Colorado Proposition 110, "Let's Go Colorado" Transportation Bond and Sales Tax Increase Initiative (2018)

Elections in Colorado, 2018

• General election: Nov. 6
• Voter registration deadline: Oct. 29
• Early voting: Mail ballots available Oct. 5
• Absentee voting deadline: Nov. 6

• Online registration: Yes
• Same-day registration: Yes
• Voter ID: Non-photo ID required for in-person voting
• Poll times: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

---

On the ballot: U.S. House • Governor • Attorney General • Secretary of State • State executive offices • State Senate • State House • Supreme court • Appellate courts • Local judges • State ballot measures • Local ballot measures • Municipal • Recalls • Democratic primaries • Republican primaries

Colorado Proposition 110
Election date November 6, 2018
Topic Bond issues and Transportation
Status d Defeated
Type State statute	Origin Citizens
List of Colorado measuresColorado Amendment AColorado Amendment VColorado Amendment WColorado Amendment XColorado Amendment YColorado Amendment ZColorado Amendment 73Colorado Amendment 74Colorado Amendment 75Colorado Proposition 109Colorado Proposition 110Colorado Proposition 111Colorado Proposition 112Submit

Colorado Proposition 110, the "Let's Go Colorado" Transportation Bond and Sales Tax Increase Initiative, was on the ballot in Colorado as an initiated state statute on November 6, 2018. It was defeated.

A yes vote supported the initiative to authorize $6 billion in bonds to fund transportation projects, establish the Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes Citizen Oversight Committee, and raise the state sales tax rate by 0.62 percent from 2.9 percent (2018) to 3.52 percent for 20 years starting on January 1, 2019, through January 1, 2039.

A no vote opposed the initiative to authorize $6 billion in bonds to fund transportation projects, establish the Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes Citizen Oversight Committee, and raise the state sales tax rate by 0.62 percent from 2.9 percent (2018) to 3.52 percent for 20 years starting on January 1, 2019, through January 1, 2039.

Election results

Colorado Proposition 110
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		990,287	40.61%
No		1,448,535	59.39%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

What would Proposition 110 have done?

Proposition 110 was designed to authorize the Colorado Department of Transportation to issue bonds up to $6 billion to fund transportation to be repaid through the sales tax increase with a maximum repayment cost of $9.4 billion. Proposition 110 would have also increased the state sales and use tax rate by 0.62 percent from 2.9 percent (2018) to 3.52 percent for 20 years starting on January 1, 2019, through January 1, 2039.

Who supported and opposed Proposition 110?

Two committees were registered to support Proposition 110:

• Coloradans For Coloradans
• Coloradans for a Responsible Future

Together, they $7.4 million and spent $7.36 million.

Two committees registered to oppose Proposition 110:

• State Ballot Issue Committee
• No on 110, Yes on 109

Together, they raised $30,000 and spent $29,825.

The relationship between Senate Bill 1 and the other bond measure on the ballot

In May 2018, the Colorado State Legislature passed Senate Bill 1, which dictated that, since a citizen initiative to approve a bond issue for transportation was not passed in November 2018, a bond issue was referred to the November 2019 ballot. Two different initiatives qualified for the November 2018 ballot: Proposition 109, known as the Fix Our Damn Roads Initiative, would have authorized bonds to fund transportation projects with repayment to come from the state's general fund. Proposition 110, the "Let's Go Colorado" measure, would have authorized bonds for transportation projects and a tax increase to repay the debt. SB 1 also dictated different funding allocation provisions depending on whether or not a citizen initiative bond issue was passed in 2018 and whether or not the initiative included a tax increase.

Colorado law provides that in the event that two conflicting measures are approved, the measure with the most affirmative votes supersedes the other on any points of conflict. However, the other measure is not wholly superseded. Provisions in the measure that receives fewer votes that don't directly conflict with the measure that got more votes still take effect. According to the legislative council, the main provisions of both Proposition 109 and Proposition 110 could have both been enacted.

Measure design

Proposition 110 was designed to authorize the Colorado Department of Transportation to issue bonds up to $6 billion to fund transportation to be repaid through the sales tax increase with a maximum repayment cost of $9.4 billion. The measure would have increased the state sales and use tax rate by 0.62 percentage points from 2.9 percent (2018) to 3.52 percent for 20 years starting on January 1, 2019, through January 1, 2039. The revenue from the increased sales tax would have been placed in the following accounts and spent as follows:

• 45 percent to the State Highway Fund for bond repayment and state transportation funding including highway construction and maintenance;
• 40 percent to the Local Transportation Priorities Fund for municipal and county transportation projects; and
• 15 percent to the Multimodal Transportation Options Fund for multimodal transportation such as mass transit and paths for walking and biking to reduce vehicle usage. To receive funds from this account, counties and municipalities would need to match 50 percent of the funds.

Under the measure, the tax would not have been imposed on sales of aviation fuel.

The measure would have created the Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes Citizen Oversight Committee. The committee would have been composed of the executive director of the transportation department and 14 members appointed from and residing in each of the 11 transportation commission districts of the state and three at-large members. Committee members would not have received any payment or reimbursement for serving on the committee.

Members would have served for four-year terms and be appointed as follows:

• Six members appointed by the governor, no more than four could be affiliated with the same political party;
• Two members appointed by the Speaker of the House;
• Two members appointed by the President of the Senate;
• Two members appointed by the Minority Leader of the House; and
• Two members appointed by the Minority Leader of the Senate.

Those appointing members to the committee would have had to work together to ensure that on the committee was at least one member:

• With public finance experience;
• Who was a certified public accountant;
• Who was a licensed attorney;
• Who was a contractor with transportation project experience;
• Who was a licensed civil engineer; and
• Who was a transit professional.

The committee would have been tasked with meeting twice a year to examine expenditures and ensure that funds were being expended in compliance with all requirements of the measure and to develop and deliver an annual report to the transportation legislation review committee regarding findings and activities related to the measure.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for the initiative is below:

“

Shall state taxes be increased $766,700,000 annually for a twenty-year period, and state debt shall be increased $6,000,000,000 with a maximum repayment cost of $9,400,000,000, to pay for state and local transportation projects, and, in connection therewith, changing the Colorado revised statutes to: 1) increase the state sales and use tax rate by 0.62% beginning January 1, 2019; requiring 45% of the new revenue to fund state transportation safety, maintenance, and congestion related projects, 40% to fund municipal and county transportation projects, and 15% to fund multimodal transportation projects, including bike, pedestrian, and transit infrastructure; 2) authorize the issuance of additional transportation revenue anticipation notes to fund priority state transportation maintenance and construction projects, including multimodal capital projects; and 3) provide that all revenue resulting from the tax rate increase and proceeds from issuance of revenue anticipation notes are voter-approved revenue changes exempt from any state or local revenue, spending, or other limitations in law?

”

Summary and analysis

The summary and analysis provided for this measure in the Colorado 2018 State Ballot Information Booklet (also known as the Blue Book) was as follows:

Proposition 110 proposes amending the Colorado statutes to: increase the state’s sales and use tax rate from 2.9 percent to 3.52 percent for 20 years; distribute the new tax revenue for transportation as follows: 45 percent to the state; 40 percent to local governments; and 15 percent for multimodal transportation projects; and permit the state to borrow up to $6.0 billion for transportation projects and limit the total repayment amount, including principal and interest, to $9.4 billion over 20 years. Current state highway funding. Maintenance and construction of state highways are funded through the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). CDOT receives most of its revenue from federal and state gasoline and diesel fuel taxes and from state vehicle registration fees, as shown in Figure 1. For state budget year 2017-18, CDOT spent approximately $1.2 billion, or roughly 85 percent of its revenue, on state highway maintenance and operations and $220.5 million, or 15 percent, on construction. Sales and use tax. The state sales tax is paid on the purchase price of most items. Some items are exempt, such as food bought at grocery stores, prescription drugs, household utilities, and gasoline. The tax applies to some services, including telephone service, food and drink service at restaurants and bars, and short-term lodging. The state use tax is paid when sales tax was due but not collected. In addition to the state’s 2.9 percent rate, most cities and counties also have sales and use taxes. Combined state and local sales tax rates in Colorado range from 2.9 percent to 11.2 percent, depending on where a purchase is made Amount of the tax increase. Beginning January 1, 2019, the measure increases the state sales tax rate from 2.9 percent to 3.52 percent for 20 years. The measure is estimated to raise about $767 million in the first year that it applies. Under the measure, the average amount of sales tax paid by a Colorado family with an average income of $74,374 is estimated to increase by $131. Use of new tax revenue for transportation. The additional tax revenue collected under Proposition 110 is dedicated to the following uses: 45 percent to CDOT for state transportation projects, including debt repayment; 40 percent to local governments for transportation projects; and 15 percent for multimodal transportation projects. The state’s share of the additional tax revenue will be spent by CDOT on state transportation projects that address safety, maintenance, and congestion and to repay borrowing under this measure for transportation projects. The Transportation Commission, an 11-member body appointed by the Governor to prioritize statewide transportation needs, will determine the use of these funds. The local share of the additional revenue will be distributed to every city and county for transportation projects based on an existing formula in state law. The additional tax revenue identified for multimodal transportation projects will mostly be spent by local governments. Multimodal transportation provides additional transportation options and includes bike paths, sidewalks, and public transit, such as buses, rail, and rides for the elderly and disabled. Bond sale and repayment. Proposition 110 permits CDOT to borrow up to $6.0 billion by selling transportation revenue bonds. The total repayment amount, including principal and interest, is limited to $9.4 billion over 20 years, and the state must reserve the right to repay the bonds ahead of schedule without penalty. Assuming the repayment schedule is for the full $9.4 billion over 20 years, the average annual repayment cost will be $470 million. Actual repayment amounts will vary depending on the terms of the revenue bonds. The measure creates a citizen oversight commission to annually report on the use of the bond proceeds. Past bond sale and repayment for transportation projects. In 1999, voters approved the sale of $1.5 billion worth of bonds for transportation projects. The state was required to use the borrowed money to pay for up to 24 transportation projects across the state. Repayment costs for the 1999 bonds totaled $2.3 billion. The debt was fully repaid through various state and federal sources in December 2016.

Full text

The full text of Proposition 110 can be found here.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2018

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The Colorado Title Board wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 65, and the FRE is -108. The word count for the ballot title is 146, and the estimated reading time is 38 seconds. In 2018, for the 167 statewide measures on the ballot, the average ballot title or question was written at a level appropriate for those with between 19 and 20 years of U.S. formal education (graduate school-level of education), according to the FKGL formula. Read Ballotpedia's entire 2018 ballot language readability report here.

Support

Let's Go Colorado led the campaign in support of the measure.

Supporters

The following individuals and organizations had endorsed the Let's Go Colorado: Yes on 110 campaign or have otherwise indicated their support for the measure:

Mayors and former mayors Marc Williams - Arvada Bob LeGare - Aurora Royce Pindell - Bennett Suzanne Jones - Boulder Tom Feldkamp - Bow Mar Tera Radloff - Castle Pines Laura Chrisman - Cherry Hills Village Sean Ford - Commerce City Michael Hancock - Denver Laura Keegan - Edgewater Daniel Dick - Federal Heights Marjorie Sloan - Golden Ron Rakowsky - Greenwood Village Christine Berg - Lafayette Adam Paul - Lakewood Debbie Brinkman - Littleton Jackie Millet - Lone Tree Bob Muckle - Louisville Connie Sullivan - Lyons Tara Bieter-Fluhr - Sheridan Clint Folsom - Superior Heidi Williams - Thornton Bud Starker - Wheat Ridge Herb Atchison - Westminster Karen Stuart - Broomfield Cathy Noon - Centennial Jacob Smith - Golden Steve Burkholder - Lakewood Joe Gierlach - Nederland City Councilors Charlie Richardson - Aurora Crystal Murillo - Aurora Nicole Johnston - Aurora Allison Hiltz - Aurora Albus Brooks - Denver Kara Swanson - Edgewater Sharon Vincent - Lakewood Jacob Labure - Lakewood Dallas Hall - Sheridan Landan de Laguna - Sheridan Roberta Mooney - Sheridan Sally Daigle - Sheridan (Mayor Pro Tem) Kathryn Skulley - Westminster Anita Seitz - Westminster Shannon Bird - Westminster Emma Pinter - Westminster Maria DeCambra - Westminster (Mayor Pro Tem) Tim Fitzgerald - Wheat Ridge Municipalities (Endorsed as a whole) Town of Bow Mar City of Lafayette Town of Limon Lone Tree Town of Sheradin City of Thornton City of Wheat Ridge County Commissioners Steve O'Dorisio - Adams County Bill Holen - Arapahoe County Nancy Jackson - Arapahoe County Tim Mauck - Clear Creek County Jill Ryan - Eagle County Casey Tighe - Jefferson County Tom Grasmick - Prowers County Joan May - San Miguel County BOCC (endorsed as a whole) Boulder County Commissioners Eagle County Commissioners Gunnison County Commissioners Gilpin County Commissioners San Miguel County Commissioners State Government Officials Senator Stephen Fenberg Senator Andy Kerr Senator Dominick Moreno Senator Kevin Priola Senator Rachel Zenzinger Senator Cheri Jahn Senator Nancy Todd Representative Chris Hansen Representative Edie Hooton Representative Pete Lee Representative Chris Kennedy Representative Susan Lontine Representative Brittany Pettersen Representative Barbara McLachlan RTD Board Member Judy Lublow Chambers of Commerce & Economic Development The Boulder Chamber Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce Downtown Denver Partnership Metro North Chamber of Commerce Colorado Black Chamber of Commerce Adams County Economic Development Denver South Economic Development Corporation Jefferson County Economic Development Corporation Lincoln County Economic Development Corporation Visit Denver Agriculture Colorado Association of Wheat Growers Colorado Cattlemans' Association Colorado Dairy Farmers Colorado Farm Bureau Rocky Mountain Farmers Union Associations American Concrete Pavement Association American Council of Engineering Companies American Heart Association Associated General Contractors Building Jobs 4 Colorado Colorado Asphalt Pavement Association Colorado Association of Home Builders Colorado Association of Realtors PAC Colorado Association of Transit Agencies Colorado Bankers Association Colorado Gaming Association I-70 Coalition Ports to Plains Alliance Western Colorado Contractors Association Environmental Groups Bicycle Colorado Conservation Colorado CoPIRG Southwest Energy Efficiency Partnership (SWEEP) LiveWell Colorado Regional Organizations Club 20 Colorado Municipal League (CML) Commuting Solutions Counties and Commissioners Acting Together (CCAT) Gunnison Valley RTA Move Colorado North Area Transportation Alliance Pro 15 Smart Commute Metro North Unions Colorado AFL-CIO Colorado Association of Mechanical & Plumbing Contractors Laborers' International Union of North America (LIUNA) Mechanical Contractors Association of Colorado (MCA) Mechanical Service Contractors Association of Colorado (MSCA)

Arguments

• Let's Go Colorado featured the following argument on its website: "Proposition 110 will create a new revenue source to fund Colorado’s crumbling roads, bridges and other infrastructure. It will generate an estimated $767 million in the first year. This isn’t a permanent tax - there is a 20 year sunset. No corner of the state is left untouched by Proposition 110. Nearly 80% of trips we take begin and end on a local road. The generated revenue will be distributed to local priorities across the entire state of Colorado. Tourists would pay their fair share. More than 39 million out-of-state tourists would help fund our transportation system when they purchase taxable goods."

• The Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce argued, "For decades Colorado’s transportation system has been underfunded. We haven’t raised gas taxes, our primary source of funding for transportation, in 25 years while vehicles have become much more fuel efficient. We need a new funding source, and this .62 percent increase, while small individually, raises enough money to truly improve our transportation system. The money is dedicated to transportation, and nothing else, and allows both our state and local communities to make improvements. It also ensures that the 40 million people who visit Colorado from another state help pay for our roads, too. Support this statewide solution that generates funds we need to fix local roads and highways."

• Christian Reece, executive director of Club 20, said, "It's about time we make a serious investment in our transportation infrastructure. This initiative is a responsible and modest approach to provide an immediate solution before our infrastructure goes from bad to worse."

• Lone Tree Mayor Jackie Millet (R), said in a statement, "Coloradans deserve a solution to our growing transportation crisis that is guaranteed to generate the revenue to address long-neglected projects in every corner of our state. [The measure] is the only measure on this year’s ballot that can fund the transportation safety, capacity and mobility improvements that our citizens and businesses are demanding. Plus, it empowers local communities to tackle our toughest transportation challenges."

• Hinsdale County Commissioner Cindy Dozier (R) said, "Colorado has been underfunding transportation for decades because we're using a funding source that just can't keep up while the need continues to grow. Speaking as a rural county commissioner, I believe the only way we'll be guaranteed that our local roads and highways will get the repairs they need is by going to the ballot and dedicating new revenue to this critical priority."

Official arguments

The supporting arguments provided for this measure in the Colorado 2018 Blue Book were as follows:

1) Colorado's highways are deteriorating, and the cost of improvements continues to increase. The state needs to invest immediately in its infrastructure and cannot afford to expand and modernize its transportation system without a new revenue source. Colorado needs a modern transportation system that includes road, bus, bike, pedestrian, and rail options to address its growing population. This measure creates a flexible statewide transportation solution, and it lets local communities identify their own transportation projects and prioritize their most urgent needs. 2) Proposition 110 creates a sustainable source of funding for Colorado’s transportation needs. Colorado’s highway costs outpace collections from the gas tax. This measure offers a way for the state to increase transportation funding and repay bonds. This new, dedicated revenue for transportation will allow the state to continue to meet its obligations to fund education, health programs, and public safety while also investing heavily in Colorado’s roads.

Campaign advertisements

The following video was released by Let's Go Colorado:

Title: "1991"

Opposition

Opponents

Colorado Springs Mayor, John Suthers

Arguments

Colorado Springs Mayor, John Suthers, supports a different measure, known as the "Fix Our Damn Roads" initiative. Suthers said, "Fix Our Damn Roads spends $35 million a year (over 20 years) to bond $3.5 billion. Why would Colorado Springs vote for the state tax increase? They could get more money out of a local tax and by voting for Fix Our Damn Roads."

Official arguments

The opposing arguments provided for this measure in the Colorado 2018 Blue Book were as follows:

1) Proposition 110 raises taxes for a fundamental government service that should be fully funded through the state budget. Any shortfall in transportation funding is a result of prioritizing state spending in other areas of government. The state can fund roads with the money it collects in taxes, rather than resorting to expensive borrowing. Additionally, this measure dedicates too much revenue to multimodal transportation, money that should be used exclusively for road repair and improvement. The majority of the workforce use their personal vehicles to commute daily and depend on quality road and highway maintenance. 2) Sales taxes, which are already high, provide a poor method of funding transportation. The total sales tax rate exceeds 10 percent in some areas of Colorado. Raising the state sales tax disproportionately affects low-income individuals because they must spend a larger share of their budget buying taxable necessities.

Media editorials

See also: 2018 ballot measure media endorsements

Support

• The Aurora Sentinel wrote: "Prop 110, Let’s Go Colorado, asks for a small sales tax increase in exchange for $6 billion worth of desperately needed transportation improvements near your home and across the state. [...] Prop 110 was created by a consortium of businesses and consumer organizations to raise badly needed cash for roads without bankrupting public schools or forcing college students and their parents to fund roads through massive tuition hikes. It enjoys widespread support of chambers of commerce and elected officials across the state."

• The Craig Daily Press wrote: "The way we see it, Proposition 110 is the clear winner. Proposition 109 asks us to commit ourselves to $5.2 billion in bonded indebtedness with no specific revenue stream to service that debt. And, while the notion of repairing the state's crumbling highways without increasing taxes or fees might, at a glance, seem appealing, the fact remains: If you take a loan, you have to pay it back. This leaves us with Proposition 110. It, too, creates new debt, but it also creates new revenue dedicated to paying that debt, and while we are hesitant to advocate another new tax, the modest increase proposed by 110 is, in our opinion, the most sensible path."

• The Aspen Times wrote: "These are two transportation funding questions getting lumped together. Prop 109 is the wrong way to address the funding for transportation improvements. Called "Fix Our Damn Roads," adding $3.5 billion in bonds and contributing to the state's debt is not the right road. We are for Proposition 110, which would add a 0.62 percent sales tax for 20 years and is earmarked for transportation fixes. We'll all share in the burden without messing with the state debt. In 20 years, it would raise about $21.7 billion and essentially pay as we go."

Opposition

• The Gazette wrote: "Hear this loud and clear. Passage of the secret society’s Prop 110 means high taxes and fewer road improvements in southern Colorado. [Proposition 109] issues bonds immediately, pays for them with existing revenues, and generates more transportation money without raising taxes. Supporters pitch [Proposition 110] as a resolution to our crisis of dangerously bad highway infrastructure. Yet less than half the money would go to fix highways. No wonder they met in secret. Don’t be fooled by a tax increase so bad a cabal of special interests concocted it behind closed doors. Vote against a secret scheme to benefit a few and for a measure created in public to benefit all with better roads. Vote 'no' on 110 and 'yes' on 109."

Campaign finance

See also: Campaign finance requirements for Colorado ballot measures

Total campaign contributions:
Support:	$7,405,307.11
Opposition:	$30,000.00

Two committees registered to support Proposition 110:

• Coloradans For Coloradans
• Coloradans for a Responsible Future

Together, they raised $7.4 million and spent $7.36 million.

Two committees registered to oppose Proposition 110:

• State Ballot Issue Committee
• No on 110, Yes on 109

Together, they raised $30,000 and spent $29,825.

Many committees were simultaneously registered to support and oppose multiple measures, therefore it is impossible to distinguish between funds spent on a particular measure. A full list of the committees and their various positions on the 13 statewide measures in Colorado can be found here.

Support

Committees in support of Proposition 110 Supporting committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures Coloradans for Coloradans $7,057,701.00 $221,256.36 $7,054,108.72 Coloradans for a Responsible Future $123,500.00 $2,849.75 $86,353.56 Total $7,181,201.00 $224,106.11 $7,140,462.28

Totals in support Total raised: $7,405,307.11 Total spent: $7,364,568.39

Top donors

Donor	Amount
Colorado Construction Industry	$2,021,500.00
National Association of Realtors	$354,000.00
Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce	$250,000.00
Protect Colorado, Inc.	$187,500.00
4DEGREES	$106,214.00

Opposition

Committees in opposition to Proposition 110 Opposing committees Cash contributions In-kind services Cash expenditures State Ballot Issue Committee $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 No on 110, Yes on 109 $30,000.00 $0.00 $29,825.00 Total $30,000.00 $0.00 $29,825.00

Totals in opposition Total raised: $30,000.00 Total spent: $29,825.00

Donor	Amount
Pikes Peak Association of Realtors	$10,000.00
Colorado Springs Chamber of Commerce and EDC	$10,000.00
Colorado Springs Forward	$10,000.00

Methodology

To read Ballotpedia's methodology for covering ballot measure campaign finance information, click here.

Reports and analyses

Note: The inclusion of a report, white page, or study concerning a ballot measure in this article does not indicate that Ballotpedia agrees with the conclusions of that study or that Ballotpedia necessarily considers the study to have a sound methodology, accurate conclusions, or a neutral basis. To read a full explanation of Ballotpedia's policy on the inclusion of reports and analyses, please click here.

Research findings from TRIP

On June 28, 2018, TRIP released a series of reports about transportation in Colorado, including one report titled "Colorado Transportation by the Numbers: Meeting the state's need for safe, smooth, and efficient mobility."

TRIP is a private, nonprofit national transportation research group sponsored by insurance companies, equipment manufacturers, businesses involved in highway and transit engineering and construction, labor unions, and more, that researches "transportation policies that help relieve traffic congestion and its impact on air quality, improve road and bridge conditions, make surface travel safer, and enhance economic productivity."

Following are some findings included in the report:

“

Driving on Colorado roads that are deteriorated, congested and that lack some desirable safety features costs Colorado drivers a total of $7.1 billion each year. Due to inadequate state and local funding, 40 percent of major urban roads and highways in Colorado are in poor or mediocre condition. Driving on rough roads costs the annual Colorado driver $468 annually in additional vehicle operating costs. Six percent of Colorado’s bridges are structurally deficient, meaning there is significant deterioration of the bridge deck, supports or other major components. Congested roads choke commuting and commerce and cost Colorado drivers $3.1 billion each year in the form of lost time and wasted fuel. In the most congested areas, drivers lose up to $1,190 and more than two full days each year in congestion. Over the last five years, 2,595 people were killed in traffic crashes in Colorado. Traffic crashes in Colorado in 2016 imposed $6.2 billion in economic costs.

”

In conclusion, the report stated "Despite the modest funding increase provided by the FAST Act, numerous projects to improve the condition and expand the capacity of Colorado’s roads, highways, bridges and transit systems will not be able to proceed without a substantial boost in state or local transportation funding. If Colorado is unable to complete needed transportation projects it will hamper the state’s ability to improve the condition and efficiency of its transportation system or enhance economic development opportunities and quality of life."

To read the full 2018 report, click here.

Background

CDOT reports funding levels

In 2016, the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) reported that from 2016 through 2040 it would need $46 billion to cover transportation costs, which included $20 billion in projects to expand transportation infrastructure. The CDOT estimated that from 2016 through 2025, it would need $19 billion, with $8.6 billion of that going toward expansion. The anticipated funding levels for the CDOT at that time were $21.1 billion for the 25-year period and $10.2 billion for the 10-year period, leaving a funding discrepancy of $24.9 billion over 25 years and $8.8 billion over the following ten years, respectively.

2018 citizen initiatives

See also: Colorado 2018 ballot measures

Two citizen initiatives related to transportation funding and bond issues were on the 2018 ballot:

• One initiative was designed to authorize $3.5 billion in transportation revenue anticipation notes (TRANs) with a total repayment cost of $5.2 billion. It would have been repaid through the allocation of an estimated $350 million per year from the state's general fund. This initiative was sponsored by the Independence Institute.

• The other initiative, which had the backing of the Metro Denver Chamber of Commerce, was designed to issue between $3.72 billion and $9 billion in TRANs and repay the debt through a sales tax increase.

Both were defeated.

2018 compromise (Senate Bill 1)

Senate Bill 1 was approved by the legislature in the last days of the 2018 legislative session. Two initiatives, Proposition 109 ("Fix Our Damn Roads") and Proposition 110 ("Let's Go Colorado") appeared on the 2018 general election ballot in Colorado. Both measures were defeated.

Proposition 109 was designed to authorize $3.5 billion in bonds to fund statewide transportation projects including bridge expansion, construction, maintenance, and repairs, and require that the state repay the debt from the general fund without raising taxes.

Proposition 110 was designed to authorize $6 billion in bonds to fund transportation projects, establish the Transportation Revenue Anticipation Notes Citizen Oversight Committee, and raise the state sales tax rate by 0.62 percent from 2.9 percent (2018) to 3.52 percent for 20 years starting on January 1, 2019, through January 1, 2039.

SB 1 included different budget allocation and bond issue scenarios in response to whether...

• A: neither citizen initiative issuing TRANs was approved in 2018 (which turned out to be the case);
• B: an initiative to issue TRANs but without a tax increase (Proposition 109) or both initiatives were passed by voters in 2018; or
• C: an initiative to issue TRANs and increase taxes (Proposition 110) to fund the repayment of the notes was passed by voters in 2018.

The different scenarios involve the lease-purchase agreement funding provided by SB 267 in 2017, which is summarized below.

• In scenario (c), in which Proposition 110 (an initiative to issue TRANs with a tax increase to repay the TRANs debt) was passed, no 2019 referral would have taken place, and SB 1 would have dictated the allocation of $50 million per year to the State Highway Fund. The lease-purchase agreement funding provided by SB 267 in 2017 would have stayed in place.
• In scenario (b), in which Proposition 109 (an initiative to issue TRANs but without a tax increase is passed) or both were passed, no 2019 referral would have taken place, and SB 1 would have dictated the allocation of the $100 million per year from SB 267 (2017) to the repayment of the TRANs debt instead of pursuing the final three lease-purchase agreement batches of $500 million each.

• Since neither citizen initiative was approved in November 2018, Senate Bill 1 required the proposed $2.337 billion bond issue to go before voters in November 2019. In May 2019, the state legislature passed SB 19-263, which moved the measure to the November 2020 and made amendments including lowering the amount of TRANs to be issued and, in the case of approval, repeal two rather than three $500 million lease-purchase agreements. One of the following two scenarios would then occur:
  • bond issue approved: the provisions specific to the TRANs debt outlined in SB1 and amended by SB 263 would be enacted— $1.837 billion of TRANs would be authorized and two of three installments of the lease-purchase agreement funding provided by SB 267 in 2017 (with a value of up to $500 million each) would be repealed.
  • bond issue rejected, the lease-purchase agreement funding provided by SB 267 in 2017 would stay in place, and an additional $50 million would be transferred from the general fund to the State Highway Fund annually for 21 years.

Lease-purchase agreements (Senate Bill 267 in 2017)

In 2017, the state legislature passed Senate Bill 267 allowing for four installments of $500 million in lease-purchase agreements (totaling $2 billion). A lease-purchase agreement is a financing mechanism that uses mortgages on state-owned property. Under the agreements, the state is required to sell buildings valued at $500 million. The purchaser then leases the building back to the state for 20 years, at which point, ownership of the building returns to the state. About $1.88 billion of the total proposed lease-purchase agreement amounts from Senate bill 267 were earmarked for transportation, and SB 267 also allocated $100 million in general fund revenue to the repayment of the lease-purchase agreements. If the 2021 measure passes, $500 million of lease-purchase agreements scheduled under current law for FY 2021-22 would be canceled. The cancellation of the final lease-purchase agreement was expected to increase state transportation revenue by about $840 million.

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing the initiative process in Colorado

The state process

In Colorado, the number of signatures required to qualify an initiated state statute for the ballot is equal to 5 percent of the total number of votes cast for the office of Colorado secretary of state in the preceding general election. State law provides that petitioners have six months to collect signatures after the ballot language and title are finalized. State statutes require a completed signature petition to be filed three months and three weeks before the election at which the measure would appear on the ballot. The Constitution, however, states that the petition must be filed three months before the election at which the measure would appear. The secretary of state generally lists a date that is three months before the election as the filing deadline.

The requirements to get an initiated state statute certified for the 2018 ballot:

• Signatures: 98,492 valid signatures were required.
• Deadline: The deadline to submit signatures was August 6, 2018.

The secretary of state is responsible for signature verification. Verification is conducted through a review of petitions regarding correct form and then a 5 percent random sampling verification. If the sampling projects between 90 percent and 110 percent of required valid signatures, a full check of all signatures is required. If the sampling projects more than 110 percent of the required signatures, the initiative is certified. If less than 90 percent, the initiative fails.

Details about this initiative

• Daniel Gibbs—Summit County Commissioner and member of the Summit County Chamber of Commerce—and Cathy A. Noon—former mayor of Centennial and 2017 Chair of the Metro Mayors Caucus—submitted the first four versions of this initiative on March 9, 2018.
• Ballot titles were issued for the first four versions on March 21, 2018.
• Cathy A. Noon and Timothy Mauck submitted a fifth version, #182, on April 6, 2018.
• A ballot title was issued for version #182 on April 18, 2018.
• On August 6, 2018, the Colorado Secretary of State's office announced via Twitter that proponents of the initiative had submitted signatures for Initiative #153.
• On August 23, 2018, the Colorado Secretary of State's office announced that the measure had qualified for the ballot. Of the 195,499 signatures submitted by proponents, 118,259 were found to be valid. A total of 98,492 were required.

Cost of signature collection:
Sponsors of the measure hired Kennedy Enterprises, Rocky Mountain Voter Outreach, and FieldWorks to collect signatures for the petition to qualify this measure for the ballot. A total of $591,356.82 was spent to collect the 98,492 valid signatures required to put this measure before voters, resulting in a total cost per required signature (CPRS) of $6.00.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Colorado

Poll times

In Colorado, polls are open from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. local time for those who choose to vote in person rather than by mail. An individual who is in line at the time polls close must be allowed to vote.

Registration requirements

Check your voter registration status here.

In Colorado, an individual can pre-register to vote if they are at least 15 years old. Voters must be at least 18 years old to vote in any election. A voter must be a citizen of the United States and have established residence in Colorado to vote.

Colorado voters can register to vote through Election Day. However, in order to automatically receive a absentee/mail-in ballot, a voter must register online, through the mail, at a voter registration agency, or driver's license examination facility at least eight days prior to Election Day. A voter that registers through a voter registration drive must submit their application no later than 22 days before the election to automatically receive an absentee/mail-in ballot. A voter can register online or submit a form in person or by fax, email, or mail.

Automatic registration

See also: Automatic voter registration

Colorado automatically registers eligible individuals to vote through the Department of Motor Vehicles and certain other state agencies.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

Colorado has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

See also: Same-day voter registration

Colorado allows same-day voter registration for individuals who vote in person.

Residency requirements

Colorado law requires 22 days of residency in the state before a person may vote.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

Colorado does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual applying to register to vote must attest that they are a U.S. citizen under penalty of perjury.

All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. One state, Ohio, requires proof of citizenship only when registering to vote at a Bureau of Motor Vehicles facility. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters.

Verifying your registration

The site Go Vote Colorado, run by the Colorado Secretary of State office, allows residents to check their voter registration status online.

Voter ID requirements

Colorado requires voters to present non-photo identification when voting in person. If voting by mail for the first, a voter may also need to return a photocopy of his or her identification with their mail-in ballot. Click here for more information.

The following list of accepted forms of identification was current as of October 2025. Click here for the most current information, sourced directly from the Office of the Colorado Secretary of State.

“

The following documents are acceptable forms of identification: A valid Colorado driver’s license or valid identification card issued by the Colorado Department of Revenue. (Note: documents issued to not lawfully present and temporarily lawfully present individuals under Part 5 of Article 2 of Title 42, C.R.S. are not acceptable forms of identification.) A valid U.S. passport. A valid employee identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector issued by any branch, department, agency, or entity of the U.S. government or of Colorado, or by any county, municipality, board, authority, or other political subdivision of Colorado. A valid pilot’s license issued by the federal aviation administration or other authorized agency of the U.S. A valid U.S. military identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector. A copy of a current (within the last 60 days) utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the elector. A Certificate of Degree of Indian or Alaskan Native Blood. A valid Medicare or Medicaid card issued by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. A certified copy of a U.S. birth certificate for the elector. Certified documentation of naturalization. A valid student identification card with a photograph of the eligible elector issued by an institute of higher education in Colorado, as defined in section 23-3.1-102(5), C.R.S.. A valid veteran identification card issued by the U.S. department of veterans affairs veterans health administration with a photograph of the eligible elector. A valid identification card issued by a federally recognized tribal government certifying tribal membership. Any form of identification listed above that shows your address must show a Colorado address to qualify as an acceptable form of identification. The following documents are also considered acceptable forms of identification for voting: Verification that a voter is a resident of a group residential facility, as defined in section 1-1-104(18.5), C.R.S. Verification that a voter is a person committed to the department of human services and confined and eligible to register and vote shall be considered sufficient identification of such person for the purposes of section 1-2-210.5, C.R.S. Written correspondence from the county sheriff or his or her designee to the county clerk indicating that a voter is confined in a county jail or detention facility.

”

• Note: SB 1, signed into law on May 12, 2025, specified that tribal IDs issued by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian Health Service, or another federal agency were also valid identification.

See also

2018 measures

• 2018 ballot measures
• Taxes on the ballot
• Transportation on the ballot
• 2018 petition deadlines

Colorado

• Colorado ballot measures
• Colorado initiative laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls
• Ballot measure signature costs

External links

• Colorado Secretary of State: 2017-2018 Initiative Filings, Agendas & Result