Boulder City Council · Special meeting
Special Meeting
June 25, 2026
Council adopted the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update and backed a $400 million bond and vacancy tax for November.
Council approved the consent agenda, then spent most of the meeting on the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan major update. Members worked through dozens of conditions and amendments proposed by Planning Board and the county commissioners, using straw polls to pick a version of each disputed policy, then passed four unanimous motions to adopt the plan. Late in the meeting, council heard 2026 ballot polling results and gave non-binding direction to move forward with a $400 million facilities bond and a vacancy excise tax on empty homes. Council also heard results of the Fund Our Future community engagement, which showed a sharp split between renters and homeowners on housing priorities.
Agenda and votes
Call to Order and Roll Call
Consent Agenda
- 2AConsideration of a motion to approve the April 2, 2026 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
- 2BConsideration of a motion to approve the April 16, 2026 Regular City Council Meeting Minutes
- 2CConsideration of a motion to hold the July 23rd, 2026 Special Meeting in-person
- 2DConsideration of a motion to accept the May 14, 2026 City Council Study Session Summary regarding the Financial Forecast and Potential Ballot Measures
- 2EConsideration of a motion to approve the conveyance of permanently affordable homes at 3315 Talisman Ct. #C, Boulder, 3365 Chisholm Trl. #B302, Boulder, 775 Bedivere Cir., Lafayette, and 1585 Sagrimore Cir., Lafayette, to eligible buyers and authorize the city manager to execute all associated documents and agreements
- 2FConsideration of a motion to approve the transfer of 1055 Alpine Ave. to the Housing Authority of the City of Boulder for its use in the Alpine-Balsam Project and authorize the city manager to execute any and all documents to effectuate this transfer
- 2GConsideration of a motion to authorize the city manager’s signature on a Revival and Amendatory Agreement for a 2020 IGA between the city and the City and County of Denver to distribute 2023 grant funds to the Boulder Police Department from the Urban Area Security Initiative; and setting forth related details
- 2HIntroduction, first reading, and consideration of a motion to order published by title only Ordinance 8754 amending Chapter 12-6, “Minimum Wage,” B.R.C. 1981, setting a local city of Boulder tip offset amount for food and beverage industry workers; and setting forth related details
Public Hearings
- 3ACity Council public hearing and consideration of a motion to approve the major update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (continued) Staff Time: 10 Min Council Time: 110 MinCouncil held its final deliberation on the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan major update, working through Planning Board, County Planning Commission, and Board of County Commissioners conditions and amendments item by item using straw polls. It closed by passing four unanimous motions adopting the plan, the county's binding conditions, the approved recommended amendments, and one council-added wildfire policy.Matters Memo Attachment A_Recommended Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Attachment B_Draft Plan Comments_Revised 06.03.26 Attachment C_Community Assembly Recommendations Attachment D_Engagement Summary Attachment E_PB Motion Summarypassed 9-0 unofficialat 2:47:57Approve the major update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan as documented in the staff memorandumMoved by Aaron BrockettWiner: yesAdams: yesBenjamin: yesBrockett: yesKaplan: yesMarquis: yesSchuchard: yesSpeer: yesWallach: yespassed 9-0 unofficialat 2:49:17Approve the Board of County Commissioner conditions of approval as decided by the earlier straw pollsMoved by Aaron BrockettAdams: yesBenjamin: yesBrockett: yesKaplan: yesMarquis: yesSchuchard: yesSpeer: yesWallach: yesWiner: yespassed 9-0 unofficialat 2:50:28Approve, with the identified modifications, the recommended amendments to the plan as decided by the earlier straw pollsMoved by Aaron BrockettBenjamin: yesBrockett: yesKaplan: yesMarquis: yesSchuchard: yesSpeer: yesWallach: yesWiner: yesAdams: yespassed 9-0 unofficialat 2:51:40Approve the major update to the plan with the City Council condition (Rob Kaplan's wildfire egress language) as decided by the earlier straw pollMoved by Aaron BrockettBrockett: yesKaplan: yesMarquis: yesSchuchard: yesSpeer: yesWallach: yesWiner: yesAdams: yesBenjamin: yes
Matters from the City Manager
- 4ALong-Term Financial Strategy Update: 2026 Potential Ballot Items Poll Results and Fund Our Future Engagement Results Staff Time: 25 Min Council Time: 50 MinStaff and pollster Adam Probolsky presented 2026 ballot polling on a facilities bond and a vacancy tax, and council gave non-binding direction to pursue a $400 million bond and the vacancy tax for November. Consultants also reported Fund Our Future engagement results showing a renter-homeowner split on housing priorities alongside shared support for wildfire and maintenance spending.Matters Memo Long-Term Financial Strategy Update - 2026 Potential Tax Ballot Measures and Fund Our Future Engagement Results Attachment A - Probolsky Research - City of Boulder - 2026 Voter Survey - Executive Summary Results Presentation Attachment B - 2026 Fund Our Future Engagement Results Attachment C - Fund Our Future Prioritization Exercise of City Service Levels
Discussion Items
Debrief
Other votes
Conversations by topic
Housing and land use
Tina Marquis asked if staff support keeping middle-income housing language versus the county's push to say the city should prioritize it. Staff (Sarah Horn) said staff worry that the word prioritizing could push middle-income housing ahead of the 0-50% AMI need that the DRCOG study flags as most critical.
“does that mean that middle housing and middle-income types are prioritized over affordable housing”
Matt Benjamin asked why the plan never uses the word attainable housing, since AMI-based affordability misses people who earn too much for subsidies but too little for market rate. Housing director Kurt Fernhaber said the term is hard to define and that the plan instead relies on housing type diversity to bridge that gap.
“the attainable is such a key factor”
Council straw polled three versions of policy 82 (housing diversity and supply): the original full-spectrum language, Planning Board's more-affordable version, and the county's more-affordable-plus-prioritizing version. The original language won 5 votes and was adopted; Nicole Speer said she would vote no on every late amendment tonight to protect the two-year community process.
“I can't support any of the proposed amendments by planning board or the county commission”
County commissioners asked to change every area two parcel with a neighborhood one designation to rural, mainly to satisfy Gunbarrel residents. Staff warned this would create confusion for enclaves surrounded by the city, and council instead limited the rural change to Gunbarrel only, passing 7-2.
“the scope of this change is really overly broad”
Planning Board proposed letting residential uses into the industrial land use designation, subordinate to industrial and small business uses. Tara Winer and Mark Wallach supported it as needed flexibility; Taishya Adams and Tina Marquis raised concerns about the lack of community review, but the change passed 7-1.
“housing infill should play a subordinate role and not displace established business”
Boulder Municipal Airport
Tina Marquis asked whether Planning Board's added airport language on noise, equity, and outreach would carry any binding weight. City manager staff said such lists work as non-exclusive examples, not mandates, and cannot force activities the FAA does not allow.
“language about activities that may highlight some over others”
Matt Benjamin proposed his own airport policy language as a middle ground between the original text and Planning Board's version, but said his real preference was the unchanged original. After discussion with Tara Winer and Ryan Schuchard, council straw polled and kept the original language on a 6-vote majority.
“my preference is to reject if the will of council”
Tribal consultation policy language
Taishya Adams asked staff to confirm the legal basis for removing the term American Indian from policy 102, noting that federal law and tribal restoration documents still use that term even though tribes prefer federally recognized. City attorney staff agreed to leave the door open to revisit the wording for legal accuracy.
“it is a term that I prefer, but it's not necessarily a term that's used in some of the legal documents”
Council straw polled the county's proposed edits to policies 102 and 103 on tribal and indigenous consultation, adding the county as a partner and dropping American Indian in favor of federally recognized tribal nations. Both changes passed 8-1, with staff asked to check the legal implications of dropping the term.
Wildfire and Xcel
Rob Kaplan proposed adding language to policy 89 requiring the city to weigh emergency management and egress capacity when approving development that adds density inside mapped wildfire ignition zones. He framed it as a life-safety and equity issue, since disaster-displaced lower-income residents are often replaced by wealthier buyers after a fire.
“it's often the residents that live there that can't afford to build again”
Council straw polled Rob Kaplan's wildfire egress amendment as a recommendation rather than a binding condition, and it passed 8-1, becoming the sole City Council-added change to the plan.
Renewable energy generation policy language
County Planning Commission proposed adding the word renewable before energy generation in policy 53. Taishya Adams argued for the specificity since all-electric does not guarantee renewable power, and the change passed 8-1.
“all electric does not mean that they're using renewables”
City budget and finances
CFO Krista Morrison traced the city's structural budget imbalance back to the 2008 and 2010 Blue Ribbon Commission reports, citing heavy sales tax reliance, dedicated revenue that limits flexibility, and cost inflation outpacing revenue growth. She said a full long-term financial plan is due in November 2026.
“an over-reliance on sales tax, which is a very volatile revenue source”
Taishya Adams raised equity concerns about the ballot poll's demographic makeup, noting only four Black and one Indigenous respondents and heavy skew toward homeowners over renters. The pollster said the survey targeted likely voters, not the full community, which explains the narrower demographic mix.
“I have significant concerns around only four African-Americans or black-identifying residents responding”
Consultant Micah Intermill and budget analyst Stacy Polleycove reported Fund Our Future engagement results showing renters ranked affordable housing investment first while homeowners ranked it near last, a split driven by the survey sample being mostly older, higher-income homeowners. Both groups agreed on wildfire response and core maintenance as top priorities.
“renters rank affordable housing investments number one... homeowners rank it near the bottom”
November 2026 ballot
Pollster Adam Probolsky presented results testing a $200 million and a $400 million facilities bond. The $400 million version, which listed specific projects like recreation centers and fire stations, drew a plurality yes while the $200 million version did not, and a second-home vacancy tax drew majority support around 55 to 70 percent depending on framing.
“you do have greater support for 400 million than 200 million”
Council took non-binding straw polls and directed staff to develop a $400 million recreation and safety facilities bond and a vacancy excise tax on second and third homes for the November ballot. Tara Winer dissented on the bond size, preferring $200 million, while others including Nicole Speer, Mark Wallach, and Matt Benjamin argued the community deserved the choice at the higher, more complete funding level.
“I think we owe it to community to prove the expense side of this before we're asking for 400 million”
Early childhood and child care
Tina Marquis asked the pollster how an early childhood care tax or a graduated income tax on the same ballot might affect support for the facilities bond and vacancy tax. The pollster said other tax measures on the ballot generally reduce support for each individual measure because voters default to no on unfamiliar items.
“having other taxes on the ballot complicates some of those other opportunities”