Hissong said.

We Don’t Waste sends both prepared meals and raw ingredients to partner organizations like food pantries and soup kitchens who further redistribute it to the communities they serve.

We Don’t Waste also supports mobile food markets where the organization gives away truckloads of food.

“People can come and shop like it’s a farmer’s market but there’s no price tag on anything,” said Hissong.

We Don’t Waste saw a spike in interest on social and traditional media recently with its “Potatopalooza” event, where the organization gave away 42,000 pounds of potatoes in roughly an hour and a half.

“We had folks literally backing up pickup trucks and loading up everything in laundry bins,” Hissong said. “It was really incredible to see.”

We Don’t Waste claims to have saved 280 million servings of food since it got started in 2009.

But economic and political shifts can change the shape of food insecurity, which means the organization has to stay adaptable.

Hissong said We Don’t Waste conducts community listening sessions and surveys to better understand the different ways food insecurity affects various communities.

The organization relies heavily on volunteers, and the attention from Potatopalooza is raising awareness about its work. But the main challenge right now is meeting the increasing demand for free and low-cost meals.

“We just need more food,” Hissong said.

NEED TO KNOW

💵 Victor Marx, the Republican in the Colorado governor’s race, is facing allegations of campaign finance violations. Darcy Schoening, a former state Republican party official, filed complaints with the Secretary of State earlier this year claiming over 100 people had collectively given Marx’s campaign tens of thousands of dollars more than allowed under Colorado law. A new complaint by Schoening claims Marx violated campaign finance laws by telling supporters to give unlimited amounts to his bid for the governor’s office by purchasing merchandise from his online store. Further proceedings will determine whether the campaign faces fines or other penalties. (9News / Kyle Clark)

🔫 Coloradans who want to buy semiautomatic firearms with detachable magazines have to take a safety class and a test first, under a law passed last year that went into effect on August 1. Huge numbers of Coloradans requested gun-purchase background checks ahead of the law going into effect, suggesting a surge in demand for the type of weapons covered by the law. (Colorado Newsline / Sara Wilson)

🚱 Rural communities in southern Colorado lack safe drinking water, despite decades-old plans for infrastructure improvements. Some communities in the Lower Arkansas Valley can’t fund the projects themselves, and the Trump administration has held up federal funding. Some local residents have installed expensive filtration systems, while others have to haul water from supply sites. (Rocky Mountain PBS / Priya Shahi)

👶 Colorado’s universal preschool initiative should shrink class sizes, set curriculum standards and bolster teacher training, according to a state-mandated report on the program. Since it launched in 2023, the program has grown to cover about 70% of the state’s 4-year-olds, offering 10 to 30 hours a week of tuition-free preschool. The state is planning to release a five-year strategic plan for universal preschool later this year. (Chalkbeat / Ann Schimke)

📚 Colorado nonprofits are helping students and teachers with the rising cost of back-to-school supplies. Teachers often spend hundreds of dollars out of their own pockets to stock their classrooms, and families also routinely spend hundreds of dollars on things like clothes, supplies and books as inflation continues to push up costs. Click through the following links for details on how to support and participate in these programs. (Denver 7 / Alex Dowd, CBS / Ashley Portillo)

COMING UP

🧑‍💻 I’ll be joining Dr. Jonathan D. Rosen on his podcast next Friday, August 14, to talk about the Tren de Aragua gang. Before starting The Blanket, I reported extensively on Tren de Aragua in the United States and Latin America. I’ve been featured as an expert by Denver7, CPR, Westword and many other outlets explaining the reality of the gang’s presence in Colorado and region-wide. I’ve still been keeping tabs on Tren de Aragua, particularly in the United States, so I’m excited for the conversation.

Colorado has become a key battleground in legal fights over the role of state and local authorities with respect to federal immigration enforcement.

Courts in Colorado are weighing whether state and local regulations apply to immigration detention centers, when state and local officials can refuse to cooperate with federal immigration agents, and whether undocumented students can get tuition benefits at Colorado universities.

Similar questions are also coming up in other states, as the Trump administration continues an aggressive anti-immigration crackdown that has communities across the country looking for ways to minimize the human and economic fallout.

To get a clearer picture of the legal issues at play, I talked with Deep Gulasekaram, a professor at the University of Colorado Boulder who specializes in immigration law and constitutional law.

“If there’s anything to say in broad terms it is that this area of law is highly unsettled, that there are lots of unanswered questions which are being asked and answered right now,” Gulasekaram said.

Read on for highlights of the conversation, and watch the extended interview below 👇

Detention centers

One question that has become more prominent and more urgent in recent weeks is whether state and local authorities can apply health and safety regulations to immigration detention facilities.

In mid-July, the Adams County Health Department confirmed a case of tuberculosis at Colorado’s only large-scale immigration detention center – a facility in Aurora that houses about 1,200 people.

But local officials say they’ve been blocked from investigating further by the GEO Group, the private contractor that runs the facility for the federal immigration agency ICE. GEO recently announced a new contract with ICE to reopen a former prison in Hudson as Colorado’s second 1,200-bed immigration detention center.

ICE told me that while there aren’t any confirmed tuberculosis cases at the Aurora facility right now, “there was one case of TB on June 25, and the detainee was treated, cleared, and removed from the country.”

GEO sued Colorado in federal court earlier this year over a new state law aimed at expanding local authorities’ power to do health and safety inspections at immigration jails. The company argued that the regulations would illegally interfere with the federal government’s authority to enforce immigration laws.

ICE is changing its internal rules to try to give contractors legal protection against local and state regulations, according to recent reports from the Washington Post and WIRED.

The plans for the new facility in Hudson sparked a separate fight in state court, where a legal advocacy group is backing a Hudson resident’s lawsuit aiming to make the town enforce local zoning requirements on the proposed facility.

Although the GEO Group and Hudson lawsuits involve different legal specifics, they address similar legal issues around the authority of state and local governments to impose regulations on the federal government or its contractors.

“This has been a question that has been a part of American constitutional law going back centuries,” Gulasekaram said.

Information sharing

Legal controversy has also unfolded around state laws passed in recent years that bar Colorado officials from giving people’s personal information to ICE unless it’s part of a criminal investigation.

A federal judge recently tossed a lawsuit involving the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office, which had argued the laws are too vague and create confusion around the limits of cooperation with immigration authorities.

A separate lawsuit in state court is looking at the same law from a different angle. Gov. Jared Polis has been fighting to force the state’s Department of Labor to respond to a request for information from ICE. A judge ruled the Department of Labor doesn’t have to comply, saying the information requested is not related to a criminal matter. Polis appealed that ruling, but the parties recently asked to pause the case until a new governor takes office next year.

Other states have similar laws restricting information-sharing and cooperation with ICE, often with exceptions for criminal investigations. But leveraging information compiled by local authorities makes ICE’s job a lot easier, so the agency has an incentive to try to make the most of those exceptions.

“That leaves the factual question whether in fact the information being sought was in connection with some very serious allegation and of criminality, or whether it looks very much like a fishing expedition,” Gulasekaram said.

Tuition and financial aid

The latest challenge to Colorado’s immigration policies is the federal government’s lawsuit over a program that offers in-state tuition and aid to undocumented university students who meet certain residency requirements.

More than a dozen other states have faced similar lawsuits claiming the policies violate federal law because they don’t offer the same benefits to out-of-state U.S. citizens.

Courts have ruled both for and against states that offer in-state tuition to undocumented students, but Gulasekaram said recipients may still face barriers related to their lack of lawful status after they graduate.

“Ultimately whether you can use your degree to work for the benefit of the people of the state of Colorado or the people of the United States – that is controlled in large part by federal law,” he said.

NEED TO KNOW

🏘️ Cutting red tape has helped lower the cost of building affordable housing in Colorado compared to states like Texas and California. Recent measures made it easier to use publicly owned land for affordable housing development, simplified paperwork and changed building and inspection rules to accommodate low-cost construction options. A recent poll found housing affordability and other cost-of-living issues are among Coloradans’ top concerns. (The Conversation / Solomon Greene, read the poll)

📚 Colorado education officials allowed hundreds of thousands of dollars of public funding to flow to a school with Christian religious curriculum. The Colorado Department of Education said it doesn’t have the authority to enforce state and federal constitutional restrictions against government support for religious institutions, claiming that is the role of the courts, but an independent legal expert questioned that assertion. The “public Christian school” closed this year after lawmakers passed new rules unrelated to religious affiliation. (Chalkbeat / Ann Schimke, May 29 newsletter)

🏫 A top federal civil rights official, Harmeet Dhillon, publicly expressed support for parents whose complaint led to an investigation of Jeffco Schools’ transgender policies. Dhillon runs the U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, which is in charge of deciding whether to cut off federal money to Jeffco, the state’s second-largest district, over its policies aimed at protecting transgender kids. Jeffco sued the U.S. Department of Education this week over the threats to cut its federal funding. (Class Notes / Suzie Glassman, Chalkbeat / Erica Meltzer, July 3 newsletter, read the new lawsuit)

⏳ The Colorado Bureau of Investigation has reduced the average processing time for rape kits to about six months, down from more than 500 days last year. That’s still short of a 90-day internal goal and a 60-day target set by state law, and victim advocates say the backlog is hindering justice. The backlog resulted from staff shortages after crime lab workers were tasked with reviewing over 1,000 cases handled by Missy Woods, a former forensic scientist who admitted this year to manipulating test results over the course of nearly three decades at the agency. (Westword / Hannah Metzger, June 26 newsletter)

🚱 Wildfire response and recovery could cost Colorado nearly a quarter of a billion dollars, according to an estimate from the state’s official Drought Task Force. A historically hot and dry winter in Colorado raised wildfire risk and added urgency to water-saving measures. The task force also recommended improving water efficiency at state facilities and temporarily extending tax deadlines for drought-impacted small businesses and agricultural producers. (CPR / Tegan Wendland, Colorado Sun / Shannon Mullane, CBS / Christa Swanson, watch the full meeting)

COMING UP

🧗 I’ve been lining up more interviews with people working directly on solutions and accountability here in Colorado, and I’m also chipping away at a few original reporting projects. I don’t want to give too much away or make any promises I can’t keep, so suffice it to say that I’m excited and hopeful you’ll find value in what I’m preparing. Speaking of which, if you find value in this newsletter, please consider sending it to a friend or contributing financial support. Anything helps.

Share The Blanket

Support our work

The Colorado Bureau of Investigation is in the process of upgrading a statewide gang database, despite little evidence of its efficacy and concerns over civil rights raised by similar databases in other states.

The CBI is required to maintain a database of alleged gang members under a state law passed in the late 1980s. Lawmakers believed that fighting gangs would be easier if cops across the state had a centralized place to share information about them.

But the database has not been working as intended.

Notably, the database currently isn’t functioning at all. The Aurora Police Department said it’s been offline for “several years,” and the Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office also said it’s been down for “quite some time.” But the CBI insisted that it’s only been offline for about a month.

Moreover, none of the biggest police and sheriff’s departments in the state use the database extensively. The Blanket contacted the 20 biggest local law enforcement agencies in Colorado, and of the 18 that responded, all of them said they either don’t use the database or use it very infrequently. None could cite an example where it had helped with an investigation.

Even though the database doesn’t seem to be very useful for Colorado law enforcement, federal agencies also have access to it.

In 2017, the federal immigration agency ICE told 9News that it had used the database to identify someone as an alleged gang member. ICE declined to answer The Blanket’s questions about how it uses the database.

CBI said that it only maintains the database, and that the agencies that use it are responsible for the accuracy of the information. Federal law says that old records are supposed to be purged after five years, but the auto purge function on the current system hasn’t been working for the past few years, meaning it may contain outdated entries.

CBI said that before the database went offline, it listed 2,839 gang members and 52 gangs. That’s a significant decrease from the last count I could find, from 2007, when the database had over 12,000 gang members and 110 gangs.

In other places where these databases have been used, they’ve created a lot of controversy. New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles have all faced lawsuits in recent years from people who claimed their gang databases included inaccurate entries and were used for illegal racial profiling.

Those issues, so far, haven’t really come up in Colorado. The Blanket reached out to several organizations that work on criminal justice issues in the state and none of them said it was a big problem.

While the database is offline right now, several law enforcement agencies said they might use the new system more frequently once it’s upgraded. The upgrade will cost a little over $600,000 and is expected to be completed later this year.

NEED TO KNOW

🧑‍⚖️ Immigration courts in Colorado and across the country are struggling under a huge backlog of cases and political pressure to quickly deport as many people as possible.

Those issues often result in violations of immigrants’ due process rights. The University of Denver’s Court Transparency Project has been sending observers to Colorado’s immigration courts to document how these problems are playing out.

In this extended interview, Ella Iveslatt, a researcher with the project, talks about transparency, due process and access to justice in Colorado’s immigration courts.

COMING UP

😅 It’s been three months since The Blanket launched, and I’ve taken some time to reflect on what’s been working and what hasn’t. One of the main lessons I’ve learned is that my time is better spent creating higher-quality content, even if that means covering fewer topics and publishing less frequently.

So I’m going to spend next week reexamining my workflows and pushing forward some deeper dives that I’ve had on the back burner. I’d like to build this newsletter audience by offering something more than a simple roundup of the videos I’ve published during the week. I want to use this space to go deeper on topics that I cover in video, linking to sources and adding additional details. I also want to add a section rounding up solutions and accountability reporting from other outlets, to keep you informed without having to cover every topic myself.

I would really appreciate any feedback, tips or questions you may have. If there’s something you want to share, you can reply to this email or send a WhatsApp, Signal or text message to 720-355-1474.

The private prison contractor, the GEO Group, announced this week that ICE is going to pay the company potentially up to a half a billion dollars to re-open an actual former prison so they can use it to lock up immigrants.

The facility is being called “Big Horn” and it’s about 30 miles outside Denver, in a town called Hudson. The former prison is owned by a Chicago-based real estate company that expects to make nearly $1 million a month by leasing it to the GEO Group.

The facility has the capacity to hold almost 1,200 people, which is roughly the size of an immigration jail run by the GEO Group in Aurora that can hold around 1,500 people.

The Aurora facility is the only other large-scale ICE detention site in Colorado, so this new jail will almost double ICE’s detention capacity in the state. And this comes as the Trump administration is continuing its immigration crackdown and locking up more and more people.

The Aurora facility and other ICE facilities around the country have repeatedly for years faced allegations of keeping people in inhumane conditions and neglecting their medical needs. But it’s been difficult to hold ICE and its contractors accountable.

State and local officials have limited power over immigration facilities like the one in Aurora and like the new one coming to Hudson, since they’re privately owned and operated by companies working for the federal government.

In Aurora, the city council recently passed ordinances to try to require the GEO Group to allow random, unannounced health and safety inspections at the detention facility there. And state lawmakers passed a bill this year to expand the state’s power to do health and safety inspections at immigration jails.

But it’s not clear if those rules can actually be enforced or if they’ll hold up in court.

ICE recently updated its detention standards to remove references to contractors having to comply with state and local laws. And the GEO Group is suing Colorado over the recent health and safety inspection law.

Federal judges in other states have ruled that state authorities can inspect privately-run immigration facilities. But the judge in the Colorado case has a record that suggests he supports the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

The lawsuit is still in the early stages, but no matter how it turns out, it’s the kind of case that’s likely to get appealed and it could ultimately end up at the Supreme Court.

NEED TO KNOW

💵 Progressive policy advocate Kayla Frawley recently started a project called the Second Fund that gives cash grants to single-parent families in Denver who need help paying expenses between $55 to $555.

A third of kids in Denver live in single-parent households, and those families are under even more pressure from the rising cost of living that’s affecting all Coloradans.

Relying on a single income means limited resources and a lack of stability. And even when single-parent families tap into public assistance, those gaps can still exist.

Small, one-time costs can snowball into bigger financial emergencies. A missed car payment can result in late fees. A credit card purchase or a payday loan to make ends meet ends up costing more because of interest.

I talked with Kayla about how the Second Fund is addressing those issues:

COMING UP

🫣 Last week I said I would have some original reporting to share this week – which is the same thing I had said the week before. Unfortunately, that reporting still isn’t ready to share. I’m still trying to get answers to some final questions, and I’ve had family in town this week, which left me less time for work than I expected. This has been an important lesson about the pitfalls of making promises about future reporting. I’ll do better in the future.

⚕️ This week, I talked with investigative journalist David Migoya about his reporting that led authorities to investigate allegations of Medicaid fraud, as well as why healthcare aid is susceptible to fraud and what Colorado is doing about the issue.

David’s reporting showed that a Colorado home health company raked in millions of taxpayer dollars through Medicaid – in part by recruiting homeless people as patients and putting them up in houses while profiting by providing them with taxpayer-funded health care.

After David’s reporting came out, the company was suspended from Medicaid while authorities investigate what one agency called “credible allegations of fraud.”

In the first video, we started by talking about how “The Program” worked.

Healthcare aid fraud has been making lots of headlines recently in Colorado, and in the second video, we went deeper on what makes health care aid susceptible to fraud.

So what is the state doing about it? In the third video, we talked about how local investigative reporting has put pressure on Colorado to do more to tackle the issue.

NEED TO KNOW

🎤 Inspired by a webinar put on by the Global Investigative Journalism Network, I started a video series this week asking what audiences want to know about how The Blanket does its work.

The first video responds to a question about the strangest story I ever covered: the murder of Argentine prosecutor Alberto Nisman.

In the next video, I talk more about where I think journalism is headed and what good journalism should look like.

I’m still gathering questions for more response videos in the future, so leave a comment or send a WhatsApp, Signal or text message to 720-355-1474.

COMING UP

🏃 Last week I promised some original accountability reporting, but I’ve had to push back publication until next week while I finish tying up some loose ends. So keep an eye out for that, as well as more solutions and accountability reporting!

Colorado generally has some of the best protections for LGBTQ people of any state in the country. But kids in Colorado are still being impacted by the Trump administration’s extensive efforts to curtail trans peoples’ rights.

Children’s Hospital Colorado stopped providing gender-affirming care to kids last year – like dozens of other hospitals across the country – after the Trump administration threatened to cut off federal funding.

Families of trans kids sued, and a few weeks ago, the state Supreme Court ruled that the hospital’s decision probably violated Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws.

At the time, it seemed like a big win for supporters of trans rights, and that’s still true. But the fight isn’t over.

Local news outlets reported recently that kids still aren’t getting gender-affirming care at the hospital because doctors who work there are refusing to provide it, saying they’re afraid the Trump administration could come after them.

Even though major US medical associations support gender-affirming care for kids, the doctors’ fears aren’t baseless. The Trump administration is exploring legal action including possible criminal charges against doctors and hospitals in other states.

The families of the trans kids are looking to hold the hospital in contempt of court, arguing it’s trying to get around the order to restart care by blaming the doctors. There’s a hearing on that issue set for next month.

Another big fight over trans kids’ rights is happening in JeffCo Schools – the second biggest district in Colorado after Denver.

The federal Department of Education launched an investigation that found earlier this year that the district’s policies aimed at accommodating trans kids violate gender equality provisions in a federal law called Title IX.

The feds claimed that dozens of male students are taking roster spots on girls’ sports teams. But the district said that isn’t true, and that the males aren’t athletes but rather mascots and managers and coaches.

So what’s next? It’s kind of hard to say.

JeffCo has asked the state for help fighting the feds, since they threatened to cut the school district’s funding. But it’s not clear how far the feds are willing to go in that case.

Trump’s Education Department also went after Denver Public Schools and demanded the district get rid of an all-gender bathroom. But the district refused and so far nothing has happened.

At the same time, parents of JeffCo students backed by a conservative, anti-trans legal advocacy group are challenging the district’s policies in federal court.

The Blanket attended the oral arguments in that case, and it did not go well for JeffCo. The court should issue a ruling in the next few weeks or months.

NEED TO KNOW

🗺️ The Colorado Supreme Court this week struck down proposals that would have asked voters to change Colorado’s congressional election maps.

The state’s current maps of U.S. House of Representatives districts were drawn by an independent commission approved by voters in 2018, which created four safely Democratic seats and four safely Republican ones.

But both parties wanted to ask voters this fall to sidestep the independent commission and change the maps through ballot initiatives. Democrats proposed plans to redraw the maps so they would have a chance to win seven of those eight seats, and the Republican counterproposal would have given that party a chance to win five of the eight.

But the state Supreme Court said those proposals violate a rule that limits ballot initiatives to a single subject. And since the proposals would have changed both the process for how the districts are drawn, as well as the actual boundaries of those districts, they didn’t meet that requirement.

Colorado has been trending more and more towards the Democratic Party over the past two decades. And the results of this year’s primary elections showed there’s an appetite for even more progressive representation.

But Colorado’s delegation in the U.S. House is probably going to stay split between Democrats and Republicans, possibly until after the next census in 2030.

⚖️ Colorado Gov. Jared Polis fired two members of the state clemency board who had recommended against his decision to give leniency to election denier Tina Peters.

The fired lawyers had publicly spoken out against Polis’ decision, saying the board had recommended — twice, unanimously — against giving Peters clemency, because they thought she wasn’t actually sorry about her crimes and was engaging in “performative accountability.”

Multiple news outlets reported this week that Polis said the public criticism of his decision violated a confidentiality policy that is supposed to keep clemency board proceedings secret.

But the lawyers stood by their decision to speak out, saying the public had a right to know how such a controversial decision got made.

Tina Peters was the top elections official in Mesa County, the biggest county in Western Colorado. She broke the law while trying to investigate false claims of fraud in the 2020 election.

She was convicted of multiple felonies in 2024 and sentenced to several years in jail. But in May of this year, Polis gave her clemency that let her get out early on June 1.

After Peters got out, she immediately went back to talking about baseless claims of election fraud, and she visited the White House this week where Trump repeated his own disproven claims.

COMING UP

🇺🇸 Enjoy the holiday weekend! 🦅 We’ll be back next week with some original accountability reporting in addition to highlighting the work of another long-time local investigative journalist. Stay tuned.

Colorado voters might be asked this fall to approve a graduated income tax that would lower tax rates for the vast majority of Coloradans while raising them for high-earning people and corporations.

A new study says that proposal, called initiative 195, would cause high-earning people and companies to leave Colorado rather than paying the higher tax rate. And that would mean the state would collect less money than expected.

But is that true?

The analysis, put out by a business-friendly think tank in the Denver area called the Common Sense Institute, contradicts not only what supporters say about initiative 195, but also the conclusions of nonpartisan, independent analysts that work for state lawmakers.

What’s more, this idea of “tax flight” has been disputed by a lot of economic research.

So I asked to interview someone from the Common Sense Institute last week, and initially they seemed open to a video conversation.

Then they said they couldn’t do video, but they could answer written questions.

So I sent them a couple of questions, but they refused to address the research that says they’re wrong about tax flight. I asked multiple times but they just ignored me and then stopped responding.

I’ve been a journalist for many years and I’ve covered a lot of reports like this. And I have to say, it raises some pretty big red flags that the Common Sense Institute either can’t or won’t defend the central thesis of this report.

And I thought it was important to share since this questionable idea of “tax flight” will likely be one of the main arguments that we hear in the coming months against the graduated income tax proposal.

NEED TO KNOW

🔬 Missy Woods, a former forensic scientist for Colorado’s state crime lab, pleaded guilty this week to criminal charges related to her manipulation of evidence.

Woods was criminally charged in 2025 after an internal investigation found she’d manipulated more than 1,000 DNA tests over nearly three decades at the agency.

She wasn’t necessarily fixing cases to get bogus convictions; it was more about taking shortcuts to make her job easier for herself.

Her mishandling of those tests raised doubts about the validity of convictions in cases she worked on – and the legal process to sort all that out could end up costing taxpayers millions of dollars.

Woods is 65, and facing the possibility of years-long sentences that could mean spending the rest of her life in prison, so she’ll likely ask the judge to give her a light sentence in exchange for admitting her guilt.

Still, Woods pleading guilty is important because it’s a step toward accountability and repairing the damage to the reputation of the state crime lab.

🛢️ The federal Bureau of Land Management said last week that it leased roughly 135,000 acres in Colorado for oil and gas drilling, bringing in more than $35 million that gets split between the federal and state government.

The public lands sale was one of the biggest ever in Colorado, and it went ahead despite formal protests by the state parks and wildlife agency and other groups that were concerned about environmental impacts.

The feds are planning even more sales later this year as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to make it easier and cheaper for oil and gas companies to lease public lands for drilling.

But new drilling operations would have to go through an environmental review before they’re allowed to start, and that will likely be a contentious process since these operations are facing increasing resistance in Colorado.

COMING UP

🤓 Next week’s newsletter will include a write-up based on a new video series focusing on K-12 education funding in Colorado.

When I did my recent series about Colorado’s state budget, a lot of you asked me about K-12 education funding. And that’s a really important topic because education is the second-biggest item in the state’s budget, after healthcare.

I’ve been reading up and talking to some experts to learn more about where the money comes from, what we’re spending it on, and how education funding choices affect schools. The first video is already out, and the next two will be coming out today and tomorrow, so stay tuned!