Greeley council agrees to further test three potential sales-tax ballot measures after April poll

A representative poll of 500 Greeley residents conducted in mid‑April showed the highest broad support for a public‑safety sales‑tax proposal and the most intense support for an affordable‑housing and homelessness measure, prompting the Greeley City Council to ask staff to pursue a second, more detailed poll in June.

The April survey, presented by Alex Dunn of Aspect Strategic and city staff member Caitlin (staff), tested a uniform 0.5 percentage‑point sales‑tax increase applied separately to three buckets: public safety; affordable housing and homelessness; and economic development. Alex Dunn said, “58% say they would support a public safety proposal, 52% housing and homelessness, and 47% economic development.” He also reminded the council the poll has a margin of error of about 4.5 percent and that the sample was representative by ward, age and gender.

City staff and Dunn told council a 0.5% increase for each measure would translate to about $12 million–$14 million annually for each measure under current revenue projections; if all three were placed on the ballot, the combined yield could approach $36 million, staff said. City staff recommended the council narrow language for a follow‑up poll to test precise ballot titles, pro‑con language and funding uses, but also offered “split polling” to keep all three measures in play if council wished.

Councilors debated strategy. Councilor Tommy Butler said he favored focusing on public safety and housing/homelessness and suggested testing a single combined option that tied a shelter component to public safety. Councilor Melissa McDonald and others said they wanted all three measures included in the next poll to obtain viability information. After discussion, Mayor Gates tested for and recorded consensus: the council will move all three proposals forward to a second round of polling in June, with public safety and housing/homelessness identified as the top two priorities to probe more deeply.

Polling methodology and timing: staff said the June poll would include preliminary ballot titles, pro/con statements and more detailed funding breakdowns; results would be reported to council for further direction in July and could feed first‑reading ordinances in early August, with second readings in mid‑August if council elects to place measures on the November ballot. The April poll also found that when respondents were forced to choose a single option, housing/homelessness (37%) edged public safety (28%) and economic development (10%), a dynamic staff said highlights the difference between breadth of support and intensity of preference.

What happens next: staff will draft possible ballot language and the June poll instrument and return with poll findings later this summer. Council members and the pollster warned that testing too many detailed options in June reduces statistical power, so the June instrument will focus on the highest‑priority variants identified by council.

The city did not take any final vote to place measures on the ballot; council’s action at the work session was to direct staff to proceed with more precise polling and analysis and to return with results and recommended ordinance language for later council decisions.