Boulder NIMBY's, "Just Cause" evictions,
Keep the oil and cement coming, but leave the plants over there.
Boulder wants to use resources, but many up there do not want to house them.
They (on a per capita basis) emit more greenhouse gases than other places. They're obviously using oil and natural gas. They don't want drilling though.
They love renewables, but how many wind turbines and solar panels are there up there? How about transmission lines cutting through their land?
I think it's probably safe to add cement to the list now. See below
https://coloradosun.com/2023/02/06/cemex-closure-activists-boulder-greenhouse-gases/?fbclid=IwAR1Zd1wgBnK_HVpTEg7Vkf3UbBKkyuNC7otzItIX_8sM-W5Eiyahib89CP8
***Related:
Related:
We don't want the greenhouse gases, but we're also not willing to explore nuclear. I am baffled at the expectations of environmentalists and people in Boulder. Energy's gotta come from somewhere and in the near term we will need baseline generation from SOMETHING.
https://i2i.org/colorado-communities-for-climate-action-boulder-county-line-up-to-oppose-nuclear-energy-bills-at-the-capitol/?fbclid=IwAR2GO4jzNSKggZbDiV_RoJItE-Ik4yYrPmK4vdjpl8ouf63F6boQA4HfCS8
and
An open email to the sponsors of HB23-1171 and the members of the House Transportation, Housing, and Local Government committee on the “Just Cause” evictions bill.
"Just Cause Requirement" for evictions and another intrusion of progressive policy into the market.
I'm not a big time landlord, but we do rent out my wife's condo in Denver and I am a big fan of limited government intervention in the market. HB23-1171 fails on both counts for me. I had hoped to be able to speak to the committee in person, but it conflicts with my schedule and so I sent an email to the sponsors and committee.
If you are concerned about this bill as well, it's up for committee on March 1 (see screenshot) currently. You can follow it through the link at the bottom of my open letter below. If anything I wrote in my open email are helpful to you in your own advocacy, please feel free to use any part of the email.
An open email to the sponsors of HB23-1171 and the members of the House Transportation, Housing, and Local Government committee
Hello to all,
My name is Cory Gaines and I'm a resident of Logan County.
I had hoped to be able to testify against HB23-1171 (linked below for reference) remotely but unfortunately the committee hearing is scheduled for when I will be teaching and so I'm unable. If anyone on the committee finds what I write compelling enough to want to read into the record, please feel free.
I would like to flesh out why I am opposed to this bill.
This bill continues the trend I have noticed over the last 3 or so years in the Assembly: more and more the impression I get from changes to tenant law seems to be geared to make the relationship more antagonistic. Instead of fostering cooperation and easing the transaction of business between two consenting parties, the bills I see (whether they ultimately end up as law or no) seem to pit hapless tenants against rich and miserly landlords.
As a landlord myself (and a tenant prior to buying my own home frankly), I find this characterization insulting. I'm neither hapless nor do my wife and I sit around laughing and rolling around in piles of money. We're not unique either. Many landlords are part timers such as my wife and I (who rented her condo when she moved out to the Plains for spare income so it would be easier for her to stay home more when we had children), or they are full timers who make a decent (but not extravagant) living by renting. We, and they, simply want to be decent and to make some money as income. We're not looking to exploit anyone. Policy like you propose in this bill seeks to further an exploitation/victim narrative that has been pushed far too often lately.
Additionally, I am concerned that bills such as these are mere stepping stones to a larger intrusion by government into the rental market. That too is a pattern I've noticed in the Assembly for the last 3 or so years: increasing government intervention into things our government should not be intruding into. I tend to resist "slippery slope" argument such as these, but experience with the Democrat majority in this state has shown time and again that, though the steps are small, the path leads to yet more intrusion. Bills such as these, and careless passage of them, will ultimately put us on track to have housing markets such as those you see in other areas of the country where the government takes a heavy hand: low supply and high prices.
Lastly, I ask myself, as I do with any proposed policy, what problem is this intended to solve and will it solve that problem? In thinking about those questions in relation to this bill, I ask how many people currently would fit under your "no fault" eviction title. I ask what law currently exists in the state that defines the process for such evictions and why you find it inadequate. I ask whether or not adding a huge financial burden on landlords will encourage more people to rent or whether it will discourage them. If you've read this far, my guess is that you know my thoughts on the matter, but I do sincerely ask that you consider these questions thoughtfully as you deliberate on your vote.
I urge you to vote NO on this bill when it is in committee. This is bad policy for a number of reasons.
Thank you for your time,
Cory
https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb23-1171
Taxes (oops! sorry, “fees”) to pay for “transportation”
Last year's Assembly session brought a whole host of new taxes (oops, sorry, I meant "fees") to the state to help pay for "transportation".
One such fee was an add on to any retail deliveries. So, for example, when you buy that widget off Amazon, you pay it. Get something mail ordered from a small business on the Plains? You pay it.
The reason I put transportation in quotes above is that while Democrats touted this as fixing the damn roads, if you look at the list of government enterprises that get these fees, you'll see that few have anything to do with putting down asphalt or building a bridge.
To wit, take a look at the screenshot from the bill page linked below. With the exception of the one I struck through, do those enterprises look like they'll be fixing the potholes on the roads that make up your commute? Will they make it easier to drive commerce across this state by helping freight move smoothly?
Yeah.
If you take exception to this, look over the bill linked below and consider supporting it. It has absolutely no chance of passing, but it, like other bills I've mentioned, gives you a chance to speak up and to the Democrats running this state and tell them what you think of their policy. I believe that CIVIL comment of this kind has value.
It's too easy for us to live in echo chambers and so I believe there's value in popping those bubbles every now and again. I've signed up to testify for the bill and hope to be able to.
I invite you to join me.
https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb23-1166