| Environmental Recklessness | Save SoBo | Initiatives Update | BVCP Update |

Dear Neighbors;

Hello!

This edition of our monthly newsletter has some news and updates for some key issues and other topics;

• Save West Pearl succeeds! SWP was formed to fight a new initiative that sought to send the area back to earlier COVID-closure conditions. With none of the affected businesses joining in support of the closure the authors of this pipe-dream had no recourse but to pull the plug. BoulderAction strongly supports our local small businesses and was not in favor of this initiative.

• Steve Lynton delivers an extremely potent and frightening report on how far we have strayed from Boulder’s once worldwide reputation as ‘environmental leaders’ as it details the impacts of our city council’s strident and rushed effort to force construction of a dam into the South Boulder watershed.

• Speaking of the Save SoBo situation, their leadership has provided a very timely update below on the current status of their work.

• Sadly, we must report that the drive to put two very important ballot initiatives in front of voters in the November election has not been successful - a more detailed explanation is provided below.

• Lastly, the revision process to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) is analyzed with key issues explained and an invitation extended to everyone to attend a Community Conversation on Transportation at:

  Boulder Public Library, Boulder Creek Room

  Friday May 23, 2025,  Noon to 1:30

  One of the PLAN-Boulder County Spring series of Community Conversations.

CURRENT TOP CRITICAL ISSUES

• BOULDER VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REVIEW

• SAVE SOUTH-BOULDER

• SAVE IRIS FIELDS

Boulder’s environmental hypocrisy at CU South

By Steve Lynton

Two major groups cite harm to threatened species and wildlife habitat from dam-building project

As Boulder’s government presses ahead with plans for a multimillion-dollar dam along U.S. 36 at CU South, its long-debated flood-protection project, twice the focus of a city referendum, has stirred new objections from two key environmental organizations, the Center for Biological Diversity and Save the World’s Rivers. The groups point to the project’s impact on wildlife habitat and two threatened species.

The city’s plans–which carry an official $66 million pricetag financed by increases in household water bills and are expected eventually to cost over $90 million including bond interest and engineering fees–already face a court challenge from South Boulder activists, alleging flaws in its “emergency” financing scheme. The national groups’ concerns highlight key environmental issues for Boulder, a city widely regarded as “progressive,” where politicians and voters support measures ranging from curbing use of fossil fuels to protecting wolves and mountain lions. …read more here

Update on Save South Boulder Lawsuit

By Marki LeCompte

The City's repeated attempts to force through a measure that would destroy wetlands and leave many vulnerable to flooding is in the news again.

First of all, just getting the lawsuit filed has made it impossible for the Utilities Department to move forward with floating a bond issue to fund the (city's estimated) $66 million construction of the dam, because the Bond Counsel will not approve a bond issue if there is a lawsuit pending against it.  And ours is pending! So we've stopped the City's frantic push to get bond sale underway by the end of April for now, but the City is NOT amused.

Now, we will need an additional $15,000 to actually fight off the City's multiple efforts to beat us and our lawsuit.  I have raised about $3000 of that $15,000 so far.  That leaves $12,000 left for the next steps.

The fight will involve combating the City Attorney's efforts to expedite this whole process, speeding it up by giving our lawyer, Randall Weiner less than two weeks to prepare to fight the City's motion for a summary judgment, and refusing to provide the legally required documentation our side needs to actually contest the case.  This is the "administrative record," or all the documents that the city used, from whatever sources, to decide to declare an emergency, pass the Ordinance 8690, and proceed with the sale of bonds.This record is crucial to our fighting the case,    

The good news:  Randall already has won the first skirmish.  First, the Deputy City Attorney decided he had no grounds to dismiss the lawsuit  because Randall proved that Save SOBO and at least one of its Plaintiffs clearly had standing to bring it.  So then, the City Attorney's strategy was to expedite the case by filing a motion for a summary judgment. He sent us the City’s Reply from this morning's brief by Randall, and the Court’s Order regarding the lawsuit.   And about that, here's what Randall reported recently that Save SOBO would get the administrative record from the City and three weeks, rather than two, for briefing. Here is the new schedule for this case:"

"April 25: Boulder shall file the administrative record. See C.R.C.P. 106(a)(4)(IV). If any components of the administrative record, such as requested transcripts, are unavailable by April 25, Boulder shall file as much of the record as is available on the 25th and shall supplement the record as soon as any missing materials become available.

• April 30: Plaintiffs may file an objection to the completeness of the record if they have not been able to resolve any such objections with Boulder through the meet and confer process.

• May 9: Plaintiffs shall file their response to the motion for summary judgment.

• May 14: Boulder may file a reply brief.

• May 16, 9-11 a.m.: Oral argument in Division 2.

An additional $15,000 is needed before  May 16th -which we understand may have passed by the time you’re reading this - but there may be more need coming if we end up in an appeals process, which is very likely. 

Right now, the $15,000 is needed to secure and assemble all the documents (which the City doesn't want to give us), fill in missing information, consult with experts, get affidavits, file a response to the motion for summary judgment, prepare responses to the City's arguments, and actually prepare for, and go to, trial on May 16.

Some very generous supporters already donated the $10,000 needed to get us this far.  We've raised a little more than $3000 since then, but we have at least $12,000 more to go.  Please.....

In summary, we need to raise $15,000 now. This might seem like an astronomical amount.  But estimates from other lawyers indicated the cost would be $30K-$50K, upfront.

We think we are lucky that Randall agreed to take our case, and at a steep discount. Randall lives in Boulder,he knows all about the dam project and the CU-South plans.  He's won a lot of environmental cases in Colorado, and he seems pleased that we figured out a way  to sue the City and put a monkey wrench in this despicable project despite Trump's gutting of all environmental regulations and protections.  Those had been our strong suit in the past... but that was pre-Trump. 

So....Please.....Send donations by check made out to Save SOBO to me at the address below. If possible, email me in advance so that I know to expect a check from you. Many grateful thanks!

Save SOBO

Marki LeCompte

290 Pawnee Drive

Boulder, CO 80303

margaret.lecompte@gmail.com

Outcome of Density and Infrastructure Initiatives 

By Emily Reynolds

The two initiatives Boulder Action was helping to gather signatures for have been formally withdrawn. 

The City of Boulder contributed importantly to our inability to gather enough signatures because of the severely limited time they allowed us after questioning everything imaginable in the initiatives language from their cumbersome format to punctuation.

We knew it was a heavy lift with so much going on nationally, but the City Attorney's delaying our effort by a full two months forcing rewrite after rewrite was the chief reason the initiatives committee wasn't able to get the initiatives on the ballot. For each iteration, the City would take the maximum amount of time to consider our rewrites and make their requests, resulting in significant loss of time with each additional request.

Our first submission was February 10 and the City wasn't satisfied with nitpicking until April 7. Estimates on printing April 10. Received printed petitions April 14, leaving us only a little over a month, 43 days, to get signatures and effectively circumventing our efforts to get these on the ballot. A lack of volunteers to gather signatures was also a factor; the City’s delays didn’t leave enough time to recruit and train sufficient volunteers for the signature gathering effort.

The infrastructure initiative would have shifted the responsibility for all infrastructure requirements of new development to be paid for by the developers rather than the present residents of Boulder. The count of housing units in the pipeline includes 20,000+ housing units to be built in the next 5-10 years. Of these, the only project that isn't yet approved is Area III of the Planning Reserve with 6700 units; however, the pro-development progressive majority on Boulder City Council is already starting to lay the groundwork for development there.

According to the City's study, the infrastructure costs for Area III alone will equal $1 billion, which will be paid either by the developers--who would still make a bundle--or the present residents of Boulder. Council can't tax future residents, so if development doesn't pay for its own impact, present residents will. Boulderites are already signed up for impressively massive fees associated with the South Boulder dam. That project of questionable legality is presently facing a lawsuit because of Council's less than straightforward approach to getting it shoved through by imaginary "emergency session." Cost estimates for that project have increased from $66 MM to $94 MM, which will appear on our water bills if the city prevails. 

The affordable housing initiative would have meant that if you built an ADU or cottage in your backyard, when you chose to rent it, it would have to be at an affordable price, renting for $2600/mo in current dollars instead of $6,000-$10,000 or whatever the market will bear. If you chose to sell your backyard house, it would have to be affordable. There was no effect on the primary house. So it would apply to backyard houses only in single-family neighborhoods only. People could build that ADU if they want to house the son and daughter-in-law or grandma, but when rent is charged or the unit is sold, it must be affordable. The effort was to be more accommodating to families, service workers and students; preserve the character of single-family neighborhoods; and discourage speculation, real-estate investment groups and big-time developers

Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Revision

By Allyn Feinberg

Have you been following the City Planning Department’s roll out of the 2025 update to our Comprehensive Plan? Do you know why the Comprehensive Plan matters to you? Because its policies are the basis for almost all city decisions.

Every 10 years the Comprehensive Plan undergoes a major revision. This sounds like so much boring city bureaucracy until you understand that the policies in the plan govern how much density will be allowed in your neighborhood, whether “road diets” and “no parking requirements” are going to be in your future, and if we will be able to continue to protect Boulder’s Open Space from destruction by excessive growth.

If this has caught your attention, you will be interested to know that the Planning Department’s engagement with the citizens so far has offered vague generalities that have only resulted in hope and wishes for rainbows and unicorns.

The Planners say that the process will turn the current comp plan’s huge number of fluffy, aspirational policies into something concrete to provide strong direction for the next 10 to 20 years; however, there is nothing in their rollout schedule that shows a place where the public will have input to that direction. That is, until the draft plan that the Planners come up with Is given to the boards and City Council for their review and approval. Then you can comment.

Many of us are convinced that this is an inadequate approach and have ourselves undertaken to identify needed data for critical community issues, like Greenhouse gases, affordable Middle Income Housing, the adequacy of our water supply in the face of another 50,000 residents or more, and the potential of gridlock of our local traffic.

We are reaching out to local citizens to join us to examine the issues and offer their input for new, revised policies for the 2025 Comprehensive Plan that will result in meaningful action. Please watch for notices of opportunities to join us in this important effort.

An upcoming Community Conversation on Transportation might interest you. Data from the city’s Transportation Department will be the basis for small breakout group discussions to offer solutions to the problems identified by the data. These solutions will be used to advocate for policy changes to the Comprehensive Plan. Your help is welcomed!

Community Conversation on Transportation

Friday May 23, 2025,  Noon to 1:30

Boulder Public Library, Boulder Creek Room

One of the PLAN-Boulder County Spring series of Community Conversations.