Vote “NO” on 2F

The time is now.

After having a similar referred measure fail by more than 12 points in 2021, yet another referendum to delay flood protection and the creation of open space and attainable housing will be on the ballot again this fall.

A “No” vote will:

Ensure Flood Safety

Establish Open Space

Provide Attainable Housing

We urge you to vote NO on 2F on November 8, 2022.

The simple truth: This is good for Boulder. Here’s why:

birds eye view of CU South

After years of thoughtful negotiation to arrive at an agreement beneficial to both Boulder residents and the university, this flood protection, open space and attainable housing project was nearly unanimously approved by the Boulder City Council. Last year’s delay tactic — 2021’s Ballot Question 302 — was overwhelmingly rejected by Boulder voters. Further, the current City Council is unanimous in its support for the adopted agreement.

We believe free and fair elections matter, and Boulder voters have spoken.

What’s at Stake?

2F threatens to erase nearly two decades of work toward a flood protection project whose urgent need was highlighted by the deadly 2013 floods. A “NO” vote ends delays on these critical and life-saving benefits:

flood safety icon

Flood Protection

This project will ensure 2,300 south Boulder residents will finally get flood protection for their lives and homes and that critical evacuation routes on U.S. 36 and Foothills stay open. In the nearly 10 years since the 2013 floods, progress has been slow on this complex project. The time is now.

open space icon

City Open Space

Permanently establish and protect 119 acres of previously privately owned land as city open space. The false narrative is that CU is taking open space from Boulder — but the opposite is true. There is currently NO OPEN SPACE at the CU South property — it is 100% private land owned by CU Boulder. Through the approved agreement, nearly half of the land becomes permanent city open space.

null

Permanently Affordable Housing

Support building hundreds of CU-sponsored housing units — including 5 acres dedicated to permanently affordable housing for Boulder residents not restricted to those associated with the university. And, despite a false narrative, the agreement stipulates that there will be no buildings in flood plains. The entirety of the current 100-year and 500-year flood plains will be protected open space or flood detention area.

The simple fact: This is good for Boulder.

Why Vote No on 2F?

Flood Safety

Open Space

Attainable Housing

With the City Council’s leadership and the overwhelming NO vote by Boulder citizens last November, the ability to provide flood protection for thousands of residents has been advanced, open space will be established and restored, and the path has been cleared for much-needed attainable housing.

Now, the same group representing a minority of Boulder residents is again attempting to overturn years of work by city staff, expert engineers and hydrologists, as well as residents and committed council members. This work has led to a beneficial agreement that protects life and property, preserves critical wetlands habitat, and carefully manages development.

The right experts have worked to reach this agreement, and Boulder voters have agreed.

Vote No for No More Delays!

We Support a No Vote

Boulder Mayors:

Aaron Brockett
Current Boulder Mayor

Rachel Friend
Current Boulder Mayor Pro Tem

Leslie Durgin
Former Boulder Mayor

Sam Weaver
Former Boulder Mayor

Bob Greenlee
Former Boulder Mayor

Matt Appelbaum
Former Boulder Mayor

Boulder City Council Members:

Matt Benjamin
Current Boulder Councilmember

Lauren Folkerts
Current Boulder Councilmember

Junie Joseph
Current Boulder Councilmember

Nicole Speer
Current Boulder Councilmember

Mark Wallach
Current Boulder Councilmember

Tara Winer
Current Boulder Councilmember

Bob Yates
Current Boulder Councilmember

Unanimous Support from the Current Council

Suzy Ageton
Former Boulder Councilmember

Jan Burton
Former Boulder Councilmember

DeAnne Butterfield
Former Boulder Councilmember

Macon Cowles
Former Boulder Councilmember

Angelique Espinoza
Former Boulder Councilmember

Jill Grano
Former Boulder Councilmember

George Karakehian
Former Boulder Councilmember

Tim Plass
Former Boulder Councilmember

Francoise Poinsatte
Former Boulder Councilmember

Gordon Riggle
Former Boulder Councilmember

Andrew Shoemaker
Former Boulder Councilmember

Adam Swetlik
Former Boulder Councilmember

Ken Wilson
Former Boulder Councilmember

Mary Dolores Young
Former Boulder Councilmember

Boulder Community Leaders:

Doyle Albee
Comprise President & CEO

Judy Amabile
Colorado House of Representatives, 13th District

Steve Bosley
Former CU Regent

Jane Brautigam
Former Boulder City Manager

Benita Duran
Boulder Library Commissioner

Mark McIntyre
Current Boulder Planning Board member

Nicole Rajpal
Current BVSD Board of Education

Linda Shoemaker
Former CU Regent

Jonathan Singer
Former Colorado State Representative

Pete Steinhauer
Former CU Regent

Lisa Sweeney-Miran
Current BVSD Board of Education

John Tayer
Boulder Chamber President & CEO

Community Endorsers:

James Aber
Cindy Agnes
Gerry Agnes
Andy Allison
Peter Aweida
Jessica Benjamin
Louise Bradley
Cynthia Caruso
Dan Caruso
Bruce Dierking

Elmar Dornberger
Laurie Dornberger
Bob Drake
Delyn Drake
Beck Gamble
Irene Griego
Roger Hibbard
Jeannette Hillery
Dave Hoover
Suzanne Hoover

Kaye Howe
Nan Joesten
Jon Kottke
Illya Kowalchuk
David McGuire
Andrea Meneghel
Bob Morehouse
Robert Motta
Debra Paul
Dennis Paul

Michele Ritter
Mike Ritter
Alan Rogers
Linda Rogers
John and Kathy Rosenbloom
Katherine Ryan
Bonifacio Sandoval
Andy Schwarz

Bob and Nancy Sievers
Marc Sobel
Julianne Steinhauer
Jeannie Thompson
James Topping
Laura Tyler
John Wyatt
Katy Yates
Joan Zimmerman

Boulder Agrees: The Time is Now

The adopted annexation agreement is a binding legal agreement between CU Boulder and the city of Boulder that guarantees the following benefits to our community:

Graphic of Flood Protection Will be Built Expeditiously

Flood Protection

The simple facts: South Boulder Creek has flooded significantly six times over the past 80 years, and the area flooded by South Boulder Creek in 2013 experienced remarkably dangerous conditions. The planned flood protection will preserve critical access via U.S. 36 and Foothills Parkway in the event of another flood. Catastrophic overtopping of U.S. 36 occurred in both 1969 and 2013, resulting in serious consequences: Emergency responders being unable to enter the area and residents unable to evacuate.

After decades of study by Boulder City Council, various boards and the city’s Public Works Department, the city now has a willing partner that will help ensure that flood protection will be built expeditiously.

It is also falsely claimed repeatedly that new buildings will be developed in a flood plain. THIS IS FALSE AND IS SPECIFICALLY FORBIDDEN IN THE AGREEMENT. Continued claims of development in the floodplain are misleading and irresponsible.

Without the agreement, flood protection will not happen.

Open Space

The simple facts: This is currently private land. Through the agreement, Boulder is gaining 119 acres of newly acquired city open space to be managed by Open Space and Mountain Parks. Sadly, many have been erroneously told this land is already city open space that will be taken away. THIS IS FALSE AND MISLEADING. Through the agreement, nearly half of the property will become permanent city open space. If we repeal the annexation, Boulder stands to lose more than 100 acres of open space.

In addition, the university has agreed to transfer its 30 shares in the Dry Creek No. 2 Ditch Company that are historically associated with the property. This allows the water to be used nearby for open space restoration. This transfer will complement the restoration of the currently degraded condition of much of the CU South property, which will become city open space and aid in re-establishing its natural balance.

Without the annexation agreement, this new city open space designation, preservation and restoration will not happen.

Graphic of 100% Private Land will be 119 Acres of Open Space
Graphic of The University will Permit Public Access

Recreational Access

The simple facts: This is currently private land, not city open space. Without this agreement, there is no guarantee for continued access by Boulder residents. By contrast, continuing and additional recreation activities are guaranteed in the agreement. The university will permit public access to recreational facilities, sidewalks, trails and other amenities located on its property. The city and university are negotiating on how to improve access to the CU South property, which may include a pedestrian/bike underpass under Table Mesa connecting the RTD Park-N-Ride with Thunderbird Drive. Costs would be split 50/50 between the city and the university. And, of course, public access to the 119 acres of city open space will be allowed, subject to any habitat restoration limitations.

Without the annexation agreement, this access to recreation will not be available.

Transportation

The simple facts: Innovative and quantifiable traffic mitigation measures are included in the agreement to ensure that traffic can be monitored and potential impacts controlled. An enforceable trip cap program that establishes a maximum number of daily automobile trips to and from the property, along with built-in monitoring, remedy and enforcement mechanisms, are codified in the agreement. The university also agrees to create a multimodal hub with connections to its campuses and larger transportation and trail networks.

Without the agreement, this careful transportation planning will not happen.

Graphic: Multimodal Hub with Connections with a bus
1,100 New Affordable Housing Units

Attainable Housing

The simple facts: The development of attainable housing will be the predominant use of the 129 buildable acres, with 1,100 housing units planned for CU staff/faculty/students (non-freshmen). This much-needed housing will allow potentially thousands of people who now commute into Boulder to live and work within the city’s limits. This not only improves the quality of life for those former commuters but also contributes to the city’s greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction and other climate action goals.

In addition, upon annexation, CU will provide 5 acres on the CU South property for the development of affordable housing units available to those outside of the CU community.

Finally, it is a false rumor that any of this development will be in any floodplain. That is specifically prohibited in the annexation agreement.

Without the annexation agreement, this attainable housing will not be developed.

Public Safety

The simple facts: Per the annexation agreement and subject to future city approval, the university will transfer 2 acres for a new public protection facility, including fire and rescue, which will serve the entire south Boulder area.

Without the annexation agreement, this public protection improvement will not happen.

2 Acres Provided for a Public Safety Facility
119 Acres to Restore and Protect

Environmental Restoration

The simple facts: The city and the university are collaborating on how best to restore/protect wildlife habitats and incorporate Open Space and Mountain Parks values within the 119 acres that will become city open space. This collaboration will include addressing issues of noise and lighting and other potential impacts within this area, as well as potential impacts to adjacent sensitive lands. The city also plans to remove the existing levee on the CU South property, which will aid in reconnecting the natural floodplain and promote environmental connectivity with the adjacent state natural area. A combination of creation, restoration and enhancement for environmental impacts on streams and wetlands will be considered.

Without the annexation agreement, this environmental and floodplain restoration will not happen.

Height, Noise & Lighting

The simple facts: The university agrees to voluntarily comply with city’s height limits, noise standards, outdoor lighting standards and wetland ordinance. There will also be no development within the 100-year and 500-year floodplains, and development along steep slopes will be restricted in accordance with the adopted agreement.

Without annexation, this adherence to Boulder’s values and regulations will not happen.

100 & 500-Year Floodplain Protection
129 Acres of Future Development Limit

Future Development Limitations

The simple facts: Future development at the site is limited to 129 acres of the 308-acre parcel and includes restrictions on height, phasing (substantial residential units come first) and a 2:1 ratio of residential to nonresidential development to ensure that residential is the prominent use of the site and promote a beneficial jobs/housing balance.

Another misleading rumor claims that major stadiums could be built here: This is false. There will be no large-scale sports venues — like a new football stadium — in this area. Such projects are specifically prohibited per the annexation agreement.

Without the annexation agreement, these development limitations will not be in place.

Debunking the Myths

The Simple Truth: NO! THIS IS FALSE.

For the design and construction of the South Boulder Creek flood protection project to advance, the annexation agreement between CU and the city must remain in place. Without the agreement in place, and thus the permission of the landowner, regulatory agencies will not accept applications for evaluation and approval of the flood project. In addition, without the water rights transfers in the agreement, the city would not be able to perform the environmental restoration work required as part of the flood project. Further, without the 119 acres of prime riparian habitat that the agreement transfers to the city for permanent protection, the city would probably be unable to perform the habitat restoration and protection that the flood project would require.

The Delay Referendum, if approved, reverses the annexation of the CU South property by the city for an unknown period. This time could easily be 10-plus years, thereby delaying the flood protection project significantly and leaving thousands of downstream residents at extended, unnecessary risk. In fact, if this ballot measure is approved, there is no certainty that flood protection for 2,300 people and two primary city evacuation routes will ever be constructed.

The Simple Truth: UNLIKELY.

Should the ballot measure pass and CU South annexation be reversed, CU may choose not to initiate a new annexation application at all or for many years. Should the Delay Referendum pass, the land (50-100 acres) and water rights required for the flood project would still be needed by the city, with no way to compel CU to sell those lands or water rights to the city.

As a result, the city’s flood protection project at CU South would likely be abandoned, and the city would need to start over to identify other options/sites/designs for the project, leaving thousands in harm’s way and unprotected evacuation routes for an unknown period. In addition, the community benefits — land for affordable housing and public safety, housing for CU faculty/staff/students and 119 acres of protected open space — negotiated by the city as a part of the annexation agreement would not be realized. If not annexed, CU may choose a different direction for their CU South property, which would likely preclude the construction of critical flood protection for thousands of Boulder residents and their primary evacuation routes.

The Simple Truth: NO! THIS IS FALSE.

The deal the city of Boulder and CU have reached in the final annexation agreement is a legal, binding contract that is very clear on the limits and requirements of any development on the property, including by CU. These development limits are specific and enforceable and include building height limits of 55’ across the entire site (lower near existing neighborhoods), requirements that ensure that housing will be constructed before any other uses on the site, a requirement that housing is built at a 2:1 ratio to nonhousing uses and a cap on the amount of nonresidential development there. There are additional provisions that require CU to not sell the property for 10 years, and for the city to be in the first purchaser position for any future potential property sales by CU.

Because CU does not currently have a formal site plan for CU South (and may not for years), it was important for the annexation agreement to provide clear, enforceable boundaries on types of use/development at CU South. The Guiding Principles, codified in the 2017 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, formed the foundation of the negotiations between the city and CU over the past three years, and the adherence to this document is reflected in the final annexation agreement. The Guiding Principles specifically address a myriad of issues, including flood protection, environmental restoration, protection of open space, building mass/heights, public access and more.

In short, the annexation agreement provides a legally binding set of guidelines that do not exist without the agreement and ensure that CU is obligated to comply with many regulations important to Boulder.

The Simple Truth: NO! THIS IS FALSE.

The city’s work on the South Boulder Creek flood mitigation project began long before the 2013 flood. The SBC flood project has followed the city flood project planning lifecycle of floodplain mapping, mitigation planning, design and construction. FEMA finalized South Boulder Creek floodplain mapping in 2010, and a major drainage-way plan was completed for the creek and approved by City Council in 2015. The SBC flood project concept plan was presented in February 2020 and approved by council later that year. The annexation was completed in September 2021, and the 30% design point was achieved in July 2022. The SBC flood mitigation project is one of many flood control projects Boulder has completed, is in the process of completing or has envisioned in the newly developed Flood and Stormwater Master Plan. Rather than being prioritized above or below other projects, this project rose to the top of the list in due course and is now ready for implementation informed by lessons from the 2013 flood.

Some community members point to a damage assessment of the 2013 flood as a reason why the South Boulder Creek mitigation project should not be prioritized ahead of other potential mitigation projects. City staff has explained to council and the public that damage assessments do not reveal the critical issues of life safety and social equity in such projects. When, for instance, US 36 overtops and enters downstream neighborhoods like Frasier Meadows as a flash flooding event as it did in 2013, thousands of people’s lives are at risk.

If property damage numbers were the only criterion used to prioritize flood mitigation projects, city flood and stormwater utility resources would be heavily skewed toward the most affluent neighborhoods in Boulder to the detriment of lower-income neighborhoods, regardless of critical health and safety needs. While property damage factors into the prioritization of flood mitigation projects, critical life safety and social equity issues are just as important, if not more so.

Years of City Council, city boards and public input have resulted in careful consideration of flood mitigation alternatives and design, culminating in the current SBC flood mitigation project, which is considered one of the city’s highest priorities for flood mitigation.

The Simple Truth: NO! THIS IS FALSE.

One of the primary reasons for annexing this property is the city’s flood protection project, which will not proceed without land and water rights being transferred by CU. Discussions around annexation have gone on for many years and have been extensively covered by local media outlets. This is particularly true after CU and the city jointly adopted the CU South Guiding Principles as part of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan in 2017. To be clear, the principles were agreed upon five years ago, and final annexation negotiations concluded in September 2021 — hardly a “rushed” process.

Community engagement related to annexation (and, thereby, flood protection) has been comprehensive and lengthy, spanning the past three years. Public engagement for the flood mitigation project goes back many years earlier.

Engagement opportunities have involved numerous events, including open houses, listening sessions, community briefings, online surveys and public comment opportunities at City Council and board public hearings. In addition, a CU South Annexation Process Subcommittee was established three years ago primarily to guide and monitor the public engagement process. This group met monthly for three years. Public comment was allowed at all meetings to ensure that the public could contribute to/comment on the adequacy of the public engagement process.

Sadly, for some, there will never be enough public engagement until such engagement stops this flood protection project. However, the facts are that after years of engagement on both the annexation and flood protection project, it is time to act in order to protect the residents currently living in harm’s way.

The Simple Truth: FALSE.

The 500-year design is not feasible. The city has been evaluating South Boulder Creek flood mitigation options for 20-plus years. In June 2020, Boulder City Council passed a motion in support of the 100-year flood design concept primarily because it was deemed to have the fewest environmental impacts, the lowest cost and the greatest probability of being permitted by the various regulatory agencies.

Prior to the council’s approval of the 100-year design, the city’s project team evaluated 100- through 500-year conceptual designs and determined that all over 100 years were not feasible due to being prohibitively expensive and the likelihood of causing unacceptable environmental impacts when compared with the 100-year design.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the lead permitting agency for this project, requires that any proposed project alternative be the least environmentally damaging alternative needed to achieve the project’s purpose. The 100-year design clearly meets the project purpose (adequate flood protection) with considerably fewer environmental impacts than the 500-year design.

“Specifically, the 500-year design concept was unable to match existing hydraulic loading conditions on the (CDOT) bridge structure and not increase flooding downstream. In other words, if the 500-year flood occurred under two scenarios: 1) with the city’s optimized 500-year flood project concept in place, and 2) under existing conditions without any flood mitigation features, the water depths would be higher under the US36 bridge under the 500-year flood project scenario. This violates fundamental criteria of regulated floodplain planning in that projects cannot make downstream flooding conditions worse. The 100-year design does not violate such criteria” [Pulled from the City of Boulder, South Boulder Creek Flood Mitigation Frequently Asked Questions]

The bottom line is that the 100 yr. design would result in substantially fewer environmental impacts, avoids creating additional flooding downstream, is considerably lower in cost and, most importantly, is more likely to be permitted and constructed. It is time to move on!

The Simple Truth: FALSE.

The city derives multiple significant benefits from the agreement. The annexation negotiations have extended over many years, beginning in 2017 in earnest when the “Guiding Principles” were agreed to by the city and CU (see the myth above regarding annexation being rushed).

The legally binding agreement is anything but one-sided in CU’s favor. Below is a list of the negotiated benefits to the city as a result of annexation.

  • Flood Mitigation – Of paramount importance, CU transfers to the city the land and water rights needed to build South Boulder Creek flood mitigation facilities on the property to protect over 2,300 vulnerable downstream residents. To facilitate that project, the university will convey about 80 acres of CU South property to the city, without which the project would not be feasible.
  • Open Space – CU transfers 155 acres of its land (slightly more than half) to the city, of which 119 acres will become permanent city open space.
  • Water Rights – CU transfers water rights associated with the property to the city, which will allow for the rehabilitation and preservation of nearby wetland ecosystems. Some portions may be needed to offset the impacts of flood mitigation construction.
  • Public Access – As is the case on the main CU Boulder campus, the property will remain open for public use/access. The city and CU are also coordinating on the potential for a pedestrian/ bike connector to the nearby Table Mesa Park-and-Ride.
  • Housing/Development – Ultimately, the predominant use of the site will be housing for faculty, staff and non-freshman student housing. CU agrees to limit any habitable buildings to 122 acres on the elevated west side of the property, all of which is outside of the 500-year floodplain (building in the 100- or 500-year floodplain is expressly prohibited). As part of the agreement, any buildings the state ultimately constructs have size, mass, height and use limitations.
  • Affordable Housing – CU designates five acres for permanently affordable housing, providing units for about 100 low- and moderate-income families (non-CU affiliates).
  • Public Safety – CU designates two acres for use as a fire station or other public safety facility at the city’s option.
  • Traffic – CU agrees to strict limits and caps on traffic in and out of the property with monitoring protocols and clear mitigative measures should those caps be exceeded.

As important as the benefits are to the city, uses which are not considered in character or compatible with the surrounding areas — first-year student housing, fraternities/sororities and large sporting venues — have been specifically prohibited in the annexation agreement. See the entire annexation agreement for more detail.

The Simple Truth: FALSE.

No city open space is being lost. In fact, the city is gaining significant open space acreage. The CU South property is not city open space — it is a mined-out former gravel pit. The annexation agreement facilitates the restoration of natural habitats and ecology of 119 acres — more than one-third of the entire site — which will be added to the city’s Open Space and Mountain Parks (OSMP) portfolio. As is true on the main CU campus, public access will continue on the developable areas at CU South. OSMP will conduct trail studies to determine the access to and use of the newly acquired 119 acres. The bottom line is that the city stands to gain a considerable amount of new open space, a win by any measure!

The Simple Truth: FALSE.

Building in the floodplain is expressly prohibited in the legally binding annexation agreement. There is simply no basis in fact for this assertion. The area of the site slated for development is not part of the 100-year or the 500-year floodplain.

The Simple Truth: FALSE.

No one knows. CU, as a private property owner, will have the latitude to “repurpose” its property for other things should annexation be repealed. This could include, for example, its use as a fenced-off solar farm with restrictions to the public use of the property. If you like CU South for its public access, including dog and people-walking — the safe bet for continued access is No to 2F.

The Simple Truth: FALSE.

Numerous quantifiable safeguards are included in the annexation agreement to prevent negative traffic impacts. The annexation agreement anticipates the future development of portions of the CU South property, primarily for housing, and addresses the impact of transportation networks that serve the community.

Per the agreement, a trip cap program will be established that defines a maximum number of daily auto trips to/from the site:

“The university will be responsible for annually monitoring daily trips and submitting specific data to the city. The university will have 90 days to communicate its strategies for reducing trips if a monitoring report shows a violation, followed by 180 days to implement its strategies. [Pulled from the City of Boulder • CU South Frequently Asked Questions]

Should the trip cap be exceeded, the annual traffic monitoring will increase from annual to quarterly.

A maximum parking ratio will be applied to the development and transportation demand management strategies, such as car/van pools and parking management. A multimodal mobility hub will be constructed by CU, which will include minimum requirements based on the city’s Transportation Master Plan. Hub construction will occur with the initial phase of housing construction and additional improvements will be phased in with future levels of development. You can find additional details in the annexation agreement and summary.

The Simple Truth: FALSE.

In 2020, Boulder City Council addressed the land swap issue. While the council acknowledged that this option might have had merit at one time, they recognized that “…when considered alongside impacts to the flood mitigation timeline, the university’s interests, and impacts to other city priorities, the idea seemed less of a viable option. Specifically, the university indicated that they are unable to realistically consider the Planning Reserve as a potential alternative without the land first becoming eligible for annexation (which could take several years). The Planning Reserve was not deemed a realistic alternative because of related delays to the flood mitigation process and the numerous unknown factors in the review process for the Planning Reserve.” [Pulled from the City of Boulder • CU South Frequently Asked Questions]

The Simple Truth: FALSE.

The annexation agreement is a legally binding document. This means that both parties (the city and CU) are legally obligated to comply with the terms, and CU simply cannot change its mind, ignore or alter the agreement on its own.

The Simple Truth: FALSE.

This is plainly disinformation. See for yourself: “Large-scale sport or event venue” is a Prohibited Use on page 18 in the agreement, oh which is defined on page 5 as a venue in excess of 3,000 seats. This means that a stadium with more than 3,000 seats of capacity is not allowed on CU South.

A Brief History of Flood Protection and Annexation

The city of Boulder and CU Boulder have worked closely together over the past seven years to negotiate an equitable annexation agreement for the CU South property (Final Annexation Agreement).

The annexation effort was initiated as a way for the city to provide flood protection to downstream residents affected by South Boulder Creek flooding over the decades, particularly in 2013. The transfer of substantial portions of the CU South property by the university to the city for flood protection and open space is a crucial benefit to this annexation without which the project is not feasible.

The City Council that overwhelmingly approved the final annexation agreement in September 2021 had years of experience in city leadership roles (including City Council, Planning Board, housing, etc.). Some Council members had been shepherding this process for almost the entire eight years of their tenure. These leaders were fully informed and capable of making the decision to finalize the annexation agreement and move ahead with flood protection as soon as possible. Reversing the sound agreement would wipe out the collective decades of city leadership, staff experience and community input from the decision-making process to annex the CU South property into the city. The result of this measured process was an eminently fair agreement that has community benefits ranging from climate resiliency to affordable housing to restored open space.

We urge you to say NO — No to abandoning highly sought-after community benefits; No to leaving Boulder unprotected from South Boulder Creek; No more delay!

Show Your Support

We are a grassroots organization of community members who are concerned about protecting our neighbors from extreme flood events, creating affordable housing and establishing city open space. We plan to accomplish our goal through education and by fighting misinformation, but these efforts require resources. We would be grateful for any financial or volunteer support you are willing to provide.