News and analysis right to your inbox. Click to get Ballotpedia’s newsletters!

Denver, Colorado, Referred Question 2G, Separate Elections for At-Large City Council Seats Amendment (November 2025)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Denver Referred Question 2G

Flag of Colorado.png

Election date

November 4, 2025

Topic
Local charter amendments and Local election administration and governance
Status

ApprovedApproved

Type
Referral

Denver Referred Question 2G was on the ballot as a referral in Denver on November 4, 2025. It was approved.

A "yes" vote supported amending the city and county charter to designate the two at-large positions in the Denver City Council as Seat A and Seat B, and requiring that officials elected to those offices be elected by a majority of voters.

A "no" vote opposed amending the city and county charter to designate the two at-large positions in the Denver City Council as Seat A and Seat B, thus maintaining an election system where the two at-large council members are elected in a single election race, with the top two candidates elected to the seats. 


Election results

Denver Referred Question 2G

Result Votes Percentage

Approved Yes

95,601 53.99%
No 81,487 46.01%
Results are officially certified.
Source


Overview

What did this ballot measure do?

See also: Text of measure

The measure changed the process for electing the two at-large members of the Denver City Council.

Before the amendment was passed, elections for the two at-large council members in Denver were held together, and the two candidates who received the most votes won the two seats. After the amendment, the elections for the two at-large seats are held as separate elections. Candidates can file to run for either Seat A or Seat B. In each of the two elections, the candidate that wins the majority of votes wins the election. In the event that no candidate receives a majority of votes in the election, a run-off election is held.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title for Referred Question 2G was as follows:

Shall the Charter of the City and County of Denver be amended to change the method for electing the two at-large councilmembers by designating a Councilmember-at-large seat A and Councilmember-at-large seat B and requiring that a candidate for election to either seat be elected in the same manner as the Mayor, Auditor, and Clerk and Recorder?

Full Text

The full text of this measure is available here.


Support

Yeson2G.png

Yes on 2G, also known as Majority Vote Denver, led the campaign in support of Question 2G.[1]

Supporters

Officials


Arguments

  • Former Denver Councilmember Debbie Ortega: "The current system for electing at-large members has resulted in only three people of color being elected in the last 56 years. But in the same time, the majority election used for all other offices that includes the runoff has resulted in people of color elected as mayor a majority of the last 14 elections."
  • President of the National Civic League Doug Linkhart: "Separating the two at-large seats would be a benefit to local democracy and representation. Requiring that all Council members receive a majority vote helps elect candidates with broad support, and establishing two separate positions helps voters distinguish among candidates, improving accountability."


Opposition

HandsoffDenverElections.png

No on Denver 2G, also known as Hands Off Denver Elections, led the campaign in opposition to Question 2G.[2] A full list of endorsements for the campaign can be found here.

Opponents

Officials

Former Officials

  • Former Denver City Councilmember Robin Kniech (Nonpartisan)

Political Parties

  • Democratic Party of Denver

Unions

  • Denver Classroom Teachers Association
  • Teamsters Local 455

Organizations

  • COLOR Action Fund
  • Colorado Criminal Justice Reform Coalition
  • Conservation Colorado
  • League of Women Voters of Denver
  • New Era Colorado

Individuals


Arguments

  • League of Women Voters of Denver: "...this change could lead to excessive politicking, such as increased political maneuvering for one seat versus the other. This could result in elections being less open and fair. If Ranked Choice Voting is ever adopted by the city, this would address concerns of the measure’s proponents by ensuring that candidates receive a higher percentage of the vote. Another solution would be to stagger the at-large seats in different election years."
  • Denver Councilmember Jamie Torres: "2G does not improve Denver’s At-Large election process, it only complicates it and you end up with less choice. You will always have two at-large representatives, but you may be forced to choose only one of your preferred candidates if they are in the same race under this new proposal. Less choice is a step backwards in Denver. Vote “NO” on 2G."
  • Denver Councilmember Shontel Lewis: "[2G is] an answer in search of a problem. The sponsors claimed this provides a pathway for more diverse candidates to get elected, but that is not true and not grounded in any best practices nor data. If 'more diverse candidates' was indeed the intended outcome, Council could consider both "ranked choice voting" and/or "proportional ranked choice voting" but that is not the case. This is about rolling out the red carpet for the status quo and keeping big money in elections to ensure the same harmful people are elected to enact the same harmful policies, while everyday people suffer to make ends meet and the well off get more comfortable in their wealth."


Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing local ballot measures in Colorado

This measure was put on the ballot through a vote of the governing body of Denver.

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in Colorado

See below to learn more about current voter registration rules, identification requirements, and poll times in Colorado.

How to vote in Colorado

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. Majority Vote Denver, "Homepage," accessed October 23, 2025
  2. No on Denver 2G, "Homepage," accessed October 23, 2025
  3. Colorado Secretary of State, "Mail-in Ballots FAQs," accessed August 6, 2025
  4. LexisNexis, "Colorado Revised Statutes, § 1-7-101," accessed August 6, 2025
  5. 5.0 5.1 Colorado Secretary of State, "Voter Registration FAQs," accessed August 6, 2025
  6. 6.0 6.1 Colorado Secretary of State, "Colorado Voter Registration Form," accessed August 6, 2025
  7. Colorado Secretary of State, "Go Vote Colorado," accessed August 6, 2025
  8. Under federal law, the national mail voter registration application (a version of which is in use in all states with voter registration systems) requires applicants to indicate that they are U.S. citizens in order to complete an application to vote in state or federal elections, but does not require voters to provide documentary proof of citizenship. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the application "may require only the minimum amount of information necessary to prevent duplicate voter registrations and permit State officials both to determine the eligibility of the applicant to vote and to administer the voting process."
  9. Florida's law takes effect on January 1, 2027
  10. Colorado Secretary of State, "Acceptable Forms of Identification," accessed August 6, 2025
  11. Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.