Ouray County 0.5% sales tax for disaster recovery and resilience
Ouray County · Ouray County County · November 3, 2026
The question on your ballot
SHALL OURAY COUNTY TAXES BE INCREASED $1,050,000 ANNUALLY (FIRST FULL FISCAL YEAR DOLLAR INCREASE IN 2027) BY IMPOSING AN ADDITIONAL 0.5% COUNTY-WIDE SALES TAX, DECLINING TO 0.3% AFTER DECEMBER 31, 2030 WITH REVENUES TO BE DIVIDED (70% TO OURAY COUNTY, 15% TO THE CITY OF OURAY AND 15% TO THE TOWN OF RIDGWAY), FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUNDING DISASTER RECOVERY AND RESILIENCE IN OURAY COUNTY, INCLUDING THE FOLLOWING: PROTECTING CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE, FIRE MITIGATION, LANDSCAPE STABILIZATION, WATERSHED PROTECTION, SUPPORTING ECONOMIC RECOVERY, AND FUNDING THE COUNTY, CITY, AND TOWN, PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE AND RECOVERY EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS, FOR DECLARED DISASTERS AND EMERGENCIES; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS’ RESOLUTION NO. 2026-019 AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT BUDGET LAWS, AND SHALL THE FIRST YEAR REVENUES, AND WHATEVER ADDITIONAL AMOUNTS ARE RAISED ANNUALLY THEREAFTER, BE COLLECTED AND SPENT AS A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE NOTWITHSTANDING ANY LIMITATION OR CONDITION UNDER ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION, C.R.S. 29-2-301 ET SEQ., AS AMENDED, OR ANY OTHER PROVISION OF LAW?
In plain language
A VoterDecoder summary of the official measure text.
Ouray County Ballot Issue 1A would add a 0.5% countywide sales tax. The rate would drop to 0.3% after December 31, 2030. Revenue would be split 70% to the county, 15% to the City of Ouray, and 15% to the Town of Ridgway. The money would fund disaster recovery and resilience, including protecting critical infrastructure, fire mitigation, watershed protection, and emergency management programs for declared disasters and emergencies. The first-year increase is estimated at $1,050,000. A YES vote approves the tax. A NO vote means the tax is not added.
Fiscal impact
The official fiscal statement reports county spending of $11,811,323 in 2022 and an estimated $14,548,264 in 2026, a 23.2% change over five years. Estimated 2027 spending without the sales tax is $16,200,000. The ballot issue would authorize an estimated 2027 sales tax increase of $1,050,000.
Official explanation
FINANCIAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Actual historical and current estimated fiscal year spending information: Year Fiscal Year Spending: 2022 (actual) $11,811,323 2023 (actual) $12,120,941 2024 (actual $14,050,186 2025 (actual) $13,571,153 2026 (estimated) $14,548,264 Other Information: Percentage change over the 5-year period 23.2% from 2022 through 2026: Estimated 2027 fiscal year spending $16,200,000 without the sales tax: Overall dollar change to fiscal year $2,736,942 spending over 5-year period from 2022 to 2026: Estimated 2027 sales tax increase $1,050,000 authorized by Ballot Issue:
Official ballot arguments
Filed for the official voter guide by each side, printed as submitted.
The two official arguments differ a lot in length: the argument in favor is 199 words and the argument against is 483 words. Both are printed in full, as filed.
Argument in favor
It is important for Ridgway, Ouray and Ouray County to maintain an emergency reserve fund for declared emergencies. We can expect more fires and floods, or more manmade emergencies like a hazmat spill, plane crashes or vandalism/terrorism of our areas water systems. My preference would be to have emergency money on hand for our community to respond to emergencies early and aggressively, rather than waiting for negotiations on cost that could provide slower response. A modest sales tax draws from visitors and residents rather than a property tax that would not capture tourist revenue. Our sales tax would stay under 10%. Comparably speaking Silverton is at 10.4% sales tax. Other places in Colorado have a higher sales tax. This sales tax steps down to .03% after the initial period of 4 years at .05% and can only be used for declared disasters. While states and the federal government have picked up the majority of the costs to fight the Gold Mountain fire and floods, every grant requires matching funding. I would like our local governments to be in the position to receive that state and federal disaster money without delay and without cutting normal functions/services to pay for emergencies.
Argument against
This Is Not a Disaster-Fund Replenishment Tax I support Ouray County having a well-funded Disaster Recovery Fund. The Gold Mountain Fire was frightening for those evacuated, those with mudslide damage, and everyone else nearby. I understand why the County wants a substantial disaster reserve. But that is not what this ballot measure actually accomplishes. Voters are being told this tax is needed to replenish a depleted Disaster Fund. Read the ballot language. It does not say the tax ends when the Fund is replenished. It establishes no reserve target, maximum fund balance, or sunset clause. Instead, it creates a new tax of 0.5% through 2030 and 0.3% beginning January 1, 2031, and then continues collecting it indefinitely, expressly authorizing “whatever additional amounts are raised annually thereafter” – bypassing TABOR. That is a forever tax. Once the Fund is replenished, the tax does not stop. Once Gold Mountain recovery is finished, it does not stop. When federal disaster recovery money reimburses the County, it does not stop. If future disasters do not occur, it does not stop. The money can continue accumulating, earning investment income and receiving future tax collections and state/federal grants. The spending authority is also far broader than replenishing a disaster reserve. The resolution authorizes spending on preparedness, mitigation, response, recovery and “resilience”, including wildfire, flooding, debris flows, watersheds, erosion, slopes, critical infrastructure, natural resources, economic recovery, matching funds, reimbursement costs, administration and staffing. At the BOCC meeting to authorize the ballot measure, it was said that this tax is “not enough” for the spending plans already envisioned. Where does it end? There is no objective answer. “Resilience” has no finish line. There will always be another road to harden, drainage system to enlarge, slope to stabilize, watershed to treat, communication system to upgrade, or infrastructure project to fund. The resolution contains reassuring non-binding meaningless WHERE-AS language about appropriate reserves, accountability and reasonable administrative costs. But these are not hard limits on the tax. Future Boards of County Commissioners, not today’s voters, will decide how much remains in the Fund and how broadly these categories are applied. This is the bait and switch: the justification is a depleted disaster fund; the authorization is an indefinite new revenue stream without spending guardrails. If the County wants to maintain a disaster reserve, establish the (inflation adjusted) reserve target in the ballot. Collect the tax until the target is reached. Turn it off. If a future disaster depletes the reserve, turn it back on until the reserve is restored. That is a disaster-reserve tax. What is before voters instead is an indefinitely collected tax with no maximum reserve, no sunset, and no defined endpoint. The measure goes far beyond replenishing a disaster reserve. Say NO to giving this or any future BOCC a permanent, ever- growing pool of taxpayer money with no meaningful limit on how much can accumulate or how it is spent.
What supporters and opponents say — outside sources (not official ballot arguments)
Statements by campaigns, officials and news coverage, quoted with attribution and linked to the original. VoterDecoder did not write them and does not endorse either side.
Supporters say
No public statements in favor were found.
Opponents say
No public statements against were found.