Larimer County staff recommend referring 0.15% sales-tax for transportation to November ballot after July polling

Larimer County staff told the Board of County Commissioners at an Aug. 4 work session that a public awareness campaign and July polling show a path to voter approval for a proposed 0.15% sales-and-use tax dedicated to transportation projects, and they asked the board to consider referring the measure to the November ballot at its Aug. 12 meeting.

The polling firm Magellan completed 1,629 interviews in July, a sample the firm said was weighted to expected odd-year turnout. Ryan Winger of Magellan reported the survey’s uninformed vote was 55% yes, 37% no, 8% undecided; after respondents were given information about the proposal support rose to 61% yes, 29% no, 10% undecided. Winger said, “We completed 1,629 interviews.”

County staff and contractors described the campaign work that preceded the survey. Staff launched a public information site at investinlarimer.co, paid for digital and radio advertising that produced roughly 3,870,000 paid impressions (about 2,800,000 of those from digital), and logged about 23,700 unique website visitors. Leslie Ellis, Community Planning, Infrastructure and Resources director, said the consultants and staff “would recommend moving forward with this language as modified based on what we learned from the polling and subsequent conversations.”

Why it matters: staff said the proposed 0.15% tax (about 15¢ on a $100 purchase) is intended to fund safety improvements, bridge repairs and mobility projects identified in the county’s recently adopted transportation plan and safety action plan. Presentation slides and staff comments cited county figures of about 900 miles of county roads and 421 bridges and noted construction-material costs have increased about 50% over the past five years.

What was proposed and what changed: the draft ballot question tested in polling would ask voters to approve a 0.15% sales-and-use tax dedicated to transportation. After the survey, staff recommended adding explicit language exempting groceries (the draft uses Department of Revenue phrasing, “food for home consumption”) and removing the word “facilities” from one line of the description to reduce confusion about whether buildings were included. Staff said county attorneys advised using the Department of Revenue wording for exemptions.

Campaign role and next steps: staff emphasized that county employees cannot run a campaign. If the board refers the measure, staff said third-party partners would be expected to organize and fund campaign outreach; the county’s factual web materials would remain available as an information resource. Staff asked the board to direct them to bring the item back for action at the board’s Aug. 12 meeting. Several commissioners signaled support to take the referral vote next week but no formal referral occurred during the Aug. 4 work session.

Messages that tested best: poll results and the consultants’ summary identified the top three persuasive messages as improved readiness for emergencies (fires, floods), reduced traffic congestion and improved safety; explaining the tax as 15¢ per $100 and that it would not apply to groceries also tested strongly. Consultants recommended focusing on one or two simple core messages if resources for outreach are limited.

What remains unsettled: staff asked the board for any final edits to the draft resolution and ballot language before Aug. 12. If the board votes to refer the question, staff said they would publish the final resolution and ballot language and continue to provide factual materials on the county web page. No formal vote or ordinance adoption occurred at the Aug. 4 session.