ISSUE #223: Aspen Unsatisfied (6/20/22)

"A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul."

-- George Bernard Shaw

ASPEN TIMES COLUMN

The results of the 2022 Aspen Community Survey are out, and they're damning. In short, dissatisfaction with the services provided by the local government is at the lowest level since 2006, declining 19% in the past two years.

This is primarily attributed to the lack of "affordability" in Aspen: food, drinks, groceries, and of course housing. The key takeaway is that many in Aspen see it as the local government's role to "Make Aspen Affordable" for them. Is it?

Read my column in yesterday's Aspen Times HERE.

And if you're so inclined, HERE is the survey, in its entirety.

THE LUMBERYARD

On a related note, my colleague Paul Menter at the other paper penned a piece on the cart-before-the-horse lack of financial planning for the Lumberyard. It's a must-read HERE.

THE MORATORIUM AND PENDING LEGISLATION

On a critical public policy front, please be aware that second reading of the moratorium-based legislation pertaining to residential building and short term rentals will be on June 28 at 5p. Public comment is encouraged at this meeting. If you are an Aspen property owner, you would be well-served to wisen up about what's coming down the pike.

The following is a letter that was sent to me recently and I whole-heartedly agree. Please review the meeting packet that will be posted on Aspen.gov this Friday, June 24. Do not rely solely on the papers for your information.

"The point of all these new policies is a massive wealth transfer from free market property owners in Aspen to those who currently live in Affordable Housing or future occupants.

And I do mean massive.

This is whether those occupants contribute to our community or not.

As a self identifying liberal, I very much support affordable housing for workers in our community.

But if you look at the details, and what city council is putting forth, it is highly fiscally irresponsible.

And will do very little to actually mitigate what truly is a worker housing crisis.

I suggest that all of you, as property owners, look into this.

And express your opinions on June 28.

Perhaps you will disagree with me.

And will support city council initiatives.

But you really should understand what is going on here.

Because city council is betting that you will not bother to dig into the details.

I suggest you encourage all your property owning friends in Aspen to do the same and really learn what is going on here.

And not just listen to the headlines about what city council is saying.

City council is trying to push all this through in the dark of night.

Just like they did with Ordinance 27 late last year (which was deemed illegal by the courts, and reversed).

There is a reason why this was rushed through during the off season.

And all of the 'community outreach' was a red herring.

Certain members of city council told me as much..that the outreach was just for show..and that they had already decided what they were going to do.

Once again, we all should support what we support.

But you all should really learn what is going on."

Forewarned is forearmed. Please attend the meeting on June 28. Be heard.

* * * * * 

It seems the Whos down in Aspen’s Whoville are not the grateful and joyful bunch most anyone on the planet would be if they were fortunate to live here. 

The 2022 Aspen Community Survey was recently released, and people’s satisfaction with the services provided by the local government declined 19% in two years to its lowest level since 2006. Plus, they feel the city can’t be trusted to look out for residents’ interests, which are primarily tied to issues of affordability.

The survey’s leading questions did not even attempt to conceal the government’s agenda. “What suggestions do you have for keeping Aspen a great place to live, work and play?” Well, not just affordable housing, how about affordable living! The responses reveal that many here see it as the government’s responsibility to address the lack of affordable bars, restaurants, shops and groceries, and of course housing. Such subjective questions about “feelings” are paramount to asking people if they wish they were richer, skinnier, prettier or in better shape. The results are predictable and would be the same anywhere.

You have to see it to believe it but the actual responses are nothing short of embarrassing, not unlike a recent letter to the editor. In response to my column questioning the wisdom and viability of housing non-workers in our subsidized housing inventory amid a widespread labor shortage, I was seriously asked, what was someone who doesn’t work here and who can’t afford free market rent to do when they want to live in Aspen if not allowed in APCHA housing. 

These are my favorite survey responses. “Affordability and services to support the working class need to remain big priorities for the town.” “Someone needs to address the lack of affordability for the working class. There are no bar menus that we can afford anymore.” “We need to step back from catering only to the tourists. I understand that they pay the bills but this is OUR town.”

When people cannot afford something, is it the government’s or the community’s responsibility to make it affordable for them? This is the critical question. The dense report yields a predictable set of recommended actions ostensibly to quell the rising discontent, which is primarily among year-round residents, men, business owners, and those 35-52. It reads like a socialist manifesto with special carve-outs for Aspen locals. 

• ·      We have an urgent need to improve affordability and reduce income inequalities between visitors and locals, and should look to other cities for best practices. 
• ·      We need to prioritize subsidized housing not just for the workforce but for others who wish to remain in the community. 
• ·      We must help local restaurants and bars stay in business through increased controls over commercial developers and the prioritization of developments that provide affordable options. 
• ·      Current full-time residents and workers should be prioritized over tourists and newer “wealthy” residents. 
• ·      We need places where locals can connect. 
• ·      And of course, we need more diversity to strengthen our sense of community.

Living in the utopia that is Aspen requires deliberate trade-offs and lifestyle choices. Perhaps it’s a willingness to have and make less, or endure inconveniences and expenses in order to live in a place that others only aspire to visit. Aspen is indeed wonderful, but living here is not for everyone. No one is stuck here. 

Furthermore, our local politburo sits on an empty restaurant space where Taster’s was, another beneath the old Cooper Street Pier, a subsidized restaurant in the Wheeler that isn’t particularly affordable, an empty Armory, an underutilized Old Power Plant, and a nearly vacant new Taj Mahal City Hall where they deliberately eschewed food vendors on Galena Plaza. Many easy solutions are already literally in the hands of the government. But like with subsidized housing, the answer is always to assail the free market for “more” instead of utilizing what we already have in abundance. (Speaking of subsidized housing, APCHA has recently enabled its residents to make more while paying the same rent through generous exemptions. So, for these residents, “affordability” is actually increasing relative to the rest of the market.)

Notably, the consultants conclude that the effects of COVID had little impact on the survey results, but I disagree. To neglect the historic significance of the disruption that riled markets for three years, created record real estate prices, caused restaurant prices to increase and brought record inflation, encourages the city to enact future policy changes based on an event that is now in the past. The focus should be entirely on people’s dissatisfaction with how the city dealt with the pandemic, not the effects of the pandemic itself. 

The survey is an indictment of a city government that is detached from its constituents who trust it less than ever and see our electeds acting more and more irresponsibly with fake, leading outreach, misguided policies and careless spending (Taj Mahal City Hall, $4.5 million bus stops) from within an echo chamber that only considers one narrow viewpoint. In other words, the survey’s push for a Make Aspen Affordable agenda in response to resident dissatisfaction is more about the city’s and its leadership’s incompetence than anything else.

We have a critical municipal election in March 2023. Time to throw the bums out. Contact TheRedAntEM@comcast.net