2026 Ballot questions

SHALL CITY OF LOUISVILLE TAXES BE INCREASED $1.5 MILLION IN 2029 AND THEN ANNUALLY THEREAFTER BY WHATEVER AMOUNTS ARE GENERATED FROM THE CONTINUATION OF THE CITY’S HISTORIC PRESERVATION SALES TAX OF 0.125% BEGINNING JANUARY 1, 2029, AND EXPIRING DECEMBER 31, 2038; WITH THE NET PROCEEDS OF SUCH SALES TAX, ALONG WITH THE CITY’S EXISTING 0.125% HISTORIC PRESERVATION USE TAX, TO BE UTILIZED FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION PURPOSES AS ESTABLISHED BY BALLOT ISSUES APPROVED BY THE VOTERS IN 2008 AND 2017, AND, COMMENCING ON JANUARY 1, 2027, SHALL THE CITY ALSO BE AUTHORIZED TO: (1) EXPEND ANY FUNDS FROM SUCH HISTORIC PRESERVATION TAX ON CITY PROGRAMS AND CAPITAL PROJECTS THAT PROMOTE AND PRESERVE THE CITY’S HISTORY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE, AND (2) INCREASE THE PORTION OF SUCH TAX ALLOCATED TO OPERATING AND MAINTAINING THE LOUISVILLE MUSEUM CAMPUS FROM 20% TO 30% PER YEAR; AND SHALL THE CITY BE PERMITTED TO COLLECT, RETAIN AND EXPEND ALL REVENUES DERIVED FROM SUCH TAX AS A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE AND AN EXCEPTION TO LIMITS WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE APPLY UNDER ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION OR ANY OTHER LAW?

About the Ballot Question:

Proposes to continue the existing Historic Preservation Sales Tax of 0.125%, set to expire in 2028, from 2029-2039 and expand the purposes for which the Historic Preservation  Tax may be spent, including increasing the percentage allocated to the Louisville Historical Museum and allowing use on City programs and capital projects, within the context of historic preservation.

• Amount
  • 1/8^th of one percent, or 0.125%
  • Just over $0.01 for every $10 spent
  • Generates ~$900,000 annually
• Use
  • Landmark Program – Designated 67 residential and commercial properties as local landmarks since 2005
    • Includes over $400,000 in pre-landmarking assessments to 73 recipients
  • Historic Preservation Grants – Awarded over $3.8M in grants to 40 unique recipients
  • Provided Funding to the Louisville Historical Museum – Over $1.1M in funding used to keep Louisville history alive through exhibits and open hours, events and celebrations like the sesquisemiquincentennial, and provide historical insights to residents and businesses.
• Prior Ballot Questions
  • The Historic Preservation Sales Tax of was first approved by voters in 2008 to begin January 2009 for a ten-year term
  • In 2010, the voters approved the imposition of a permanent 0.125% Historic Preservation Use Tax
  • An extension of the Historic Preservation Sales Tax was approved by voters in 2017 for a second ten-year term
• What changed in this question?
  • The Historic Preservation Tax Task Force, comprised of residents, business representatives, and Council members, recommended Council place the extension of the Historic Preservation Sales Tax on the ballot.
  • The Task Force also recommended that the contribution to the Louisville Historical Museum be increased and recommended allowing the Historic Preservation Tax to be spent on City programs and capital projects that promote and preserve the City’s history and cultural heritage.

Arguments for:

• Continues funding for the Louisville Historical Museum, without which the Museum would be underfunded and required to significantly reduce services
• Continues historic preservation programing, which protects and enhances the unique character and charm of Louisville
• Louisville’s unique character and historic areas attract tourists, which supports businesses, and enhances the economic vitality of Louisville
• Increasing the amount allocated to the Museum allows the Museum to continue existing service levels
• Allowing the tax to be used for capital projects will allow the restoration of places such as the Austin Neihoff building, the first residence on Main St.
• Louisville City Council passed Resolution No. 85, Series 2026 in support of this ballot measure.

Arguments against:

• Without this measure, this sales tax will expire in 2028, which would decrease the amount of the City’s sales taxes
• The historic preservation and Museum programs are working as is, so why change?
• There are greater priorities than historic preservation that a sales tax could be used to fund
• Grants from the historic preservation program are provided to owners of historic properties, which represents a small portion of the City’s population. The sales tax should be used more equitably to support a larger portion of the City’s population.

What your vote means: 

Yes/For — means you support the extension of the Historic Preservation Sales Tax for an additional 10 years (to 2038) and expand the uses of the tax as well as increase the funding percentage that goes to the Louisville Historic Museum.

No/Against — means you want to let the Historic Preservation Sales Tax expire at the end of 2028.

Shall the City of Louisville Home Rule Charter be amended to authorize the City Council to convene executive sessions for the purpose of considering any matter authorized by the Colorado Open Meetings Law, C.R.S. § 24-6-401, et. seq., as amended, and for boards, commissions, task forces, and committees to convene executive sessions pursuant to the Colorado Open Meetings Law in accordance with procedures and subject to limitations established by ordinance, thereby expanding the topics for executive sessions currently permitted under the Charter?

About the Ballot Question:

Section 5-2 of the City Charter currently allows City Council to convene executive sessions for the following limited purposes: Matters where the information being discussed is required to be kept confidential by federal or state law;

• Personnel matters involving the dismissal, demotion or review of the performance of employees directly appointed by Council, consideration of complaints or charges against employees appointed directly by Council, and other personnel matters upon request of the City Manager or Mayor for informational purposes only;
• Consideration of water rights and real property acquisitions and dispositions by the City, but only as to appraisals and other value estimates and strategy for the acquisitions or disposition of such rights or property; and
• Consultation with an attorney representing the City with respect to pending litigation. Pending litigation shall include cases in which a lawsuit is actually commenced, and any situations where the person requesting the executive session believes in good faith that a lawsuit may result. The Council may discuss settlement strategies in an executive session.

The Colorado Open Meetings Law, C.R.S. § 24-6-402(4), includes a broader list of topics allowed to be discussed in executive sessions.  Ballot Question 2C asks to align the Charter with the Open Meetings Law and would allow City Council to discuss the following topics in executive session:

•  The purchase, acquisition, lease, transfer or sale of any real, personal, or other property interest; except that no executive session shall be held for the purpose of concealing the fact that a member of the local public body has a personal interest in such purchase, acquisitions, lease, transfer, or sale;
• Conferences with an attorney for the local public body for the purposes of receiving legal advice on specific legal questions. Mere presence or participation of an attorney at the executive session of the local public body is not sufficient to satisfy this requirement;
• Matters required to be kept confidential by federal or state law or rules and regulations. The local public body shall announce the specific citations of the statutes or rules that are the basis for such confidentiality before holding the executive session;
• Specialized details of security arrangements or investigations, including defenses against terrorism, both domestic and foreign, and including where disclosure of the matters discussed might reveal information that could be used for the purpose of committing, or avoiding persecution for, a violation of the law;
• Determining positions relative to matters that may be subject to negotiations; developing strategy for negotiations; and instructing negotiators;
• Personnel matters except if the employee who is the subject of the session has requested an open meeting, or if the personnel matter involved more than one employee, all of the employees have requested an open meeting. This section does not apply to discussions concerning any member of the local public body, any elected official, or the appointment of a person to fill the office of a member of the local public body or an elected official or to discussions of personnel policies that do not require the discussion of matters personal to particular employees;
• Consideration of any document protected by the mandatory nondisclosure provisions of the Colorado Open Records Act; except that all consideration of documents or records that are work product as defined in section 24-72-202(6.5) or that are subject to the governmental or deliberative process privilege shall occur in a public meeting unless an executive session is otherwise allowed pursuant to this subsection [C.R.S. § 24-6-402(4)]

Additionally, the Charter currently only allows other public bodies (boards, commissions, task forces and committees) to enter an executive session to discuss pending litigation. The proposed Charter amendment will apply to all other public bodies, subject to limitations established by City Council.

What your vote means: 

Yes/For — means you support the Charter change to expand the topics allowed for an executive session to align with the Colorado Open Meetings Law and to allow boards and commissions to enter executive sessions in accordance with procedures and limitations adopted by City Council.

No/Against — means you want to keep the current language in the Charter that limits the topics that can be discussed in executive sessions.

Shall the City of Louisville Home Rule Charter be amended to provide that the Mayor and each Councilmember shall take office at the first regular Council meeting following certification of the election results, as opposed to the first meeting following the election?

About the Ballot Question:

Section 3-4(b) of the City Charter currently states, “The Mayor and each Councilmember shall take office at the first regular meeting of the Council following their election…” Under Colorado election law, the election results are not final until they have been certified, which can take up to 22 days after the election.  As such, the first Council meeting after the election may occur prior to the election results being certified.

The ballot question asks that the Charter be amended to state that the Mayor and each Councilmember take office after the election has been certified. This change would move the date of elected officials from the second regular meeting in November, to the first regular meeting in December.

What your vote means: 

Yes/For — means you support the Charter amendment to change the timing of when Council and Mayoral candidates take office to after the election results have been certified.

No/Against — means you want to keep the current language in the Charter that Council and Mayoral candidates take office the first regular meeting after the election.

Shall the City of Louisville Home Rule Charter be amended to increase the number of signatures required for initiative petitions from 5 Percent to 7.5 Percent of registered electors and to increase the number of signatures required for referendum petitions from 2.5 Percent to 5 Percent of registered electors?

About the Ballot Question:

This ballot question will increase the number of registered elector signatures required for initiative and referendum petitions.

What your vote means: 

Yes/For — means you support the Charter change to increase the number of registered elector signatures required for initiative and referendum petitions.

No/Against — means you want to keep the current language in the Charter regarding the number of registered elector signatures required for initiative and referendum petitions.

Shall the City of Louisville Home Rule Charter be amended to allow the City’s public bodies to hold public meetings in locations other than public buildings and public facilities, provided  all meeting locations shall be accessible to all members of the public?

About the Ballot Question:

This ballot question will allow Council, boards, commissions, and committees to hold meetings in places other than City owned facilities, as long as those places are accessible to all members of the public.

What your vote means: 

Yes/For — means you support the Charter change to allow Council, boards, commissions and committees to meet in other places that are accessible to all members of the public.

No/Against — means you want to keep the current language in the Charter that limits meeting locations to City owned facilities.

Shall the City of Louisville Home Rule Charter be amended to require proponents of an initiated ordinance or Charter amendment to first submit the text of the initiated measure to the City Manager for review and comment at a public meeting, subject to the limitation that City staff shall not have the authority to require any amendment, modification, or other alteration to the text of the proposed measures, or to impose additional procedural requirements of the proponent?

About the Ballot Question:

This ballot question would require proponents of an initiative or Charter amendment to first submit the proposed language to the City Manager for review and comment in a public meeting. Staff do not have the authority to make any changes to the language or impose any additional requirements.

What your vote means: 

Yes/For — means you support the Charter change to require a review and comment public meeting for all proposed initiatives and Charter amendments prior to submission to the City Clerk.

No/Against — means you do not want to add the requirement of a review and comment public meeting for initiatives and Charter amendments.

Shall the City of Louisville Home Rule Charter be amended to remove gendered pronouns, to replace references to “citizen” with “members of the public,” to replace references to “City offices” with “City Clerk’s office and City website,” and to replace references to “television” with “virtually”?

About the Ballot Question:

Updates language to be gender neutral; deletes the general reference to City offices and replaces it City Clerk’s office; adds the City website as a source of information; and replaces “television” with “virtually”.

What your vote means: 

Yes/For — means you support the Charter change to update and clarify certain language in the Charter.

No/Against — means you want to keep the current language in the Charter.