Boulder County 2025 Community Survey

Magellan Strategies is pleased to present the topline results of a survey of 1,574 adult residents in Boulder County, Colorado. The interviews were conducted from November 13th to 24th, 2025.

Residents of Boulder County expressed a mix of pride in their community and concern about several pressing challenges. When asked about the most important issues the county should address in the coming years, housing affordability was the most frequently mentioned concern, with residents pointing to rising rents and home prices, limited middle-income housing, and restrictive zoning. Homelessness and related safety concerns were also prominent, along with the overall cost of living, including groceries, utilities, childcare, and transportation. Other commonly cited issues included taxes and government spending, traffic congestion, infrastructure conditions, bicycle and pedestrian safety, and the preservation and maintenance of open space and trails.

Residents generally viewed Boulder County as a desirable place to live, with three-quarters saying it was a better place to live compared with other counties in Colorado. However, opinions about the county’s direction were more divided, with more residents saying things were on the wrong track than on the right track, and a sizable share unsure. Those who believed the county was headed in the right direction frequently cited the natural environment, outdoor recreation opportunities, strong quality of life, investments in infrastructure and public spaces, and the community’s progressive values and social services.

Residents who believed the county was on the wrong track most often pointed to housing affordability, homelessness, and rising living costs. Many expressed concerns about encampments, drug activity, and safety in public spaces. Others cited dissatisfaction with government spending, rising taxes, infrastructure problems, and a perception that local policies favored developers or wealthy newcomers. Frustration with construction delays, traffic congestion, and what some saw as bureaucratic or ideologically driven decision-making also contributed to negative perceptions about the county’s direction.

Quality-of-life ratings remained generally positive despite these concerns. Large majorities rated their neighborhoods and the county overall as good places to live, and many also rated the overall quality of life favorably. More moderate ratings were given to Boulder County as a place to raise children, work, or retire, while perceptions of openness to diverse people and the overall sense of community were more mixed.

Residents reported frequent interactions with county services and programs. Parks, open space areas, and trails were by far the most commonly used amenities, with nearly all residents saying they had used open space trails or visited natural areas. Libraries, public transportation, and mobility services were also widely mentioned as common points of interaction with county government. Other interactions included motor vehicle and election services, as well as various health and human service programs.

Opinions about county government performance varied depending on the service or department. Parks and open space programs received the most favorable impressions, while services such as the motor vehicle office and fairgrounds also received generally positive ratings. However, perceptions were more mixed for departments such as the sheriff’s office, public health, road and bridge maintenance, and human services, and many residents reported limited familiarity with certain departments and programs. Approval of the Board of County Commissioners was divided, with similar shares approving and disapproving and many residents unsure.

Residents placed high importance on the county’s strategic priorities, particularly good governance, economic security and social stability, and environmental stewardship. However, evaluations of the county’s progress toward achieving those priorities were more modest, with stronger ratings for climate action and environmental stewardship than for economic security or governance. Many residents also believed population growth and residential housing growth were occurring too quickly, highlighting broader concerns about managing growth, maintaining affordability, and preserving the county’s quality of life.