---
title: "Proposition 137: Direct Sporting Goods Sales Tax Revenue for Conservation | The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures – Part 14 of 14"
description: "Colorado Proposition 137: conservation funding plan, sporting goods sales tax, TABOR refund effects, arguments for & against | Links to all 2026 measures"
---

[What's Up Americans? | Blog](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog)

# [Proposition 137: Direct Sporting Goods Sales Tax Revenue for Conservation | The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures – Part 14 of 14](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-137-2026-election)

 Written by [Marek Bobik](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/author/marek-bobik) | Oct 17, 2026, 2:04:12 AM

Should Colorado dedicate existing sporting goods sales tax revenue to conservation and wildfire mitigation—or keep that money available for the general state budget and taxpayer refunds?

That is the central question behind Proposition 137, 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. ([ebs.publicnow.com](https://ebs.publicnow.com/view/78C36F341C71A797B34BCEA5FAE4F4FC60E9FDFD?utm_source=openai))

Supporters describe it as investing in Colorado’s outdoors without increasing tax rates. Opponents raise concerns about smaller refunds, reduced budget flexibility, and the land-management practices the money could support. Understanding the proposal requires separating reduced refunds from changes in how Colorado retains and spends the revenue. ([yesonprop137.com](https://yesonprop137.com/))

## What Your Vote Means

### A YES vote

A **YES vote** would dedicate existing sporting goods sales tax revenue to specified conservation, wildfire mitigation, and outdoor recreation programs. It would exempt that revenue from Colorado’s constitutional revenue limit, reducing TABOR refunds when refunds would otherwise be required. ([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 keep that revenue in the general state budget, subject to existing revenue limits. Lawmakers could allocate it through the budget process, or it would be refunded when required. Rejecting Proposition 137 would not eliminate existing conservation programs. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

## Official Ballot Language

The official question asks whether Colorado should retain existing sporting goods sales tax revenue for conservation, wildfire prevention, and outdoor recreation, with an adjustment to protect certain tax credits.

**That is a summary—not the complete ballot wording.** The Secretary of State publishes the full question and [initiative text](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/titleBoard/filings/2025-2026/308Final.pdf). ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/ballot/contacts/2026.html))

## Official Proposition Language: What the Measure Actually Changes

Originally filed as **Initiative 308**, the proposal would create the **Conserve and Protect Colorado’s Water, Land, and Forests Fund**. Annual transfers would begin on **July 1, 2027**. ([leg.colorado.gov](https://leg.colorado.gov/ballots/direct-sporting-goods-sales-tax-revenue-for-conservation-2/files/text-of-measure))

### 1. Existing revenue would receive a dedicated destination

The measure would transfer an amount calculated from specified sporting goods sales tax revenue out of the General Fund. The new funding must **supplement—not replace—existing funding** for the identified programs. ([leg.colorado.gov](https://leg.colorado.gov/ballots/direct-sporting-goods-sales-tax-revenue-for-conservation-2/files/text-of-measure))

### 2. The money would be divided among four funds

| Recipient | Share |
| --- | --- |
| Great Outdoors Colorado Trust Fund | 47.5% |
| Colorado Wildfire Prevention and Water Fund | 47.5% |
| Outdoor Equity Fund | 2.5% |
| Outdoor Recreation Economic Development Cash Fund | 2.5% |

The wildfire and water allocation would support specified forestry, watershed, and mitigation programs, including a **one-time $10 million transfer** to the Prescribed Fire Claims Cash Fund in the first year. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-fiscal-impact-statements-english-accessible.pdf))

### 3. Future allocations could be reduced to protect tax credits

Beginning with **FY 2028–29**, the amount could be reduced if exempting the full revenue would lower the available **Family Affordability Tax Credit** or **Earned Income Tax Credit**. The proposal therefore does not guarantee the full projected allocation every year. ([leg.colorado.gov](https://leg.colorado.gov/ballots/direct-sporting-goods-sales-tax-revenue-for-conservation-2/files/text-of-measure))

Three additional details deserve attention.

### Would sporting goods become more expensive because of this measure?

The proposal would not increase the sales tax rate. Covered categories extend beyond conventional sports equipment to items such as boats, recreational vehicles, camping equipment, and certain rentals. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

### Would only sporting goods buyers receive smaller refunds?

No. The revenue exemption changes the statewide TABOR refund pool; it is not a refund adjustment calculated from each taxpayer’s sporting goods purchases. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-fiscal-impact-statements-english-accessible.pdf))

### What happens when Colorado is below its revenue limit?

The transfer could leave less General Fund money for other priorities rather than reduce refunds. **No higher tax rate does not mean no financial trade-off.** ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

## Sponsors and Designated Representatives

The Secretary of State lists **Brendan Witt** and **Aaron Citron** as Initiative 308’s designated representatives. Supporting committees include **Protect Colorado’s Land and Water, Prevent Wildfires** and **Make Good Change**. The listed opposition committee is **Protect Colorado’s Land, Communities, and Tax Dollars**. ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/ballot/contacts/2026.html))

The supporting campaign emphasizes conservation, water protection, and outdoor access. The opposition disputes both the fiscal approach and some anticipated forest-management spending. These are campaign positions—not neutral findings. ([yesonprop137.com](https://yesonprop137.com/))

## The Case for Voting YES on Proposition 137

*The arguments below describe competing policy positions, not guaranteed environmental or economic outcomes.*

### Investing in wildfire risk reduction and water protection

Supporters argue that dedicated funding would help protect communities and water resources while supporting conservation work. ([yesonprop137.com](https://yesonprop137.com/))

**Counterargument:** Opponents question whether the anticipated forestry spending would provide the most effective community protection. ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-137-sporting-goods-sales-tax/?trk=article-ssr-frontend-pulse_little-text-block))

**The question to weigh:** Does the proposal fund the kinds of protection you consider most valuable?

### Funding conservation without increasing tax rates

The supporting campaign argues that Colorado can invest more in its outdoors using revenue already collected. ([yesonprop137.com](https://yesonprop137.com/))

**Counterargument:** The Blue Book’s opposing argument stresses that retaining revenue still costs taxpayers through smaller refunds or reduced funding for other priorities. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

**The question to weigh:** Is the proposed investment worth weakening TABOR?

### Expanding outdoor opportunities

Supporters emphasize recreation-related economic development, workforce training, and improved outdoor access for young people and families. ([yesonprop137.com](https://yesonprop137.com/))

**Counterargument:** Critics question directing additional money to selected programs rather than weighing those needs against others through annual budgeting. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

**The question to weigh:** Should voters reserve this revenue for outdoor programs?

## The Case for Voting NO on Proposition 137

*The arguments below describe competing policy positions, not guaranteed fiscal or environmental outcomes.*

### Preserving taxpayer refunds

Opponents argue that Colorado should preserve TABOR’s refund protections rather than exempt another revenue stream. ([completecolorado.com](https://completecolorado.com/2026/09/21/the-case-against-colorado-proposition-137/?utm_source=openai))

**Counterargument:** Supporters consider conservation and wildfire risk reduction worthwhile uses of that existing revenue. ([yesonprop137.com](https://yesonprop137.com/))

**The question to weigh:** Would you prefer the potential refund or the proposed public investment?

### Maintaining budget flexibility

The League of Women Voters of Colorado opposes the measure’s fiscal approach, citing reduced legislative flexibility over General Fund spending. ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-137-sporting-goods-sales-tax/?trk=article-ssr-frontend-pulse_little-text-block))

**Counterargument:** Supporters seek a dedicated commitment precisely because conservation must compete with other demands. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))

**The question to weigh:** Should conservation receive protected funding or remain part of annual budget negotiations?

### Questioning forest-management priorities

Some opponents warn that the measure could expand logging and other interventions they consider environmentally harmful. ([completecolorado.com](https://completecolorado.com/2026/09/21/the-case-against-colorado-proposition-137/?utm_source=openai))

**Counterargument:** CPR reports that funded projects should remain subject to existing environmental laws and forestry rules. Passage would not itself approve every future project. ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-137-sporting-goods-sales-tax/?trk=article-ssr-frontend-pulse_little-text-block))

**The question to weigh:** Are existing project-selection processes and safeguards sufficient?

## Fiscal Impact

The **September 10, 2026, official fiscal analysis** estimates the following major effects. These are transfers of existing revenue—not additional sales taxes collected. ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-fiscal-impact-statements-english-accessible.pdf))

| Fiscal effect | FY 2027–28 | FY 2028–29 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Change in total state tax revenue collected | $0 | $0 |
| Estimated transfer from the General Fund | $175.0 million | $180.2 million |
| TABOR refunds | Reduced when applicable | Reduced when applicable |
| Other General Fund resources | Potentially reduced below the revenue limit | Potentially reduced below the revenue limit |

Actual spending would not necessarily occur in the same year as the transfers. For example, the fiscal analysis anticipates that GOCO would allocate its first-year receipts for spending in the following year. Future transfers are also subject to the tax-credit safeguard. ([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 a dedicated investment in conservation, wildfire risk reduction, water protection, and outdoor access. The strongest case for **NO** is preserving refunds, government accountability to taxpayers, and flexibility while questioning some spending priorities. ([yesonprop137.com](https://yesonprop137.com/))

My takeaway is that voters should separate three questions:

1. Do these programs deserve a dedicated revenue stream?
2. Are the potential refund and chipping away at TABOR acceptable?
3. Do you trust the proposed allocation and existing oversight processes?

A voter can support conservation while questioning this funding mechanism. Another can value taxpayer refunds while believing additional prevention and restoration work deserves priority.

**NOTE: Proposition 137 would not raise the sales tax rate, but it would allocate funds from the general fund to conservation and weaken TABOR protections.** ([leg.colorado.gov](https://leg.colorado.gov/ballots/direct-sporting-goods-sales-tax-revenue-for-conservation-2/files/text-of-measure))

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

 

 

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 137 measure page.** ([leg.colorado.gov](https://leg.colorado.gov/ballots/direct-sporting-goods-sales-tax-revenue-for-conservation-2))
- **Initiative 308 — Final measure text.** ([leg.colorado.gov](https://leg.colorado.gov/ballots/direct-sporting-goods-sales-tax-revenue-for-conservation-2/files/text-of-measure))
- **2026 Blue Book — Proposition 137, printed pages 64–68.** ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-blue-book-en-accessible.pdf))
- **Official fiscal impact statement — Proposition 137.** ([content.leg.colorado.gov](https://content.leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2026-fiscal-impact-statements-english-accessible.pdf))
- **Secretary of State — Ballot wording and registered committees.** ([coloradosos.gov](https://www.coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/ballot/contacts/2026.html))

### Reporting

- **Colorado Public Radio — Proposition 137 voter guide.** ([cpr.org](https://www.cpr.org/2026/09/25/vg-2026-prop-137-sporting-goods-sales-tax/?trk=article-ssr-frontend-pulse_little-text-block))
- **Colorado Newsline — Proposition 137 campaign overview.** ([coloradonewsline.com](https://coloradonewsline.com/voter-guides/ballot-measures/proposition-137/?utm_source=openai))

### Opinion and advocacy

- **Yes on Proposition 137 — Supporting campaign.** ([yesonprop137.com](https://yesonprop137.com/))
- **Complete Colorado — Guest editorial opposing Proposition 137.** ([completecolorado.com](https://completecolorado.com/2026/09/21/the-case-against-colorado-proposition-137/?utm_source=openai))

[View full post](https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-137-2026-election)

```json
{
  "@context" : "http://schema.org",
  "@type" : "BlogPosting",
  "author" : {
    "@type" : "Person",
    "name" : "Marek Bobik"
  },
  "dateModified" : "2026-10-17T02:36:36.600Z",
  "datePublished" : "2026-10-17T02:04:12Z",
  "headline" : "Proposition 137: Direct Sporting Goods Sales Tax Revenue for Conservation | The Scoop on Colorado’s November 2026 Proposed Measures – Part 14 of 14",
  "image" : {
    "@type" : "ImageObject",
    "height" : 768,
    "url" : "https://whatsupamericans.com/hubfs/Colorado%20Proposition%20137.png",
    "width" : 1376
  },
  "mainEntityOfPage" : "https://whatsupamericans.com/blog/proposition-137-2026-election",
  "publisher" : {
    "@type" : "Organization",
    "logo" : {
      "@type" : "ImageObject",
      "height" : 60,
      "url" : "/hs/hsstatic/content_shared_assets/static-1.4092/img/default-amp-logo.png",
      "width" : 60
    },
    "name" : "What's Up Americans? | Blog"
  }
}
```