Elizabeth Park & Recreation District 2025 Ballot Measure Survey

Magellan Strategies is pleased to present the topline results of a survey of 773 registered voters within the Elizabeth Park and Recreation District. The interviews were conducted from November 6th-20th, 2025.

Voters in the Elizabeth Park and Recreation District expressed a moderately strong familiarity with the District and its offerings, with more than two-thirds reporting they were at least somewhat familiar with its programs, parks, and amenities. Approval of the District’s overall job managing parks, facilities, and recreation programs was quite high, though fewer voters felt strongly confident that the District spent taxpayer money wisely, with a notable share expressing uncertainty on that question.

When asked about general support for a modest tax increase to fund a new recreation center, a majority of voters indicated they would support such a measure. This initial question, framed broadly without specific dollar amounts or ballot language, drew the highest level of support seen throughout the survey.

Voters were then asked to rate the importance of various potential amenities for the proposed recreation center. Aquatics features — including a leisure pool and lap pool — along with fitness equipment ranked as the most important amenities. Features like a climbing wall, arts studio, café, and racquetball courts were viewed as lower priorities by respondents.

After reading specific sample ballot language proposing a mill levy increase over 30 years to fund construction and operation of a recreation center, a slim majority of voters indicated they would approve the measure. Opposition was meaningful, however, with roughly a third indicating they would reject it and a small share remaining undecided.

Voters were then presented with a series of informational statements about the project — including the District’s anticipated population growth, the absence of similar facilities in Elbert County, the planned sunset of the mill levy after 30 years, the proposed facility design, and the projected construction timeline. Most of these disclosures moved voters modestly toward approval, with the growth and lack of local facilities arguments proving particularly persuasive.

The one piece of information that shifted opinion most negatively was the specific cost breakdown — showing that a $750,000 home would see taxes increase by roughly $10 per month. After learning this, the share of voters leaning toward rejection rose noticeably, making the tax cost framing the most challenging aspect of the campaign.

After reviewing all the information and re-reading the ballot language, voter support settled at a slim majority in favor, essentially unchanged from the initial ballot test. Voters who said they would approve cited the lack of local recreation options, benefits for families and youth, community health, and the relatively modest cost. Those opposed cited resistance to any tax increase, concerns about the 30-year commitment and TABOR implications, a preference for preserving Elizabeth’s rural character, and a belief that infrastructure needs like roads and schools should take priority.