This commentary is by Judy Amabile, a Colorado state senator representing District 18, and Mark Wallach, a member of the Boulder City Council, writing in his individual capacity.
This November, the voters of Boulder County will be asked to approve Ballot Issue 1B, which provides for an increase of sales and use taxes of .15%. The proceeds from 1B, estimated to be $13.8 million in the first year, will support the needs of youth, adults, families, unhoused individuals and older adults with or at risk of mental health and substance use disorders. The funds will be used for various countywide programs as well as in grants to community providers.
It is clear that the revenue this tax will generate is needed to continue funding all of these services. Without the new revenue it provides, some important mental health supports and substance misuse disorder programming could be eliminated. That would be a disservice to those who rely on these programs for help. It is on this basis that we endorse 1B and advocate for its passage by the community.
But our support does come with some reservations, and we wanted to take this opportunity to explain what they are, and why, despite them, we continue to recommend passage of 1B.
The revenue from 1B will sustain mental health programs that are already in place, and that, by itself, is an important consideration in supporting the ballot initiative. The impact of an additional $13.8 million is not to be minimized, especially in an environment where the county budget is strained and all municipal budgets within the county are operating under tight financial conditions. The services to be provided by these additional funds include programs for those in need of help: people who are unhoused, addicted or suffering from a serious mental illness. We believe that the amount of the tax — 15 cents for a purchase of $100 — is more than proportionate, when measured against the benefits that can be provided by this additional funding.
OK, so what is the problem? Our reservations stem from a couple of concerns. The first is that while the additional funds will sustain established mental health programs, they are not sufficient to address a critical gap in our current system: residential and long-term treatment for people with severe mental illness (like schizophrenia) and difficult-to-treat addictions (like methamphetamine dependence).
Our current infrastructure does not provide adequate care for people with these conditions, and our community is dealing with the fallout: homelessness, repetitive emergency room care, overburdened jails and compromised public safety. This churn is devastating in terms of massive direct and indirect costs, and it causes needless suffering.
We need an adequate continuum of care for individuals with serious mental illnesses to disrupt and address this cycle. Without it, we can only go so far in our ability to treat the people who are the sickest. 1B will sustain important programming, but we urgently need a plan to bring about the transformational changes our community seeks.
We are also concerned with the lack of concrete plans from the county to address the manner in which funds from 1B will be spent. However, we regard the short, three-year term of 1B — which is unusual for a funding initiative — as a runway for the county to address these issues. The county has pledged to use this three-year period to strengthen transparency, measure outcomes and develop a clearer proposal for long-term investments to address untreated severe mental illness and addiction. We are optimistic that the county will do this work and fulfill this mandate.
Ballot Issue 1B, if not perfect, is an important step we can take now to continue funding programs addressing mental health and addiction. We need to keep these services afloat in this difficult financial time, and we must not let perfection be the enemy of the good. People are suffering, people whom we can help with the funds that will be generated by the passage of 1B. We therefore support the passage of 1B, and we hope that you will support it as well.
“We are also concerned with the lack of concrete plans from the county to address the manner in which funds from 1B will be spent. ” That says it all. Why should we support taxing citizens at a time when so many are struggling when the county has no plan and no cost benefit analysis to justify this expense? Let’s wait until we have both. That is wise public policy. Throwing money at a problem is not.
This is another example of the practice of local government: “Ready, Fire. Aim.”
They see an issue, rush to fund solutions and only then work out the details of how and where to measure and apply those solutions. It makes more sense to spend time on clearly identifying real and workable solutions before funding a system –and a staff to implement them. How about some time spend looking at programs in other places to see what has worked and will fit Boulder’s needs.
I think it is a good start and with oversight can begin the bigger job of a more permanent longterm solution. There is a bigger risk to the community if we don’t start somewhere. It will cost us some now but as a sales tax, shifts a lot to the visitors who do still frequent Boulder. We need these people to help support our businesses, especially those locally owned and operated, and prevent a loss of revenue from loss of shoppers who will feel safer when they visit. And make all of us safe too.
No business or nonproft can get funding/investment without a plan in place which includes specifics of how to measure the wise use of funds. And the use of trust but verify is laughable. That came from a conservative hawk who we knew would hold the Soviets accountable. No thank you. I’ll trust, verify and give my money to people who have a plan, experience and a means of measurement in place. And you are losing shoppers because of the expense of living in Boulder County. Adding more taxes is not helping business. Quite the opposite. More taxes along with the massive increase in minimum wage proposed by the county will just put more people out of business at a time when consumers are pulling back and job growth is down. We do need better mental health care but we also need to judiciously use taxpayer money. This current ballot measure is fiscally irresponsible.
We can’t keep raising sales tax to fund undefined programs. Yes, we have a problem with the mental health and addiction, particularly the unhoused. However, the lack of clear planning on how to best address the issues is disheartening. Rather than re-inventing the wheel, the city and county need to partner with organizations already working with these individuals – For Example – EFAA, Bridge House, and Mental Health Partners.