Save South Boulder

September 28
 

A couple of Boulderites uncover shocking new facts and review long-known failures in the ongoing saga of CU South.  Both first appeared in the neighborhood app, Next Door.

​

Steve Lynton  

Secret Pact Negotiated Between City and CU on Development at CU-South  9-24-2026
 

Boulder secretly endorses pact with CU, clearing way for development at CU South. City official says accord means CU can move ahead with development, even if Boulder changes mind about dam-building scheme 

The city's utility chief told Boulder's Water Resources Advisory Board last night that, without public notice, the city had received all of the required permits to start $76 million in construction work on a dam along U.S. 36 and had formalized its tentative annexation agreement with CU, allowing development to proceed at CU South. The city apparently acted even before the water board and City Council had given approval to the current capital spending plan including the controversial dam-building project. 

​

Utility chief Joe Taddeucci told the board that, with the agreement officially completed, CU can start development projects on the tract, regardless of city actions. Final approval of the tentative accord had been delayed because of delays by the city in securing permits from regulatory agencies. Taddeucci has blamed delays and cost increases on a lawsuit by the project's opponents, but the city's failure to secure the permits were a prime cause of the delays. 

The water board approved the project, whose overall price tag now totals more than an anticipated $100 million including consulting fees and other costs, after a perfunctory session, during which a handful of advocates and opponents of the project testified. WRAB members did not challenge Taddeucci's defense of the project. Advocates offered emotional appeals, citing conditions after the 2013 flood. Opponents argued that the project's costs had skyrocketed while its benefits dwindled, and called for an updated cost-benefit analysis and peer review. 

Environmental groups have criticized the project as detrimental to wildlife habitat in a state conservation area, including two threatened species. 

​

A lawsuit is pending after an appellate panel rejected opponents' contentions, and the challengers have not announced whether an appeal to the state Supreme Court will be filed. [Subsequent to this writing, the challengers have stated they will go forward with their appeal.] The secrecy surrounding the city's endorsement of the tentative pact is in line with other city moves, intended to thwart opposition to the project. The City Council has previously acted on an "emergency" basis, blocking public hearings on the plan. It has planned to finance the construction through bonds tied to fees on household water bills to circumvent TABOR requirements for a citywide vote on taxes, but now has apparently revised its financing scheme as interest rates have risen. Its unannounced move to conclude the annexation agreement appears designed to stymie further moves by opponents and clear the way for the city to push ahead with the hotly debated scheme.

​

Here's the Next Door link:

https://nextdoor.com/p/yXPwb6_-XjnT?utm_source=share&extras=NTY3MzA1ODg%3D&utm_campaign=1790614466772&share_action_id=e3436397-146b-41a6-b11a-08d9f4b36325

​

​

Ben Binder

​

Boulder plans to spend $76.5 million to construct a high-hazard dam at CU South to control flooding of South Boulder Creek.  This is after spending $14.2 million on engineering.

​

This Thursday, October 1st, the Boulder City Council will hold a public hearing on the proposed 2027 budget which includes $76.5 million for the South Boulder Creek project.  This huge appropriation is hidden on page 509 of the 590-page agenda packet.

​

When the project was first approved by the Boulder City Council, the estimated cost was $20.4 million for construction and $1.9 million for engineering.  Cost estimates are usually within 20 to 30 percent of the final cost; but the city’s current $76.5 million construction estimate is 375% greater than the original estimate, and the $14.2 million spent on engineering is 750% greater than the original estimate of $1.9 million.  While the city spent $14.2 million on engineering, CU paid $11 million to purchase the entire 308-acre CU South site!

​

During the final design of the project, the estimated construction cost increased from $20.4 million to $66 million to address blatant flaws in the preliminary design.  If the true cost of the project was known when the city chose between alternative designs, the current project would never have been selected.

 

One would expect that for $90.7 million for engineering and construction we would receive state-of-the-art gold-standard flood protection.  But that is not the case.  While climate change is increasing the frequency and magnitude of major floods, the project will only protect against historic 100-year storms located on the main stem of South Boulder Creek.  The project will provide zero flood protection if a storm is located several miles north over the Bear Creek and Viele Channel drainage basins, which caused a major portion of the 2013 flood damages in South Boulder.

 

Yes, the project will prevent the flooding of US 36 several times each century, but gravity drains the floodwaters in a matter of hours, and the highway is closed more often by blizzards and snowstorms which are not drained by gravity.

 

There is no excuse for the incredibly poor management of the engineering and the fact the city has refused to obtain an independent peer review by experts who are not invested in the current design.  The city claims a peer review is not needed because the project was reviewed by the State Engineer and the Colorado Department of Transportation.  I spoke with the State Engineer who informed me his only purview is to ensure the dam is properly designed and will not fail.  His office is not concerned with the cost of the project, or if it will provide adequate flood protection, or if there are better alternatives.  Likewise, CDOT is only concerned with the impact of the project on US 36.

 

The project is being managed by Joe Taddeucci, Director of Utilities, who recently wrote a 5-page email to the city council blaming “core project opponents” for driving up the cost of the project.  He takes no responsibility for the ineptly-managed engineering which used a contract designed for small miscellaneous projects whereby numerous multi-million-dollar additional work requests were routinely approved whenever appropriated funds were spent.  The $14.2 million spent on engineering is crying for an audit.

 

Mr. Taddeucci has also refused to prepare a current cost-benefit analysis as required by the city’s Capital Improvement Project Guiding Principles.  The last cost benefit analysis was prepared a decade ago and was barely cost-beneficial when the project cost $22.3 million instead of $76.5 million, and the benefits were $26.3 million before the Frasier Meadows Retirement Community spent millions flood proofing its facilities thereby reducing the benefits of the project.

 

If you too are concerned about wasting the limited funds available for flood control, please contact city council members before Thursday’s city council meeting and sign up to speak during the public hearing on October 1st.

 

There are far better and less expensive ways to control flooding in South Boulder, and it will be interesting to see if any Boulder City Council members have the backbone to question this budget item.

​

​

Breaking News, September 24

​

On October 3, Boulder citizens will become aware that CU South has been closed to all users when they discover the gate closed and a fence around the entire property. The fence is being erected because the city is now required by the terms of the annexation agreement to demolish the tennis courts. The land northeast of the tennis courts is now being prepared for construction of the dam project. The construction company is restricting the public from the site because of “construction risks.” This means that no one is allowed on the property.

 

Save South Boulder (SSB) initially filed a lawsuit against the city to contest the city’s approval of a $66 million bond issue (currently estimated by the city to exceed $100 million) to fund the dam—without a vote of the citizens and without adequately remediating many of the flaws in the design.

 

The city appealed SSB’s lawsuit and the appellate court dismissed SSB’s case. At this point, SSB is seeking to appeal this dismissal to the Supreme Court. We must file our appeal request by October 1. Preparing the legal arguments needed to file our appeal will cost $20,000. 

 

Contrary to what city officials have claimed, this dam project has never been voted on by Boulder taxpayers. The dam’s engineering design has many flaws which the city has not adequately addressed. More important, the city has never seriously considered—as required—any of 6 to 8 viable flood mitigation alternatives suggested by community experts since 2001. 

 

If SSB wins before the Supreme Court, the city will finally be forced to hold a vote on dam construction and the entire flood control project. Moreover, its engineers will have to address the design flaws that SSB and many others have pointed out. This will require redesign of the project in accordance with current best practice principles for flood mitigation. If this doesn’t happen, the dam, by design, will increase downstream flooding into neighborhoods such as Greenbelt Meadows. The flaws also pose a great danger to rare and protected habitat and species. 

 

What can you do? Please continue reading.

​

Urgent Request for Donations

​

This is an urgent request for donations to Save South Boulder. Would you help out immediately? 

 

We need donations to pay for the appeal of the dismissal of our lawsuit against the city to the Colorado Supreme Court.  We filed this case because of the City’s failure to permit a vote on the now $100 million dam project. We must request this appeal by October 1. Preparing the documents for this will cost $20,000. We do not have that amount in the bank. 

 

We have solid, specific grounds for winning this appeal. We are simply asking the Supreme Court to extend a similar affirmative ruling it already made in Lakewood, Colorado, regarding increasing fees, instead of taxes, as a way to avoid a citizen vote on municipal expenditures. 

 

If the Supreme Court agrees to hear this case, and if we win, the TABOR Amendment requires that the city pay back all of the money we have expended  on this lawsuit, and we will be able to refund donations that were made to us, if donors wish. More important, the city also will finally have to hold a vote of citizens on the construction of the dam and its cost. This is what we’ve been asking for all along: a vote of the people. 

 

Will you please donate immediately to make this Supreme Court appeal possible? You can donate to Save South Boulder with a credit card by going to: https://www.savesouthboulder.com/blank-page or you can write a check payable to Save South Boulder and mail or drop it by:

 

Margaret LeCompte
Chair, Save South Boulder

290 Pawnee Drive

Boulder, CO 80303

 

Many thanks for your generosity! 

 

​

Breaking News, May 27

 

Dear Friends, Supporters, and Donors to Save South Boulder,

​

Finally: Updates!  At least as far as our court case against the City of Boulder is concerned, we’re still in the game. And we are elated!!  However, we still need to raise about $8500 to retire our debt to our hardworking lawyers. So, Read On, and Please send donations!    Here’s the latest:

 

What Happened in Court: 

​

On May 27th, 2026, Attorney Randall Weiner,  of Weiner and Cording, appeared in the Colorado Appellate Court to argue for the plaintiffs in Save South Boulder et. al v City of Boulder and City Council for the City of Boulder CO. The oral arguments were heard before a panel of three judges. First Randall, and then Thomas Snyder, of Kutak Rock LLC, the City’s hired attorney, had just 15 minutes, including rebuttal, to argue whether Save South Boulder's appeal of the dismissal of its lawsuit, moved by the City and granted by a local District judge, would be upheld or not.   

 

The judges asked quite a few questions (which is good); they did not seem at all hostile to Randall’s arguments and seemed very knowledgeable about the intricacies of TABOR law. They clearly had read our briefs. We felt that Randall did a stellar job of responding to even the most pointed questions, especially when his interpretation of key cases used as support differed from the City’s interpretation. He also persuasively and strongly rebutted all of the arguments made by the City's lawyer. We also felt that Mr. Thomas didn’t seem to be all that well-prepared or even a very articulate speaker. After it was over, Randall said, "Well, we've got a shot!"  Which is about as positive as we've seen him be. So we feel about as optimistic about our chances of success as is possible, given that the appeals process is lengthy and wearing.

​

What's Next?

​

The judges' decision will be handed down anywhere from a month (unlikely) to 6 months from now.  If we win, it’s likely the City will seek certiorari –or agreement that the State Supreme Court will hear their appeal. Only about 1 in 20 cases actually are accepted for such a hearing. If we lose, we also definitely will try to appeal.  Nonetheless, given that the Colorado Supreme Court upheld the plaintiffs in a TABOR case similar to ours in Lakewood, CO, last year, we feel our chances are pretty good of gaining a hearing and then of prevailing.  

A win on appeal would be a landmark ruling on how Colorado cities can finance capital projects. It would reinforce the First Amendment rights of citizens to seek redress from government actions. Importantly, it would require citizen votes on large public works projects!

​

What The Lawsuit Is About:

​

While our fight ultimately is about protecting the environment and implementing safe, sane and best-practice flood control, our legal case is based on the Colorado TABOR Amendment. The Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights requires that governments submit any increases in taxes to a citizen vote for approval. In so doing, TABOR reinforces democratic rights.  We’re arguing that the City has violated not only the City Charter by declaring an “emergency” where none existed, and TABOR law—by declaring that what really is a tax is “just” a fee not requiring a citizen vote. So the key legal questions are, is the increase in stormwater assessments a fee?  Or is it a tax?  And by declaring it a fee, is the City violating the First Amendment of the US Constitution, which gives citizens the democratic right to seek redress of grievances imposed by their government? 

​

Basically, when Boulder’s City Council approved a $66 million bond issue on March 6, 2025, to fund a dam at Hwy 36 and CU-South, it included in that approval repaying the bond debt through increases in the stormwater assessments imposed for every water user in Boulder. It did so unilaterally, without public input, any public hearings, or a vote of the citizens to approve this use of its utility bill payments. Save South Boulder believes that the City Council is calling the increase a “fee increase,” not a tax increase, because it wants to avoid a public vote on both this water bill increase and on construction of the dam project. Crucially, under TABOR law, a tax increase requires voter approval. A fee increase doesn’t.

​

Save South Boulder’s lawsuit argues that the City is trying to sidestep the TABOR requirement that voters must approve tax increases—and the City’s plan for paying for the dam--by claiming that the increase in water bills is just a fee, not a tax. The TABOR Foundation of Colorado agrees with us, stating in the Amicus Brief it filed with the Court of Appeals that it, too, believes that the City’s planned  bond repayment plan does not meet the TABOR definition of a fee and therefore is a tax. It should, therefore, have been approved by a vote of the citizens of Boulder—not unilaterally by the City Council.

​

Save South Boulder believes that the City's actions are undemocratic and violate citizens’ First Amendment rights. Our grievances include decades of failure by the City and its staff to listen to Boulder residents’ and other experts who have presented at least a dozen viable alternative flood mitigation plans for South Boulder Creek. They also have failed to address dangerous flaws and risks in the City’s own proposed flood control plan. All citizen efforts to get our local government to listen have been met with official dismissal, derision, and silence. Given the Council's and the City staff's long-term intransigence, Save South Boulder's only avenue left for protest was through the courts. And so, we sued on TABOR grounds and because of violations of the City Charter, which the City ignored in declaring an emergency to pass the bond issue—when no emergency existed.  

The City Attorney tried hard to derail our lawsuit, including asking for a summary judgment against us, filing a motion to dismiss our case, which we lost, and launching a personal SLAPP action against the three plaintiffs (LeCompte, Savage and Telleen). We won that case!

​

Beating back the SLAPP action allowed us to pursue an appeal of the City's motion to dismiss our case. The hearing on the 27th May was the result. We’re awaiting word whether we succeeded.  But we now feel at least moderately hopeful about the outcomes!

​

If we win, we could make history with this fight!  We could force a re-examination of how cities all over the state are trying to fund public works projects without voter approval.  We would reinforce the right of citizens to have a voice in how their tax money is spent.  So:  Let’s just do it.

​

If we win, our current plans are to seek remedies that require the City to:

​

•  Submit the current flood control design to an independent, third-party peer review by outside flood management experts and engineers—something the Utilities Department has adamantly refused to do.

•  Conduct a genuine comparison of the City’s plan against the flood control alternatives that we and other experts have presented since 2001, and which the Utilities Department has consistently ignored and ridiculed.

•  Put the City’s proposed flood mitigation project and its complete price tag to a vote of Boulder residents—an action which the City has done everything possible to avoid.

We’ll have to wait till we hear what the judges say before taking any further steps, but we will keep you posted of any and all developments.

​

MEANWHILE:  We still need to raise about $8,500 to repay Randall and his associates for the legal work they’ve done so competently to get us this far. We don’t have to worry about the costs of the appeal.  Randall and Cording are carrying that forward at their own expense.  But we need help to pay them back for over a year of previous hard work for us. Please help us win this fight, and help us retire our legal debt by making a donation to Save South Boulder. Go to https:/www.savesouthboulder.com and click on the “Contact and Donate” page to contribute.

​

With very best wishes and so many thanks….

​

Marki LeCompte, Harlin Savage and Steve Telleen

Plaintiffs for Save South Boulder

margaret.lecompte@gmail.com

​

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Dear Friends and Supporters of Save South Boulder:
 

Save South Boulder has not given up its fight to preserve the South Boulder environment.  We’re still advocating for feasible, cost-effective, best-practice flood control. After years of being shut out, ignored, and outspent by the City and CU, we finally have a court date in our fight! 
 

Oral arguments in Save South Boulder et al. v. City of Boulder are set for:
 

May 27, 2026 — 2:00 p.m.

Colorado District Court of Appeals

2 E. 14th Ave., Denver — near Civic Plaza, Old Supreme Court Building
 

Come to Court! Support our legal team!  Let everyone see how much people care! 
Scroll down to the end of this page for bus directions from Table Mesa Park n Ride.
 

What Our Lawsuit Is About
 

In March 2025, Boulder’s City Council approved a $66 million bond issue  to fund a dam at Hwy 36 and CU-South, including in that approval repaying the bond debt through increases in stormwater assessments on every water user in Boulder. It did so unilaterally, without public input or hearings. Why? Because City Council does not want the public to vote on either this water bill increase or on construction of the dam project. That’s why the City is calling the increase a “fee increase,” not a tax. Under TABOR law, a tax increase requires voter approval. A fee increase doesn’t. Save South Boulder’s lawsuit argues that the City is trying to sidestep the TABOR requirement that voters must approve tax increases by claiming that the increase in water bills is just a fee, not a tax. The TABOR Foundation of Colorado agrees with us, stating in the Amicus Brief it filed with the Court of Appeals that it, too, believes that the City’s planned  bond repayment plan does not meet the TABOR definition of a fee and therefore is a tax.
 

But this strategy is how the Boulder City Council intends to avoid obtaining the voter approval for the dam flood project which Colorado law requires. This is not democratic. And it is governmental overreach.
 

City Council’s actions also violate the First Amendment, which gives citizens the democratic right to seek redress of grievances imposed by their government.  Our grievances include the decades of efforts by Boulder residents’ to induce the City to  consider alternative flood mitigation for South Boulder Creek and address flaws in the City’s proposed flood control plan. All citizen efforts have been met with official dismissal, derision, and silence. Therefore, when citizens can’t get a vote and can’t get a hearing and when elected officials won’t listen, a lawsuit is the only avenue left for protest. And so, Save South Boulder sued.
 

What the City Threw at Us
 

The City has tried to keep our lawsuit from ever getting a hearing.  We’re now appealing the City’s attempt to dismiss it. Getting this far—to the courthouse door—has meant fighting the City’s:
 

•  Stonewalling on giving us access to public records

• First motion for summary judgment to kill the suit without a hearing

• Second motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which Judge Kotlarczyk granted — and which we immediately appealed. This is the appeal to be heard on May 27th.

• Attempt to scare us into withdrawing our lawsuit by filing a SLAPP action against us, demanding that we pay nearly $50,000 for their attorney fees—on the grounds that our lawsuit was “frivolous, vexatious, and groundless.”

It didn’t work. We weren’t scared off.  We fought that SLAPP action.  And we WON! Judge Kotlarczk, who previously had granted dismissal of our lawsuit, this time ruled our lawsuit was NOT “frivolous, vexations and groundless.”  

But the fight isn’t over! The motion to dismiss still stands, and we still have to win our appeal against it.  
 

What We Need From You
 

Our attorneys, Weiner and Cording, are taking the appeal forward at their own expense.  They really believe in this fight! But we still owe them roughly $10,000 for the work they did earlier--the records fight, the SLAPP defense, the dismissal motions and delays, and the preparation for the appeal--everything they had to beat back to get us to the courtroom door.
 

And so, we need your support even more. Please donate. Whatever you can give helps retire our debt to our lawyers and keeps this case alive.
 

If We Win…

A win on appeal would be a landmark ruling on how Colorado cities can finance capital projects. It would reinforce the First Amendment rights of citizens to seek redress from government actions. If we win, Save South Boulder will seek remedies that require the City to:
 

•  Submit the current flood control design to independent, third-party peer review—something the Utilities Department has adamantly refused to do.

•  Conduct a genuine comparison of the City’s plan against the alternatives it has consistently ignored and ridiculed.

•  Put the full flood mitigation project and its price tag to a vote of Boulder residents—which it has done everything possible to avoid.
 

We would then need to win that vote—which means paying for a public education campaign to tell the real story of this project—an unpleasant saga of collusion between the City and CU, as well as the failure of the Utilities Department and its consultants to design an effective, feasible and environmentally sensitive flood control project—despite years of criticism and multiple proposed alternatives to their chosen high hazard dam solution. 
 

The City already has paid its engineering consultants RJH more than $14 million, with absolutely no audit of that spending and still no design that could actually be permitted and built. Meanwhile, the benefits of this exorbitantly expensive plan would go to less than 2% of Boulder’s population—regardless of flood risks in need of remediation elsewhere in Boulder.
 

The bond issue we are contesting asked for $66 million, even though the cost of the flood control plan had already ballooned from $23 million in 2017 to over $100 million by March 2025, when the bond issue was approved by the City Council. Clearly an additional bond issue will be required to complete the project—if it ever is built. 
 

THIS HAS TO STOP.
 

Good News: Our New Website

Thank you for visiting Save South Boulder's website where you now can donate online by credit card. Our URL is  https://www.savesouthboulder.com  To donate, click here  (or visit the Contact/Donate page).
 

You can also send a check payable to Save South Boulder, or cash, to:
 

Save South Boulder

Margaret LeCompte, Co-Chair

290 Pawnee Drive

Boulder, CO 80303
 

Please check out the in-progress website!  We’re still adding information to it.  Send any questions or feedback about the website to: margaret.lecompte@gmail.com

Please remember: South Boulder Creek and its floodplain — the ponds, the wildlife, the creek itself, the open space and the trails—are integral to our quality of life.  They’re part of what makes Boulder and our neighborhoods worth defending. So is the principle that city government must be accountable to its residents. Save South Boulder has been fighting for these principles since 2015. We need your help to finish the fight.
 

Save South Boulder is a recognized Colorado non-profit. Donations are not tax-deductible because we endorse candidates, support ballot measures, and engage in public advocacy, which disallow tax deductible donations under IRS rules.
 

Learn More and Stay Current by returning here:  https://www.savesouthboulder.com