• VOTE YES

    We recommend voting YES.

  • Boulder Ballot Initiative 300 would increase occupancy limits for renters so that up to four unrelated people would be allowed to live together in a three-bedroom house, up to five unrelated people would be allowed to live together in a four-bedroom house. The city of Boulder has an inaccessible housing market and a considerable homelessness problem. Young people and students living in Boulder face many barriers due to the current restrictions that are in place. This initiative would bring more housing access to the city of Boulder by breaking down barriers.

    Boulder Ballot Initiative 300 would increase occupancy limits for renters so that up to four unrelated people would be allowed to live together in a three-bedroom house, up to five unrelated people would be allowed to live together in a four-bedroom house. The city of Boulder has an inaccessible housing market and a considerable homelessness problem. Young people and students living in Boulder face many barriers due to the current restrictions that are in place. This initiative would bring more housing access to the city of Boulder by breaking down barriers.

City of Boulder

Not in City of Boulder? Click here to choose your customized guide.

City of Boulder

Boulder City Council, At-Large

  • Mark Wallach photo
    Non-Partisan

    Mark Wallach

    Website Facebook Endorsements
  • See the above links for this candidate's endorsements and additional campaign information.
    See the above links for this candidate's endorsements and additional campaign information.

    Mark Wallach

    See the above links for this candidate's endorsements and additional campaign information.
    • Endorsed By: AFSCME Council 18

Statewide Ballot Measures

Amendment #78

  • VOTE NO

    We recommend voting NO.

  • The Legislative Authority for Spending State Money would mandate that all state spending from “outside funds” — such as federal money or private donations — would need to be determined and approved by the Colorado Legislature. At a time when Colorado is still rebounding from several disasters, this amendment would effectively paralyze our state in times of future emergencies, when our government needs more flexibility and responsiveness, not less. It also risks over-politicization of ongoing state activities and reduces the influence of technical experts. When our budgeting system fails to produce evidence-based, timely solutions, the most marginalized Coloradans suffer and we miss opportunities to make critical long-term investments in public infrastructure. We must find more nuanced solutions that promote both transparency and effective budgeting.

    The Legislative Authority for Spending State Money would mandate that all state spending from “outside funds” — such as federal money or private donations — would need to be determined and approved by the Colorado Legislature. At a time when Colorado is still rebounding from several disasters, this amendment would effectively paralyze our state in times of future emergencies, when our government needs more flexibility and responsiveness, not less. It also risks over-politicization of ongoing state activities and reduces the influence of technical experts. When our budgeting system fails to produce evidence-based, timely solutions, the most marginalized Coloradans suffer and we miss opportunities to make critical long-term investments in public infrastructure. We must find more nuanced solutions that promote both transparency and effective budgeting.

Proposition #119

  • No Position

    We are neutral on Proposition 119.

  • The Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Program would raise sales tax on marijuana purchases from 15% to 20% over three years to fund out-of-school educational programs for children ages 5-17, with a priority for providing programs for low-income households. It is estimated that this would raise an estimated $137 million per year. Though the outcome of this taxation is of course laudable, continuing to fund needed education and enrichment programs through “sin taxes,” is an unsustainable model and circumvents the necessary major systemic funding issues we need to address as a state.

    The Learning Enrichment and Academic Progress Program would raise sales tax on marijuana purchases from 15% to 20% over three years to fund out-of-school educational programs for children ages 5-17, with a priority for providing programs for low-income households. It is estimated that this would raise an estimated $137 million per year. Though the outcome of this taxation is of course laudable, continuing to fund needed education and enrichment programs through “sin taxes,” is an unsustainable model and circumvents the necessary major systemic funding issues we need to address as a state.

    • Endorsed By: The Bell Policy Center

Proposition #120

  • VOTE NO

    We recommend voting NO.

  • The Property Tax Assessment Rate Reduction Proposition would: lower the property tax assessment rate for non-residential property from 29% to 26.4%, and lower the property tax assessment rate for residential property from 7.1% to 6.5%.


    This reduction would cut needed public funding -- an estimated $45 million in its first year -- for local government services that all Coloradans rely on, such as schools, fire departments, and police departments. In sum, this proposition would have the effect of primarily benefitting wealthy property owners while robbing funding from crucial public investments like education and infrastructure. When public programs such as these are continually underfunded, the most marginalized in our communities are consistently disproportionally harmed.

    The Property Tax Assessment Rate Reduction Proposition would: lower the property tax assessment rate for non-residential property from 29% to 26.4%, and lower the property tax assessment rate for residential property from 7.1% to 6.5%.


    This reduction would cut needed public funding -- an estimated $45 million in its first year -- for local government services that all Coloradans rely on, such as schools, fire departments, and police departments. In sum, this proposition would have the effect of primarily benefitting wealthy property owners while robbing funding from crucial public investments like education and infrastructure. When public programs such as these are continually underfunded, the most marginalized in our communities are consistently disproportionally harmed.

Boulder City Ballot Measures

Initiative #300

  • VOTE YES

    We recommend voting YES.

  • Boulder Ballot Initiative 300 would increase occupancy limits for renters so that up to four unrelated people would be allowed to live together in a three-bedroom house, up to five unrelated people would be allowed to live together in a four-bedroom house. The city of Boulder has an inaccessible housing market and a considerable homelessness problem. Young people and students living in Boulder face many barriers due to the current restrictions that are in place. This initiative would bring more housing access to the city of Boulder by breaking down barriers.

    Boulder Ballot Initiative 300 would increase occupancy limits for renters so that up to four unrelated people would be allowed to live together in a three-bedroom house, up to five unrelated people would be allowed to live together in a four-bedroom house. The city of Boulder has an inaccessible housing market and a considerable homelessness problem. Young people and students living in Boulder face many barriers due to the current restrictions that are in place. This initiative would bring more housing access to the city of Boulder by breaking down barriers.