Opinion: Energy slums or efficient housing?


Boulder is considering an ordinance that would require landlords to bring their rental units up to a reasonable standard of energy efficiency. The draft ordinance went to the Planning Board on Thursday, and will likely be considered by the City Council in May. But will the complaints by some landlords derail this important step in our efforts to address climate change while making rental housing more affordable?
The need to use regulation to improve energy efficiency was recognized many years ago. The reason is simple: When the tenants pay the utilities, landlords do not have a direct incentive to improve energy efficiency. And tenants have little incentive to make improvements since they will not be there long enough for the energy savings to pay them back. This “split incentives” paradox is the main obstacle to upgrading rental housing, and is why regulation is the only effective approach.
From my perspective, the complaints about the proposed regulations are overblown. Any building that can meet the energy code of a decade ago is in compliance. The implementation is phased; many buildings will meet their initial requirements at their first rental re-licensing with little or no improvement. After that, landlords have another complete rental license cycle of four years to meet the full requirements. Landlords have flexibility, in that they can choose to meet a performance standard or can opt to get a specified number of points from a list of possible improvements. From work done by the city on example units, the required investments should be cost effective, with the payback exceeding any reasonable cost of financing.
The city is also providing technical assistance, code named “Two Techs in a Truck,” to make energy retrofits as easy as possible. This program will provide energy auditors to determine what investments will get the best return, help obtain rebates from Xcel (assuming that they don`t cut us off because the program actually works) and from the state and federal governments (there may be millions of dollars of assistance), explain tax effects, aid with selection of and dealing with contractors, and assist with financing. Post-retrofit inspections will help ensure that the work was done correctly.
What about the effect on rents? A building that is upgraded should be able to generate more in rental income simply because the tenants will have to pay less in energy bills. And if the improvements selected are cost effective, then landlords ought to be able to increase their profits, since the higher rents will endure past the time when the improvements have been paid off. The tenants are better off, or at least no worse off, since their increase in rent is offset by a reduction in their energy bills. Since all buildings will be energy efficient, the whole market will shift, with no possibility of prospective tenants accidentally confusing apples (efficient retrofitted units) with lemons (energy hog units).
I asked a landlord friend what her experience was with making energy efficiency improvements. She said it made the property more valuable, and attracted tenants who were more likely to care for their rented home.
Another friend was concerned that the requirements might be difficult to do in a condo because of the HOA rules. According to city staff, the requirements can generally be met without impinging on these rules. City staff actually retrofitted an apartment and a condo to check their work in the real world.
A lot of thought and work has been put into this approach. It`s time to bite the bullet and do what`s right.


Popular Posts

Opinion: Opportunity for the new Boulder City Council

Congratulations to the four new Boulder City Council members! You have a great opportunity to make a contribution to the Boulder community, but it will take a lot of work to do it responsibly; the learning curve is pretty steep. Here are some suggestions for you (and other Council members) that may help improve the process. Read the Charter. It is the document that governs how you, city staff, and board and commission members operate, and how you relate to each other. It defines the limits of your and their power, and can only be amended by a citizen vote. You don’t have to remember every word. But just knowing what’s there makes you more self reliant and less at the mercy of others’ opinions. For example, relative to the recent meeting discussion over diversity, the council does  not  have the power to suspend the rules as to when the mayor is selected. Charter Section 14 specifies, “The mayor shall be chosen by the council from its own number, upon the convening of the new co
Read more

Opinion: Is this the end of Boulder as we know it?

Much of what has made Boulder such a great place to live has been the work of people half a century ago. These people recognized what I call the “ ratchet effect ,” that bad development decisions cannot be undone, so policies needed to be put in place to prevent, or at least limit, the damage that a growth-at-all-costs majority of the council could do. These policies include charter limits, like the Blue Line that prevents city water for development from being supplied above a certain altitude, the 55-foot height limit that has prevented high-rise development from cutting off our views, and the open space referendum process that allows a 60-day window for citizens to challenge disposals of open space. Other constraints include the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan’s requirement for Planning Board agreement for land-use changes in the area inside the city limits (Area I) and additional agreement by the county commissioners and county Planning Commission for urban development further
Read more

Policy Documents: Impact Fees and Adequate Public Facilities

I am writing this to correct some of the apparent inaccuracies put forward at the 10/14 CC/PB study session about charging growth for its costs. I do not claim to be an expert in the field, but I have studied it long enough and consulted with enough supposed experts and legal types to understand most of the basics. In addition, I have found that the experts don’t necessarily know everything and won’t necessarily put forward the most appropriate solutions. The fundamental rule, both legal and equitable, is that growth should pay to address its impacts so as to maintain existing levels of service (LOS) for existing residents and businesses. But growth cannot be required to improve levels of service. LOS is measured in all sorts of ways depending on the facility and/or service being measured. For transportation, it could be total VMT, travel time, intersection waits, access to transit, etc. For schools, it might be square footage per pupil, etc. For water, it could be water righ
Read more