After last week’s snowfall, the city received about 80 complaints about icy, hazardous streets, especially on steep roads like Bellevue Drive in Lower Chautauqua. Boulder’s new snow removal policy, which excludes plowing secondary streets during storms with less than three inches of snow, has drawn widespread frustration. Although the policy is data-driven and was reviewed by the Transportation Advisory Board and City Council, it has unintentionally created unsafe conditions for drivers and pedestrians on certain streets.

Councilmember Mark Wallach captured public sentiment perfectly in his Hotline message: this policy is creating hazardous conditions. Residents described their streets as “toboggan slides,” underscoring the danger posed by steep and shady roads where ice doesn’t melt quickly. The rationale for the policy: budget constraints. Expanding plowing to steep streets during small storms would cost $400,000 annually, with staffing challenges adding to the difficulty. However, Wallach pointed out the Transportation Fund’s $2 million surplus, suggesting it could be used for a one-time adjustment to address immediate safety concerns.

Public safety must remain the top priority. Other cities of similar size and climate have found practical solutions. Missoula, MT, prioritizes steep grades in its plowing strategy, while Provo, Utah, uses a combination of city crews and contractors to manage snow removal. Boulder could adopt a similar approach. A temporary patch, such as advancing steep streets to primary priority status or outsourcing steep street plowing, could mitigate risks while a long-term solution is developed. For example, Bellevue Drive, which has an 8% grade in some areas (according to my calculations), should be prioritized due to its unique hazards.

As a software engineer, I understand how edge cases can emerge despite the best intentions. You write what seems to be a flawless program and go through QA, only for users to uncover unforeseen bugs when it’s released into the real world. That’s what has happened here. The snow removal policy isn’t fundamentally flawed; it simply missed critical edge cases like steep and shady streets. Now that the issue has been identified, it’s time to revisit and refine the policy.

This issue also highlights Boulder’s broader budget challenges. Council must decide whether reallocating funds or delaying other services is necessary to ensure public safety. Even well-designed policies need adjustments when they create unintended consequences. Waiting until April to review this policy is not an option. When residents fail to shovel their sidewalks, they face fines to protect pedestrian safety. Shouldn’t the City hold itself to the same standard for its streets? Boulder must act now, before the next storm, to ensure its streets are safe for everyone.

Hernán Villanueva, chvillanuevap@gmail.com

Boulder started a new policy this winter. The policy? Not removing snow from neighborhood streets if the accumulation is under three inches. Despite this being a “new” policy, my buddy told me his street was plowed for the first time after our most recent storm. He’s stumped about why his street was plowed but likes the new no-plow policy because he has 4WD. And lives on a flat street. It’s much tougher for those who live on the Hill. Boulder needs a more nuanced policy based on street grade and post-storm temperature forecasts.

Boulder’s 2025 budget is nearly $600 million. Staffers estimate that expanding the city’s snow removal would cost $2.7 million to start up and $1.4 million yearly. Let’s call it $3 million a year to be charitable, which is 0.5% of the city budget. Let’s see if we can find a savings of 0.5% elsewhere in the budget …

The city’s General Fund was increased by 7.5% to $211 million and this fund is for “citywide core services.” Snow removal is a core service. On the website, seven projects are highlighted under the General Fund and five of them are funded for $250K or less. These five highlighted projects are less than 0.4% of the General Fund. Why not highlight where 99% of the money is going instead?

The Community Vitality program’s budget was increased by 30% to $22.8 million. But vitality … I mean, who doesn’t want community vitality? I think we all do.

We shouldn’t be touching essential services like the police ($46 million) or fire and rescue ($34 million), but there is no question we can move money from OSMP and it won’t even cost us anything! Why? On the city web page for the budget overview, it states OSMP has a budget of $38 million, but if you click through to the OSMP page it says the budget is $41.4 million. Cha-ching! Simply edit the webpage to make it consistent and we have our snowplow money. Sweet. Or reduce the ridiculously high head count of 146 employees.

The city employs 22 people for “Climate Initiatives,” up one from 2024, and spends $11.3 million on said initiatives. This is, by far, the dumbest money Boulder spends. If any of these employees could define the word “climate,” they’d know Boulder has zero effect on it. Eliminating these jobs would more than fund the snow-removal expansion. Heck, we could even repair potholes! Ah, but I know I’m dreaming.

Bill Wright, bill@wwwright.com

My first contact with Colorado snow came courtesy of Stephen Stills’s 1970s solo album. There he sits, sleeves rolled up, acoustic guitar in hand sitting in a wintry snow-scape outside his cabin in Gold Hill. From my bedroom window in Jersey City, I had never seen snow like that; fluffy, white, luminous. It was “happy” snow, not the dirt-encrusted slush that violated every corner of my childhood. Snow removal back East was a moral imperative, a demon to be exorcised, to be prayed away.

Snow is essential to Colorado’s economy and identity. Snow is a love letter to our state, until you have to shovel it. Now I speak of our collective aching back and pocketbook. My romance with Colorado snow soon melted and like any element of nature it can be dangerous, and that danger is most apparent on unplowed streets.

Boulder County has 740 miles of road of which 606 get plowed leaving 134 miles of treacherous passage. At a cost of about $3,169 per mile for snow removal that would leave a budget shortfall of $424,600 per snowfall. How do we reconcile a need for basic safety with budget restraints? Heavily used corridors, school and hospital routes, and bus lanes are prioritized. Pedestrian and bike passageways are thrown into the mix, with a vocal citizen outcry of “What about my street?”

If snow removal is a basic need as Councilman Wallach contends then we must expand our resources and imagination to meet this growing concern. After basic roadways are cleared is it possible to target steep side streets and east/west thoroughfares that don’t get direct sunlight with additional sanding?

Some cities have begun to use robotic snowplows which are compact and agile as part of their snow removal arsenal to address narrow roads and residential clearing. High-tech solutions are on the horizon.

In Boston, GPS real-time tracking allows its citizens to call in and alert the transportation department about roads that need servicing. This information if supported by traffic camera data enables the city to embark on a dynamic response. AI has now replaced the Farmer’s Almanac and can now create algorithms that predict snowfall and uncover trouble spots in specific municipalities.

John Greenleaf Whitter in his poem “Snowbound” exalts in the pleasure of forced isolation by a roaring fire. But a hundred and fifty years later Americans have places to go and people to see. So, whether a “happy snow” or a menacing white fury, snow on the roadways has to go, unless you’re sitting by your cabin in Gold Hill.

Jim Vacca, jamespvacca1@gmail.com