Mountain Towns Carried Colorado's $2.7B Tax Measures

Aspen —The snow is still wet on the roof of the Vail Daily office, a heavy, gray blanket that signals the kind of cold that makes you want to stay inside. But outside, the temperature is dropping fast, and the wind is picking up. It’s the kind of weather that makes you think about how much you rely on the infrastructure around you — the roads, the power lines, the water treatment plants. And that’s exactly what was at stake in November’s election.

Colorado’s resort communities didn’t just support the tax-related ballot measures; they carried them over the finish line. While more rural areas leaned heavily toward opposition, the counties along the Interstate 70 corridor and those with deep ties to the ski industry and tourism provided the decisive margin. This wasn’t a close race in the mountain towns. It was a landslide.

Take Amendment 87, which passed with about 51.6% of the statewide vote. The measure removes the flat income tax requirement from the Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) and creates a graduated income tax system. The extra tax on higher earners funds a $2.7 billion pool for education, childcare, and healthcare. In Pitkin County, 62% of voters said yes. In Summit County, it was 58.5%. In Routt, Eagle, and Garfield counties, support ranged from 53% to 56%. Across these five counties, "yes" votes pulled ahead by just over 10,000. That’s the difference between victory and defeat.

Contrast that with Grand County, where opposition narrowly outpaced support by about 544 votes. Only 47% voted yes. In Rio Blanco County, 79% opposed the measure. In Moffat County, it was 74%. These are small counties, but their collective "no" votes added nearly 4,000 to the total. Without the mountain towns’ enthusiasm, Amendment 87 might have lost.

Proposition NN followed a similar pattern. It passed with about 57% of the vote, clearing the 55% threshold. The measure lets the state keep and spend up to $4.6 billion over the TABOR cap each year. That cuts refunds for taxpayers but boosts K-12 education funding by 2% annually for the next decade. Mountain resort communities backed it broadly. The exact county-by-county breakdown for Prop NN wasn’t fully detailed in the reporting, but the trend was clear: support was strongest where tourism and second homes drive the economy.

Proposition 137 also scraped by with about 52% of the vote. It exempts sales taxes on outdoor goods from the TABOR cap, reducing refunds and directing the extra revenue to conservation and outdoor programs. Again, the mountain counties likely played a key role in pushing it over the top.

The part everyone skips past is the sheer size of the gap between the mountain and rural votes. In Pitkin and Summit, support hit the high 50s and low 60s. In Rio Blanco and Moffat, opposition topped 70%. That’s not a slight preference; it’s a fundamental divide in how these communities view the role of state government and the value of their own tax dollars.

And that matters because these measures will shape Colorado’s finances for decades. Amendment 87 changes how the state taxes its residents. Prop NN determines how much money the state can keep without triggering refunds. Prop 137 affects how we fund the outdoors. All of it hinges on the narrow margins that the mountain communities helped secure.

Stand there long enough and you realize the election wasn’t really about the details of the tax code. It was about identity. For folks in the valleys, the mountain towns represent a lifestyle they aspire to — or one they envy. For the rural communities, the mountain towns represent a wealthy elite who benefit from state spending without paying their fair share. The ballot measures forced those tensions to the surface.

The Vail Daily reported that the breakdown of votes in northwest Colorado showed this stark contrast. The paper noted that support for Amendment 87 picked up thousands of votes in the I-70 corridor counties. The Daily highlighted the specific percentages: 62% in Pitkin, 58.5% in Summit, 56% in Routt, 55% in Eagle, and 53% in Garfield. Those numbers are the backbone of the statewide win.

Meanwhile, the opposition in the rural counties was just as strong. The paper pointed out that in Rio Blanco, 79% voted no. In Moffat, it was 74%. In Grand, the margin was razor-thin, with 53% voting no. Those "no" votes were essential in keeping the statewide margin tight. If the mountain towns hadn’t voted so strongly for the measures, the rural "no" votes would have tipped the balance.

This dynamic is not new to Colorado politics. The state has always been a patchwork of distinct regions, each with its own economic interests and cultural values. The Front Range cities tend to lean progressive, favoring higher taxes and more government services. The rural areas often lean conservative, preferring lower taxes and less regulation. The mountain communities sit somewhere in between, valuing both the quality of life that state funding provides and the freedom from excessive bureaucracy.

In this election, that middle ground proved to be the deciding factor. The mountain towns didn’t just support the measures; they embraced them. They saw the potential for improved schools, better healthcare, and a more vibrant economy. They were willing to pay a little more in taxes to get those benefits. The rural counties, on the other hand, were wary of any increase in taxation. They feared that the money would be wasted or mismanaged. They preferred to keep their dollars in their own pockets.

The result was a statewide victory for the tax measures, but a narrow one. Amendment 87 won by 86,098 votes. Prop NN won by a similar margin. Prop 137 also cleared the bar by a modest amount. None of these wins were comfortable. Any of them could have gone the other way if a few thousand more voters had chosen differently.

That’s why the role of the mountain communities is so important. They provided the cushion that allowed the measures to survive. Their enthusiasm offset the skepticism of the rural areas. Without them, the outcome would have been uncertain. With them, the path to victory was clear.

Now, as the snow continues to fall on the Vail Daily roof, the reality of those votes is setting in. The measures are law. The changes will begin to take effect. The state will start collecting the new taxes. The funds will start flowing to the designated programs. The impact will be felt across the state, from the urban centers to the remote outposts.

But for now, the focus remains on how it happened. On the specific choices made by the specific voters in the specific counties. On the precise percentages that determined the final tally. On the delicate balance between the "yes" and "no" camps. On the critical contribution of the mountain communities to that balance.

It’s a complex story, with many layers and nuances. But at its core, it’s a simple one. The mountain towns voted yes. The rural areas voted no. The yes votes won. That’s the basic framework. Everything else is detail.

And yet, those details matter. They reveal the texture of the decision. They show the intensity of the feeling. They highlight the depth of the division. They underscore the fragility of the result.

So, as the winter deepens and the days grow shorter, let’s remember that. Let’s remember the weight of those votes. Let’s appreciate the significance of that choice. Let’s recognize the power of that community.

Because in the end, it was their voice that counted. It was their preference that prevailed. It was their support that secured the win.

And that’s a fact worth noting.