Lodging incentive public hearing, letter to the editor 2014

I'm posting some old letters to the editor. This is so I can remember what I wrote, and to keep myself honest.  I'm posting them in the order I wrote them so this goes back a couple of years.

The more things change….

Winter 2014

Comments on the December 1, 2014  Lodging Incentive public hearing.

The lodging incentive isn't black and white, it's 50 shades of permits.

1. I woke up the morning after remembering one comment above all others. It's easier to get a permit to bulldoze than to renovate. The example cited was 6 years of permit denials for the Holland House addition of 10 rooms  and less than 6 months to get a permit to bulldoze the Holland House. I'm sure Yasmine and Jack could give specifics. That's the formula- the harder it is to upgrade and renovate the more tear downs you get. We should call this the "Aspen Given Effect".

2. "Lodging Incentive" is a bit of spin. I prefer the phrase "removing disincentives" to "incentivising". This may sound like splitting hairs but honestly our road blocks to renovation are mostly self inflicted. For the public outreach "clicker session" I brought in a permit for a 1996 renovation to my Condo- it was under $600 in permitting fees - today I can't get a permit for under $6000 and that doesn't include water and sewer fees. I can buy bathroom fixtures for both condos and quite a bit of  tile for $6000.

3. Mick Ireland is worried that incentives will deplete the City coffers. I'm not. I'm worried about Aspen losing it's soul. The soul of Aspen isn't about old decrepit buildings and it's not about new shiny buildings. The soul of Aspen is in it's people and that's the part of the equation which Mick left out of his "Condo owners only renovate to sell (see footnote*)" You don't  buy into Aspen for the money. There are lots of other places with less risky investments for a higher return. The people who buy something in Aspen do it because they've fallen in love with Aspen. They don't fall in love with a building, they fall in love with a mountain and they find a community which feels "right".

The mountain is the mountain. 

The Community on the other hand is something which can be broken pretty easily. I've had several conversations with other condo owners over the Thanksgiving weekend and there is a theme. "What's happening to Aspen? Why does it want to be New York? Well, dammit, I don't want to be New York. I want to be Aspen." That doesn't mean Aspen in aspic and it certainly doesn't mean a public vote on every variance.

The Mountain Chalet of 50 years ago 

is not the Mountain Chalet of today. 

You have to let steam out of the kettle sometime and if you try and keep the lid on the pressure cooker without opening a safety valve you're going to get an explosion.

We need balance.

4.  I would argue that one of our strongest community assets is the long term local. We've been in the Guest Services biz awhile and have survived boom and bust. A Guest wants a  humidifier, an alarm clock, a coffee maker instead of a french press? No problem I'll buy it, cha-ching for Carl Bergman.  A Guest wants a 60' pine tree removed to get a better view? I refer them to a lodge without trees next to the balconies. We aim to please.

5. Another comment was that Intentionally avoiding maintenance keeps  prices low. Seriously? Well, leave your bike out in the rain for 40 years without oiling the chain and then ride it up Aspen Mountain. That's a strategy for Clear Cut loggers,  Robber Barons, Pyramids  and Ponzi.  It doesn't keep prices low it just destroys the asset.

Since Mick called me out  personally on my plea for "no deed restrictions" I feel obligated to point out that everyone who spoke directly to the proposed deed restriction "lock in 6 months of short term rentals in condos and vacation rentals" said it wouldn't work. Everyone cited a different reason that it wouldn't work but the majority centered on the 6 months of off season being crowded with condos outcompeting long established lodges or overpricing their rentals to the point of a virtual "lock out". 

Everyone can think how to scam the  deed restrictions but they're not thinking about the unique advantages of condos in the rental/residence pool. Condos are flexible. They're like the swiss army knife of property ownership. During the 2008 crash repurposing my long term rentals to short term let me pay the bills. When my mother was no longer able to live alone repurposing the residential condo into a long term rental let me use that income to find a "senior friendly" home for both of us down valley. When my mother purchased two condos in 1968 it gave a single woman with a child a place to live  in one and a  steady source of income in the other. Two condos were cheaper than a West End house, even in 1968. It was 1968's affordable Aspen. The restrictions imposed by Condo declarations and the current permitting labyrinths are high enough hurdles. If Condos lose flexibility the  rental base will be less able to respond to market forces and Community will lose diversity.

*Bill Sterling effectively refuted this viewpoint from Mick by citing the number of his managed properties which continue to rent after renovating. Lest we forget the City also makes money if a Condo sells and as "challenged" as the Aspen City budget is at only $100,000,000 for 6500 residents I don't worry about running out of money, I worry about how we spend that money. That's a related topic for a different letter.

More links of interest:
Marketplace is running a series on Gentrification this week- well worth a listen.