News, Analysis and Opinion for the Informed Boulder Resident
Wednesday August 21st 2019

Support the Blue Line

Subscribe to the Blue Line

That's what she said

city council transportation energy municipalization xcel housing urban planning april fools bicycles climate action election 2011 density boulder county affordable housing open space election agriculture renewables CU local food climate change election 2013 development jefferson parkway youth pedestrian election 2015 preservation Rocky Flats election 2017 recreation BVSD immigration mountain bikes boards and commissions GMOs decarbonization urban design transit fracking plan boulder farming fires wildlife planning board colorado politics architecture downtown smart regs new era colorado land use natural gas plutonium homeless journalism transit village parking commuting ghgs radioactive waste rental taxes height limits coal historic preservation walkability energy efficiency april fools 2015 Neighborhoods zoning population growth diversity historic district flood students growth North Boulder gardens arts education election 2018 solar bus election 2010 University Hill water supply nutrition RTD bike lane electric utility library safety sprawl groundwater water quality election 2012 affairs of the heart april fools 2016 renewable energy organic flood plain planning reserve mayor zero waste blue line wetlands county commissioners hogan-pancost politics electric vehicle hazardous waste transportation master plan obama longmont ballot right-sizing street design golden Mapleton solar panels PV climate smart loan recycling comprehensive plan diagonal plaza bears colorado legislature flood mitigation campaign finance congestion conservation easement food epa boulder junction pesticide drought oil flooding inequality election 2016 road diet planning bus rapid transit commercial development daily camera climate change deniers automobile PUC children ecocycle community cycles BVCP Newlands community league of women voters wind power public health ken wilson david miller sam weaver civil rights mlk west tsa crime public spaces city attorney boulder creek al bartlett marijuana green points technology EV Orchard Grove Whittier arizona

City of Boulder Ballot Question 2H: Advisory Commissions


By

Note: This article is part of a series of 2018 ballot issue analyses written for the Blue Line by author Richard ValentyYou can find coverage of the other 2018 ballot issues here. Ed.

Question 2H would amend Section 130 of the City Charter to accomplish four things:

  • Allow the newly-formed Housing Advisory Board to expand from its current five members to seven
  • Allow the city to set membership for any new board at five or seven members
  • Change references to “sex” of members to “gender identity”
  • Change the definition of what constitutes a majority to accommodate boards of different sizes

According to the city memo on 2H, Council members brought up the idea of having seven members on the Housing Advisory Board, which touched off a discussion on the membership numbers for other boards. The Council did not decide to propose changes to existing boards or commissions, but did place the point about the option of setting membership at five or seven for newly created boards on the ballot.

Current charter language says commission membership shall not be “all of one sex,” to ensure some diversity, and 2H proposes a change from “sex” to “gender identity” to modernize charter language. While the ballot title includes a phrase saying 2H would “change the criteria for what constitutes a majority,” don’t freak out—Boulder still believes in math. All that this language means is that majorities would be based on the pertinent numbers for voting or establishing quorum—for example, a majority vote of a seven-member commission would require four votes, while a five-member commission would need three.

Question 2H Pros and Cons

Pro

  •  Adding members to the Housing Advisory Board could increase the number of voices and add broader perspective.
  • Council would have the discretion to decide that new boards should have five or seven members.
  • It’s 2018, and time to catch up with the times by using “gender identity” in our guiding document.

 Con

  • Larger board membership might give a Council greater opportunity to appoint more people who are in line with their ideology.
Rate this article: 1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...

What do you think? Leave a comment!

You must be logged in to post a comment.