Meeting Reviews
Author: Julie Gordon
Amendment 24 is a bad initiative that will cause a lot of problems for Colorado if passed in the Nov. 7 general election, said Susan Connelly, vice president of community design for the developer McStain Enterprises, at Boulder Tomorrow's Sept. 28 luncheon.
A complex citizen growth management initiative, Amendment 24 would require that the cities and counties in Colorado prepare growth plans and then have the community vote on them.
Connelly said she is opposed to Amendment 24 because of the citizen vote requirement and because it would be in the state constitution.
"These issues are complex, and these regulations are not necessarily one size fits all," Connelly said. "To have it be a constitutional amendment that is interpreted by the Colorado Supreme Court and has no other ability from legal background to me is not a smart way to proceed."
If Amendment 24 passes, development can occur only in committed areas and growth areas that are approved by voters in a particular community, Connelly said. Committed areas are land contained within a recorded subdivision, at least 50 percent of which already has permanent structures constructed on it, or where central water and sewer services have been extended. The land has been identified by the local government as an area for development or re-development. Like the committed areas, the growth areas would have to be equipped with water and sewer services.
Amendment 24 won't stop growth, it will just re-direct it, Connelly said. It could even stop growth entirely, she added. "It makes sense to encourage development and re-development in the core of the city and not continuing to keep out on the edges," she said. "(Amendment 24) may stop growth. If you can't go out, and you can't grow in or up, then you're not going to grow at all."
Connelly also pointed out that if Amendment 24 passes, developers would face more delays, expenses, moratorium, and litigation. Since Amendment 24 applies to cities and counties with a population greater than 10,000, developers will look to cities and counties with less than 10,000 to do their development, Connelly said.
Boulder Tomorrow President Earl McLaughlin also pointed out that Amendment 24 will inflate housing dramatically, in the places where jobs are, and increase the cost of doing business.
Overall, Amendment 24 "creates more problems than it solves," Connelly said. With Amendment 24 being such a hot issue, several candidates running for state senator and state representative have also spoken out against the initiative, saying that it takes away local control of growth.
Connelly said she is worried that a lot of people won't take the time to thoroughly understand Amendment 24, and that they will vote "yes" without realizing what it's going to do.
"I don't think citizens are stupid," Connelly said. "I think they're busy. My concern is that citizens will not have time to really become aware of the issues and implications, and will in effect default to how does this effect me. If the growth area is in their backyard, and this impacts me directly, no way. If it's all the way across town, I don't care."
Connelly encouraged those at the luncheon to share the information she was giving about Amendment 24 with people they know, so that everyone is educated and aware of what will happen if it passes.
"We have to do something," Connelly said. "I'm concerned about the future of our state. Each one of you, the better you understand it, the better you can explain it to your friends, family and colleagues. The better it will be in getting out the word and getting more balance."
Connelly practiced land use and real estate law in Florida and Illinois for 13 years, representing private, public and not-for-profit clients. She was director of community development for the town of Vail for a couple of years and also served as deputy commissioner for the city of Chicago's Department of Planning. She holds a master's degree in public administration, with an emphasis on growth management
"I think she had a very balanced background because of her varied work experience in the public and private sector," said Jill Rood, an attorney with Jacobs, Chase, Frick, Kleinkopf and Kelley in Denver. "I thought her comments were reasoned and insightful."
Like Connelly, Boulder Tomorrow is taking a stance against Amendment 24. The organization recently passed a resolution encouraging members to vote "no" on the amendment on election day.
"I think Susan Connelly captured the essence of it," said Ken Hotard, a Boulder Tomorrow board member. "It will be put in the Colorado constitution. Whatever flaws can only be changed by a state-wide vote and at the local level, they can only be changed by a local vote."
Hotard pointed out that if the growth area maps need to be changed, the cities and counties have to wait a year for it to be done.
Furthermore, Hotard said, Amendment 24 takes away planning commissions and city councils' ability to make decisions about growth and substitutes it with ballot-box planning. "That's a bad way to make decisions," Hotard said. "Most planning decisions require a great deal of understanding and thoughtful process. Voters are unlikely to spend the amount of time (considering a growth issue) that appointed and elected officials will."
City Councilman Gordon Riggle, who also attended the Boulder Tomorrow luncheon, said that he had heard a lot of the arguments for Amendment 24 and he appreciated getting the con perspective from Connelly.
Boulder Tomorrow's next luncheon will be held on Oct. 26, again at the Angel Pines Country Club, 5706 Arapahoe Road, at noon. Guest speaker Barrie Hartman, editor of the Boulder Daily Camera's editorial page, will talk about the upcoming election.
