Karen I appreciate your sharing these details, including those of our old City Hall on Simpson. I remember it well from childhood, and am happily reminded by its creaky floors every time I enjoy a coffee at East Simpson.
Like Guy, I would express similar sentiments. Three capital construction and renovation projects funded by 20 year bonds totaling $74M, without an NTE even is concerning. Our residents are funding a new water treatment center and additional fire station through increased sales tax and substantial fees added to monthly utility bills. I might swallow some of this if it was one project only, but three in addition to what we’re already paying!?! I think many of us already know that City under Gary Klaphake’s earlier leadership, did not plan well for future growth in unison with their Planning Department! A lack of contribution to ongoing annual budgets for “Capital Construction Funds” is evident! There in lies the problem, but taxpayers are already footing significant costs in our community — three proposed capital projects in the current climate is not realistic. Nor are the assumptions for future staffing needs at present. The City should be endeavoring to shore up what will be funding losses from other agencies in the near future, including State. Stabilizing existing staffing levels as a result and residential services should be paramount. Those of us who work in other local governments know that.
I’d add a funny thing too. My neighborhood used to see City snow plows after significant storms when Doug Short was at Public Works. Haven’t seen a plow here in 6 years, but the City Service Center needs a renovation? We also only have one non-animal control Code Enforcement Officer, very part-time, he’s a Sr. Planner too. Want to know how many surrounding municipalities have? And their officers are still part of Police Departments, not moved to a Planning Departnent to cover a shortfall in staffing and do double duty. That to has led to problems in our community, which left unattended are starting to spiral. Again, let’s interject some realism, City leaders need to refine these requests, table them, consider retention and to, remote office workspace as other agencies source with drop in shared spaces for in-office days. Even better for the environment!
Thank you for your response, Karen. I did receive and complete the poll.
Jon is still a Sr. Planner as of 2025, parlaying skills to Code Enforcement. And all City endeavored Capital Projects are funded by sales tax revenues first, with a smaller portion thereafter received from County property tax. True of all local municipalities in Boulder County. While the original building for Station 2 was funded through property tax revenues, specifically commercial and special use, ongoing maintenance and capital equipment replacement is deferred to sales tax initiatives.
From our 2021 Ballot initiative - Public Safety:
“The public safety ballot initiative will ask voters to decide whether to increase the sales and use tax by 0.27%, or 2.7 cents on a $10 purchase, to fund public safety services.
Lafayette’s current sales and use tax rate is 3.5%, making it the fourth lowest out of 11 nearby communities.”
A link to that earlier initiative, consider the increase in earlier tax base between 2021 to now. That translates to population increases to within City. Our current sales tax rate is the highest in the County in 2025.
While I appreciate your local knowledge and history, I’ve been in government funding 30 years professionally. Those annual operating budgets formerly, Lafayette’s 2025 is $121.5M. Proposed bonds, even with 10 year fixed fee collection, will dramatically increase. Property taxes are expected to fall lower too. And tariffs for construction materials face an all time high over the same proposed construction period. Then to after construction period services, are maintenance and operating for three capital assets. What City leadership has consistently failed to do is fund a fixed Capital Expenditure Fund, though Mike Romero did consistently pursue as Mayor, back in the day. All-in-all not terribly realistic.
You are expressing sentiments similar to those I hear from other residents, too much of an ask at this time. The poll results should be interesting. Hmm, that reminds me, did you get the poll?
A couple of things. At this point we don't have a site selected for a new water treatment plant. I think we should see an update on that soon. We are not paying for the second fire station with sales tax. We for sure should have had an ongoing fund for capital projects. I think our new city manager is doing that now.
I've lived in my house for over 30 years. I can count on one hand the number of times my street has been plowed. 🤣 I did get to see the service center, and it is terrible. We really do need to do something there. Regarding code enforcement, the person whom I think you are referring to is no longer a planner but a full-time code enforcement officer these days. Has been for a few years now.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts from the point of view of someone who works in local government!
Been doinʻ some thinninʻ here. Arranged in NPO (No Particular Order):
- $74 million bucks is a lot of money. The residents of Lafayette have, in the last four years, been hit with double digit inflation (thatʻs cumulative), double digit increases in water prices, major increases in property taxes, and now the expert economists are getting their Fruit-of-the-Looms in wad over a possible recession. Not sure this is a good time to ask the hard workers of Lafayette to further tax themselves (thatʻs what bond issue does -- donʻt anyone kid themselves).
- The Laws of Physics are iron clad. You cannot appeal the law of gravity. There are few things in the realm of the social sciences that are as iron clad, but one of those is Parkinsonʻs Law, While it was empirically derived, it seems to hold everywhere. It says, "Bureaucracies grow four percent per year completely independent of needs." BTW, those are true needs - not, "Gee we could do X if we hired a couple more people." Looking at Karenʻs lay out of the increases in Lafayetteʻs city staff, it seems to be in fine fettle here. Maybe, just maybe, before we go building a new city hall, we should look at what weʻre doing with the eye of someone spending their own (instead of your) money.
- The city (and the state for that matter) have become addicted to federal government grants. It isnʻt at all clear to me that those grants are going to continue coming. Mayhaps we should plan and be prepared for that eventuality. Hope is not a strategy.
- While I appreciate having the Rec Center, I will, again, ask why the city has one. We have the YMCA and commercial gyms. Things like the Rec Center are perfect examples of distributed costs and focused benefits (everyone pays for it, but a minority of people use it)
- Looking at the drawing of the new city hall, I have to ask why, if Lafayette is jumping through its own rear end to be energy conscious, do we have a multi story atrium (aka heat sump). Also, given that Colorado enjoys an enormous number of sunny days, why do we have so many south facing windows? Is that so we can use more electrons to cool the upper two thirds of the atrium?
I think these initiatives are ill timed and being proposed without truly considering the alternatives and whatʻs best for the taxpayers here in Lafayette.
For the record, I know that the aquatic area at the Rec Center must be fixed, but the private sector would have had an established reserve fund (as those evil HOAs are required to have by, ahem, government) to fund such emergent needs, but governments donʻt have to do that because they can always squeeze the taxpayer more.
Karen I appreciate your sharing these details, including those of our old City Hall on Simpson. I remember it well from childhood, and am happily reminded by its creaky floors every time I enjoy a coffee at East Simpson.
Like Guy, I would express similar sentiments. Three capital construction and renovation projects funded by 20 year bonds totaling $74M, without an NTE even is concerning. Our residents are funding a new water treatment center and additional fire station through increased sales tax and substantial fees added to monthly utility bills. I might swallow some of this if it was one project only, but three in addition to what we’re already paying!?! I think many of us already know that City under Gary Klaphake’s earlier leadership, did not plan well for future growth in unison with their Planning Department! A lack of contribution to ongoing annual budgets for “Capital Construction Funds” is evident! There in lies the problem, but taxpayers are already footing significant costs in our community — three proposed capital projects in the current climate is not realistic. Nor are the assumptions for future staffing needs at present. The City should be endeavoring to shore up what will be funding losses from other agencies in the near future, including State. Stabilizing existing staffing levels as a result and residential services should be paramount. Those of us who work in other local governments know that.
I’d add a funny thing too. My neighborhood used to see City snow plows after significant storms when Doug Short was at Public Works. Haven’t seen a plow here in 6 years, but the City Service Center needs a renovation? We also only have one non-animal control Code Enforcement Officer, very part-time, he’s a Sr. Planner too. Want to know how many surrounding municipalities have? And their officers are still part of Police Departments, not moved to a Planning Departnent to cover a shortfall in staffing and do double duty. That to has led to problems in our community, which left unattended are starting to spiral. Again, let’s interject some realism, City leaders need to refine these requests, table them, consider retention and to, remote office workspace as other agencies source with drop in shared spaces for in-office days. Even better for the environment!
Thank you for your response, Karen. I did receive and complete the poll.
Jon is still a Sr. Planner as of 2025, parlaying skills to Code Enforcement. And all City endeavored Capital Projects are funded by sales tax revenues first, with a smaller portion thereafter received from County property tax. True of all local municipalities in Boulder County. While the original building for Station 2 was funded through property tax revenues, specifically commercial and special use, ongoing maintenance and capital equipment replacement is deferred to sales tax initiatives.
From our 2021 Ballot initiative - Public Safety:
“The public safety ballot initiative will ask voters to decide whether to increase the sales and use tax by 0.27%, or 2.7 cents on a $10 purchase, to fund public safety services.
Lafayette’s current sales and use tax rate is 3.5%, making it the fourth lowest out of 11 nearby communities.”
A link to that earlier initiative, consider the increase in earlier tax base between 2021 to now. That translates to population increases to within City. Our current sales tax rate is the highest in the County in 2025.
https://www.lafayetteco.gov/2700/2021-Public-Safety-Ballot-Measure
While I appreciate your local knowledge and history, I’ve been in government funding 30 years professionally. Those annual operating budgets formerly, Lafayette’s 2025 is $121.5M. Proposed bonds, even with 10 year fixed fee collection, will dramatically increase. Property taxes are expected to fall lower too. And tariffs for construction materials face an all time high over the same proposed construction period. Then to after construction period services, are maintenance and operating for three capital assets. What City leadership has consistently failed to do is fund a fixed Capital Expenditure Fund, though Mike Romero did consistently pursue as Mayor, back in the day. All-in-all not terribly realistic.
Thanks for your comments, Cheyenne!
You are expressing sentiments similar to those I hear from other residents, too much of an ask at this time. The poll results should be interesting. Hmm, that reminds me, did you get the poll?
A couple of things. At this point we don't have a site selected for a new water treatment plant. I think we should see an update on that soon. We are not paying for the second fire station with sales tax. We for sure should have had an ongoing fund for capital projects. I think our new city manager is doing that now.
I've lived in my house for over 30 years. I can count on one hand the number of times my street has been plowed. 🤣 I did get to see the service center, and it is terrible. We really do need to do something there. Regarding code enforcement, the person whom I think you are referring to is no longer a planner but a full-time code enforcement officer these days. Has been for a few years now.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts from the point of view of someone who works in local government!
Been doinʻ some thinninʻ here. Arranged in NPO (No Particular Order):
- $74 million bucks is a lot of money. The residents of Lafayette have, in the last four years, been hit with double digit inflation (thatʻs cumulative), double digit increases in water prices, major increases in property taxes, and now the expert economists are getting their Fruit-of-the-Looms in wad over a possible recession. Not sure this is a good time to ask the hard workers of Lafayette to further tax themselves (thatʻs what bond issue does -- donʻt anyone kid themselves).
- The Laws of Physics are iron clad. You cannot appeal the law of gravity. There are few things in the realm of the social sciences that are as iron clad, but one of those is Parkinsonʻs Law, While it was empirically derived, it seems to hold everywhere. It says, "Bureaucracies grow four percent per year completely independent of needs." BTW, those are true needs - not, "Gee we could do X if we hired a couple more people." Looking at Karenʻs lay out of the increases in Lafayetteʻs city staff, it seems to be in fine fettle here. Maybe, just maybe, before we go building a new city hall, we should look at what weʻre doing with the eye of someone spending their own (instead of your) money.
- The city (and the state for that matter) have become addicted to federal government grants. It isnʻt at all clear to me that those grants are going to continue coming. Mayhaps we should plan and be prepared for that eventuality. Hope is not a strategy.
- While I appreciate having the Rec Center, I will, again, ask why the city has one. We have the YMCA and commercial gyms. Things like the Rec Center are perfect examples of distributed costs and focused benefits (everyone pays for it, but a minority of people use it)
- Looking at the drawing of the new city hall, I have to ask why, if Lafayette is jumping through its own rear end to be energy conscious, do we have a multi story atrium (aka heat sump). Also, given that Colorado enjoys an enormous number of sunny days, why do we have so many south facing windows? Is that so we can use more electrons to cool the upper two thirds of the atrium?
I think these initiatives are ill timed and being proposed without truly considering the alternatives and whatʻs best for the taxpayers here in Lafayette.
For the record, I know that the aquatic area at the Rec Center must be fixed, but the private sector would have had an established reserve fund (as those evil HOAs are required to have by, ahem, government) to fund such emergent needs, but governments donʻt have to do that because they can always squeeze the taxpayer more.