In the wake of Boulder’s 2025 city election, Boulder Reporting Lab brought together two of its opinion columnists – Brian Keegan, a CU professor, and Bob Yates, a former Boulder city councilmember – for a candid conversation about the results, what they signal for local politics and where the city might be headed next.
The discussion came after the near-final batch of results confirmed that voters had reelected Councilmembers Matt Benjamin, Mark Wallach and Nicole Speer, along with newcomer Rob Kaplan, a former captain with Boulder Fire-Rescue who ran on a more moderate platform and unseated progressive incumbent Lauren Folkerts. All four city and county ballot measures passed easily, funding everything from open space and capital projects to mental health services. What follows is a back-and-forth between two keen observers of Boulder civic life, one seeing voters staying the course on the council’s progressive trend, the other detecting a modest shift to the center.
Brian Keegan: So Bob, Boulder voters have spoken. What’s your first reaction to this year’s election?
Bob Yates: Hi, Brian. I think it’s worthwhile noting a couple of historical points: First, it’s been quite a while since every single city council incumbent ran for reelection. Typically, one or two retire voluntarily. But this year, all four incumbents ran.
Second, it’s rare for voters to retire an incumbent against their will. I believe that this has happened only twice in the past 20 years: Tim Plass in 2015 and Jan Burton in 2017. So, a little like the U.S. Congress, Boulder City Council has more than a 90% reelection rate for incumbents who choose to run again. With newcomer Kaplan unseating incumbent Councilmember Folkerts, maybe that security of tenure is eroding.
Keegan: The nearly 2,000-vote gap between Speer and Folkerts is a storyline that will be worth following in December after the County Clerk releases the ballot-level cast vote records. There were strong efforts by those trying to unseat both Speer and Folkerts to tie the pair together but voters ended up keeping only one of them. Did the proliferation of three-member slates in a four-seat race scramble things?
Editor’s note: Groups like Boulder Progressives and Sierra Club endorsed three candidates: Benjamin, Speer and Folkerts. Meanwhile, several of the most prominent moderate-to-conservative groups like PLAN-Boulder County and Open Boulder endorsed Wallach, Robins and Kaplan, and Open Boulder also endorsed Benjamin. The practice of endorsing coordinated groups of candidates is known as forming “slates,” Boulder’s closest equivalent to local political parties.
Yates: I’m not sure that “slates” ever play a big role in who is elected to city council in Boulder. Invariably, it’s some from Column A and some from Column B, and that’s what happened again this year. Speer and Folkerts were endorsed by many of the same groups, but only one prevailed. Likewise, Kaplan and Robins were endorsed by many of the same groups, but only one of them was elected. I give Boulder voters credit for picking people over politics.
Keegan: Turnout, in both absolute and relative metrics, was not substantially higher than previous years, maybe even below 2019. Electoral reaction to federal disruptions showed up around the country but didn’t trickle down to significantly greater turnout for Boulder’s races. Does this mean the Boulder bubble is real? Or what do you think of other explanations, like the absence of polarizing local ballot issues keeping turnout down?
Yates: You’re right that a dearth of interesting ballot measures probably kept turnout a little lower than typical. And I’m guessing that 11 out of the 11 people who ran for Boulder City Council are opposed to Trump, so there was no opportunity to vent there.
Rather, the big issues in this year’s city council campaign seemed to be wildfire mitigation, transportation infrastructure and support for small businesses. Newcomer Kaplan — a former firefighter and small business owner — may have resonated better with voters on those issues than incumbent Folkerts, who wanted to limit some wildfire mitigation efforts, supported closing lanes on Iris Avenue, voted last month to impose a new transportation fee on residential and commercial property owners, and advocated raising the minimum wage beyond the point that some small businesses felt comfortable with.
Keegan: Folkerts was not alone among the incumbent candidates in her position on the issues you mentioned, so perhaps those issues contributed but were not decisive.
Boulder has a lot to be thankful for with Lauren. She stepped up after the pandemic and did unglamorous work on modernizing our land-use and building codes while representing the interests of younger people and renters who rarely get such an effective voice in local government. Boulder is going to end up missing her expertise as an architect when so much of the business before council involves questions about what kind of city we want to build. But I am not alone in believing she also has a very bright future in politics (if she wants one). Maybe readers can share their theories about her loss in the comments.
I would absolutely welcome Kaplan helping to move our policy focus toward major ecological (wildfires, floods, smog) as well as sociological (aging, slowing growth, affordability) crises Boulder faces in the short through long term. Clearing out the red tape that leaves small businesses waiting months for permits should also be on a shortlist for the council retreat.
What’s another reaction you have to these results?
Yates: I think there will be a shift in the politics and policies of city council as a result of this election. Kaplan is more of a centrist than Folkerts, who he’s replacing. And we’ve already seen a move towards the middle by Matt Benjamin (this year’s top vote-getter) and Speer, both of whom have been perceived in the past as more liberal than some of their council colleagues.
As a result, I think that real estate development proposals will get greater scrutiny next year than they’ve received the last two years. Perhaps the new transportation maintenance fee will be revisited, considering that only five of the nine councilmembers were in favor of imposing it starting in the middle of next year, including the soon-to-be-departed Folkerts. We may see a reconsideration of the proposed Iris Avenue lane closures, especially as the county selects a buyer who will build new housing on the county’s land at Iris and Broadway. We’ll probably see a rollback of the scheduled minimum wage increases for tipped employees. And council likely will be more aggressive on wildfire mitigation in 2026, under the leadership of newly elected councilmember Kaplan, who brings 18 years of firefighting experience to the council dais.
Keegan: One of the biggest issues that will be before council in 2026 will be the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. Kaplan’s bona fides serving Boulder’s bicyclist community could translate into prioritizing bicyclist and pedestrian safety as part of the BVCP and expanding Boulder’s investments in the beleaguered Core Arterial Network. He also campaigned on wildfire safety, and there are much-needed code changes to prepare ourselves for the risks of a drier, hotter and windier future. What do you think could be different about the council’s priorities and process around the BVCP next year in the aftermath of this election?
Yates: Actually none, as it relates to the Comprehensive Plan. While I think there will be shifts on council next year around things like the minimum wage, wildfire mitigation and transportation priorities, I don’t think the substitution of Kaplan for Folkerts will change the once-a-decade update of the Comp Plan, scheduled for 2026.
First written in 1977, it’s a mammoth document that no one really understands and that has a hundred internal inconsistencies. If it ever served as a policy document guiding Boulder’s growth and development, those days are long past. When council tackles a decennial update to the Comp Plan, they ultimately give up after a year or two and go along with whatever city staff says. Then council invariably makes growth and development decisions on a case-by-case basis, regardless of how the Comp Plan reads. Predicting Boulder’s future using the Comp Plan would be like reading the Bible to learn how to change the oil in your car.
Keegan: Any thoughts on the ballot measures that all passed overwhelmingly? I supported Boulder County creating a mental health tax with Issue 1B to fund additional services as a bridge for the next three years, especially as federal and state funding disappears. The county taking on this issue potentially breaks the logjam of the county and municipalities blaming each other for gaps in supporting these services.
But this and other measures like county Issue 1A and city Issue 2A are also sales taxes, which are more regressive and variable funding sources. Tying social services to sales taxes means funding evaporates when people need them most and expands when we need them least. And saving excess revenue in a rainy day reserve fund is tougher when Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR) requires governments to use it or lose it. I would personally rather see social services be funded in the future by more equitable and consistent property taxes. Bob, what do you think of this year’s ballot issues?
Yates: Brian, I think this year’s ballot measures were kinda boring. The only new thing that passed was a county tax to support mental and behavioral health. Like you, I supported it, in part because it’s only for three years. But the county commissioners now have to come up with a cogent plan for how to spend the $14 million a year it will generate, so that voters will be willing to renew the tax when it expires in 2028. I have a few ideas, but you and I can save that for a future column.
Keegan: Last question: 2025 was also the last odd-year council election, meaning there will be another election for city council in November 2026. This new council may only get a single year together. What is your advice to the new council as they gear up for a council retreat based both on these results and on your experience?
Yates: My advice to council: Listen to your constituents, and don’t take yourselves too seriously.
Thank you for this thoughtful discussion. However, property taxation is not in all cases more equitable. I retired in 2018 (not with a $1m retirement fund) and the world is entirely a different place. I make approximately $80,000/year now but pay approximately $10,000/year in property taxes (on a third of a lot) and approximately $10,000/year on homeowner’s insurance. I’m not anti-tax; in fact I’m sympathetic to most of the causes for which taxes are earmarked, but it’s very difficult to get by with what’s left in my allowance. Remember there are other charitable organizations that also need donations for their work. This is just food for thought for another article–I, too, will feel the sales taxes, but at least it’s a little bit at a time. Thanks for listening.
I like seeing this more balanced editorial. To continue balance, next time have Yates interview Keegan.
Thanks for reading, Barbara. I would love to interview Brian next time. We’re already kicking around a few timely topics on which I think we can civilly disagree. – Bob
Bob and Brian, I greatly appreciated your taking the time to have this conversation. It gave me further insights on our city’s challenges. Although I have been a cycling commuter most of my working life of 45 years, I hope that the Iris lane-reduction project will not take place, especially because of the increased traffic we will have due to both the Alpine project and the upcoming Broadway and Iris project.
100% enjoyed the back and forth between Bob and Brian. Its entertaining and informative. I’d like to see more!
To me this election for more notable for what issues weren’t discussed and perhaps purposefully avoid. First and foremost environmentalism is often cited as a major part of Boulder’s ethos. As far as I can tell, there was little to no discussion on decarbonization or how we plan to meet our climate goals. Electrification of Pearl anyone?! There is no future in methane gas and the council needs to accept this fact and take action.
With federal environment regulations being eroded everyday the city has an even bigger role to play. Did the Sierra Club even have any sort of questionnaire or score card for the candidates? Elections are a great time to get politicians on the record and find out their stances.
The Flock AI surveillance is another great example. This is completely antithetical to any sort of liberal or progressive ideal and yet I saw little to no discussion of this.
Perhaps it’s time for a new political organization in Boulder that’s willing to truly take on these unavoidable and critical issues that face all of us.