Steve Pomerance

The Boulder City Council is considering forming a Downtown Development Authority (DDA). This entity would be run by downtown property owners and have the power to use tax-increment financing (TIF) to fund improvements in downtown. The theory is that the DDA’s improvements would increase property and/or sales tax from this area, so it should be able to collect this increment to finance public improvements. The DDA’s board would make the decisions within the limits of Boulder’s zoning and other regulations, and state law. DDA’s are potentially useful in areas where there is a lot of development potential and attendant public infrastructure needs. But that is not the case in Boulder, where our downtown is mostly built out, and whose business success is more a function of the quality of the experience of residents, tourists and employees who come there but live outside of this area. A significant concern is that what the downtown property owners want may not be what the rest of Boulder...

What started me on this subject was the recent discussions on the Boulder City Council about asking the citizens for more money. It would be one thing if there were a serious analysis of the long-term spending habits to date, but I have not seen anything remotely like this. And without that, it’s impossible to know if this money is truly needed to maintain our quality of life and preserve our environment, or if this is just what is perceived to be the simplest way to do whatever the council majority dreams up next. Some time ago I did some analysis of the city’s expenditures over recent history; I updated my work in the last week. I attempted to compare the overall budgets from 20 years ago and 10 years ago with the current budget numbers. I adjusted the raw data to account for inflation (using the CPI) and for the city’s population, and also for the extra revenues from the separation of the library district. What I found surprised me. From 20 years ago to 10 years ago, the per-person ...

This election, Louisville citizens get two sterling opportunities to help set the direction of their city, courtesy of citizen initiatives. Ballot Measure 300 will help decide what happens in two relatively undeveloped areas, Redtail Ridge and the McCaslin Corridor. It would require at least 30% of any housing be affordable to persons earning at or below 80% of median income.  Thirty percent is stronger than Boulder’s requirement. It also eliminates Boulder’s loophole that allows developers to pay a fee instead, which requires matching funds from external sources (like tax breaks, etc.) to generate enough for the housing to be affordable. So, rather than increasing developer profits, the Louisville measure actually benefits the people who need affordable housing. Ballot Measure 301 expands Louisville’s current set of development impact fees to specifically include library, transportation, parks and trails, open space, recreation, emergency services and municipal buildings (along wi...

Last Sunday, June 8, the Denver Post had an extensive article on the  “Data Center Boom”  in Colorado. Data centers can be small, in nondescript buildings, and support our use of internet and emails. Or they can be huge, like the ones supporting the use of artificial intelligence. Per the article, Xcel currently estimates that the current requests for data centers will increase electric use by 1,923 megawatts over the next 6 years. That’s enough to power 2.1 million homes; it is an increase of 31% above our current power supply. The total requests by 2031, not all of which will come online, is estimated to be 6,181 megawatts, which would nearly double Xcel’s current electric power needs in Colorado. Generating this massive increase in electricity requires either burning lots more fossil fuels, with attendant greenhouse gas emissions, or installing a huge number of photovoltaic panels, wind turbines, batteries for storage or building nuclear plants. Cooling the da...

The Boulder city council is considering putting the current General Fund 0.15% sales tax, which expires at the end of 2024, on this November’s ballot for renewal. There seems to be a general agreement among council members that they need the money. However, a citizen group gathered enough signatures for a ballot measure dedicating this tax renewal to the arts. The council authorized a survey to be done, allegedly to determine what level of support there is in the community for the renewal as undedicated funds. City staff hired a California firm to design and perform the polling. It was sent out in June via email and text.  I received the text and was concerned that it was spam, because the text just said it was from “the City.” So, I asked, and city staff said it was legitimate. But before I got started, someone read me some of the questions. The questions made it sound like the survey was a “push poll,” an attempt to influence the voters, as I believe occurred some months ago on o...

The Library District proposal, with its huge property tax increase, had serious problems with both its structure and funding. But worse, it has taken a relatively simple issue and turned it into yet another polarized debate. Yesterday I watched the video of Tuesday’s council meeting, I saw councilmembers struggling to come to agreement on even the basic LD issues. It became clear to me that there is no solid reasoning to support the creation of a Library District (LD). Every significant desire can be better or more easily met with actions that can be taken by the city on its own. What I find irritating is that these alternative actions have not been explored. It’s as if the “good idea” of a LD has taken over the thinking. What should have been done is to identify the actual policy goals, and then explore the options to achieving them, with both pros and cons fully analyzed. Here’s a start: Money:   Fundamentally, the advocates want the library to have more money to spend on providi...

Proposition CC, on the ballot this November, would allow the Colorado state government to keep all tax revenues above the population-plus-inflation limit approved by Referendum C in 2005, which got rid of the ratchet effect of the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR. The state forecasts that Prop CC would allow the state to keep about $310 million for 2019-2020 and $342 million for 2020-2021 that otherwise would be refunded to the taxpayers. House Bill 1257, which put Prop CC on the ballot, says this money is for public schools, higher education, roads, bridges and transit. As KC Becker, Speaker of the House and a Boulder representative, commented in The Colorado Sun, “Is this the long-term fix to any of the state’s long-term issues? No, it’s not,” but “I think it’s a necessary, important part of it.” But the real problem is that most of Colorado’s huge unfunded needs are caused by growth and development not paying its way, and Prop CC fails to implement any of the necessary fixes....

I recently read through the latest draft of the co-op ordinance. Unfortunately, it is still a mash-up of ideas that sound good but have significant flaws. And it is still disorganized — general requirements are mixed with specifics, concepts show up in multiple places, and some terms, including “limited equity cooperative,” “certification,” and “privilege,” are undefined. One of the biggest problem areas is the “permanently affordable Group Equity Cooperative” (GEC). I’ll focus there, but it is not the only problem by any means. The ordinance allows up to 12 people to live in a co-op in low-density zones, and up to 15 in higher-density zones. But if the Planning Board so recommends, the city manager can increase the upper limit for a “permanently affordable” co-op like a GEC. The Planning Board must consider impacts, crowding, parking, and the co-op’s “mission,” but there are no actual rules for the board to follow to calculate their recommended number. So no one can challenge the ...

Building the U.S. 36 HOV lane is important, but the privatization approach is a huge mistake. CDOT is setting up a no-win situation: the goals of private business are to maximize revenues (from tolls); to minimize costs (on snow removal and maintenance); to limit risk (by financing its investment by selling bonds, and thus reduce its exposure); and to avoid downsides (by eliminating free HOV2, and obstructing innovation that might reduce toll revenues). The public’s goals are exactly the opposite. This arrangement is nothing like a multi-year lease for a restaurant, where the terms are pretty standard, good deals can be struck because competition is strong, and the leased space is not a critical public asset. This is a one-time 50-year no-exit monopoly on essential infrastructure. Worse, the concessionaire is collecting tolls on one lane but doing the maintenance on all lanes, creating an inherent conflict. With a 600-page Concession Agreement plus numerous side agreements (guarant...

Boulder’s open space program has probably provided more benefits to Boulder residents than any other single program. Our prime water supply, the 55-foot height limit, the Blue Line, the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, etc. all are important. But open space has provided us with unparalleled protection from sprawl and fantastic access to the outdoors. On Tuesday night, the City Council discussed options for extending the current open space taxes. Low interest rates and favorable land prices make this the time to go full out to complete the property purchase program. Here’s the way I see it: The council has already identified a long list of properties that it wants to acquire, called the Accelerated Acquisition Plan, estimated to cost nearly $90 million. It includes very visible parcels along the road to Lyons, and others east and south of town. In addition, the council is looking to open space to purchase oil and gas drilling rights, help build a regional trail network, and incr...

Clearly, Xcel is behind the current attempt to amend Boulder’s charter in a way that could stop Boulder from creating a clean, innovative, and financially responsible electric utility. The proposed language was taken word-for-word from a poll Xcel did, and Xcel is intending to fund this effort to maintain its highly profitable monopoly. (See Camera stories of May 16 and 22.) Here’s what the initiative says, and what it means: The first paragraph requires that, “Before the utility issues any debt, voters must approve the amount of the utility’s debt limit and the total cost of debt repayment that the utility will incur…” This requires voter approval of both a debt limit and the total cost of debt repayment. This is much more stringent than even the Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR). It forces a vote on the exact total cost of repayment, not on the maximum as TABOR requires. This means that the utility will have to guess at the final interest rate, because the vote will occur well b...

In December I wrote about the Boulder City Council’s need to determine how they intend to fund the massive transportation needs that will be created by the 60,000 more jobs and thousands of new residents expected under “reasonable” build-out of the city. Last week I had the pleasure of participating in a PLAN-Boulder panel discussing the city’s proposed Transportation Maintenance Fee, a stopgap measure to make up for deficits in funding road maintenance and paying for increased transit. My fundamental issue with the TMF is that it provides no incentive for people to reduce their auto trips: The TMF charges properties based on statistical averages rather than charging real drivers for actual behavior. The city has expressly decided to avoid creating any incentive with this charge, even though they know that incentives work — in downtown Boulder parking is costly, so people have shifted away from single-occupant-vehicle use. I have been involved with local politics long enough to kno...

Against my own better judgment, I have been closely following the fiscal cliff process in Washington. It appears that the wisdom of our Founding Fathers was insufficient to ensure that this collective group of elected officials would address a major crisis in any useful way. I’m starting to wonder if this isn’t the end of the great American experiment in democracy. We apparently have reached near total paralysis, where the big issues are ignored or dealt with in a cursory fashion. I don’t see how this country can operate with a debt load so big and growing so fast that much of the resources our children create will have to be dedicated to paying off this burden. Our tax code promotes rather than reduces income inequality, and our defense budget reportedly exceeds that of the next 17 nations combined. We are faced with a climate crisis that could submerge coastal cities, and cripple our agricultural productivity and water supplies, yet the best Congress can do is extend the tax cred...

The City of Boulder is working on a wish list of projects that it may ask the taxpayers to fund in an upcoming election. What is also needed is an equivalent effort to look at alternatives to general tax increases as a way to fund public infrastructure. For example, the suggested $43.2 million for street improvements could be funded by imposing parking fees in all employment areas. Boulder has something like 60,000 in-commuters. And we are on the edge of having a very serious traffic congestion problem, caused to a significant extent by this in-commuting. Parking fees would raise needed funds, and at the same time encourage car-pooling and buses. The city could charge private lots a fee on a per space basis, which would be reduced if parking charges were put in place. Such fees, together with an Adequate Public Facilities ordinance like Fort Collins has, that requires new development to pay to maintain transportation levels of service, could eliminate the need for future tax increa...

I`ve been involved in local politics for going on 30 years now, and I was under the illusion that there wasn`t much left that could surprise me. But the recent lawsuit challenging the “Taxpayers Bill of Rights,” TABOR, caught me completely off guard. This lawsuit against the State of Colorado was filed by a group of mostly current and former elected officials. It argues that TABOR violates Article IV, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution, which in part states that “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.” The lawsuit claims, among other things, that TABOR “compromises and undermines the fundamental nature of the state`s Republican Form of Government.” And “By removing the taxing power of the General Assembly, the TABOR amendment renders the Colorado General Assembly unable to fulfill its legislative obligations under a Republican Form of Government.” The New Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “republic” as (1) a government ha...

State Senator Rollie Heath has proposed temporarily increasing various taxes here in Colorado to address a critical funding shortfall in K-12 education. His proposal actually just returns some taxes to previous rates, and would generate an estimated $1.63 billion in additional revenue, averaging somewhat over $500 million per year for three years. Although these funds are very important, what`s more important is that this proposal misses a huge opportunity to permanently improve school funding and, at the same time, reduce taxes on ordinary Coloradoans. The Legislature, without going to the ballot, could remove the prohibition on the use of school impact fees that is in the state statutes, and grant the power to school districts to impose such fees. Then school districts could either impose school impact fees on new development (no TABOR ballot vote on the fees is required, but issuing bonds would still require a vote), or try to get their voters to pass tax increases to cover the ...