Prop 137 Proponents Spend $5 Million Outspending Opponents

Glenwood Springs —You’re standing at the edge of a trailhead in Pitkin County, watching the smoke from last summer’s fires hang low over the Roaring Fork Valley, and you ask yourself: who is actually paying for the people trying to keep that smoke from reaching my porch?

The answer, according to filings with the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office reported by the Post Independent, is a coalition that has now spent nearly $5 million to get Proposition 137 on your ballot. The disparity is stark, almost comical in its scale. While proponents reported an additional $1 million in fundraising and spending in their Oct. 19 report, hitting about $5 million total this election cycle, the opposition reported an additional $3,000. That’s a total of about $6,300 for the entire "No" campaign.

If you look closely at where that money is coming from, it isn’t your neighbor’s garage sale. The supporting committee, registered as Protect Colorado’s Land and Water, Prevent Wildfires, is bankrolled by heavyweight environmental nonprofits. The Nature Conservancy has poured in more than $2 million. Western Resource Advocates and its action fund have contributed a combined $900,000. The Holdfast Trust, associated with the company Patagonia, has given $255,000. The Trust for Public Land added $215,000, and the Conservation Fund chipped in $100,000.

In their latest filing alone, the Environmental Defense Action Fund donated $525,000. The Colorado Civic Alliance contributed another $100,000. And then there is Pamela Boll, a filmmaker with an address in New Jersey, who gave $300,000. There’s a warmth to the idea of protecting our wild spaces, but there is also a rough edge here: this isn’t just local passion. It’s institutional muscle.

The measure itself would create a pool of about $175 million for existing conservation and outdoors programs, specifically aiming to mitigate wildfire risk. It does this by allowing the state government to keep more of the taxes it collects from sports equipment sales. For you, sitting on your couch in Aspen or Glenwood Springs, the math is personal. If approved, Prop 137 would reduce your Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights, or TABOR, refunds by between $26 and $83 for single filers. For joint filers, double that. In some years, you’ll see less cash in your pocket because the state is redirecting those sports equipment taxes into wildfire and conservation projects.

The proponents argue this increases funding for crucial programs without raising new taxes. They have spent more than $3 million on consultants and professional services for signature gathering, campaign management, and compliance consulting. Since mid-September, they’ve also spent more than $1.6 million on advertising. You can feel it in the volume of mailers and digital ads that have flooded your inbox this month.

The opposition, registered as Protect Colorado’s Land, Communities, and Tax Dollars, is fighting with a handful of donations from Colorado residents ranging between $15 and $5,000. In their latest filing, they disclosed spending just $1,000 on ads with the O’Rourke Media Group, about $1,800 for ads in The Aspen Times, and $250 for Meta ads on social media. It is a grassroots effort against a corporate one, and the spending gap tells you exactly how much weight the "Yes" campaign has in shaping the narrative.

The question isn't just whether we need more money for wildfire mitigation, though that need is undeniable. It’s who controls the purse strings when we say yes. The smoke over the valley doesn’t care about the source of the funding, but your TABOR refund does.