UNREPENTANT TENANT from Page 7
(present day Campus Townhomes) and it got off to a strong start. While it ultimately failed several months later, it did bring much needed focus on the plight of tenants in Boulder. The following year, BTU broadened its focus and started counseling tenants for the many problems renters faced, including evictions, not getting back deposits, lack of repairs, etc. It also worked with the Colorado Daily (then, an independent CU paper) to publish an annual “10 Worst Landlords” list, based on complaints. The Daily Camera wrote in May, 1970: The Boulder Tenants Union has set out to end what it terms “tenant exploitation by landlords” in the Boulder area.
following year, BCTO had new allies, with the election of some of the youngest people to sit on the City Council and, more importantly, the first renters. Notably, Tim Fuller was a strong tenant advocate on the Council and he worked with BCTO to not only strengthen and enforce the housing code, but to enact the first (and only) rental housing license ordinance in the state. With few exceptions, all rental housing in the city of Boulder was required to pass annual housing code inspections (it’s now every three years) and get a license to legally rent out a residential housing unit. While there are still a number of unlicensed rental units to this day, it made a big difference in improving living conditions for tenants. Predictably, landlords fought the rental license program tooth and nail, but ultimately lost. Later in 1973, Fuller and BCTO again teamed up to address exorbitant rents by gathering 7,000 petition signatures calling for rent stabilization. “Councilman Tim Fuller introduced a rent control ordinance in October,” according to Boulder’s Municipal Government History collection, “which would have included a rollback of rent to January and permission for landlords to raise rents in order to earn ‘a fair and equitable’ profit. In addition, landlords would be permitted to raise rent by 2.5%, if their buildings passed housing code inspections without any violation. The proposal was not accepted by the City Council.” BCTO would continue counseling and advocating for more tenant protection—along with organizing tenants in buildings—for the next eight years. But over time, it lost its activist edge, especially when it started receiving government funding. The 1980s kickstarted a new chapter in tenant activism that will be addressed next time. This opinion column does not necessarily reflect the views of Boulder Weekly. Email comments or questions to editorial@boulderweekly.com
THERE’S ALWAYS BEEN CONCERN over high rental prices and poor conditions in Boulder.
Moving toward the dual objectives of lowering the level of rent—which it now feels is exorbitant—and of assuring fair lease terms for the tenant, the BTU is stressing education of tenants as the first step and its campaign. The BTU asserts most tenants in the area are easily exploited by landlords because they don’t understand the local housing situation and because they aren’t aware of their legal rights as tenants particularly with respect to eviction.”
Needless to say, more than 50 years later, little seems to have changed. And yet, unbeknown to most renters, Boulder now has the best laws in the state, thanks to activism resulting in protective state and local legislation. BTU’s activism burned out by 1971, but in December 1972 a new group, the Boulder County Tenant’s Organization (BCTO), picked up the mantle. With new leaders, they eschewed the rent strikes, pickets and confrontation of their predecessors and continued counseling, with a new focus on other tenant issues. Simultaneously, in an important power shift, 18 year olds got the right to vote in 1972 nationwide, and that dramatically shook up Boulder’s politics, which had been relatively conservative up to that point. With City Council elections the 8
l
MAY 19, 2022
Can the Davids influence the Goliaths? by Tina Eden
C
ommercial giants, such as Amazon, Walmart, Tyson Foods frequently make the news for high salaries and soaring stock valuations garnered by top management and shareholders. At the other end of the spectrum are stories about the working conditions within these giants detailing low pay, lack of work-life balance policies and sparse benefit plans for employees who do not occupy the C-suite. This dichotomy is considered the normal consequence of a free market economy, and with mixed emotions we accept it as the way of the world. Or is it? What less frequently makes the news are companies that make an effort to consider the welfare of their employees and their communities before that of their shareholders. Yet, there is a movement afoot for this model. Many small- and mid-sized companies have opted to earn the designation of a “B Corporation”—the B stands for beneficial. This designation is granted by a nonprofit known as B-Lab, which
uses metrics to issue a score based on the company’s social and environmental performance standards. Boulder boasts several B Corporations, such as Bloomin, Dojo4, Namaste Solar, Upslope Brewery and Wallaroo Hats. Larger (out-of-state) companies such as Patagonia and Ben & Jerry’s are also B Corporations. B-Lab was launched in 2006 by Bart Houlahan, Jay Coen Gilbert and Andrew Kassoy after the three friends and business associates saw the need for companies to prioritize their stakeholders, such as employees, the natural environment, and the community at-large, over shareholders. Prior to launching B-Lab, Houlahan and Gilbert co-founded AND 1, a $250 million athletic footwear and apparel company. According to Houlahan, AND 1 was a socially responsible business before the concept was popular. However, shortly after the sale of the company, the new owners stripped
TO EARN A B CERTIFICATION, corporations must meet social and responsibility starndards, public transparency, and accountability.
l
OPINION from Page 11
BOULDER COUNTY’S INDEPENDENT VOICE
