City of Boulder Ballot Issue 2F (2022)
No / Against the measure. Perhaps the most incredible part of Ballot Question 2F is that Boulder voters had to consider the same issue last year with Question 302, which tried to stop the annexation of CU South.
Repeal of Ordinance 8483, Regarding the Annexation of CU South
Should Ordinance 8483 regarding the annexation of CU South, be repealed?
No / Against the measure. Perhaps the most incredible part of Ballot Question 2F is that Boulder voters had to consider the same issue last year with Question 302, which tried to stop the annexation of CU South. So what has changed in a year? Not much. Will the result be the same? I can’t wait to find out!
I’ll leverage the intro from last year’s guide:
A few things have been true for many years: South Boulder Creek is prone to significant flooding risk in East Boulder, and the University of Colorado owns a parcel in southeast Boulder dubbed “CU South,” bearing a sign that says “To serve the needs of future students.”
Question 302 is about providing critically needed flood protection to 2,300+ Boulder residents and building the housing that CU and our city critically needs. Read “CU South annexation: A primer” from Shay Castle to get the full backstory.
This year we have another great read from Boulder Reporting Lab that I highly encourage to read for fun and intrigue: Decades of ‘what-ifs’: The history of CU South leaves many wondering what could have been.
So where does this leave us as voters evaluating how to vote on the measure?
Voting ‘No / Against’ will mean:
The current annexation plan, including flood mitigation, university housing, some university facilities, and preserving a large portion of the site as open space, will continue as outlined in the annexation agreement. I highly endorse voting no.
Voting ‘Yes / For’ will mean:
The City of Boulder and University of Colorado annexation agreement will be repealed. That means that current plans for the above agreement will stop. At that point, it will be incumbent on the city to renegotiate an agreement with the university.
The risks of a Yes vote are severe. We must accept that it was the City of Boulder that initiated the agreement in order to protect our own residents from dangerous flooding. The university has no obligation to concede to further demands to meet the city’s goal.
While some think that the parcel of land should be purchased and converted entirely to open space, that is not a realistic nor ideal use for much of the land, as witnessed in 1981 when “Boulder’s then open space director, the late Jim Crain, recommended Boulder not buy the Deepe farm to add to the open space accumulating around town,” via the Boulder Reporting Lab article.
The agreement as it stands will benefit both the university and our city. Please vote No to allow no more delay.
You can read more details from Shay Castle at Boulder Beat News: 2F – Repeal of Ordinance 8483, regarding the annexation of CU South.
Additional Reporting, Commentary, and Sources
Ordinance 8534 – Repeal of Ordinance 8483, Regarding the Annexation of CU South – City of Boulder
Ordinance 8483- Annexation of CU South – City of Boulder
CU South Annexation Agreement (2021) – City of Boulder
Elections 2022: Ballot Measure 2F to Repeal Annexation of CU South – KGNU
Editorial: Flood protection must prevail, “no” on question 2F – Daily Camera
Opinion: No on 2F: Boulder needs flood protection, not endless negotiations – Boulder Beat
Opinion: Yes on 2F: Facts, science and a win-win – Boulder Beat