Boulder staff outline multi‑year financial strategy, recommend extending sales tax and exploring new public‑realm levy

City of Boulder staff presented an update on a long‑term financial strategy on April 3, 2025, asking council for early policy feedback on a multi‑year ballot approach and a community engagement plan.

The presentation outlined four work streams—long‑term financial planning, alternative funding mechanisms, core service levels and a multi‑year ballot measure strategy—and recommended two potential 2025 ballot measures: (1) extend the existing 0.3% Community, Culture, Resilience and Safety (CCRS) sales and use tax and (2) explore a new public‑realm property tax that would raise the permanent parks property tax from 0.9 mills to about 2.252 mills and broaden eligible uses (parks, civic buildings and public right‑of‑way). Staff described the two measures as complementary: the CCRS extension focused on capital maintenance and nonprofit capacity while the public‑realm levy would create a larger, more flexible revenue source for the city’s public infrastructure.

Why it matters: staff said the city is increasingly dependent on sales tax revenue and faces a backlog of unfunded capital and maintenance projects. The long‑term strategy draws on prior local reviews including the Blue Ribbon Commission reports and the 2019 Budgeting for Resilience analysis; it aims to diversify revenue, clarify core service levels, and use outcome‑oriented budgeting to align dollars with public priorities.

Details and fiscal estimates: staff estimated the CCRS extension would generate roughly $15 million annually. If extended from its current sunset in February 2036 to February 2050, staff estimated total incremental revenue in the range of about $195 million–$210 million, of which roughly $175 million–$189 million would support city projects and $19.5 million–$21 million would support nonprofit capacity and capital. Staff proposed that about 90% of CCRS revenues would support city infrastructure projects and 10% would support nonprofits if extended to 2050 rather than permanently. The public‑realm option would raise the permanent parks property tax rate to enable broader capital and maintenance uses and allow debt issuance for larger projects; staff said charter and ballot language questions remain.

Alternatives considered: staff reported they analyzed a range of revenue options—incremental sales tax increases, combining existing sales taxes, extensions of existing taxes, a public‑realm property tax, an occupation/head tax, and a vacancy tax. For a vacancy tax staff modeled a conservative scenario of 1,000 vacant units taxed at $1,000–$2,000 per unit yielding an initial, high‑level estimate of roughly $1–$2 million annually; staff noted other U.S. jurisdictions levy vacancy fees ranging from about $2,500 to $7,500 and said detailed legal and design work would be required.

Timeline and next steps: staff asked council for initial guidance and said polling and public outreach are next. Planned milestones include a May 8 council discussion of items to place on the 2025 ballot, delivery of statistically valid polling results in late June, ballot‑item confirmation meetings July 24 and anticipated ordinance second reading Aug. 7. A community engagement program called Fund Our Future will run July–October 2025 with board and commission preview sessions in April and May; polling for possible 2026 ballot options is expected January–March 2026.

Council reaction and questions: council members raised several concerns—whether to pursue one or both 2025 measures, voter sentiment during a volatile national economy, clarity in ballot language (especially how “public realm” would be described), how funds would be prioritized across recreation centers, bridges and parks, and sequencing with possible future property‑tax cap changes. Several members supported moving forward with further analysis and polling; others urged careful message testing and clearer differentiation between proposed measures and existing taxes.

Staff next steps are to refine the unfunded needs list, complete additional revenue and legal analysis, begin polling in time for late‑June results, and roll out the Fund Our Future public engagement series to inform council decisions this summer.