City of Boulder 302 – Voter Approval of CU South Annexation Agreement

For years the city and CU have been in discussion over the status of the CU South 308-acre property which is just outside the city’s boundary line between Hwy 36 and Broadway (Hwy 93). Objections were raised in 1996 when CU purchased the land, a former gravel mine, for future development. Now CU is ready to build, including student housing, but will need city water and sewer services.

During Boulder’s 1,000-year rain in 2013, Frasier Meadows was one of the flooded neighborhoods. To minimize future flooding, the city would like to establish flood mitigation on the CU South property and reserve some of the property as a floodplain. An annexation agreement between CU and the city would specify both city services and flood mitigation.

The CU South property has been treated as open space by its neighbors for many years. The Save South Boulder group supports exchanging CU South land “for a higher, drier, less sensitive [city-owned] site.” In 2020 a last-minute mid-pandemic effort to collect signatures for a citizens’ initiative was unsuccessful.

This year Save CU South did get enough signatures to place Question 302 on the ballot. This ballot question requires the inclusion of certain details in any CU South annexation agreement and requires voter approval of the agreement prior to entering into it.

Meanwhile, on September 21st the city council voted 6-1 (with 2 recusals) to approve a final CU South annexation agreement as an emergency measure. This move – more than one month before Election Day – means that Question 302 will not impact the current CU South agreement just yet.

Unsurprisingly, this preemptory move by council has generated some hard feelings in the community. The proponents of 302 have promised to collect signatures for a referendum ballot measure asking the voters to weigh in on the Sept 21st annexation agreement – similar to how Prop 113 in 2020 asked voters if they wanted to affirm the Colorado’s entry into the National Popular Vote Compact.

The city charter’s Section 50 states, “Measures passed as emergency measures shall be subject to referendum like other measures, except that they shall not be suspended from going into effect while referendum proceedings are pending. If, when submitted to a vote of the electors, an emergency measure be not approved by a majority of those voting thereon, it shall be considered repealed…” Meanwhile, the city is moving forward with creating flood mitigation plans, doing engineering studies and obtaining permits.

If Question 302 and the promised future referendum question both pass, then the Sept 21st annexation deal will be dead and any future CU South annexation agreement must meet the terms of Question 302.

The proponents of Question 302 complain that CU has not presented a detailed site plan as, they state, is normally required prior to an annexation agreement. Question 302 seeks some assurances by creating a new city section 9-2-17.5 in the Boulder Revised Code to require any CU South annexation agreement to “identify in detail the following items:” a site plan, a transportation plan, cost projections, any financing, government permits, environmental impacts, pollution controls and terms to bind future owners to the agreement.

The Sept 21st annexation agreement limits future development to 129 acres and transfers 155 acres to the city for flood protection and permanent open space. One alternative to immediate annexation that has been floated is getting an easement on the land in order to start work on flood mitigation now. CU is in the advantageous position here and does not want to allow an easement without getting something in return.

Recommendation: no/against

The fact that we are having a huge discussion about annexing the CU South property shows that this annexation is more complex than many annexations. Evidently, standards for previous annexations were not codified or were not of the quality that Save CU South wants. For consistency, the Save CU South group could have asked voters to create a new city code section which pertains to any annexation, but they limited it to only the CU South property.

We elect city council members, county commissioners and legislators to represent us. We should vote in city council elections and reach out to council members with our concerns, but, in the end, we entrust them to make decisions. We call this a representative democracy. We don’t want a true (but very inefficient) democracy where every person gets to weigh in on every issue. The average citizen doesn’t have enough time to research every issue. Many citizens don’t vote even when given the opportunity.

If we believe our city council made a terrible decision, fortunately, we do have recourse in the form of a referendum petition. Whether or not Question 302 passes, its proponents are within their rights to pursue this form of recourse. If the referendum petition question gets on the ballot, then the issue won’t be whether citizens should have the right to vote on the annexation of CU South, but the content of the annexation agreement and whether or not, overall, the Sept 21st agreement is good enough.

Website for the Yes side – Save CU South
https://savecusouth.org/

Website for the No side – Protect Our Neighbors
https://www.protectourneighbors.org/

Other websites
CU’s CU South website about the annexation agreement (includes map)
https://www.colorado.edu/cubouldersouth/

Save South Boulder stakeholder group
https://www.savesouthboulder.com/save-south-boulder-news


Approved Ballot Language (in the city of Boulder format)
City of Boulder Ballot Question 302

Shall the voters of the City of Boulder adopt changes to the City of Boulder, Colorado, Revised Code to require that any agreement with the University of Colorado regarding terms of annexation for the land known as CU South include certain specific details, and that the annexation agreement gain voter approval in an election prior to provision of city utilities and services other than flood control facilities to or on any portion of CU South?

YES/FOR _____
NO/AGAINST _____

Ordinance No. 8474 to put Question 302 to the voters
Ordinance 8474 or go to https://bouldercolorado.gov/nov-2-2021-boulder-election-ballot-measures-and-candidates

Sept 21st CU South Annexation Agreement
https://bouldercolorado.gov/media/4315/download?inline