OFFICIAL BALLOT QUESTION

“Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes creating new law restricting participation in all K-12 and collegiate school sports based on the participant’s sex as determined by certain aspects of their biological reproductive system, and, in connection therewith, requiring a school, institution of higher education, or athletic association to designate each school or intramural athletic team or sport as male, female, or coeducational; only allowing participants to compete on the team or sport of their designated sex or to compete on a coeducational team; creating an exception to allow a female to participate on a male-designated team or sport if there is no female team available; prohibiting a government entity, licensing or accrediting organization, or athletic association from entertaining a complaint, opening an investigation, or taking other adverse action against a school for maintaining separate teams or sports for females; and providing the commissioner of education with the authority to enforce the proposed initiative for K-12 school districts?”

Source  Colorado Secretary of State certified ballot title for Initiative 109

NEUTRAL OVERVIEW

Proposition 134 is a statutory measure that creates a statewide sex-based eligibility rule for school-sponsored sports. Every covered team must be designated for biological males, biological females, or as coeducational or mixed. Students may compete on the team matching their biological sex or on a mixed team. A female student may join a male team when no corresponding female team is available. A YES vote adopts these rules. A NO vote leaves eligibility to the existing combination of law, school policy, and athletic-association standards.

The measure defines male and female by whether a person’s reproductive system is organized around the production of sperm or ova. It applies from elementary school through college to public, charter, private, and religious schools, including interscholastic teams, intramural sports, and school-sponsored after-school programs. It does not apply to independent youth leagues that are not operated by schools.

Source  2026 Colorado Blue Book analysis of Proposition 134

The measure does not require a particular test, document, or examination to establish eligibility. Each school or district would create its own verification procedure. It requires public K-12 districts to receive notice and time to make a good-faith correction before the Commissioner of Education takes remedial action, but it provides no specific enforcement process for private schools, colleges, universities, or athletic associations.

The official analysis says the measure’s interaction with the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act remains unclear. It also notes that federal policy currently favors sex-based female teams, that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in June 2026 that Title IX permits states to maintain separate male and female sports based on biological sex, and that NCAA female varsity eligibility is already limited to athletes assigned female at birth. NCAA rules do not cover collegiate intramurals.

THE PROPONENT CASE

Supporters argue that the female athletic category exists because sex-linked physical differences, especially after puberty, can affect strength, speed, power, stature, lung capacity, muscle development, endurance, and injury risk. They contend that a category created to give girls and women meaningful competition loses its purpose if biological sex no longer determines eligibility.

They also argue that roster places, playing time, records, championships, awards, recruitment, and scholarships are limited resources. A statewide rule protects female athletes from having those opportunities displaced and prevents eligibility from changing by district or opponent. In contact sports, proponents also cite injury risk; in team settings, they cite privacy and emotional boundaries connected to travel and changing facilities.

THE OPPONENT CASE

Opponents argue that transgender students are a small and vulnerable group for whom school sports can provide health, friendship, confidence, and belonging. Requiring a student to join a team that conflicts with the student’s gender identity may cause humiliation, isolation, harassment, or withdrawal from athletics. They emphasize that age, puberty, medical treatment, sport, skill level, and individual physiology differ, and they oppose one categorical rule for every student from elementary school through college.

Opponents also focus on verification. Because the measure sets no statewide procedure, districts could demand different records, medical certifications, tests, or examinations. Girls whose appearance, strength, or success does not match someone else’s expectations could face intrusive challenges. Opponents also warn of litigation under state anti-discrimination law and uneven enforcement because the measure regulates institutions more broadly than its stated enforcement process reaches.

OFFICIAL MEASURE INFORMATION

Current committee listings and contact information: coloradosos.gov/pubs/elections/Initiatives/ballot/contacts/2026.html.

THE COLORADO CONSERVATIVE RECOMMENDS YES

WHY WE RECOMMEND YES

We recommend YES because fairness requires Colorado to preserve a meaningful female athletic category. The fight for women’s equal civic, educational, and athletic opportunity spans generations. School sports became one of the places where that progress could be measured: girls and women gained teams, coaching, facilities, records, championships, recruitment, and scholarships that had long been denied or neglected. Those opportunities should not be treated as symbolic or expendable.

Female sports are separated by sex for a practical reason. On average, biological differences that become more pronounced through puberty can affect size, speed, power, strength, reach, muscle mass, lung capacity, endurance, and injury risk. The degree of advantage varies by sport and by individual, and there is overlap between athletes. But categories are not built around whether every individual male can defeat every individual female. They are built around group-level differences that materially shape fair competition at the upper end of performance.

That distinction matters because athletic opportunities are scarce. A roster has a fixed number of places. A race has a fixed number of lanes. A championship has a winner. Records, all-state recognition, recruiting attention, and scholarships cannot be awarded to everyone. When a policy allows biological males into a protected female category, any competitive advantage can displace a female athlete from an opportunity created specifically to advance girls and women. Protecting that category is not hostility toward transgender people. It is fidelity to the reason the category exists.

A clear sex-based rule is also more administrable than asking schools to measure each athlete’s hormones, treatment history, strength, or predicted advantage sport by sport. Those individualized systems can become invasive, expensive, and arbitrary. Biological sex supplies a consistent classification rule. Proposition 134 therefore draws the right basic line: female teams are reserved for biological females, male teams are generally reserved for biological males, and mixed teams remain open to everyone.

The privacy and safety discussion must be handled with equal care. Transgender students should never be presumed to be predators, and their identities do not make them responsible for the misconduct of bad actors. At the same time, schools must design rules that cannot be exploited merely by assertion and that recognize the bodily privacy of every student. Adolescents are still developing judgment and self-control; adult policy should create clear boundaries rather than assume every child will navigate intimate shared spaces perfectly.

Proposition 134 regulates team eligibility; it is not a complete locker-room or bathroom code. Schools still need humane facility policies. Private changing stalls, private showers where practical, and individual restroom options should be available to any student who wants them, without forcing a transgender student or any other child into public humiliation. Privacy accommodations should protect everyone and should never become punishment or forced isolation.

We also hear the central concern of transgender students and their families. These students are not political abstractions. They are children and young adults who want friendship, exercise, achievement, and a place on a team. Many have endured bullying or rejection. A fair society should not answer their request for belonging with contempt. Respectful names, protection from harassment, equal access to education, and meaningful opportunities to participate in athletics are duties schools owe every student.

The measure itself provides part of the answer by permitting coeducational or mixed teams that are open to participants of any sex or gender. But permission is not the same as availability. A school can comply without creating a single mixed option. Colorado’s legislature, schools, colleges, and athletic associations should therefore build practical alternatives: open or mixed intramural divisions, regional teams shared by smaller districts, club programs, skills clinics, recreational leagues, and events organized by skill or weight where appropriate. These should be real athletic opportunities, not ceremonial sidelines.

Transgender athletes would also remain eligible for the team aligned with their biological sex. We should be honest that some students will not experience that as full inclusion. That is why open and mixed options matter. The goal should be to preserve fair female competition without telling any student that athletics, teamwork, or recognition are closed to them entirely.

The measure’s greatest defect is its silence on verification. A statewide eligibility rule paired with dozens of local verification systems can invite rumor, targeting, and invasive demands. No child should be subjected to a public accusation, physical inspection, or unnecessary medical test because another person thinks she looks too strong or insufficiently feminine. The legislature should establish a confidential, records-first process; restrict who may challenge eligibility; require written reasons and prompt appeal; protect medical information; and prohibit retaliatory or frivolous complaints.

The legal and administrative gaps also require correction. The official Blue Book says interaction with the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act is unclear, enforcement is specified mainly for public K-12 districts, and state legal costs cannot yet be determined. Because Proposition 134 is statutory, the General Assembly can amend it. Lawmakers should clarify enforcement, harmonize the law with controlling federal decisions, and correct any provision that creates inconsistent treatment or unnecessary intrusion without weakening the protected female category.

Fairness is not achieved by erasing one group’s legitimate protections or by dismissing another group’s humanity. Colorado can preserve sex-based female teams, protect privacy, welcome transgender students, and build open avenues for participation. Until the legislature supplies a better system that accomplishes all four, the clearer duty is to preserve the female athletic category. We recommend a YES vote, followed by immediate work on confidential verification and genuine mixed or open opportunities.

HOW WE REACHED THE SCORES

Each category uses five tests worth 0 to 10 points. The fixed anchors are: 0 for clear harm or failure; 2 for a material weakness; 5 for mixed or neutral evidence; 8 for a clear benefit with workable safeguards; and 10 for an exceptional benefit with strong controls. Intermediate whole numbers are used only when the evidence falls between anchors.

Star conversion is fixed: 0–4 points earns no star; 5–14 earns one; 15–24 earns two; 25–34 earns three; 35–44 earns four; and 45–50 earns five. The same thresholds apply to every category.

FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY   34 OF 50   ★★★☆☆

Direct implementation costs should be modest, but legal exposure and locally designed verification procedures create uncertain expenses.

LIMITED GOVERNMENT   29 OF 50   ★★★☆☆

Protecting fair female competition is a legitimate public role, but the measure imposes one broad statewide rule across ages, sports, and institutions.

INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY   31 OF 50   ★★★☆☆

The measure protects female athletes’ equal opportunity and privacy while limiting transgender students’ preferred team placement.

INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY   24 OF 50   ★★☆☆☆

The ballot states the core rule clearly, but verification, enforcement, and interaction with existing state law remain materially incomplete.

LONG-TERM COLORADO IMPACT   36 OF 50   ★★★★☆

The measure can preserve female athletic opportunity statewide, but its durability depends on respectful inclusion and careful implementation.

OVERALL RESULT

The result supports a YES recommendation because the measure preserves the practical purpose of the female athletic category and allows mixed teams. The score remains three stars—not five—because it applies broadly across ages and levels, does not guarantee an inclusive alternative, omits a safe verification process, leaves major enforcement gaps, and may conflict with existing state law.

WHAT WE WILL HOLD GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLE FOR

Whatever the election result, the publication will compare the promise of fair female competition with actual participation, privacy, student treatment, legal outcomes, and taxpayer cost.

HOW WE WILL DO IT

1. Establish the baseline. Record team offerings, participation, roster places, championships, records, scholarships, injuries, complaints, and existing transgender-athlete policies for at least the three years before implementation.

2. Measure female opportunity. Track female participation, cuts, playing time, podium places, records, recruiting, awards, and scholarships by sport and level. Do not treat policy adoption alone as proof that opportunity improved.

3. Measure inclusive participation. Report the number and location of mixed or open teams, regional programs, club alternatives, and intramural options; participation and retention; and how often students have no practical team available.

4. Prevent invasive verification. Publish every verification policy. Require confidential, records-first procedures; prohibit public accusations and routine physical examinations; restrict access to medical information; and track complaints, appeals, data breaches, and frivolous challenges.

5. Protect every student from harassment. Track bullying complaints, discipline, retaliation, team removals, and school climate without exposing individual students. Enforce the same conduct rules regardless of a student’s sex, gender identity, viewpoint, or team.

6. Protect privacy in athletic facilities. Report whether private changing, shower, and restroom options are reasonably available to any student who requests them. Ensure accommodations do not become forced isolation or public labeling.

7. Audit consistency. Compare eligibility decisions, evidence requirements, timelines, appeals, and remedies across districts, private schools, colleges, and athletic associations. Correct policies that create materially different treatment without a lawful reason.

8. Track legal and fiscal consequences. Compare actual state, district, college, and athletic-association costs with the official forecast. Publish litigation, settlements, federal-funding disputes, remedial actions, and the public money spent on each.

9. Review edge cases respectfully. Monitor accommodations for differences in sex development, disputed records, students moving between districts, and sports without a corresponding team. Use confidential expert review rather than public controversy.

10. Require one-, three-, and five-year decisions. At each review point, state whether to keep, narrow, expand, or repeal each provision. Recommend immediate amendments if verification becomes invasive, female opportunity is not protected, students are left without meaningful participation, or enforcement is inconsistent.

Primary accountability records: Colorado Department of Education policies and remedial actions; CHSAA and NCAA eligibility rules; school, district, college, and athletic-association participation data; scholarship and championship records; complaint and appeal logs; Department of Law expenses; court decisions; student climate data; and General Assembly budget documents. Student medical and identity information must remain confidential.

APPENDIX INITIATIVE 109 TEXT

Source  Colorado Secretary of State final text of Initiative 109

Be it enacted by the people of the State of Colorado,

SECTION 1. Legislative Declaration. The people of the State of Colorado hereby find and declare;

(1) Males and females possess unique and immutable biological differences that manifest prior to birth and increase as they age and experience puberty;

(2) Biological differences between the sexes are enduring and may, in some circumstances, warrant the creation of separate social, educational, athletic, or other arrangements in order to ensure safety and to allow members of each sex to succeed and thrive;

(3) Physical differences between males and females have long made separate and sex-specific sports teams important so that female athletes can have equal opportunities to compete in sports while reducing the risk of physical injury; and

(4) Because of the physical differences between males and females, having separate athletic teams based on the biological sex of the athlete reduces the chance of injury to female athletes, promotes equality between the sexes, provides opportunities for female athletes to compete against their female peers rather than against male athletes, and allows female athletes to compete on a fair playing field for athletic accomplishments, including educational scholarships.

SECTION 2. In Colorado Revised Statutes, add article 60 to title 25 as follows:

25-60-101. Short Title. ARTICLE 60 OF THIS TITLE SHALL BE KNOWN AND MAY BE CITED AS THE “PROTECT WOMEN AND GIRLS SPORTS ACT.”

25-60-102. Definitions: AS USED IN THIS ARTICLE 60, UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES:

(1) “ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION” MEANS A CORPORATION, ASSOCIATION, OR ORGANIZATION WHICH HAS AS ONE OF ITS PRIMARY PURPOSES THE SPONSORING OR ADMINISTRATION OF EXTRACURRICULAR INTERSCHOLASTIC ATHLETIC CONTESTS OR COMPETITIONS.

(2) “BOY” MEANS AN ADOLESCENT HUMAN MALE.

(3) “ FEMALE” MEANS A PERSON WHOSE BIOLOGICAL REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM IS ORGANIZED AROUND THE PRODUCTION OF OVA. FEMALE INCLUDES A WOMAN AND A GIRL.

(4) “GIRL” MEANS AN ADOLESCENT HUMAN FEMALE.

(5) “MALE” MEANS A PERSON WHOSE BIOLOGICAL REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM IS ORGANIZED AROUND THE PRODUCTION OF SPERM. MALE INCLUDES A MAN AND A BOY.

(6) “MAN” MEANS AN ADULT HUMAN MALE.

(7) “POSTSECONDARY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION” MEANS A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE UNIVERSITY, COLLEGE, OR COMMUNITY COLLEGE LOCATED IN COLORADO THAT IS A MEMBER INSTITUTION OF AN ACCREDITING BODY RECOGNIZED BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.

(8) “SCHOOL” MEANS ANY

(a) PUBLIC, CHARTER, PRIVATE, OR DENOMINATIONAL SCHOOL OFFERING INSTRUCTION IN ELEMENTARY OR SECONDARY GRADES OR

(b) POSTSECONDARY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION.

(9) “STATE AGENCY” MEANS ANY STATE BOARD, BUREAU, COMMISSION, DEPARTMENT, INSTITUTION, DIVISION, SECTION, OR OFFICER OF THE STATE, EXCEPT THOSE IN THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH OR JUDICIAL BRANCH.

(10) “WOMAN” MEANS AN ADULT HUMAN FEMALE.

25-60-103. Men’s and women’s sports teams.

(1) AN INTERSCHOLASTIC OR INTRAMURAL ATHLETIC TEAM OR SPORT THAT IS SPONSORED BY A SCHOOL OR ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION SHALL BE EXPRESSLY DESIGNATED AS ONE OF THE FOLLOWING BASED ON BIOLOGICAL SEX:

(a) MALES, MEN, OR BOYS;

(b) FEMALES, WOMEN, OR GIRLS; OR

(c) COEDUCATIONAL OR MIXED

(2)(a) AN INTERSCHOLASTIC OR INTRAMURAL ATHLETIC TEAM OR SPORT SPONSORED BY A SCHOOL OR ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION THAT IS DESIGNATED FOR FEMALES, WOMEN, OR GIRLS SHALL NOT BE OPEN TO A MALE STUDENT OR PARTICIPANT.

(b) AN INTERSCHOLASTIC OR INTRAMURAL ATHLETIC TEAM OR SPORT SPONSORED BY A SCHOOL OR ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION AND DESIGNATED FOR MALES, MEN, OR BOYS SHALL NOT BE OPEN TO A FEMALE STUDENT OR PARTICIPANT UNLESS THERE IS NO FEMALE TEAM OFFERED OR AVAILABLE FOR SUCH SPORT FOR SUCH FEMALE STUDENT OR PARTICIPANT.

(3) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION SHALL BE CONSTRUED TO RESTRICT THE ELIGIBILITY OF ANY STUDENT OR PARTICIPANT TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY INTERSCHOLASTIC OR INTRAMURAL ATHLETIC TEAMS OR SPORTS DESIGNATED AS COEDUCATIONAL OR MIXED.

(4) A GOVERNMENT ENTITY, LICENSING OR ACCREDITING ORGANIZATION, OR ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION MAY NOT ENTERTAIN A COMPLAINT, OPEN AN INVESTIGATION, OR TAKE ANY OTHER ADVERSE ACTION AGAINST A SCHOOL FOR MAINTAINING A SEPARATE INTERSCHOLASTIC OR INTRAMURAL ATHLETIC TEAM OR SPORT FOR FEMALE STUDENTS OR PARTICIPANTS.

25-60-104. Enforcement by the Commissioner of Education.

(1) THE GOVERNING BODY OF EACH SCHOOL MUST ADOPT A POLICY IMPLEMENTING THE PROVISIONS OF THIS ARTICLE.

(2) IF THE COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION DETERMINES THAT ANY SCHOOL DISTRICT AS DEFINED IN SECTION 22-30-103(13) HAS INTENTIONALLY REFUSED TO COMPLY WITH THIS ARTICLE, THE COMMISSIONER SHALL NOTIFY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE NONCOMPLIANCE AND ALLOW THE SCHOOL DISTRICT A REASONABLE TIME TO COMPLY. IF THE COMMISSIONER DETERMINES, AFTER SUCH TIME HAS ELAPSED, THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE AND HAS NOT MADE A GOOD-FAITH ATTEMPT TO COMPLY, THE COMMISSIONER SHALL TAKE APPROPRIATE REMEDIAL ACTION WITHIN THE COMMISSIONER'S AUTHORITY.

25-60-105. Protections under the Americans with Disabilities Act. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION WITHIN THIS ARTICLE, AN INDIVIDUAL BORN WITH A DIAGNOSIS OF A DISORDER OR DIFFERENCE IN SEX DEVELOPMENT MUST RECEIVE ALL LEGAL PROTECTIONS AND ACCOMMODATIONS AFFORDED UNDER FEDERAL LAW.

25-60-106. Severability. IF ANY SECTION IN THIS ACT OR ANY PART OF ANY SECTION IS DECLARED INVALID OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL, THE DECLARATION SHALL NOT AFFECT THE VALIDITY OR CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE REMAINING PORTIONS.

SECTION 3. Effective Date. This measure shall become effective on January 1, 2027.