Ten Community Organizations Call for More Public Input on Boulder County Commissioners’ Affordable Housing Tax Decision

The Boulder County commissioners, Claire Levy, Marta Loachamin, and Ashley Stolzmann, have voted on broad categories of affordable funding for county issue 1B funds without benefit from any public hearings at which the public was invited to discuss with the Commissioners what the money should be spent on, and what criteria should govern the funds distribution. .

Boulder County’s previous election passed a measure to fund affordable housing. Prior to that, there was a measure to pass that required voters to pay for additional construction of the Alternative Sentencing Facility at the Boulder County Jail. Once the construction was completed, voters were asked for permission to extend that tax cut without raising their taxes. The funds were then repurposed for affordable housing, which is now about 18 million a year and is anticipated to last for the next 15 years.

A variety of organizations showed up and supported this measure, including the NAACP, Labor Council, the faith community, and other prominent business groups. In supporting the measure these groups were promised a robust and transparent community engagement process to decide what the funding should be used for.

The lack of an open public process which includes public input from all aspects of the community has frustrated many in Boulder County. Early on in the process interest groups urged the commissioners to adopt a robust community engagement model allowing for a broad section of community groups to participate. This was done when the commissioners distributed federal ARPA funds, but not done as a part of the 1B process. There are still opportunities for the commissioners to engage the public on some of the details of the funding plan, and community groups recently wrote a letter to the commissioners asking for more community input.

Commissioners have already made broad budget decisions but there should still be additional opportunity within those broad categories to meet with groups to get more definitive about how those dollars will be spent. . In a series of budget meetings the Commissioners, item by item outlined some of the uses of these funds, and made it clear that in some cases, these funds would be used to replace other funding. The interest groups believe the voters intended for these funds to be new monies, not to replace existing funds and that they believe conversations with the community should have occurred before voting to replace existing funds with these funds.

Ten prominent Community organizations have expressed their concern by emailing the Boulder County Commissioners as well as submitting a letter to the Press with specific demands regarding the allocation of the funds. The organizations include the Boulder Area Labor Council, the Boulder Chamber of Commerce, the Boulder Housing Network, Flatirons Habitat for Humanity, Launch Longmont, the Longmont Chamber of Commerce, the NAACP Boulder Chapter, Prosper Longmont, Thistle Community Housing, and Together Colorado.

The email consisted of two demands directed at the commissioners: ensuring “a formal, robust community engagement process regarding the allocation of funds, including a community meeting before December 3, 2024,” and “Transparency” regarding the proposed use of the voter funds:

Dear Boulder County Commissioners: (Copied to media outlets)

As community organizations, we are writing out of concern regarding the allocation of funds from the voter-approved County Issue 1B. We request that the commissioners:

- Adopt a formal, robust community engagement process regarding the allocation of funds, including a community meeting before December 3, 2024

- Share, with complete transparency, any proposed use of the voter-approved 1B funds to supplant existing program funds

On Monday, November 4th, the commissioners made preliminary decisions regarding the allocation of funds from County Issue 1B 2023. Before further decisions are made, we encourage the commissioners to adopt a formal, robust community engagement process, as was specified during the discussion of Issue 1B with voters. The meeting on the 4th did not permit public testimony, was not recorded, and we have been unable to determine if minutes were taken. We understand that a public budget hearing was held on October 22. The County Issue 1B housing funds were not included in the budget at that time, so those concerned with 1B funding would not have known to attend the hearing.

Our diverse organizations actively supported County Issue 1B with the understanding that there would be opportunities for public input. These have not materialized. We therefore propose that a community meeting be held before December 3, before the budget is finalized, to allow for public input regarding the allocation of these funds.

Earlier this year, county staff communicated their intention to organize a meeting with community groups and all three commissioners, which has not occurred. There was one Zoom meeting with Commissioner Loachamin, but it was specifically arranged by ECHO staff, included community organizations that they invited, and was not an open, public meeting. Other meetings have primarily involved the Regional Housing Partnership, which consists of staff and limited community organizations. We have no documentation that indicates whether the ideas discussed at the Regional Housing Partnership were presented to the Commissioners. In April, following a meeting with the county, Together Colorado sent a proposed outline for a community engagement program but received no response.

We have also learned that there are budget recommendations for these funds to supplant existing funding. Without a recorded meeting, we are unclear about the extent of this redistribution. The public approved these funds to provide additional resources, not to cut and replace existing funding. The lack of transparency leads us to question whether County Issue 1B is being implemented as voters expected. A strong community engagement process could alleviate these concerns and promote understanding between the Commissioners and the community.

It is important for community members who supported County Issue 1B to have a chance to provide input on various matters, such as:

- The percentage of funds allocated for very low-income residents
- The allocation for rental/mortgage assistance
- The potential use of funds for legal assistance
- Preferences for regional solutions
- Prioritization of green projects
- Identification of opportunities for homeownership
- Establishment of the requested advisory committee for recommendations, similar to the one for the emergency response fund and many other funds that are administered by the County.

While a meeting about the broad budget categories may not be the best opportunity for discussion of these details, no outreach or community engagement has been shared that allows for such discourse. We are asking for a commitment on when this kind of engagement will occur. We look forward to a remedy for these issues.

We hope to hear from you promptly by next Thursday, November 21st. Please reply directly to this email.

Signed by the 10 organizations listed below:

Boulder Area Labor Council, Boulder Chamber of Commerce, Boulder Housing Network, Flatirons Habitat for Humanity, Launch Longmont, Longmont Chamber of Commerce, NAACP Boulder Chapter, Prosper Longmont, Thistle Community Housing, Together Colorado

Following this the commissioners have responded by stating that the previous public hearing on the budget, which occurred last month on October 22, was the time and place for individuals to express their concerns as to where the funds should go. However, 1B funds were not included in the budget on October 22, and the commissioners’ meeting in early November was when the 1B funds were added to the budget. Many claim that this process is not the robust community engagement process they feel was promised. One individual who chose to stay anonymous tells YS, “The business community is upset — the Boulder Chamber is really concerned with homelessness and also concerned about workforce housing, and so are other business groups, and they didn’t get spoken to.”