Referendum Petition to repeal the lodging ordinance, 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….

Summer 2014

Why you should sign the petition to put the lodging incentive on the ballot.

1. Height is a big red herring. Renovation and modernization isn't about height, but that's all anybody is talking about.  Who benefits from that? The existing buildings don't .  My condo is already too high to rebuild , heck it was over Wheeler Opera house height when Fred Hibberd and George Shaw built it in the 60's. Freddy got a deal to take the "median" height of the roofs as our overall height. There's a lovely precedent for you. Seriously, older lodges and condos,  we're just trying to keep from falling down and patch roof leaks- and yet there isn't anything in this ordinance which promotes maintenance or repair the only "renovations" addressed are those which apply to new construction- larger room sizes and taller buildings. Hmmmm…. what "new construction" could be south of Durant I wonder?

2. Taking out 20 pages of code and replacing it with 91 pages of ordinance isn't "simplification".  In many cases the "new" rules increase the penalties, mitigations and fees for renovation-and reduce them for new construction. I don't want a "rebate", I just don't want to be penalized for renovating. Full disclosure - that's my interpretation applying this to my own upcoming condo renovation (I'm no lawyer but it's one way to interpret the ordinance). If you want the full spin on this go back and watch all the public comment sessions on Grassroots.

3. It's an omnibus. It's 91 pages and It's  still not specific enough. This tries to lump lodges, condos, and multiplexes under the same rules and regs. Condos are 41% of our bed base and if the ordinance doesn't take into account how condos work then it isn't well thought out. For condos, (my world) it takes no consideration for condo bi-laws or HOAs and asks that the HOA enforce deed restriction of individual owners which would be contrary to most (if not all) condominium bi-laws. Are you going to get HOA's to change their bi-laws to enroll in this plan? Not likely.

4.There are no specified "incentives" other than a rebate on fees which would require deed restrictions. The "low interest loans" are mentioned but not specified (loans on the entire renovation project? on the permitting fee portion? How much "refinancing" does City Hall want to do? Do we start hiring used car salesmen on staff?). Those rebates when applied to individual owners in condos are laughably small ($400 per year in my case- out of a $200,000 special assessment- on a $6 million renovation) This does not warrant the immense "give back" of a deed restriction which would greatly devalue the property (especially if I have to sell it to pay for the ****ing renovation). Of course, if the condo chooses not to participate, we fall to the bottom of the permitting pit. Oh Goody. Win win. I repeat- keep your rebate just let me renovate without kneecapping me.

5. We need more than 3 votes to change the town this much. There was one public work session (I think there were 4 other people in the room). There have been 3 public comment City Council sessions (all the last item on the agenda making the start time after 8 pm).  The vote was originally scheduled for August 25,  two weeks after the last public comment session,  and then got pushed up to August 11, right after the last public comment leaving no opportunity for revision. I believe that the points brought up by the public during those meetings were insufficiently addressed by the Council.

I applaud the idea of the initiative. We do need to modernize our older rental properties because if we don't modernize those older properties will fall down and we will get new construction and that's not the Aspen people come to visit, if that's what they want they go to Vail (and, maybe, by next year, Snowmass?)

Please- take this thing back to the drawing board- break it up into separate incentives for buildings of a certain age, condos, lodges and multiplexes.  Put the Focus on maintenance and renovation the way you said you would when you proposed the ordinance. Then, and only then, look at changing the rules for new construction.

I have a copy of the petition, contact me if you want to make the lodging incentive a public vote.