Steve Pomerance

The city council recently approved pay raises for Boulder’s city manager and attorney. They both received “equity” raises, apparently to bring them up to comparable levels with others in similar positions. They also received “very high” performance ratings and 4 percent permanent “performance” salary increases. The totals were a 9 percent increase for the manager, to $236,508, and a 5 percent increase for the attorney, to $203,839. Does the council really think that the city’s performance was that great? And why were these not just bonuses, so as to leave room for future flexibility? Besides, matching other cities’ salaries, and then raising them, will unnecessarily escalate all salaries when others cities follow suit. The 2014 Boulder Transportation Master Plan shows a very significant funding gap between expected revenues and what is needed to reduce vehicle-miles-traveled and prevent congestion increases. The TMP calculates that this would require almost doubling expected reven

From discussions I’ve had about the two citizen initiatives — “Neighborhoods’ Right To Vote” and “Development Shall Pay Its Own Way” — it appears that there are some misunderstandings that need to be cleared up. The “Neighborhoods’ Right To Vote” initiative does not affect projects allowed under the existing land use regulations; it only affects proposed changes to the regulations themselves, and then only inside neighborhoods. So if you want to build an addition on your house and your plan fits within the zoning, even if you need a variance, a conditional review, or other approval, you are unaffected by this initiative. Neighbors that are unhappy with a land use regulation change that affects their neighborhood can gather signatures for a referendum under the initiative. But the initiative specifically states that the results of that referendum only affect the regulation change for the neighborhood that votes. One neighborhood’s vote cannot affect changes in other neighborhoods.