News, Analysis and Opinion for the Informed Boulder Resident
Friday February 24th 2017

Support the Blue Line

Subscribe to the Blue Line

That's what she said

city council transportation energy municipalization xcel housing april fools urban planning bicycles climate action density election 2011 boulder county open space affordable housing agriculture renewables CU local food election 2013 jefferson parkway youth climate change pedestrian development election 2015 preservation Rocky Flats BVSD immigration recreation mountain bikes GMOs transit farming boards and commissions decarbonization plan boulder urban design fracking fires wildlife colorado politics architecture smart regs downtown new era colorado journalism plutonium homeless transit village radioactive waste commuting natural gas ghgs parking rental height limits planning board april fools 2015 historic preservation energy efficiency coal diversity Neighborhoods historic district students walkability North Boulder gardens education land use arts population growth growth election 2010 solar bus University Hill taxes water supply election 2012 water quality RTD library zoning nutrition groundwater bike lane safety affairs of the heart april fools 2016 organic electric utility mayor planning reserve election zero waste politics county commissioners longmont hogan-pancost hazardous waste ballot obama golden right-sizing transportation master plan flood electric vehicle Mapleton solar panels climate smart loan recycling comprehensive plan sprawl PV colorado legislature bears diagonal plaza blue line wetlands epa conservation easement pesticide food congestion street design drought election 2016 boulder junction inequality road diet bus rapid transit renewable energy ken wilson automobile children community cycles daily camera ecocycle Newlands campaign finance sam weaver league of women voters PUC community david miller climate change deniers wind power boulder bob bellemare boulder creek bsec contamination modernism john tayer crime lisa morzel suzanne jones kevin hotaling tim plass Whittier mlk EV green points BVCP technology Orchard Grove arizona civil rights west tsa flood mitigation marijuana public spaces

Other People’s Money


By

Screen clip from a City of Boulder online zoning map

Macon Cowles and Steve Pomerance (Boulder Daily Camera, January 5) both address the same issue: what Cowles calls using Other People’s Money and what economists frame as externalizing costs. The natural tendency for people to try to get something for nothing is universal, and it is one of the roles of government to try to figure out when this individual tendency might actually be beneficial to the whole. Congress decided, for example, in 1986, at the height of the Reagan administration, to require hospitals to treat anyone needing emergency health care, regardless of their ability to pay (or their legal status in the country, for that matter). The calculus employed by Congress probably factored in how unseemly it would be to have the bloated bodies of poor people littering our sidewalks. (It should be noted that this was an unfunded mandate-we have all paid for treatment of uninsured patients since then, despite claims that this cost is just now being imposed on us.)

But, there has been no such argument put forward, at least not as far as I am aware, that supports subsidizing rural residents, as Cowles argues is the case (and which rough math suggests must be true). Let’s have someone tote this up-maybe the Commissioners’ offer to pay 20% of subdivision road rehabilitation is too generous.

Pomerance points out that development of commercially-zoned lands in Boulder will impose very large costs on residents not only of Boulder, but of the region. He suggests that we reduce those external costs by regulating the negative effects of commercial development. Make no mistake, his proposed standards are meant to be formidable requirements, but they should be viewed as appropriate by those who have the imagination to visualize the alternative. Pomerance does not mention population in his standards, so his proposal cannot be tagged as anti-growth. In fact, a more favorable outcome (perfect being out of reach) could be realized if a significant fraction of commercial landowners were to petition to “downzone” their land to a multifamily use for non-luxury housing, thus allowing Boulder’s population to grow into a better balance against fewer jobs. Make no mistake, Boulder’s future will be ugly if we do nothing about this.

Rate this article: 1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5 votes, average: 2.20 out of 5)
Loading...

What do you think? Leave a comment!

You must be logged in to post a comment.