In 2020 voters approved Prop EE to increase taxes on nicotine and tobacco products by taxing wholesalers and distributers. The Blue Book’s estimate of tax revenue turned out to be lower than the actual taxes collected. In such a case, TABOR requires that, “except by later voter approval, … the tax increase is thereafter reduced up to 100% in proportion to the combined dollar excess, and the combined excess revenue refunded in the next fiscal year.”
Prop II is asking for the “later voter approval” to maintain the tax rate approved in Prop EE and to allow the state to retain the excess revenue already collected and all excess revenue going forward.
A main aim of Prop EE funding was to “enhance the voluntary Colorado Preschool Program and make it widely available for free.” Passage of Prop II would further that objective with continued funding.
Recommendation: YES/FOR
We’ve been down this road before. In 2015 Prop BB asked voters to “de-Bruce” -- in this case, retain Prop AA revenue in excess of the Blue Book estimate for marijuana taxes. Colorado is the only state with TABOR.
If this measure fails, the tobacco wholesalers and distributors who would receive the tax refund come out way ahead because they’ve already passed on the taxes to their customers in higher prices. What guarantee do we have that the tobacco and nicotine companies will proportionally reduce their prices in the future if Prop II fails? If anyone should be getting a tax refund, perhaps it should be the tobacco and nicotine customers who couldn’t pass on the higher taxes to anyone else.
Passage of this measure would be a financial win for Gov Polis’ efforts to provide free preschool in Colorado.
Website for the Yes side
https://www.preschoolforallcoloradans.com/
Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Approved Ballot Language
Proposition II (STATUTORY)
Without raising taxes, may the state retain and spend revenues from taxes on cigarettes, tobacco, and other nicotine products and maintain tax rates on cigarettes, tobacco, and other nicotine products and use these revenues to invest twenty-three million six hundred fifty thousand dollars to enhance the voluntary Colorado preschool program and make it widely available for free instead of reducing these tax rates and refunding revenues to cigarette wholesalers, tobacco product distributors, nicotine products distributors, and other taxpayers, for exceeding an estimate included in the ballot information booklet for proposition EE?
YES/FOR ___
NO/AGAINST ___
HB23-1290 to refer Proposition II to the voters
https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2023a_1290_signed.pdf
Sunday, October 22, 2023
Saturday, October 21, 2023
County of Boulder 1A - Extension of the Expiring 0.05% Portion of the 2004 Open Space Sales and Use Tax
Boulder County’s open space sales and use taxes have experienced quite a bit of movement over the years. Consider the following voter actions on open space sales and use taxes:
2004 – Voters approve a new 0.10% tax
half (0.05%) permanent -- for maintenance
half (0.05%) expiring end of 2024
2007 – Voters extend a 0.10% tax for 20 years
2009 – Voters reject a 15-yr tax extension of 0.25% tax. This tax was first approved by voters in 1993 and extended in 1999 through 2019.
2010 – Voters approve a new 0.15% tax expiring end of 2030
2016 – Voters approve extending 0.25% tax through 2034
half (0.125%) to continue going to open space
half (0.125%) for sustainability
Of the 1.185% county sales and use tax, 0.475% is dedicated to open space. County commissioners are asking voters to renew the temporary part (0.05%) of the 2004 tax for 15 more years.
Recommendation: TAX
Back in 2016, this site posted the following comment: “We just passed a brand-new open space sales tax in 2010 and were told by proponents that Boulder County had purchased almost everything it ever expected to purchase. I wondered then if 2010 would be the year of the last open space ballot issue – evidently not.”
Website for the Yes side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Approved Ballot Language
Boulder County Ballot Issue 1A
OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX EXTENSION AND REVENUE CHANGE
WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX, SHALL THE COUNTY'S EXISTING 0.05% OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX BE EXTENDED FOR FIFTEEN (15) YEARS FOR THE PURPOSES OF ACQUIRING, IMPROVING, MANAGING, AND MAINTAINING OPEN SPACE LANDS AND OTHER OPEN SPACE PROPERTY INTERESTS; AND SHALL THE REVENUES AND THE EARNINGS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAX CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2023-068?
YES/FOR ___
NO/AGAINST ___
Resolution No. 2023-068 to refer Issue 1A to the voters
https://assets.bouldercounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Reso-23-068-Open-Space-tax-extension-proposal-signed.pdf
2004 – Voters approve a new 0.10% tax
half (0.05%) permanent -- for maintenance
half (0.05%) expiring end of 2024
2007 – Voters extend a 0.10% tax for 20 years
2009 – Voters reject a 15-yr tax extension of 0.25% tax. This tax was first approved by voters in 1993 and extended in 1999 through 2019.
2010 – Voters approve a new 0.15% tax expiring end of 2030
2016 – Voters approve extending 0.25% tax through 2034
half (0.125%) to continue going to open space
half (0.125%) for sustainability
Of the 1.185% county sales and use tax, 0.475% is dedicated to open space. County commissioners are asking voters to renew the temporary part (0.05%) of the 2004 tax for 15 more years.
Recommendation: TAX
Back in 2016, this site posted the following comment: “We just passed a brand-new open space sales tax in 2010 and were told by proponents that Boulder County had purchased almost everything it ever expected to purchase. I wondered then if 2010 would be the year of the last open space ballot issue – evidently not.”
Website for the Yes side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Approved Ballot Language
Boulder County Ballot Issue 1A
OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX EXTENSION AND REVENUE CHANGE
WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX, SHALL THE COUNTY'S EXISTING 0.05% OPEN SPACE SALES AND USE TAX BE EXTENDED FOR FIFTEEN (15) YEARS FOR THE PURPOSES OF ACQUIRING, IMPROVING, MANAGING, AND MAINTAINING OPEN SPACE LANDS AND OTHER OPEN SPACE PROPERTY INTERESTS; AND SHALL THE REVENUES AND THE EARNINGS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAX CONSTITUTE A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2023-068?
YES/FOR ___
NO/AGAINST ___
Resolution No. 2023-068 to refer Issue 1A to the voters
https://assets.bouldercounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Reso-23-068-Open-Space-tax-extension-proposal-signed.pdf
Friday, October 20, 2023
County of Boulder 1B - Sales and Use Tax Extension and Reallocation to Attainable Housing
In 2014, following the 2013 flood, voters approved a new 5-year 0.185% sales and use tax for flood recovery. In 2018 voters approved extending the tax for five years to pay for an Alternative Sentencing Facility for the Boulder County Jail. This year the county commissioners are asking to extend the tax for 15 years to go toward affordable and attainable housing. The current tax is expiring at the end of 2024 so if this extension doesn’t pass, the county can try again next year.
The county’s “Affordable Housing in Boulder County” fact sheet explains the impact of reduced rent. County commissioners planned to use a big chunk of the Worthy Cause sales tax, extended for 15 years by voters in 2017, for affordable housing. Now the county is asking for a separate dedicated tax for affordable housing. Meanwhile, the city of Boulder is piloting a guaranteed income pilot project to give 200 low-income households $500/month, no strings attached.
Recommendation: TAX
This feels like a case of the county commissioners combining “Oh! A tax is expiring. What would people support enough that they would vote to extend the tax? And can we extend it for 15 years instead of 5?” and “Let’s throw money at the housing affordability problem.” An arguably better option would be to make structural changes (rent control, inclusionary housing, living wages, eliminating requirements for developers to provide parking, etc) to address the housing crisis.
The city of Boulder has the highest housing costs in the county and the demand for housing is fairly inelastic. Housing in the rest of the county is not particularly cheap either. Reducing the effective cost of housing for a limited number of people through subsidies will help those individuals but is probably not going to have as much long-term effect as making structural changes.
Website for the Yes side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Information on Boulder’s guaranteed income program https://bouldercolorado.gov/news/city-boulder-partners-community-foundation-support-elevate-boulder-guaranteed-income-pilot#:~:text=Details&text=The%20Elevate%20Boulder%20pilot%20will,two%20years%2C%20no%20strings%20attached.
Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Approved Ballot Language
Boulder County Ballot Issue 1B
AFFORDABLE AND ATTAINABLE SALES AND USE TAX EXTENSION AND REVENUE CHANGE
WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX, SHALL THE COUNTY'S EXISTING 0.185% SALES AND USE TAX APPROVED IN 2018 PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 2018-76 BE EXTENDED FOR FIFTEEN (15) YEARS FOR THE PURPOSES OF FUNDING AFFORDABLE AND ATTAINABLE HOUSING AND RELATED SUPPORT SERVICES WITHIN BOULDER COUNTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: THE COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT, OPERATION, ACQUISITION, PRESERVATION, RENOVATION, MAINTENANCE AND CONSTRUCTION OF FOR-SALE AND RENTAL HOMES FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND LOCAL WORKFORCE; SUPPORTIVE HOUSING; SERVICES THAT SUPPORT HOUSING STABILITY; GRANTS TO HOUSING AUTHORITIES, NONPROFIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS, AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES; AND SHALL THE REVENUES AND THE EARNINGS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAX CONSTITUTE A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2023-070?
YES/FOR ___
NO/AGAINST ___
Resolution No. 2023-070 to refer Issue 1B to the voters
https://assets.bouldercounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Resolution-2023-070-Affordable-Housing-Proposal-signed.pdf
“Affordable Housing in Boulder County” Fact Sheet
https://assets.bouldercounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Affordable-Housing-in-Boulder-County-One-Pager-English.pdf
The county’s “Affordable Housing in Boulder County” fact sheet explains the impact of reduced rent. County commissioners planned to use a big chunk of the Worthy Cause sales tax, extended for 15 years by voters in 2017, for affordable housing. Now the county is asking for a separate dedicated tax for affordable housing. Meanwhile, the city of Boulder is piloting a guaranteed income pilot project to give 200 low-income households $500/month, no strings attached.
Recommendation: TAX
This feels like a case of the county commissioners combining “Oh! A tax is expiring. What would people support enough that they would vote to extend the tax? And can we extend it for 15 years instead of 5?” and “Let’s throw money at the housing affordability problem.” An arguably better option would be to make structural changes (rent control, inclusionary housing, living wages, eliminating requirements for developers to provide parking, etc) to address the housing crisis.
The city of Boulder has the highest housing costs in the county and the demand for housing is fairly inelastic. Housing in the rest of the county is not particularly cheap either. Reducing the effective cost of housing for a limited number of people through subsidies will help those individuals but is probably not going to have as much long-term effect as making structural changes.
Website for the Yes side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Information on Boulder’s guaranteed income program https://bouldercolorado.gov/news/city-boulder-partners-community-foundation-support-elevate-boulder-guaranteed-income-pilot#:~:text=Details&text=The%20Elevate%20Boulder%20pilot%20will,two%20years%2C%20no%20strings%20attached.
Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Approved Ballot Language
Boulder County Ballot Issue 1B
AFFORDABLE AND ATTAINABLE SALES AND USE TAX EXTENSION AND REVENUE CHANGE
WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX, SHALL THE COUNTY'S EXISTING 0.185% SALES AND USE TAX APPROVED IN 2018 PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 2018-76 BE EXTENDED FOR FIFTEEN (15) YEARS FOR THE PURPOSES OF FUNDING AFFORDABLE AND ATTAINABLE HOUSING AND RELATED SUPPORT SERVICES WITHIN BOULDER COUNTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: THE COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT, OPERATION, ACQUISITION, PRESERVATION, RENOVATION, MAINTENANCE AND CONSTRUCTION OF FOR-SALE AND RENTAL HOMES FOR LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND LOCAL WORKFORCE; SUPPORTIVE HOUSING; SERVICES THAT SUPPORT HOUSING STABILITY; GRANTS TO HOUSING AUTHORITIES, NONPROFIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS, AND LOCAL MUNICIPALITIES; AND SHALL THE REVENUES AND THE EARNINGS ON THE INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAX CONSTITUTE A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS' RESOLUTION NO. 2023-070?
YES/FOR ___
NO/AGAINST ___
Resolution No. 2023-070 to refer Issue 1B to the voters
https://assets.bouldercounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Resolution-2023-070-Affordable-Housing-Proposal-signed.pdf
“Affordable Housing in Boulder County” Fact Sheet
https://assets.bouldercounty.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/Affordable-Housing-in-Boulder-County-One-Pager-English.pdf
Wednesday, October 18, 2023
City of Boulder 2A - Sales and Use Tax Extension and Reallocation
The city of Boulder has a budget. Revenue goes in the general fund unless the revenue is dedicated for a specific purpose such as open space. City council has flexibility to spend general fund money according to the city’s current needs and priorities. The more revenue that goes into dedicated funds, the more handcuffed city council is when trying to budget for fire and emergency response services, public safety services, human services, homelessness solutions and services, parks, and other general fund purposes.
Some of Boulder’s sales and use taxes are permanent and others sunset. A 0.15% sales and use tax for the general fund is due to expire at the end of 2024. Arts supporters circulated an initiative petition to ask voters to extend the tax but repurpose it for arts and culture. Meanwhile, the city council wanted a simple extension with all the revenue continuing to go to the general fund. The two groups compromised with arts getting 50% and the general fund getting 50%.
If this tax extension passes, Boulder may have to find alternative sources of funding to keep non-arts city services funded at the current level. The proponents argue that the city can afford to put half the tax revenue into arts since the city is no longer paying for a library. Note that voters are still paying for a library through higher property taxes –- money that previously was part of this sales and use tax. The TABOR language in this ballot question is “Without raising additional taxes,” but taxpayers would effectively pay more in taxes.
If this tax extension fails, expect to see a tax extension on next year’s ballot, maybe with all the revenue going to the general fund.
Recommendation: AGAINST THE MEASURE
Dedicated taxes are problematic. Boulder should have a very good reason for a dedicated tax. The library was consistently getting short shrifted in the budget so voters approved creating a library district. (Note that “libraries” is no longer listed in the ballot language’s general fund purposes.) Boulder’s open space is a core part of Boulder’s identity and also gets substantial dedicated tax revenue. Arts and culture get some funding from the city, but arts and culture do not merit a dedicated tax.
A cleaner, more honest option would have been to put two questions on the ballot:
*one to collect 0.075% sales and use tax for general fund purposes and
*one to collect 0.075% sales and use tax for arts and culture
That would be true direct democracy. The county took this very tactic in 2016 with its 1B and 1C ballot measures.
Website for the Yes side
https://2aforall.com/
Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
2½-minute argument in opposition: https://tinyurl.com/NoOn2ABoulder
Former council member Mary Young’s guest opinion: https://tinyurl.com/yzper79m
Approved Ballot Language
City of Boulder Ballot Question 2A
CITY SALES USE AND TAX EXTENSION (TABOR)
WITHOUT RAISING ADDITIONAL TAXES, SHALL THE EXISTING 0.15 CENT CITY SALES AND USE TAX FOR GENERAL FUND PURPOSES, APPROVED BY THE VOTERS BY ORDINANCE 7300, BE EXTENDED BEYOND THE CURRENT EXPIRATION DATE OF DECEMBER 31, 2024, UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 2044, WITH THE REVENUE FROM SUCH TAX EXTENSION AND ALL EARNINGS THEREON BE USED TO FUND SERVICES AND PROJECTS AS FOLLOWS:
· 50% FOR FIRE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICES, PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, HUMAN SERVICES, HOMELESSNESS SOLUTIONS AND SERVICES, PARKS, AND OTHER GENERAL FUND PURPOSES;
· 50% FOR ARTS, CULTURE, AND HERITAGE PURPOSES; INCLUDING DIRECT AND GRANT FUNDING FOR ARTS AND CULTURE NONPROFITS, PROFESSIONAL ARTISTS, ARTS EDUCATION, VENUES AND WORKSPACES, PUBLIC ART, AND MULTI-CULTURAL PROGRAMS;
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 ___
Ordinance 8591 to refer Question 2A to the ballot
https://documents.bouldercolorado.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182490&dbid=0&repo=LF8PROD2&_ga=2.168124513.1348057877.1697325494-181246305.1661276300&cr=1
Some of Boulder’s sales and use taxes are permanent and others sunset. A 0.15% sales and use tax for the general fund is due to expire at the end of 2024. Arts supporters circulated an initiative petition to ask voters to extend the tax but repurpose it for arts and culture. Meanwhile, the city council wanted a simple extension with all the revenue continuing to go to the general fund. The two groups compromised with arts getting 50% and the general fund getting 50%.
If this tax extension passes, Boulder may have to find alternative sources of funding to keep non-arts city services funded at the current level. The proponents argue that the city can afford to put half the tax revenue into arts since the city is no longer paying for a library. Note that voters are still paying for a library through higher property taxes –- money that previously was part of this sales and use tax. The TABOR language in this ballot question is “Without raising additional taxes,” but taxpayers would effectively pay more in taxes.
If this tax extension fails, expect to see a tax extension on next year’s ballot, maybe with all the revenue going to the general fund.
Recommendation: AGAINST THE MEASURE
Dedicated taxes are problematic. Boulder should have a very good reason for a dedicated tax. The library was consistently getting short shrifted in the budget so voters approved creating a library district. (Note that “libraries” is no longer listed in the ballot language’s general fund purposes.) Boulder’s open space is a core part of Boulder’s identity and also gets substantial dedicated tax revenue. Arts and culture get some funding from the city, but arts and culture do not merit a dedicated tax.
A cleaner, more honest option would have been to put two questions on the ballot:
*one to collect 0.075% sales and use tax for general fund purposes and
*one to collect 0.075% sales and use tax for arts and culture
That would be true direct democracy. The county took this very tactic in 2016 with its 1B and 1C ballot measures.
Website for the Yes side
https://2aforall.com/
Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
2½-minute argument in opposition: https://tinyurl.com/NoOn2ABoulder
Former council member Mary Young’s guest opinion: https://tinyurl.com/yzper79m
Approved Ballot Language
City of Boulder Ballot Question 2A
CITY SALES USE AND TAX EXTENSION (TABOR)
WITHOUT RAISING ADDITIONAL TAXES, SHALL THE EXISTING 0.15 CENT CITY SALES AND USE TAX FOR GENERAL FUND PURPOSES, APPROVED BY THE VOTERS BY ORDINANCE 7300, BE EXTENDED BEYOND THE CURRENT EXPIRATION DATE OF DECEMBER 31, 2024, UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 2044, WITH THE REVENUE FROM SUCH TAX EXTENSION AND ALL EARNINGS THEREON BE USED TO FUND SERVICES AND PROJECTS AS FOLLOWS:
· 50% FOR FIRE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICES, PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, HUMAN SERVICES, HOMELESSNESS SOLUTIONS AND SERVICES, PARKS, AND OTHER GENERAL FUND PURPOSES;
· 50% FOR ARTS, CULTURE, AND HERITAGE PURPOSES; INCLUDING DIRECT AND GRANT FUNDING FOR ARTS AND CULTURE NONPROFITS, PROFESSIONAL ARTISTS, ARTS EDUCATION, VENUES AND WORKSPACES, PUBLIC ART, AND MULTI-CULTURAL PROGRAMS;
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 ___
Ordinance 8591 to refer Question 2A to the ballot
https://documents.bouldercolorado.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182490&dbid=0&repo=LF8PROD2&_ga=2.168124513.1348057877.1697325494-181246305.1661276300&cr=1
City of Boulder 2B - Elections Administrative Charter Changes
The ballot language refers to this question as a “charter cleanup” but except for changing Section 37 to clarify that state law governs the process for charter amendments, the rest of the amendments are better described as “changes” than “cleanup.”
Currently, candidates for city council and mayor have to collect between 25 and 35 signatures with the signers required to show up in person to sign the candidate petition at the Municipal Building. The proposed change to Sections 27 of the city charter would allow candidates to take their petition offsite to collect signatures. If candidates want to continue having signing parties at the Municipal Building to fill in the petition in a single swoop, they could still do so.
The other three changes all have to do with giving the city clerk at least 5 more days to verify signatures on citizen initiative (Sec 39), referendum (Sec 46) and recall (Sec 57) petitions.
Recommendation: For the Measure
Because petition deadlines are in the charter, changing them requires approval of the electorate. Giving the clerk a few more days to process petitions will make the clerk happy and probably have little or no effect on the petitioners.
The main value of this charter change is to clarify the process for charter amendments. The City Attorney’s Office has been criticized for giving incorrect guidance on citizen initiatives – see the 2021 Bedrooms Are for People campaign. https://www.denverpost.com/2020/08/10/boulder-bedrooms-ballot-occupancy-limits/
City council has also been criticized for asking voters for a charter change regarding elections and then asking voters in an election soon after to correct a problem with that charter change – see 2021 City of Boulder Question 2L.
Website for the Yes side
No known website – Info on a proponents’ website appreciated.
Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Approved Ballot Language
City of Boulder Ballot Question 2B
Elections Administrative Charter Cleanup
Shall Sections 27, 37, 39, 46, and 57 of the city Charter be amended pursuant to Ordinance 8587 to:
· remove the requirement that signers to petitions appear personally before the city clerk;
· clarify that state law governs the process for charter amendments;
· change the timing provisions of filing a petition to 160 days before an election instead of 150 days;
· change the number of days that the city clerk has to approve a petition to 15 days from 10 days; and
· change the number of days that the city clerk has to verify petition signatures from 10 to 15?
For the Measure ___
Against the Measure ___
Ordinance 8587 to refer Question 2B to the ballot
https://documents.bouldercolorado.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182522&dbid=0&repo=LF8PROD2&_ga=2.88416603.1348057877.1697325494-181246305.1661276300&cr=1
Currently, candidates for city council and mayor have to collect between 25 and 35 signatures with the signers required to show up in person to sign the candidate petition at the Municipal Building. The proposed change to Sections 27 of the city charter would allow candidates to take their petition offsite to collect signatures. If candidates want to continue having signing parties at the Municipal Building to fill in the petition in a single swoop, they could still do so.
The other three changes all have to do with giving the city clerk at least 5 more days to verify signatures on citizen initiative (Sec 39), referendum (Sec 46) and recall (Sec 57) petitions.
Recommendation: For the Measure
Because petition deadlines are in the charter, changing them requires approval of the electorate. Giving the clerk a few more days to process petitions will make the clerk happy and probably have little or no effect on the petitioners.
The main value of this charter change is to clarify the process for charter amendments. The City Attorney’s Office has been criticized for giving incorrect guidance on citizen initiatives – see the 2021 Bedrooms Are for People campaign. https://www.denverpost.com/2020/08/10/boulder-bedrooms-ballot-occupancy-limits/
City council has also been criticized for asking voters for a charter change regarding elections and then asking voters in an election soon after to correct a problem with that charter change – see 2021 City of Boulder Question 2L.
Website for the Yes side
No known website – Info on a proponents’ website appreciated.
Website for the No side
No known website – Info on an opponents’ website appreciated.
Approved Ballot Language
City of Boulder Ballot Question 2B
Elections Administrative Charter Cleanup
Shall Sections 27, 37, 39, 46, and 57 of the city Charter be amended pursuant to Ordinance 8587 to:
· remove the requirement that signers to petitions appear personally before the city clerk;
· clarify that state law governs the process for charter amendments;
· change the timing provisions of filing a petition to 160 days before an election instead of 150 days;
· change the number of days that the city clerk has to approve a petition to 15 days from 10 days; and
· change the number of days that the city clerk has to verify petition signatures from 10 to 15?
For the Measure ___
Against the Measure ___
Ordinance 8587 to refer Question 2B to the ballot
https://documents.bouldercolorado.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182522&dbid=0&repo=LF8PROD2&_ga=2.88416603.1348057877.1697325494-181246305.1661276300&cr=1
Tuesday, October 17, 2023
City of Boulder 302 - Prioritize Removal of Prohibited Items on Specified City Properties
Question 302 would add subsection (c) to Section 8-3-21 of the Boulder Revised Code (B.R.C.):
“(c) Prohibited items located on city property within a radius of five-hundred feet from any point on a school property line or within fifty feet on both sides of any multi- use path or sidewalk are subject to prioritized removal. Signage or other notification methods may be used to identify these boundaries.”
In other words, Question 302 would prioritize removal of prohibited items (as already defined in B.R.C.) on city property near schools, sidewalks and multi-use paths. The main prohibited items in 8-3-21 are temporary structures, such as tents, and propane tanks -- items frequently found at illegal encampments. Parents collected signatures and got this citizen initiative on the ballot following a propane tank explosion near Boulder High School, but their concerns also include other dangers, such as discarded needles and harassment of their children.
Both sides in this debate agree that there are already laws that protect areas around schools. However, members of Safe Zones 4 Kids felt that their concerns were not being addressed by the city. Their recourse was to put Question 302 on the ballot. Because this is a code change and not a charter change, even if 302 passes, the city council could override it.
Recommendation: Leaning for the measure
This ballot question is an example of direct democracy in action. A successful grassroots effort put this measure on the ballot to hold the city accountable to the rule of law. The opponents of this measure say, “What about treating drug addiction and mental health for the unhoused?” These issues should be front and center, but these issues don’t preclude enforcing or even prioritizing current laws and policies.
Interestingly, the opponents are not saying that the prohibited items should be allowed.
The 2021 Question 300 Bedrooms Are For People effort failed at the ballot box. This year the city council passed a version of Bedrooms Are for People on their own, effectively overriding the will of the electorate. Depending on who is elected to city council, passage or failure of 302 could also be moot if city council decides that it, rather than the electorate, knows what is best.
Website for the Yes Side – Safe Zones 4 Kids
https://www.safezones4kids.org/
Website for the No Side – Solutions Not Safe Zones
https://www.solutionsnotsafezones.org/
Approved Ballot Language
City of Boulder Ballot Question 302
Safe Zones 4 Kids
Shall Section 8-3-21, B.R.C. 1981, be amended to add a provision to prioritize removal of prohibited items, such as tents, temporary structures, or propane tanks, within five hundred feet of a school or fifty feet of any multi-use path or sidewalk pursuant to Ordinance 8586?
For the Measure ___
Against the Measure ___
Ordinance 8586 to place Question 302 on the ballot
https://documents.bouldercolorado.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182521&dbid=0&repo=LF8PROD2&_ga=2.230518492.1348057877.1697325494-181246305.1661276300&cr=1
“(c) Prohibited items located on city property within a radius of five-hundred feet from any point on a school property line or within fifty feet on both sides of any multi- use path or sidewalk are subject to prioritized removal. Signage or other notification methods may be used to identify these boundaries.”
In other words, Question 302 would prioritize removal of prohibited items (as already defined in B.R.C.) on city property near schools, sidewalks and multi-use paths. The main prohibited items in 8-3-21 are temporary structures, such as tents, and propane tanks -- items frequently found at illegal encampments. Parents collected signatures and got this citizen initiative on the ballot following a propane tank explosion near Boulder High School, but their concerns also include other dangers, such as discarded needles and harassment of their children.
Both sides in this debate agree that there are already laws that protect areas around schools. However, members of Safe Zones 4 Kids felt that their concerns were not being addressed by the city. Their recourse was to put Question 302 on the ballot. Because this is a code change and not a charter change, even if 302 passes, the city council could override it.
Recommendation: Leaning for the measure
This ballot question is an example of direct democracy in action. A successful grassroots effort put this measure on the ballot to hold the city accountable to the rule of law. The opponents of this measure say, “What about treating drug addiction and mental health for the unhoused?” These issues should be front and center, but these issues don’t preclude enforcing or even prioritizing current laws and policies.
Interestingly, the opponents are not saying that the prohibited items should be allowed.
The 2021 Question 300 Bedrooms Are For People effort failed at the ballot box. This year the city council passed a version of Bedrooms Are for People on their own, effectively overriding the will of the electorate. Depending on who is elected to city council, passage or failure of 302 could also be moot if city council decides that it, rather than the electorate, knows what is best.
Website for the Yes Side – Safe Zones 4 Kids
https://www.safezones4kids.org/
Website for the No Side – Solutions Not Safe Zones
https://www.solutionsnotsafezones.org/
Approved Ballot Language
City of Boulder Ballot Question 302
Safe Zones 4 Kids
Shall Section 8-3-21, B.R.C. 1981, be amended to add a provision to prioritize removal of prohibited items, such as tents, temporary structures, or propane tanks, within five hundred feet of a school or fifty feet of any multi-use path or sidewalk pursuant to Ordinance 8586?
For the Measure ___
Against the Measure ___
Ordinance 8586 to place Question 302 on the ballot
https://documents.bouldercolorado.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=182521&dbid=0&repo=LF8PROD2&_ga=2.230518492.1348057877.1697325494-181246305.1661276300&cr=1
Tuesday, November 22, 2022
2022 Election Results
At the county, city, BVSD and Boulder Library District level, all the measures excepting 2F Repeal Annexation of CU South passed. Boulder voters will be paying 5 new taxes and approved 1 tax extension.
At the state level, voters also approved most of the ballot measures. Interestingly, Boulder County was the only county that rejected Prop 121 to reduce the income tax rate, but Prop 121 passed statewide with 65% of the vote. The state ballot measures that failed were Amendment F Charitable Gaming (which didn’t even reach the 50% mark that its 2020 version received), Prop 124 Number of Liquor Store Locations and Prop 126 Third-Party Delivery of Alcohol.
After the Dobbs decision and the overwhelming Kansas vote this summer to protect a woman’s right to an abortion, the other abortion measures around the nation went the same way that the Kansas vote went and may have impacted the control of Congress. The Democrats right now have 50 seats in the US Senate – plus VP Harris’ tiebreaking vote – with one of Georgia’s seats going to a Dec 6 runoff.
The Republicans won control of the US House in the first election since decennial redistricting, by not by as many seats as expected in a midterm election. Colorado’s own 3rd congressional district returned Lauren Boebert to Washington, DC, but with a margin so close that Colorado automatically requires a recount. Our new 8th congressional district, drawn by an independent commission, was competitive, as expected, but won’t need a recount, with Democrat Yadira Caraveo prevailing.
In the state legislature, the Democrats have comfortable control of both houses. We’ll see if that means more or fewer referred measures in 2023 and 2024. Democrats won all the statewide seats, leading some people to say that Colorado is solidly blue now, not purple.
At the state level, voters also approved most of the ballot measures. Interestingly, Boulder County was the only county that rejected Prop 121 to reduce the income tax rate, but Prop 121 passed statewide with 65% of the vote. The state ballot measures that failed were Amendment F Charitable Gaming (which didn’t even reach the 50% mark that its 2020 version received), Prop 124 Number of Liquor Store Locations and Prop 126 Third-Party Delivery of Alcohol.
After the Dobbs decision and the overwhelming Kansas vote this summer to protect a woman’s right to an abortion, the other abortion measures around the nation went the same way that the Kansas vote went and may have impacted the control of Congress. The Democrats right now have 50 seats in the US Senate – plus VP Harris’ tiebreaking vote – with one of Georgia’s seats going to a Dec 6 runoff.
The Republicans won control of the US House in the first election since decennial redistricting, by not by as many seats as expected in a midterm election. Colorado’s own 3rd congressional district returned Lauren Boebert to Washington, DC, but with a margin so close that Colorado automatically requires a recount. Our new 8th congressional district, drawn by an independent commission, was competitive, as expected, but won’t need a recount, with Democrat Yadira Caraveo prevailing.
In the state legislature, the Democrats have comfortable control of both houses. We’ll see if that means more or fewer referred measures in 2023 and 2024. Democrats won all the statewide seats, leading some people to say that Colorado is solidly blue now, not purple.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)