We want to protect and keep the middle class in Boulder

0

As Livable Boulder moves forward in getting 4,500 signatures to put its two initiatives on the ballot, we would like to point out to the community that one of our main goals is to protect and keep the middle class in Boulder. The two initiatives are called “Development Pays its Way” and “Neighborhoods’ Right to Vote.” Both of these initiatives were written with the middle class in mind.

“Development Pays its Way” was drafted to make large scale developments pay impact fees to offset the impacts that development causes on services, such as traffic, police, fire and other services that the city provides. The city administration brought in an expert from out of state to discuss impact fees with city council and the city employees a few months ago. This expert also met with concerned citizens to answer questions about impacts of development on the city. In no uncertain terms, this expert stated very clearly to the citizens that developments do have a huge impact on the city with associated monetary costs. Without impact fees, the city taxpayers end up subsidizing these developments.

So how can this ballot initiative, making the developers pay for these impacts, help the middle class? Simply put, charging developers for these impacts reduces the amount of taxes that citizens have to pay for city facilities and services. So instead of going back to the voters to ask for yet another tax increase to pay for the impacts of more and more growth, the city council could point out that when growth pays its own way the city will save money and thereby be able help the middle class. If such impact fees were fully implemented, there might even be an opportunity to reduce current tax rates. This would help the middle class afford the rising costs of living in Boulder. Further, the city could provide rental or mortgage support for people who make up the middle class, or even offset increased property taxes that people have to pay. These are only a few examples of what could be done. Creative thinking could certainly come with other ways to use this considerable revenue to benefit the middle class after the city no longer has to subsidize the developers’ projects and profits. Why don’t we hear our city council members discussing these types of arguments? That perhaps is a question for the coming election in November.

The other initiative, “Neighborhoods’ Right to Vote,” also was drafted with the middle class in mind. It provides a much needed safe guard for our remaining middle class, single family neighborhoods. The initiative creates a pathway for our neighborhoods to vote on accepting or rejecting land use regulation changes that affect them. An example of a land use regulation change would be the upzoning of a single family neighborhood to allow multi-unit, high density buildings in that neighborhood. If 10 percent of the neighbors petition to get a full neighborhood vote, then a majority of all those voting in that neighborhood would have to vote to reject that change in order for it not to come into force. A vote on a particular development project in a neighborhood would not be allowed unless that development proposal required a land use regulation change. If there was no land use regulation change proposed, the developer could build under the existing land use regulations for that neighborhood. One neighborhood’s vote does not affect any other neighborhood. The initiative would also not impact commercial development adjoining the neighborhood.

How would this initiative help the middle class? First of all, it would give the neighborhoods a say in the development that takes place in their neighborhood. From a practical sense, the city would have to engage the neighborhoods before enacting land use changes. One of the benefits of this cooperation between the city and the neighborhoods is that it allows neighborhoods to protect the lifestyle they have. Our neighborhoods have residents who have been living in their houses for 20-30 years, or even longer. Many of these residents are the middle class of Boulder. They live in Martin Acres, Newlands, Table Mesa, East Aurora, Goss Grove, as well as many other neighborhoods throughout the city. They have a way of life that the developers would gladly snatch away to profit from the building of high density, multi-unit housing in the neighbor-hoods. This initiative would provide protection for those middle class residents so that they could “age in place,” maintaining the lifestyle they have lived for most of their lives.

Other middle class residents in our neighborhoods consist of young families. These young families want to raise their children in a neighborhood setting. They don’t want to be forced to live in an apartment with their children, as many of the city planners would like them to do. They choose their neighborhoods for the explicit purpose that they are neighborhoods, not high density housing projects. If the neighborhoods are upzoned, which appears to be the city’s ultimate goal, these middle class Boulderites will leave Boulder. The city talks all the time about how we need young, middle class families in our city. These families are already here. They live in our neighborhoods. This initiative is one way to further that goal and to encourage a neighborhood family way of life. It will also be an incentive for other young, middle class families to move to Boulder knowing that their neighborhood will have a say in its future.

The development of luxury condos and increased property taxes in the city is obviously not working for the middle class. Yet the business community argues “let’s do more of the same” because they “supposedly” have affordable housing in mind. Everyone knows, however, that the housing these developers are building is anything but affordable. Instead, it is driving the middle class out of our city. As we were all told growing up, don’t listen to what someone says but watch what they do. And what the developers are doing is making Boulder unaffordable for anyone but the richest of our citizens. They say they are for affordable housing but the results of their actions tell a completely different story.

Let’s get these two ballot initiatives on the ballot and over the coming months have an intelligent discussion about Boulder’s future. If we don’t do that, we will end up with more of the same, and the evidence is clear that would be a disaster for the middle class.