Steve Pomerance

Last week, the  Boulder City Council voted 7-2  to proceed with looking at annexing an area of currently rural land north-east of U.S. 36, called the Area III planning reserve. It’s approximately 500 acres, part private and part owned by the Parks Department, bought decades ago for eventual use as playing fields, etc. The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan states that expanding the city into the Area III-PR “will only be considered if there are priority community needs that cannot be met within the existing Service Area.” Sensibly, the Planning Board voted 4-3 against looking further at this time. The basic argument being made is that we need more housing. More, more and more housing. A friend did a detailed look at coming housing growth inside the Boulder city limits. Here are the numbers: There are about 27 projects at various stages, totaling over 15,000 new units....

As many of you already know, three Boulder citizens filed a lawsuit against the city over both the process and the substance of the city’s attempt in early March 2025 to sell $66 million worth of bonds to finance the ill-considered South Boulder Creek dam. The court ruled against the citizens. Then, in early July, the city filed a motion to go after these citizens for attorneys’ fees. But on Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2026, the judge ruled for the citizens and against the city. His excellent comments included the importance of preserving the citizens’ right to challenge the city’s actions (my words, not his). In the original lawsuit, the citizens alleged that the city (1) failed to follow the city charter in passing the bond issue at a single reading “by emergency” and (2) that the fees the city intended to charge calculated on “impervious surface” within the city were not legal to use to pay for the dam that, for the most part, would contain water coming from outside the city. In my opin...