Over a year ago, South Boulder residents began lobbying the city to save their rec center after officials announced the building was nearing the end of its life. One year later, the city isn’t much closer to finding a clear funding source for its replacement.
The city bought some time last year by repairing some of the most urgent issues at the South Boulder Rec Center, but the 50-year-old building still needs to be replaced within five to seven years because of failing infrastructure. A replacement is likely to cost at least $30 million, and potentially far more, according to Ali Rhodes, director of Boulder’s Parks and Recreation Department.
“We do think there will be recreation in South Boulder,” Rhodes said. “It’s not in our interest to abandon this site.”
One possible solution would be a ballot measure to fund the project, though it remains unclear whether voters would approve it.
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) member Yvonne Castillo has also proposed taking some or all of the $53 million currently allocated for renovations at the East Boulder Rec Center and redirecting it to South Boulder instead, an idea city staff say is not feasible.
The suggestion has received pushback from Rhodes, who said the East Boulder renovations were approved by city council as part of a broader capital improvement plan in 2021. The project is currently in the planning stages and is necessary to ensure the long-term viability of the East Boulder Rec Center, Rhodes said.
“We want to catch it before we’re in the state that we are in at South,” she told PRAB members at a November 2025 meeting.
A city needs assessment found that both the East and North Boulder rec centers are nearing an inflection point, after which renovations are no longer cost-effective. South Boulder has already passed that threshold.
The East Boulder renovation project is also meant to reduce its energy use. Boulder’s three rec centers account for about 7% of the city’s municipal square footage but consume nearly 30% of its building energy, according to a 2021 city facilities master plan. Improving the rec centers’ energy performance is a key part of the city’s climate strategy, city documents say.
East Boulder renovations were listed as an example project in a 2021 ballot measure extending Boulder’s Community, Culture, Resilience and Safety (CCRS) sales and use tax, which passed with 86% of the vote. While the ballot language is not legally binding, Rhodes said abandoning those projects would raise credibility concerns.
“We think it would be a credibility concern when you’ve advertised a ballot measure and given examples of projects, to then not fund those projects,” she told PRAB members.
Lobbying to preserve South Boulder’s amenities
Ryan Bennett, an early member of Reimagine South Boulder Rec Center, said he is less concerned about where the money comes from than about what the replacement includes.
Earlier this month, the group launched a petition asking city council to commit to ensuring South Boulder retains “all three of its existing core features”: a six-lane lap pool, a full-size gymnasium, and exercise equipment and classrooms. The group has hosted events, distributed flyers to nearby residents and spoken at PRAB and city council meetings to press the issue.
Castillo is particularly concerned that the new rec center include a lap pool.
Rhodes said she isn’t interested in reducing the overall number of pools in Boulder, but “how and where we deliver it should be a discussion.” For the same amount of money, the city may be able to add more total lanes at an existing facility.
Rhodes said she’s not advocating for any one option, just an “out-loud conversation” about options via the city’s Fund Our Future initiative, a community engagement effort focused on spending priorities amid increasing financial strain. Sales and use tax revenues, the city’s main funding source, have begun to flatten, prompting reductions to the general fund in last year’s budget.
At the same time, 68% of the city’s revenues are dedicated and cannot be reallocated, limiting flexibility. Core services, including parks and recreation, remain underfunded. And the city faces at least a $380 million backlog of maintenance and repair needs, not including the South Boulder Rec Center.
The Fund Our Future window will begin in February and conclude in April, at which point Rhodes said staff can be more specific about plans for both the East and South Boulder rec centers.
“There are more needs than … current funding,” Rhodes said. “And so the question is going to be, What is most important to you?” she added, referring to the community. “And are you willing to pay for those things?”
Ballot measure
If the city is unable to redirect funding from the East Boulder Rec Center to fund the South Boulder Rec Center, it will need additional funds, likely through a ballot measure, ideally in the next few years to avoid further deterioration of the building.
Last year, city council opted not to put a “public realm” property tax on the ballot after polling showed weak support. The measure would have raised about $7 million annually for infrastructure projects.
The tax would have raised the existing permanent parks property tax and was floated as one potential funding source for a new South Boulder Rec Center. This year, PRAB has again urged city council to consider expanding the tax’s allowable uses and increasing rates.
That’s one of several ballot measure options the financial strategy committee is considering.
Still, a standalone South Boulder rec center ballot measure is unlikely. Instead, staff plan to bundle it with other city needs in hopes of attracting broader voter support.
PRAB member Andrew Bernstein agreed the project shouldn’t be pursued on its own. “I hope that in November we see a ballot measure to fund capital needs across the city, making it easy for all Boulderites to enthusiastically support the necessary bonding.”
BRL — it would be great if you could dig deeper into Boulder’s budget in a future piece. Boulder has a very large budget, and if it were managed and prioritized effectively, it seems like many necessary projects (Like South Boulder Rec) could already be funded without continually turning to new taxes and fees.
A few specific questions I’d love to see explored:
• City staffing levels: Boulder’s city staff-to-resident ratio appears significantly higher than comparable municipalities (even before counting consultants). Why is that? How has it changed over time, and what are the drivers? Could manual processes and jobs be reduced by smarter implantation of technology?
• Alpine-Balsam transparency: The City has not provided enough transparency around Alpine-Balsam, the largest capital project it has ever taken on. What is the full cost picture (including land value, site prep, bonds, interest, and consultant spend)?
• Office vacancy vs. new city offices: The City is building offices at Alpine-Balsam at a time when Boulder has roughly 30% office vacancy (and this trajectory has been evident for years). Why did the project continue unchanged, or why wasn’t it materially modified to match market realities? The Denver Office market has completely collapsed with office buildings selling for pennies on the dollar in the CBD….Similar things are staring to happen in Boulder as loans on vacant offices mature – the City is the best Tenant possible for a commercial landlord, we could be negotiating long term favorable leases for City offices in this environment instead of building a Taj Mahal that will put us deeper in debt.
• Affordable housing cost per unit: There will be affordable housing at Alpine-Balsam — but what is the City’s net cost per unit once all inputs are accounted for, including the effective land cost and financing? Once again this has never been shared with the public. What is the number and how does that compare to other ways Boulder could produce affordable units or alternative uses of that capital?
• Budget pressure and policy response: From the outside, it feels like unchecked staff size, consultants and large projects with limited scrutiny are putting unnecessary pressure on the budget — and the City’s primary response has been new taxes and fees (e.g., the recently implemented infrastructure fee), rather than doing the hard work of aggressively prioritizing, scaling back, and demanding accountability for spending.
It would be great to get some reporting that lays out the numbers in a clear, comparable way so residents can understand the tradeoffs and what’s driving costs. Something needs to change soon in Boulder and I don’t think the answer is passing on more taxes and fees to those that live and work here. Thanks
Awesome comments, Jorge; I completely agree. The city is not prioritizing what its community desires. There should have been a vote to “right-size” Iris and 30th. Unnecessary, in my view (along with many cyclists and neighbors I have spoken with). That $$ could be poured into rec centers. To this day I do not understand the city wanting to “centralize” its services to Alpine-Balsam. More concentrated traffic. I wish reality and common sense would replace ideology. Boulder is aging, younger adults who want families will want breathing space and will(already are) willing to drive in to work. Families arent exactly wanting to raise their kids in “affordable” apartments surrounded by cement (and BRL should investigate % occupancy of affordable and market rate apts/condos that have ruined the views around town–how many are moving in and has that reduced inbound traffic?) Been here 30 years, when it was a “15 minute” city…
777 Broadway, west side of street due south next door to “New” Vista, was to be the Homeless Shelter 20 yrs. ago. Instead the historic Hoby Wagener is being demolished for 4 stories with SIX bedroom apartments and those are for students, not families, and more profit to the developer because of less infrastructure. Since communal 40 bedroom Marpa House became Ash House, replaced with 16 3-bedroom “units,” there is rent-by-the-BEDROOM, all over, like at the Millennium, soon coming to Naropa Arapahoe, which CU owns, except for the Lincoln School, to be dwarfed. CU bought Rincon Mexican. 28th St. had City of Boulder Sales Tax Revenue generating hotels converted to student row. Colorado, west of 28th, up to the church across the street from the football stadium is all to be demolished. Up to 8 stories there, almost the whole block on the south side of the street across from Engineering. Next, another CU development diagonally at the SE corner of 28th and Colorado. Best Western farther south on 28th is now 4 stories, “The Hub”. Not a square foot for Boulder.
Jorge speaks truth to power. Run with his suggestion, BRL. Jorge for City Council.
“ The South Boulder Rec Center, a 50-year-old community hub, has been deteriorating for years. If the aging boiler that heats the pool fails again, the pool will close permanently.”
Genuine question, why not just have an unheard pool? Crazy concept, I know. Might be nice in the summer.
Louisville passed an extra tax for their $28 million Rec center renovation a decade ago. Taxes that mostly benefit one corner of town are tougher to pass.
CCRS! We just passed a tax for facilities and infrastructure not yet three months ago that is never scheduled to sunset, along with a big increase in allowable debt that can be financed with the sales tax. The 2A ballot measure language literally says revenue from the sales tax can be used for “recreation center renovations and replacements.”
If you would like to see th South Rec center keep the core amenities please read the petition below and consider signing.
https://www.change.org/SBRCpetition
Why exactly are we consolidating all city offices to the Alpine Balsam site again? I never understood why that campus was necessary considering all of the vacant office space around town, and especially in East Boulder.
With a backlog of maintenance projects and apparently declining sales and use tax revenue, hard questions need to be asked and decisions made regarding the Department’s programs and priorities. For example, was it wise to add 5 urban park rangers to the city’s permanent staff among these budget shortfalls?
It’s no surprise that no progress on the South Boulder rec center has been made in the last year, since there has been no planning to upgrade or replace any of these aging decrepit facilities over the last several decades. The plan all along has been to wait until there is a crisis, then react. We should absolutely move funds from the East Boulder project to support a new facility at South Boulder. This city desperately needs additional indoor pools. The city contracted a study 10 years ago regarding the need for additional aquatic facilities. That study has been largely ignored and shelved. Our facilities are frankly embarrassing considering our budget and in relation to our neighboring towns. Projects such as Alpine Balsam, the bike lane expansions on Iris and Baseline need to really be examined as to whether these were wise use of community funds, and who they actually serve.