Opinion: Thanks for being able to serve our community

It’s Thanksgiving week! I want to give thanks for being able to write this column and all the other opportunities I’ve had over the last 40-plus years to serve our Boulder community.

My first political foray was in 1982, when I conceived Boulder’s solar access ordinance. This was way before I ever thought about running for the council. I had designed and helped build a few solar houses. And when I read about such ordinances elsewhere, it seemed like Boulder should also have one. I ended up working with Susan Osborne, then in the Planning Department, and later our mayor, on the concepts. And with help from then assistant city attorney Alan Boles, it got drafted and the council passed it.

I was blown away — I could actually do something big that would make a positive difference to my community. That led to working at the Legislature, running for council, lots of other projects and eventually writing for the Daily Camera. As a kid, I hated listening to my parents talk politics. And my worst skill in school was writing. So, of course, here I am — writing about politics.

It’s heartwarming to read in the papers about Coloradoans’ efforts to restore our beaver population. Beavers can help restore wetlands, reduce flood hazards and mitigate wildfire risk. And their interference with irrigation ditches, etc., apparently can be managed. I’m thankful that they’re coming back.

It was also inspiring to see the photo of pelicans in Sawhill Ponds in the Camera. Having wildlife around refreshes my sense of balance regarding the damage humans do to our environment. So, thanks to those birds for being here. Their presence warms my heart.

Last week, I read that the State Demographer’s Office now forecasts that the state will grow by 120,000 fewer people by 2029 and 200,000 fewer by 2050. The SDO seems to still be advocating for population growth, so its willingness to forecast lower numbers is, in my opinion, a huge plus. Personally, I’d rather see Colorado stop growing and preserve what wilderness we have left.

A deal has finally been cut to buy the Colorado River water rights associated with the Shoshone hydro plant in Glenwood Canyon. These rights attracted a lot of interest from some Front Range water providers, who wanted to use them to supply water to their cities. But the purchase by the Colorado River District, and approved by the state water board, pretty much guarantees that the water will stay in the river. Thanks! The river’s flow has shrunk markedly in recent decades (a third by some estimates); keeping the Colorado River at a decent level is critical to preserving our natural environment.

Locally, last week, the council approved the Williams Village 2 redevelopment. It has 304 residential units of varying sizes, from efficiency units to 3-plus bedrooms. Total bedrooms are over 400, plus over 50,000 sq. ft. of commercial, etc. There will be 560 parking spaces total. None of the residential units are permanently affordable, so the student occupants will likely be from well-to-do families.

But the council failed to provide any limiting mechanism for the number of cars that they could own. So, it’s easy to imagine their cars overflowing the on-site parking and ending up in adjoining neighborhoods, which, of course, will have no say in the matter.

As with many other recent developments in Boulder, the council has persisted with its current policy of letting the developers off the hook in terms of providing on-site, permanently affordable units. In exchange, the developers pay a “fee-in-lieu”, which is a fraction of the cost of providing units on-site, and of course preserves their profits. The city’s argument is that the city can use this money to leverage other (publicly funded) sources of funds, like grants, etc., and come out ahead in terms of the number of permanently affordable units.

But these sources are disappearing because of Federal and state cutbacks. I was one of the people who pushed requiring on-site permanently affordable units back in the ‘80s in my first years on council. I think it’s most unfortunate that we’ve bent over so far backwards just to appease the developers.

The study done by KMA some years ago (which I helped make happen) argued that Boulder could require something like 50% of units to be permanently affordable on-site. That’s way above the current 25%, with off-site fee-in-lieu allowed. I would be truly thankful if the council took a serious look at the KMA work, upgraded the city’s affordability requirements and prevented negative impacts on existing neighborhoods.