Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policy Vacancy Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council signals interest in vacancy tax research and drafting charter language on debt and open‑space wildfire mitigation
Summary
Council members asked staff to research residential vacancy excise tax options (tiering, square footage, up to ~$5,000) and to draft charter amendment language—including a possible change to section 97 debt limits and optional open‑space language permitting wildfire mitigation—for legal analysis and potential polling.
Boulder councilors spent a substantive portion of the study session probing a proposed residential vacancy excise tax (a second‑homes tax) and two charter changes that the city’s charter committee recommended for further work.
On the vacancy tax, several council members expressed support for staff research and polling to test options including tiered rates by unit size or square footage and higher maximums than prior proposals. Council Member Matt (first name used in transcript) suggested raising the maximum fee to about $5,000 and favored a tiered structure to avoid disproportionate impacts on smaller homes; city attorney staff said the measure would require a legal review because Colorado has limited precedent for excise taxes on vacant residential properties.
“ I'd like to see the max go up to about 5 k,” one councilor said when discussing potential tiers and enforcement structures.
Councilors also discussed whether vacancy policy should be adopted by ordinance (more adjustable) or by a ballot tax measure (which requires another ballot to change rates). City Attorney office staff indicated there is more flexibility with fee structures enacted by ordinance but that polling and legal research would be needed to assess enforceability and potential unintended consequences.
On charter amendments, the charter committee proposed two items: updates to Section 130 (boards and commissions) to adjust term/appointment/removal provisions, and an amendment to Section 176 to explicitly allow wildfire mitigation as a use of open space. Council feedback was mixed: some members supported clarifying open‑space purposes to explicitly include wildfire mitigation (and suggested adding flood or broader ecological disaster language), while others cautioned that staff said current open‑space purposes already permit such work and that adding explicit language could raise community concern about open‑space protection.
Council provided direction to staff to draft and research charter language for the open‑space item and to provide a confidential legal memo on vacancy tax and charter implications, with poll testing to follow as appropriate.
