export default [
  {
    id: 'introduction',
    number: 1,
    question: 'Besides being in love with Boulder, tell us who you are and what the most compelling reason is for why you’re running for City Council?',
    questionShort: 'Introduction',
    topics: ['candidate-insight'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `<p>My name is Jan Burton, and I moved to Boulder 9 years ago after
the death of my husband. I became involved in several music
non-profits, and I was encouraged to run for City Council in the last
election. I’m an environmentalist, an outdoors person, a business
person, a gran, and a life-long learner.</p>
<p>I’m running for Council because I have had two years on the
Council to learn, and I now have a better view of what needs to be
done to improve governance of the City and accountability to our
citizens. I hope to win a 4-year seat so I can make a difference in
the Council and in the City. I will bring a practical, common-sense
approach to solving the problems of this community. In addition,
my entrepreneurial background gives me that kind of mindset to
opportunities within the city, whether it be economic, environmental,
transportation, or the arts. Plus, I’ll be the budget watchdog.</p>`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `<p>Boulder must continue to evolve. We need to crowd source our
wisdom, which will require new outreach methods – insisting upon
attendance at public hearings will not suffice. Council members
should be approachable and they should have well-established
relationships with a diverse mix of community members, through
extensive and varied types of community service. http://byrneforcouncil.com/bio/</p>

<p>What we need in a Council member: Relevant experience and
expertise - assistant city attorney [municipal prosecutor, zoning,
planning, OS/RE], Colorado Ski Country USA (CSCUSA) [environmental
and resort town challenges]; co-chair, North Boulder
Subcommunity Steering Committee [principles of Neighborhood
primary self-sufficiency], Chamber CAC Chair, DBP Public Policy
Committee Chair, Foothill SIT Chair</p>

<p>What City Council should be: A policy-making board of directors,
not a management team immersed in day-to-day operations.
Council’s highest priorities should be:</p>
<ul>
  <li>Fiscal accountability</li>
  <li>Neighborhood and Regional outreach</li>
  <li>foster more hope, less fear re: Boulder’s future</li>
  <li>public/private partnerships</li>
  <li>civil discourse</li>`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `<p>Hi, I’m Eric Budd and I’m running for Boulder City Council because I
believe we need bold, progressive leadership to fight climate change,
to honestly face our critical housing and transportation challenges,
and to become a more welcoming community with broader participation
in local decisions.</p>

<p>With Boulder’s high housing prices, many of my peers have made
the hard choice to purchase homes and start families elsewhere. But
Boulder is my community, and I plan to stay here by making efficient,
low-cost, healthy, and creative choices that match my lifestyle with
my values.</p>

<p>Over the last seven years I have become more and more involved in
our community:</p>

<ul>
<li>I’ve worked as a project and product manager for technology
companies in the Boulder area</li>
<li>I worked on a connected toy startup helped kids learn engineering</li>
<li>analyzed B-cycle bike sharing system usage to understand how a
system of bikes help people get around the city</li>
<li>delivered an Ignite Boulder talk on creative housing options in
the city</li>
<li>completed the 2015 Ironman Boulder</li>
<li>served on committees for Community Cycles and Better Boulder,
worked with the Boulder Community Housing Association</li>
<li>President of Newland Court Condo Association to successfully</li>
lead homeowners through a difficult restoration</li>
<li>I currently chair the City of Boulder Landmarks Board.</li>
</ul>`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `As a citizen of Boulder for the last 11 years I’ve seen the unaddressed
inequality in our housing sector. After the 2016 election
I was inspired to help those working class and young people who
do not have the same options for affordable housing that existed
in Boulder years ago. I’ve worked multiple jobs since graduating
just to keep up with housing cost increases. I’m passionate about
representing the members of our community that work long hours
or multiple jobs just so they can stay part of this community. Most
of the candidates in this race will share similar values and ideas,
but we need a council with diverse viewpoints and experiences.
I’m running to provide a different perspective as a young, working-class
citizen. `
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `<p>I’m running for Council because I care deeply about Boulder – the
place where I was born and raised. I’ve lived 32 of my 34 years
here. I’m running because I believe better solutions need to be
crafted, that can bring the community together rather than pushing
it apart.</p>

<p>I represent a fresh perspective – as a younger candidate, a businesswoman,
a Boulder native, a Gunbarrel (City of Boulder portion)
resident, and a volunteer firefighter who deeply understands
our emergency professionals who daily put their lives on the line
for us. I’m also an affordable housing alumnus, who saved enough
to eventually buy a home.</p>

<p>I straddle many worlds that don’t often intersect. This puts me
in an excellent position to facilitate the elusive solutions Boulder
really needs now. Rather than settling for winners and losers, our
city can do better by working together. If elected, I’ll work tirelessly
to create win-wins.</p>`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `<p>I'm a long-term Boulder resident, CU grad, mother of two children
born and raised here, a twice elected official--Boulder City Council
and University of Colorado Regent--and, with many, many others,
have invested time, energy, and money into making Boulder the
attractive and alluring community it is. I'm running because I think
Boulder stands at a crossroads with two clear choices: traditional
progressive values and greater trust in government on one hand
and an adherence to the principles of big money--more for me--
and dwindling trust in government on the other.</p>

<p>I think current government isn't listening to the community about
issues from affordability to climate change to community participation
in government. Boulder's success in attracting business
and the jobs/population imbalance have led to the city's decline in
retaining and welcoming diverse economic populations. Boulder's
residents have clearly stated through various self-imposed taxes
that they want strong action against climate change. Boulder's
citizen working group, PPWG, concluded that government needs
to listen to its citizens and that will necessitate a culture change in
government practice. If elected, I'm committed to listening to our
community on these and other comp</p>`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `I am indeed in love with Boulder, and have been for the last 28
years. The values of Boulder citizens are infectious: environmentally
aware, curious, educated, civic-minded, entrepreneurial, and
dedicated to social justice. It is a community that thinks globally
and acts locally. I have been proud and humbled by the chance to
serve this community for the last 6 years, and would be honored
to serve it again if the residents of Boulder think that’s a good path
forward. I have always strived to be a servant-leader, serving on
a host of boards of environmental organizations, being an active
member of the Sugarloaf Volunteer Fire Department for 15 years,
2 of those as Chief, and serving on the Boulder Planning Board
before being elected to City Council. I have also founded and run
two companies here in town, one of which is devoted to producing
electricity through sustainable means. I would be proud to
represent the people of Boulder again on Council, and the reasons
I am running include mitigating and adapting to climate change,
promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency, working to implement
better land use policy that includes increased community
benefit, and furthering social and economic equity in our city.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'economic-vitality',
    number: 2,
    question: 'What do you see as the vital components to the future of Boulder’s economic vitality and what specific strategies would you support as a City Councilmember to maintain a vibrant economy?',
    questionShort: 'Economic Vitality',
    topics: ['growth-development'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `
We are blessed with a dynamic, diverse economy and employment
base. Our employers are environmentally-conscious, committed
to the ethos of Boulder, and tolerant of our demands. I would stay
out of the way of the Chamber, the Boulder Economic Council, and
our businesses, and let them get on with what they are doing in
this strong economy. I would continue with the economic vitality
programs we have done as a city to encourage our start-ups and
businesses. I would continue to focus on developing the Hill and
supporting our businesses.

Sales tax is the biggest source of revenue for the city. YTD, we are
growing at .9%, as opposed to a 5.11% growth across Colorado municipalities.
So, we have reason for concern. A large source of our decline is retail grocery.
Part of this is the exit of Walmart, but it
may have to do with the sugary drink tax, or with our neighboring
cities building more shopping for their citizens (our commuters).
Whatever the source of decline, we need to monitor our sales tax
revenue and budget accordingly.

One of the biggest issues for our employers is the cost of housing
for their employees. Regularly, their employees travel from outside
the City and even the County to afford their housing. In addition,
cost-of-doing-business has increased, and those costs must be
passed on. This is a concern that must be dealt with. City fees and
taxes must generate value to the community to justify their costs
to our businesses.

One of my priorities is to improve cost-of-living issues for all
income levels. With the recent exit of Walmart, we lost a grocery
provider to lower income levels. I have asked the City and the
Chamber to recruit Aldi as a lower cost, environmentally-friendly
alternative. The City must always consider that we need shopping
choices for everyone.
`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `
Good jobs are essential to our quality of life. They enable workers
to compete in the housing market and great employers support
civic culture and many Boulder amenities. Limiting job growth,
without making meaningful distinctions, can diminish Boulder’s
overall quality of life.

Our tax receipts fund most of the community benefits we all
appreciate. We must carefully balance the risks and rewards
associated with any specific potential employer, or any proposed
expansion of existing ones.

Taking a more regional view, Boulder can become more of a “point
guard,” distributing opportunities among our regional neighbors
that don’t work for us.
          `
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `
The key elements to Boulder’s future economic vitality are the
things that made Boulder what it is today:
<ul>
<li>Citizens who are creative, thoughtful, passionate, and committed.
<li>Open Space and recreation opportunities</li>
<li>Shared community values supporting our environmental
goals, community arts, and development that provides</li>
ongoing community benefit.</li>
<ul>
While at times it may seem we are divided, I have seen that for the
most part the people of Boulder do share a deep care for their city.
We tend to all love many of the same attributes of our town.

To maintain the economic vitality we must provide greater flexibility
in housing options, more support for transportation options that
leave the car behind, and foster a culture that is willing to try new
solutions to our problems.
          `
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `The future of Boulder’s economic vitality will depend of how well
we continue to build on our strengths (what attracted businesses
here to begin with), and how effectively we address our challenges
(the reasons businesses find it challenging to stay). Building on
strengths means: Continuing to protect & maintain open space;
Continuing to partner with CU, the academic engine of our economy;
Continuing to incentivize primary employers; Continually
striving towards an open, inclusive community that values collaboration,
innovation, and public discourse. Addressing our challenges
means: Providing more accessible workforce housing; Improving
transportation systems & more effectively embracing all modes of
transportation; Extending incentives & regulatory relief to small
businesses, retailers, & restaurants; Helping to ensure that high
quality space (office, retail, etc.) is available & accessible.
We must continue to recognize that economic vitality is not
one-dimensional: it’s an eco-system. In addition to the bullet
points above, I believe that embracing all of the ideas (and more!)
that I write about below will ultimately enhance economic vitality`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `Boulder has one of the most productive and successful economies in
the country for a city and region of its size. Our success often means
that we spend little money to attract new businesses, which is atypical,
but need to spend additional money to ensure it’s economical
for businesses to stay, develop, and thrive. It’s important for our city
to use an array of options in addition to our public housing program—allowing
more infill in the city center and enhancing transportation
for those who live outside the city— to keep the area affordable.
We need to provide strong local and regional transportation,
and to invest in our amenities like open space, parks, schools, and
internet infrastructure to ensure Boulder is a place where people can
live, work, and play.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `Boulder already has one of the best job markets in the country,
including some of the best tech jobs and startups. We have no
problem attracting business to this beautiful city. What is being
left behind are the people to work these jobs who could further
contribute to the economy by living where they work. Daily commuters
add little to our economy compared to having those people
be permanent residents. Small businesses also feel squeezed
by exorbitant lease increases, getting pushed out of our city. We
should not be allowing mega hotels for the rich to overtake diverse
retail spaces such as The Hill. Developing and planning affordable
spaces for small businesses will keep Boulder’s retail economy
unique.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `With an unemployment rate of 1.8%, it’s hard to improve on what
is virtually full employment. The biggest threat to our local economy
right now is the cost of office and retail space. This is driving a
lot of small businesses out of Boulder and hurting the diversity of
our business sector. As property values continue to increase, small
businesses will be squeezed the same way low and middle income
families are being squeezed out of Boulder. We are already seeing
this happen on Pearl Street and other surrounding areas. Turning
current and building new space that is truly affordable for office
and retail will help maintain economic diversity. Another threat
that is related is the lack of affordable housing. Some businesses
are choosing to relocate out of Boulder in order to be closer to
where their employees live. As housing costs continues to rise we
may become victims of our own success. I strongly support affordable
housing across an economic spectrum in order to keep the
business that we cherish here in Boulder.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `
          Boulder is experiencing pressure from the weight of its own
success. Boulder has become so popular – for businesses,
people living here, visitors, in-commuters, etc. – that effective
ways of managing that popularity will be critical.
• People from other Colorado towns have told me that they
don’t like coming to Boulder any longer because of the traffic.
That’s one example.
• So, effectively addressing our transportation challenges will be
key.
• In addition to affordable housing, we also need to pay attention
to affordable community- and neighborhood-serving retail.
We’re increasingly experiencing losses of iconic, long-time
local retail businesses.
• We don’t want to end up with Boulder residents having to drive to nearby communities for goods and services, thereby
worsening our traffic and greenhouse gas emissions.
• We need to support our local small business community.
• Boulder should pay close attention to the jobs/population balance,
and make sure that we’re managing it in the best way.
          `
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `It is a privilege every day to live and work in Boulder. Smart growth
and development mutually support our community’s values, and I
want to ensure that we are creating an enabling environment for
our innovation economy. And underpinning this is the startup and
tech companies that provide a source of new energy and vitality.
We must work together to ensure that Boulder remains the international
hub for innovation. Boulder’s companies create rewarding
job opportunities and a strong tax base that covers the cost of high
quality city services, including important human service needs,
transportation initiatives, climate resilience, and other vital services,
and we must work in partnership on these strategies.
But with this growth comes challenges related to housing, transportation,
and displacement, and we need to work together to
determine how we can best meet our objectives for a strong economy
while maintaining our high quality of life.`
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `The first component of Boulder’s future economic vitality is
continuing stability of the University, federal labs, city and county
governments, and Boulder Valley School District. The second is a
diverse society—not limited to, but comprising-- all ages, ethnicities,
educations, and artistic abilities, with a strong field of small
businesses supporting and generating not only community life, but
more small businesses—of all kinds—from shoemaking to pharmaceuticals--making
up the creative thinking of the entirety. These
components, which comprise a community, can only thrive if the
city has adequate affordable space for living, learning, creating,
doing business, starting businesses. Lack of affordability leads to
an out-migration of diverse small elements—like Perry’s Shoes,
university professors, and young workers who live in less expensive
towns and in-commute. If elected, I’d work hard to change zoning
and land use regs to help provide a greater degree of affordability
for the “little guys.”`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `Boulder’s economy has been described as a pyramid, with employment
by Federal Labs, CU, County and City representing much of
the triangle. In the past, small service businesses and entrepreneurial
ventures formed much of the rest of the pyramid; however
today development and tech businesses are taking over much of
that portion of the economy, and local small service and entrepreneurial
ventures suffer from economic downturns. Specific action
is required to protect our small businesses to maintain a diverse
and resilient economy. This must be a focus of our City policy
documents, from the Comprehensive Plan to the Land Use Code. I
envision the Boulder Chamber of Commerce playing an important
role as a partner with the City in identifying and developing effective
actions. I expect that these actions might include arrangements
for the preservation of affordable space and accommodations
required for these businesses and services. Tools to preserve
affordable commercial space could include programs as diverse
as: landmarking local businesses themselves and providing tax
credits to landlords who extend long-term, reasonable-cost leases;
requiring smaller and thus more affordable commercial spaces in
new developments; ensuring displaced businesses have the right
of first refusal for affordable spaces in new developments; and several
other policy options.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `A sustainable economy (per BVCP) promotes a diverse economy
that supports the needs of all community members. Boulder is
falling behind in two primary areas that create vitality: 1) Lack of
available workers with specialized skills (non-university technical
training) and 2) Rising rents for small commercial businesses either
displacing them or causing their demise. The city currently doesn’t
have a way to protect these small businesses from rising rents in
privately owned buildings.
To address:
#1 I would: Work with employers, educators and partners to develop
and support programs designed to provide workforce training
opportunities that also meet the human services goal of economic
mobility.
#2 I would: Ensure that in the update of the Economic Sustainability
Strategy the city adopt some or all of the strategies recommended
in the ILSR Report among which are strategies that reduce
the power imbalance in tenant/landlord negotiations and recognizing
businesses at cultural landmarks. `
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `I am the founder of a Boulder–based company developing clean
energy technology. Boulder’s entrepreneurial culture is important
to the place we’ve become and should be nourished by the
public sector. I would support continuation of the Flexible Rebate
program to retain some of our fast-growing companies in the
area. I would also initiate a discussion of how use tax is applied
to prototype equipment purchased by hardware development
companies, and software in general, to make sure that tax policy
is encouraging entrepreneurship. I support a dedicated economic
vitality program annual budget, and strong City coordination with
business groups.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'service-needs',
    number: 3,
    question: 'What do you believe are the most pressing human service needs in the City of Boulder and why?',
    questionShort: 'Service Needs',
    topics: ['projects-services'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `The cost of housing, transportation, and overall cost-of-living are
the biggest concerns from a human service perspective. Many people
on lower or limited incomes have trouble making ends meet,
even working multiple jobs, and 7000 of our residents live under
the Federal Poverty level. This disproportionately impacts our Latino
community. Homelessness is on the rise, caused by the fact that
we don’t have enough low-cost housing. Mental health care is also
an area of huge concern. We’ve seen our Police force become our
de-facto social workers. `
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `Workforce housing - our community’s long term environmental
sustainability and economic resiliency depends upon ready
access to skilled, creative and motivated employees.
• Homelessness – our support for our motivated homeless,
trying to recover from devastating life changes should be a
community priority.
• Affordable health care – unfortunately, Boulder can only impact
this at the margins.
• Transportation infrastructure – people need to be able to get
where they need to go effectively, efficiently, and without
undue delays`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `Housing: Many issues that we confront have a root cause in a lack
of housing. In-commuting traffic is caused by a lack of affordable
housing for everyone from CU instructors to Google workers, to
our fire, police, healthcare workers and our teachers. For some of
our homeless population (those not just travelers) Housing First
has proved to be a model that can get them off the street and help
them become a productive and healthy part of our community
again.
Health Care: More specifically, mental health care. While providing
housing for a person that has mental health issues is key, getting
treatment must follow. I support our efforts with the new “integrated
receiving” model for those in need of housing and healthcare.
`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `While Boulder has many pressing human service needs, the root
of many of them is lack of affordable & accessible housing. Over
40% of Boulder residents spend more than 50% of their income on
housing. Studies show that we shouldn’t spend more than 30% of
our income on housing and when we go beyond that number, key
necessities take a back seat. Food insecurity, homelessness, and
lack of quality health care are directly related to housing prices.
It is well established that the health of a city is connected to how
effectively it supports its most vulnerable community members,
and stable and accessible housing is the most impactful way to
provide support. In addition to housing & issues arising from lack
of affordability, mental health services & elderly care services +
facilities are pressing human service needs`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `There are a number of causes for housing instability in Boulder. We
have continued challenges to support people who have lost housing
or are facing domestic violence. We need a social safety net that focuses
on helping people get the help they need, exit homelessness,
and into stable housing. We can accomplish these through supporting
our housing voucher program and building basic transitional
housing. We need to focus on better serving people that want help,
and provide basic but critical services for health care and mental
health to get people on a path to stability. Our services also need to
consider additional support for organizations providing shelter from
domestic violence and emergency family assistance.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `Boulder faces a major question on what to do with our transient
population. Having few solutions to address this problem has
accelerated it as an issue over recent years. A portion of our
community see this population simply as undesirables who have
no intention of contributing to our community without even giving
them a chance to contribute. Successful cities will always have
transient and homeless populations, but addressing these populations
with morality is a choice. I believe we should be utilizing
social services and work programs to help people in tough situations.
Providing a small amount of help can substantially reduce,
crime, littering, and most importantly human suffering. As citizens
who pride ourselves on progressiveness it’s time to come up with
permanent solutions for everyone’s benefit.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `Housing is the most pressing need in Boulder. The housing crisis is
affecting just about every group across the city. From low/middle
income individuals and families who can’t afford to live in Boulder
to those that live on fixed incomes and can’t afford the rising property
taxes. With a surging economy marked by an unemployment
rate of 1.8%, there is simply not enough housing for those that
work here. The skyrocketing housing market has disproportionately
affected middle class families. They are being forced out and we
aren’t building enough affordable inventory to draw them back.
This is also having a adverse impact on the number of children under
the age of 18 in Boulder. In turn this will affect Boulder Valley
School District and its schools west of 28th. I will focus on slowing
the annual loss of the inventory of affordable housing and aggressively
pursue community land trust as a mechanism to establish
actual permanence within our affordable housing market.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `Affordable housing. If we don’t address this, Boulder will
become an increasingly homogenous, wealthy community and
we’ll lose the critical vitality of a diverse community. People
are struggling to stay in Boulder.
• Expanded senior services, because more people are living
longer. We must make sure that we’re addressing the needs of
this fastest-growing segment of our population.
• Early child care and education, because studies are showing
that this is one of the single most important aspects of ensuring
future success and opportunities for youths. Particular
focus should be given to low income families.
• Community engagement of our immigrant and Latin populations,
because there are currently many impediments ranging
from language to societal barriers. A diverse city is a better
one, so we should help these communities feel comfortable in
engaging.
• At-risk youth, of middle-school and high-school age. Kids can
start to lose their way at this age. Early intervention is critical.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `As a Council member, I will focus on the distinct needs of our aging
population, and to understand what is required for our community
to age in place with dignity and affordably. This includes distinct
services unique to our elders, including transportation, recreation
facilities, and housing.

A second pressing need is to defend against the assault on the
Affordable Care Act, and ensuring that we remain active advocates
for improving and sustaining the ACA, but also preparing to help
the most vulnerable populations in the event that dramatic actions
are taken to reverse the ACA. We cannot go backwards.

Finally, Boulder County has one of the highest homeless populations
in Colorado, with many of these families and veterans. Helping
those in need with compassion and essential services is critical
to breaking the homelessness cycle. `
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `The safety net for homeless families – because of the number
(almost half of the homeless population in our community are
families with children), and because this situation has a ripple
effect for the children, impacting their physical and mental
health and life-long patterns for achievement and employment.
• Housing for low-income residents who pay a very large portion
of their income for housing and are therefore economically
stressed and dependent on services (like effa).
• Physical and mental health care for disadvantaged populations
– because this (in addition to lack of housing) is one of the
major factors leading to homelessness.`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `The most pressing human service needs are related to the impact
on low wage earners of the cost of living in Boulder. For too many,
housing takes an unacceptably high percentage of income, so that
affordable housing is a critical need. Homelessness is one symptom
of how difficult it can be to find affordable housing in Boulder,
and continuing the City’s focus on a programmatic approach to
moving people out of homelessness is critical. Improving the state
of emergency support services and integrating the provision of
those services would create a more accessible and efficient system
for quick response for those in need.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `Poverty - Excluding college students, approximately 7,000 residents
live in households earning under the Federal Poverty Guidelines
(FPG), an annual income of ~ $24,000 for a family of
four; nearly 50 percent of Boulder residents live in households
earning < 300 percent FPG, ~ $74,000 annual income for a
family of four.

Equity and Inclusion - The Boulder Community Perception Assessment
report identified that non-majority community members
and newcomers report a small, but persistent lack of inclusion
(local lack of exposure to diversity, micro-aggressions, affordability.)
The CPA also identified the lack of affordable housing, access
to basic living supplies and representation in local government as
factors creating these perceptions of inequity

Family Homelessness - Single parent households (often headed by
women) are more susceptible to economic hardships, especially
when fleeing domestic abuse. Fifty percent of homeless individuals
in Boulder are families.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `I think Boulder’s most pressing human/social service needs are
addressing homelessness, delivering culturally sensitive support to
the Hispanic community especially in the areas of education and
domestic violence, and preparing for the ageing of the Boulder
population. The City needs to continue to increase the amount of
affordable housing in the City, expand support for the homeless in
collaboration with non-profits, and protect and advance the safety
of all of its residents. In addition, the City needs to address the
increasing difficulty of middle-income individuals and families to
afford to live in Boulder`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'marginalized-people',
    number: 4,
    question: 'What do you believe is the appropriate role for the City of Boulder in addressing human service needs (e.g. housing, food, health care) for low income/marginalized people in our community?',
    questionShort: 'Marginalized People',
    topics: ['projects-services'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `We have learned that there is trickle down to our affluence and
skyrocketing housing costs. The City of Boulder must allocate more
money (and we have authorized it) to our excellent regional service
providers to provide more services to our citizens. In addition,
we must get more serious about increasing affordable housing.
We should ensure we alleviate our own taxation and fees that get
passed down to renters and businesses, which then get passed
down to the ultimate consumer. We need to recruit an affordable
grocer like Aldi to replace Walmart.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `As a compassionate community, Boulder has developed, supported
and implemented excellent services for the motivated homeless.
I support the Letter of Intent from Bridge House that was
accepted by the City on 5/25/2017 and look forward to implementation
of the Bridge to Home service strategy they have proposed.

EFAA and Community Food Share should continue to receive
strong support from the City. Boulder may make principled distinctions
in the level and continuity of services provided to our
homeless verses transients traveling through Boulder. Emergency
shelter must be provided year-round to deter camping in unsanitary
conditions.

Health Care will require flexibility and adaptability as we wait to
see what happens to the ACA and Colorado’s Exchange. We need
to plan for the worst (ACA is repealed and the CHE fails for want of
federal funding) and hope for the best.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `The City’s role is vital to having a healthy community. Support from
the city for hardworking organizations like Bridge House, Community
Food Share, Attention Homes, etc. is essential and must be
continued. Many times these partner organizations can multiply
their city funding with matching funds from donor sources and
money from federal, state, and county grants.`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `The City of Boulder should seek to understand human service
needs and address them - not only because it is the right thing to
do, but because it is in the City’s best interest. When 40% of residents
are spending 50% of their income on housing, that means
they are not spending money in other areas of our economy -
restaurants, retails, entrepreneurship, etc. Furthermore, every
homeless individual that we leave on the streets & every person
who relies on the ER for health care costs our taxpayers thousands.

In addition to helping incentivize accessible housing
(which I outline below), the City’s role in addressing human service
issues is broad: We can help through land use & regulatory relief -
such as in allowing Attention Homes to build their facility (a recent
study showed that for every homeless youth that becomes financially
self-sufficient, taxpayers save ~$250,000 in avoided social
service costs). The City can also help through allocating additional
funding for human services, strengthening public private partnerships,
& creating zoning overlays designed to encourage elderly
care housing & facilities.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `Many of our human service needs in the city are supported by our
strong nonprofit and faith community. As we have seen this year,
Boulder Outreach for the Homeless Overflow (BOHO), a nonprofit
serving our homeless population downtown, discontinued operations
even with significant support from the city. It’s important that
we develop sustaining, supported organizations to provide critical
support in the city while recognizing that human services need a
regional strategy. The City of Boulder should work with the county to
provide support for these services as much of the burden has been
placed on faith-based organizations which have a limited capacity to
serve our great need.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `Boulder should be providing a pathway to better opportunities
for our marginalized citizens. While there are several community
organizations and nonprofits who provide great assistance to our
citizens there’s no doubt that growing inequality will accelerate
growth of our low income populations. Continuing our push towards
more affordable housing is the first step towards solving this
problem. Renting doesn’t provide a stable base for people to build
their lives, and without a stable base we can never hope to build
a community that will see other people’s problems as their own.
Boulder needs to be a community that cares, and caring for those
who need assistance is where we need to begin.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `We have an obligation to help those in the greatest need; bottom
line is the city is their safety net. The economic and societal effort
we make to improve the lives of those in need is emblematic of
the character of our community. The City needs to work harder
to provide affordable housing across the entire economic spectrum.
We need to provide more homeless shelters year-round to
provide them with a constant source of security. We have around
300 homeless families register with BVSD. We must make sure
that these children know that there is hope and opportunity for
them to have a bright future. Food equity is a huge part of helping
underserved communities, and the schools carry this load during
the school-year - annual programs need our support. Childhood
obesity disproportionately affects these groups and we can help
limit the huge economic costs of healthcare by providing healthy
food and teaching good eating habits.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `I believe the City of Boulder should have a very large role in
addressing human service needs.
• I believe that an advanced civilization – any civilization, really
– is only as advanced as its ability to care for its least fortunate
members. I believe this is as worthy an evaluation as any for
judging a society – and quite possibly, the best evaluation.
• Therefore, I’d like to see Boulder be an exemplary city of success
in this area.
• I believe the City has a very important role in addressing human
services, but also has an important partnering role with
the many fine human service non-profits in our community.
• It takes a real team effort, and I would advocate such an
approach.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `Despite our relative wealth, Boulder encounters many challenges
that other cities face, including homelessness, addiction, and mental
illness. Council should ensure that City Staff are empowered
with resources and support to address these needs, and I believe it
can facilitate critical public-private partnerships.

Boulder has been a leader in providing and funding human
services since the 1960s. We have a long history of making these
services available for at-risk populations, and we need to continue
this.

The City should continue to partner with subject-matter experts
on homelessness, health, and aging to provide a stable source
of funding. These experts are best suited to provide recommendations
and are best educated on best practices. And, I believe
the City of Boulder can play a valuable role in facilitating efficient
service delivery, and can bring nonprofits together with the goal of
streamlining services.`
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `As described in the city’s Homeless Strategy, our role is to support
basic needs services as part of a continuum including both emergency
support to help individuals and families in crisis and prevention
to help people on a path toward long-term self-sufficiency,
health and well-being. The City’s focus on coordinated intake and
navigation of services to help people get back on their feet quickly
is a sound approach based on best practices. It will enable us to
provide a strong safety net for those in need and enhance the
overall quality of life for all residents in our community.

On Council, I will work to 1) maximize efficiency and effectiveness
of city resources in reducing homelessness and 2) encourage staff
to play a leadership role in crafting regional solutions so governmental
entities throughout the county are doing their part. Let’s
make sure that whatever we do, we make the situation in Boulder
better`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `The City of Boulder’s role in addressing human service needs
is provide funds, policy initiatives and leadership in developing
collaborative solutions for Boulder’s low income/marginalized
population. Boulder should support County-wide efforts, including
the regional housing plan, addressing homelessness, and enhancing
coordination of service providers by providing input on lessons
learned from our City programs related to affordable housing,
homelessness and emergency services.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `Boulder is one of very few municipalities that taxes themselves for
Human Services and has a Human Services Department. That role
is usually filled by counties. Boulder’s role should be as:

Service Provider – in circumstances involving an expressed desire
of the community, a service need that cannot be met through
other sectors, or a service that requires such a broad collaborative
effort or institutional capacity that it is appropriate for the city to
provide.

Funder – awarding approximately $2.1 million to communityagencies
for programs and services to Boulder residents that align with
the community’s most pressing needs.

Partner – funding to community agencies to provide community
services and partnering with other organizations, governments
and community members to plan for emerging social needs`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `The City of Boulder has a critical role to play in the provision of
local social services. Traditionally in Colorado, counties take the
lead in receiving and disbursing funds for Medicare, Medicaid,
housing assistance, and other social services. Boulder has long
adopted a policy of buttressing these county services with its own
direct aid to those in need, principally through directing funding
to existing social service agencies. Another front on which Boulder
provides direct support is through providing funding to affordable
housing projects, including partnering with Boulder Housing Partners,
Thistle Communities, Habitat for Humanity, Attention Homes,
and other organizations. In addition, the Human Services department
provides direct grant funding to a host of local non-profits,
including EFAA, Bridge House, Boulder Shelter for the Homeless,
Mental Health Partners, and many others. Finally, the City provides
direction around the coordination of services between these
non-profits, its police force, and the municipal court system. This
is all as it should be in a progressive city like Boulder.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'community-hospital',
    number: 5,
    question: 'The City has spent a considerable amount of money on buying the Boulder Community Hospital site. The site currently sits vacant and debt service accrues. Should this project be accelerated and how should it be developed?',
    questionShort: 'Community Hospital',
    topics: ['projects-services'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `Debt service is $2.825 million/year. This is a considerable expense.
However, the Boulder Community Hospital is the tenant there
through 2019, so they are paying the utilities and rent through
that time (utilities are $1M/year). We need to do full and complete
community involvement to determine the best use of the land
and draw up the best plans for the entirety of Boulder. It should
be a high priority, and I believe it should be a model “mixed use”
area where people can live, work, shop, and go to school, and it
should be tied in to the entire Broadway corridor plan. Affordable
housing for all levels should be the highest priority, and we should
be creative about addressing different housing types: micro-units,
coops, co-housing, etc.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `The BCH site should be developed sooner than later. It provides
us with an opportunity to create a diverse mix of affordable and
mixed income housing, plus offices that should include City and
County departments with aligned responsibilities and expertise.
Boulder’s need to address daunting challenges (housing, transportation,
human services, recreational access, etc.) on a more
regional basis will only increase.

The BCH site will allow co-locating of the in-house expertise of
both government organizations in ways that will encourage cooperation
and innovation.

Consultation with the neighborhood is very important, but with
the ongoing carrying costs, we need to develop the general parameters
needed to prepare an RFP, and then use the RFP award
process to fine-tune the project. Until we have a sense for what
the private sector, in partnership with the City (and County) can
finance and build, we’re spinning our wheels.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `The site should be developed with great creativity. It should not
be architectural design by committee. A team of designers, both
competitive and collaborative, should design the site so that in 100
years, the citizens look back on it the way we now view NCAR and
Chautauqua. We need to stretch and reach so that this becomes
a second center of our community. It also needs to embody our
environmental goals by making it people centric – not car centric.`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `Yes, this project should be accelerated. While public input &
discourse is important, at a certain point there are diminishing
returns & lost opportunity cost. The City recently adopted a vision
plan for this site, which can be seen here:
https://www-static.bouldercolorado.gov/docs/Final_Vision_Plan-
1-201706091514.pdf I support much of this plan and would like it
implemented as effieciently as possible. As outlined in the plan, I
support lower density residential along 9th Street and near North
Boulder Park; I support medium density residential between
10th and 11th; I support commercial & retail along Broadway. In
the medium density zone, we should emphasize middle income
housing. I think that the bike lanes are important & the continuous
green space connecting all of these areas will be beautiful &
useful. I would like to see the commercial space used for private
businesses rather than City offices & I would like to see retail shops
& restaurants on the lowest level.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `The BCH site is in a prime location along Broadway near downtown
and should be a place where Boulder can build a significant amount
of housing. Due to its walkable, bikeable, and very transit-accessible
location adjacent to downtown and nearby retail, as well as North
Boulder Park, the site should support a denser development more
easily than other parts of the city. The primary focus should be to
provide significant amounts of both market-rate and permanently
affordable housing, with a mix of smaller, modest units specifically to
accommodate families. There may be opportunities for light commercial
use as well. The project is currently in the Phase II — feasibility
stage, with site-specific design starting in 2019. I would like to see
the schedule accelerated, but given the large and important nature
of this site, I’m not sure that’s realistic for city planning to achieve at
this point.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `The simplest answer is to choose a city government department
or group that would benefit most from the facility and get them
working. On the list of problems Boulder needs to address this is
not a major issue that impacts the entire community. By being indecisive
we’re causing more debt to be incurred that will ultimately
impact the community. This is one example of our government
needing to be more decisive and prioritize our planning to benefit
the community as a whole.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `This large central property has the potential to add great value to
the community. Some public trust has eroded with council and a
project of this scope serves as a great opportunity to build back
public trust. We can do this by taking in public comment and using
some of the recommendations from the Public Participation Working
Group. There is enough space for us to focus on more than one
city priority and as it’s city owned land, this should be extremely
affordable for occupancy. Affordable housing, mixed use, renewable
energy, bicycle centric areas and central/open public space
should be included in the design. I do think this project should
be accelerated but only with the mindset of achieving our larger
goals, not just to check a box. This is 8.8 acres in central Boulder
and needs to be done right the first time. The public trust and
excitement is key to making this a success.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `Yes, this project should be accelerated.
• I believe this site, and the former Pollard Motors site at 30th
and Pearl, should be used for high density, affordable housing.
• Specifically, an appropriate mix of housing for lower income
and middle income residents.
• To me, these two sites make much more sense for the
off-sited affordable housing requirements that developers of
new rental housing pay cash-in-lieu for, in order to not build
on the site of their new developments.
• These two sites are:
a) located in Boulder’s center, within easy walking, biking, and
transit distance of goods, services, and jobs.
b) surrounded by commercial zoning on three to four sides,
such that concerns about neighborhood-specific siting are
minimized.
• It makes much more sense to place off-sited affordable housing
in these locations, where potential conflicts with neighborhoods
are as minimal as we’ll find.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `The BCH site represents a strategic opportunity to create a new,
vibrant community center for Boulder. And at the same time, we
have an opportunity to carefully balance local neighborhood interests
and broader community goals.

The BCH site can help us address goals associated with affordable
housing through sustainable redevelopment and infill. To that end,
I am convinced that a significant portion of this site should accommodate
the housing needs across diverse income levels and needs.

As a resident of the Uptown Broadway neighborhood, I believe
that 15-Minute neighborhoods are an important part of our community
because they offer density, great restaurants and shopping,
and convenient access to mass transportation. I believe that BCH
should have a mix of uses to create a livable, walkable environment
that reduces the need for car travel and takes advantage of
accessible mass transit options.`
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `The site is not vacant. TRU Care hospice operates in the hospital –
a needed community service and good interim use.
The Brenton Building across the street is undergoing an $8 million
energy retrofit and renovation and will provide office space on
completion.

Because of the size of the site (8.8 acres), its assets (>350,000
square feet of building space and a 5-story garage), and the consequences
of its development for the city and the adjacent neighborhoods,
decisions about its development must be made with
robust public involvement. Given the lack of affordable housing in
Boulder and our city’s need to preserve income diversity, housing
should be a top priority for the site. We must take the time to
examine all options and make sound decisions.`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `The project should not be accelerated and it should be developed
based largely on community input. The Boulder Community
Hospital site is not entirely vacant. There is an important medical
Hospice facility located there, and there are also other facilities
that provide key health services to the Boulder community. Plans
to refurbish one of the buildings on the site for temporary uses
have already been announced. The City Council intends to involve
the larger community in plans for using this site, and several planning
initiatives have already been started. I support continuing to
develop an excellent plan that makes maximum use of this unique
site. It is an opportunity that is unlikely to come along again, and
we should do the absolute best with it that we can.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `The city purchased the site in December of 2014 with 10 year
callable Certificates of Participation (COPs) with a call date of
2026 or after. This means we can call, or buy back, any debt with
a maturity date of 2026 or later. To do so, the city would need to
pay the debt holders the remaining principal and accrued interest
at the time – that number would high (~ $24 million). Doing the
math, other than the slightly higher yield, it would be pretty much
a wash to pay off the $24 million in 2026.

So, in essence, we are committed to 20 years worth of annual debt
service dollars (~ $2.825 million) regardless of process pace and
redevelopment time. I support good process and including input
from a broad spectrum of community members per the recommendations
of the Public Participation Working Group and guiding
principles set by City Council in 2017.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `The planning process for the Alpine/Balsam project is well underway,
and the needs of the entire community, including the
neighborhood in which the project will be developed, should be
carefully considered. There is no reason to rush the planning for
this site. The site should consider the following uses for its development:
City offices, County offices, affordable housing, mixed
use including food service, small business space, and space for
community gatherings. Other considerations should be given to
public art, highly energy efficient construction, and excellence in
site design.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'bicycle-mode-share',
    number: 6,
    question: 'Do you support the Transportation Master Plan’s goal of increasing the mode share of bicycles from 10% to 30% by 2035 to achieve the community’s environmental and livability goals? If so, what concrete steps do you propose to achieve this and how do you anticipate doing that while maintaining safety for cyclists and motorists alike?',
    questionShort: 'Bicycle Mode Share',
    topics: ['transportation'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `I would have to see the trend lines to determine if 30% is achievable.
We’re currently at 10%, and more men than women/families
commute by bike. There would need to be more north south
routes, preferably not on main car thoroughfares, for families to
feel safe. We should make this a bigger priority. The promotion
or electric bikes could be beneficial for everyone, especially older
people and women. It will be interesting to see what happens with
the current e-bike promotion going on in Boulder County (I plan
to buy one, and two of my friends have already purchased). Safety
concerns are real. As someone who has recently been hit while on
my bike, I have become very observant. We need non-distracted
and considerate car and bike riders, and we need to ensure the
left-hand turn lanes are protected at key intersections. I would
consider a small bike licensing fee, educational programs around
laws and safety, and using Community Cycles or another organization
to promote safe biking. Oh, and if we could just get rid of
some of these beastly hills, we might get more riders. `
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `Bicycling is pretty well supported by Boulder’s transportation infrastructure
today, and many of our VMTs are created by in-commuters,
so I’m skeptical we can attain a 30% mode share. If our streets
become parking lots, we may become like Barcelona where motor
scooters swarm like red blood cells in clogged arteries. We will
have widespread revolts before that level of congestion is acceptable.

At-grade separations can be tried on streets wide enough to be
reduced from 4 lanes to three lanes with a shared turning lane,
but not on streets with existing concrete, landscaped medians. We
tried that on Folsom between Spruce and Arapahoe and it failed.

Public education, incentives, and recognition, coupled with market-priced
parking may move the needle, but people will need to
embrace cycling for its many health and quality of life benefits to
hit 30%.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `Yes, I support the goal, but I think we may be able to reach it much
earlier and possibly exceed it. We must look to other cities like
Portland and NYC, that are more aggressively and successfully
building cycling infrastructure. We should also look to cities like
Amsterdam, as they have been at it much longer than us and we
have much to learn from them. Two concrete steps that must be
made are: increased bike/pedestrian paths that are fully separated
from auto traffic and bike paths that are fully integrated with the
street, but protected by bollards, curbs, etc. We can’t let one failed
experiment on one short section of Folsom doom a program of
complete and safe streets. We need to learn from that and carry
on, or we will never reach or goals.`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `I do support the TMP’s goal of increasing mode share. As a City we
have embraced cars for decades and I believe it is time to begin to
embrace all modes of transportation without apology. I support
continuing to “right size” streets, however I would like to be more
sensitive about the locations we start with, the timing at which
we implement it, and the communication to the public. I see 13th
Street as a perfect location (and north/south direction) to begin
to work towards a true, continuous cycleway. Additionally, I would
continue to study roads that we think may be ripe for “right-sizing”
in the future. On those roads, we can begin to ease drivers into
the coming changes by first adopting different stoplight patterns,
adding stop signs and lights, etc. In our messaging around this, I
think it is important to not go so head to head with cars. This is not
a fight against the car - it is an embracing of all modes.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `Yes, we need to take stronger steps to achieve our mode share
goals that also make better, more efficient use of our limited space
in the city. Boulder needs to develop a map for a city-wide bike
network, continuing use of underpasses, and an increased focus
on separated bikeways. Boulder’s multi-use paths have been a
great benefit, but on-street bike facilities need to be a priority for
Boulder to meet its goal of 30% bike mode share by 2035. More
on-street bike facilities will reduce the burden on our multi-use
path system and improve safety for pedestrians by further separating
them from cyclists. We can also help pedestrians by giving
more priority and protection at the city’s most dangerous intersections
and ensure that redevelopment in Boulder promotes
walkable neighborhoods.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `I do support the Transportation Master plan’s goal. This is the
right option to keep progressing toward our environmental and livability
goals as a community. Continuing to increase safe crossing
areas and lighting on trails will increase mode share. Partnering
with community biking organizations in promoting events like
“Bike to Work Day” will also generate more awareness to increase
riders. Going forward we need to execute plans in a much more
thoughtful way then the initial steps of the “right-sizing” initiative.
Once individual plans are in place we need clear communication
and marketing campaigns for the changes well in advance of their
roll-out. Also these roll-outs need to be incremental in their execution
to provide both cyclists and motorists time to adjust to the
new flows. `
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `I support increasing the mode share of bicycles, but we need to
completely rethink the transportation Master plan as in many
ways it is already obsolete. At over 3 years old, this plan does not
adequately address and/or make recommendations on the explosive
growth of electric and autonomous vehicles in the next 10-15
years. In fact, the Master Plan mentions electric vehicles only once
and doesn’t even use the words “autonomous vehicle”. This transportation
revolution will happen long before 2035, so thinking
about exclusively bicycle goals beyond that is ignorant. This paradigm
shift will force us to reevaluate how bicycles, mass transit
and personal vehicles all exist together. We should not be investing
in infrastructure changes that we will change again within the next
decade. As a city council member I will facilitate the transportation
experts to derive solutions that meet our city goals that prepare
Boulder for the future of transit.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `I support the goal, as part of an integrated transportation
strategy. We should:
• Pursue community-wide Eco-Passes.
• Ensure that all buses have easy on/easy off bike racks, so that
bus commuters can switch to bicycles, once in their general
destination area.
• Increase bike share programs and the placement of bicycles-for-loan
at workplaces, so that workers can use handy
bicycles for mid-day errands, lunch, in-town meetings, etc.
• Continue to work on expanding the connectivity of our bicycle
routes.
• For safety:
- Expand the number of off-road, auto-free bike paths, such as
those off Broadway, along the CU campus.
- Construct bicycle and pedestrian underpasses where needed.
- Expand education on safety practices and “share the road”
principles.
- Increased enforcement of crosswalk and other violations by
motorists and cyclists alike.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `Yes, and We need to do everything we can to achieve our bike
mode-share goals through practices that make cycling convenient,
safer, and more accessible. And we must also recognize that people
are more inclined to bike when it is safe and convenient to do
so.

As the Chairman of the Transportation Advisory Board for the last
two years, I have worked closely with neighborhood associations,
community groups and advocacy organizations, and business and
civic leaders to advance a safety agenda that benefits all users. I
support bike lockers at transit stations, bike parking and infrastructure
investments in new developments, and on-street bike paths.

I think the City can and should do more to engage and enlist the
local tech community to assist in the creation of more user-friendly
information systems and platforms in order to meet the TMP.`
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `As a long-time bicyclist, I support an increase in the mode share
of bicycles, and many concrete steps can be taken to achieve
that – e.g., constructing more underpasses, providing more racks
throughout the city and on buses, maintaining and expanding our
system of bike paths and lanes separated from street traffic, and
keeping designated lanes clear). Our Transportation Master Plan
is to be updated in 2018-19, and the goal should be to prevent an
increase in congestion and in emissions with the aim of reducing
both. I’ve not investigated the methodology that led to the current
10 to 30% goal, but I know that bicycles can make an important
contribution. In my prior experience on Council, we successfully
identified specific projects and brought them to completion. The
new Master Plan must include goals AND specific projects and
include a robust public participation process from the beginning.`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `I believe the real goals of the Transportation Master Plan should
be to improve mobility, reduce congestion and decrease emissions.
Increasing the mode share of bicycles is one of a number
of ways to achieve those goals. I have never seen the calculations
that produced the 30% goal by 2035, so I do not know if that is
the right objective, but I support providing more bike routes, lanes
and paths of adequate size for safety of bicyclists, and improved
maintenance of biking infrastructure. The Transportation Master
Plan should be updated periodically with funding identified in the
Transportation CIP to fund this infrastructure and its maintenance.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `Yes. The key to achieving these goals is outlined within the city’s
Towards Vision Zero. While the vision consists of engineering,
education, enforcement and evaluation, I think that real progress
could be made through the formation of a Community Advisory
Group (CAG) to assist with program implementation. This group
could be made up of folks that experience the hazards and barriers
on a day to day basis. In 2017, the City Council identified key
initiatives (e.g. impaired travel /outreach /enforcement) to be
accelerated and allocated $150,000 to maximize safety efforts.
I look forward to the outcome of these particular initiatives and
the appointment of the CAG to increase safety and the number of
folks on bikes.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `I do support this goal, and will support a variety of policies to
achieve it. First and foremost is to continue to extend our greenways
network. Combining flood control and transportation, our
greenways provide a low-stress way for bicycles to travel through
the city without close contact with auto traffic. The greenways and
paths have the advantage of fully separating cyclists and pedestrians
from motor vehicles, ensuring a high degree of safety for all
modes, and enabling more rapid transit by cyclists and peds due to
the underpasses that accompany the greenway system. It almost
goes without saying that the current sidewalk system needs to be
maintained, and expanded to areas that desire it, mostly for the
benefit of peds, but in certain areas for bikes as well. Maintaining
road-level multi-use paths is the next-best set of solutions for bikes
and peds, as some degree of physical separation exists between
modes, though curb-cuts and turning autos still present some level
of auto interaction with bikes/peds. The next-best set of solutions
is street-level bike lanes which have some form of physical separation,
as in the existing pilot along Folsom between Valmont and
Spruce. Finally, stripe-separated bike lanes along most city streets
allows bikes between sidewalks and vehicle lanes, and while this
is the least safe of the network solutions, it provides access to all
areas of the City. The Safe Streets Boulder program is an example
of Boulder’s efforts towards better safety for all modes.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'commuter-workforce',
    number: 7,
    question: 'What strategies do you support regarding land use, housing and transportation policies and programs to address the impacts of our in-commuting workforce?',
    questionShort: 'Commuter Workforce',
    topics: ['transportation'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `Coming right out of our Transportation Master Plan:

Three ingredients
work together to provide the fertile ground necessary for a
Transportation Demand Management Plan to be effective in providing
individuals with transportation choices. These ingredients
include
<ol>
  <li>land use with a sufficient mix and density of land uses
in the right places;</li>
  <li>place making and attractive urban design
which integrates with our transportation system, and</li>
<li>a comprehensive
transportation system that provides multiple choices and is seamless
 between modes of travel.</li>
 </ol>

 We have begun to execute
this plan at Boulder Junction, and I believe it will be a fine example
of land use, housing, and transportation (when we really make it
a hub). Some of our biggest employers are located along Arapahoe,
but we have done nothing to execute against the vision. In
fact, the planning of transportation and land use within the City
are still separate.

We need to demonstrate action by completing a
plan for the Arapahoe Corridor (into the County and neighboring
towns) that truly integrates land use, housing, and transportation.
RTD needs to get on-board, but we need to be open to consider
more flexible transportation options than buses, and we need to
acknowledge that cars are still most people’s choice. Picking on car
drivers in non-productive. We need to be open to density along
the corridor, limit or charge for parking, and offer transportation
alternatives.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `Boulder does not need to build any new housing units that do not
appeal directly to our in-commuters. They are in our workplaces,
so we should ask them what types of dwelling units, with which
amenities, they would rent or purchase to move back to Boulder
and stop commuting. Then we should build them.

Our single use zone districts need to be re-mixed to form more
complete neighborhoods. This will require close coordination with
existing residential and non-residential neighborhood representatives.
We can’t mandate outcomes; consensus about land use
changes to reduce vehicle trips can only be achieved because the
neighborhoods want the changes to occur.

In-commuting will only become more frustrating. The opportunity
to imagine, develop and approve strategically located mixed
use density to offer people a viable alternative to in-commuting
requires curb appeal and voluntary buy-in, not punishment.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `RTD has proven to not be our friend in solving our daily transportation
problems of in/out commuting. A partnership between
the city and major employers should be explored to create new
commuting routes and bus systems separate from RTD. Businesses
need to contribute. We do not need Google busses running unless
they are available to all. I will work for:
• EcoPasses for all of Boulder
• A transit system that is responsive to our needs vs. the RTD
agenda
• A convenient and frequent system that accommodates in/out
commuters to major employment centers
• Working with businesses on all of the above`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `There are many strategies that we can use to increase housing options
and therefore help lessen in-commuting and the related impacts.
1. Incentivize affordable housing through expedited review
processes, reduced development fees, and staff level approval for
select “by right” variances for affordable units. 2. Relax regulations
on RL-1 neighborhoods to allow homeowners to have more options
on their own land. (ie. Allow homeowners more opportunity
to build OAUs & ADUS; duplexes & triplexes & tiny homes on larger
lots; etc. 3. Seek opportunities for zoning overlays in industrial &
commercial areas so as to allow housing units on top of existing
spaces without a net loss of the industrial or commercial space. (A
perfect location for a pilot project for this is at Wilderness Place.
This commercial/industrial is already home to fabulous businesses,
breweries, and art studios, plus is located near major bike and car
transit ways. Most of the buildings are one story so we could easily
build housing above them.) ** There are many more opportunities
(this is a passion of mine!) but these would be a great start.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `Adopt a city-wide Ecopass for employees to reduce single-occupancy
vehicle trips inside Boulder and regionally. If we cannot get
adequate support from RTD, I think we need to investigate working
regionally to create an additional regional transit authority to
serve Boulder county and adjacent in-commuting towns. Work
with corporations to reduce their transportation footprint by offering
incentives like parking cash-outs and alternative transit options
for larger companies to reduce stress on our roads and local
impacts from in-commuting. Pursue opportunities to house more
of our workforce by adding housing units allowing density bonuses
for people earning middle and lower incomes on transit corridors,
give residents the option to build granny-flats for additional units,
and look at parts of the city where we may allow by-right development
of townhomes and duplexes.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `Providing a free Ecopass to those within the county would help reduce
congestion within Boulder. Continuing to increase the share
of low and middle income housing would allow more people to
live where they work and invest in our community by being part of
it. Further development of higher capacity projects will increase
opportunities in the city on smaller footprints. Finally reconsidering
laws maximizing how many people can live in a household
or how many square feet each person must have will allow us to
better utilize existing spaces to reduce traffic.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `I support focusing on efficient land use and zoning. We have many
areas that do not support enough density or need to be zoned for
housing. We should not put pressure on neighborhoods until we
can objectively show that we have maximized the zoning efficiency
in and around the center of Boulder. One of the biggest examples
of this is the geographic center of Boulder, east side of Foothills
between Arapahoe & Pearl. This is a majority warehouses and the
land is so valuable the price for renting is astronomical. With a
large amount of businesses over off of Pearl & Foothills it makes
sense to re-zone some of these warehouses and parking lots
to housing and to build affordable housing developments. This
would minimize a huge amount of in-commuters. Boulder cannot
house all of the 65,000 in-commuters, so I would also work closer
with the County and our sister cities to developing strategies that
increase public transportation routes. `
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `
• I agree that these three elements are integrally linked.
• I believe our biggest land use need at this point is housing.
Therefore, I support re-zoning certain commercial and industrial
zoned lands, to residential and mixed use.
• As stated earlier, I believe we should maximally utilize rare
opportunities as we get them (such as Alpine-Balsam and
the Pollard Motors site) for affordable workforce housing. I
honestly believe that affordable housing is the highest and
best use for these sites. And an advantage of these sites is
that even if they’re re-developed as 100% housing, they’d be
virtually “mixed use” developments – already being located
next door to commercial and retail.
• We should ensure that all housing units developed on land an
nexed into the City are permanently affordable – with a 50/50
split of low and middle income affordable housing.
• We should preserve our existing affordable housing stock.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `This is especially important to me. I live in the Uptown Broadway
neighborhood, and if elected, would be the only renter on Council.
I can empathize with people who would love to live in our community
but cannot afford it.

First, we need to provide sufficient diversity of housing, and more
housing, so that our talented workforce can live and work here if
they choose. Second, we need to create more regional transportation
solutions that are affordable, convenient, and efficient for
those workers who choose to commute.

There are also a number of regional solutions that we need to explore,
including the Regional Housing Plan and broadband, which
would enable more workers to telecommute. In fact, we have
made dramatic strides in reducing the number of SOVs in the last
decade, largely through more people telecommuting. We should
continue to advance this. `
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `With 60,000 in-commuters, having these people and their families
live in Boulder—if they wished to -- would require a doubling of
Boulder’s population. So, I’d focus on transportation policies and
programs for dealing with the in-commuting population – with
van pools, carpools, peripheral parking lots and electric-powered
shuttles from remote parking. This, of course, costs money. I’d turn
to the people creating the problem –assessing capital costs to the
developers/businesses creating the traffic. Some in-commuters,
again, if they wished, could occupy new residential development
if we follow policies in the BVCP update and rezone some of the
commercial/industrial land to mixed zoning.`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `I support a focus on dealing with in-commuters more efficiently. To
accommodate this population with housing would require doubling
or tripling the population of Boulder, which is unacceptable.
I would support remote parking and shuttles, van pools, better
bus service and user fees. I would support a requirement for users
to pay for all parking. I would also support a community-wide
Ecopass for all residents, and would also support a requirement
for Boulder employers to provide an Ecopass to all employees
working in Boulder. Money is the best incentive/disincentive and
there is fairness in charging the source of the problem in order to
change behavior, and to raise funds for the provision of alternative
transport measures.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `Commercial development growth potential outstrips residential
development potential per current zoning. More jobs create a
greater demand for housing, putting upward pressure on prices.
We need to bring this into balance. Employment and thus commuting
patterns, are too variable to expect to stop in-commuting
through housing all the in-commuters.

We have made a policy choice to be a Regional Job Center (RJC)
(BVCP 5.02), with that we destined ourselves to a certain amount
of in-commuting workforce. The types of jobs being created are
trending toward importing workers from outside the area (vs.
creating jobs that satisfy local employment needs.)

Our strategies should embrace a regional approach that optimizes
transit links to outlying communities who have housing that is
more affordable than Boulder’s. The whole region should contribute
to the housing pool to support RJC employment.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `I believe in using the high number of in-commuters as a motivation
for two things: an excellent public transit system (local and
regional), and a continued focus on housing access for all income
levels. Since current zoning in Boulder allows for 45,000 new
employees, and only 6,000 new dwelling units, Boulder clearly
needs to re-examine its current zoning to enable more residential
development and less commercial. In addition, I think that
gradual, sensible, and sensitive in-fill development can make a
neighborhood (like mine in Whittier) very walkable, and create
a great diversity of housing types and costs. A person who lives
in Boulder and is holds a job is 75% likely to work in Boulder. So
when we add housing in Boulder, there is a good chance someone
who lives there will work in Boulder. I think that when people live
and work in the same place, they have a strong social connection
to that place, and tend to give back to it in many ways. Regarding
expansion of Boulder, I would consider annexation only in the
case of a truly excellent project that provided a lot of measurable
community benefit to the existing Boulder community ( affordable
housing, public gathering spaces, public art, excellent energy
efficiency, etc) and clearly met the Boulder Valley Comprehensive
Plan guidelines. Whatever policy changes enable any increase
in housing (zoning changes or overlay districts, etc) needs to be
worked on in close partnership with the local neighborhoods. People
picked their areas to live in for a reason, and should be part of
any decision-making process.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'open-space',
    number: 8,
    question: 'Tell us your vision for open space moving forward, including specifically the challenges regarding the success of huge visitation. Would you prioritize either protection or recreation on a hypothetical new property?',
    questionShort: 'Open Space',
    topics: ['open-space'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `We all love our Open Space. We have sufficiently surrounded our
City with a stunning moat of environmental, recreational, and
agricultural value of 45,000 acres (before the recent acquisition of
the Boulder Valley Farm). Open Space Mountain Parks (OSMP) is
commencing a Master Plan, something that has never been done
before, to address the future strategy and use of the most valuable
asset in the City of Boulder. It is time to begin spending more
money on management of our assets rather than acquisition. We
need to protect the land from fire, inappropriate use, and potential
over-use. As an OSMP volunteer raptor monitor, protection
of land and species is a very high priority for me, but we must
balance that with recreational use of all types in areas where the
land can sustain it. I believe that by getting people on the land,
especially when they are young, they will respect it, value it, and
help to steward it. Let’s not get in religious battles; let’s listen to
each other and truly come up with a balanced plan.

The skyrocketing usage associated with the huge population
increase on the Front Range is a concern, so we must plan how to
manage that. We should look at spreading usage among multiple
properties, plan with the county and other cities/counties, and put
the right management plans in place, including the possibility of
charging out-of-city residents for parking or usage.

I can’t respond to a hypothetical property usage, but I can say that
for the recent acquisition of the Boulder Valley Farm, it has been a
long-term ranching operation. There is wetland; there are eagles
and other species that we should protect. But, it has been an operational
ranch for many, many years, and it has oil and gas operation
on-site, so let’s be realistic. Should we get in a fight to make it
a Habitat Conservation Area? We should use an operational ranch
to educate young people (and adults) about where their food
comes from*, and we should run trials to grow sustainable crops
for people, rather than animals. We should encourage recreation
on the site, and we should tie it in to a coordinated county and
city-owned Open Space paths that can be used by all, without having
to drive. (*16 Million Americans think chocolate milk comes
from brown cows. I’m sure none of those people live in Boulder).`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `Public access is a good in its own right, leading to greater support
of the City’s efforts and expenditures on Open Space lands, so it
should be equally balanced with preservation.

We should shift more of our Open Space tax revenues towards
operations and management of the recreational opportunities
available to everyone who contributes to them.

Siting, design, approval and development of attractive new trails
will relieve some of the pressure on our existing world-class trail
options. `
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `I reject the idea that we must prioritize recreation over conservation
or vice versa. This is a false dichotomy. Well-constructed trails
that are fun and challenging, take visitors where they want, and
connect to other trails are not a conservation detriment, they are
a benefit.

We have a deferred maintenance backlog of millions of dollars and
it is growing. Many parts of the system are still waiting for flood
repairs— now four years out. The department is understaffed in
people that know how to construct a trail for sustainability.

Any new acquisitions must be part of a plan to connect parcels
that are currently unconnected and do not allow visitor access or
aren’t large enough to accommodate access in their own right.`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `Our open space program is one the most special and unique aspects
of Boulder and a huge driver of our economic success. I am
grateful to those who came before me for their vision and courage
to protect space around us. I think it is always important to
emphasize conservation first. In the locations that biologists deem
appropriate for recreation, I do believe that we have the knowledge
and ability to build trails that are appropriate for various user
groups (hikers, bikers, children) and that through thoughtful trail
design, we can minimize conflict between these groups. Given the
success of our open space program - and particularly the heavy
use by people throughout the entire region - I think it important
that where environmental possible (least impactful) we provide
additional trail options for users in order to spread the use and
the related impacts. Moving forward, it is also important that we
emphasize maintenance of our trails.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `The city has largely bought open space available near our growth
boundary and needs to consider how to direct OSMP to better
manage its resources from increased demand going forward and
plan to address the demand imbalance for trail/recreational use
which will continue to outpace our current land used for those
purposes. We need to determine guidelines for how much recreation
we should permit and how to manage regional demand for
the city’s open space system. We should build on the success of
Boulder’s open space program by making our trails sustainable and
by making new purchases strategically to preserve vulnerable land,
improve connections between existing open space and through
the region. Our new purchases should lean toward prioritizing
recreational uses and we should consider trails on new land to
disperse impacts of recreation on our current system which faces
increased pressure from population growth in the Front Range.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `
I believe we should be approaching all open space with a balance
of protection and recreation. Open space is meant to bring people
together with nature, we just have to provide the knowledge and
expectations of how to do that when developing space. Open
spaces should be planned so that as many groups as possible can
utilize it in harmony, including the pre-existing nature. While we
have many passionate groups who have priorities about how open
space should be used, working together and making concessions
is how we learn to appreciate each other’s priorities and further
build caring in our community. The problem of huge visitation can
be better addressed by marketing our many miles of Front Range
trails instead of focusing on a very few which get overcrowded.
Simply informing people of all their options will go a long way to
helping congestion. `
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `
Conservation is the priority of Open Space. The increasing recreational
demand means we have to take a closer look at the levels
of environmental impacts. Boulder has some very sensitive areas
of Open Space and recreation should not impact them negatively.
Areas with a lower environmental sensitivity should be given
greater latitude to develop recreation. It is vital that the OSMP lay
out a strategy that directs people to recreation sites and provides
infrastructure to meet those needs. The massive visitation and
degradation on Chautauqua could have been managed better if we
were proactive. We must look to the next heavy-use areas (NCAR
and Sanitas) and plan for increasing impacts. A hypothetical property
should be based on what is needed. If it’s recreation, then
purchase open space that has minimal environmental sensitivity. If
the goal is protecting a sensitive area that is under threat, then we
should understand it will not be developed.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `
First, let me generally say that I believe Councilmembers
should be representatives of the people. There should be a
balance that recognizes this principle, alongside whatever
vision individual Councilmembers or candidates have.
• To that end, I feel that the Open Space Master Plan update
is an ideal place to apply the recommendations of the Public
Participation Working Group. I’m keenly interested to know
the public’s vision.
• That said, I feel our Open Space is one of the core aspects
that define Boulder. So I place high value on ensuring that our
Open Space be well managed, in perpetuity, to ensure appropriate
maintenance, upkeep, and visitor services.
• The question of recreation or protection has more to do with
the specific property than an a priori approach before knowing
anything about the property.
• That said, I believe recreation and protection can co-exist.
• Re: huge visitation: I support higher user fees for non-residents.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `John Muir, the founder of the Sierra Club, said that “of all the
paths you take in life, make sure a few of them are dirt.” I use our
Open Spaces nearly every day, and am an avid hiker, mountain
biker, and trail runner.

We need to balance the benefits of Open Space. There are many
natural values of our Open Space lands that we must preserve, including
protection of rare animal and plant species which demand
wide protective land areas. I don’t believe it is inconsistent with
our preservation goals to provide access for a wide array of recreational
pursuits. In fact, I have seen firsthand how facilitating more
public interaction encourages greater preservation.

I support identifying opportunities to purchase more Open Space,
while thoughtfully identifying opportunities in existing Open Space
that can safely and responsibly meet the diverse recreational
needs and interests of our citizens. `
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `
          My vision is embodied in the citizen-approved Charter and Council-approved
BVCP -- to preserve natural areas, water resources,
fragile habitat, floodplains, and lands for passive recreation and
agricultural production. I believe it is our responsibility to sustain
that full array of Open Space purposes for future generations.
Doing this in the face of limited land AND financial resources,
plus a growing population and demand for recreation, will be a
challenge -- one that must be addressed in the upcoming OSMP
Master Plan. The planning process must confront trade-offs and
hard choices – and openly engage the public and accurately assess
costs.

OSMP surveys show that Boulderites want BOTH conservation
AND recreation. For any new property, whether protection or
recreation is prioritized will depend on the experts’ analysis of the
land’s values/resources and recommendations and an assessment
of its best use within the system. Personally, I want to continue
enjoying the trails, but also believe we must err on the side of conservation
and sustain the habitat that so many native and migrant
species depend upon.
          `
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `My vision is that, on the 50th anniversary of the citizens of Boulder
voting to tax ourselves to create Boulder’s Open Space program,
existing eco-systems and large blocks of habitat are preserved
for the next 50 years. Achieving this vision will require careful
management of the growing visitation to Open Space, currently
approaching 6 million visits per year. This vision includes acknowledgement
by all of us who love to visit Open Space that we all
have impacts, even the least and most careful of us, and that we
may have to restrict ourselves in some ways to preserve this iconic
treasure that makes Boulder what it is. Active management of the
growing use of our Open Space is essential if we are to avoid a
“Tragedy of the Commons” situation, in which overuse results in
degradation and destruction of the resource we have worked so
hard to protect. Without knowing the location size and habitat of
a hypothetical new acquisition, it is impossible to hypothetically
prioritize protection or recreation.

Boulder has already adopted its Open Space Acquisition Plan (in
2013) and is moving ahead with the development of the Open
Space Master Plan.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `We have created an asset in our city that both nurtures us and
plagues us. Chautauqua currently receives more visitors than
Rocky Mountain National Park, with the number of visitors at Mt.
Sanitas close behind. This is good for our economy, but bad for
the land and the flora and fauna which it nurtures. Add to that the
the following factors: climate change and fire risk, rise in homeless
transients choosing to camp there, diminishing funding for Open
Space and you have a wicked problem in formulating a broadly
acceptable stewardship plan. My vision for Open Space is to honor
the charter and make whatever sacrifices we need to to be truly
good stewards of the land.

As for the hypothetical, I need more information regarding
location, qualities or provenance of site to provide a thoughtful
opinion.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `It is fitting that in the year of the 50th anniversary of the founding
of Boulder’s Open Space program, that a major strategic visioning
process should kick off to guide management for the next 50 years.
The Master Plan should set forth criteria-based decision-making
processes for determining which uses, if any, are appropriate for
each type of area of Open Space. The different ecological types of
land managed by OSMP are already well-categorized in other documents,
and guidelines and criteria for uses in each type should
be set forth, without making specific determinations of use within
sites. Theories of management for the different area types should
be laid out clearly. Management of uses should be spelled out explicitly,
and every effort should be made to allow as many uses on
trails as possible without causing appreciable degradation of the
local ecological and habitat value of the land. Where user conflicts
are noted, the plan should be creative in proposing strategies for
managing uses, considering approaches such as alternating uses
by schedule (temporal separation) and using use restrictions only
when levels of use conflict are unacceptable, or when given uses
are causing degradation of the habitat values.

Regarding prioritizing preservation or recreation on a hypothetical
new property, there are many issues to consider. The value of
open space has the many aspects laid out in the Charter: preservation
or restoration of natural areas; preservation of water resources;
preservation of land for passive recreational use; preservation
of agricultural uses; utilization of land for shaping City development;
utilization of non-urban land for spatial definition of urban
areas; utilization of land to prevent encroachment on floodplains;
preservation of land for its aesthetic or passive recreational value
and contribution to quality of life. The tensions inherent to the
discussion of how much use, when and where are inherent in
the purposes listed, which include passive recreation as well as
preservation. A guiding principle for me is that OSMP habitat
which shelters threatened or endangered species (both vegetation
and wildlife) should be treated with the utmost care, and that in
those areas, preservation values must be addressed first. In areas
in which primarily more common species are found, the balance
between preservation and use can tilt somewhat more towards
user group interests. Regardless of the regulations developed,
enforcement should be strong in order to preserve natural values
and minimize user conflict.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'municipalization',
    number: 9,
    question: 'Do you support Boulder’s drive to municipalize its electric utility? If so, what are the limits on taxpayer dollars and time you are prepared to spend to achieve that goal and, if not, how do you propose to achieve Boulder’s renewable energy goals?',
    questionShort: 'Municipalization',
    topics: ['municipalization'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `Climate change is the biggest problem faced by humanity. Moving
to the use of 100% clean energy is of paramount importance for
Boulder, Colorado, the U.S., and the world. I have supported the
goals of renewable energy and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions,
and I have supported the goals of the muni project. However,
I am a realist and have not been satisfied with our progress. We
have been slowed to a crawl from legal and regulatory challenges,
and in the meantime, we are not progressing toward a more energy-efficient
future. I support the community being able to vote
on the three ballot measures, so we can see if they still support
spending the kind of money we need to spend to continue this
effort. I will be closely watching the PUC decision in September to
see how difficult and time-consuming the effort will continue to
be.

We’ve spent 7+ years and close to $20M, and we’re asking the voters
for another $16.5M to get to a “go/no-go” decision. Then, we’ll
have hundreds of millions of dollars of separation costs, stranded
costs, and condemnation. Will other cities be able to model what
we’ve done? I doubt it and question if the solution to clean energy
for the country will be accomplished by each city municipalizing. If
we get a discouraging decision from the PUC or if the voters decide
not to support the utility occupation tax, I would encourage the
City of Boulder to work with Denver, Aurora, and other cities in
Colorado on a common solution that could have a greater impact
on climate change. We should also encourage our legislators, and
the entire state legislature, to apply pressure to Xcel to switch to
clean energy much faster to encourage the PUC to make renewables
a higher priority. This is much more realistic approach, at a
lower cost, to achieve REAL change.

In addition to working with other cities and the State of Colorado
on our electric generation, we should look to solar farms, the
transportation sector (see below), and our buildings, and land use
as ways to improve our emissions targets.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `I am concerned that we will never be able to afford the price we
may be required to pay Xcel to purchase their aging, increasingly
irrelevant infrastructure. It would help if we had won a few of our
lawsuits along the way. The costs to date, coupled with the delays,
which seem to stretch well beyond the horizon, make it increasingly
unlikely that buying out Xcel will be fiscally responsible.

In any event, Boulder’s voters must be given an opportunity to
vote up or down on municipalization when all the facts are known.

I will wait to see what Council decides to put on the ballot before
taking positions, but my sense is that Boulder’s citizens are
becoming more interested in pulling the plug on this endeavor,
even while they resent Xcel’s our way or the highway approach to
development of more creative, energy-saving, carbon-footprint-reducing
innovations.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `In all things regarding the muni, I promise to clearly evaluate how
proceeding, or not, will move us forward in our carbon reduction
goals. To municipalize is not a goal in itself; carbon reduction and
environmental benefits are the key outcomes. These are the questions
that must be answered:
• Does this help us reach our carbon goals in a cost-effective
manner?
• Can we do more with less money somewhere else?
• If we decide to move forward or away from the muni how do
we maximize our leverage with Xcel to help us achieve our
goals?`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `I do support Boulder’s effort to municipalize our electric utility.
While our current provider is making strides towards increasing
renewables, the data still shows that being in control of our energy
future provides the best opportunity to meet our climate energy
goals. Being in control of our energy future will provide an excellent
opportunity for the business community to form partnerships
with the City as we incentivize rooftops solar, microgrids, battery
storage, more efficient monitoring and distribution technologies,
and as we move towards electrification of our homes and cars. The
future of energy will require more nimbleness and flexibility than
we have with our current provider. I do support the occupation
tax extension being placed on the ballot in order to move forward
towards condemnation court to know the true costs of municipalization.
I would not support pulling from the general fund to
move forward. Once we know the costs, we’ll be able to make a
more informed decision. I will not support moving forward if rates
are going to increase beyond our current provider’s normal yearly
increases.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `I support continuing and completing the effort for municipalization.
I believe given Colorado’s regulatory structure, pursuing
a municipal energy utility is currently Boulder’s best option to
democratize, decentralize, and decarbonize our energy system to
reach 100% renewable energy by 2030. I realize the legal battles
will be long and the earliest projected cut-over could be 2022. If
the utility occupation tax fails to pass in 2017, I am committed to
not diverting funding from the general fund. I’m greatly interested
in the response from the PUC to better determine how long we’ll
be in litigation and whether that’s worth the cost for the city. If
the tax fails, we need to be pragmatic and pursue additional ways
to decarbonize our electric system by promoting our solar strategy,
using renewable programs offered from Xcel, and pushing for
aggressive changes at the state legislature.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `I am for municipalization. While this is a costly and time-consuming
endeavour it is the right choice if Boulder’s goal truly is
sustainability. We are the tip of the spear in the fight against large
energy corporations who seek short-term profits over our future.
While this is a large expense, our long term financial and environmental
security is better in our citizen’s hands. This is a fight worth
fighting to be a leader in the nation in sustainability.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `First and foremost I support Boulder’s efforts to reach our climate
goals of 100% renewable energy by 2030. I have supported the
drive to municipalize, but I am concerned that the Muni itself has
become the goal. I have always viewed the Muni as one of many
avenues to reach our goal. I will be hard pressed to continue to
support the Muni if it’s cost dramatically exceed the voter approved
$214Million and/or our projected time table draws out
beyond 2030. The Muni should not distract us from implementing
several solutions large and small to accomplish our goals. I will
push for Boulder to provide a local renewable energy incentive for
residential and commercial buildings. We should add a renewable
energy requirement to our leading Net Zero program for commercial
development. These are concrete steps that get us closer
to our goal while we anticipate what the PUC and courts decide
about the fate of our Municipal electric utility. `
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `• I support a Boulder municipal electric utility – if rates, reliability
and renewables are equal to or better than Xcel.
• Reducing emissions and the effects of climate change are
personal to me, as a firefighter.
• Currently, Boulder collectively pays Xcel $35 million a year, every
year. Discussions of expenditures should be kept in proper
perspective.
• If the Utility Occupation Tax (UOT) doesn’t pass, and the funds
aren’t there to carry the muni onto the next step – which,
provided we get a good PUC ruling, would go to the Federal
Energy Regularity Commission (FERC) – I’d recommend we:
- pause the muni,
- not sign an Xcel franchise agreement,
- and pursue State Legislative remedies to make forming
municipal utilities easier and fairer.
- Senator Fenberg is assembling a coalition to do exactly this.
• I’d also examine the City’s Climate Commitment goals and
prioritize those we can fast track.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `I moved to Boulder to work for Al Gore, because I believe that we
have a moral imperative to act on climate change. And I previously
served on the senior leadership team at the Rockefeller Foundation
that now funds Boulder’s Resilient Cities Initiative. I am absolutely
committed to achieving Boulder’s goal of 100% renewable
power by 2030.

After seven years and at least $12 million, I believe we face an
inconvenient truth of our own: too many Boulder residents have
lingering questions about the Muni’s total cost, timetables, and
litigation scenarios. While I fully support the goals, I think we must
consider whether to re-focus our efforts and tax dollars on market-based
solutions that will help us achieve our targets.

I will closely scrutinize the forthcoming PUC decision, and encourage
everyone to do so, so that we can openly and constructively
discuss the best way forward. `
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `We simply cannot clean up our energy supply by continuing with
Xcel – they have committed too much of their equity to coal-fired
and natural gas plants to back out without a real push by the Legislature,
and that is unlikely. So, we need to stay the voter-approved
course to municipalization until we either succeed or find out we
can’t, but never sign another 20-year franchise with Xcel. The
millions in profits we’ve sent to Xcel will do more work in achieving
our climate change goals if they are spent locally.

Regarding costs, we should be able to source electricity generated
by renewables at costs comparable to Xcel’s costs, because wind is
already cheaper than coal and solar is getting close.

If we find out we cannot pursue a Muni, we should push to convert
Colorado to a system of “competitive energy supplies” where customers
can choose their sources at competitive rates. This system
is being used widely in other states (including Texas) now.`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `I do support Boulder’s effort to municipalize our electric utility. We
are at a critical point where the cost of wind is cheaper than coal
and solar is getting close. If we can keep the costs of becoming
a municipal electric utility within a reasonable range, we should
have cleaner energy at comparable prices and reliability to Xcel.
If the cost of municipalizing turns out to be too great, we should
press to convert Colorado to competitive energy supply, where
customers can choose their energy suppliers, a system that is common
in other parts of the US and elsewhere, and to increase the
statewide renewable energy requirements that all electric energy
suppliers must meet.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `Yes. The municipalization project is everything in our ability to
achieve Boulder’s Climate Commitment (100% clean energy by
2030, 80% emissions reduction by 2050.) It also proves whether
any municipality, in practicality, really does have the constitutional
right to extricate itself from a regulated monopoly. Boulder’s
effort will determine which way the whole state goes. Council was
careful in crafting the Utility Occupation Tax, being careful not to
diminish the reserves for very long, an indication of unwillingness
to spend from the general fund and an indication as to limits. If
we cannot municipalize, the effort moves to change things at the
state level and gains momentum through support of all the other
municipalities within the state that have been carefully watching
the outcome of Boulder’s effort. I would support municipalizing if
the PUC rules in our favor. If not, I would support a strong effort at
the state level.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `
I am a full-throated advocate for Boulder to have its own municipal
electric system. There are many reasons for this, the first among
them the City’s adopted climate and renewable-energy goals.
Boulder (and other Colorado cities) will never reach their climate
commitments with the current energy provider Xcel unless Xcel
were to change course radically. In the best possible projections,
even if Xcel gets all it aspires to (which may be a bad deal for
ratepayers) Xcel may achieve a 55% emissions reduction by 2030.
Boulder is committed to a carbon-emissions-free electricity system
by 2030. The only way for Boulder to meet its climate and energy
goals (which I helped to establish and am personally committed
to) is a municipal electric utility. The additional benefits of a muni
include local democratic control as well as the ability to test and
establish new energy provider business models, which can further
advance clean energy goals outside of the Boulder footprint. Supporting
the muni is foundational to me, and even if Boulder’s efforts
were to fail, I would continue to support state action towards
a rational Modern Path to Municipalization. That state-level push
for energy choice would be coupled with additional city incentives
for renewable energy, energy efficiency, and electrification of
transportation.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'traffic-congestion',
    number: 10,
    question: 'What transportation solutions would you suggest to ease congestion, especially resulting from 49,000 in-commuters, specifically those that drive alone? Would you favor solutions to improve roads and parking; bus or other transportation; cycling and walking, or some combination thereof? How would you fund transportation improvements? Do you favor higher parking costs and other disincentives to driving? ',
    questionShort: 'Traffic Congestion',
    topics: ['transportation', 'traffic'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `We haven’t seen an increase in bus ridership in over 20 years, and
my discussions with potential bus commuters aren’t fruitful. We
will need to work with our largest employers with in-commuters
to develop some creative alternatives for their employees: Uber,
van-commuting, driverless cars, etc. I believe we need to widen
some roads like Arapahoe to accommodate current needs, and we
need more park ‘n ride options for those who would ride a bus.
Of course, we need Rtd bus routes to operate more often, but we
won’t get that until we get more density. So, land use reform is a
key to the puzzle.

For Boulder, I am a huge fan of electric vehicles. We need to put
a priority on them as gasoline cars become a greater and greater
percentage of our emissions. We should set an aggressive goal of
eliminating gas vehicles by 2040 and put the plans and metrics
in place to accomplish it. Things we could do include: 1) convert
the city’s fleet; 2) build more charging stations; 3) educate the
public about electric vehicles, ranges, etc.; 4) engage with automobile
dealers and manufacturers to get more models stocked in
Boulder; 5) work with local businesses to get them to adopt and
promote EV’s, encourage them to build charging stations for their
employees and customers; 6) promote shared EV’s by providing
central charging depots for Uber, Lyft, etc. I would recommend
one full-time employee to manage this, and I would encourage
the Environmental Advisory Board to become more engaged and
accountable for the success of the program.

Also for Boulder, we must continue to invest in safe biking. I would
build more north-south bike routes and encourage electric bikes. I
would do a PR campaign on e-bikes, featuring older residents and
women and promote safety.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `I’ve seen in-commuter estimates ranging from 49,000 to 65,000.
We first need to agree on the magnitude of the challenge.

In my response to Q#6, I suggested several ways to address the
last mile challenge that keeps people driving SOVs into Boulder
every day to work. The RTD routes established decades ago do not
meet the current trip patterns of our residents and workforce, but
changing them is very difficult.

I support a county-wide EcoPass funded by a property tax, but it
is not clear Boulder County voters will pass it. Everyone wants the
other guy to take the bus, so they can drive where they want to go.
Increasing the cost of parking and use of other driving disincentives
feeds frustration and can harm the economy – we should be
careful to provide better solutions before increasing people’s pain.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `Please see my answers above to questions 5 and 6 as they address
these issues.

I favor frequent busses for in-commuters with real improvements
for cycling, walking, and sharing rides for the “last mile” between
the bus and a destination. We don’t need more parking… we need
fewer cars. Our planning and development process have been driven
by autos and parking for too long. We need to start planning
for a future that is less car centric and more about finding better
solutions for getting people where they need to go. `
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `In a dream world we would have a community-wide Eco-Pass
(citywide or ideally countywide to address in-commuting), with
the possible funding mechanism being a head tax. This may not be
a viable solution, however. I believe that we can improve citywide
transportation by embracing mode share and possibly even
the creation of an RTA, however, this will not ease pressure on
in-commuting. Nearly 50,000 in-commuters has been a problem
for Boulder for decades. The most viable solution that I see to chip
away at the in-commuting pressure is to increase housing options
for in-commuters. I do favor higher parking costs to disincentivize
driving.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `The strongest steps Boulder can take are to adopt a city-wide
ecopass including residents and employees, to develop a map for
a city-wide bike network with a plan to reduce gaps in our system,
and to use more parking districts. For new investment in the city,
we need to prioritize funding other transportation options, including
buses, bike infrastructure, and ride-sharing.

Higher parking costs for employees should be bundled with a
parking cash-out model so that changing transportation modes
can bring a financial benefit. The city should consider a transportation
maintenance fee to fund transportation projects as the city
as a whole benefits from these investments. To plan for the longer
term, we need to change our land-use patterns to reduce parking
minimums while investing in alternative transportation options
and planning for a future that includes more ride-sharing and
autonomous vehicles.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `A free Ecopass for Boulder County citizens is a good first step to
decrease commuting by car. Aside from that continuing increase
housing options is key to getting more people to live where they
work. We have a large imbalance of housing to business activities
at the moment. If large corporations continue entering Boulder
and increasing jobs they should take on more responsibility for
community development to allow easier commuting.I believe
disincentivizing driving through higher parking cost will ultimately
affect the lowest income people in our community more harshly
and would like to avoid that tactic. `
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `Based on city data there are roughly 65,000 people and 49,000
vehicles commuting daily into Boulder. The solution to ease this
congestion is a combination. We need to rethink our Transportation
Master Plan to focus on the transportation revolution to electric
and autonomous vehicles within 10-15 years. The last thing
we should do is spend money now on a problem that will either
not exist or will be completely different in the next decade. One
solution that will help prepare for the next decade is to decouple
pedestrian/bicycle movement from that of vehicles. A prime example
is that of the hill and the traffic on Broadway from Baseline
to University. There are 10 traffic lights and one underpass in 1.7
miles. We should look at additional under or overpasses for pedestrians
and bicycles to increase their safety and movement. The
Chautauqua pilot program this summer was a huge success and
should be implemented daily in the summer`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `
• Transportation management requires integrated, multipronged
solutions. Therefore, I’d favor the combination solutions
outlined above.
• There’s much we can and should do to increase the viability
and safety of cycling and walking. See my Question #5
answers.
• Re: disincentives, I tend to favor more “carrot” and less “stick.”
• I believe people want to do the right thing, but things are
backwards: It costs a non-Eco-Pass holder $4.50 round trip to
travel downtown on the SKIP. If we want more people to use
buses, we’ve got to make it easier and cheaper, not punish
them if they can’t afford it. Therefore, I support community-wide
Eco-Passes.
• I support higher non-resident parking fees for Open Space.
And I fully support ideas like the Chautauqua Park shuttle.
• I support impact fees on new commercial development (with
exceptions for small businesses), to fund transportation capital
improvements they create the need for.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `When I moved to Boulder, it was the first time in 20 years that I
had owned a car. While I would much rather take the bus or bike
if I can, I understand that this isn’t always practical for families or
our elderly, and I will prioritize the creation of more transportation
options, with wider accessibility, to reduce traffic congestion and
carbon emissions.

I favor investments that expand multi-modal transportation options,
such as community-wide EcoPass-type programs, additional
bus-rapid-transit corridors, electric vehicles and charging stations,
and first- and final-mile connections to incentivize mass transit
that facilitate biking and pedestrian travel without creating additional
pain for drivers.

And just a word about RTD: I have seen firsthand through my role
as TAB Chair how difficult it is to work with them to improve our
transportation services. I am very interested in partnering with
other towns in the region on commuting solutions. `
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `The appropriate way to deal with people’s actions that impose
costs on our community is to charge user fees. Since the state controls
gas taxes and tolls, the only relevant fee here is parking fees.
Technology systems for parking fees are well-developed and in use
in Boulder (at the Library, CU, and Chautauqua). Such systems have
proven effective and efficient (e.g. in Santa Clara County/Stanford)
and could be effective if used with perimeter parking for in-commuters.
Partnering with Google, Apple, and others to
begin experimenting with autonomous electric vehicle shuttles,
ride services and delivery services, could accelerate their use,
reduce congestion, and increase everyone’s ability to get around.
I’m hoping the Chamber’s October 18 session will provide concrete
examples of ways we can proceed. New and emerging technologies
will both shape how we move around as individuals and have
major implications for Boulder’s transportation planning.`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `We currently have around 100,000 residents of Boulder, 97,000
jobs in the city, and 30,000 Boulder residents working in Boulder.
This means significant traffic congestion impacts from workers
driving into Boulder. I would support improved bus service, remote
parking with better transit and/or shuttles, van pools, delivery services,
and charging for all parking. We should also have a city-wide
Ecopass system, and require all employers to provide Ecopasses for
employees working in Boulder, as well as charging employees for
parking facilities, so that the cost is made clear and obvious both
to employers and employees.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `See Transportation section of #6 above. Some combination. Transportation
improvements should be funded through development
impact fees. Yes on higher parking costs, but should be mindful of
low wage workers who have no choice but to drive.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `As Boulder continues to grow, typically at 0.5% residential and
0.7% commercial, traffic congestion will continue to increase. To
believe otherwise is foolish. However, every effort should be
made to mitigate the increase in congestion and emissions related
to transportation. While some parties seem to believe that there
will be a miracle solution through autonomous vehicles and transportation
network providers like Uber and Lyft, I am highly skeptical
that we should count on those technological solutions to make
a big dent in congestion and emissions. Instead, I believe that
Boulder should incentivize the increased use of electrical transportation
modes of all kinds. Autos, scooters, and bicycles are all
modes which are being electrified currently, and there are electric
versions of all types of modes for sale. For the last year, I have
been commuting more and more by electric bike, putting over
1000 miles on the bike during the first year of ownership. The
current County programs for electric vehicle sales (including both
autos and bikes) are a good start in incentivizing this transition.
City codes have been adopted for new construction to require
some charging facilities in new buildings, and the City provides 44
charging stations (and counting) across its parking system. Working
with RTD to provide the best possible options to encourage high
use of transit remains an important strategy, including subsidizing
more bus frequency on heavily-used routes, and continuing to
work towards a community-wide EcoPass. Finally (and with the
most complexity) land use regulation can be used to reduce the
number of vehicle-miles travelled through incentivizing developers
to build in areas and manners that allow all modes of travel.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'carbon-footprint',
    number: 11,
    question: 'Despite Boulder’s reputation as a “green” community, our per-capita carbon footprint is pretty high. How can we shape our built environment and transportation systems for lower impact?',
    questionShort: 'Carbon Footprint',
    topics: ['environment'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `The Danish Plan promoted a dense urban core, surrounded by
green space. We have surrounded our city with green space (Open
Space), and we have controlled our height limits, but we have
since allowed zoning laws to decrease density and allow for larger
homes on bigger pieces of land. We should take environmental
issues more seriously regarding the built environment, allowing for
more dense in-fill (like ADU’s, duplexes, triplexes, split lots), which
will allow more people to bike, walk, and take the bus. We should
build more mixed use and higher density developments on our
major transit roads like Arapahoe and Broadway, and we should
encourage smaller living quarters like micro-units. We need to
do more education about the original strategy of a “dense urban
core” and get more buy-in to the concept of density.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `As noted above in Q#6 and Q#9, the most important change we
can make in our built environment is creation of more “complete”
residential and non-residential neighborhoods. Village and subcommunity
centers that create walkable, primarily self-sufficient
neighborhoods are the best way to reverse the auto-dependent
sprawl it has taken us 60 years to create.

When we can work, shop and play closer to where we sleep, we
will reduce our carbon footprint and become a more environmentally
sustainable and economically resilient community.

New technologies (home offices, dark fiber, Uber, Lyft, self-driving
vehicles, solar on every south-facing rooftop, better batteries, etc.)
may help reduce our footprint. Finally, we need to capture in-coming
vehicles at the edge of town by offering nimbler, less expensive
mobility options within Boulder.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `Our high per capita carbon output is due to our affluence and
continued reliance on coal for electricity generation. We can do
more with or without Xcel to promote more distributed solar
installations. We can and should do more with our solar and
conservation programs for lower to middle level incomes. The
affluent can already afford solar and have embraced it. We need to
drive down into our mobile home, rental and other lower income
communities with incentives to improve efficiency. These sorts of
improvements mean greater resiliency in these communities and
our community as a whole.

See above for transportation discussion.`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `The three most impactful ways to reduce our carbon footprint are:
1. Move to 100% renewable energy as quickly as possible (particularly
rooftop solar); 2. Move towards electrification of our homes
and commercial spaces; 3. Move towards other modes of transportation
and 100% electric vehicles. As stated above, I believe
that municipalization is our best path towards renewable energy,
but we have an opportunity to do all of these things in parallel to
that effort, or if we stay with our current provider. I would focus
on achieving these goals through an increased carbon tax and use
funds from that to incentivize all three points above. Embracing
transportation modes has been discussed in 5 and 9.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `Land-use must be a part of the equation to help reduce Boulder’s
per-capita carbon footprint. Improving our lower-carbon transportation
options like biking and transit will require that a greater
number of people can use a system effectively for their needs.

Currently, much of Boulder is poorly served by transit because of
the first or last mile distance, as well as low frequencies of service.
We need to give people more incentives to use transit which
would help us run more frequent buses. We can also focus on
building smaller housing with shared walls that are more relatively
affordable and have intrinsically lower energy consumption and
lower embodied energy, particularly due to Boulder’s new aggressive
energy efficiency standards. On the personal vehicle side,
we also need to move forward with the city’s new standards for
electric vehicle charging to reduce carbon emissions from people
who drive.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `Small-footprint housing development is key to both increasing
housing and generating a low carbon footprint. Boulder is going to
keep growing, so addressing the problem as we build by building
the right types of housing will ultimately lower our per-capita
footprint. By addressing our housing problem we’ll also reduce
emissions from commuting.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `In many ways the Transportation revolution I have mentioned
brings with it an energy revolution. Some recent studies point to
between 7,000 and 10,000 electric vehicles in Boulder in less than
10 years. We can make a loose estimate that the average battery
will hold 30 kW of electricity. By 2028 we will have roughly 300
MW of stored electricity moving throughout Boulder. There are a
plethora of creative solutions that leverage this new abundance.
We have every ability and reason to plan for this future and that
means we can start taking steps now. We should partner with our
newest neighbor, Google, to explore and analyze the transportation
and energy revolution. Google is the backbone of autonomous
vehicles and will be crucial in shaping the future of Boulder.
This partnership should provide insight on how to prepare policy,
infrastructure and management to prepare for this new future. `
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `
• Boulder residents are actually driving less and increasingly
making transportation modal shifts.
• But our per-capita carbon footprint is higher, due in part to
high in-commuting and a significantly higher daytime population.
• We can lower our carbon footprint by actively addressing the
three pillars of carbon emissions:
- Buildings – we should reducing emissions from residential
and commercial buildings.
- Transportation – we should reduce emissions from transportation.
- Utilities – we should reduce emissions in the way we generate
electricity.
• With regard to buildings, we should work to enact policies
requiring new buildings to be net zero energy use.
• In new commercial office buildings, we should incorporate
electric vehicle recharging stations running off roof top solar,
and preferred parking for EV’s.
• We should promote and enable solar gardens.
• Regarding transportation, see my earlier comments addressing
this subject.
• Regarding the greening of utilities, see my earlier comments
addressing this.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `One of the reasons I love Boulder so much is because we can draw
upon both the expertise of our business and tech communities
and some of the leading climate scientist in the world. Strategically
engaging Boulder’s business and scientific communities presents
an awesome and unique opportunity to create smart technologies
that help encourage greater use of renewables and track energy
consumption that can be then replicated and improved upon
nationwide.

The affordability and accessibility of renewable power has to be a
priority. This includes reviewing and bolstering programs that provide
grants and rebates on solar and wind power for homeowners.
Finally, I think it will be important to explore whether individual
homeowners and users of solar energy in Boulder will be allowed
to generate and keep their own power, versus buying it from the
grid.`
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `• reduce in-commuting, especial in single-occupancy vehicles.
• get IBM to go 100% renewable like other high-tech companies.
Google figured it out; why not IBM?
• build net-zero buildings and continue to facilitate and incentivize
energy retrofits in existing homes and commercial/industrial
buildings.
• get a real mix of uses in our neighborhoods – where housing,
offices and services (like grocers, repair shops) are nearby – by
better planning, rezoning, and land-use decisions.
• continue working on waste reduction and recycling.
• ratchet up the carbon-reducing modes in our transportation
plan – with universal eco-passes, more electric vehicles
and charging stations, more circulator buses/shuttles and
bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly paths/walkways, and begin
experimenting with autonomous vehicles in partnership with
Google, Apple and others. We need an updated Transportation
Master Plan that sets ambitious goals, up-to-date measurement
systems, is funded by fees that affect behaviors, and
includes specific projects to achieve the goals.`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `There are a number of measures we can implement to lower
the carbon impact of our built environment and transportation
systems: require new development to be net zero; combine jobs,
services and housing in careful mixed development based on area
or neighborhood plans; transition to the use of electric vehicles;
implement incentives and disincentives to shift to alternative
modes of transportation, which have been described in above
questions; require servers for big tech companies to run on renewable
energy sources. The City should also develop and incentive
program to encourage the improvement of energy performance
of existing housing, and establish a community-wide Ecopass to
encourage use of public transit.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `Wealth begets bigger houses, higher resource consumption, more
driving, more flying; hence resulting in a bigger carbon footprint.
It can be mitigated by constraining consumption (house size),
constraining driving (both in reducing road access and constraining
parking), enhancing transit (both the network, dedicating bus
lanes and by eliminating barriers with programs like EcoPass),
electric car infrastructure and enhancing biking and walking options.
Mixed use development and densifying in certain areas like
major community transit network corridors (under the backdrop
of sub-community, area and/or neighborhood planning) are also
appropriate approaches. And critically, a municipally owned
electric utility predominantly powered by renewables would take
the biggest bite out of the Boulder’s carbon apple. And, of course,
building energy efficiency measures. `
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `Increased electrification of all building systems, increased electrification
of transportation, and an increasingly carbon-emissions-free
system of electricity generation will all contribute to a lower
average ‘carbon footprint’ for Boulder residents and businesses. A
community-wide Ecopass for Boulder residents and workers can
only help with the emissions issue, and well-considered transit-oriented
development (in the TVAP and along Broadway and Arapahoe,
among others) are other strategies to reduce emissions. A
municipal electric utility in Boulder would put these decisions into
the hands of Boulder residents.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'inclusionary-housing',
    number: 12,
    question: 'Do you support Boulder’s inclusionary housing ordinance requirements to produce permanently affordable housing? Should the requirements include permanently affordable middle income housing? And, what do you think is the appropriate mix of permanently affordable rental versus ownership units?',
    questionShort: 'Inclusionary Housing',
    topics: ['housing-affordability'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `I do support the inclusionary housing requirements, at the level
Council agreed on earlier in the year (12%). I feel it’s the right
balance of adding cost to development (which will get passed on)
and building a fund for affordable housing. I have my doubts about
including it for middle income housing. I fear it will add too much
cost to a normal person’s dwelling. I call it “clearing out the middle”
because new middle income workers won’t be able to afford
it. We will have people on the extreme high income level and on
the very low. Wiping out the middle: is that what we want?

You want data? From the study: “A 5% middle income inclusionary
housing obligation represents an additional cost of $9-$12/square
foot for most project types, which would represent an increase of
37-54% over the cost of satisfying Boulder’s existing 20% inclusionary
requirement.” Folks, that is real money. Who will pay for this?
Some people think the developers will pay. No, that will not happen.
The developers will pass the cost to the renters, thus making
housing even more unaffordable for our workers. The study went
on to say: “A new 5 percent requirement could be absorbed by a
10-15% decrease in land values.” Who here thinks land values will
decrease by that amount?

The report cautions that if developers are not able to afford sites,
housing production could be constrained for a period until values
recover. There you have it. Supply and demand does impact
housing prices. So, I am not supportive of adding more cost to our
workers who are already burdened by high cost of living.

One more thing: we could do a simple thing to expedite affordable
housing through the arduous planning process. If we cut the process
from 1.5 years to 3 months, the carrying costs and risk would
be lessened, and the developer could pass the cost savings to the
renters/homeowners.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `Our current inclusionary housing residential and non-residential
requirements and cash-in-lieu (CIL) fees are close to what Boulder’s
current real estate market can bear. CIL works because it
benefits from a multiplier effect created by the state and federal
housing subsidies and tax incentives they attract.

Where such subsidies and incentives fall short is with the development
of middle-income housing, Boulder’s greatest housing
challenge today. With state law prohibiting mandated local rent
control, only city-owned rental units can reasonably be expected
to remain “permanently” affordable.

However, 50% of our housing stock in Boulder is rental today.
Home ownership is the most important wealth-building option for
most people. This must be taken into account.

For this and other reasons, regional transportation/ housing
solutions must urgently be explored. Boulder cannot meet this
challenge alone.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `Yes, I support the inclusionary housing ordinance. Yes, I would
support steps to broaden that into middle income level housing
(depending on how that is defined).

The mix of permanently affordable rental/ownership units is somewhat
a moot point until the “Telluride” law is adjusted to allow for
rent controlled rental units.`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `Yes, I do support Boulder’s inclusionary housing ordinance to produce
permanently affordable housing - and yes, it should include
permanently affordable middle income units - however, I do not
support increasing the requirements for on-site or cash-in-lieu. I
believe that putting all of our emphasis on our IH program in order
to solve our affordability problems is short-sighted at best. Our IH
program needs some structural & functional changes. Currently,
the financial requirements to qualify for this program do not scale
with age. The program is not always approachable for users either.
Finally, the program incentivizes building fewer larger, more expensive
homes, rather than many smaller homes. Rather than focusing
all of our attention on our IH program, we should be working with
the methods I outlined in #6. We should also work with alternative
opportunities to create affordability, such as Community Land
Trusts.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `I support the inclusionary housing ordinance, particularly for those
at the lowest end of the income scale. Many of our lowest-paying
jobs in the city will simply not pay enough for these employees
to find adequate housing and we need to ensure a diversity of
incomes and people in Boulder. As the income scale increases into
middle-income categories, we need to look at market solutions to
help address our housing needs to avoid subsidizing a significant
percentage of our housing and save subsidies for people that need
it most. We need to focus on adding housing options that provide
compact, livable places to serve middle class people and families.
Rental-to-ownership ratio could mirror the rest of the city — 50%
/ 50%. However, we need to address problems with our current
system for ownership, including better handling of the case where
a person’s income increases greatly after purchasing a deed-restricted
home.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `I do support the inclusionary housing ordinance and I think it
should be expanded to middle income housing. Boulder is a very
successful city with a huge job market, but housing has not kept
pace. Many individuals make enough to not qualify for low-income
housing but nowhere near enough to afford even a small
condo. We need a new tier of housing requirements for these
people. Without the possibility of ownership we can’t hope to
build a diverse and invested community. The American Dream is
built on owning your own home, so I believe we should make as
many permanently affordable units for ownership as possible.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `We should aim to increase our middle-income housing inventory.
We have done a good job in the past few years building up permanently
affordable housing stock so it’s time to keep balance in the
economic diversity of our overall housing inventory. The middle
class is being squeezed out of Boulder and these working families
are essential to the vibrancy of our businesses and schools. Before
changing the percentage mix of affordable versus ownership units
we have bigger priorities. First modify our “Cash in lieu” program
so that we are no longer creating a financial incentive to buy out of
and dilute our housing goals. We also need to slow the loss of affordable
units from our inventory. I strongly support studying and
implementing “community land trusts” to stabilize the affordable
housing inventory. If we don’t stop the hemorrhaging of the units
we will be building in pursuit of our affordable housing goals in
perpetuity.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `
• I greatly support Boulder’s inclusionary housing requirement.
• In fact, I support increasing it significantly – with the caveat
that it’s built onsite at new housing developments, rather than
off-site.
• The original legislative intent of inclusionary housing was that
society benefits when people of multiple socio-economic
backgrounds live next to each other. I fully agree.
• Why then, do developers get a “free pass” when it comes to
their onsite mix of housing? We’re seeing 100% homogenous,
market-rate developments onsite – the opposite of inclusionary
housing’s intent.
• Yes, I believe the requirements should include permanently
affordable middle income housing, to avoid a hollowing out
of Boulder’s middle class, and a “barbell-shaped curve” of
income distribution in Boulder.
• I’d like to see greater emphasis placed on ownership units.
There are the obvious hurdles of down payments. I’d explore
ways to loan would-be home buyers money for their downpayments,
so their up-front costs aren’t as formidable.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `I believe our middle-income professionals are at great risk on
housing issues because they exceed the income requirements for
affordable housing, and yet cannot afford to buy in Boulder. I myself
am part of this group, and I acutely understand the pressures
facing middle-income professionals and families.
Our priority must be the creation of housing options for a broad
spectrum of incomes. An inclusionary approach helps retain our
sense of community, creates an environment to nurture, and welcome
a workforce that can contribute to our sense of community.
On Council, I will embrace a sensible housing policy—one that
includes the direct city purchase of affordable rental units, as well
as incentives for housing development in commercial zones—to
create a stronger sense of belonging and community. And I believe
there are other benefits to this approach, including economically,
environmentally, and quality of life (including reduced traffic
congestion). `
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `Yes. The city’s stated goal is to maintain economic diversity, so let’s
do that. We are in a hole --losing more middle- and low-income
residents each year—and we’ve got to stop digging that hole
deeper. I support increasing the inclusionary housing requirements
to something approaching 50% and include both low and medium
income units. I know that our community will be more vibrant and
fulfilled when a range of people from service workers to teachers
and CU professors can afford to live here. The jobs-housing linkage
fees at $12/ft2 are less than 10% of the real cost of providing
affordable housing for the average workers. If this were increased,
we could fund more affordable housing and discourage spec
developers. I think we would do well to have more owner-occupied
units, but accomplishing it will be complicated and difficult
because of state regulations. Ideally, I’d like to see a 50-50 mix. `
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `Yes, but improvements are needed, which the council is currently
considering. These include increasing the percentage of affordable
units from 20% to 25% and creating incentives for more of the
units to be constructed on the project site rather than through use
of the cash in lieu option. Permanently affordable housing for middle
income residents is an increasing need as housing prices continue
to climb steeply, and requirements to provide this range of
housing affordability should be included in the updated Inclusionary
Housing program. Currently and in past years, the mix of rental
versus ownership units in Boulder has been split about 50/50. The
market determines what the mix will be, and as a practical matter,
at the present time the market and general real estate environment
doesn’t favor permanently affordable housing units that are
owned by the occupant. I believe that the City should become
more active in developing deed-restricted occupant-ownership
affordable housing which would remain permanently affordable
but provide the additional long-term security and other desirable
aspects of ownership.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `The IH program is an important tool for addressing housing affordability,
but it is insufficient. Relying on creating 80% unaffordable
housing units to provide 20% affordable does little to maintain
the percentage of affordable units relative to overall units. The
percentage IH should be expanded to also include middle income
(in process.) Real strides could come from preservation of housing
that is already affordable to middle income households (currently
mostly rental.) To accomplish this, the city should outright buy
or facilitate residents buying their apartment complexes, mobile
home parks etc.

There isn’t a universal advantage to owning a home over renting
when considering all the costs of ownership including maintenance
and opportunity costs. Transactions costs alone require a
minimum of 5 years recovery. Low and moderate income households
have less stable jobs, are more likely to move and may not
own a home long enough to recover their original investment.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `I fully support the inclusionary housing requirements as they currently
exist, but also support putting commercial development on
par with residential development in terms of what new development
pays towards affordable housing. Development of commercial
space should also pay a roughly 20% share towards affordable
housing – taxing housing to pay for housing only makes sense if all
development is taxed at the same level. And I also support housing
assistance for the bottom half of the middle-income bracket, especially
through down-payment assistance that is loaned in exchange
for permanent ownership affordability.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'adus',
    number: 13,
    question: 'Accessory dwelling units – otherwise known as “granny flats” – have been considered as one option for expanding affordable housing options in established neighborhoods. Please explain your position on whether or not ADUs are an appropriate affordable housing tool for our community?',
    questionShort: 'Accessory Dwelling Units',
    topics: ['housing-affordability'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `ADU’s are a great in-fill option for our community. They add incremental
housing in smaller units, managed by homeowners on
their own property. For the property owner, an ADU can provide
income, helping many people stay in their home. In addition,
for older homeowners, they can rent to someone who can help
them on the property or even move into the ADU and rent their
main home (or let their kids move in). For the renter, they have
an opportunity to live in a neighborhood setting, and the renters
typically integrate successfully into the neighborhood. Studies
show that car usage is lower among ADU dwellers, so parking and
traffic do not become issues. Environmentally, they are a dream,
driving up density slightly without the negative side effects of large
developments.

62% of our citizens supported ADU’s in the Boulder Valley Comp
Plan study. They are absolutely an appropriate affordable housing
tool that should be mainstreamed into the community. And for
those people who suggest they should be deed-restricted, I don’t
understand that concept at all. This country was founded on individual
property rights. Let’s not screw things up by making it too
complicated.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `ADUs should be permitted more widely. Some of Boulder’s most
underutilized assets are our existing empty bedrooms. I have
proposed the following revisions to Boulder’s existing ADU regulations:

- allow creations of ADUs in detached accessory structures in the
RL-1 and RL-2 zone districts
- incorporate the City’s OAU provisions into the ADU regulations,
eliminating the need for separate rules
- eliminate the two-person ADU occupancy limit (zone district and
building code occupancy rules will apply)
- eliminate the neighborhood area restriction and waiting list rules
- eliminate the “one off-street parking space” requirement or modify
the variance standards

We will then have one set of rules that permit accessory units to
be located within a principal structure or an accessory structure
(including tiny homes) in all of Boulder’s residential zone districts,
while preserving the size, setback, par`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `Yes, ADUs are an appropriate tool that allows homeowners in a
variety of circumstances the ability to make their homes more
affordable, bring different generations together, and provide
more support and resilience for the community as a whole. Just
like distributed solar has benefits for the community, distributed,
private, affordable housing can have great community benefit. If
neighborhoods are concerned about more cars and traffic then
there may need to be parking/auto restrictions that fairly span the
neighborhood.`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `I do believe that granny flats are an appropriate tool to increase
affordable housing options. Relaxing regulations around granny
flats will have two positive effects: 1. It will increase our rental inventory
(and theoretically many of these new rentals will be more
affordable than in large new complexes) and it will put downward
pressure on our rental market. 2. It will make homeownership
more affordable (and even possible to new buyers) if a portion of
the home can be used for additional income. We can do all of this
with a simple regulatory change - and it has the added benefit of
not significantly impacting neighborhood character.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `Accessory dwelling units have the opportunity to be a win / win
/ win for our community. ADUs can be a win for homeowners
to generate additional income on their land, a win for renters
providing additional options to rent a small unit or an entire home,
and a win for the city tax base by providing incremental additional
property taxes without much additional investment in services
required. Boulder’s existing ADU ordinance needs to be updated
to allow more homeowners to build an ADU while minimizing impacts
on existing neighborhoods. Effective options we may employ
are: increasing the number of ADUs we’d allow, remove off-street
parking requirements, and allow more flexibility on ADU size. We
need to move forward on allowing ADUs given the broad support
in the city and the real benefits they would provide.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `While this option is not ideal as compared to more large scale
affordable housing projects this does provide a way to use existing
space to help more people live where they work. ADUs also provide
a source of income for people who are priced out by increasing
property taxes and mayjj help many middle and low income
people retain their homes. As an added benefit utilizing existing
space for more people will help lower the carbon footprint of the
space.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `First of all I don’t like the term “granny flats”. We have a tremendously
active population of people over the age of 60. Many of
them can run, bike and ski circles around their middle age counterparts.
Plus in this town these units are valuable to more than
other groups like researchers on sabbatical and artists to name a
few. Let’s stick with the term ADU’s. I support the use of ADU’s as a
tool for addressing affordable housing. These units are more than
just affordable places to live. They also offer a means of auxiliary
income to many in Boulder who are on fixed income and struggling
to keep up with our increasing property taxes. To avoid the same
frustration and fear we had centered around Co-Ops, I will work
hard to engage these neighborhoods in a constructive conversations
align their needs with that of the rest of our community.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `
• I believe ADU’s can represent an affordable housing option.
• However, one-size-fits-all approaches often backfire.
• Certain Boulder neighborhoods are chronically under greater
stress, impact, and rate of change than others.
• It’s always important to seek good fit, engage residents, and
ascertain areas that can accommodate more change.
• An excellent way to do this is with neighborhood plans,
written in large part by neighborhood residents – who best
understand the on-the-ground conditions in their neighborhoods
– with broad community goals in mind.
• I’m an optimist. I don’t believe neighborhoods will say no to
any and all change. I know many residents, in many neighborhoods.
Boulder residents are progressive. Nearly all understand
that their neighborhoods need to address community
wide issues.
• They just want to be part of the planning. People are more
accepting of change when they are part of the process, rather
than having decisions handed down to them from “on high.”`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `I support ADUs as one of a range of options for expanding the
range of housing affordability options. They also have the benefit
of supporting our environmental sustainability goals in the
promotion of more efficient building designs. At the same time,
we need to be sensitive to neighborhood concerns about higher
density uses. It is a balance that considers the amount of available
parking in certain residential zones and other impacts associated
with higher occupancy rates.

ADUs provide another element of affordable housing in our
community, especially as they can make home ownership more
affordable through the creation of opportunities for cost-sharing.
And, I think ADUs are a potential option to ensure that our elderly
can age in place affordably.`
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `I support ADUs in theory, but the reality is complicated because
we don’t have proper regs in place to protect their intent. ADU’s
may provide a small number of affordable rental units but they are
temporary. When a house + ADU sells, the sale price will increase
and without rent control, the ADU will no longer provide affordable
housing. At the time of sale, ADUs become a windfall for the
owners that get to have them under our existing rules. Increases
in the number of ADUs must be considered in a neighborhood
context with full public participation. We need to invest in developing
sub-community plans as described in the updated BVCP,
so residents, neighbors, businesses, land owners and city come
together and define the vision, goals and actions desired for each
part of our city based on its unique character. Plans must define
changes desired, needed, and appropriate for the broad array of
services, businesses, transportation/access, and housing affordable
for economically diverse residents. `
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `As part of a neighborhood plan, the addition of ADU’s would
provide a useful housing option. It is not a solution to long-term
affordability since the value of the residence to which an ADU is
attached will increase with the added value of another unit as
part of the property. The owner who develops the ADU will reap
a windfall when selling his/her property, and then the price will
respond to the housing market by escalating. It would, however,
provide some additional housing supply to the market in a manner
which may be more acceptable to neighborhoods than other
measures.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `Yes, ADUs are appropriate, with two caveats, size should not
exceed 1,000 sqft (average house size in 1950 was 983 sqft) and
should be deed restricted to provide true affordability over time.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `Accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and owner accessory units (OAUs)
are both potential paths to gentle infill which serve homeowners
and the community in various ways. For homeowners, these two
dwelling unit types allow for income generation, offsetting high
housing prices, and allowing aging in place. For the community,
additional housing supply allows for more choice and housing
availability. After a sufficient process for public engagement and
input, I could support increased ADU/OAU density, removing the
ban on these structures in new development, and making the
transfer and licensing of these structure much easier.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'growth-development',
    number: 14,
    question: 'What’s your vision for Boulders growth and development over the next 20 years? ',
    questionShort: 'Growth & Development',
    topics: ['growth-development'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `As with everything, there should be balance in growth and development.
We all feel negative about the current level of development,
but it was at a standstill during the 2009-2012 economic
downturn. On balance, we have still grown .7% over the past 10
years (housing units), under our growth limit of 1%.

The City has done an admirable job in controlling growth, as dictated
by the Blue Line, the Danish Plan, and by City charter. It’s why
we all love Boulder so much. Surrounded by Open Space, limited
by growth and height limits, it still feels like a small town (albeit
growing in the past few years, and strangled with traffic at times).
But, compared to surrounding communities, we have managed the
growth superbly.

The downside of our excellent growth management is that we
are unaffordable and completely non-diverse. So, we must decide
what we want to be. Do we want to be an elderly, wealthy white
community or a thriving diverse community? If we want to become
more diverse and affordable, we will have to make decisions
that increase the availability of housing. But in a balanced way.

Regarding the jobs/housing imbalance, I believe most people
support having jobs in our community, as evidenced by our Community
Surveys. We are lucky that we have businesses that can still
afford to base their operations in Boulder.

We just spent $4M developing the 2015 Boulder Valley Comprehensive
Plan. We need to prioritize activities to move toward
execution of that plan. It should be a measured, well-thought-out
plan, executed over time. And it should include a view of the entire
county and beyond regarding housing and transportation.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `My hope and belief is that Boulder will continue to evolve in
surprising and delightful ways, encouraging more of our in-commuters
to move back to carefully designed, higher density, village
and subcommunity centers that will enhance our quality of life.
The total number of residents will increase, but not beyond the
number of current residents and employees who already occupy
Boulder every workday.

Transportation and energy innovation, coupled with cooperative
regional planning, will reduce the carbon-footprint of our existing
commuter-shed. Reconfiguration of our single-use land use
enclaves into more complete neighborhoods will gradually unwind
our failed 60-year auto-dependent sprawl experiment.

Entrepreneurial innovation will continue and Boulder will be a
better place to work, live and raise a family than it has ever been. `
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `My vision for Boulder is to be a beautiful and compact city that
is highly walkable, easy to navigate in all-weather by bike, with a
diversity of people enjoying our well-maintained Open Space. I
envision a city that is architecturally stimulating with great public
art. I like to think that Boulder will be essentially de-carbonized for
electrical power and most transport needs. I want Boulder to be a
city that has met its goals for emissions, housing affordability, and
transportation options by boldly acting on those goals in creative
and innovative ways.`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `My vision for Boulder’s growth and development is that we continue
to be the creative, visionary, collaborative City we have always
been and find solutions to problems in places where they may not
be obvious. Let’s continue to treat our economy as the eco-system
that it is. On housing, I take a forward-thinking approach: Let’s
look at opportunities to integrate housing and commercial such as
I outlined in 6.3. Let’s work together to create affordable housing
solutions. Let’s be honest when something isn’t working and fix it.
On development, let’s encourage innovation and beautiful design.
Let’s encourage innovative green building. Let’ continue to be a
thriving hub of innovation & entrepreneurship and let’s further
embrace the arts, cultural diversity, and all incomes.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `We need to accept that Boulder will grow and change, but we
need to be diligent to change in ways that remain true to our values
and culture. When people talk about the character of neighborhoods,
we need to remember that character is more than the
built environment — it also includes the lives and culture of the
people who live there. Our current direction is a place where few
can afford to live and we need to change that. We’ve surrounded
the city with an incredible open space system which has provided
huge benefits — and now it’s up to us to address the tough
realities. I see Boulder maintaining the environment and great
amenities while consistently moving forward to make better use of
our land and transportation systems to ensure Boulder remains an
open and accessible place to live and visit.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `Boulder needs to spend the next 20 years reducing inequality and
providing opportunity for all of its community members. Through
representation of all citizens regardless of income and background
we can build a Boulder that is prepared to face struggles as a tightly-bound
community. Focusing on getting people to live where
they work will build this sense of community. As we travel this
path we need to keep our growth sustainable so that the positive
aspects that attract people to Boulder are maintained. `
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `There are really three parts to growth and development: commercial
development, residential development and transportation.
Balanced communities recognize that these three pillars of growth
and development must be planned for and implemented in lockstep
with each other. As soon as one of them gets out of sync the
others will suffer. We are seeing this uneven shift here in Boulder.
Our commercial development has gotten ahead of our housing
and our transportation system lags even further behind that. We
must put our efforts into our housing and transportation solutions
to get them back on par with our commercial development. We
have a transportation revolution coming in the next 10-15 years
that we must prepare for. In many ways the future of transportation
will likely become the driving force of what, how and where
we develop in the years to come and not the other way around like
it is today.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `
• First, I believe in facing reality. We are approaching build-out.
• Environmental science holds that every bioregion on earth has
a certain carrying capacity.
• Boulder exists in a semi-arid climate, which may become more
so under climate change. Availability of water is one of our
principle natural limits.
• Exceeding carrying capacity carries with it myriad risks.
• Abiding within carrying capacity doesn’t equal stagnation, or
zero change. Communities constantly change, and so will a
Boulder that exists within its limits. Progress on all fronts can
and should continue, toward:
- Greater affordability
- Greater inclusivity and diversity
- Greater social justice
• But as we approach build-out, I believe the growth and development
we have should serve the people – the residents
of Boulder – in areas such as community benefit, affordable
housing, local shopping and services, public art, community
commons and gathering spaces, etc.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `Smart, attractive, and vibrant.

We need to have development that meets our environmental,
affordable housing, and livability goals.

We need to promote architecture that encourages creativity and
attractive design.

And, we need to have a mix of uses that are active and lively and
meet the needs and cultural and entertainment goals of our community.`
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `Boulder is still of a size where governance can be done on a first
name basis – where residents know the names of their elected
representatives and can talk to them. We don’t want to lose that.
Growth and development should be limited to the extent necessary
to preserve the quality of life we’ve all invested in. Based on
the BVCP survey, that means we need to make sure we can see
the mountain views, ensure affordability, and sustain our beloved
Open Space system. As we address our climate change goals,
we’ll see multiple changes in our transportation system. That will
provide opportunities for gentle infill, and if we can create the kind
of inclusive planning processes envisioned in the updated BVCP so
that residents have a real say in shaping the future of their neighborhoods,
our town will be able to grow in a way that does indeed
preserve the quality of life we all treasure. `
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `My vision for Boulder’s growth is that it should be limited to the
extent necessary to preserve the quality of the community that
we have invested in over the years. The City’s thoughtfulness, care
and restraint has given us a city that has accessible governance,
its citizens, who can know their city council members by their first
names, can call or email them and get responses, and feel that we
have some control over the future of our community. I want to
preserve that aspect of Boulder. I also want to ensure that Boulder
keeps its character and the desirable physical aspects which have
been so successful in making this where we want to live.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `It is 2037. Boulder’s neighborhood planning efforts have been
completed for 10 years. Neighborhood plans have served as vehicles
for evolution. Because of these plans, change has occurred at
a pace that has kept residents satisfied. The development process,
modified nearly 20 years ago, works well. Every redevelopment
proposal that has received height exemptions provides community
amenities highly valued by the community. Solar powered autonomous
vehicles have reduced traffic by nearly 80%. All residents
are very mobile and can get to where they need to go easily and
affordably (low cost municipal solar power!) thanks to forward
thinking policies on driverless cars. The vast majority of parking
structures have been adaptively re-used as storage units. Storage
units have been remodeled to serve as housing. Boulder is still
very desirable, but so are all other communities along the front
range thanks to smarter land use policies throughout the United
States.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `I support a continued focus on keeping the Boulder quality of life
very high. We live in a beautiful natural setting, and have inherited
a community developed by leaders who insisted on environmental
considerations and a careful development process which has
given us the wonderful City we live in today. We need to continue
that thoughtful approach to development, critically questioning
whether our land use and zoning designations are serving to steer
us to the Boulder in which we want to live. It is exceedingly clear
that Boulder is a regional employment center, and our current zoning
for 45,000 new jobs but only 6,000 new dwelling units is only
going to produce increasing congestion and emissions. If re-elected,
one of my goals will be to take a look at the structural issues
around commercial vs residential development, and make adjustments
which do not exacerbate our in-commuting challenges. `
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'civil-discourse',
    number: 15,
    question: 'What are your specific strategies for promoting civil public discourse around growth and development? Please indicate what level of commitment you would have in regards to collaboration, consensus building and joint problem solving to address this issue?',
    questionShort: 'Civil Discourse',
    topics: ['public-engagement'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `I just met with PLAN Boulder to review their Housing Strategy.
While I didn’t agree with everything in the plan, we came to a
large degree of consensus. I will request the City to analyze some
of their recommendations, and I hope to support them in making
something happen. While I know they will not endorse me in
this election, there is no reason we shouldn’t work together to
accomplish what we do agree on.

The City recently hosted a group to analyze pubic involvement.
While I don’t agree with all their recommendations, I can find
some things to latch onto. We really must work together if we’re
going to achieve our environmental goals (especially).

Finally, I’d like to address the notion of “change”. Most people
detest change. All of this is about change management. It’s
a tough cultural and social issue that is not easy to solve. We
should involve some of our best leaders in the community and
try to get more broad representation from people who don’t
normally participate in the process.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": `Our democracy cannot survive in an environment suffused with
tirade-driven, bumper-sticker logic. Uncivil discourse scorches the
podium and drives reasonable -often younger, diverse and family -
voices from the room. Social media can help, but it is no panacea.
Responsible decision-makers must acknowledge those who attend
hearings, and those whose community DNA is not represented in
the room.

The recommendations in the Public Policy Working Group’s report
hold some promise, but right-sizing process to specifically suit the
issues being addressed will be critical. There is nothing more likely
to discourage participation than process for its own sake.

As a trained mediator and co-founder of the Boulder County Bar
Association’s first Alternate Dispute Resolution committee (1986),
I hope to help improve the tenor and substance of our public hearings,
so that more people will be satisfied with the outcomes, even
when they don’t agree with them.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": `I support the findings of the city’s working group on public process.
In Boulder, growth and development are contentious and
there is no level of public process that can get us to 100% consensus.
I am deeply committed to the core values of public participation
and input, combined with real leadership in a democratic
process. But we have to remember that just because things might
not go our way, it does not mean our voice was not heard, or that
we have been disrespected. It may mean that we as citizens need
to engage earlier, be more thoughtful, and contemplate what we
can say yes to versus simply saying no. The best way to counter
fear of change is to lead with vision and clear community goals.`
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": `I am strongly committed to honest, open public discourse. If I
could accomplish one thing around public discourse regarding
growth and development, it would be better presentation of the
facts to the public and the by-right opportunities that exist on
parcels. I have talked with more than 100 community members in
preparation for this election and many think that they are choosing
between open space or parks on parcels, not between the
by-right opportunity and the proposal. It is critical that we have
well-informed public discourse.`
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `We need to focus on working on our biggest challenges and the
areas that we can find the most agreement. Because change in areas
related to low-density residential neighborhoods, open space,
and the growth of our economy are so significant, we need to have
a broad process to get input from people in the city, particularly
those who are under-represented in our city government and
public processes—people who rent, people who are younger, and
people of color. We need to bring people from all parts of the city
together in our public process to understand and gain empathy
in order to reach consensus, and look for opportunity to move
forward on options for which we can build coalitions. I’m very
committed to bringing people together and ensuring that I will
represent all people and viewpoints in the city.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": `I think it’s very important to respect the people of Boulder who
have lived here a long time. This is a unique and beautiful place in
the world, and they live here because of it. I can’t fault anyone for
wanting to keep Boulder the way it has been in past years. While
keeping this in mind we have to prepare for changes that are coming
regardless of our desires. Our city’s success has put a crunch
on many people who make its uniqueness possible. Citizens need a
voice through all levels of government for the young and working
class people who just want a future as part of our community.
Without including different perspectives we won’t be a diverse and
inclusive community, which leads to poor decision making. Good
discourse starts with full representation, and that’s what we need
now more than ever.`
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `This years report from the Public Participation Working Group
identified a lot of problems and laid out some very good strategies.
This report needs to be taken seriously in order for us to
lower the temperature and reduce the polarization that is crippling
our community. In particular the “9 steps to public engagement”
offers a compelling mechanism from which we can build trust and
foster and inclusive public process. I will support “sub community
plans” to help align neighborhood and City goals. By focusing on
areas of agreement we build a foundation of trust that sets us up
for success when we face more challenging issues.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `
• I’m extremely committed to collaboration, consensus building
and joint problem solving. I’m eager to enact the Public Participation
Working Group recommendations.
• Many recent City decisions and policies have created winners
and losers, contributing to polarization.
• As a Boulder native, it wounds me to see rifts in our community.
We can do better.
• I’m well situated to facilitate collaboration, given the worlds I
straddle as a:
- Boulder native
- 34-year old candidate
- Alumnus of affordable housing who saved enough to buy a
home
- Part of the nurses-teachers-firefighter community that’s of
great concern to Boulder
- Resident of the City portion of Gunbarrel
- Businesswoman and small business owner.
• I have profound faith in Boulder’s incredibly skilled, educated,
creative residents. Surely we can affect win-win solutions and
model this for other communities. Let’s exemplify a community
that eschews winner-and-loser outcomes, and instead, goes
the extra distance to create win-wins.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": `Through my various public service and volunteer roles, I have seen
firsthand the importance of proactive civic engagement, openness
and transparency, and a willingness to listen.

As the Chair of TAB, I have proactively forged close relationships
with neighborhood associations, advocacy groups, the business
community, and climate experts to promote transparency, accountability,
and innovation in our transportation policies that
promote safer streets.

Most recently, as an important step forward in our commitment
to transportation safety, TAB recommended reinstatement of the
Neighborhood Speed Mitigation Program. The goal of NSMP is to
make neighborhood streets safer by reducing automobile traffic
speeds and creating improved passage for bicyclists and pedestrians,
while balancing the need to maintain emergency response
times.

The public process surrounding the NSMP was critical: we held numerous
Town Halls throughout town, and actively solicited more
than 1000 in-person and online comments that helped guide our
work.`
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `I support the Public Participation Working Group’s report and
recommendations (PPWG) for changing the culture and listening
to the public. Implementation of the PPWG requires Council
leadership, and I am committed to that. I am committed to
engaging citizens in conversation, making sure that their concerns
are sought from the beginning, and promoting collaboration and
decision-making WITH people. Examples of improvements I will
champion: (a) Our development review process is so flawed that
any development of any size turns into a “food fight.” Defining a
planning process that creates more certainty, reduces the time
staff and developers spend in a “lets-make-a-deal” process, and
openly engages the public early is a must. (b) On Council, we used
to invite knowledgeable people to come and testify and ask them
questions. We actually paid attention to them! We should tap multiple
experts to inform our community decisions on issues ranging
from our energy future to affordable housing and social services`
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": `I would support strong leadership by city council to implement the
recommendations of the Public Participation Committee Report.
I that there should be significant citizen involvement earlier in
the development process. I would strongly support amendments
to bring more clarity and certainty to our Development Review
process. Currently it is so flexible and uncertain that many developments
turn into a lengthy battle over what seems a City’ “let’s
make a deal” development process. This is an inefficient and
expensive process for the developer, the City and for the public,
evidence of which is that very few are happy with the results. My
approach to this conundrum would be for the City to take a much
more active role in the conceptual and practical decision-making
associated with new development project, so that it can provide
clearer and more useful guidance at an early stage, rather than
reacting to proposals from developers. I have a very high level of
commitment to collaboration, consensus building and joint problem
solving; however, I would start with an process designed to get
the results that we want, not thrash around trying to get agreement
out of our current unsatisfactory procedures.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `The Public Participation Working Group spent the better part of a
year developing recommendations for good public engagement:
A clearly defined problem, thoughtfully planned public engagement,
all voices are encouraged and included, public contribution
and civil participation are fostered, process is trustworthy and
transparent process. These core principles should be applied to
conversations around growth and development. I have a high level
of commitment to collaboration, consensus building and joint
problem solving and worked at bringing both sides to the middle
on one particularly contentious issue last year. We must all unbury
our heels for good public discourse to occur.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `I have tried to model civility over the last 6 years, even as I have
had vigorous disagreements with others in our community on land
use and development issues. I am committed to civil discourse on
all ‘wicked’ problems facing Boulder (homelessness, municipalization,
climate change response, growth and development, etc).
Local politics is the level at which we must model the behavior
that we hope to return to our state and federal politics, and I am
personally committed to being able to disagree without being
disagreeable. I routinely sit down with people that I disagree with
on policy but can still wish them the best in their personal life. I
consider this one of my strengths as a leader.`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'important-issues',
    number: 16,
    question: 'What is the most important issue to you in Boulder and what kind of leadership will you provide for addressing it?',
    questionShort: 'Important Issues',
    topics: ['candidate-insight'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `Housing is the most important issue. I will continue to study the
subject, read books, meet with all sides on the issue, and try to
become more knowledgeable. I will try to get Council to simplify
our codes and processes, and I will support initiatives and developments
that focus on affordable housing. I am passionate about
providing “housing first” for our un-housed, especially families
with kids, and I will be looking to clear the roadblocks. `
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `Effective Governance is the most important issue in Boulder.. It is
the umbrella from which all the issues we have discussed either
succeeds or fails. Effective governance starts with building trust
and accountability within the community. In order to build back
that trust, city council must take the time to listen, engage and
facilitate public participation on the issues facing our community.
This takes time, and with the City’s current agenda we don’t provide
adequate time for it to be fruitful. This means that we have
to choose “quality” issues over “quantity” to foster the changes
needed for an inclusive community and democracy. We need to
resist the national polarization and remember that change percolates
up, it doesn’t trickle down. `
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": `The most important issue to me is that of community. I have a
track record of listening to and working with Boulder's citizens,
including the university's students, staff, and faculty. If elected,
I'll carry that strong commitment into office and, to start, work
diligently to put the public participation working group's recommendations
into practice.

I think current government isn't listening to the community about
issues from affordability to climate change to community participation
in government. Boulder's success in attracting business
and the jobs/population imbalance have led to the city's decline in
retaining and welcoming diverse economic populations. Boulder's
residents have clearly stated through various self-imposed taxes
that they want strong action against climate change. Boulder's
citizen working group, PPWG, concluded that government needs
to listen to its citizens and that will necessitate a culture change in
government practice. If elected, I'm committed to listening to our
community on these and other compelling issues that--together--
we may better manage our city. `
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": `Throughout the last few years I have spent much time cultivating
relationships with communities that do not feel welcome in this
town. They include people of color and low income folks. I have
spoken up for these communities in many ways and on the many
issues that come before council. I have learned that, even though
the city of Boulder strives to be inclusive, it is often not. This was
confirmed in findings of the Community Perceptions Survey. This
work has raised my awareness on how our sliice of the world here
in Boulder could be improved. A million little things will add up to
making our city truly more welcoming and inclusive. I will continue
to lead on this work and welcome any and all allies.`
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `The two issues that I consider the most challenging for Boulder
are climate change which will affect all beings on the planet, and
housing affordability, which is emblematic of ever-rising income
inequality nationally. On climate change, I think my record is clear,
and I will continue to advocate for increased energy efficiency
through building codes, cleaner energy generation through a
public power utility or a new path with Xcel, and increasing electrification
of transportation and building systems. On affordable
housing, I will support increasing commercial linkage fees to fund
more low-income affordable housing, and I will work to pilot a
modern-era down-payment assistance program for middle-income
earners which will bring increased housing access and grow the
pool of permanently affordable ownership units in Boulder`
      }
    ]
  },
  {
    id: 'legacy',
    number: 17,
    question: 'As a Boulder City Council member what kind of legacy will you look to leave?',
    questionShort: 'Legacy',
    topics: ['candidate-insight'],
    answers: [
      {
          "id": "jan-burton",
          "answer": `After two years, it’s very difficult to say what my legacy could
be. I try to listen actively more than talk. I act on citizen issues
and try to hold the city accountable. I am a budget and expense
watchdog, and I believe in good governance. I will continue to focus
on using our tax dollars to pay for the basics: firemen, police,
fixing the roads and bike lanes, flood and safety plans. I will push
that we become more efficient in our operations and that we
spend money on the right things. I support the arts and want the
arts to become a bigger priority for the City. I will commit to putting
in the work, being a balanced and common-sense thinker,
acting with 100% integrity, and mentoring any young person who
gets on Council. I won’t overstay my welcome.`
      },
      {
          "id": "ed-byrne",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "mark-mcintyre",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "jill-grano",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "eric-budd",
          "answer": `Climate change is the central issue of our planet and we’re not
going to see climate progress from the federal level. We need to
continue to take strong action to achieve 100% renewable energy,
reduce our emissions from our transportation as well as commercial
and residential development and we need to move quickly.

Housing is a central issue for my generation — I want to be remembered
as someone who pushed hard to make sure that young
people, families, and the middle class can afford to live and stay in
Boulder. On city council, I’ll push forward on housing policy that
keeps Boulder accessible, gives transportation options to all people,
and protects the quality of life that Boulder residents love.

I’ve lived in Boulder long enough to become part of the culture
and people, but still bring the benefit of an outside perspective.
I’ve developed a great appreciation for the decisions that have
been made to make Boulder a great place. I’m young enough to
understand the challenges that are coming up, fighting climate
change, working on our serious issues on affordable housing. Now
I’d like to bring that perspective to serve Boulder at the next level
as a member of Boulder City Council.`
      },
      {
          "id": "adam-swetlik",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "matt-benjamin",
          "answer": `Many Native American cultures planned for seven generation out.
We struggle to plan for two years out. Protecting and preparing
our environment and community for future generations is the
greatest legacy any of us can leave behind. In the 21st century,
change happens much faster than ever before. As a result, our
future seems to arrive sooner than many of us expect. It is in
this modern reality that my time on council will be spent putting
our future first. I want my legacy on council to be remembered
for preparing Boulder for tomorrow and bringing back trust and
accountability in local government. I will be a balanced participant
and independent thinker as I collaborate on crafting policy for our
future generations.`
      },
      {
          "id": "mirabai-nagle",
          "answer": `My campaign slogan is “A New Generation of Commitment to
Boulder’s Legacy of Stewardship.”

It’s not my legacy. I hope to continue Boulder’s legacy of stewardship,
that has made Boulder the wonderful place it is.

Places like Boulder don’t happen by accident. They happen as a
direct result of specific, concerted, intentional actions by forward-thinking
citizens. Over the years, Boulder residents have had
a vision for a wonderful community nestled against the foothills.
Specifically, a shining example to the world of a community that
chose greenbelts over sprawl, and guiding documents of carefully
managed growth – like our Comprehensive Plan – over the chaotic,
random, and undesirable ways in which some communities evolve.

As a community, Boulder has also celebrated and respected diversity
of thought, race, religion, national origin, income, and sexual
identity. Amidst national regression into divisive, hurtful rhetoric…
we choose the opposite.

This is the legacy I hope to continue.`
      },
      {
          "id": "bill-rigler",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "cindy-carlisle",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "john-gerstle",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "mary-young",
          "answer": ``
      },
      {
          "id": "sam-weaver",
          "answer": `My ideal legacy would include a 100% renewable electrical power
supply for Boulder residents and businesses, a diverse economic
population not eroded by high housing costs, a continued thriving
local economy, and a well-preserved and -maintained parks and
open space system for the enjoyment and well-being of the local
community.`
      }
    ]
  },
]
