In 2008 voters passed both of the Boulder County ballot issues. This year voters face twice as many county ballot issues.
In 2008 voters in the city of Boulder passed only 3 of the 7 city ballot issues: 201, 202 and 2C. This year voters only have 4 city ballot issues to consider.
In a local election your vote counts for more than in a state or national election. Please vote on the ballot issues. If many people bypass the ballot issues leaving them blank, a small number of people can get their personal preferences passed. Please educate yourself on the ballot issues. If you still don’t know how you want to vote, you can always vote no and keep the status quo rather than not vote or vote for unintended consequences.
I hope this blog helps to educate you and generates some conversation about the ballot issues. Warning: The descriptions below are very brief! Each ballot issue has its own blog entry if you would like more information or to make comments about the ballot issue. Please limit comments on this blog entry to general comments about the process or the election.
BOULDER COUNTY BALLOT ISSUES
1A
Open Space Sales and Use Tax $50M Bond Authorization and 0.25% Tax Extension Issue
To continue a 0.25% (25¢ on $100) dedicated open space tax until Dec 31, 2034. The tax is set to expire on Dec 31, 2019.
lean toward yes
1B
ClimateSmart (CEOLID) $85M Bond Authorization
To continue and expand a program to make low-interest loans to property owners for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects.
YES
1C
$6.1M Bond Authorization for Energy Conservation Projects
To take advantage of federal stimulus dollars available at low financing to fund energy efficiency and renewable energy projects on county buildings such as the jail.
YES
1D
DA Term Limits Extension to Three Terms
To allow the Boulder County District Attorney to seek and serve a third consecutive term as DA.
YES
CITY OF BOULDER BALLOT ISSUES
2A
Sales and Use Tax Extension
To continue indefinitely a 0.15% sales and use tax (15¢ cents on $100) due to expire on Dec 31, 2012. The tax revenue would go into the city’s general fund.
FOR
2B
Open Space General Obligation Bonds
To permit the city to issue general obligation bonds with more favorable interest rates rather than revenue bonds.
FOR
2C
Pension Bond Funding
To permit the city to issue bonds to fund pension obligations on police officers and fire fighters hired before April 8, 1978.
for
2D
Changes to Housing Excise Taxes
To substantially increase excise taxes on new non-residential development and eliminate excise taxes on residential development.
against
Get a SAMPLE BALLOT or Check Your Voting Status
http://www.bouldercounty.org/clerk/elections/index.htm
Click on Check Your Voter Information and enter the requested data. Your voting status, precinct number, etc will appear below. You can click on Your Sample Ballot to get a practice ballot. Your actual ballot should arrive in the mail. Contact the Elections Division at 303 413 7740 if you have questions about voting.
OTHER BALLOT ISSUE SITES
County of Boulder Election 2009 Ballot Issue webpage
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/templates/bocodefault.aspx?articleid=1764&zoneid=1
City of Boulder Election 2009 webpage
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=7466&Itemid=2233
League of Women Voters of Boulder County
http://lwvbc.org/
Camera Election Section
http://www.dailycamera.com/election
Boulder Weekly on the County Ballot Issues
http://www.boulderweekly.com/article-12-boulder-county-ballot-issues.html
Boulder Weekly on the City Ballot Issues
http://www.boulderweekly.com/article-10-city-of-boulder-ballot-questions.html
Yellow Scene Magazine
http://yellowscene.com/2009/10/14/2009-election-endorsements/#more-15350
Insomnia Log (Mike Ellis)
http://insomnialog.blogspot.com/2009/10/summary-of-2009-boulder-ballot-issues.html
Monday, October 19, 2009
Sunday, October 18, 2009
County of Boulder 1A – Open Space Countywide 0.25% Sales and Use Tax Extension and $50M Bond Authorization Issue
In 1993 voters originally approved this open space tax. In 1999 voters approved an extension of this tax through the end of 2019. The tax revenue through 2019 is already committed to finance bonds for purchased open space. The county commissioners would like to borrow money from an extension of this tax until the end of 2034 to pay for open space purchases now while there are willing buyers and lower prices due to the economic situation.
The total county sales and use tax is 0.65% (65¢ on $100). This proposal concerns over a third of the county sales and use tax (25¢ on $100). In addition the county collects two other sales and use taxes dedicated to open space for a total open space tax of 0.45% (45¢ on $100). See the chart below.
0.05% Non-profit Human Service Agencies
expires 12/31/2018
0.25% Open Space (under discussion in this proposal)
expires 12/31/2019
0.10% County Road & Transit Improvements
expires 6/30/2024
0.10% Open Space
half expires 12/31/2024
half in perpetutity for maintenance
0.10% Open Space
expires 12/31/2029
0.05% Jail Improvement & Operation
perpetuity
Recommendation: lean toward yes
Clearly open space is a priority for our county. Land acquisition is also a preferred protection tool of the Nature Conservancy, but they use donations rather than tax dollars. I worry about borrowing from the future when we haven’t even finished paying off the current debt. Fortunately open space should be around for the future generations that will be paying for it. Because of this and because I don’t want our county to miss an opportunity, I support this tax extension.
In addition to borrowing from the future, other concerns come to mind. I worry about a never-ending dedicated tax. I worry about having three separate dedicated open space sales and use taxes. I would understand why some people might not support this tax extension.
Website for the Yes side
http://yesonopenspace.org/
Website for the No side
No known website -- Info on an opposition website appreciated.
County of Boulder Ballot Issue 1A (Approved Ballot Language)
Open Space Countywide 0.25% Sales and Use Tax Extension and $50M Bond Authorization Issue
SHALL BOULDER COUNTY DEBT BE INCREASED BY UP TO $50,000,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $140,000,000, WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX OR TAX RATE, BY THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH BONDS SHALL BEAR INTEREST, MATURE, BE SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION, WITH OR WITHOUT PREMIUM, AND BE ISSUED, DATED AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME OR TIMES, AT SUCH PRICES (AT, ABOVE OR BELOW PAR) AND IN SUCH MANNER AND CONTAINING SUCH OTHER TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAY DETERMINE; SHALL THE COUNTY'S EXISTING 0.25% OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX CURRENTLY SET TO EXPIRE IN 2019 BE EXTENDED FOR FIFTEEN YEARS, TO AND INCLUDING DECEMBER 31, 2034, AT THE RATE OF 0.25% FOR THE PURPOSES OF OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENTS, AND MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF SUCH OPEN SPACE AND IMPROVEMENTS; SHALL SUCH BONDS BE REPAID FROM THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH EXTENDED TAX AND, TO THE EXTENT PROCEEDS FROM SUCH EXTENDED TAX ARE NOT SUFFICIENT FOR THE REPAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, FROM OTHER COUNTY OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX REVENUES, THE CONSERVATION TRUST FUND, THE COUNTY'S GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS; SHALL THE COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, TO ENTER INTO A MULTIPLE-FISCAL YEAR OBLIGATION TO TRANSFER THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH EXTENDED TAX, OTHER COUNTY OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX REVENUES, AND MONEYS FROM THE CONSERVATION TRUST FUND, THE GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS TO THE OPEN SPACE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE ON SUCH BONDS AND TO OTHERWISE COMPLY WITH THE COVENANTS OF THE RESOLUTION OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS GOVERNING SUCH BONDS; AND SHALL THE EARNINGS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAX AND SUCH BONDS, REGARDLESS OF AMOUNT, CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2009-100?
YES _____ NO _____
Resolution No. 2009-100 referring Ballot Issue 1A to the voters
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1764-2009-100_POS_ext.PDF
The total county sales and use tax is 0.65% (65¢ on $100). This proposal concerns over a third of the county sales and use tax (25¢ on $100). In addition the county collects two other sales and use taxes dedicated to open space for a total open space tax of 0.45% (45¢ on $100). See the chart below.
0.05% Non-profit Human Service Agencies
expires 12/31/2018
0.25% Open Space (under discussion in this proposal)
expires 12/31/2019
0.10% County Road & Transit Improvements
expires 6/30/2024
0.10% Open Space
half expires 12/31/2024
half in perpetutity for maintenance
0.10% Open Space
expires 12/31/2029
0.05% Jail Improvement & Operation
perpetuity
Recommendation: lean toward yes
Clearly open space is a priority for our county. Land acquisition is also a preferred protection tool of the Nature Conservancy, but they use donations rather than tax dollars. I worry about borrowing from the future when we haven’t even finished paying off the current debt. Fortunately open space should be around for the future generations that will be paying for it. Because of this and because I don’t want our county to miss an opportunity, I support this tax extension.
In addition to borrowing from the future, other concerns come to mind. I worry about a never-ending dedicated tax. I worry about having three separate dedicated open space sales and use taxes. I would understand why some people might not support this tax extension.
Website for the Yes side
http://yesonopenspace.org/
Website for the No side
No known website -- Info on an opposition website appreciated.
County of Boulder Ballot Issue 1A (Approved Ballot Language)
Open Space Countywide 0.25% Sales and Use Tax Extension and $50M Bond Authorization Issue
SHALL BOULDER COUNTY DEBT BE INCREASED BY UP TO $50,000,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $140,000,000, WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX OR TAX RATE, BY THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS FOR THE PURPOSE OF OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENTS, WHICH BONDS SHALL BEAR INTEREST, MATURE, BE SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION, WITH OR WITHOUT PREMIUM, AND BE ISSUED, DATED AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME OR TIMES, AT SUCH PRICES (AT, ABOVE OR BELOW PAR) AND IN SUCH MANNER AND CONTAINING SUCH OTHER TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAY DETERMINE; SHALL THE COUNTY'S EXISTING 0.25% OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX CURRENTLY SET TO EXPIRE IN 2019 BE EXTENDED FOR FIFTEEN YEARS, TO AND INCLUDING DECEMBER 31, 2034, AT THE RATE OF 0.25% FOR THE PURPOSES OF OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION AND IMPROVEMENTS, AND MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF SUCH OPEN SPACE AND IMPROVEMENTS; SHALL SUCH BONDS BE REPAID FROM THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH EXTENDED TAX AND, TO THE EXTENT PROCEEDS FROM SUCH EXTENDED TAX ARE NOT SUFFICIENT FOR THE REPAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, FROM OTHER COUNTY OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX REVENUES, THE CONSERVATION TRUST FUND, THE COUNTY'S GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS; SHALL THE COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, TO ENTER INTO A MULTIPLE-FISCAL YEAR OBLIGATION TO TRANSFER THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH EXTENDED TAX, OTHER COUNTY OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX REVENUES, AND MONEYS FROM THE CONSERVATION TRUST FUND, THE GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS TO THE OPEN SPACE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE ON SUCH BONDS AND TO OTHERWISE COMPLY WITH THE COVENANTS OF THE RESOLUTION OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS GOVERNING SUCH BONDS; AND SHALL THE EARNINGS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAX AND SUCH BONDS, REGARDLESS OF AMOUNT, CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2009-100?
YES _____ NO _____
Resolution No. 2009-100 referring Ballot Issue 1A to the voters
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1764-2009-100_POS_ext.PDF
County of Boulder 1B – ClimateSmart (CEOLID) $85M Bond Authorization
Boulder County would like to continue providing low-interest loans to property owners so they can make energy efficiency improvements or install renewable energy equipment such as solar panels. The loans are for 15 to 20 years and are paid back by the participating property owners through a special assessment which stays with the property until the loan is repaid. The voters are being asked to allow Boulder County to take on debt in order to finance more loans. This is not a tax increase or extension.
CEOLID stands for Clean Energy Options Local Improvement District. In 2008 county voters approved 1A, a similar ballot issue -- call it a pilot project, if you will. 1A established the CEOLID which has distributed about 650 loans totaling about $11.5 million. In addition to providing more money for loans, this year’s proposal would expand on the current program by allowing Boulder County to partner with other counties with similar local improvement districts (pending state legislation) to increase participation and realize more cost efficiencies.
Recommendation: YES
People purchasing new homes should try to wrap the cost of energy improvements into their mortgage so that they can get the mortgage tax break. The rest of us could line up to take advantage of this program. Individuals benefit since the county can usually get loans at a lower interest rate than individuals can. Collection of property taxes is straightforward. Yes, the county has become a banker, but the extra work and risk is minimal. Meanwhile, the county is encouraging less energy consumption and a smaller carbon footprint.
Website for the Yes side (sort of) – This is the 2008 Ballot Issue 1A website
http://yes1a.org/resolution.php
Website for the No side
No known website -- Info on an opposition website appreciated.
County of Boulder Ballot Issue 1B (Approved Ballot Language)
ClimateSmart (CEOLID) $85M Bond Authorization
SHALL BOULDER COUNTY DEBT (FOR CLEAN ENERGY OPTIONS LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND SIMILARLY SITUATED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS IN OTHER COLORADO COUNTIES) BE INCREASED BY UP TO $85,000,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $180,000,000, WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX OR TAX RATE, PROVIDED THAT AT LEAST $45,000,000 OF SUCH DEBT AND AT LEAST $95,000,000 OF SUCH MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST SHALL BE PAYABLE FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTIES IN SUCH OTHER COUNTIES AND OTHER AMOUNTS PAYABLE BY SUCH OTHER COUNTIES, RESULTING IN A NET OF $40,000,000 OF DEBT AND $85,000,000 OF MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST PAYABLE FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN BOULDER COUNTY, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING THE COSTS OF CONSTRUCTING, ACQUIRING AND INSTALLING SOLAR AND OTHER RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS OR ENERGY-EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS THAT CONSENT TO BE INCLUDED IN SUCH DISTRICTS BY ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT FOR INCLUSION THEREIN, AND ANY COSTS NECESSARY OR INCIDENTAL THERETO, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE COST OF ESTABLISHING RESERVES TO SECURE THE PAYMENT OF SUCH DEBT, BY THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS PAYABLE FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IMPOSED AGAINST BENEFITED PROPERTIES FOR WHICH THE OWNERS THEREOF HAVE CONSENTED TO BE INCLUDED WITHIN SUCH DISTRICTS BY ENTERING INTO SUCH A CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT FOR INCLUSION, AND FROM OTHER FUNDS OF BOULDER COUNTY AND SUCH OTHER COUNTIES THAT MAY BE LA WFULLY PLEDGED TO THE PAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, WHICH BONDS SHALL BEAR INTEREST AT A MAXIMUM NET EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE NOT TO EXCEED 10%, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION, WITH OR WITHOUT PREMIUM, SHALL BE ISSUED, DATED, AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME OR TIMES, AT SUCH PRICES (AT, ABOVE OR BELOW PAR) AND IN SUCH MANNER, IN ONE OR MORE SERIES, AND SHALL CONTAIN SUCH TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE BOULDER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAY DETERMINE; SHALL BOULDER COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED TO ENTER INTO A MULTIPLE-FISCAL YEAR OBLIGATION TO ADVANCE AMOUNTS FOR PAYMENT OF A PORTION OF SUCH BONDS AND TO REIMBURSE ITSELF FOR SUCH ADVANCES BY COLLECTING UNPAID ASSESSMENTS AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 30-20-619(2), COLORADO REVISED STATUTES, AS AMENDED; AND SHALL THE REVENUES FROM SUCH SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND ANY EARNINGS THEREON AND FROM THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH BONDS CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOULDER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2009-101?
YES _____ NO _____
Resolution No. 2009-101 referring Ballot Issue 1B to the voters
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1764-2009-101_CSLP_LID.PDF
CEOLID stands for Clean Energy Options Local Improvement District. In 2008 county voters approved 1A, a similar ballot issue -- call it a pilot project, if you will. 1A established the CEOLID which has distributed about 650 loans totaling about $11.5 million. In addition to providing more money for loans, this year’s proposal would expand on the current program by allowing Boulder County to partner with other counties with similar local improvement districts (pending state legislation) to increase participation and realize more cost efficiencies.
Recommendation: YES
People purchasing new homes should try to wrap the cost of energy improvements into their mortgage so that they can get the mortgage tax break. The rest of us could line up to take advantage of this program. Individuals benefit since the county can usually get loans at a lower interest rate than individuals can. Collection of property taxes is straightforward. Yes, the county has become a banker, but the extra work and risk is minimal. Meanwhile, the county is encouraging less energy consumption and a smaller carbon footprint.
Website for the Yes side (sort of) – This is the 2008 Ballot Issue 1A website
http://yes1a.org/resolution.php
Website for the No side
No known website -- Info on an opposition website appreciated.
County of Boulder Ballot Issue 1B (Approved Ballot Language)
ClimateSmart (CEOLID) $85M Bond Authorization
SHALL BOULDER COUNTY DEBT (FOR CLEAN ENERGY OPTIONS LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT AND SIMILARLY SITUATED LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS IN OTHER COLORADO COUNTIES) BE INCREASED BY UP TO $85,000,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $180,000,000, WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX OR TAX RATE, PROVIDED THAT AT LEAST $45,000,000 OF SUCH DEBT AND AT LEAST $95,000,000 OF SUCH MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST SHALL BE PAYABLE FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ON PROPERTIES IN SUCH OTHER COUNTIES AND OTHER AMOUNTS PAYABLE BY SUCH OTHER COUNTIES, RESULTING IN A NET OF $40,000,000 OF DEBT AND $85,000,000 OF MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST PAYABLE FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IN BOULDER COUNTY, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING THE COSTS OF CONSTRUCTING, ACQUIRING AND INSTALLING SOLAR AND OTHER RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS OR ENERGY-EFFICIENCY IMPROVEMENTS FOR PROPERTY OWNERS THAT CONSENT TO BE INCLUDED IN SUCH DISTRICTS BY ENTERING INTO A CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT FOR INCLUSION THEREIN, AND ANY COSTS NECESSARY OR INCIDENTAL THERETO, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE COST OF ESTABLISHING RESERVES TO SECURE THE PAYMENT OF SUCH DEBT, BY THE ISSUANCE OF SPECIAL ASSESSMENT BONDS PAYABLE FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS IMPOSED AGAINST BENEFITED PROPERTIES FOR WHICH THE OWNERS THEREOF HAVE CONSENTED TO BE INCLUDED WITHIN SUCH DISTRICTS BY ENTERING INTO SUCH A CONTRACT OR AGREEMENT FOR INCLUSION, AND FROM OTHER FUNDS OF BOULDER COUNTY AND SUCH OTHER COUNTIES THAT MAY BE LA WFULLY PLEDGED TO THE PAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, WHICH BONDS SHALL BEAR INTEREST AT A MAXIMUM NET EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE NOT TO EXCEED 10%, SHALL BE SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION, WITH OR WITHOUT PREMIUM, SHALL BE ISSUED, DATED, AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME OR TIMES, AT SUCH PRICES (AT, ABOVE OR BELOW PAR) AND IN SUCH MANNER, IN ONE OR MORE SERIES, AND SHALL CONTAIN SUCH TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE BOULDER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAY DETERMINE; SHALL BOULDER COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED TO ENTER INTO A MULTIPLE-FISCAL YEAR OBLIGATION TO ADVANCE AMOUNTS FOR PAYMENT OF A PORTION OF SUCH BONDS AND TO REIMBURSE ITSELF FOR SUCH ADVANCES BY COLLECTING UNPAID ASSESSMENTS AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 30-20-619(2), COLORADO REVISED STATUTES, AS AMENDED; AND SHALL THE REVENUES FROM SUCH SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND ANY EARNINGS THEREON AND FROM THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH BONDS CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOULDER COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2009-101?
YES _____ NO _____
Resolution No. 2009-101 referring Ballot Issue 1B to the voters
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1764-2009-101_CSLP_LID.PDF
County of Boulder 1C – $6.1M Bond Authorization for Energy Conservation Projects
The recent federal stimulus package (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) allows for a limited time the issuance of no-interest bonds to reduce energy consumption by at least 20% in government buildings. There are fees and administrative costs amounting to about 1% a year. The county would create a capital improvement trust fund to handle the bond money. This issue is going to the voters because it is a request to increase debt.
The county jail is the target of most of the attention for the energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy projects. Other buildings under consideration include the Boulder County Fairgrounds, the Justice Center, the sheriff’s new administration building, the Open Space and Transportation Complex and a new transportation building on Longhorn Road.
Recommendation: YES
This proposal appears to be a win-win situation with a limited window of opportunity. According to Resolution 2009-102, the county will use the bond money for previously planned capital improvements. In other words, the county doesn’t have to look for projects to fit the federal government’s criteria and doesn’t have to delay desired projects due to lack of funding. Meanwhile, the county can get favorable terms to pay for the improvements, can achieve some desired energy savings and work toward decreasing our county’s carbon footprint.
County of Boulder Ballot Issue 1C (Approved Ballot Language)
$6.1M Bond Authorization for Energy Conservation Projects
SHALL BOULDER COUNTY DEBT BE INCREASED BY UP TO $6,100,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $8,000,000, WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX OR T AX RATE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING ENERGY CONSERVATION IN COUNTY BUILDINGS AND OTHER COUNTY PROPERTY, BY THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS PAYABLE FROM MONEYS TRANSFERRED FROM THE COUNTY'S GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND TO BE ESTABLISHED IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH BONDS, WHICH BONDS SHALL BEAR INTEREST, MATURE, BE SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION, WITH OR WITHOUT PREMIUM, AND BE ISSUED, DATED AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME OR TIMES, AT SUCH PRICES (AT, ABOVE OR BELOW PAR) AND IN SUCH MANNER AND CONTAINING SUCH OTHER TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAY DETERMINE; SHALL THE COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, TO ENTER INTO A MULTIPLE-FISCAL YEAR OBLIGATION TO TRANSFER MONEYS FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS TO SUCH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE ON SUCH BONDS AND TO OTHERWISE COMPLY WITH THE COVENANTS OF THE RESOLUTIONS OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS GOVERNING SUCH BONDS; AND SHALL THE EARNINGS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH BONDS, REGARDLESS OF AMOUNT, CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2009-102?
YES _____ NO _____
Resolution No. 2009-102 referring Ballot Issue 1C to the voters
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1764-QECBreferral.resolution.pdf
United States Code, Title 26, Section 54D: Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds
http://www.dsireusa.org/documents/Incentives/US51Fb.htm
The county jail is the target of most of the attention for the energy efficiency improvements and renewable energy projects. Other buildings under consideration include the Boulder County Fairgrounds, the Justice Center, the sheriff’s new administration building, the Open Space and Transportation Complex and a new transportation building on Longhorn Road.
Recommendation: YES
This proposal appears to be a win-win situation with a limited window of opportunity. According to Resolution 2009-102, the county will use the bond money for previously planned capital improvements. In other words, the county doesn’t have to look for projects to fit the federal government’s criteria and doesn’t have to delay desired projects due to lack of funding. Meanwhile, the county can get favorable terms to pay for the improvements, can achieve some desired energy savings and work toward decreasing our county’s carbon footprint.
County of Boulder Ballot Issue 1C (Approved Ballot Language)
$6.1M Bond Authorization for Energy Conservation Projects
SHALL BOULDER COUNTY DEBT BE INCREASED BY UP TO $6,100,000, WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $8,000,000, WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX OR T AX RATE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING ENERGY CONSERVATION IN COUNTY BUILDINGS AND OTHER COUNTY PROPERTY, BY THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS PAYABLE FROM MONEYS TRANSFERRED FROM THE COUNTY'S GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND TO BE ESTABLISHED IN CONNECTION WITH SUCH BONDS, WHICH BONDS SHALL BEAR INTEREST, MATURE, BE SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION, WITH OR WITHOUT PREMIUM, AND BE ISSUED, DATED AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME OR TIMES, AT SUCH PRICES (AT, ABOVE OR BELOW PAR) AND IN SUCH MANNER AND CONTAINING SUCH OTHER TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MAY DETERMINE; SHALL THE COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED, IN ORDER TO PROVIDE FOR THE PAYMENT OF SUCH BONDS, TO ENTER INTO A MULTIPLE-FISCAL YEAR OBLIGATION TO TRANSFER MONEYS FROM THE GENERAL FUND AND OTHER LEGALLY AVAILABLE FUNDS TO SUCH CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT TO PAY THE DEBT SERVICE ON SUCH BONDS AND TO OTHERWISE COMPLY WITH THE COVENANTS OF THE RESOLUTIONS OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS GOVERNING SUCH BONDS; AND SHALL THE EARNINGS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH BONDS, REGARDLESS OF AMOUNT, CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2009-102?
YES _____ NO _____
Resolution No. 2009-102 referring Ballot Issue 1C to the voters
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1764-QECBreferral.resolution.pdf
United States Code, Title 26, Section 54D: Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds
http://www.dsireusa.org/documents/Incentives/US51Fb.htm
County of Boulder 1D – DA Term Limits Extension to Three Terms
In 1994 Colorado voters approved an amendment to the constitution imposing term limits on state and local elected officials. The amendment allowed for voters to eliminate or modify the term limits. The new district attorney (first elected in 2008) asked the county commissioners to place this issue on the ballot to allow a Boulder County district attorney to seek and serve a third consecutive term. In 2005 county voters approved similar term limit extensions for the sheriff, clerk and recorder, treasurer, assessor, coroner, and surveyor,
Recommendation: YES
I tend to consider experience an asset in public office. In general, I’m in favor of the voters imposing “term limits” at the ballot box rather than the constitution imposing term limits. (An exception: If the officeholder appoints judges, e.g. the president and governors, then I am in favor of term limits.) We voters in Boulder County aren’t shy about exercising term limits via the ballot box, at least in primary elections. Witness the 2nd Congressional District CU regent race in 2002 and the county clerk and recorder race in 2006.
County of Boulder Ballot Question 1D (Approved Ballot Language)
DA Term Limits Extension to Three Terms
SHALL THE TERM LIMITS IMPOSED BY STATE LAW AND IN ARTICLE XVII, SECTION 11 (2), OF THE COLORAO CONSTITUTION ON THE OFFICE OF DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BOULDER COUNTY, TWENTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, BE MODIFIED SO AS TO PERMIT AN ELECTED OFFICEHOLDER IN THAT OFFICE TO SEEK AND, IF THE VOTERS OF BOULDER COUNTY CHOOSE TO RE-ELECT THAT PERSON TO A THIRD TERM IN OFFICE, TO SERVE A THIRD CONSECUTIVE TERM?
YES _____ NO _____
Resolution No. 2009-103 referring Ballot Question 1D to the voters
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1764-2009-103_DA_term_limits.PDF
Recommendation: YES
I tend to consider experience an asset in public office. In general, I’m in favor of the voters imposing “term limits” at the ballot box rather than the constitution imposing term limits. (An exception: If the officeholder appoints judges, e.g. the president and governors, then I am in favor of term limits.) We voters in Boulder County aren’t shy about exercising term limits via the ballot box, at least in primary elections. Witness the 2nd Congressional District CU regent race in 2002 and the county clerk and recorder race in 2006.
County of Boulder Ballot Question 1D (Approved Ballot Language)
DA Term Limits Extension to Three Terms
SHALL THE TERM LIMITS IMPOSED BY STATE LAW AND IN ARTICLE XVII, SECTION 11 (2), OF THE COLORAO CONSTITUTION ON THE OFFICE OF DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BOULDER COUNTY, TWENTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, BE MODIFIED SO AS TO PERMIT AN ELECTED OFFICEHOLDER IN THAT OFFICE TO SEEK AND, IF THE VOTERS OF BOULDER COUNTY CHOOSE TO RE-ELECT THAT PERSON TO A THIRD TERM IN OFFICE, TO SERVE A THIRD CONSECUTIVE TERM?
YES _____ NO _____
Resolution No. 2009-103 referring Ballot Question 1D to the voters
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1764-2009-103_DA_term_limits.PDF
Saturday, October 17, 2009
City of Boulder 2A – Sales and Use Tax Extension
In 1992 voters approved a 0.15% sales and use tax (15¢ cents on $100) to pay for bonds for recreational improvements and facilities. The excess money generated goes into the city’s general fund. The tax is due to expire on Dec 31, 2012. This proposal asks voters to extend the tax indefinitely. In 2008 voters approved Ballot Question 202, a similar proposal for an indefinite tax extension.
The 2009 city budget is $242.7 million with $202 million in the operating budget and the remainder in the capital budget. Of the $202 million in the operating budget only $82.9 million is in the general fund. The majority of the operating budget is in dedicated funds. The general fund money is, by nature, not dedicated to a certain purpose unlike, for instance, the open space sales and use tax. Rather, it is available to fund whatever the city needs or desires including police, fire fighters, the library, parks and human services.
The total city’s sales and use tax is currently 3.41% ($3.41 on a $100 purchase) and accounts for 37% of the city’s revenue. About 60% of the sales and use tax including the tax in question here currently has sunset dates. The sales and use tax that would go to the general fund if this proposal passes is only 1.68% ($1.68 on $100). The remaining 1.73% ($1.73 on $100), a majority of the sales and use tax, goes to dedicated funds.
Recommendation: FOR
In my opinion, too many of the city’s funds are earmarked. I would like to see fewer earmarks, reducing budgetary constraints on our elected officials and city staff. The money in the general fund is not earmarked and may be spent at the discretion of the city council. Yet the general fund goes to pay for the essential and desirable services listed above and needs a relatively reliable source of funding (although I’d prefer a source that doesn’t disproportionately affect the poor). If in the future the city wants to raise the tax rate, TABOR would require the city to come back to the voters for approval.
City of Boulder Ballot Issue 2A (Approved Ballot Language)
SALES AND USE TAX EXTENSION
WITHOUT RAISING ADDITIONAL TAXES, SHALL THE EXISTING 0.15% CITY OF BOULDER SALES AND USE TAX CURRENTLY SET TO EXPIRE ON DECEMBER 31, 2012 BE EXTENDED INDEFINITELY AND WITHOUT RESTRICTION TO CONTINUE TO FUND GENERAL FUND SERVICES SUCH AS, WITHOUT LIMITATION, POLICE, FIRE, LIBRARY, PARKS AND HUMAN SERVICES, PURSUANT TO AND BY ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 7672;
AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH,
SHALL THE FULL PROCEEDS OF THE TAX AND ANY EARNINGS THEREFROM, BE COLLECTED, RETAINED AND SPENT AS A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE WITHOUT LIMITATION OR CONDITION AND WITHOUT LIMITING THE COLLECTION, RETENTION OR SPENDING OF ANY REVENUES OR FUNDS BY THE CITY OF BOULDER, UNDER ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION OR ANY OTHER LAW?
FOR THE MEASURE ____ AGAINST THE MEASURE ____
Ordinance 7672 submitting Ballot Issue 2A to the voters
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/Elections/2009/Ordinance_7672-SALES_AND_USE_TAX_EXTENSION.pdf
The 2009 city budget is $242.7 million with $202 million in the operating budget and the remainder in the capital budget. Of the $202 million in the operating budget only $82.9 million is in the general fund. The majority of the operating budget is in dedicated funds. The general fund money is, by nature, not dedicated to a certain purpose unlike, for instance, the open space sales and use tax. Rather, it is available to fund whatever the city needs or desires including police, fire fighters, the library, parks and human services.
The total city’s sales and use tax is currently 3.41% ($3.41 on a $100 purchase) and accounts for 37% of the city’s revenue. About 60% of the sales and use tax including the tax in question here currently has sunset dates. The sales and use tax that would go to the general fund if this proposal passes is only 1.68% ($1.68 on $100). The remaining 1.73% ($1.73 on $100), a majority of the sales and use tax, goes to dedicated funds.
Recommendation: FOR
In my opinion, too many of the city’s funds are earmarked. I would like to see fewer earmarks, reducing budgetary constraints on our elected officials and city staff. The money in the general fund is not earmarked and may be spent at the discretion of the city council. Yet the general fund goes to pay for the essential and desirable services listed above and needs a relatively reliable source of funding (although I’d prefer a source that doesn’t disproportionately affect the poor). If in the future the city wants to raise the tax rate, TABOR would require the city to come back to the voters for approval.
City of Boulder Ballot Issue 2A (Approved Ballot Language)
SALES AND USE TAX EXTENSION
WITHOUT RAISING ADDITIONAL TAXES, SHALL THE EXISTING 0.15% CITY OF BOULDER SALES AND USE TAX CURRENTLY SET TO EXPIRE ON DECEMBER 31, 2012 BE EXTENDED INDEFINITELY AND WITHOUT RESTRICTION TO CONTINUE TO FUND GENERAL FUND SERVICES SUCH AS, WITHOUT LIMITATION, POLICE, FIRE, LIBRARY, PARKS AND HUMAN SERVICES, PURSUANT TO AND BY ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 7672;
AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH,
SHALL THE FULL PROCEEDS OF THE TAX AND ANY EARNINGS THEREFROM, BE COLLECTED, RETAINED AND SPENT AS A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE WITHOUT LIMITATION OR CONDITION AND WITHOUT LIMITING THE COLLECTION, RETENTION OR SPENDING OF ANY REVENUES OR FUNDS BY THE CITY OF BOULDER, UNDER ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION OR ANY OTHER LAW?
FOR THE MEASURE ____ AGAINST THE MEASURE ____
Ordinance 7672 submitting Ballot Issue 2A to the voters
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/Elections/2009/Ordinance_7672-SALES_AND_USE_TAX_EXTENSION.pdf
City of Boulder 2B – Open Space General Obligation Bonds
In 1993 voters approved the issuance of bonds payable from the open space sales and use tax. The city has not yet issued $33.45 million of those bonds. The city intended to issue general obligation bonds which have favorable interest rates, but the Colorado Supreme Court subsequently determined that the voters only approved revenue bonds which require that the city keep a 10% reserve fund while the bonds are outstanding. On the other hand, the general obligation bond safeguard requires the city to increase property taxes if open space sales and use taxes are insufficient to repay the bonds. Five previous open space bond issues have been issued with a general obligation pledge, but the pledge has never been needed because sales and use tax collections have been sufficient.
Recommendation: FOR
This technical change would allow the city to save money on interest and not have to hold over $3 million in reserve -- two smart financial moves in these tough economic times. Property taxes which are fairly low in Colorado would be raised only if the designated open space sales and use taxes and other city revenue are insufficient. In this economy it seems possible that city income from the sales and use tax could be lower than expected and a property tax increase might occur. However, I think the certain benefits of this proposal outweigh the potential, if any, costs.
City of Boulder Ballot Issue 2B (Approved Ballot Language)
OPEN SPACE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
SHALL CITY OF BOULDER DEBT BE INCREASED UP TO $33,450,000 WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $80,863,800, AND SHALL CITY TAXES BE INCREASED UP TO $3,200,000 ANNUALLY, (TAXES TO BE INCREASED ONLY IF EXISTING DEDICATED OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAXES ARE INSUFFICIENT TO REPAY THE DEBT); AND
SHALL THE PURPOSE OF THIS MEASURE BE TO ALLOW THE CITY TO OBTAIN MORE FAVORABLE INTEREST RATES AND TERMS FOR BONDS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS IN 1993 BY ISSUING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS; AND
SHALL THE BOND PROCEEDS BE USED TO CONTINUE THE PURCHASE OF OPEN SPACE REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS AS WAS PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED BY A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE IN 1971; AND
SHALL THIS PURPOSE BE ACCOMPLISHED BY THE ISSUANCE AND PAYMENT OF CITY BONDS AT A NET EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE NOT TO EXCEED 7% PER YEAR AND WITH A MATURITY DATE NOT TO EXCEED 30 YEARS FROM THE RESPECTIVE DATES OF ISSUANCE; AND
SHALL SUCH BONDS BE ISSUED, DATED, AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME(S) AND IN SUCH MANNER AND CONTAIN SUCH TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THIS MEASURE, AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE; AND
SHALL SUCH BONDS BE PAYABLE FROM REVENUE DERIVED FROM EXISTING SALES AND USE TAXES, WITHOUT ANY INCREASE IN RATE, EARMARKED AND COMMITTED FOR SUCH PURPOSES BY VOTE OF THE CITY’S ELECTORS AND BY A PLEDGE OF THE FULL FAITH AND CREDIT OF THE CITY AS AUTHORIZED IN THE CITY’S CHARTER AND PURSUANT TO THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 7673; AND
SHALL AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES BE LEVIED IN ANY YEAR WITHOUT LIMITATION AS TO RATE AND IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT, TOGETHER WITH OTHER AVAILABLE REVENUES, TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL OF, PREMIUM, IF ANY, AND INTEREST ON SUCH BONDS WHEN DUE; AND
SHALL ANY EARNINGS FROM THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAXES AND BONDS (REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT) CONSTITUTE A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE WITHOUT REGARD TO THE REVENUE AND SPENDING LIMITS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION?
FOR THE MEASURE ____ AGAINST THE MEASURE ____
Ordinance 7673 submitting Ballot Issue 2B to the voters
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/Elections/2009/Ordinance_7673_-_Open_Space_General_Obligation_Bonds.pdf
Recommendation: FOR
This technical change would allow the city to save money on interest and not have to hold over $3 million in reserve -- two smart financial moves in these tough economic times. Property taxes which are fairly low in Colorado would be raised only if the designated open space sales and use taxes and other city revenue are insufficient. In this economy it seems possible that city income from the sales and use tax could be lower than expected and a property tax increase might occur. However, I think the certain benefits of this proposal outweigh the potential, if any, costs.
City of Boulder Ballot Issue 2B (Approved Ballot Language)
OPEN SPACE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS
SHALL CITY OF BOULDER DEBT BE INCREASED UP TO $33,450,000 WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $80,863,800, AND SHALL CITY TAXES BE INCREASED UP TO $3,200,000 ANNUALLY, (TAXES TO BE INCREASED ONLY IF EXISTING DEDICATED OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAXES ARE INSUFFICIENT TO REPAY THE DEBT); AND
SHALL THE PURPOSE OF THIS MEASURE BE TO ALLOW THE CITY TO OBTAIN MORE FAVORABLE INTEREST RATES AND TERMS FOR BONDS APPROVED BY THE VOTERS IN 1993 BY ISSUING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS; AND
SHALL THE BOND PROCEEDS BE USED TO CONTINUE THE PURCHASE OF OPEN SPACE REAL PROPERTY INTERESTS AS WAS PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED BY A VOTE OF THE PEOPLE IN 1971; AND
SHALL THIS PURPOSE BE ACCOMPLISHED BY THE ISSUANCE AND PAYMENT OF CITY BONDS AT A NET EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE NOT TO EXCEED 7% PER YEAR AND WITH A MATURITY DATE NOT TO EXCEED 30 YEARS FROM THE RESPECTIVE DATES OF ISSUANCE; AND
SHALL SUCH BONDS BE ISSUED, DATED, AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME(S) AND IN SUCH MANNER AND CONTAIN SUCH TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT WITH THIS MEASURE, AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE; AND
SHALL SUCH BONDS BE PAYABLE FROM REVENUE DERIVED FROM EXISTING SALES AND USE TAXES, WITHOUT ANY INCREASE IN RATE, EARMARKED AND COMMITTED FOR SUCH PURPOSES BY VOTE OF THE CITY’S ELECTORS AND BY A PLEDGE OF THE FULL FAITH AND CREDIT OF THE CITY AS AUTHORIZED IN THE CITY’S CHARTER AND PURSUANT TO THE ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE NO. 7673; AND
SHALL AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAXES BE LEVIED IN ANY YEAR WITHOUT LIMITATION AS TO RATE AND IN AN AMOUNT SUFFICIENT, TOGETHER WITH OTHER AVAILABLE REVENUES, TO PAY THE PRINCIPAL OF, PREMIUM, IF ANY, AND INTEREST ON SUCH BONDS WHEN DUE; AND
SHALL ANY EARNINGS FROM THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAXES AND BONDS (REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT) CONSTITUTE A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE WITHOUT REGARD TO THE REVENUE AND SPENDING LIMITS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION?
FOR THE MEASURE ____ AGAINST THE MEASURE ____
Ordinance 7673 submitting Ballot Issue 2B to the voters
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/Elections/2009/Ordinance_7673_-_Open_Space_General_Obligation_Bonds.pdf
City of Boulder 2C – Pension Bond Funding
Police officers and fire fighters hired before April 8, 1978 receive a city pension from a different pot of money than more recent hires. Currently 104 employees or beneficiaries receive these old pension plan benefits. Only one active police officer is still paying into the old pension plan fund. These demographics combined with losses in the recent financial markets mean that the pension fund is expected to be short around ½ million dollars a year beginning in 2010. This proposal would permit the city to issue bonds and thereby increase its debt in order to fund its pension obligations. This proposal does not give the city permission to raise taxes.
Recommendation: for
The city is required under state and federal law to meet its pension obligations. Although ideally the city would not have gotten caught in the financial market collapse, it should fulfill its obligations. These payments will inevitably decrease over time as the number of people receiving pension payments declines. The city could just move money around to solve this financial problem, but then it may create a financial problem in another area. Pension obligation bonds are not a good choice in all markets, but with low interest rates and a low stock market this is the right time to issue this kind of bond.
City of Boulder Ballot Issue 2C (Approved Ballot Language)
PENSION BOND FUNDING
SHALL CITY OF BOULDER DEBT BE INCREASED UP TO $11,320,000 WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $26,597,000 -- WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY CITY TAX -- TO FUND ONGOING REQUIRED PENSION OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY FOR POLICE OFFICERS AND FIRE FIGHTERS HIRED BEFORE APRIL 8, 1978; AND
SHALL THE PURPOSE OF THIS MEASURE BE TO ALLOW THE CITY TO ESTABLISH A MORE PREDICTABLE PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR ONGOING OLD HIRE FIRE AND POLICE PENSION OBLIGATIONS; AND
SHALL THIS BE DONE BY THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS OF THE CITY, AT A NET EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE NOT TO EXCEED 10% PER YEAR AND WITH A MATURITY DATE NOT TO EXCEED 20 YEARS FROM ISSUANCE; AND
SHALL SUCH BONDS BE ISSUED, DATED, AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME(S) AND IN A MANNER WITH TERMS CONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE, SUCH BONDS TO BE PAYABLE FROM THE CITY’S GENERAL FUND; AND
SHALL ANY EARNINGS FROM THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH REVENUES AND BONDS CONSTITUTE A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE WITHOUT REGARD TO THE REVENUE AND SPENDING LIMITS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION?
FOR THE MEASURE ____ AGAINST THE MEASURE ____
Ordinance 7674 submitting Ballot Issue 2C to the voters
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/Elections/2009/Ordinance_7674-PENSION_BOND_FUNDING.pdf
Recommendation: for
The city is required under state and federal law to meet its pension obligations. Although ideally the city would not have gotten caught in the financial market collapse, it should fulfill its obligations. These payments will inevitably decrease over time as the number of people receiving pension payments declines. The city could just move money around to solve this financial problem, but then it may create a financial problem in another area. Pension obligation bonds are not a good choice in all markets, but with low interest rates and a low stock market this is the right time to issue this kind of bond.
City of Boulder Ballot Issue 2C (Approved Ballot Language)
PENSION BOND FUNDING
SHALL CITY OF BOULDER DEBT BE INCREASED UP TO $11,320,000 WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $26,597,000 -- WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY CITY TAX -- TO FUND ONGOING REQUIRED PENSION OBLIGATIONS OF THE CITY FOR POLICE OFFICERS AND FIRE FIGHTERS HIRED BEFORE APRIL 8, 1978; AND
SHALL THE PURPOSE OF THIS MEASURE BE TO ALLOW THE CITY TO ESTABLISH A MORE PREDICTABLE PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR ONGOING OLD HIRE FIRE AND POLICE PENSION OBLIGATIONS; AND
SHALL THIS BE DONE BY THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS OF THE CITY, AT A NET EFFECTIVE INTEREST RATE NOT TO EXCEED 10% PER YEAR AND WITH A MATURITY DATE NOT TO EXCEED 20 YEARS FROM ISSUANCE; AND
SHALL SUCH BONDS BE ISSUED, DATED, AND SOLD AT SUCH TIME(S) AND IN A MANNER WITH TERMS CONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE, SUCH BONDS TO BE PAYABLE FROM THE CITY’S GENERAL FUND; AND
SHALL ANY EARNINGS FROM THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH REVENUES AND BONDS CONSTITUTE A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE WITHOUT REGARD TO THE REVENUE AND SPENDING LIMITS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION?
FOR THE MEASURE ____ AGAINST THE MEASURE ____
Ordinance 7674 submitting Ballot Issue 2C to the voters
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/Elections/2009/Ordinance_7674-PENSION_BOND_FUNDING.pdf
City of Boulder 2D – Changes to Housing Excise Tax
The housing excise tax (HET) is a one-time tax paid on new development. Despite its name, it is not restricted to housing. This proposal would provide for a substantial increase in the excise tax on non-residential developments and eliminate the tax for residential developments. After the initial phase-in of new tax rates, the proposal would allow annual increases beginning in 2015 based on the cost of producing housing. The city council would have the authority to waive or reduce the excise tax when in the public interest.
The intent of the housing excise tax is to promote affordable housing. However, the money is deposited in the general fund and city council is not required to spend the money on affordable housing. According to research done by the League of Women Voters, current rates assist “one to two homeowners or rental households per year. With the proposed changes, the HET would assist an estimated 12 to 20 households.”
Recommendation: against
The housing excise tax is written in terms of dollars per square foot. This dollar figure requires regular adjustment as the value of the dollar changes. The 2009 tax rate is 23 cents per square foot for new and annexing residential units and 49 cents per square foot for new, expanded and annexing nonresidential units. The jump from 49 cents to up to $3 (institutional), $5 (industrial and general non-residential) and $7 (commercial) over approximately 5 years is a drastic increase for businesses.
The goal of increasing affordable housing is laudable, but the projected number of households helped seems small. The current inclusionary zoning requirements seem more effective at least on paper. Developers must provide that 20% of their new housing be permanently affordable or pay into a dedicated Affordable Housing Fund. An argument for eliminating the HET on residential development is that these developers are “taxed twice” to pay for affordable housing.
City of Boulder Ballot Issue 2D (Approved Ballot Language)
CHANGES TO HOUSING EXCISE TAX
SHALL CITY OF BOULDER HOUSING EXCISE TAXES BE INCREASED FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT TO PRODUCE APPROXIMATELY $1,250,000 (IN THE FIRST YEAR) ANNUALLY; AND
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 7679 AND FUTURE CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
SHALL THE PURPOSE OF THIS MEASURE BE TO SHIFT THE TAX BURDEN FROM NEW RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS TO OTHER CATEGORIES OF NEW DEVELOPMENT; AND
SHALL THE EXISTING HOUSING EXCISE TAX BE ELIMINATED ON RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; AND
SHALL THE HOUSING EXCISE TAX ON NEW DEVELOPMENT OTHER THAN RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS BE RAISED TO BETWEEN $3.00 AND $7.00 PER SQUARE FOOT BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS:
• COMMERCIAL USES
• INDUSTRIAL AND GENERAL NON RESIDENTIAL USES
• INSTITUTIONAL USES; AND
SHALL THE CITY COUNCIL BE AUTHORIZED TO PHASE IN THE NEW TAX RATES OVER FIVE YEARS OR MORE AND MAKE THE TAX SUBJECT TO AN ANNUAL INCREASE BEGINNING IN 2015 BASED UPON AN INDEX RELATED TO THE COST OF PRODUCING HOUSING IN THE AREA; AND
SHALL THE CITY COUNCIL BE AUTHORIZED TO REDUCE OR WAIVE ANY PORTION OF THE HOUSING EXCISE TAX WHEN DETERMINED TO BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST; AND
SHALL APPROVAL BE GRANTED FOR THE COLLECTION, RETENTION AND EXPENDITURE OF ALL REVENUES RECEIVED FROM SUCH TAX NOTWITHSTANDING ANY STATE REVENUE OR EXPENDITURE LIMITATION?
FOR THE MEASURE ____ AGAINST THE MEASURE ____
Ordinance 7679 submitting Ballot Issue 2D to the voters
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/Elections/2009/Ordinance_7679-CHANGES_TO_HOUSING_EXCISE_TAX_.pdf
Boulder Revised Code, Title 3: Land Use Regulations, Chapter 9-13: Inclusionary Zoning
http://www.colocode.com/boulder2/chapter9-13.htm
Boulder Revised Code, Title 3: Revenue and Taxation, Chapter 3-9: Housing Excise Tax
http://www.colocode.com/boulder2/chapter3-9.htm
The intent of the housing excise tax is to promote affordable housing. However, the money is deposited in the general fund and city council is not required to spend the money on affordable housing. According to research done by the League of Women Voters, current rates assist “one to two homeowners or rental households per year. With the proposed changes, the HET would assist an estimated 12 to 20 households.”
Recommendation: against
The housing excise tax is written in terms of dollars per square foot. This dollar figure requires regular adjustment as the value of the dollar changes. The 2009 tax rate is 23 cents per square foot for new and annexing residential units and 49 cents per square foot for new, expanded and annexing nonresidential units. The jump from 49 cents to up to $3 (institutional), $5 (industrial and general non-residential) and $7 (commercial) over approximately 5 years is a drastic increase for businesses.
The goal of increasing affordable housing is laudable, but the projected number of households helped seems small. The current inclusionary zoning requirements seem more effective at least on paper. Developers must provide that 20% of their new housing be permanently affordable or pay into a dedicated Affordable Housing Fund. An argument for eliminating the HET on residential development is that these developers are “taxed twice” to pay for affordable housing.
City of Boulder Ballot Issue 2D (Approved Ballot Language)
CHANGES TO HOUSING EXCISE TAX
SHALL CITY OF BOULDER HOUSING EXCISE TAXES BE INCREASED FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT TO PRODUCE APPROXIMATELY $1,250,000 (IN THE FIRST YEAR) ANNUALLY; AND
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 7679 AND FUTURE CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
SHALL THE PURPOSE OF THIS MEASURE BE TO SHIFT THE TAX BURDEN FROM NEW RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS TO OTHER CATEGORIES OF NEW DEVELOPMENT; AND
SHALL THE EXISTING HOUSING EXCISE TAX BE ELIMINATED ON RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS; AND
SHALL THE HOUSING EXCISE TAX ON NEW DEVELOPMENT OTHER THAN RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS BE RAISED TO BETWEEN $3.00 AND $7.00 PER SQUARE FOOT BASED UPON THE FOLLOWING LAND USE CLASSIFICATIONS:
• COMMERCIAL USES
• INDUSTRIAL AND GENERAL NON RESIDENTIAL USES
• INSTITUTIONAL USES; AND
SHALL THE CITY COUNCIL BE AUTHORIZED TO PHASE IN THE NEW TAX RATES OVER FIVE YEARS OR MORE AND MAKE THE TAX SUBJECT TO AN ANNUAL INCREASE BEGINNING IN 2015 BASED UPON AN INDEX RELATED TO THE COST OF PRODUCING HOUSING IN THE AREA; AND
SHALL THE CITY COUNCIL BE AUTHORIZED TO REDUCE OR WAIVE ANY PORTION OF THE HOUSING EXCISE TAX WHEN DETERMINED TO BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST; AND
SHALL APPROVAL BE GRANTED FOR THE COLLECTION, RETENTION AND EXPENDITURE OF ALL REVENUES RECEIVED FROM SUCH TAX NOTWITHSTANDING ANY STATE REVENUE OR EXPENDITURE LIMITATION?
FOR THE MEASURE ____ AGAINST THE MEASURE ____
Ordinance 7679 submitting Ballot Issue 2D to the voters
http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/files/Elections/2009/Ordinance_7679-CHANGES_TO_HOUSING_EXCISE_TAX_.pdf
Boulder Revised Code, Title 3: Land Use Regulations, Chapter 9-13: Inclusionary Zoning
http://www.colocode.com/boulder2/chapter9-13.htm
Boulder Revised Code, Title 3: Revenue and Taxation, Chapter 3-9: Housing Excise Tax
http://www.colocode.com/boulder2/chapter3-9.htm
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
State Ballot Issues – A Look Ahead
There are no state ballot issues in 2009.
Possible 2010 Initiatives Submitted for Review and Comment
http://www.leg.state.co.us/lcs/Initiative%20Referendum/0910InitRefr.nsf/reviewcomment?openview&count=30
Possible 2010 Initiatives Submitted for Review and Comment
http://www.leg.state.co.us/lcs/Initiative%20Referendum/0910InitRefr.nsf/reviewcomment?openview&count=30
2008 State Ballot Issues – 11 Months On
In 2008 the voters of Colorado only approved 4 state ballot issues (all constitutional changes): Amendments 50 and 54 and Referenda M and N. The approved referenda were housekeeping referenda to deal with obsolete provisions in our overburdened state constitution. Below are some follow-up comments on a few of the 2008 state ballot issues from the perspective of October 2009.
Amendment 50 – approved by voters (59% yes to 41% no)
Limited Gambling in Central City, Black Hawk and Cripple Creek
Seventy-eight percent of the tax revenue increase from this amendment goes toward community colleges. David Skaggs was the Executive Director of CO Department of Higher Ed and lobbied hard for passage of Amendment 50. On Sept 11, 2009 David Skaggs resigned from his position citing an irreconcilable difference with the governor.
Amendment 54 – approved by voters (51% yes to 49% no)
Campaign Contributions from Certain Government Contractors
In June Denver Judge Catherine Lemon temporarily halted implementation of Amendment 54. The Colorado Attorney General appealed the ruling to the State Supreme Court. The case has been fast-tracked and arguments will begin in the fall.
Colorado Independent article on Amendment 54
http://coloradoindependent.com/36511/colorado-supreme-court-fast-tracks-clean-government-amendment-case
Amendment 59 – rejected by voters (45% yes to 55% no)
Education Funding and TABOR Rebates
There are several big constitutional constraints on our state budget. Amendment 59 would have gotten rid of the Amendment 23 and TABOR rebate handcuffs, but voters rejected it. Meanwhile, the state budget situation is even bleaker today than a year ago. To help solve the budget problems, legislators used a loophole in the School Finance Act (SB 256) to delay until January 2010 some of the Amendment 23 funding. In January we will know if the delayed funding is actually available.
A column by Kevin Holst about Amendment 23
http://www.examiner.com/x-9202-Denver-Republican-Examiner~y2009m5d6-Amendment-23-and-the-new-fiscal-crisis-factor
Referendum O – rejected by voters (48% yes to 52% no)
Citizen-Initiated State Laws
Ref O proposed constitutional changes to the initiative process. It was rejected by voters, but since then a new law, HB 1326 (Integrity of Citizen-Initiated Petitions), makes many statutory changes to the initiative process including changing the way that state issues are presented on the ballot. Changes to the constitution will be called amendments and changes to the statutes will be called propositions.
Text of HB 1326
http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2009A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/5A4C8A345E184B5487257537001A32E4?Open&file=1326_enr.pdf
Amendment 50 – approved by voters (59% yes to 41% no)
Limited Gambling in Central City, Black Hawk and Cripple Creek
Seventy-eight percent of the tax revenue increase from this amendment goes toward community colleges. David Skaggs was the Executive Director of CO Department of Higher Ed and lobbied hard for passage of Amendment 50. On Sept 11, 2009 David Skaggs resigned from his position citing an irreconcilable difference with the governor.
Amendment 54 – approved by voters (51% yes to 49% no)
Campaign Contributions from Certain Government Contractors
In June Denver Judge Catherine Lemon temporarily halted implementation of Amendment 54. The Colorado Attorney General appealed the ruling to the State Supreme Court. The case has been fast-tracked and arguments will begin in the fall.
Colorado Independent article on Amendment 54
http://coloradoindependent.com/36511/colorado-supreme-court-fast-tracks-clean-government-amendment-case
Amendment 59 – rejected by voters (45% yes to 55% no)
Education Funding and TABOR Rebates
There are several big constitutional constraints on our state budget. Amendment 59 would have gotten rid of the Amendment 23 and TABOR rebate handcuffs, but voters rejected it. Meanwhile, the state budget situation is even bleaker today than a year ago. To help solve the budget problems, legislators used a loophole in the School Finance Act (SB 256) to delay until January 2010 some of the Amendment 23 funding. In January we will know if the delayed funding is actually available.
A column by Kevin Holst about Amendment 23
http://www.examiner.com/x-9202-Denver-Republican-Examiner~y2009m5d6-Amendment-23-and-the-new-fiscal-crisis-factor
Referendum O – rejected by voters (48% yes to 52% no)
Citizen-Initiated State Laws
Ref O proposed constitutional changes to the initiative process. It was rejected by voters, but since then a new law, HB 1326 (Integrity of Citizen-Initiated Petitions), makes many statutory changes to the initiative process including changing the way that state issues are presented on the ballot. Changes to the constitution will be called amendments and changes to the statutes will be called propositions.
Text of HB 1326
http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2009A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/5A4C8A345E184B5487257537001A32E4?Open&file=1326_enr.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)