14 statewide measures on the ballot.

Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution requiring law enforcement to notify the department of homeland security when a person is charged with either a violent crime or any crime if the person has a prior felony conviction if law enforcement cannot determine that the person is lawfully present in the United States?

State Spending In state budget year 2026-27, state spending and workload will increase for agencies that employ law enforcement officers. Two departments require system updates: the Department of Revenue requires $50,000 to access federal databases and make programming changes, and the Department of Natural Resources requires $10,000 to update computer systems. The measure does not specify a funding source to pay for these costs and it is assumed that they will be paid from the General Fund. Workload may also increase in these departments, as well as the departments of Higher Education, Human Services, Judicial, Law, and Public Safety, to the extent they are required to determine a charged individual's immigration status and communicate with the federal government on affected cases; however, this work will be primarily conducted by local governments. Local Government Spending Local law enforcement agencies, including police, district attorney offices, and Regional Transportation District officers, will have increased workload and potential spending. As with the state, the added workload involves determining a charged individual's immigration status and communicating with the federal government on affected cases. Because this determination happens after charges are filed, most of the workload will fall on district attorney offices. The amount of work will vary by jurisdiction depending on how many individuals are charged there. Spending, if incurred, will be on systems updates.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Amendment 81' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution creating new law granting the right for consumers to purchase natural gas for cooking or heating in homes or businesses and for distributors and utilities to sell natural gas to consumers?

State Spending The measure may minimally increase expenditures for state agencies, primarily the Department of Local Affairs, to revise technical assistance to local governments concerning building codes that conflict with the right to purchase or sell natural gas. The measure may also increase workload and legal services for state agencies that regulate or monitor emissions from natural gas utilities or intervene in those cases, including the Public Utilities Commission, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Public Health and Environment, and the Colorado Energy Office. Local Government Spending Local governments that currently have or are considering building codes that regulate, prohibit or restrict natural gas in commercial and residential development may have increased legal services and costs to conform the codes with state law, and to modify permitting, inspection, and compliance activities.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Amendment 82' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution creating a constitutional right to hunt, fish, and harvest fish and wildlife by traditional methods, including all species of fish and wildlife managed by the state except non-game species, endangered species, or any species that is illegal to hunt under federal law, and, in connection therewith, establishing hunting and fishing as the preferred means of managing fish and wildlife populations; and preserving the right of the state to regulate hunting, fishing, and wildlife management if necessary for sound scientific wildlife conservation and management, public safety, or to preserve the future of hunting and fishing opportunities for all species?

State Spending The measure is not expected to significantly change state spending in the near term, but could result in increased legal costs for the state as the new right to hunt and fish is applied. Specifically, CPW may have increased workload and costs for legal advice when developing new rules and regulations to ensure that they comply with the measure. In addition, if legal challenges to the constitutionality of new or existing hunting and fishing regulations occur, CPW spending on litigation costs will increase. The exact amount of these potential costs cannot be estimated because they depend on the actions of private parties and decisions by the courts.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Amendment 83' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution requiring a voter to sign and include the last four digits of their social security number or their Colorado driver’s license or identification card number on the outside of their mail ballot for any federal or state election, and, in connection therewith, allowing the voter to correct missing or incorrect information, including with alternative forms of identification; and prohibiting a county clerk and recorder from counting the mail ballot unless the problem is fixed?

The measure will increase state and local spending by up to $2.7 million in the initial budget year 2026-27, and $1.2 million annually in future years for voter outreach, printing, and election staff to verify voter information. These costs will be divided between state and local governments as discussed below. Local Government Spending The new verification process under the measure will increase county spending by up to $2.5 million in the 2026-27 budget year and up to $1.2 million in future years. About 45 percent of these county costs will be reimbursed by the state government. These costs are driven from several new requirements under the measure. First, election judges must review identification numbers provided by voters, which will increase staffing hours and overtime during elections. Second, county election offices must notify voters of any discrepancies involving their identification information, which will require sending a postcard or digital notification to voters and segregating ballots until valid identification is provided. Lastly, county election offices will also be required to update ballot materials and envelopes, modify various elections systems, and conduct voter outreach. State Spending The Department of State will have increased costs to inform voters of the changes to mail voting across the state and to reimburse counties. Specifically, the department will need to conduct an outreach and communication campaign at a cost of $100,000 in state budget year 2026-27 and $200,000 in state budget year 2027-28. The department will also have ongoing workload and costs for outreach and printed materials estimated at $20,000 for each presidential primary, statewide primary, and general election. As discussed above, the state will also have costs to reimburse counties for a portion of their costs under the measure. This reimbursement is estimated to be up to $1.1 million in during the 2026-27 budget year, and up to $500,000 for in future years. Historically, these costs have been paid using fees and other revenue collected by the department, rather than from the state General Fund. State Revenue To cover the costs in the Department of State discussed above, business filing fees may need to be raised to cover all or some of the costs of this measure. The fees affected, the timing of any increase, and the actual amount of fee charges will be set administratively by the department based on its available fund balance and total program costs.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Amendment 84' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution concerning ballot question language, and, in connection therewith, requiring all state and local ballot questions to be written in plain language and at no more than an 8th grade reading level and prohibiting a state statute from requiring language that conflicts with these requirements in ballot questions for citizen-initiated measures?

State Spending The Title Board includes representatives from the Department of State, the Attorney General’s Office, and the General Assembly. The measure may minimally increase workload for the Title Board to update its standards for plain language and what constitutes an eighth-grade reading level and to apply these standards when setting titles for citizen-initiated ballot measures.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Amendment 85' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

Shall there be an amendment to the Colorado Constitution concerning congressional redistricting, and, in connection therewith, reenacting the current process for congressional redistricting in the Colorado Constitution and prohibiting modifications to a final map unless at least three public meetings are held, the modifications do not have the effect of dividing communities of interest or purposefully favoring one political party, and are approved by the congressional redistricting commission and the Colorado Supreme Court?

State Spending The measure increases costs in the Legislative Department by about $370,000 in any year that the commission must convene and review changes to congressional maps outside of its usual redistricting schedule. The costs are to staff the commission, provide reimbursement for commissioners, and hire legal counsel. The Judicial Department will also have a small workload increase to review any new maps.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Amendment 86' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

SHALL STATE TAXES BE INCREASED $2.7 BILLION ANNUALLY, IN ORDER TO INCREASE OR IMPROVE LEVELS OF PUBLIC SERVICES, INCLUDING K-12 PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION, HEALTH CARE, AND EARLY CHILD CARE AND EDUCATION SERVICES, BY AN AMENDMENT TO THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION AND A CHANGE TO THE COLORADO REVISED STATUTES REPEALING EXISTING LAW AND CREATING NEW LAW TO REPLACE THE UNIFORM STATE INCOME TAX RATE WITH A GRADUATED INCOME TAX STRUCTURE, AND, IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, AMENDING THE TAXPAYER’S BILL OF RIGHTS TO ELIMINATE THE CONSTITUTIONAL REQUIREMENT FOR ALL TAXABLE NET INCOME TO BE TAXED AT ONE RATE WITH NO ADDED TAX ON INCOME; ESTABLISHING VARIOUS INCOME TAX RATES BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF TAXABLE INCOME EARNED BY INDIVIDUALS, ESTATES, TRUSTS, AND CORPORATIONS, WHILE MAINTAINING THE CURRENT 4.4% TAX ON INCOME FROM THE SALE OF A PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE, WHICH WILL RESULT IN THE ESTIMATED CHANGE IN INCOME TAXES OWED BY INDIVIDUALS AS IDENTIFIED IN THE FOLLOWING TABLE; AND AUTHORIZING THE STATE TO RETAIN AND SPEND ANY INCREASED REVENUE FROM THE NEW TAX STRUCTURE, AS A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE, TO SUPPLEMENT CURRENT LEVELS OF FUNDING FOR K-12 PUBLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION, HEALTH CARE, AND EARLY CHILD CARE AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS?

Taxpayer Impacts Amendment 87 will decrease the amount of income tax owed by taxpayers with Colorado taxable income of less than $510,834 and increase the amount of income tax owed by taxpayers with Colorado taxable income of $510,834 and above. State law requires Legislative Council Staff to estimate the potential tax burden on affected taxpayers within specified federal adjusted gross income categories. Federal adjusted gross income is total income from all sources, with certain adjustments, as determined when filing federal income taxes. Colorado taxable income, calculated when filing state income taxes, is based on federal adjusted gross income with additional adjustments required or allowed under state law. Table 3 shows the expected change in tax burden by federal adjusted gross income category. The measure has no impact on current TABOR refunds or TABOR refund mechanisms. [Table 3 not reproduced here; see the Blue Book] Income is federal adjusted gross income, not Colorado taxable income; therefore, the income ranges and tax rates do not align with those in Table 2. The estimated number of taxpayers column counts joint filers as one taxpayer. Estimates are based on Colorado Department of Revenue data for all residents for tax year 2023 and Legislative Council Staff estimates. State Revenue By replacing the state flat income tax with a graduated income tax, the measure increases revenue from income taxes by an estimated $958.4 million in budget year 2026-27, $1.972 billion in budget year 2027-28, and increasing amounts in future years based on income and population growth. The estimate for budget year 2026-27 represents a half-year impact for tax year 2027. The additional revenue will be credited to the Colorado Future’s Account created in the measure. The increased revenue is exempt from TABOR as a voter-approved revenue change. The state budget year begins each July 1 and ends on June 30. State law requires Legislative Council Staff to include an estimate of the maximum dollar amount of the change in state government revenue for the first full fiscal year of a proposed tax increase. This is the number that appears in the ballot question. The estimates in the previous paragraph represent the revenue impact of the measure under the current Legislative Council Staff revenue forecast. Based on forecast error that could occur, the maximum dollar amount of the change in state government revenue and fiscal year spending for budget year 2027-28 is estimated as an increase of $2.7 billion. State Spending The measure increases the amount of state revenue available to spend for the purposes identified in the measure, including K-12 education, health care, and early childhood care and education, in FY 2026-27 and future fiscal years. To administer the tax rate change, the measure is expected to increase one-time spending in the Department of Revenue by $98,000. School District Revenue and Spending The measure increases available state funding to school districts. The exact amount distributed to school districts will depend on decisions made by the General Assembly when allocating money from the Colorado Future’s Account. State Spending and Tax Increases Article X, Section 20, of the Colorado Constitution requires that the following fiscal information be provided when a tax increase question is on the ballot: • estimates or actual amounts of state fiscal year spending for the current year and each of the past four years with the overall percentage and dollar change; and • for the first full year of the proposed tax increase, estimates of the maximum dollar amount of the tax increase and of fiscal year spending without the increase. “Fiscal year spending” is a legal term in the Colorado Constitution. It equals the amount of revenue subject to the constitutional spending limit that the state or a district is permitted to keep and either spend or save for a single year. Table 4 shows state fiscal year spending for the current year and each of the past four years. [Table 4 not reproduced here; see the Blue Book] Four-Year Dollar Change in State Spending: $3.85 billion Four-Year Percent Change in State Spending: 23.1 percent Table 5 shows the maximum revenue expected from the income tax increase in Amendment 87 for FY 2027-28, the first full fiscal year for which the tax increase would be in place, and an estimate of state fiscal year spending without the tax increase. [Table 5 not reproduced here; see the Blue Book]

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Amendment 87' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff, with its tables left out (marked in brackets).

Shall state investment in K-12 public education increase two percent each year for the next ten years, with investments used to increase teacher pay, improve teacher retention, lower class sizes, and increase access to career and technical courses, without raising taxes but instead funded by raising the annual limit on state fiscal year spending only by the amount spent on public K-12 education as a voter-approved revenue change, and requiring an annual publicly released, independent audit to show how the new investments are spent?

Taxpayer Impacts Proposition NN is expected to reduce the amount refunded to taxpayers by $329.9 million in the current 2026-27 budget year, $521.0 million in the 2027-28 budget year, and by varying amounts in future years. This eliminates TABOR refunds for budget years 2026-27 and 2027-28. Table 1 shows estimated TABOR refunds under Proposition NN for certain income levels. [Table 1 not reproduced here; see the Blue Book] Note: This table assumes that taxpayers claim the standard deduction and no other deductions. This table shows TABOR refunds for individual taxpayers, not corporations. Corporations are not expected to receive TABOR refunds in 2027, and are expected to receive smaller TABOR refunds than individuals at the same income level in 2028. A forecast of state revenue subject to TABOR is not available beyond budget year 2027-28. The impact of Proposition NN on TABOR refunds will vary significantly across different years, such that it could have no impact on TABOR refunds in some years and reduce them by over $1,000 per taxpayer in other years. The actual amount that the measure reduces TABOR refunds will depend on how much money the state collects above the current TABOR limit in future years. State Spending The measure increases state spending by an estimated $329.9 million in budget year 2026-27 and $521.0 million in budget year 2027-28 on net, and by varying amounts in future years. Changes in state spending are shown in Table 2. [Table 2 not reproduced here; see the Blue Book] As shown in Table 2, $153.1 million that would be available for the general state budget under current law is instead deposited in the Children’s Account for budget years 2026-27 and 2027-28 only. This reduces General Fund spending in each of these two years. Long-term spending. After ten years, there is no longer a requirement for half of the money in the account to be spent on K-12 education and half on children’s programs. Beginning in the 2036-37 budget year, the measure increases state spending for property tax reimbursements and funding for teacher pay and retention, smaller class sizes, and career and technical education. Any remaining funds may be used for any purposes as determined by the state legislature. School Districts Proposition NN increases state funding for school districts by an estimated $241.5 million in budget year 2026-27 and $234.0 million in budget year 2027-28. Funding for teacher pay and retention, smaller class sizes, and career and technical education will be distributed based on each school district’s percentage of statewide school finance funding under the state’s new school finance formula. Funding for school services, disability services, and increasing annual instructional hours will be distributed in a manner determined by the state legislature.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Proposition NN' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff, with its tables left out (marked in brackets).

Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes concerning criminal penalties for fentanyl and certain synthetic opioids, and, in connection therewith, increasing the felony classifications of drug-related crimes for distribution, manufacturing, dispensing, sale, or possession of fentanyl and certain synthetic opioids; creating mandated treatment for certain drug felony violations based on possession amount; and changing sentencing provisions to narrow or eliminate exemptions for crimes related to fentanyl and certain synthetic opioids and drug-related deaths?

State Revenue Proposition 132 increases state revenue to the Judicial Department by $23,000 in the first year, and $73,000 in the second and future years from additional criminal fines due to the measure’s increase in crime classification. State Spending Proposition 132 increases state spending to cover increased criminal justice system costs for the courts, public defenders, and prisons. These costs are paid from the state General Fund. Specifically, the measure increases state spending in the first budget year by $0.9 million to pay for costs in the courts and for public defenders. In the second year, state spending under the measure is estimated to increase to $8.9 million as more individuals are sent to prison for distributing or possessing. Prison costs will continue to increase as individuals are incarcerated for longer periods of time. By year five, total state spending is estimated to increase by $68.2 million. In addition, due to the estimated increase in the future prison population, the state may need to construct or contract for additional prison space. The measure does not specify a funding source to pay for this increased criminal justice-related spending, and it is assumed that these costs will be paid from the General Fund. While the measure may reduce money available for other uses (the three largest of which are Health Care Policy and Financing, Education, and Higher Education), the effect of the measure on other programs is unknown and will depend on future budgeting decisions by the state legislature. Local Government Similar to the state, costs will increase for county-funded district attorneys to prosecute longer cases with enhanced penalties.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Proposition 132' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes modifying existing law concerning human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude, and, in connection therewith, creating new law expanding human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude to include knowingly trading anything of monetary value to buy or sell sexual activity with a minor and increasing the penalty to be life in prison without parole or release?

State Spending The measure increases future state spending in the Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC). Costs for the measure are estimated to begin in about 14 years. Initial costs are estimated at $180,000 in budget year 2041-42, and grow by that amount for several years thereafter. This would be an increase of $360,000 in budget year 2042-43, $540,000 in budget year 2043-44, and so on. These costs are not adjusted for inflation. Eventually, the increase will stabilize as the costs of new offenders staying longer are offset by a decrease in costs from life sentences ending due to an offender dying or potentially receiving a commutation or pardon. The cost increase results from persons convicted of child sex trafficking serving a life sentence instead of a fixed term. It takes years for the first affected offenders to reach the point in their original sentence where they would have been paroled under current law, and that is when the added cost starts. This cost estimate reflects current sentencing data and values for state-run prison beds; actual costs will likely be higher in the future due to inflation, and if more individuals are convicted of child sex trafficking than under current law. Notably, costs for medical care will grow separately as offenders age in prison. In addition, workload in the trial courts and agencies that provide representation to indigent offenders in the Judicial Department will minimally increase as cases with enhanced penalties generally take longer to process than cases with lesser penalties. The measure does not specify a funding source to pay for the increased spending in the CDOC and it is assumed that these costs will be paid from the state General Fund. While the measure may reduce money available for other uses (the three largest of which are Health Care Policy and Financing, Education, and Higher Education), the likely effect of the measure on other programs is unknown and will depend on future budgeting decisions by the state legislature. Local Government Spending Similar to the state, workload will minimally increase for county-funded district attorneys to prosecute longer cases with enhanced penalties.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Proposition 133' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

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?

State Spending Proposition 134 will increase workload and legal costs by an indeterminate amount in the Colorado Department of Education if a school district is intentionally out of compliance with the measure and the Commissioner of Education is required to take remedial action. Legal services are provided by the Department of Law. In addition, state institutions of higher education will have increased costs to adopt or update policies for interscholastic or intramural athletic programs to align with the requirements in the measure. Any costs are assumed to be paid by institutional revenue, such as tuition, fees, or athletic department revenue. Local Government Spending Proposition 134 will increase workload and may increase costs for schools, school districts and charter schools that offer interscholastic or intramural athletic programs to update and implement their policies. These costs are expected to be minimal. To the extent the Colorado Department of Education takes remedial action for noncompliance, legal and other costs may also increase for school districts.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Proposition 134' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes modifying existing law by prohibiting surgery on a minor for the purpose of altering the minor’s biological sex characteristics, and, in connection therewith, prohibiting any health-care professional or other person from knowingly performing, prescribing, administering, or providing any surgery to a minor for the purpose of altering the minor’s biological sex characteristics and prohibiting the use of state or federal funds, Medicaid reimbursement, or insurance coverage to pay for this type of surgery?

State and Local Government Spending Proposition 135 will minimally increase workload and costs for the Department of Regulatory Agencies, which regulates health care professionals and insurers, to update rules and materials pertaining to gender- and sex-based surgeries and to handle complaints if prohibited surgeries are performed or paid for. Similarly, various state and local government agencies that employ health care professionals, such as the Department of Human Services and county hospitals, among others, will have additional workload to update their policies to ensure that their employees follow the measure. Legal costs may also increase for the state and local governments to respond to any allegations of noncompliance. Assuming health care professionals, insurance companies, and government agencies comply with the measure, any impact on state and local spending is expected to be minimal. Proposition 135 may also slightly decrease state spending on health programs and employee health insurance from no longer paying for certain surgeries for minors related to gender perception. Specifically, to the extent the state Medicaid program covers these surgeries for minors, spending will decrease. Similarly, if private insurance companies no longer cover these surgeries, it may minimally contribute to lower health insurance premiums for state and local governments. Overall, any savings are expected to be minimal.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Proposition 135' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes capping the state income tax rate at 4.4% of federal taxable income for individuals and corporations?

The measure limits the state income tax rate to no higher than the current rate of 4.4 percent. This results in no change to state or local government revenue or spending. For this reason, the measure has no fiscal impact.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Proposition 136' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff.

Shall there be a change to the Colorado Revised Statutes creating new law to increase water and land conservation funding without raising taxes, and, in connection therewith, through a voter-approved revenue change, allowing the state to keep and spend a portion of revenue from the state sales tax on sporting goods and equipment to conserve and protect Colorado’s water, land, and forests, prevent wildfires, support outdoor recreation training and activities, and reduce revenue spent on these conservation purposes if necessary to preserve funding for certain tax credits?

The measure transfers an estimated $175.0 million in the 2027-28 budget year, and increasing amounts in later years, from the state General Fund to pay for various programs related to forest restoration, wildfire mitigation, conservation, and outdoor recreation. It reduces TABOR refunds in years when revenue exceeds the TABOR limit. State Revenue The measure transfers an estimated $175.0 million in the 2027-28 budget year and $180.2 million in 2028-29 and future budget years for use on specified programs. This money would otherwise be available for the general state budget or refunded to taxpayers. The transferred revenue is divided between programs within GOCO (47.5 percent), Colorado State Forest Service and the Department of Natural Resources (47.5 percent), Colorado Parks and Wildlife (2.5 percent), and the Office of Economic Development and International Trade (2.5 percent). The amount transferred may be reduced in years where the transfer would result in the reduction of certain income tax credits for families. State Spending The measure increases state spending by up to an estimated $175.0 million in budget year 2027-28 and $180.2 million in budget year 2028-29, and by increasing amounts in future years assuming sporting goods sales growth. Some funds may not necessarily be spent in the year they were received. Potential spending under the measure is shown in Table 1. [Table 1 not reproduced here; see the Blue Book] In years where state revenue collections are below the TABOR limit, the measure will reduce state money available for other uses (the three largest of which are health care, education, and human services); however, the exact effect of the measure on other programs will depend on budgeting decisions by the state legislature. In years where state revenue collections are above the TABOR limit, the measure has no impact on other state spending, but has impacts to taxpayers as described below. Taxpayer Impacts The measure will decrease the amount refunded to taxpayers in years when state revenue is over the TABOR limit. Based on forecasts from June 2026, the measure is expected to decrease refunds by $175.0 million in tax year 2027. Refunds in tax year 2028 are outside the forecast window. The impact on taxpayers depend on how this money would be refunded. The measure is expected to eliminate six-tier sales tax TABOR refunds in at least the 2027-28 budget year, by between $26 and $83 per single filer and between $52 and $166 per joint filer, with the actual amount dependent on income level. Interactions with Other Measures Proposition NN allows the state to keep and spend revenue that would otherwise be refunded to taxpayers under TABOR, up to a newly established limit. Because Proposition 137 reduces revenue subject to the constitutional revenue limit, Proposition 137 will reduce the amount of money the state actually keeps and spends under Proposition NN, if both measures pass.

Official text: the 'Fiscal Impact of Proposition 137' section of the 2026 Blue Book, prepared by Legislative Council Staff, with its tables left out (marked in brackets).