Arapahoe County 2024 Ballot Measure Survey

Magellan Strategies is pleased to present the topline results of an online survey of 2,875 residents of Arapahoe County, Colorado. The interviews were conducted from February 12th to February 29th, 2024.

Arapahoe County residents expressed moderate familiarity with and approval of county services heading into the survey. Fifty-four percent of respondents reported being very or somewhat familiar with the public services, projects, and programs provided by the county, while 51% approved of the job the county was doing providing those services, and 21% disapproved. Views on fiscal stewardship were mixed: 45% agreed that the county was fiscally responsible and spent taxpayer money wisely, 31% disagreed, and 24% offered no opinion. When asked to identify the top issues the county should be addressing, residents most frequently cited infrastructure and road maintenance, homelessness and housing affordability, crime and public safety, taxation and budget management, and the need for community services and social support.

Residents also shared specific priorities when choosing among a list of issues. Reducing crime and improving public safety was selected most often at 52%, followed by managing street and road improvements and maintenance at 39%, and creating affordable rental and homeownership opportunities at 31%. Sixty-three percent of voters believed the county had the financial resources to provide an acceptable level of services, while 23% did not. On roads specifically, 60% of voters rated the condition of major streets and roads in the county as only fair or poor, though 62% approved of the job the Public Works Department was doing to maintain them. On public safety, 52% approved of the job the Arapahoe County Sheriff’s Office was doing, while 35% disapproved, and 66% of residents said they believed crime in the county had increased in recent years.

The survey also explored voter familiarity with and opinions about the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, known as TABOR. Seventy-seven percent of respondents reported being very or somewhat familiar with the TABOR Amendment, and 54% held a favorable view of it. Seventy-six percent correctly identified that TABOR requires the county to return tax revenue exceeding the established revenue limit to residents. However, opinions were divided on how the county returned that revenue, with 35% believing the county issued refund checks and 31% believing it lowered property taxes — suggesting significant public uncertainty about the county’s specific TABOR refund mechanism.

Two ballot measures were tested before voters received detailed information about the county’s financial situation. A 0.25% sales and use tax increase, estimated to cost the average household approximately $52 per year, received initial support of 55% in favor and 36% opposed. A separate TABOR de-Brucing measure — framed as not imposing any new tax but allowing the county to retain up to $75 million in property tax revenue that would otherwise be returned to taxpayers — received lower initial support of 50% in favor and 41% opposed. When asked to choose between the two measures, 42% preferred the TABOR retention measure and 37% preferred the sales tax increase.

Voters were then presented with a series of messages describing the impact of a potential 10% budget reduction across various county departments. Information about cuts to the Sheriff’s Office — including the elimination of deputy and patrol positions, all mental health co-responder positions, eight investigators, and five school resource officers — moved 51% of voters toward approval. Details about reductions to Human Services, including the elimination of 60 full-time employees and diminished protections for vulnerable children and adults, also moved 51% toward approval. Information about Public Works and Development cuts — including significant delays in permitting, deteriorating road conditions, and the elimination of major regional transportation projects — moved 51% toward approval as well.

Additional budget cut scenarios generated similarly moderate shifts in voter opinion. Details about reductions to the Clerk and Recorder’s Office, including the closure of two motor vehicle branches and a reduction in voter locations and ballot drop boxes, moved 49% of voters toward approval. Information about Community Resources cuts, including the elimination of homeless prevention programs and older adult support services, moved 49% toward approval. Details about Coroner’s Office reductions, including delayed death scene response times and diminished investigation quality, moved 46% toward approval — one of the lower persuasion scores among all messages tested.

After receiving all informational messages, voters were asked to re-evaluate both ballot measures. Support for the 0.25% sales tax increased to 57% in favor and 31% opposed — a 2-point gain from the uninformed test. Among undecided sales tax voters, opinion was closely divided, with 18% leaning yes, 19% leaning no, and 63% still undecided. The TABOR retention measure declined slightly in the informed test, with 47% in favor and 38% opposed — a 3-point drop from the uninformed test. The sales tax measure continued to outperform the TABOR retention measure following the information phase.

Open-ended responses showed that supporters of the sales tax increase most often cited the need to fund essential services, the appeal of spreading the financial burden more broadly across residents and visitors rather than relying solely on property owners, and the relatively modest per-household cost of the proposed increase. Opponents most frequently pointed to perceived government inefficiency and wasteful spending, the cumulative financial burden of taxes on residents already struggling with the high cost of living, and a preference for prioritizing core services over broader programming. Supporters of the TABOR retention measure cited the need to maintain essential services and quality of life, the fact that it would not constitute a new tax, and opposition to TABOR’s restrictions on county spending. Those opposing the TABOR measure most often cited general opposition to any tax increase, a lack of trust in how government spent existing funds, and strong support for TABOR as a protection against excessive taxation.