I’d like to remind Daniela Marini of the Picklebric Co-op that homeowners in low-density neighborhoods are growing weary of being accused of white privilege, fear and discrimination, as she was quoted as saying in the Daily Camera. Even more amusing is that these accusations are mostly generated from young white people.
Jan Trussell’s column got it exactly right: A vocal, self-selected group of activists is coercing City Council into granting them a special privilege — at the expense of residents in every existing neighborhood of Boulder. The co-op advocates’ resort to name-calling and labeling is unhelpful. But the biggest problem is that City Council is swallowing the co-op story whole, without asking critical questions:
Why are we creating something that will have very little benefit in terms of affordable housing, yet will put still more pressure on middle-class housing availability? Why do we need to define umpteen different types of co-op all at once? Why not start with a single model that everyone can understand, a real ownership co-op, instead of experimenting with untried concepts like so-called “rental co-ops”? Continue reading “Boulder Weekly: Co-op Conundrum”
The following article has been submitted to the Daily Camera as a Guest Opinion. Update (9/13/16): The Daily Camera has rejected Jan’s submission! Update (9/22/16): But the Boulder Weekly has published it as: The Six Million Dollar Question on Co-ops!
It’s becoming quite clear co-op advocates can’t come up with better arguments other than referring to those of us that disagree with their proposals as rich, white, wealthy, privileged NIMBY classists. Now we can add the amusing new phrase of being “nefariously financially motivated.”
I would like to remind Michael Rush, author of that captivating judgmental guest opinion in favor of co-ops on 09/08/2016, that the Progressive homeowners in question are not wicked, evil, wealthy elitists. The wealthy here in Boulder don’t have to worry about large co-op rentals moving in next to them. Co-ops activists are specifically targeting the most affordable low to medium density neighborhoods in Boulder located on the Hill, Goss Grove, Martin Acres, among others.
Yes Michael, most of us purchased homes in Boulder to live in them, not to make a killing on the market. We poured our life savings into them because we wished to put down roots here in Boulder. One of the primary motivators people like myself chose detached homes in areas zoned for low to medium density use was because we wanted to get away from exactly what you’re proposing. Continue reading “Jan Trussell: Co-op advocates resort to name-calling”
This article has been submitted to the Daily Camera as a Guest Opinion, but the Daily Camera has so far refused to publish it.
A Boulder pro-growth advocate regularly tweets, “If you love your City, you should build more of it.”
That’s like saying, “If you love your 15 children, have 15 more. If you love candy bars, eat hundreds.”
Analogies aside, the tweeter’s perspective seems at odds with the reality of our finite world and ecosystem. My field was science. Science everywhere confirms finite limits of: resources, amount of carbon our atmosphere can handle, and the population a bioregion can sustain.
The tweeter’s attitude reminds me of the anti-science fringe wing of Congress, which doesn’t accept science or facts. More disturbingly, Boulder government demonstrates a similar disregard for facts and limits. Our City government refuses to say how many more people they plan to draw to Boulder. The “silence from the top,” is deafening.
No wonder citizens are uneasy. We look to our civic leaders, but hear only the policy equivalent of “More, more, more!” Continue reading “Stacey Goldfarb: Boulder Government, Wake Up!”
Another national YIMBY reporter accepts the co-op advocates story at face value: Boulder, Colorado’s Picklebric show why expensive cities need group housing.
At least he found one quote for the opposing viewpoint, unlike the Daily Camera:
It wasn’t a question of whether the house was properly managed, anyway, neighbor Steven Meier wrote in the Camera, so much as the sheer number of people: “High-density boarding houses are simply incompatible with single-family residential neighborhoods. Nobody cares whether the occupants of the over-occupied boarding house have democratic meetings or are ruled by an authoritarian matriarch. The problem is the number of people per square yard, the temporary nature of most of the occupants, and the hostel/airbnb-like operation, that is most troubling to the neighbors.”
And he found a wonderful quote from the Boulder City Attorney:
“We’ve purposely not enforced because overoccupancy serves a purpose,” City Attorney Tom Carr told the Daily Camera.
Source: Boulder, Colorado’s Picklebric show why expensive cities need group housing – slate.com
The Daily Camera appears to have abandoned balanced reporting, as it degrades into advocacy journalism in the manner of its conservative counterpart, Fox News… I refer to the Camera’s sympathy story about the illegally over occupied Picklebric co-op, having to vacate the premises of 765 13th St. The real story is that the property’s owner/landlord complied with the law, as he should, operated well within his rights, and did the responsible thing…
Fair journalism about a controversial topic should cover and/or quote both sides of the story. Alex Burness’s highly biased article about co-ops did not even attempt to cover both sides … He should have at least attempted to interview one or two of the thousands of residents in quiet, low- and medium-density, single-family neighborhoods that aren’t interested in living next to a six-to-15 person co-op. Most homeowners did not sink their life savings into the biggest purchase of their life with the expectation that one day they could live next to a grossly over-occupied house…