Tax fight supplants 2011 municipalization campaign $1.22 million: Total amount spent on both sides of Boulder ballot issue 2H, which would create a $0.02-per-ounce excise tax on distributors of soda and other sugary beverages. About 60 percent of that total has been raised by Healthy Boulder Kids, the group pushing the tax. $1.07 million: Total amount spent in 2011 on both sides of Boulder ballot issues 2B and 2C, which voters narrowly approved, and which allowed the city to begin its quest to form a municipal electric utility. Proponents of municipalization were outspent 10 to 1 by Xcel Energy.

Coming Sunday Watch for a full voter guide, and a closer look at the sugary drink tax that’s on this year’s Boulder ballot, in Sunday’s Daily Camera

A month out from Election Day, the fight over a proposed $0.02-per-ounce excise tax on distributors of soda and other sugary drinks already is Boulder’s most expensive election campaign ever.

According to campaign finance reports posted Wednesday by the city clerk’s office, the issue committees organized for and against the tax have raised a total of more than $1.22 million in contributions.

City records show the most expensive campaign Boulder had seen prior to this year took place in 2011, when Xcel Energy spent just shy of $1 million to stop Boulder ballot measures 2B and 2C, which gave the city authority to leave Xcel and form a municipal utility, and to raise the occupation tax on Xcel to help pay for the legal and engineering fees associated with that process.

The fight over 2B and 2C brought in a total of $1.07 million, with proponents of municipalization being vastly outspent, and accounting for only about $100,000. Voters narrowly supported the ballot measures, in spite of the opposition’s much deeper pockets.

The sugary beverage tax — referred to as 2H on ballots — has inspired major industry spending, just as the 2011 municipalization vote did. The “No on 2H” issue committee has brought in $503,000 to date, with every penny of that money coming from the Coca-Cola and Pepsi-backed American Beverage Association.

But this time around, the ostensible little guy is much wealthier than it was on 2B and 2C. Healthy Boulder Kids, the group pushing the tax, has raised $724,000 to date — $630,000 of which comes from the organization Healthier Colorado.

In a statement Wednesday, Matthew Moseley, spokesman for No on 2H, questioned Healthy Boulder Kids’ fundraising.

“Where is their money coming from? We are less than a month out from the election and they owe it to the voters of Boulder to disclose where the dollars from Healthier Colorado are coming from. That is a lot of money to enact a tax that won’t make people healthy,” Moseley said.

Healthier Colorado was founded about two years ago as an offshoot of the Colorado Health Foundation, which gave the organization a $15 million endowment to get started.

Jake Williams, executive director of Healthier Colorado, said in a recent interview that the contributions his group has made recently in Boulder were drawn from that endowment.

Healthy Boulder Kids has also benefitted from a $73,500 contribution by the American Heart Association, plus several dozen smaller donations from individuals.

Angelique Espinoza, campaign manager for Healthy Boulder Kids, also offered a statement Wednesday.

“We knew at the outset the tactics that the soda industry would bring to fight us, as they have in other places where people dared to stand up to them,” she said.

“That’s why we are working so hard to raise awareness in our community about the unhealthy effects of sugary drinks and to build grassroots support for the soda excise tax in Boulder. Our efforts are working. We now have a growing list of more than 200 supporters, including numerous individuals as well as organizations such as the American Diabetes Association, The American Heart Association, Moxie Moms, Alfalfa’s Market and the YWCA of Boulder.”

While both sides have brought in plenty of cash, the proponents are spending at a much higher clip, with about $670,000 in expenditures to date.

The bulk of $231,000 Healthy Boulder Kids has reported spending since Sept. 27 has gone toward digital and cable advertising.

Meanwhile, much of No on 2H’s $282,000 in spending has gone toward print ads, mailers and video production. Also included on that side’s payroll are Denver and Washington, D.C., consultants and a San Francisco polling group. The campaign has not run any TV ads yet, focusing video spots on social media instead.

Moseley, the spokesman, said No on 2H isn’t sure whether it will bring in more money between now and Nov. 8. Espinoza, though, suggested that the total spent on Boulder’s most expensive campaign ever is going to keep rising.

“We do expect to raise and spend a little more to cover our full voter outreach program,” she said.

The next deadline for campaign finance reporting is Oct. 25.

Alex Burness: 303-473-1389, burnessa@dailycamera.com or twitter.com/alex_burness