Vehicle Climate Fee
Consultation has concluded
Addressing climate change is an important priority at the city. The City of Boulder has adopted aggressive climate and sustainability goals, including 100 percent renewable electricity and an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The city’s current revenue for climate programs is insufficient to meet these targets, especially in light of the urgency that is now known.
Staff has evaluated a number of revenue options, especially related to reducing transportation, which accounts for more than a quarter of our community's emissions. Based on that evaluation, council has directed staff to pursue the development of a proposed Vehicle Climate Fee, which includes gathering community feedback on a possible fee structure and uses.
The proposed fee amount would be added to the cost of car's annual registration and will be determined by the mile per gallon (MPG) of the vehicle. More efficient vehicles would pay a lower fee, and electric vehicles would be exempt. The fee is expected to be between $10 and $50 per vehicle each year.
Addressing climate change is an important priority at the city. The City of Boulder has adopted aggressive climate and sustainability goals, including 100 percent renewable electricity and an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The city’s current revenue for climate programs is insufficient to meet these targets, especially in light of the urgency that is now known.
Staff has evaluated a number of revenue options, especially related to reducing transportation, which accounts for more than a quarter of our community's emissions. Based on that evaluation, council has directed staff to pursue the development of a proposed Vehicle Climate Fee, which includes gathering community feedback on a possible fee structure and uses.
The proposed fee amount would be added to the cost of car's annual registration and will be determined by the mile per gallon (MPG) of the vehicle. More efficient vehicles would pay a lower fee, and electric vehicles would be exempt. The fee is expected to be between $10 and $50 per vehicle each year.
-
Share Submit your ideas for how the funding from the proposed Vehicle Climate should be used! on Facebook Share Submit your ideas for how the funding from the proposed Vehicle Climate should be used! on Twitter Share Submit your ideas for how the funding from the proposed Vehicle Climate should be used! on Linkedin Email Submit your ideas for how the funding from the proposed Vehicle Climate should be used! link
Submit your ideas for how the funding from the proposed Vehicle Climate should be used!
over 5 years agoFunding from the proposed fee will go to on-road transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions including developing infrastructure, creating program offerings and driving market transformation.
Additionally, staff will be piloting a Participatory Budgeting process to allow community members to determine how a portion of the revenue from the fee will be used.
Tell us your ideas! What should the city use the funds collected from the proposed vehicle climate fee for?
elemdoubleuabout 5 years agoTurn street parking into parklets
"Parklets are designed to provide a public place for passersby to relax and enjoy the atmosphere of the city around them, in places where either current urban parks are lacking or where the existing sidewalk width is not large enough to accommodate vibrant street life activities." -- Wikipedia
0 comment0gwedoguidoabout 5 years agoUse the commuter toll to buy all of the gas stations in Boulder and shut them down. Install electric in their place.
Close all of the gas stations
0 comment0elemdoubleuabout 5 years agoCommunity Wide EcoPass
EcoPasses should be available to add residents, regardless of employer or neighborhood. According to the 2014 TMP, studies have calculated that the auto driver only pays for 10 to 60% of the true cost of an auto trip. We should be subsidizing transit *at a greater rate* than we subsidize auto driving.
0 comment1shaquettayabout 5 years agoWhy the heck are you asking us? Put the money where the actual experts say to put it.
We're not the experts here. Economists and climate scientists are. If you ask a question of the community that the experts should be answering instead, it devalues BOTH the opinion of the experts AND the community members' contributions. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/most-public-engagement-is-worse-than-worthless
0 comment1mjwynneabout 5 years agoThis is just another way for Boulder City to try to rake in more $$. When will this stop in Boulder?
0 comment0 -
Share What do you think the average fee should be? on Facebook Share What do you think the average fee should be? on Twitter Share What do you think the average fee should be? on Linkedin Email What do you think the average fee should be? link
What do you think the average fee should be?
over 5 years agoRecent ground-breaking scientifically proven reports show that there is still a narrow window to prevent catastrophic climate change and argue that some form of carbon pricing (e.g. a tax on greenhouse gas emission) will be necessary.
If the proposed Vehicle Climate fee were set to recover the true societal costs of vehicle emissions, it would be about $250/year for an average gasoline vehicle. This would obviously be a financial burden for Boulder residents, so staff is modeling fee options around $10-50 per vehicle, depending on the mileage.
Additionally, staff is investigating several options to address equity including:
- tying the amount of the fee to the value of the car, so that the tax does not unfairly burden people with lower incomes (similar to the ownership tax);
- rebates for people with low-income (using the same income threshold as the food tax rebate);
- rebates for service workers who rely on specific vehicles; and
- rebates for residents that can prove a very low mileage per year.
What do you think the average fee should be?
ChrisGabout 5 years agoPreferred tax structure is often regressive WRT carbon emissions
The preferred tax structure is extreme regressive wrt emissions. Using myself/family) as an example: 28 years ago, I chose employment in Boulder in part so I could bike to work (for climate and health reasons) and still use my bike whenever possible. I own a gasoline powered car. The combined yearly mileage for 3 people was ~3200, >1/2 of which is typically summer vacation travel (typically 2 people) on highways. My car gets a MEASURED and TRACKED 38-40 MPG on the highway and ~28 MPG City. My son works nights (i.e. no public transportation available) and bikes to work most of the year, but recently bought his 1st car largely for transportation during winter and inclement weather conditions. Not the greatest mileage, but it was very inexpensive. The proposed tax structure would effectively punish low effective carbon footprint folks like us at a much greater RATE per ton of carbon emitted per person than someone who travels 50 miles per day but owns an expensive Prius for example. Better would be a tax on actual gas/diesel consumption. That only works if the tax is regional. Not as good would be a tax based on vehicle rating and ACTUAL miles driven. The miles driven could be taken from the periodic emissions tests, or from the common insurance company data base (if that is accessible). Also note that people who drive little and keep cars for many years do no add to the excess manufacture and consumption of cars that has a large footprint of its own! Please don't punish us simply because its easy ( and may sound good while being ineffective and regressive). Also, please make whatever measure you come up with directly carbon-effective and income-neutral. Regardless of income, reducing ones own carbon footprint is a personal civic responsibility. If you can;t afford to buy a $50k car, use a bike, or move to a place where you can (as I did long before it was fashionable).
0 comment0Sallyabout 5 years agoIt's hard to decide on a fee when there are areas of Boulder that are poorly served by public transportation and driving is needed.
0 comment3Boulder77almost 5 years agoI certainly agree. $250 a year is a small price to pay to possibly save the planet.
0 comment0Shawn McQuerryabout 5 years ago$0
This is a regressive subsidy for Tesla owners that doesn't address the real issues (lack of mass transit and dangerous year-round bike commuting conditions that supports ALL citizens)
1 comment8Nogasgertieabout 5 years agoWhy are there so many gigantic cars and SUVs in Boulder?
If it is because they want to go in the mountains to get to trails that a Prius can’t get to I understand because I drive a Prius and have to rely on others. I wish there was an SUV sharing service. Maybe this would work for others as well. So yes, tax the hell out of those big gas guzzlers
0 comment0
Who's listening
Important Links
Key Dates
-
May 14 2019