On November 5th, 2024, 42% of voters (141,357 people) said YES to banning new fur sales in the city.
36% of voters (120,342 residents) said YES to banning slaughterhouses within city limits.
That’s well over one-hundred thousand people standing up to say, “Animals deserve better.”
A closer look at the precinct-level election results reveals where Denver neighborhoods stood with the animals—and where they didn’t.
The Socio-Economic Story Behind the Election Results
Denver is a city of contrasts, and the vote revealed just how much those contrasts shape opinions on animal issues.
Globeville is a diverse, working-class neighborhood surrounding the city’s slaughterhouse (owned by Superior Farms). Here, small single-story homes stand in the shadow of factories, where the air often carries the telltale odors of the city’s slaughterhouse and the nearby Purina factory. While in Globeville this fall, I heard complaints from residents that when the National Western Stock Show rolls into town, it clogs parking and turns the neighborhood into an impromptu lot.
On Election Day, Globeville residents sent a powerful message: they’re ready for change.
Over 50% of residents here voted YES to both banning fur sales and shutting down the slaughterhouse, rejecting the noise, pollution, and disruptions these industries bring into their daily lives.
On the other hand, in Denver’s ‘Country Club’ neighborhood, tree-lined streets frame elegant historic mansions. Residents there can easily afford luxury fur products and the ultra-rich are known to enjoy fly fishing—a sport that often relies on fur-based lures. Over 75% of voters here voted NO to both measures, swallowing the opposition’s lines about ‘tradition’ and ‘economic impact’. These two neighborhoods couldn’t be more different—and their votes reflected that.
Where Denver Stood Up for Animals
River North Arts District (RiNo)
In RiNo, vibrant murals and trendy breweries attract young creatives, over half of whom voted YES to ban fur sales. Ironically, one of the opposition’s main arguments against our fur ban—that it would economically harm the National Western Stock Show—may have backfired here. For many RiNo residents, frustrations with the traffic gridlock, parking chaos, and noise disruptions from the stock show likely outweighed any sympathy for its economic concerns.
Sun Valley / Villa Park
The pattern continued in Sun Valley and Villa Park, some of Denver’s most diverse working-class neighborhoods. In Sun Valley, our Yes on 308 billboard stood tall right next to Empower Field, which likely played a significant role in building support for the fur ban in this area.
University of Denver / Lowry / Hale
We saw strong support for the fur ban in the University of Denver (DU) , Lowry, and Hale neighborhoods where a high number of residents hold bachelor’s and advanced degrees. From DU’s large young population, to Lowry’s planned community and Hale’s location near a major hospital, these areas reflect progressive values tied to education and ethics, driving strong support for the fur ban.
Capitol Hill
Known for their historic apartment buildings and streets lined with pride flags, this neighborhood is the heart of Denver’s progressive movement. In ‘Cap Hill’, a majority of precincts voted yes to ban fur sales. Interestingly, when we canvassed there earlier in the campaign, people showed enthusiastic support for banning slaughter. But by election day, even in the city’s progressive core, voters wavered on the slaughterhouse ban. The opposition’s messaging about local meat and job losses had likely cut through, sowing just enough doubt to tip the scales.
Baker / Speer
These eclectic neighborhoods became ground zero for our most visible campaign efforts. From our billboards to countless banner drops along Speer Boulevard and guerrilla posters along South Broadway, we made sure our message couldn’t be ignored. Our strategy may have partially worked—a majority of residents of these vibrant, art-filled communities showed up to vote YES on 308, proving that when we make animal issues visible, people respond.
Where Denver Clung to the Status Quo
Country Club / Wellshire
Country Club is an elite neighborhood near Cherry Creek North Country Club with historic mansions and stately homes that exude elegance, while Wellshire is a suburban enclave of quiet affluence, with sprawling homes nestled around a lush golf course. Voters here overwhelmingly rejected both pro-animal measures, with over 75% voting NO on 308 and 309. For these residents, I can only assume that luxury fur accessories and locally-slaughtered lamb were seen as luxuries worth protecting, while the fur and slaughterhouse initiatives were painted as major threats to Colorado’s economy.
Hilltop / Belcaro / Fort Logan
Hilltop, with its stately homes and wide boulevards, reflects Denver’s established wealth, while Belcaro, home to the Phipps Mansion, exudes quiet sophistication. In Fort Logan, near country clubs and private schools, families enjoy a suburban lifestyle rooted in tradition. Residents here overwhelmingly rejected Ordinance 309, likely prioritizing economic stability and preserving cultural ties to Denver’s agricultural heritage over progressive change.
The Big Picture
Election Day revealed stark contrasts in Denver. Communities impacted by industry, like Globeville and RiNo, demanded progress, while several affluent neighborhoods voted to keep the status quo.
The five precincts where over 75% of voters rejected Initiative 309 are, unsurprisingly, Denver’s wealthiest neighborhoods. These aren’t just rich areas—they’re likely where meat industry executives and investors live, where lobbyists network at country clubs, and where the trillion-dollar meat industry’s influence runs deep. When Stop the Ban, Protect Jobs (the group that formed to oppose the slaughterhouse ban) needed to protect their profits, they knew exactly which doors to knock on.
What’s Next?
Movements like ours don’t win overnight. They’re built one election, one conversation, and one breakthrough at a time.
The story of Denver’s vote isn’t over—it’s a goldmine of insights waiting to be uncovered.
That’s why Pro-Animal Future is launching an in-depth research study to understand exactly why voters chose as they did. Through polling and voter interviews, we’ll analyze what campaign tactics and messages resonated most strongly—and which fell flat. These insights will shape our future campaigns, ensuring we build on both our successes and our setbacks.
We hope that the insights we’re uncovering from our pilot campaigns in Denver—from wealth’s influence to industry power—will give us a roadmap to follow as we launch other pro-animal initiatives in Denver and beyond.
