---
title: "Proposition 134: Male and Female Participation in School and Collegiate Sports | The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures – Part 11 of 14"
description: Colorado Proposition 134’s proposed school sports eligibility rules, arguments for & against, & its implications | Links to all Colorado 2026 Measurements
image: https://whatsupamericans.com/hubfs/Colorado%20Proposition%20134.png
---

[Skip to content](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-134-2026-election#main-content)

- [HOME](https://whatsupamericans.com)
- [INTERVIEWS](https://whatsupamericans.com/interviews)
- [TALK TO US](https://whatsupamericans.com/interview-sign-up)
- [PRIVACY](https://whatsupamericans.com/privacy)
- [TERMS OF USE](https://whatsupamericans.com/terms)
- [CONTACT](https://whatsupamericans.com/contact)
- [BLOG](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog)

 Oct 16, 2026, 6:01:28 PM

# Proposition 134: Male and Female Participation in School and Collegiate Sports | The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures – Part 11 of 14

[Marek Bobik](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/author/marek-bobik)

Share: [facebook-f icon](http://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-134-2026-election) [linkedin-in icon](http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-134-2026-election) [Twitter icon](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-134-2026-election) [pinterest-p icon](http://pinterest.com/pin/create/link/?url=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-134-2026-election) [envelope icon](mailto:?body=https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-134-2026-election)

Should Colorado establish a statewide biological-sex requirement for school sports—or leave eligibility decisions with schools and athletic organizations, subject to existing law?

That is the central question behind Proposition 134, which Colorado voters will decide on November 3, 2026. The citizen initiative would change state statutes rather than the Constitution, so it requires a simple majority to pass. ([leg.colorado.gov](https://leg.colorado.gov/ballots/male-and-female-participation-in-school-and-collegiate-sports-2?utm_source=openai))

Supporters describe the proposal as protecting fairness and opportunities for girls and women. Opponents argue it would exclude transgender students and create uncertainty about how schools would verify athletes’ sex. Understanding the proposal requires separating its eligibility rules from questions about implementation. ([coloradopolitics.com](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/10/02/transgender-athletes-biological-sex-colorado-proposition-134/))

## What Your Vote Means

### A YES vote

A **YES vote** would require school-sponsored sports teams to be designated male, female, or coeducational. Participation on sex-designated teams would generally depend on biological sex as defined in the measure, rather than gender identity. Schools would have to adopt implementing policies. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

### A NO vote

A **NO vote** would reject these requirements. Schools, school districts, and athletic associations would continue making eligibility decisions subject to applicable state and federal law. It would not establish one universal eligibility policy for every Colorado sports program. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

## Official Ballot Language

The ballot question asks voters to approve restrictions based on reproductive biology, male/female/coeducational team designations, an exception allowing females onto male teams when no female team is available, protections for schools maintaining female teams, and enforcement authority for the education commissioner. This is a summary—not the complete ballot wording. ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-134-trans-students-sports/))

**The proposal does more than restrict participation on girls’ teams.** It also regulates eligibility for boys’ teams and requires schools to implement the new rules. ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2025-2026/109Final.pdf))

## Official Proposition Language: What the Measure Actually Changes

The final text, originally filed as **Initiative 109**, would add Article 60 to Title 25 of the Colorado Revised Statutes. Its effective date would be **January 1, 2027**. ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2025-2026/109Final.pdf))

### 1. Teams would receive one of three designations

| Team designation | Participation rule |
| --- | --- |
| Male | Generally restricted to participants classified as male |
| Female | Restricted to participants classified as female |
| Coeducational or mixed | Open regardless of sex or gender |

A participant classified as female could join a male team when no female team for that sport was offered or available. There is no corresponding exception allowing a participant classified as male onto a female team. ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2025-2026/109Final.pdf))

### 2. The definitions concern reproductive systems—not demonstrated fertility

The text defines female and male by whether the reproductive system is organized around producing ova or sperm. It does **not** require proof that someone currently produces reproductive cells. ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2025-2026/109Final.pdf))

### 3. The scope extends beyond varsity competition

The measure covers public, charter, private, and religious schools, along with public and private colleges and universities. It includes interscholastic and intramural sports and school-sponsored after-school programs. Independently operated youth leagues are outside its scope. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

Three implementation details deserve a closer look.

### How would schools verify eligibility?

The proposal does not prescribe a particular verification method. Schools and districts would determine their procedures. **It does not expressly mandate genital examinations, chromosome tests, or a particular document.** Concerns about invasive testing describe possible implementation risks—not an examination requirement written into the measure. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

### Who would enforce it?

For school districts intentionally refusing to comply, the education commissioner would provide notice and reasonable time for compliance before taking remedial action within existing authority. The Blue Book identifies no equivalent enforcement mechanism for private schools, colleges, universities, or athletic associations. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-fiscal-impact-statements-english-accessible.pdf))

### What protections would schools receive?

The text would prohibit government entities, licensing or accrediting organizations, and athletic associations from entertaining complaints, investigating, or taking adverse action against schools for maintaining separate female teams. That provision should not be read as a guarantee that no federal legal challenge could occur. ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2025-2026/109Final.pdf))

## Sponsors and Designated Representatives

The Secretary of State lists **Erin Lee** and **Michele Austin** as Initiative 109’s designated representatives. ([coloradosos.gov](https://coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/index.html?utm_source=openai))

**Protect Kids Colorado** supports Proposition 134 and promotes it alongside Propositions 133 and 135. ([protectkidscolorado.org](https://www.protectkidscolorado.org/resources?utm_source=openai))

Organized opposition includes **Families Not Politics**, whose coalition includes One Colorado, Rocky Mountain Equality, the Transgender Law Center, and Inside Out Youth Services. ([coloradonewsline.com](https://coloradonewsline.com/voter-guides/ballot-measures/proposition-134/))

Campaign affiliations provide context; they do not settle the policy question.

## The Case for Voting YES on Proposition 134

*The following are attributed policy arguments, not guaranteed outcomes.*

### Protecting competitive opportunities for girls and women

Supporters argue that sex-based categories preserve female athletes’ opportunities to win competitions, set records, earn roster positions, and pursue scholarships. They view biological sex as the appropriate eligibility boundary. ([coloradopolitics.com](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/10/02/transgender-athletes-biological-sex-colorado-proposition-134/))

**Counterargument:** Opponents argue that a categorical rule excludes transgender students without considering the circumstances of individual sports or athletes. ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-134-trans-students-sports/))

**The question to weigh:** Is one statewide eligibility boundary the fairest approach across different ages, sports, and competitive levels?

### Addressing safety concerns

Supporters argue that physical differences associated with sex can affect strength, size, and injury risks, particularly in sports involving contact. They believe separate categories provide appropriate protection. ([coloradopolitics.com](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/10/02/transgender-athletes-biological-sex-colorado-proposition-134/))

**Counterargument:** Opponents question applying the same restriction to young children, recreational programs, and high-level competition rather than tailoring rules to the activity. ([coloradopolitics.com](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/10/02/transgender-athletes-biological-sex-colorado-proposition-134/))

**The question to weigh:** Should safety concerns produce one statewide rule or sport-specific eligibility standards?

### Establishing a consistent statewide standard

Supporters interviewed by CPR say federal policy and individual districts have not adequately resolved the issue. They favor a clear statewide requirement. ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-134-trans-students-sports/))

**Counterargument:** A uniform eligibility definition would not necessarily create uniform verification procedures, because schools would still decide how to establish eligibility. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

## The Case for Voting NO on Proposition 134

### Exclusion could undermine students’ participation and belonging

Opponents argue that school sports provide teamwork, confidence, and social connection—not just competitive awards. They warn that restrictions could force transgender students to change teams or stop participating in a particular sport. ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-134-trans-students-sports/))

**Counterargument:** Supporters argue that maintaining female categories protects other students’ opportunities and that coeducational participation remains available under the proposal. ([coloradopolitics.com](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/10/02/transgender-athletes-biological-sex-colorado-proposition-134/))

**The question to weigh:** How should schools balance inclusion with the purpose of sex-separated competition?

### Verification could affect more than transgender athletes

Opponents warn that athletes could face scrutiny because of their appearance, strength, or success. Without a prescribed verification process, they fear inconsistent treatment or intrusive demands. ([coloradopolitics.com](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/10/02/transgender-athletes-biological-sex-colorado-proposition-134/))

**Counterargument:** The proposal itself does not require invasive testing. Those concerns depend partly on how implementing authorities choose to administer it. ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2025-2026/109Final.pdf))

**The question to weigh:** Should verification safeguards be specified before imposing the eligibility requirement?

### Local flexibility would be reduced

Current policies are not uniform across Colorado, and collegiate associations also have their own requirements. Proposition 134 would replace that flexibility with a statutory eligibility framework. ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-134-trans-students-sports/))

**Counterargument:** Supporters consider varying policies a reason for statewide action rather than a reason to preserve local discretion. ([coloradopolitics.com](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/10/02/transgender-athletes-biological-sex-colorado-proposition-134/))

**The question to weigh:** Which decisions should voters establish statewide, and which should remain with sports administrators?

## Fiscal Impact

The **September 10, 2026, official fiscal analysis** reports these estimated state-budget effects:

| Fiscal effect | FY 2026–27 | FY 2027–28 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| State revenue | $0 | $0 |
| State expenditures shown in the fiscal table | $0 | $0 |
| TABOR refund changes | $0 | $0 |
| Additional state staffing | None | None |

**Those figures do not mean implementation would require no work or expense.** The analysis anticipates enforcement workload and possible legal-service costs, assumes most districts will comply, and expects enforcement costs to be minimal. Additional funding needs would go through the budget process. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-fiscal-impact-statements-english-accessible.pdf))

## Conclusion

The strongest case for **YES** is that statewide sex-based eligibility rules would protect female competitive opportunities and address fairness and safety concerns. The strongest case for **NO** is that the restrictions would exclude transgender students while leaving important verification questions unresolved. ([coloradopolitics.com](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/10/02/transgender-athletes-biological-sex-colorado-proposition-134/))

A voter can value female athletic opportunities while questioning this proposal’s scope. Another can support transgender students while believing sex-separated categories need clearer boundaries.

## [Share & Engage](https://leg.colorado.gov/explorebudget)

 

[![Share on facebook](https://7528309.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hub/7528309/hubfs/raw_assets/public/mV0_d-web-default-modules_hubspot/img/facebook-color.png?width=24&name=facebook-color.png)](https://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatsupamericans.com%2Fblog%2Fproposition-134-2026-election%3Futm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_source%3Dfacebook) [![Share on linkedin](https://7528302.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hub/7528302/hubfs/raw_assets/public/mV0_d-web-default-modules_hubspot/img/linkedin-color.png?width=24&name=linkedin-color.png)](https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatsupamericans.com%2Fblog%2Fproposition-134-2026-election%3Futm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_source%3Dlinkedin) [![Share on twitter](https://7528304.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hub/7528304/hubfs/raw_assets/public/mV0_d-web-default-modules_hubspot/img/twitter-color.png?width=24&name=twitter-color.png)](https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?original_referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatsupamericans.com%2Fblog%2Fproposition-134-2026-election%3Futm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_source%3Dtwitter&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatsupamericans.com%2Fblog%2Fproposition-134-2026-election%3Futm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_source%3Dtwitter&source=tweetbutton&text=) [![Share on pinterest](https://7528311.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hub/7528311/hubfs/raw_assets/public/mV0_d-web-default-modules_hubspot/img/pinterest-color.png?width=24&name=pinterest-color.png)](https://pinterest.com/pin/create/button/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwhatsupamericans.com%2Fblog%2Fproposition-134-2026-election%3Futm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_source%3Dpinterest&media=) [![Share on email](https://7528311.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hub/7528311/hubfs/raw_assets/public/mV0_d-web-default-modules_hubspot/img/email-color.png?width=24&name=email-color.png)](mailto:?subject=Check+out+https%3A%2F%2Fwhatsupamericans.com%2Fblog%2Fproposition-134-2026-election%3Futm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_source%3Demail&body=Check+out+https%3A%2F%2Fwhatsupamericans.com%2Fblog%2Fproposition-134-2026-election%3Futm_medium%3Dsocial%26utm_source%3Demail)

 

If you find this post useful, [sign up](https://whatsupamericans.com/interview-blog-alert-sign-up) for notifications of the following blog posts. 

Share your thoughts in the comments below.

---

## The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures Series

Links to blog posts on all Colorado Amendments and Measures

1. [Amendment 81: Law Enforcement Communication with Federal Immigration Authorities](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/colorado-amendment-81-2026-election)
2. [Amendment 82: Constitutional Right to Purchase and Sell Natural Gas](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/colorado-amendment-82-2026-election)
3. <https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/colorado-amendment-82-2026-election>[Amendment 83: Constitutional Right to Hunt and Fish](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/colorado-amendment-83-2026-election)
4. [Amendment 84: Mail Ballot Voter Identification](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/colorado-amendment-84-2026-election)
5. [Amendment 85: Plain Language Ballot Titles](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/htcolorado-amendment-85-2026-election)
6. [Amendment 86: Requirements for Off-Cycle Congressional Redistricting](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/colorado-amendment-86-2026-election)
7. [Amendment 87: Graduated Income Tax](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/colorado-amendment-87-2026-election)
8. [Proposition NN](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-nn-2026-election): Keep and Spend Money for Education and Other Purposes
9. [Proposition 132](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-132-2026-election): Increase Penalties for Fentanyl Crimes
10. [Proposition 133](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-133-2026-election): Penalties for Human Trafficking of a Minor
11. [Proposition 134](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-134-2026-election): Male and Female Participation in School and Collegiate Sports
12. [Proposition 135](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-135-2026-election): Prohibit Surgery on Minors in Response to Perception of Sex or Gender
13. [Proposition 136](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-136-2026-election): Income Tax Limit
14. [Proposition 137](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-137-2026-election): Direct Sporting Goods Sales Tax Revenue for Conservation

 

## Learn More

### Official wording and analysis

- **Colorado General Assembly — Proposition 134 measure page.** ([leg.colorado.gov](https://leg.colorado.gov/ballots/male-and-female-participation-in-school-and-collegiate-sports-2?utm_source=openai))
- **Secretary of State — Initiative 109 final measure text.** ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2025-2026/109Final.pdf))
- **2026 Blue Book — Proposition 134, printed pages 55–58.** ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))
- **Official 2026 fiscal impact statements — Proposition 134.** ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-fiscal-impact-statements-english-accessible.pdf))

### Reporting

- **CPR — Proposition 134 voter guide.** ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-134-trans-students-sports/))
- **Colorado Politics — Transgender athletes in schools.** ([coloradopolitics.com](https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2026/10/02/transgender-athletes-biological-sex-colorado-proposition-134/))
- **Colorado Newsline — Proposition 134 voter guide and campaign overview.** ([coloradonewsline.com](https://coloradonewsline.com/voter-guides/ballot-measures/proposition-134/))

[voting](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/tag/voting)

## Related posts

[![Colorado Proposition 136: Income Tax Rate Limit of 4.4%](https://whatsupamericans.com/hs-fs/hubfs/Colorado%20Proposition%20136.png?height=200&name=Colorado%20Proposition%20136.png)](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-136-2026-election)

[voting](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/tag/voting)

## [Proposition 136: Income Tax Rate Limit | The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures – Part 13 of 14](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-136-2026-election)

[Marek Bobik](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/author/marek-bobik) 

 Oct 16, 2026, 7:20:49 PM

Should Colorado establish its current income tax rate as a legal ceiling—or keep existing law...

[Read more](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-136-2026-election)

[![Colorado Proposition 133: Penalties for Human Trafficking of a Minor](https://whatsupamericans.com/hs-fs/hubfs/Colorado%20Proposition%20133.png?height=200&name=Colorado%20Proposition%20133.png)](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-133-2026-election)

[voting](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/tag/voting)

## [Proposition 133: Penalties for Human Trafficking of a Minor | The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures – Part 10 of 14](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-133-2026-election)

[Marek Bobik](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/author/marek-bobik) 

 Oct 16, 2026, 5:09:04 PM

Should someone convicted of child sex trafficking automatically spend the rest of their life in...

[Read more](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-133-2026-election)

[![Colorado Proposition 135: Prohibit Surgery on Minors in Response to Perception of Sex or Gender](https://whatsupamericans.com/hs-fs/hubfs/Colorado%20Proposition%20135.png?height=200&name=Colorado%20Proposition%20135.png)](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-135-2026-election)

[voting](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/tag/voting)

## [Proposition 135: Prohibit Surgery on Minors in Response to Perception of Sex or Gender | The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures – Part 12 of 14](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-135-2026-election)

[Marek Bobik](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/author/marek-bobik) 

 Oct 16, 2026, 6:25:43 PM

Should Colorado prohibit certain surgeries until a person turns 18—or leave those decisions to...

[Read more](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-135-2026-election)

facebook-f icon linkedin-in icon Twitter icon instagram icon

- [Our Blog](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog)

- Privacy
- Terms of Use

[![WUA Favicon-1](https://whatsupamericans.com/hubfs/Branding/WUA%20Favicon-1.png "WUA Favicon-1")](https://www.whatsupamericans.com)

---

**9249 S Broadway, Unit 200-536, Highlands Ranch, CO, 80129**

Copyright © 2024,

```json
{
  "@context" : "https://schema.org",
  "@type" : "BlogPosting",
  "author" : {
    "@type" : "Person",
    "name" : "Marek Bobik",
    "url" : "https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/author/marek-bobik"
  },
  "dateModified" : "2026-10-17T02:32:57.402Z",
  "datePublished" : "2026-10-17T00:01:28.000Z",
  "headline" : "Proposition 134: Male and Female Participation in School and Collegiate Sports | The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures – Part 11 of 14",
  "image" : [ "https://whatsupamericans.com/hubfs/Colorado%20Proposition%20134.png" ],
  "mainEntityOfPage" : {
    "@id" : "https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-134-2026-election",
    "@type" : "WebPage"
  },
  "publisher" : {
    "@type" : "Organization",
    "logo" : {
      "@type" : "ImageObject",
      "url" : "https://whatsupamericans.com/hubfs/Branding/WUA%20Logo.png"
    },
    "name" : "WhatsUpAmericans.com"
  }
}
```