Growth control

Growth control

Constituents want their legislators to represent them on tough issues

April 17, 2001

Any sensible growth legislation the Colorado Legislature might have planned for this session has gone by the wayside, caught up in barter-and-bully system that characterizes so much of politics these days.

The only bill left standing is the bill favored by developers, which is to say that it’s not one that addresses what the average citizen wants most: a way to manage growth rather than allowing it to be controlled by those with the money and the heavy equipment.

That’s reality in government, and we suppose the political system wouldn’t work at all without the trading of favors, but when it stalls legislation on a topic the people of Colorado so clearly want addressed, it’s become obstructive rather than constructive. When legislators see no way to pass the bill the favor, they exact retribution by attempting to kill bills to which they actually might not have a serious objection but whose sponsors have not earned their favor. The end result is often wishy-washy legislation that fails to deal with the root topic, which in this instance is uncontrolled growth.

The last election, with all its attempted initiatives, emphasized how much citizens of Colorado care about this issue. It also emphasized how ineffective citizen initiatives are when pitted against the sophistication and financing of the construction industry, which has not yet been required to come to the table with real solutions for sprawl. The scare tactics that threaten the end of affordable housing may not be as effective next time around, when the boom has stalled and the demand is not nearly as high.

Amendment 24 would not have reached the ballot in the first place if the legislature had accepted responsibility for growth management. Democrats have been critical of Gov. Bill Owens for failing to exercise leadership on the issue, but this is why we elect legislators: to work through the complicated negotiations required to put together a workable law governing a complex issue like growth. They have resources — including researchers — not readily available to the rest of us, and they have the perfect forum in which to sit down and hash out details that will protect constituents without unduly restricting industry. Both sides have valid concerns. They can, if sufficiently motivated, start out with ideals and move toward workable legislation, building consensus along the way and, equally importantly, recognizing when consensus is less important than principle.

Developers and landowners, who are worried that growth legislation will limit them in the future, know they have the advantage in initiatives and referenda, but they need to understand that this issue is not going to die until growth controls are crafted and approved.

So what now? The ideal scenario would be to combine the best features of all the bills proposed this season; the most likely is that growth legislation will wait for the next legislative session. There’s a small opportunity in that delay — Colorado’s counties and communities could come up with individual solutions that would obviate the need for state laws addressing growth — but the reality is that the responsibility rests with the Colorado Legislature.

That’s the way representative government is supposed to work. The people of Colorado want sensible controls; their elected representatives need to find a way to provide them.