City of Boulder 2L – Utility Occupation Tax Extension and Increase

At the end of 2010, Xcel Energy’s franchise agreement with the city of Boulder ended. Xcel no longer charged electricity users a franchise fee which had gone to the city’s general fund. Instead, the voters in 2010 agreed to pay an equivalent utility occupation tax (UOT) to go into the city’s general fund. In 2011 the voters agreed to pay a bit extra from 2012 through 2017, with the extra UOT going to fund the costs of setting up a municipal electric utility.

Municipalization litigation and regulation costs – including engineering study and design costs for Public Utility Commission proceedings – have exceeded the amount collected by the extra UOT. Money from the city’s reserve fund has been used to cover the deficit spending. The extra UOT expires at the end of this year; the city wants to continue collecting the extra UOT for five years and collect additional taxes on top of the extra UOT in 2018 ($4M) and 2019 ($3M).

The city estimated the additional tax on an average residential bill that residents will pay compared to 2017:
2018 = $2.37/mth or $28.44/yr
2019 = $1.78/mth or $21.36/yr
2020-2022 = same as 2017
If 2L doesn’t pass, then the average consumer would not pay the $2.37/mth nor the current extra UOT which is about $1.10 (my estimate) so an average 2018 electricity bill would go down about $3.47/mth or about $42/yr.

The city anticipates needing all five years of extra UOT revenue (about $17M) over the next three years. Money from the reserve fund would cover the costs in the short term with the reserve fund getting replenished with the last two years of extra UOT funds. Passage of 2O does not guarantee success of the city’s municipalization efforts.

See Ballot Question 2O for more information about the cost of municipalization.

Recommendation: leaning

This ballot measure is seen by many as a referendum on the entire municipalization process. Who gets elected to city council this fall will be another indication of the electorate’s mood on municipalization. If 2L doesn’t pass, the city council could continue to fund municipalization efforts using general fund money.

If the following are most important to you, then vote for the 2L tax.
1) Meet Boulder’s climate goal of 100% renewable electricity energy by 2030 or at least sooner than Xcel would get to the goal.
2) A customer-owned utility -- profits returned to customers and no regulatory barriers to energy innovations.
3) Providing a role model of a new municipal electric utility for other cities.

If the following are most important to you, then vote against the 2L tax.
1) Not borrowing from the city’s reserves to pay muni costs in the near future.
2) Having a clear path toward the municipalization goal at the time of this election.
3) Having a long-term, fixed-price energy contract rather than depending on variable spot prices on the wholesale electricity market for electricity needs.

Regardless of which way you vote, we should work to change clean-energy regulations at the state, federal and global levels. For instance, the city of Boulder currently sells wholesale electricity from its Boulder Canyon Hydro plant to other customers, rather than using it directly for municipal residents or the government.

Boulder is still clarifying its municipalization vision. The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) “dismissed” an earlier application for Boulder to acquire Xcel facilities which only served customers outside of the city limits. Under the current plan, Boulder’s customers would be limited to city residents and businesses. However, two city-owned parcels – the Boulder Reservoir and the Open Space and Mountain Parks Department at Cherryvale Road and South Boulder Road – would continue to be Xcel customers.

Boulder planned to acquire Xcel’s facilities or, at a minimum, co-locate Boulder’s facilities in six of Xcel’s substations. The PUC found it “premature” to authorize the transfer of assets within the substations; Xcel will continue to service customers from four of those substations. The PUC also refused to compel Xcel to allow joint use of utility poles, although Xcel and Boulder could come to such an agreement. Boulder plans to argue that federal law requires Xcel to allow open access to any utility, such as a municipal utility, under “just and reasonable” terms.

IBM is located in the city limits and is the sole customer of one of the substations. IBM asked the PUC to give it special treatment and let it continue as an Xcel customer for at least 5 years after the Cut-Over Date, when the municipal utility starts distributing electricity. The PUC denied IBM’s request for the time being, but IBM is allowed to bring additional evidence to the PUC in the future.

The bottom line is that Boulder will be working with Xcel for a long time, even if Boulder succeeds in its quest for municipalization. One of PUC’s three conditions for Boulder is to write up a plan for giving Xcel a permanent easement and other property rights. Because the municipal boundaries and the substations’ customer boundaries are not aligned, the separation process is particularly difficult. The other two conditions require that Xcel work “in good faith” with Boulder to correct the list of assets to acquire in the muni process and to file agreements between Xcel and Boulder regarding Boulder’s payments to Xcel.

The “good faith” phrase was an acknowledgment by the PUC that Xcel is putting up roadblocks. Meanwhile, Boulder made some extravagant demands, asking the PUC to make Xcel pay for Boulder’s municipalization construction costs until the Cut-Over Date – a bit reminiscent of “We’re going to build a wall and Mexico is going to pay for it.” PUC not only said that Boulder has to pay for all the construction costs for its new facilities, but Boulder has to pay for any of Xcel’s construction costs related to the separation plan so that non-Boulder customers don’t finance any of Boulder’s muni.

More will be known after Boulder and Xcel return to the PUC in the 90-day window. Unfortunately for those voters who want more information, the November election occurs before the 90-day PUC deadline.

You may also see Xcel called by its utility subsidiary’s name, Public Service Company of Colorado.

Website for the Yes side (Empower Our Future)
http://empowerourfuture.org/election-2017-muni-related-ballot-measures/
City of Boulder Climate and Energy Goals
https://bouldercolorado.gov/climate

Facebook Page for the No side (No on 2L)
https://www.facebook.com/Noon2L/
Xcel Energy says that they will not participate in this campaign, but “would prefer that Boulder ultimately opt not to pursue the path of forming a municipal utility.” Below is a link to their recently released Colorado Energy Plan with 55% renewables by 2026.
https://www.xcelenergy.com/company/rates_and_regulations/resource_plans/colorado_energy_plan


Approved Ballot Language

BALLOT ISSUE 2L CITY OF BOULDER UTILITY OCCUPATION TAX INCREASE AND EXTENSION
SHALL CITY OF BOULDER TAXES BE INCREASED $4,000,000 ANNUALLY (IN THE FIRST YEAR) THROUGH AN INCREASE OF UP TO THAT AMOUNT IN THE CURRENT UTILITY OCCUPATION TAX IN THE YEAR 2018; AND $3,000,000 IN THE YEAR 2019; AND SHALL THE PORTION OF THE CITY'S UTILITY OCCUPATION TAX APPROVED BY VOTERS ON NOVEMBER 1, 2011, WHICH IN 2017 WAS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,015,710, BE EXTENDED FROM ITS CURRENT EXPIRATION DATE OF DECEMBER 31, 2017 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2022; AND SHALL THE EXTENSION AND THE ANNUAL INCREASE IN THE TAX BE USED TO FUND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH A MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC UTILITY THAT WILL SUPPORT BOULDER'S CLEAN ENERGY GOALS AND THE COMMUNITY'S COMMITMENT TO THE PARIS CLIMATE AGREEMENT, IMPROVE SYSTEM RELIABILITY, AND CREATE ENERGY-RELATED BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES, PROVIDED THAT IF THE CITY OF BOULDER DECIDES NOT TO PROCEED WITH A MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC UTILITY, THE TAX SHALL EXPIRE AFTER COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MUNICIPAL UTILITY EFFORT ARE PAID; AND SHALL THE INCREASED AND EXTENDED PORTION OF THE TAX BE SUBJECT TO THE SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS AS THE ORIGINAL TAX AND ALL EARNINGS THEREON (REGARDLESS OF AMOUNT) CONSTITUTE A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE, AND AN EXCEPTION TO THE REVENUE AND SPENDING LIMITS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION?

For the Measure ____
Against the Measure ____

See Ordinance No. 8189 to put Issue 2L to the voters
https://bouldercolorado.gov/central-records/document-archive then click on Browse City Council Records > Ordinances > 2017 > 8189

City of Boulder 2M – Extend Community, Culture and Safety Tax

Once again a government is asking us to extend a tax that was originally labeled as temporary. In 2014 voters approved a 3-year 0.3% sales tax (or 30 cents per $100 purchase) to fund the Civic Area construction and landscaping project, Creek Path improvements, lighting in the University Hill Commercial District, public art and funds for non-profit organizations such as the Museum of Boulder, the Dairy Center and Chautauqua.

Since the tax expires at the end of this year, the city naturally created a Capital Improvement Tax Renewal (CITR) Stakeholder Committee to recommend more projects that could be funded by a tax extension. Tax extensions, where the language reads “without raising the existing tax rate,” tend to be easier for voters to swallow than new taxes.

The proposed tax extension is for 4 years, expiring at the end of 2021. About $31M (80%) would go toward the following 6 capital improvement projects in the city.
$12.5M relocate 50-yr-old Fire Station #3 from 30th & Arapahoe floodplain
  Includes money to acquire land. Price expected to be steep.
$ 5.5M new police and fire radio system and infrastructure
$ 5.0M build a bigger north Boulder library branch
  From current 570 sq feet to size comparable to other branches
$ 4.2M help pay to replace Scott Carpenter Pool and make associated improvements
$ 3.5M Fourmile Canyon Creek greenways improvements
  Multi-use paths and flood mitigation
$ 0.4M public art

About $7.9M (20%) would go toward the following 7 community non-profit groups for capital improvement projects. These groups are expected to raise matching funds.
$1.75M Studio Arts education center at Diagonal Crossing
  Land is at Hwy 119, 47th St and Independence Rd
  Expand from Pottery Lab offerings to woodworking, printmaking, etc.
$1.60M new Meals on Wheels facility at Diagonal Crossing
  Current West Sr Center facility not available in Civic Area plan
$1.40M build Zero Waste Community Center for 4 non-profits at 6400 Arapahoe
  Official applicant is the Center for ReSource Conservation.
  Mayor, aka Eco-Cycle exec dir, recused herself from ordinance vote.
$1.25M new Community Media Center at KGNU Radio
  Construct a second floor at current location, 4700 Walnut St
$1.00M Boulder Museum of Contemporary Art (BMoCA)
  Phase I renovations to a city-owned building
  Originally asked for $6M as part of a $12M expansion project
$822.5K new Community Cycles Center in Boulder Junction
  $2.25M total cost. $200K of funding from county’s Worthy Cause tax.
  Includes L. Bohm Education Center; his widow chairs Yes campaign.
$ 87.0K Growing Gardens – Pollinator Pavilion
  88% of funding will come from other sources.
  $87K to pay for a kitchen, walk-in cooler and solar power system.

If the accompanying ballot issue 2N passes, then about $1.5M more could go to interest on debt. Any other tax money collected in excess (forecasted at another $1.5M) would go into a contingency fund to cover unanticipated expenses for the above projects or for other city capital improvement projects. The projects for the original 2014 ballot measure have a “healthy contingency” fund, but city staff want to wait until next year when all the projects should be completed before committing any of those contingency funds.

The CITR Stakeholder Committee noted that the original 2014 ballot measure focused on the city core. They wanted to focus more on the city’s outskirts this time. One city project which requested funding but wasn’t recommended by the CITR committee was the Civic Area project which received about 1/3 of the funding under the 2014 measure.

The CITR committee also expressed dismay about the city’s large backlog of deferred maintenance. Originally the committee proposed $3.2M for maintenance backlog which didn’t make the ballot. The CITR presented 2 tax renewal plans – one for 5 years and another for 7 years.

The council decided to pursue a 4-year renewal, and all amounts for the city projects were cut from the CITR committee’s recommended amounts. The recommended amounts for the non-profit groups were left intact except for a massive cut to BMoCA. The CITR committee had been quite hesitant about BMoCA’s plans in their final report; subsequently BMoCA had widely reported personnel problems. Generally, the city council’s changes honored the intent of the CITR committee.

The CITR Committee focused on stable, well-known Boulder non-profit organizations with well-developed projects. Twelve groups made presentations to the committee requesting funding. Only Growing Gardens and Community Cycles would receive the full amount they requested. The other community group projects will need to fill in the funding gap elsewhere or downsize their projects.

Don’t be fooled into thinking that this tax will quietly expire at the end of 2021. The city council had a long discussion about whether the tax renewal should be for 3, 4 or 5 years because the timeline affects how long community groups will have to wait before a funding opportunity in the next tax renewal.

Recommendation: for the measure

As voters consider a tax renewal to fund capital improvements, the city manager’s proposed 2018 draft budget for about $390M is a 21% increase of the $322M budget for 2017. Of the new budget requests, $32M is for construction of the Carter Lake Pipeline. It’s obvious that what gets onto a ballot measure is only a small portion of the city’s budget, and politics plays a role in that process. See comments under this year’s 1A for a similar situation in Boulder County.

Some council members have noted that it’s the non-profit groups’ grants that will excite the public and help this measure pass. Others say that we should first fund city projects with city money. Meanwhile, the city has a long list of unfunded projects and deferred maintenance.

If this process interests you, consider asking to be on the citizens’ committee for the next tax renewal. Or get a job with the city or run for city council. Meanwhile, vote for this measure to support our community, culture and safety. A lot of people worked very hard on this ballot measure. The outcome is an admirable package.

Website for the Yes side (Community, Culture, Safety YES)
https://communityculturesafetyyes.org/

City’s webpage with information about the CITR process
https://bouldercolorado.gov/planning/capital-tax-renewal

Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opposition website appreciated.


Approved Ballot Language

BALLOT ISSUE 2M CITY OF BOULDER 0.3 CENTS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TAX EXTENSION
WITHOUT RAISING THE EXISTING TAX RATE, SHALL THE EXISTING COMMUNITY CULTURE AND SAFETY SALES AND USE TAX OF 0.3 CENTS, SCHEDULED TO EXPIRE DECEMBER 31, 2017, BE EXTENDED TO DECEMBER 31, 2021, WITH THE REVENUE FROM SUCH TAX EXTENSION AND ALL EARNINGS THEREON BE USED TO FUND CITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS SUCH AS: APPROXIMATELY $12,500,000 TO RELOCATE FIRE STATION #3; APPROXIMATELY $5,000,000 FOR LIBRARY - NORTH BOULDER BRANCH; APPROXIMATELY $5,500,000 FOR CITYWIDE RADIO INFRASTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT; APPROXIMATELY $3,500,000 FOR FOURMILE CANYON CREEK GREENWAYS IMPROVEMENTS - 19TH TO BROADWAY; APPROXIMATELY $4,200,000 FOR SCOTT CARPENTER POOL REPLACEMENT; AND APPROXIMATELY $400,000 FOR PUBLIC ART; NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS SUCH AS: APPROXIMATELY $87,000 FOR GROWING GARDENS - POLLINATOR PAVILION; APPROXIMATELY $822,500 FOR COMMUNITY CYCLES COMMUNITY CYCLING CENTER; APPROXIMATELY $1,600,000 FOR MEALS ON WHEELS NEW FACILITY CONSTRUCTION; APPROXIMATELY $1,750,000 FOR STUDIO ARTS BOULDER - COMMUNITY STUDIO ARTS EDUCATION CENTER; APPROXIMATELY $1,400,000 FOR CENTER FOR RESOURCE CONSERVATION – ZERO WASTE COMMUNITY CENTER; APPROXIMATELY $1,250,000 FOR KGNU - COMMUNITY MEDIA CENTER; AND APPROXIMATELY $1,000,000 FOR BOULDER MUSEUM OF CONTEMPORARY ART - MUSEUM RENOVATION; ANY PAYMENTS FROM THIS TAX TO NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS SHALL BE MADE IN COMPLIANCE WITH TERMS, CONDITIONS, TIMING AND FUNDRAISING MATCHING REQUIREMENTS APPROVED BY THE BOULDER CITY COUNCIL; AND ANY REMAINING FUNDS TO BE APPROPRIATED BY THE BOULDER CITY COUNCIL TO FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS; AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, SHALL ANY EARNINGS FROM THE REVENUES FROM SUCH TAX EXTENSION CONSTITUTE A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE AND AN EXCEPTION TO THE REVENUE AND SPENDING LIMITS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION?

For the Measure ____
Against the Measure ____

See Ordinance No. 8197 to put Issue 2M to the voters
https://bouldercolorado.gov/central-records/document-archive then click on Browse City Council Records > Ordinances > 2017 > 8197

City of Boulder 2N – Authorize Debt to Spend Community, Culture and Safety Tax Now

This companion measure to 2M would allow the city to borrow against the future tax-revenue stream in order to fund the city projects listed in 2M. The city would not be authorized to borrow any of the non-profit groups’ funding. As a reminder, 80% of the project funds are allocated for city projects.

Borrowing money allows the city access to funding, for instance, to buy a parcel of land for Fire Station #3 immediately rather than wait until enough taxes are collected. Passage of this measure “does not require the city to issue debt, but provides the flexibility to do so in the case one or more projects are ready on an accelerated timeline.” (July 25 memo to city council)

Recommendation: for the measure

Authorizing debt authority is reasonable for large projects or purchases and is similar to taking out a mortgage to buy a house. In this case, the repayment period would be a maximum of 4 years, the term for the proposed tax renewal.

Please read the entry for ballot issue 2M for many more details about the overall project.

Website for the Yes side (Community, Culture, Safety YES)
https://communityculturesafetyyes.org/

Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opposition website appreciated.


Approved Ballot Language

BALLOT ISSUE 2N CITY OF BOULDER DEBT AUTHORITY FOR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT TAX
SHALL CITY OF BOULDER DEBT BE INCREASED UP TO $26,000,000 WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF UP TO $29,000,000 (SUCH AMOUNT BEING THE TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST THAT COULD BE PAYABLE OVER THE MAXIMUM LIFE OF THE DEBT) TO BE PAID FROM THE EXTENSION OF THE COMMUNITY CULTURE AND SAFETY SALES AND USE TAX OF 0.3 CENTS, IF SEPARATELY APPROVED; SUCH DEBT TO BEAR INTEREST AT A NET EFFECTIVE RATE NOT TO EXCEED 4.002 PERCENT PER ANNUM AND HAVE A MATURITY DATE NOT LATER THAN FOUR YEARS FROM THE DATE ANY SUCH DEBT IS ISSUED, SUCH DEBT TO BE SOLD AT SUCH TIME AND IN SUCH MANNER AND TO CONTAIN SUCH TERMS, NOT INCONSISTENT HEREWITH, AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY DETERMINE, WITH THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH DEBT AND EARNINGS THEREON BEING USED TO FUND THE FOLLOWING CITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS OTHERWISE PAYABLE FROM SAID SALES AND USE TAX; RELOCATION OF FIRE STATION #3; LIBRARY - NORTH BOULDER BRANCH; CITYWIDE RADIO INFRASTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT; FOURMILE CANYON CREEK GREENWAYS IMPROVEMENTS - 19TH TO BROADWAY; SCOTT CARPENTER POOL REPLACEMENT; AND PUBLIC ART; WITH ANY REMAINING PROCEEDS OF SUCH DEBT AND ALL EARNINGS THEREON BE USED TO FUND CITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS THAT ARE DESCRIBED IN ORDINANCE 8197 WITH ANY REMAINING FUNDS TO BE APPROPRIATED BY THE BOULDER CITY COUNCIL TO FUND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECTS; AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, SHALL ANY EARNINGS FROM THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH DEBTS AND THE REVENUES FROM SUCH TAX EXTENSION CONSTITUTE A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE AND AN EXCEPTION TO THE REVENUE AND SPENDING LIMITS OF ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION?

For the Measure ____
Against the Measure ____

See Ordinance No. 8198 to put Issue 2N to the voters
https://bouldercolorado.gov/central-records/document-archive then click on Browse City Council Records > Ordinances > 2017 > 8198

City of Boulder 2O – Vote Prior to Municipalization Construction Debt

In May 2014 the city created a municipal electric utility, albeit only on paper. Xcel Energy sued, challenging the utility’s creation and saying that “Boulder had not done enough to show it could run a utility under the stated criteria.” (Daily Camera, July 18, 2017) After two lower rulings, that case is now awaiting a hearing by the CO Supreme Court.

City Attorney Tom Carr strongly advocated placing 2O on the ballot, arguing that resolving the existential legal question is of fundamental importance to bonding and rating agencies before they will deal with a municipal utility. Measure 2O is seen as a way to render the court case immaterial.

As part of forming a municipal electric utility, the city and Xcel proposed new construction to expand substations, increase the number of transformers, and erect utility poles or put wires underground. The Public Utility Commission’s (PUC) decision not to force Xcel to allow Boulder use of Xcel’s substations or utility poles will likely increase Boulder’s acquisition costs, although the city plans to argue that federal law requires Xcel to allow open access to any utility, such as Boulder’s municipal utility, under “just and reasonable” terms.

In 2013 voters limited debt related to acquisition costs for a muni to $214M. City staff are predicting that by 2019 or 2020 the city will have better information on the costs to create an actual electric utility – not just one on paper.

Measure 2O requires voters to approve the city incurring debt prior to this construction – a go/no-go vote. Any debt over the previously approved $214M would also need to be approved.

In addition to the generally unobjectionable idea of voter approval, the language to be added to Section 178 in the charter includes the curious phrase, “Provided, however, nothing in this section shall require any subsequent vote for future debt.” According to staff, this is intended to clarify that voter approval is a “one-time requirement.” However, TABOR requires voter approval for most debt – in particular, for “creation of any multiple-fiscal year direct or indirect district debt or other financial obligation whatsoever without adequate present cash reserves pledged irrevocably and held for payments in all future fiscal years,” but perhaps a municipal utility isn’t considered a district under TABOR.

In 2013 city voters passed 2F to amend Section 98 of the city charter to allow the city to negotiate private sales of bonds. The new language in Section 98 seems to imply that private sales of bonds are not subject to a vote of the electorate, but a reading of TABOR would preclude that, unless the passage of 2F in 2013 is considered voter approval for all such future private bond debt.

Recommendation: for the measure

Both municipalization supporters and opponents are generally in favor of 2O. While Xcel Energy and the CO Supreme Court may not agree with City Attorney Carr that 2O solves the legal entity question, it otherwise seems like a do-no-harm ballot issue. Measure 2O requires yet another approval step in the municipalization process – but it’s an easy-to-execute step compared to the PUC approvals and required agreements between Xcel and Boulder.

Website for the Yes side (Empower Our Future)
http://empowerourfuture.org/election-2017-muni-related-ballot-measures/

Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opposition website appreciated.


Approved Ballot Language

Ballot Question 2O City of Boulder Charter Requirement for Vote Before Electric Construction Debt
Shall Section 178 of the Charter be amended pursuant to Ordinance 8193 to require a vote at a general or special election prior to the enterprise incurring debt for construction to separate the existing utility system for the City to provide electricity to customers of the City by a separate system?

For the Measure ____
Against the Measure ____

See Ordinance No. 8193 to put Question 2O to the voters
https://bouldercolorado.gov/central-records/document-archive then click on Browse City Council Records > Ordinances > 2017 > 8193

City of Boulder 2P – Limited Executive Sessions for Municipalization

In 2014 Boulder voters temporarily approved executive sessions for legal advice on a municipal electric utility. That approval expires at the end of 2017. As most Boulder residents are aware, the municipalization negotiations are ongoing, and the city council would like to continue discussing negotiation strategies and getting legal advice behind closed doors through the end of 2023.

This year’s version has an interesting twist. It prohibits any discussions of negotiation strategy related to terminating the municipalization effort. The city manager and city attorney conduct the actual negotiations on behalf of the city council, but strategy considerations usually include the entire range of possible actions. Council member Bob Yates points out, “if we have to discuss on live TV what terms we would accept to settle all or some portion of the litigation, we will likely never settle it (which I suppose is the intent of the folks who proposed the change).” A previous version of the ordinance prohibited “legal advice” related to termination, but those words were deleted.

Recommendation: for the measure

On Sept 5 the city council voted 6 – 2 to put 2P on the ballot with the two lawyers, Bob Yates and Andrew Shoemaker, voting against it and Mary Young absent.

The city council will have a stronger hand in the municipalization negotiations if it can discuss strategy in executive session. Although this temporary measure is flawed, I support it. If termination discussions are forced into a public discussion, so be it.

Website for the Yes side (Empower Our Future)
http://empowerourfuture.org/election-2017-muni-related-ballot-measures/

Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opposition website appreciated.


Approved Ballot Language

Ballot Question 2P City of Boulder Charter Provision Allowing Executive Sessions for Municipalization
Shall Section 9 of the Charter be amended pursuant to Ordinance 8202 to: (1) amend the requirements for notices of executive sessions regarding legal advice and negotiation strategy regarding municipalization to align processes more closely with state law; (2) prohibit any discussions about negotiating a franchise or other settlement discussions that would terminate Boulder's effort to operate an independent municipal electric utility; and (3) extend the authority to hold executive sessions until December 31, 2023?

For the Measure ____
Against the Measure ____

See Ordinance No. 8202 to put Question 2P to the voters
https://bouldercolorado.gov/central-records/document-archive then click on Browse City Council Records > Ordinances > 2017 > 8202

City of Boulder 2Q – Charter Clean-Up: Petitions and Miscellaneous

In 2016 the city’s initiative process brought to light some conflicts between dates in the city’s charter and state statute. The charter was adopted in 1917 and is regularly updated with the approval of voters as parts of it become outdated.

Below are the changes being considered under ballot measure 2Q:
  Section 8 – city council vacancies occurring before Aug 1 (currently July 1) to be filled in the November election
  Section 22 – conforms Charter election language with Municipal Election Code language.
  Section 29 – adds text that votes for candidates who withdraw before Election Day won’t be counted
  Section 37 – specifies that citizen initiatives must propose charter amendments or legislative measures
  Section 38B – eliminates a specified time limit for citizen initiatives, allowing the city manager or state rules to set timelines
  Section 39 – similar to Section 38B and spells out the petition signature-verification process
  Section 41 – eliminates the language about two different signature thresholds for citizen petitions – only threshold is 5% of registered voters
  Section 43 – similar to Section 37, specifies that referenda will be for legislative measures
  Section 48 – authorizes city council, rather than petition committees, to determine ballot titles
  Section 63 – eliminates early 20th-century requirement that the city manager post a bond to ensure “faithful performance of the duties”
  Section 68 – eliminates the 1917 paragraph about the city clerk being the acting finance officer
  Section 72 – eliminates the paragraph about the city manager appointing a probation officer
  Section 73 – eliminates section 73 wherein council may provide relief funds for “employees of the department” -- the power, if appropriate, would reside by default with the city manager

Recommendation: for the measure

Not surprisingly, on Sept 5 the city council voted unanimously 8 – 0 to place 2Q on the ballot. Mary Young, one of the 3 Council Charter Committee members recommending the changes, was absent.

There are two parts of 2Q that might cause hesitation for petitioners:

Since, under 2Q, only legislative measures may be put on the ballot, it seems that a ballot measure such as 2H on the 2011 ballot would no longer be allowed. 2H was a reaction to the famous Citizens United case and made a statement rather than being a legislative measure.

Under the proposed changes to Section 48, the city council has the power to determine the ballot title. The current charter has the petitioners preparing the ballot title. Activists who worry that the city council will nefariously choose a less appealing ballot title might be concerned, but it’s more likely that the city council will use the petitioners’ proposed ballot title as long as it seems appropriate.

Website for the Yes side
No known website – Info on a supporting website appreciated.

Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opposition website appreciated.


Approved Ballot Language

Ballot Question 2Q City of Boulder Charter Clean Up
Shall Sections 8, 22, 29, 37, 38B, 39, 41, 43, 48, 63, 68, 72 and 73 of the Charter be amended as specifically set forth in Ordinance 8195 including to: (1) remove obsolete provisions; (2) eliminate timelines for election related matters that conflict with state laws; (3) clarify when council vacancy elections are required; (4) clarify that initiative and referendum relate only to legislative matters; and (5) authorize signature verification and protests of petitions?

For the Measure ____
Against the Measure ____

See Ordinance No. 8195 to put Question 2Q to the voters
https://bouldercolorado.gov/central-records/document-archive then click on Browse City Council Records > Ordinances > 2017 > 8195

Special Session Fails to Restore Axed Funding to RTD and SCFD

Governor Hickenlooper called a special session for Oct 2 to restore funding inadvertently exempted by Senate Bill 17-267. The governor’s proclamation stated that when the bill “consolidated two … taxes on retail marijuana sales … [it] exempted certain special districts,” notably the Regional Transportation District (RTD) and the Scientific and Cultural Facilities District (SCFD). RTD is losing out on about $500,000 per month and SCFD more than $50,000 per month.

It takes three days to pass a bill. The special session adjourned on the second day with no resolution but plenty of political bickering. Lawmakers could take up the issue again when the 2018 regular session starts in January.

Coloradans have passed 4 statewide marijuana ballot measures.
  2000 Amendment 20 – Medical Marijuana
  2012 Amendment 64 – Use and Regulation of Marijuana
  2013 Proposition AA – State Marijuana Taxes
  2015 Proposition BB – Retain Revenue in Excess of Blue Book Estimate