Denver Measure 2R, 2024 Case Study
Housing Ballot Measures
Oftentimes as many lessons can be drawn from failed ballot measures as from ones that succeeded. Denver’s Measure 2R would have increased the city’s sales tax by 0.5%, generating an estimated $100 million a year in new annual revenue to support housing production through 2064. Despite strong support from Denver Mayor Mike Johnston and a broad coalition of supporters who raised nearly $2.5 million to help pass the measure, it failed by a narrow margin
of 1.1%
Proponents of the measure attributed its failure to a number of factors, all of which can provide key lessons for organizers of housing ballot measures in other communities:
Limited Time for Needed Stakeholder and Community Engagement: The campaign for the ballot measure wasn’t formally launched until June, only six months before the election. This made it difficult for organizers to conduct the necessary community engagement during the design phase, leading to tough public questions from city council members and other stakeholders that otherwise could have been resolved before the measure was put on the ballot. These questions and criticism contributed to negative media coverage of the measure. Furthermore, the short timeframe for the campaign made it difficult for organizers to organize supporters at a grassroots level.
Avoid Competition at the Ballot Box: Measure 2R would have been the single largest sales tax in Denver history, a 0.5% increase that would have raised nearly $100 million annually over 40 years. On the same ballot, Denver voters simultaneously considered Measure 2Q, a 0.34% sales tax to fund health programs, including Denver’s safety net hospital, which voters approved by a 55-45% margin. Asking voters to consider nearly $170 million in annual tax increases may have been too much at once, especially during an election where many had concerns about the cost of living.
Have a Clear Plan Linked to the Financial Ask: In order to keep a broad coalition together, the measure did not include many specifics about how the funds would be allocated across various programs and targeted at households at various median income levels. This allowed proponents to build a broad tent of supporters, but also led to tough questions from council members and advocates about how the funds would be spent and whether they would address specific
priorities. Further confounding this issue, Denver voters had recently approved two smaller measures to support homeless services and emergency housing: an independent ballot measure in 2020 and an allocation as part of the approval process for a general obligation bond in 2021. This led to some confusion among voters about whether Measure 2R would overlap with or be duplicative of existing taxes.
Limited Polling Late in the Election: Organizers commissioned three polls over the summer which showed that 63% of likely voters supported the measure. Based on this consistent base of support, organizers canceled a September poll to save costs for media and other campaign costs. A final poll commissioned in mid-October showed that support for the measure had dropped precipitously, leaving organizers with only limited time to adjust their messaging and shore up support.
Despite these challenges, the measure still came extremely close to passing, only failing by 3,706 votes out of more than 350,000 cast. This suggests that Denver voters might be willing to support a ballot measure to increase taxes for housing production if a more focused effort is launched in the future.