ISSUE #245: The Housing Solution Must Address the Issues (4/12/23)

"You don't get unity by ignoring the questions 

that have to be faced."

-- Jay Weatherhill

ASPEN TIMES COLUMN

Apologies for the delay in getting Sunday's column to you. 

We have a labor shortage, not a housing one. And if we are not going to house actual workers, we cannot lament the lack of them. 

Read my column from Sunday's Aspen Times HERE.

***

Habitat for Humanity’s recent regional housing summit welcomed well-intended bureaucrats to Aspen to address the western slope’s “housing crisis.” I tuned in online and immediately identified its flawed premise. Slide number one presented a housing “need” for 6,826 units in the greater Roaring Fork Region by 2027, as determined by a consultancy called EPS in 2019. 

Bureaucrats love a report that supports their wishes, but the “landmark” EPS study has been debunked. When questioned to better understand the stated 5,200 unit shortfall in Aspen/Snowmass, the principal of EPS revealed that there was no formula. A young staffer simply made that conclusion, and that individual is no longer at the firm. 

And, as preposterous as 5,200 new units may sound, it’s actually off by an order of magnitude.  The desire for housing that enables people to live affordably in Aspen is infinite, and therefore a nonsensical goal to chase. The question not asked is one of economic need: businesses needing workers, as opposed people wanting subsidized housing.

Aspen’s role in regional solutions is dubious. We already have 7,000 subsidized bedrooms, not including Snowmass Village and employer-owned units, and exist in a real estate environment far different from that of our regional neighbors. Besides, our issue is unique: we don’t have a housing shortage, we have a labor shortage, the result of our housing program not prioritizing workers.

Aspen leaders should be asking three simple questions:

• ·      What do we currently have? When counted by bedrooms, not units, across the APCHA portfolio plus Snowmass Village, AVH, the school district, SkiCo and countless employers, we would know our existing housing supply and the capacity we can reasonably accommodate today.
• ·      Who lives there and what jobs do they hold?  Knowing which jobs are being provided for with housing in our inventory will illustrate housing utilization. Empty bedrooms and non-workers negatively impact housing utilization. The community should determine the amount it is willing to accommodate.
• ·      How many workers does the economy need to fill its vacant jobs? This number is the economic demand side of the equation. 

The city inventories its trees, ADUs and STRs, but wants to keep secret how many empty bedrooms and non-working residents we have in our housing in order to perpetuate that infinite “demand.”

Such active avoidance is politically expedient for building more housing, which has become our de facto community vision despite a stated aversion to growth and development. Meanwhile, anti-worker APCHA has zero interest in solving the labor shortage by prioritizing resort and community service workers. Aspen’s “housing” discussion is merely a ploy to build more, regardless of where people work.

Then there’s the “company town” argument perpetuated by class warriors Mick Ireland and Rachel Richards who talk out of both sides of their mouths saying locals should not have their housing tied to employment, yet the city, the hospital, the schools, SkiCo and countless local employers who have secured proprietary units for their employees provide exactly that. Housing utilization is optimized when tied to employment, yet prioritizing workers is somehow antithetical to the goal of “building community.” Shouldn’t all workers be welcomed as community members?

Take the long-delayed 170-bedroom Burlingame 3 project where the city plans to poach 8 bedrooms for “essential” workers despite already owning 67 units elsewhere. Are their “essential” workers more essential than the community’s? Then, APCHA wants to usurp 5 more units for its right-sizing experiment where current households with unoccupied bedrooms can purchase new, smaller BG3 units. Since APCHA owners are not required to be workers, actual workers in need of housing may be shut out. We are constantly negotiating against ourselves.

Worst, however, are the local housing-industrial-complex NIMBYs who ignore the Latino community. We’re told, “They don’t want to live here.” Local social justice non-profit MANAUS disagrees. They say it’s because the housing system in Aspen is not designed for the needs of the Latino population, never has been and hasn’t evolved with our changing demographics. Advocacy organization Voces Unidas de las Montañas was not at the recent housing confab but reminds that those who work the hardest at the resort and community service jobs we need filled are the ones continually pushed increasingly farther from where they work. 

These organizations are critical to solving our labor shortage and must be part of any housing conversation intended to address it. We should be talking about appropriately accommodating a critical mass of this vital workforce in the upper valley where the jobs are instead of building more for the middle class.

No one wants to talk about a numerical bedroom goal or the community’s carrying capacity either. They know that if we reach a given number, it still won’t solve the labor shortage since our housing program does not prioritize workers. No amount of new housing will unless things change.

It’s time to shift our priorities to provide housing for workers by immediately enabling local employers to acquire APCHA units and dramatically reconsidering plans for The Lumberyard. Service workers are essential to our economy, as improved unit utilization is to the long-term sustainability of our housing program. The solution is right before our eyes.

If we don’t provide housing for workers, then we can’t lament the lack of them. It’s that simple. Contact TheRedAntEM@comcast.net

ISSUE #244: Startling Housing Truths (3/27/23)

"Government is not a solution to our problem. Government is the problem."

-- Ronald Reagan

ASPEN TIMES COLUMN

Saddle up! The city is hoping to fast track the entitlements to develop the Lumberyard.

Keep in mind, the plans they have for the site are for 277 subsidized housing units at a time when the APCHA portfolio is facing the loss of 244 other units due to expiring deed restrictions. The willingness to even contemplate spending an estimated $500 million we don't have on net 33 units is incomprehensible.

Digging into the subject, several other previously unknown and alarming facts became clear.

Read my column in yesterday's Aspen Times HERE.

***

As The Lumberyard subsidized housing project barrels toward its development entitlements this spring, the “major public project” process consists of just two steps: P&Z sign-off followed by council approval. The details are in place: 500,000 sf of construction on nearly 11 acres for 277 housing units comprised of 467 bedrooms in three 49’ tall buildings, plus a street network, landscaping, parking for 436 cars, a bus stop and other site improvements. Early cost estimates approach $500 million.

The entitlements require many variances, including drastically rezoning the parcels from SCI (service, commercial, industrial), CON (conservation) and RR (rural residential) to RMF (residential multi-family), and other considerations for the planned development such as design, height, bulk, mass, density and a new stoplight on Hwy 82, not to mention a growth management review and design standard variations, several of which are incomplete or not to code.

Buried in the dense P&Z packet on The Lumberyard are several interesting and here-to-fore unknown tidbits. Coupled with the results of other housing-related research I’ve done recently, here’s a quick housing update:

• ·      Voters will NOT be asked to approve the financing of The Lumberyard, despite its nearly $500 million price tag. Even with the more favorable borrowing rates associated with General Obligation debt, because of required voter approval the city appears to be planning to again pursue Certificates of Participation (COPs) as it did when building the disfavored Taj Mahal City Hall.  The COPs are more expensive but the city can again skirt the taxpaying public because these do not require a public vote; a tactic employed with increasing frequency for unpopular and fiscally irresponsible endeavors.

• ·      The Lumberyard will be all rental housing.  Revealed for the first time in the P&Z packet is this all-rental scenario, notably because the city cannot sell a COP-financed asset. Despite the city’s aversion to publicly discussing the project’s financing to-date, such considerations are integral to the project itself, particularly the unit mix. Why so many 2 and 3-bedroom units in an all-rental complex?

• ·      Free market “buy downs” will not happen in Aspen. In fact, they specifically “will not be pursued” as highlighted in the much-celebrated 2022-2026 Strategic Housing Plan because of the obvious, prohibitive expense. Yes, they’re doing them in Eagle County, but no, not here.

• ·      Regional collaboration on housing might benefit the western slope, but not Aspen. The upstart regional housing coalition comprised of eight Roaring Fork Valley government entities aspires to enact a buydown program using use-it-or-lose-it American Rescue Plan grant money from the Colorado Department of Local Affairs earmarked for housing solutions. Given that grants will go to “locals” purchasing homes for $800,000 or less who place deed restrictions on them, the local real estate market puts any implementation well outside of Aspen’s borders and likely the county’s as well.  

Aspen’s seat at the table can, however, still serve a constructive purpose: with nearly 6000 subsidized housing bedrooms in the APCHA portfolio which does not include 865 additional bedrooms in Snowmass Village nor countless others owned by local employers, we are a shining example to the other jurisdictions of how not to run housing program.

• ·      APCHA regulations do in fact permit remote work. On page 6 of the APCHA regulations, Section 6 on APCHA eligibility, it clearly states that “To be eligible to rent or purchase a unit in APCHA’s inventory, unless an applicable deed restriction otherwise requires, eligible applicants/households must work full-time, 1500 hours per calendar year in Pitkin County and/or for a Pitkin County employer and earn at least 75% of household total income in Pitkin County.” APCHA likes to deny that remote work is allowed because it is clearly not the intent of the program, however, from a legal standpoint, remote work is a-ok.

In fact, I asked several Colorado attorneys to review the matter and all agree that according to the regulations, an APCHA resident working the requisite hours remotely from his unit in Pitkin County is indeed in compliance. The “and/or” is read as “or” by the courts in Colorado, and is consistent with statutory interpretation principles everywhere. 

This is great news for the hundreds of APCHA residents who work remotely from their units. And remote work has become the de-facto “next step” once someone wins the housing lottery, knowing that their employer and income never matter again. But what about the long-term sustainability of the program? Shouldn’t APCHA change this poorly conceived provision so as to require local employment?

It can’t. Imagine having literally hundreds of blatant cases of non-compliance, easily proven with 1099s and W-2s. This would create a massive upheaval to the system, forcing many households to forfeit their units and likely leave the valley. APCHA does not enforce its own rules as they stand today. They would never enforce rules that disqualify a broad swath of current residents, even if they do live subsidized and work for Google, Facebook and Amazon from 81611. Remote work is allowed. Case closed.

Despite being contrary to community values, building more housing remains the political solution, but is it the best one? Why aren’t we talking about taking care of what we already have and ensuring it’s still standing for the next generation?

Is $500 million best spent developing 277 new housing units when 244 existing units are set to evaporate when their deed restrictions expire? Perhaps we should preserve these first? Contact TheRedAntEM@comcast.net

ISSUE #243: Aspen Has Spoken (3/13/23)

"I vote because it gives me the right to 

complain about the outcome."

-- Unknown

ASPEN TIMES COLUMN

The election is over - and without a run-off, Aspen has two new councilmen and an incumbent mayor. As such, the dynamic on council will still change dramatically.

Read my column that ran in yesterday's Aspen Times HERE.

And congratulations to Bill Guth and Sam Rose, with honorable mention to mayoral candidate Tracy Sutton for a spectacular showing against a long-time local politico. Well done.

***

Like the 2022 “living lab” parking experiment, the Skippy Mesirow experiment is over.

Incumbent Skippy Mesirow was shown the door in Tuesday’s municipal election.

There is new optimism that we might finally see some debate and discussion in city hall, not to mention provocative questions and fiscal responsibility. It’s a seismic shift to add two guys who can read a financial report to a body that has notably been led around by city staff toward ridiculous experiments, unfunded developments, punitive policies and legislative over-reach. 

It wasn’t even close. Sam Rose ran away in the 3-way council race, capturing 2323 votes (you could vote for two) in an election where just over 2800 voted. He shot the inside straight with a brilliant strategy of not taking much of a position on anything because he never had to. Rose had a strong following of his own, and, given the dramatic ideological battle lines between Mesirow and Bill Guth, Rose became everyone’s second vote.  

Business owner Guth, who offers real-world, matter-of-fact pragmatism, garnered 1499 votes to Mesirow’s 1286, and will quickly assume the role of the grown-up in the room. 

Torre retained his mayoral seat for a third and final two-year term, but not without a valiant fight by his challenger Tracy Sutton. He had intended to coast to re-election unopposed, but when Sutton threw her hat into the ring in the 11^th hour, Torre was forced to actually campaign. In the end, despite his record of failed policies and weak leadership, Torre prevailed, 1675-1114.

But the real story is how a well-respected businesswoman who had never flirted with elected office managed to come so close and left Torre without a mandate. It was nothing short of baptism by fire for Sutton, who endured some of the uglier moments of this year’s campaign season, notably from Torre himself as well as fellow councilman Ward Hauenstein. We owe a debt of gratitude to this newcomer to the Aspen political scene who surprised everyone. Let’s hope she isn’t done.

And as Mesirow packs his chakras and retreats to a safe space where he can do yoga with kittens and rainbows and sing kumbaya around the campfire, we can thank Rose and Guth for joining the race and saving us from more pie-in-the sky lunacy. Mesirow’s final undoing was likely his misguided pandering to the nostalgia squad about an Aspen “revival” that longs for the 1970s instead of being future-focused and solutions-based about the issues of today. Yes, the past is to be respected, cherished, and where appropriate, preserved. But Aspen is most certainly not going backwards. 

The community made itself clear that a future that respects our small town values is the challenge before us, and we can’t get there with elected leadership that espouses nonsense like “we are a single organism, connection feeds compassion, and well-being is contagious” when we have a bridge to replace, a rogue housing program to fix and a community to unite. 

On election day, I received a get-out-the-vote message that said it all. “We don’t need any more well-intentioned but impractical goals. Vision without action is useless. Action without vision is reckless. True progress requires both.” Clearly Aspen agreed. In a notable uptick in voter participation, 45% of registered voters showed up and brought the change we so desperately need.

Now two new city councilmembers is not a panacea, but it’s a step in the right direction. New eyes and ears, and the willingness to ask the tough questions, are reasons for optimism.  With new electeds who can think independently and have sound financial skills, gone is wasteful spending on countless consultants whose reports go unchallenged. Gone is the evil specter of a vacancy tax. Gone are unquestioned expenditures on the Lumberyard when how to actually pay for it has never been discussed. Gone is back burner-ing a renovation of the Armory for community use. Gone are ignoring expiring deed restrictions and construction defect lawsuits within our housing program in favor of developing new projects. Gone is blind acceptance of staff priorities as policy. Gone is ignoring citizen outreach and feedback. Gone are ill-informed 5-0 votes at the council table.

The new dynamic will be interesting to watch.  In a post-election interview, Torre notably said (to the 40% of voters who went with Sutton), “I hear you.” Darned right, he did, and loudly. But the question remains, will he listen?

I’ll take winning 2 out of 3 any day. Contact TheRedAntEM@comcast.net

ISSUE #242: Conspiracy? Or Common Sense? (2/28/23)

"Common sense is like deodorant, those who 

need it the most never use it."

-- Unknown

With one week to go, it's unfortunate that voter turnout has been remarkably low so far. Given the widespread discontent in our community and the very straightforward solutions at the ballot box, I implore you to turn in your ballot today.

The CITY HALL drop box is easily accessed on Rio Grande Place - and there is free parking right in front of it. Do you need me to come pick up your ballot and deliver it? If so, I'd be happy to. 

It's time to let the non-schievers Torre and Skippy know that their actions have been detrimental to the community and their inaction toward addressing very real issues can no longer be tolerated.

Please vote TODAY!! Incumbents out - Challengers in.

Read my column in Sunday's Aspen Times HERE.

* * *

It’s the final week of election season in Aspen. The mayoral and council races are in full swing, with one challenger to the sitting mayor and three candidates running for two council seats. It’s rare to have such a narrow field in which more candidates will win on March 7 than will lose.

Battle lines have formed, notably between the incumbents and the challengers. The palpable outrage in the community marked by widespread discontent and dissatisfaction with the current council’s policies and regulations (71 of 72 decisions in 2022 were made in 5-0 votes) has resulted in loud cries for change. 

These cries aren’t just coming from the usual city hall critics and fiscal hawks like myself; I’m joined by childcare families, downtown businesses and restaurants, subsidized housing residents, West End residents, anti-growth advocates, local homeowners, second homeowners, historic preservation supporters and those looking for a responsible and transparent 2023-era process for the Castle Creek Bridge replacement.

It’s been a relatively civil process thus far. Town is peppered with colorful yard signs from all five candidates, and for the first time in many election cycles, such signs are not mysteriously disappearing in the night.  It was, however, hard to stomach Mayor Torre’s rude public rebuke of his opponent Tracy Sutton about how infrequently she skis, ignoring her notable knee injury. He is obviously feeling the heat. 

So too, apparently, is sitting councilman Ward Hauenstein. Writing to the papers in support of his colleague Torre, Hauenstein clarifies what city hall watchers have been saying for years, “Tracy knows the business side and Torre knows the government side,” adding that Torre’s job “ushering us through COVID-19 is reason enough to reward him with a final two years as mayor.” Even Hauenstein sees Torre’s re-election campaign as one seeking a “reward” vs. something earned.

A 33-year Aspen resident, Sutton is a popular, successful businesswoman and thoughtful problem solver, with a background in construction management, real estate and accounting. Given the over-$150 million annual city budget, in Hauenstein’s laughable opinion, she would be a “mayor with no experience.” As arguably one of the largest developers and real estate owners in the valley, the city of Aspen would undoubtedly benefit from a leader who specializes in these fields, just as it would under Mayor Torre if Aspen were a tennis club. But we’re not. Perhaps this is why we have the problems we do.

Despite the relative civility, don’t be fooled. Conspiracy theories abound. In fact, after being shamed for proudly touting his dubious record as mayor, Torre is now running campaign ads that call for “community not commodity.” Cute. He claims “this election is about a single interest group commoditizing our community to benefit clients not constituents.” Councilman Skippy Mesirow of vacancy tax and psychedelic legalization fame has joined the chorus, vocalizing his angst over Sutton, Guth and Rose yard signs being found together throughout town. Palace intrigue indeed.

Sutton, with council challengers Bill Guth and Sam Rose, clearly offers a stark departure from the status quo. Guth is a 13-year successful local entrepreneur and father of three young children with experience in real estate, development, historic preservation and hospitality, as well as tenure on the commercial core and lodging commission (CCLC) and with The Buddy Program. Rose is employed by Pitkin County and serves as an Aspen Volunteer Firefighter/EMT, planning and zoning member, and Response Hotline advocate, and recently completed his masters in finance and risk management at CU.  

In short, the challengers are highly qualified, far more so than the existing council where no member has ever signed the front of a paycheck.

But “commoditizing our community?” Poor Torre is simply lashing out the challengers’ comprehension of basic business principles. Isn’t retiring councilwoman Rachael Richards supposed to be the business hater? Perhaps it’s their abilities to read spreadsheets and budgets, or their management experience and willingness to challenge city staff that intimidate Torre. And just who exactly are the challengers’ vilified “clients?” Locals? Homeowners? Families? Restaurant patrons? Commuters? Women? Tourists? 

Elected leadership in Aspen should be representative of a broad constituency, not just city voters. The challengers represent a group alright; not a nefarious “single interest group” but the greater community itself: diverse, self-aware and looking for actual common sense solutions to local issues. 

There’s nothing scary about that, unless you’re an incumbent with no record to run on for re-election. Or unless local registered voters do not participate in the election. Without a controversial tax or development measure on the ballot, Aspen voters have historically been relatively indifferent to municipal elections regardless of the election date, with only around 40% casting ballots.

If you’re an Aspen voter, how well have Torre and Skippy have acknowledged and addressed your specific issues? Or were you ignored and steamrolled by one of their detrimental 5-0 decisions? Are you better off today than you were two or even four years ago?

This year’s ballot, while short, is a referendum on the status quo. There is no conspiracy. There are only common sense solutions. Vote for change.

The election is March 7. Drop off your ballot at city hall today. You can also go inside to vote in person. Contact TheRedAntEM@comcast.net

ISSUE #241: The Torre Story (2/13/23)

"Bad officials are elected by good citizens 

who do not vote."

-- George Jean Nathan

You know how much I love municipal election season in Aspen. In a town of 6,336 registered voters, each vote REALLY, REALLY counts!

Read my column in yesterday's Aspen Times HERE to learn about the urban myth that "the housing bloc" controls the ballot box. I looked at the numbers - and what controls the ballot box are the registered voters in free market housing who don't bother to vote! I was gobsmacked. 

(And try not to be distracted by the headline the Aspen Times gives my columns each time they don't like the ones I send in. Remember, they don't like me or my stuff, so they do what they do, and that includes some rather aggressive editing lately.)

Your mail ballot will arrive before my next column runs, so here is what I recommend:  It's time to send Mayor Torre and Councilman Skippy packing. Their records speak for themselves. They've been wrong on every issue facing this community over the past two years. 

THIS is what I wrote recently about Skippy's candidacy. Yesterday's column summarizes Torre's abysmal record. No judgment, just the facts. It's remarkable how proud they both are about what they've done to Aspen! As I wrote, "Everything they've touched has gone to hell."

Uniquely, we have three seats up for grabs in this election and three challengers. It's straightforward. It's time to put some grown-ups in the room!

The obvious choice for mayor is local businesswoman Tracy Sutton. www.TracySuttonforAspen.com

Businessman Bill Guth is perhaps the strongest city council candidate we have had in the mix in well over a decade. He has my unwavering support.  www.BillGuthforAspen.com

If you are so inclined to vote for two council candidates because you can, then use that opportunity (vs a "bullet vote" for Bill because you must vote for him) to vote for Sam Rose. www.SamRoseforAspen.com

VOTE THE INCUMBENTS OUT.

Feel free to contact me with any voting questions or issues. Ballots are due back on March 7.

* * * 

I read that Torre announced is seeking a third, final term as mayor of Aspen. After four years in office, he hopes to continue “working for Aspen on the issues that impact our community.”  Stating an unabashed pride in the accomplishments of his two terms and optimism about where he sees Aspen headed, Torre asks for support so that he can continue his “good work.”

Atop his list of good works is the hiring of city manager Sara Ott. That’s your job, Torre. In the absence of a city manager, you hire one. It’s hardly a notable accomplishment. It’s odd that he didn’t list actually reviewing this hire, probably because it went something like, “She has nice penmanship and she shares her snacks, let’s give her a raise.”

Next was moving the seat of Aspen’s government into the new 37,500 sf Taj Mahal City Hall, the same monolith for which during 2019 campaign season Torre famously promised “a review and changes to the final design and programming” of the project because “the current iterations have unclear space/program allocations” and “do not appear to address community goals.”  Once in office, however, did he think we’d forget? Torre will say whatever it takes to get elected.

He boasted about “important land use code revisions” and the regulation of “some STRs,” without mentioning the deliberate, rushed moratoria on false “emergency” pretenses, employed to concoct extreme policies that resulted in punitive restrictions for private property owners and a convoluted excise tax that punishes traditional condo-hotels as though they are nuisance rental properties.

I was astonished to learn that Torre claims council’s action resulting in the closure of not one but two long-time childcare providers at the Yellow Brick was an act of “stabilizing early childhood care.” Perhaps the 100 affected local families can comment on the “stabilization” that befell them.

And he “supported more local businesses.” How could anyone forget Torre’s unwavering support of local businesses last summer during the catastrophic Living Lab experiment? That is some support when the business community turns out to beg you not to proceed with an ill-conceived gimmick yet you move forward in spite of them.

“More funds for arts and culture” were actually approved by the electorate in 2021, not Torre,  with a reallocation of some Wheeler RETT dollars towards the arts. Since that time, there has been no formation of a public arts commission, no arts endowment and no public art show. Instead, “the arts” received only a paltry $60K for fifteen $4K grants to creatives in 2022. 

These are just his stated accomplishments. Torre is a good guy, which is often the litmus test for voters in Aspen. (I think it’s time we leave the voting for prom king to the kids at Aspen High.) We have a $155 million enterprise to run, and if 2022 is any indicator, 71 of 72 official 5-0 votes from this council have resulted in widespread community discontent. Everything they’ve touched has gone to hell.

So before we vote, let me dispel one of Aspen’s great urban myths. The widespread belief that “the housing block” controls the vote here is patently false. Looking at the 2021 election, of 6336 total registered voters, 59% (3761) were in the free market while just 41% (2575) were APCHA owners/renters. However, of the 3761 free market voters, only 31% bothered to vote! The 2605 who didn’t vote are more than the total number of votes cast in the entire election (2351). Voter apathy can obviously be very costly. 

Furthermore, who says “the housing block” isn’t similarly aligned with free market voters, especially this election cycle? 

Given the actions of Torre and this council, the subsidized housing folks are surely outraged by his touted “strategic housing plan” that focuses exclusively on building new housing projects like the Lumberyard, while ignoring and neglecting the construction defect lawsuits at Centennial and Burlingame, as well as underfunded reserves, expiring deed restrictions and widespread malfeasance throughout the APCHA portfolio.

If these good works, plus dusting off a 25-year-old plan for a “straight shot” into Aspen, the conversion of Aspen’s cherished historic Victorian homes into dense subsidized housing projects throughout town, real growth through the annexation of the Lumberyard and plans to grow our population by nearly 10% when it’s complete, and a future that ignores West End traffic because it’s merely a symptom of the larger “entrance” issue, are good for you, then stick with the status quo. Torre and his group-thinking council are really proud of what they have accomplished. 

On the other hand, if this horrific record of detrimental decisions with real life implications, made consistently in 5-0 echo chambers, disturbs or disgusts you, vote to stop the madness. This is your opportunity to weigh in on Torre’s record of “good work.” 

The municipal election is on March 7. Please register if you haven’t and check your voter registration mailing address. You’ll be receiving your ballot in the mail within the next 2 weeks. Your vote absolutely counts. Let’s put an end to this horror story.

The future of Aspen is in your hands. Contact TheRedAntEM@comcast.net

ISSUE #240: Life, Liberty and a Vacancy Tax (1/30/23)

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it."

-- Frédéric Bastiat

Someone asked me recently if city councilman Skippy Mesirow is serious about a residential vacancy tax in Aspen. In short, yes, among several outlandish ideas, a residential vacancy tax is at the center of his campaign platform for re-election. 

Read my column about it in yesterday's Aspen Times HERE.

Are you registered to vote on March 7? Is your mailing address correct? (It's a mail ballot election.) Go to www.PitkinVotes.com

YES - The Red Ant will indeed be weighing in. Please contact me for all election-related information!

A reader shared the following that I thought you'd enjoy:

From Money magazine in July 1973, "Congress Tackles the Income Tax."

"Most people have the same philosophy about taxes," says Senator Russell B. Long (D-LA), who has heard all the variations during seven years as chairman of the Senate Finance Committee which handles tax legislation. Long puts that universal theme to verse:

"Don't tax you,

Don't tax me,

Tax that fellow behind the tree."

Skippy would surely add a fourth line:

"In Aspen, hell, let's tax ALL THREE!"

* * * 

One of these things is most certainly not like the others. But a “vacancy tax” is effectively on Aspen’s March 7 municipal election ballot in the guise of councilman Skippy Mesirow who seeks re-election to a second term. 

For owners of private property in Aspen, the local taxman is a growing presence who lurks in every shadow. First, upon purchasing property, there’s a 1.5% real estate transfer tax (RETT), with 0.5% going to maintain and subsidize the historic Wheeler Opera House and 1% for Aspen’s beleaguered 30-plus-year-old, 3,100-unit subsidized housing program. 

Next there are annual property taxes, based on an appraisal of the monetary value of every property, whereby a tax is assessed in proportion to that value.

New, beginning in May 2023, is a rental excise tax to be paid to the city when one rents out one’s private property, ranging from 5-10% nightly on top of the 11.3% existing sales tax, depending on type of property and whether or not one lives in said residence on a full-time basis. There are additional permit fees and required business licenses, but with special deals for locals, of course.

And today, Mesirow proudly touts his vision for a vacancy tax, to be paid to the city for the days and nights one chooses not to be in residence, as if that’s anyone’s business. Apparently Skippy thinks it’s his.

Recall, those housing RETT dollars, $17.1 million in 2022, fund the program that requires its subsidized housing owners and renters to occupy their units a minimum of nine months a year, leaving 3 months to frolic about without penalty. The biennial housing affidavit only requires an online checkmark attesting to 1500 hours worked annually in Pitkin County. No one verifies this so why would they begin counting nights in residence? One could safely assume that Mesirow’s vacancy tax would not apply to subsidized housing residents, after all, they’re protected from the burden of paying the RETT too, despite directly benefitting from it.

Would Mesirow’s vacancy tax apply similarly to the free market, granting three months of vacancy, free and clear? Don’t count on it. He’s intentionally vague on the details of such red meat for the “soak the rich” crowd. The entire premise of his vacancy tax is to eliminate empty homes and punish those who deign to lock their doors and leave until the next visit to their personal residence. 

In his perverse mind, the “creation” of work in the form of property managers, housekeepers, landscapers and affiliated service providers to vacation homes is a detriment to Aspen and at the root of all our ills. Others might call this “job creation” for those who do the work that is essential and beneficial to the local economy. For a better perspective, ask a local property manager, which, ironically, Mesirow purports to be. 

It doesn’t sit well with Mesirow that “outside entities” can own property here; they “don’t have local ties.” Seriously? Isn’t this the very definition of second-homeowners or part-time residents, the very ones who pay the lion’s share of our property taxes and underwrite our non-profits yet don’t enroll kids in the schools nor encumber our social and emergency services? How, exactly, are “local ties” determined? And by whom?

Mesirow’s belief is that the punitive vacancy tax will motivate free market homeowners to open their doors and rent cheaply to “locals,” regardless of where they work, and who simply want to live in Aspen affordably. It can’t but conjure images of Yuri’s house in Boris Pasternak’s Dr. Zhivago. Yes, apparently it’s come to this.

When espousing his “development neutral model for affordable housing” campaign platform, Mesirow acknowledges the economic and environmental pitfalls of new housing construction, but he most certainly intends to commandeer your house, literally and figuratively, to meet his ambitious goals. I struggle to reconcile such heavy-handed plans with his flowery eloquence of being “a passionate advocate for community connection and empowerment,” unless this loosely translates to a Fifth Amendment “taking” with a cashmere glove.

So, to summarize, you’re taxed when you purchase your Aspen property and taxed annually on the property you own. Then you’re taxed if you rent out your property and might be taxed again if you don’t. Damned if you do. Big Brother Skippy is watching. And counting. 

For one who aspires to “heal our politics from the inside out,” Mesirow, despite his lofty vocabulary, is hard to take seriously. He lacks situational awareness, common consideration, basic knowledge of democratic principles, and respect for private property. Instead, we are presented with tactics honed during the Russian Revolution by a clueless ideologue whose envy of and vitriol toward those with “more” have manifested themselves in such a way that exacerbating and perpetuating class divides are what truly define his candidacy.

A vacancy tax is far from “healing.” It’s more like stealing.

This draconian plan is hardly in the spirit of Aspen’s Paepcke-era “mind, body and spirit” ideals. It’s no “revival,” despite Mesirow’s campaign rhetoric. It’s divisive. It’s ignorant. It’s greedy. And, like Mesirow, it’s entirely wrong for the future of Aspen, where our best days are indeed ahead of us.

Are you curious about the new “intelligent” electric and water meters installed by the city last summer? Today they are monitoring your consumption data in real time. Guess why. Contact TheRedAntEM@comcast.net

ISSUE #239: APCHA's Dirty Cop (1/16/23)

"The greater the power, the more 

dangerous the abuse."

-- Edmund Burke

Never mind The Aspen Times did not like the headline I submitted, this one was a long time coming. As APCHA gives lip service to its dreaded task of enforcing program compliance, the fact they hired Mick Ireland as "hearing officer," and deputized him with the ability to sit in judgment, as well as to evict and force sales, is indicative of how our housing program is indeed rotten to its core.

Read why Mick is uniquely unsuited for this role in yesterday's Aspen Times HERE.

* * *

In 2020, when the APCHA board realized it needed some muscle to deal with program compliance issues on its behalf, it sought to hire an official hearing officer or two. This seemed like a reasonable first step toward compliance enforcement for a program riddled with abuse that relies on tattle-tales and anonymous tips to root out the scofflaws.

So, the housing authority solicited proposals from licensed attorneys who would conduct case hearings and written opinions in accordance with the APCHA rules, preferably with experience in municipal law, public administration law or criminal justice law. Once appointed, the hearing officer would hear and decide cases, such as appeals of notices of violations, special reviews and grievances, and would have the authority to assess and enforce penalties and fines, and/or require the eviction from or the sale of deed restricted units. The powerful hearing officer’s decisions would be final, and would not require board ratification.

Two attorneys applied for the job. One began by writing, “My primary motivation to becoming a hearing officer for APCHA is my personal commitment to fairness and a desire to participate in effective dispute resolution.” The other was Mick Ireland. The board expressed concern about Ireland’s “local government involvement” over the years, yet he was still offered the role of primary hearing officer at $150/hour. The other applicant declined the opportunity to be Ireland’s back-up. Later, a secondary officer from Grand Junction was hired, specifically because he was not in any way “conflicted.” 

Ireland is a tax attorney who consults for land use applications and political campaigns. He describes himself as being “intimately involved with the analysis and response to this community’s housing problems since 1988.” He has served on the Board of County Commissioners and as mayor of Aspen where helped write the APCHA guidelines. More recently, Ireland has served the county as a hearing officer presiding over citizen tax appeals; sitting in judgment of others is clearly a role he relishes.

Despite his formidable role with APCHA, Ireland his out of compliance with his own HOA, the Common Ground Co-housing Association, a property within the APCHA portfolio. 

I’ve learned about this the same way APCHA does. Someone emailed me. The Red Ant has become a repository for grievances and whisper campaigns. While curiously intriguing on some level, as problematic as some issues might seem for a program intended to house the local workforce, according to the existing rules, most surprisingly aren’t actual infractions. 

In Ireland’s case, however, it’s a lot more clear. Michael C. Ireland, PC, his law office, is located at his Common Ground residence. Only recently upon being questioned, Ireland procured a required “home occupation permit” to accompany his business license from the city. The permit application specifically encourages applicants “to check with their homeowner’s association, if any, to ensure compliance with covenants or guidelines.”

Uh-oh. Right there in the Common Ground declarations are restrictions on use, specifically, that “each unit shall be used for residential purposes only and none shall be used for any commercial or business purpose.”  The homeowner’s association’s insurance carrier, speaking generally, confirms that no general liability policy would cover business activities there. Furthermore, no special rider policy would cover such activities if these were not allowed in the HOA declarations. Yes, he is putting his own HOA at risk.

Notified of Ireland’s questionable compliance given his deputized role to enforce such things, the APCHA team circled the wagons. Mick asserted that he has his HOA’s “permission” to run a business from home, never mind that if granted, the HOA board has exceeded its legal authority by doing so. It would take an amendment of the HOA declarations by a two-thirds vote and proper filing. APCHA’s executive director smugly pointed to Common Ground’s deed restriction that stipulates an owner “not engage in any business activity on or in such unit, other than permitted in that zone district.” Did you know “Affordable Housing” zoning allows home occupations? It does, which is a discussion for another day. No matter, though, the HOA declarations explicitly do not, and that’s what matters.

Ireland’s suspected non-compliance was dismissed by the APCHA board. They stated that if it’s allowed by the deed restriction according to underlying zoning, HOA matters are not their concern. At least when these concern the hearing officer, apparently. Yours is another story. And Mick will likely be the one to decide.

Ireland’s contract can be cancelled for any reason. It should be. He is currently named in pending litigation that challenges his objectivity and asserts bias in an APCHA compliance case.  The optics, if not the questionable legalities of his personal compliance issues with the program rules he serves to enforce are beyond problematic for an agency desperate to gain any semblance of public trust.

If APCHA ever intends to be respected, its staff and officers should be beyond reproach.

Mick Ireland is the wrong person to lord over decisions affecting anyone’s housing. Contact TheRedAntEM@comcast.net

ISSUE #238: A New Year with Hope on the Horizon (1/2/23)

"Hope is not blind optimism. It is not ignoring the enormity of the task ahead or the roadblocks that stand in our path. It's not sitting on the sidelines or shirking from a fight. Hope is that thing inside us that insists, despite all evidence to the contrary, that something better awaits us if we have the courage to reach for it, and to work for it, and to fight for it. Hope is the belief that destiny will not be written for us, but by us, by the men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is, who have the courage to remake the world as it should be."

-- Barack Obama

The Red Ant loves municipal election season! Ours is a mail-ballot affair on March 7. Please register or check your voter registration at PitkinVotes.com

Local businesswoman Tracy Sutton has stepped up to challenge Mayor Torre, while firefighter Sam Rose and businessman Bill Guth are vying for the two council seats, one of which belongs to Skippy Mesirow that he intends to defend. Read news about the race HERE. 

The next nine weeks will be filled with campaign-related news and information. As always, you can count on The Red Ant for all the inside scoop, including endorsements in late February when ballots are mailed out! Stay tuned.

In the meantime, Happy New Year! Read my column in yesterday's Aspen Times HERE.

* * *

Ahhh, the season of New Year’s resolutions. It was 4,000 years ago when the ancient Babylonians began the tradition of celebrating the new year by crowning a new king or reaffirming their loyalty to the existing one, while promising to repay debts and return borrowed objects.

Later, in ancient Rome, emperor Julius Caesar established January 1 as the beginning of the new year. Significant for its namesake, Janus, the two-faced god who looked backward at the past and forward into the future, January was when the Romans made sacrifices and promises of good conduct.

Early Christians marked the occasion by examining one’s past deeds and committing to be better. Today, the focus is more on self-improvement, often marked by aspirational yet unrealistic goals. But hey, it’s January 1. Hope springs eternal.

A local reason for hope is a municipal election on March 7 offering one open council seat and has mayor Torre and councilman Skippy Mesirow fighting for their electoral survivals. In the spirit of Janus, there’s no time like the present to take a look back and focus on some leadership basics that desperately need to be reintroduced into the local discourse. 

It would be hard to do worse. Marked by a seemingly never-ending series of misguided foibles and decisions made in a congratulatory 5-0 echo chamber, Aspen’s incumbents’ records provide a illustrative roadmap for their challengers.

• ·      Talk less, listen more.  Pulled off course by both a newsworthy global occupation and a high profile local hotel development sale, our electeds became distracted far beyond their pay grades. For elected leaders who have never signed the front of a paycheck to rant about real estate pro formas and call for boycotts and media take-overs, it can’t but remind one of the metaphorical lesson from 1929 when stock tips given at the shoe-shine stand foretold the impending stock market crash.

Such diversions provided all the feel-good, warm fuzzies this council is known for, but they also fostered an environment where staff-driven regulatory overreach and punitive policies became the blueprint for a council that governs as though it knows better than anyone else about every issue.

• ·      Seek guidance. There is a wealth of knowledge and experience in this community. At the beginning of every council term, it is valuable to point out that council oversees two city employees: the city manager and the city attorney, and city staff reports to them. But each cycle, staff inevitably runs roughshod over city council, burying it in countless pages of meeting materials and driving its own agenda. 

Council does not work for staff. It’s time for our elected representatives to push back and question staff’s proposals, drawing from their own experiences and seeking feedback from the community, especially subject matter experts.  

• ·      Foster relationships with all constituents. Widely acknowledged bad decisions such as Summer 2022’s “living lab” on Cooper Avenue and Galena that removed 44 parking spaces and tested a nonsensical auto-bike-pedestrian maze could easily have been prevented by first meeting with local downtown businesses and taking their feedback to heart. But those relationships don’t exist. The same holds true for residents of Aspen’s West End who seek the city’s assistance in reducing dangerous traffic in their neighborhoods. 

Just who are our local government’s key constituents? With a long list of issue groups they’ve ignored, over-regulated and disenfranchised, it’s hard to know. There’s much fence-mending to be done. Consider our second homeowners. As convenient as it’s been to blame them for all of Aspen’s ills, our taxation-without-representation neighbors are savvy investors who might just be wisening up and, not unlike seasonal residents, registering to vote here to protect their interests. (Hint, hint.) 

• ·      Build trust. The easiest way to gain trust is through transparency, but a long-ingrained culture of secrecy in city hall has lived up to its reputation with the surprise moratorium on short term rental (STR) and residential development permits in 2022. In the absence of a meaningful public process, constituents were blind-sided by the foregone conclusions and resulting regulations that decimated their private property rights. 

Government regulations will never be popular, but a proper, transparent and inclusive process that courts various viewpoints and weighs data instead of feelings is a far better way to determine new policies. 

• ·      Be nice to tourists. It’s outrageous to even have to say it, but when our own chamber of commerce, partially funded by the city, surveys local residents to gauge the degree that tourists negatively impact our lives, we are long overdue for a course correction. The unwelcoming behavior, the spite and the resentment are not a good look for Aspen, and much of it stems from the punitive attitudes emanating from city hall.  

Aspen’s is a tourism-based economy, and yes, this has “impacts,” but don’t we all? Those in glass houses ought not throw stones.

No one loves campaign season as much as I do. The next nine weeks will provide illuminating contrasts between decisions of the recent past and future leadership potential. Here’s to much-needed change in the new year. 

Check your registration or register to vote at www.PitkinVotes.com  Ballots will be mailed around February 17. Contact TheRedAntEM@comcast.net