Broomfield Housing task force seeks poll funding for $10M‑per‑year ballot measure to close $15M gap

Representatives of the volunteer Broomfield Housing Stability Task Force told council on March 18 that the community faces an estimated annual gap of roughly $15 million in services for people with housing instability, and asked the city to fund a scientific poll to gauge voter support for a local ballot measure to raise approximately $10 million per year.

Martin Dormish, a Ward 1 resident who chairs the task force, said the group — formed from the Broomfield Housing Solutions Forum — proposes a self‑capped local measure that would raise roughly $10 million annually via either a roughly 0.5 percentage‑point sales tax (exempting basic necessities) or a commercial construction‑excise tax. Dormish said the task force would then ask local nonprofits and philanthropic partners to raise the remaining ~$5 million per year.

“We are attempting to address our most urgent housing‑related needs,” Dormish said, listing three proposed spending buckets: rehousing for the most vulnerable residents, stabilization assistance to keep people housed, and preservation/creation of deeply affordable units. He said the task force expects final allocations among the three buckets would be refined by public input and poll results.

The group said they have modest grant support from local foundations and in‑kind help but need a scientific poll (Magellan Strategies quoted at $15,000–$20,000) to learn whether the electorate would support the measure and to guide whether council should refer a measure to the November ballot.

Council members asked several technical questions about options and timing. Melissa Mejia of Switchboard Strategies, the task force’s consultant, said the poll would ask direct, ballot‑style questions and measure (1) whether voters support a funding mechanism and (2) which mechanism they prefer, and the task force wants refinement and outreach before a formal council referral. Council members discussed conducting the referendum in an odd‑year local election (lower turnout) versus a general election (higher turnout), whether to exempt groceries and other necessities from a sales tax, and whether a construction excise tax has been used elsewhere. Mejia said large U.S. cities and some Colorado communities have used construction excise or local housing taxes; Portland’s experience was cited as an example.

Council direction: by the end of the discussion, several council members said they would support funding the scientific poll from city funds; a handful wanted to see final poll results before committing to a ballot referral. Council did not formally refer a measure; staff clarified that only council can formally refer a tax measure and a separate resolution will be required if council decides to do so after the poll. Dormish asked council to agree in principle that if a poll shows roughly 60% or higher support, council would refer; members were split but most supported commissioning the poll.

Quotes (selected): "We hope to raise $10,000,000 per year through a local sales tax increase and/or a construction excise tax on commercial development…" — Martin Dormish, Broomfield Housing Stability Task Force. "The appeal of the sales tax is a good chunk of it is paid by nonresidents…" — Melissa Mejia, Switchboard Strategies.

Ending: Council signaled willingness to fund a scientifically based community poll and to review poll results before deciding whether to place a measure on the ballot. Dormish and the task force said they will continue community outreach and return with polling results and further details.