Consultants from the PUMA firm presented an existing-conditions analysis and recommendations for Boulders established improvement districts (GIDs) and business-improvement areas at the April 8, 2025 joint commission meeting. The presenters recommended evaluating the formation of a downtown development authority (DDA) that could encompass downtown and The Hill and potentially extend to other commercial areas.

Why this matters: Presenters argued a DDA could provide options—tax increment financing (TIF) and an optional mill levy of up to five mills—to fund capital maintenance, streetscape and visitor-experience improvements without immediately raising existing tax rates citywide. Regan, a PUMA presenter, said, "Tax increment financing does not increase anybody's taxes," explaining that a DDA captures only future revenue increases above a base year and can reinvest the increment in the district.

Key findings and recommendations:
- District profiles: PUMA summarized budgets and market indicators for downtown (CAGID), University Hill (UJID) and Boulder Junction (BJAD). PUMA reported rising retail vacancy across most districts since the pandemic, office vacancy near 20% in some districts, and significant variation in property-value trends. Presenters said some districts face capital-maintenance backlogs and ambiguous roles between overlapping entities.
- DDA evaluation: PUMA recommended a near-term evaluation of a DDA that could use TIF and an optional mill levy (up to five mills) to finance infrastructure and redevelopment; consultants noted a DDA has a typical statutory life of 30 years with extensions possible. The presentation described a DDAs two primary revenue mechanics: (a) capturing incremental increases in sales and property tax revenues inside the DDA boundary; and (b) an optional mill levy, which could be used to consolidate existing district levies if voters approve.
- Alternative tools: If a DDA is not pursued, consultants proposed other options: debrucing to adjust mill levies, a Pearl Street public-improvement fee (PIF) on sales in a defined area, targeted lodging assessment capture for new hotels, urban-renewal tools on site-specific parcels, metropolitan districts for new, large-scale development, and options to merge BJAD's two overlapping GIDs (parking and TDM) to reduce administrative costs.
- Governance and safeguards: PUMA stressed the importance of a Plan of Development and DDA board composition to preserve local priorities and ensure The Hill's and downtown's interests are represented; suggested board seats could be allocated to ensure geographic representation.

Concerns and constraints discussed: Consultants and commissioners flagged several constraints and trade-offs: any TIF capturing property-tax increment would reduce future revenues flowing to other taxing authorities (for example, Boulder Valley Schools and the county) unless revenue-sharing or other arrangements are negotiated; TABOR/Tabor-election rules mean affected-area electors must approve most of these changes; and the language required on TABOR ballots can be difficult to communicate to voters. One commissioner noted that some nonprofit and affordable-housing properties have previously been unable to obtain fee waivers under the current GID structure, which could complicate consolidation or expansion.

Public comments at the meeting raised concerns that earlier tax programs intended to support nonprofits have shifted funding toward city capital projects and that raising property taxes could disproportionately affect residents on fixed incomes.

Ending: PUMA asked the commissions to provide input for a memo to city council; commissioners generally signaled support for continued evaluation and asked staff to include commission feedback in the memo scheduled for council in the coming days. No formal votes were taken.