Boulder's Soda Tax and Foot Voting

I went home to Boulder, CO for fall break for the first time in a while. Boulder is a unique city, and upon arriving back home, I found myself surprised again by the mix of the public goods Boulder provides. One example of this public good is Boulder’s sugary-drink tax, a two cents per ounce excise tax on sodas that voters passed in the 2016 election — the highest soda tax in the country, and one of only eight in existence. Additionally, to protect the mountain views, no buildings are allowed to exceed 55 feet in height.

These laws are unique in nature, and their passage was controversial — I was certainly annoyed by the higher cost of my soda when I got lunch for the first time since getting back. However, it struck me that these are the exact types of laws Charles Tiebout would have advocated. Boulder is providing a unique set of public goods to try and attract residents — allowing them to vote with their feet. Neighboring towns Lafayette, Longmont, and Louisville have neither of the above laws. Individuals should be able to choose where they want to live based on these laws — if people want cheaper sodas or taller buildings, they can live elsewhere. By Tiebout’s standards, these laws appear to be a success, as Boulder is growing at a rate well above the national average. However, Tiebout doesn't account for overflow of public goods to other localities (among other things) in his model, as I can live closer to the mountains in Boulder, but drive ten minutes to Louisville for cheaper sodas. Additionally, people in Louisville benefit from the unblocked views Boulder's building laws create, but can live in taller buildings themselves. Thus, factors not accounted for by Tiebout’s model may affect individuals living decisions, not necessarily Boulder’s unique set of laws themselves.