Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post Reply
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by mister_coffee »

Fun CH wrote: Thu Aug 24, 2023 11:58 am ...
A second home tax on homes that sit empty most of the year would increase rental supply and lower costs.

Why would towns need to Annex more property when a sensible water law where water is actually shared as the public resource that it is would create more housing? But they still would be expensive homes, many of them vacation homes, so tax those homes, a lot.

There's Twisp's pool funding problem solved right there with more money available to build affordable housing.

It's estimated that 80% of the homes in Mazama are vacation homes.

Pine Forest probably has similar numbers.
Yes, but implementing a tax on second homes might require a constitutional change at the state level. You could implement a pretty vicious tax on vacation rentals, but that would require getting the County Commissioners (which would rather eat raw broken glass than increase any tax) to vote on them. I'd be for a pretty steep tax on vacation rentals, because I think that is a big part of the affordable housing problem here. Such a tax would help but I am doubtful it would be sufficient on its own.

Also, if towns annex more properly you get around the zoning rules, or more precisely permit the towns to implement their own zoning. Also, from an environmental impact standpoint you don't want 500 new homes each with their own well and septic. Better to have a complete water and sewer system that is shared.

I do hold that you'll need to add about 500 new homes to the supply to significantly impact home prices in the valley.

You'll also have to solve the homeowner's insurance problem.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by Fun CH »

mister_coffee wrote: Thu Aug 24, 2023 11:04 am The only way we are going to fix the housing affordability problem here is by increasing the supply of housing. End of story.

What it is going to take to accomplish that:

1. Twisp or Winthrop have to annex more land.
2. That land is zoned for higher density residential use, probably some multifamily homes as well.
3. The infrastructure (water, sewer, power, &c) are built out for that annexed land.
4. Sell the lots and wait patiently.
A second home tax on homes that sit empty most of the year would increase rental supply and lower costs.

Why would towns need to Annex more property when a sensible water law where water is actually shared as the public resource that it is would create more housing? But they still would be expensive homes, many of them vacation homes, so tax those homes, a lot.

There's Twisp's pool funding problem solved right there with more money available to build affordable housing.

It's estimated that 80% of the homes in Mazama are vacation homes.

Pine Forest probably has similar numbers.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by mister_coffee »

The only way we are going to fix the housing affordability problem here is by increasing the supply of housing. End of story.

What it is going to take to accomplish that:

1. Twisp or Winthrop have to annex more land.
2. That land is zoned for higher density residential use, probably some multifamily homes as well.
3. The infrastructure (water, sewer, power, &c) are built out for that annexed land.
4. Sell the lots and wait patiently.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
PAL
Posts: 1308
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by PAL »

Troubling of course.
Pearl Cherrington
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by Fun CH »

A lot of real estate sales in the Valley are from people paying cash. Alot of bidding wars also. Heard that one home had a asking price of around $800,000 and sold for 1.2 million.

Assessed values will also keep going up.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
PAL
Posts: 1308
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by PAL »

The book talks about what has happened to Montana and Jackson Hole and how a few billionaires or even millionaires can influence property values, etc.
Pearl Cherrington
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by mister_coffee »

Well, to be fair, there aren't that many billionaires in the world. But there are more than ten million people with a net worth above five million in the United States.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
PAL
Posts: 1308
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by PAL »

The library has the book, "Billionaire Wilderness" about this very thing as the post title says. It is a great read.
Pearl Cherrington
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by Fun CH »

mister_coffee wrote: Mon Aug 21, 2023 1:22 pm Kind of what we are looking at in our future:

"California's becoming uninsurable"

https://wildfiretoday.com/2023/08/21/ca ... insurable/
Unlike heavyweights State Farm and Allstate, which declined to sign new homeowners in the state, AmGUARD and Falls Lake will also drop their existing policyholders. Safeco plans to drop 950 policies in October in San Francisco and the East Bay.
a friend of mine in Mazama is losing his home insurance. With the Cedar creek fire passing close by his place, its probably the most fire safe it's been there in years.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by mister_coffee »

Kind of what we are looking at in our future:

"California's becoming uninsurable"

https://wildfiretoday.com/2023/08/21/ca ... insurable/
Unlike heavyweights State Farm and Allstate, which declined to sign new homeowners in the state, AmGUARD and Falls Lake will also drop their existing policyholders. Safeco plans to drop 950 policies in October in San Francisco and the East Bay.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by Fun CH »

mister_coffee wrote: Sun Aug 20, 2023 7:13 am
Fun CH wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 10:24 pm ...
I fear we are losing the Methow Valley. I imagine the First Nation people felt the same way.
You assume that it was ever ours to lose in the first place. Our continued existence and current way of life are subject to negotiation.
when I say we are losing the Methow Valley I mean we are losing a value system here where we were once somewhat isolated from the effects of greed.

I can understand insurance companies not covering homes that are located in high hazard areas. What I can't understand is a group of recent arrivals who think its OK to tax low income people or working people trying to establish a foot hold in the Valley.

Taking money from the poor to service the luxury needs of the wealthy was never something we aspired to here until recently apparently.

Look at what they did in Tonasket, a town of about 1000 people. They built a pool with a very low tax rate of .13 per $1000 of assessed value.

They did that with fund raising, grants and a lot of volunteer hard work.
Exactly the same recreational project model that was the norm in the Methow until some recent arrivals found a way to enrich themselves at tax payer expense. They even have the people of Twisp fooled into believing the Mega spa will be built in Twisp.

Prop 1 isn't about a pool. Its about establishing a Metropolitan Park District.

The best hope for either replacing or recycling the Wagner pool and maintaining Valley values and affordable living is to vote no on prop 1.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by mister_coffee »

Fun CH wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 10:24 pm ...
I fear we are losing the Methow Valley. I imagine the First Nation people felt the same way.
You assume that it was ever ours to lose in the first place. Our continued existence and current way of life are subject to negotiation.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by mister_coffee »

Just my personal opinion, but I think that higher insurance costs, and the likelihood that homeowner's insurance will become unavailable here in the near future, is going to have a far bigger impact on home prices (and more precisely, affordability of housing) than any swimming pool or indoor climbing gym built here. With public money or not.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by Fun CH »

just-jim wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 7:21 pm [….so more and more folks are looking to re-locate into mountain towns. And have the salaries to do so.
.
and they will want mega spas, climbing wall gyms, amusement park rides, Helicopter skiing, etc.

But why do they want tax payers who can't afford that lifestyle to pay for it.

Surely they don't intend to displace low income people, or do they know they are doing just that very thing?, do they even care?

Two letters to the editor lately from folks who will vote yes for the creation of a Metropolitan Park District thinking life won't change here as more of these playgrounds for tourists are developed. Building homes will be replaced by building hotels and rarely used McMansions

Do they even know that they are voting for their own displacement?

How do you convince them, to use David's analogy, that they are triggering an avalanche that will sweep them away?

In Hawaii, non local surfers trying to catch a wave in a local's spot often find a hand on their shoulder gently persuading them back into the water.

Here we welcome them to share this place. Do the Hawaiian surfers have the right idea? I imagine they've seen a lot of their culture threatened throughout recent history. Yet they still hold onto the same Spirit of Aloha.

I saw an interview after the Lahaina Maui fire. The local they interviewed basically said no more tourists, we want to develop a sustainable community. This while people suffering through a tragedy are getting offers for their land from the greedy looking to make a buck off their loss.

I fear we are losing the Methow Valley. I imagine the First Nation people felt the same way.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
just-jim
Posts: 651
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:24 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by just-jim »

mister_coffee wrote: Sat Aug 19, 2023 6:07 pm More like:
The best laid schemes o' mice an' men / Gang aft a-gley.
-- Robert Burns

I think the driving force is wealthy people in Seattle. If you haven't noticed, there are a lot more wealthy people in Seattle these days, and there are also a lot more people. The **average** salary for an Engineer at Amazon with 10-15 years of experience is about 350k per year. There are thousands of such engineers. Tens of thousands if you count the folks that work for Microsoft, Google, and all of the other companies you never heard of.

It is easy to imagine that a lot of them are married and live in two-income households, with combined incomes north of 500k per year. Probably well north of 500k per year.
I read somewhere - maybe 6 months ago - that the average wages for such Engineers were exactly that…with some earning up to double THAT. And the writer was guess-timating that there were in excess of 100K software types in Pugetopolis making those salaries.

Ain’t nothing gonna stop that flood of money.

The article on Colorado mountain towns was pretty spot on. I grew up there. Back in the early 70’s prices in Aspen and Vail were already out of control. But, most of the other hipster mountain towns (Durango, Steamboat, Breckenridge, Crusty Butt, etc) didnt really take off into the same space until the 1980’s. The whole State is pretty weird, now. Front Range places like Denver, Boulder and Fort Collins are dealing with the same issues that confront Seattle or Portland….so more and more folks are looking to re-locate into mountain towns. And have the salaries to do so.
.
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by mister_coffee »

More like:
The best laid schemes o' mice an' men / Gang aft a-gley.
-- Robert Burns

I perceive that the market forces driving real estate prices here aren't likely to be affected much, one way or the other, by the proposed pool complex. And while it is nice to carry the paper for some people to help them get into a home here, I am doubtful that you can change the direction of the wind that way.

You are arguing with an avalanche. You aren't likely to persuade it to go somewhere else.

I think the driving force is wealthy people in Seattle. If you haven't noticed, there are a lot more wealthy people in Seattle these days, and there are also a lot more people. The **average** salary for an Engineer at Amazon with 10-15 years of experience is about 350k per year. There are thousands of such engineers. Tens of thousands if you count the folks that work for Microsoft, Google, and all of the other companies you never heard of.

It is easy to imagine that a lot of them are married and live in two-income households, with combined incomes north of 500k per year. Probably well north of 500k per year.

The Methow is a small and thinly traded real estate market. For that matter the Chelan area isn't much bigger. It is easy for me to imagine that quite a few of those Deep Learning Engineers or Cloud Ops Engineers at Amazon or Google decide they like cross-country skiing and mountain biking and want a piece of paradise to call their very own. And it wouldn't take very many of them to produce pretty extreme swings in home prices here.

Top that off with the perception that the quality of life on the west side is in precipitous decline. Add in the fact that highly trained, highly compensated people at the peak of their abilities have a lot of negotiating power with their employers. In reality most of their employers will work with them if they all of a sudden want to telecommute from Mazama.

Also the technology has moved quite a ways to enable remote collaboration in ways that go far beyond video conferencing and screen sharing.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by Fun CH »

Some of the causes of rural gentrification are the unintended consequences of people desiring to live in a rural mountain community. I welcome anyone who wants to live here who comes to enjoy natures bounty and build community without carpet bagging strictly for profit.

Purposeful processes such as the creation of a Metropolitan Park District will accelerate rural gentrification here as this place starts to resemble Sun Valley with more and more big city like amenities. There are no unintended consequences here as we know what those consequences will be and can vote not to pass that proposition on November's ballot.

If passed, the ripple effect will be low income people will be displaced as the land under where they currently live greatly increases in value. I'm not sure they understand that but that has been the case in many similar Mountain Communities.

There are things we can do to slow down that displacement process.

One example that I and a few other people I know have done is to rent homes to families trying to establish a foothold here at below market value. I did that for two homes that I constructed and that we lived in. We rented each home with 3 year leases, waiting to be sold as we lived in the unfinished houses that I was building at the time.

I offered to apply their rents paid to the purchase price of the home should they decide to purchase that home. Without a realtor fee, the homes would be sold at below market value. We offered below market creative financing saving both up front mortgage fees and the cost of higher interest rates. The way the creative financing works is say you want $300,000 for a home. You sell the home for $275,000 and make up your original asking price by collecting $25,000 in interest over 10 years.

By doing this we were able to place the emphasis on positive human values that foster and build community rather than line our pockets with greed.

It all worked out for us and until the WSDOE, with the advocacy of a local "lock the gate to the Methow" organization, cut off our right to drill wells on the last two parcels that I was going to develope and then retire.,Both parcels pretty much worthless now without water.

We tried to fight greed but greed won out in the end over our value system of building communty.

Now Greed wants a Mega Spa and ever more of my blood, sweet and hard earned money. Will we be displaced?

So David, does that fall under the heading, that you stated in a different thread, of "life's not fair" and too bad but "investments aren't guaranteed to pay off"?
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by mister_coffee »

I do think the culture and community are changing here. And I don't think we can do very much to steer that ship, which has bluntly already sailed.

Climate change is hitting us faster and harder than anyone expected. That will literally impact air, water, and fire.

At the same time, economic and social forces far larger than us are going to push us around. The westside urban zones are undergoing their own housing and quality of life crises, and we are likely to continue to see an ever-growing influx of refugees coming here, if not for the good life, at least for a "less heinous" life. That and the "zoom town" effect implies we will have a pretty substantial population of very well paid remote workers here -- if we don't already, but I'd expect that segment of the local economy to grow very fast.

Like I've implied before, we are faced with multi-dimensional challenges that are going to be hard to meet with business-as-usual thinking. And one thing that is true about even the best organizations: when they don't know what to do, they will do what they know. And all of those challenges are very daunting in scale -- I can imagine us being able to beat one or two of them, but all of them? I just don't know.

There are a lot of things that are driving the crisis in affordable housing:

1. You can make more money, sometimes far more money, renting a home as a short-term rental (e.g. on VRBO or AirBnB) than you can doing a traditional rental.
2. Private equity has discovered the rental market and has been buying up homes for over a decade. This has led to enormous concentration in the rental market and far less competition. Less competition implies higher prices.
3. Some states, like Washington, have absolutely insane laws governing landlord-tenant relations. It is basically impossible to evict a tenant for cause in Washington at this point in time. So that makes renting any home impossibly risky and a wise property owner probably won't rent their property at any price under these conditions.
4. The above means that apartments and other multifamily developments which are mostly rented are very poor and risky investments, so most investors won't put their money on them.
5. Both material and labor costs for homes have gone up dramatically in the past decade. The costs have far outstripped the traditional inflation rate.

We also need to keep in mind that with the increased wildfire risks we are facing insuring homes here is becoming problematic and probably will become all but impossible in the very near future. It is hard to get a home loan or even a construction loan if you can't insure the property.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Jingles
Posts: 353
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2022 3:48 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by Jingles »

Does not surprise me that you got no action from the then FS LEO, will not say more than I would not of expected any action due to said person's associations off work, both personnel and organizations
User avatar
mister_coffee
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
Location: Winthrop, WA
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by mister_coffee »

High rental and housing costs are a nationwide problem, not just in pretty mountain towns.

At the same time, it is not a supply deficit that is causing high rents: it is estimated that there are 16 million vacant homes in the United States, out of a total of about 140 million homes.
:arrow: David Bonn :idea:
Fun CH
Posts: 1440
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by Fun CH »

The FOP, by the creation of the proposed Metropolitan Park District will develope ever more indoor recreational tourist attractions. As property values go up so will rents and property taxes.

I wonder if the people in the Methow Valley understand that our culture and sense of community is changing here and will be vastly accelerated by the creation of the Metropolitan Park District.

At first I thought this was going to be a limited Metropolitan Park District which would only seek money for the Aquatic Center Mega Spa. I was wrong. They want to build "future related" recreational projects which the law allows and could be anything from a climbing wall in Mazama to an amusement park ride in Winthrop to a Tourist Tram taking folks to the top of Sandy Butte.

I think it's important to understand the make up of the people who seek MPD board commissioner power and control of an enormous amount of tax dollars. All of them FOP board members who have chosen not to allow voters to elect MPD board commissioners as is one of the options under the Wa State law. That very conspicuous exclusion means only they will have complete control over what tourist attractions will be built.

FOP board member Sarah Schrock is a City Planner so it's reasonable to assume she wants to plan recreation in this Valley.

FOP board member Blue Bradly is married to Larry Goldie part owner of North Cascade Mountain Guides.

FOP board member Bo Thrashed is married to Paul Bulter, co-owner of North Cascade Mountain guides and co-owner of North Cascade heli skiing.

Both have exclusive commercial control over guide Outfitter services and our North Cascade Mountain and now I appears both families desire control over tax dollar funded commercial Recreation in our Valley.

Both have violated their Forest Service special use permits and Paul Butler's Corporation has broken the law and damaged the environment in which they operate when they cut down White Bark pine trees in order to create unauthorized helicopter landing zones. White Park pine trees were federally listed as a sensitive species at the time, and are now listed as threatened species.

When I recently disclosed these facts on this forum, I was approached and recently harassed by Bo Thrasher in front of the Mazama Store with a angry " do you have something to say to my face" comment.

When I was one of the concerned citizens who tried to hold Paul Butler's Corporation accountable for the environmental damage they did and the special use permit violations, I was harassed and borderline threatened in front of the Twisp Community Center Library. Four times he told me to "stay out of Mazama" adding because "we don't like narcs".

I filed a police report at the time with Twisp the police department and with officer Dave Graves with the Forest Service law enforcement. I can only conclude that they don't like to be held accountable to facts of their despicable actions.

Like I said it's important to know the character of the people who seek power and which will ultimately change the character of this Valley forever.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
PAL
Posts: 1308
Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
Contact:

Re: Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by PAL »

Wonderfully depressing but realistic article. It's like a bubble. When's it going to burst? Fantasy of what would happen if all the workers stopped for a week in the height of tourist season. But they can't, as the rent is still due. Endless cycle. Insanity.
Doesn't have to or didn't have to be that way. One word-Greed.
Pearl Cherrington
User avatar
pasayten
Posts: 2452
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:03 pm
Contact:

Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies? Or the Methow Valley?

Post by pasayten »

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/17/busi ... using.html
Can Affluence and Affordable Housing Coexist in Colorado’s Rockies?

By Talmon Joseph SmithPhotographs by Joanna Kulesza
Reporting from the counties of central and western Colorado.

Aug. 17, 2023
In the recreation-fueled, amenity-rich economy of Colorado’s Rocky Mountain region, there are two peak seasons: summer, with its rafting, hiking, fishing and biking, and the cold months filled with skiing and other winter activities.

And then there is “mud season” — a liminal moment in spring when the alpine environment, slowly then suddenly, begins to thaw and only a trickle of tourists linger.

It’s a period that workers in other places might bemoan. But for much of the financially stretched work force serving the assemblage of idyllic mountain towns across the state, a brief drop-off in business this spring was a respite.

During a slow shift on a 51-degree day at the Blue Stag Saloon — a nook on Main Street in the vacation hub of Breckenridge — Michelle Badger, a veteran server, half-joked with her co-workers that “this winter was hell.”

Crowds were larger than ever. And workers in the old Gold Rush town still enjoy the highs of the easy camaraderie and solid tips that come with service jobs in the area. But it was all sobered by the related headaches of soaring rents and acute understaffing, which left employees, managers and demanding customers feeling strained.

Working in mountain towns like Breckenridge and others in Summit County — including Silverthorne, Dillon and Frisco — would feel like a fairer bargain, Ms. Badger and her colleagues said, if they could better afford living close by.

Long commutes are common throughout America. But rental prices in hamlets among the wilderness on the outskirts of town are becoming burdensome too.

Job growth has severely outpaced the stock of shelter throughout Colorado. Median rent in Frisco — which a decade ago was considered a modest “bedroom community” for commuting employees — is about $4,000 a month, according to Zillow, and 90 percent above the national median. Residential property prices in Summit County are up 63 percent in just the past year, even amid higher interest rates. Cash buyers buttressed by family money abound.

The wage floor for most jobs in and around the county — from line cook to ski lift operator — is at least $18 an hour, or roughly $37,000 a year. Yet for those not lucky enough to land a rare slot in subsidized local employee housing, it’s not uncommon to live an hour or more away to attain a livable budget.

As that happens, the contingent displaced by the rich ripples outward down rural highway corridors and, in turn, displaces the farther-flung working poor.

Inequality has always been rampant within the orbit of popular destinations. But the financial knock-on effects of those ritzy spheres have expanded as the pandemic-induced surge in remote work has supercharged divides.

Wanderlust-filled white-collar workers abruptly discovered that multiweek visits or even permanent relocations were possible for them and their families. Those seeking investment properties saw the opportunities of this hybrid-driven land rush as well, and pounced.

Longtime residents have had a front-row seat.

Matt Scheer — a 48-year-old musician who grew up on a ranch eastward in El Paso County, where “as soon as we could carry the milk bucket we were milking the cow” — is the sort of extroverted jack-of-all-trades who typifies the spirit (and the wistful brand) of Summit County.

Matt Scheer feels lucky to have bought a house 11 years ago when homes were more affordable and mortgage rates lower. But he feels unable to move.

Having moved near Breckenridge in the early 2000s to ski, hike, fly fish and work around town, he’s relieved that he managed to pick up his place in 2012 for $240,000 with a fixed-rate mortgage. Prices in his tucked-away French Creek neighborhood — a hilly, unincorporated patch with modest double-wide manufactured homes — have more than tripled.

Though he’s a loyal resident with little interest in ever moving, Mr. Scheer said he “can’t really leave.”

For a payout of tens of thousands of dollars from the local government, he recently signed onto a hefty “deed restriction” for his property, banning its use for Airbnb stays, limiting any potential renter or buyer to the work force of Summit, and limiting any potential resale price. And he did it with pride.

It’s part of a growing program led by Breckenridge and other local governments to limit gentrification without licensing a large buildup of new developments. (Deed restrictions in destination areas got off to a quieter start in the 2010s but have ticked up.)

Incumbent property owners willing to sacrifice lucrative short-term vacation rental income see it as a fair trade-off, key to keeping long-term residents and the dashing contours of their towns’ terrain. Policy critics, and frustrated local renters fighting over limited spots, say it is an inadequate tool for the scale and source of the problem: a lack of units.

Those critics include the governor of Colorado, Jared Polis, who is skeptical that lump-sum payments to owners in exchange for deed restrictions will be a sufficient incentive to broadly move the needle on affordability.

“There is no silver bullet,” he said in an interview. “But one of the areas that we have focused on is removing the barriers to additional home construction.” He added that “housing is not a problem that you can solve by throwing more money at the existing housing stock.”

His sweeping legislation to ensure “a home for every Colorado budget” by pre-empting local land-use laws and directly loosening zoning rules statewide died in the State Senate in May, after some initial momentum. All but one of the mayors in the state’s Metro Mayors Caucus issued a letter opposing the plan.

‘It’s Either Five Mil or Five Jobs’
As politicians jockey, many resourceful Coloradans find ways to make do.

Mr. Scheer, for instance, has picked up over 30 music gigs through the end of summer, paying about $100 an hour — though he acknowledges it’s his locked-in, lower housing costs that make his lifestyle workable.

During a practice jam session and impromptu afternoon party of 20- to 40-somethings at Mr. Scheer’s place in the spring, his pal and fellow guitarist, Bud Hallock (the other half of their occasional duo band, Know Good People), explained the grind people face by echoing the playfully hard-nosed aphorism uttered around town: “It’s either five mil or five jobs.”

“If you’re willing to put in the work, you’ll be able to,” argues Mr. Hallock, who moved out West shortly after graduating from St. Lawrence University in 2015. Mr. Hallock has three jobs, he said, adding, “I don’t think it’s the God-given right of anyone to come to a ski town and have it easy.”

For many longtime residents and transplants alike, it has become harder to finesse: Even as Summit County adds waves of remote workers, it has experienced net negative migration since 2020. It’s a trend mirrored in the larger urban areas of Denver and Boulder, where the share of people working remotely is among the highest in the country, as homelessness rises.


Tamara Pogue, a member of Summit County’s governing board, said the mountain towns and valley cities of the Front Range near Fort Collins and Colorado Springs as well as those out by the Western Slope struggled with an “affordability issue” similar to the nation’s big cities for the same reason: “We’re supply-constrained.”

“The problem is the average cost of a single-family home in Summit County so far this year is $2.14 million,” Ms. Pogue said. “Not one job makes that affordable.”

The stock available is limited: 70 percent of homes in the county are second homes that sit vacant most of the year or serve as short-term rentals, she said, typically Airbnbs.

As a single mother of three, Ms. Pogue bought a 1,400-square-foot duplex for $525,000 in 2018 — a rarity, if not an impossibility, now. She said a determination to prevent “mountain communities” from becoming “towns without townspeople” had driven her to become a staunch YIMBY, or a “yes in my backyard” supporter of home-building efforts, against the wishes of perceived NIMBYs, or the “not in my backyard” voices.

Ms. Pogue and her allies argue that the relatively slow pace of building in the Rockies, despite the area’s popularity and rising prices, is a subtle form of denial.


“Everyone wants to be here, whether they work here or not,” she added, “and so we have this spiral.”

If, When, Where and How to Build More
A few affordable-housing projects visibly chug along in Summit near the airport service road, not far from Kingdom Park Court, one of a handful of mobile home parks in the county with pricey lot rents. But getting middle-income developments greenlit can be a slog. Many proponents of limiting development note that about 80 percent of the county is restricted federal public land, putting a ceiling on what can be done. (There’s a nascent pilot program with the U.S. Forest Service to approve some apartments on leased land.) In the meantime, the well-off are gobbling up much of what’s left.

Just north of downtown Silverthorne sits Summit Sky Ranch — a sprawling development with homes starting around $1 million, with a pledge of “bringing modern mountain living to over 400 acres of pristine natural beauty” in the valley. It quickly sold out and many have moved in, lured by a private observatory and private access to a river bend.

Laurie Best, the longtime planning manager for housing in the community development department for the Town of Breckenridge, said she had emphasized deed-restriction policies and more generally trying to preserve existing units to reduce the need for new ones.

Ms. Best and her backers have acceded to some construction at a slow and steady pace, but they staunchly oppose taller, dense multifamily buildings, which are not, as she put it, “consistent with the character of the town.”


In several counties, there has been a swell in “conservation easements” — legal agreements between private landowners and local governments to guard wildlife and scenic open space by permanently banning development. The trend led the state to create a Division of Conservation in 2018 with an oversight commission to authenticate the contracts.

Eric Budd, a leader of a movement in Colorado called Bedrooms Are for People — which favors expanding land use and more widely permitting apartments, duplexes and triplexes — scoffs at the uptick in easements. He contends that what he tartly calls a “xenophobic attitude of ‘there’s only so much to go around’” is self-defeating.

Trying to restrict access to a hot commodity — in this case, half of a state — won’t end well for anyone, he said, and a California-level, cost-of-living crisis is only five or 10 years away.

Down in the foothills of the Rockies in Boulder, where Mr. Budd lives, school enrollment and the overall population have declined along with affordability, as remote-worker migration has picked up.


In some sense, the arguments against restrictionism amount to a water-balloon analogy: squeezing leads to odd bulges in random places.

Before the pandemic, Leadville, an old mining town 15 minutes from the trailhead of the highest peak in the Rockies, was an affordable harbor for working-class Hispanic employees of the nearby vacation economies: just out of reach of the affluence around Aspen to the west and resorts near Vail to the north.

Since 2020, though, Leadville has become engulfed as those realms of wealth expand and overlap, causing rents and home prices to spike beyond what many can feasibly afford over time, with few other places to go.

Second-home owners constituted half of all home sales in 2020 and 2021.

The Downside of Good Intentions

Kimberly Kreissig, a real estate agent, at a home she was selling in Steamboat Springs. She says an effort to build affordable homes yielded house flippers.

Half of Colorado renters are officially defined as cost-burdened — spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing costs. And local economists suggest that the rate has ticked even higher in mountain locales.

For Kimberly Kreissig, a real estate agent in Steamboat Springs, a year-round recreation hub with natural hot springs near Wyoming, the affordability crisis in “the high country” has no simple villain. For years, her practice in Steamboat — where the average home price is above $1 million, compared with $580,000 in early 2019 — included both upper-middle-class, first-time home buyers and luxury-market sellers.

In 2018, she and her husband, a developer, broke ground on a dense, 50-unit multifamily project in Steamboat designed for people “in that $75,000 range,” she said — “for instance, my office manager here.”

“We had grandiose plans that we were going to be able to sell these things for $300,000,” Ms. Kreissig said, but they were foiled by several factors.

Even before Covid-19 struck, “the demand was just so through the roof that people were offering us more than list price right out of the chutes,” she said, with precontract bids coming in “twice as high as we anticipated.”

Then, once lockdowns in early 2020 ended, the remote-working cohort swooped in — just as labor and material costs shot up for the contractors still finishing some units. Before long, many families she sold units to in 2019 for around $400,000 realized that because of the housing boom they had “over $300,000 in equity” in their homes — and with interest rates so low, they could parlay a different (or additional) purchase. Many apartment owners began independently flipping their units to investors and buyers of second homes who were willing to pay well above the list prices.

The Yampa River flows through Steamboat Springs. With the pandemic’s onset, the area became a magnet for remote workers.

“For the people that are already ‘in,’ there’s a fair share of folks that are saying, you know, ‘I’m in, we don’t we don’t need any more growth,’” Ms. Kreissig said. “But you can’t stop growth.”

“One flip near the end for one of the units was for $800,000,” Ms. Kreissig said. “We tried to be the good guys.”

One way to respond to house flippers is through greater deed restriction, which Steamboat has enforced in a few neighborhoods, along with some short-term rental restrictions, not unlike other hot spots. The area has also benefited from the state’s Middle Income Housing Authority pilot program, which has put up a few buildings in town. But Steamboat still has a shortage of 1,400 units, according to a report from local authorities.


A big break came when an anonymous donor recently purchased a 534-acre farm property, Brown Ranch, and turned it over to the Yampa Valley Housing Authority, with instructions that it be used for long-term affordable housing for local workers.

It came as welcome news to the area’s middle class. And yet the sheer surprise, and luck, of the donation is indicative of broader, underlying tensions that typically drive community-level and state debates: Is more supply a threat to both cultural vibes and property price appreciation, or a win-win opportunity to flourish?

Ms. Kreissig thinks it all comes back to “the kind of ‘not in my backyard’ mentality” that a silent majority holds.

“For the people that are already ‘in,’ there’s a fair share of folks that are saying, ‘You know, ‘I’m in, we don’t we don’t need any more growth,’” she said. “But you can’t stop growth.”

Adrift Between Uphill and Down

Nancy Leatham and her husband got back on their feet after lean times early in the pandemic. But when looking for a new house, she found that the booming housing market had far outpaced the good labor market.

In March 2020, Nancy Leatham, 34, was making just above the minimum wage, living with her husband and their baby daughter in Idaho Springs — a little city above 7,000 feet wedged between a steep crag and an I-70 exit, far downhill from chic resort land.

They struggled to get by “right during the height of the pandemic, when everything was shut down,” wiping out their income, she said. It felt like a repeat of her teenage years during the mortgage-induced financial crisis when her family’s business as excavation contractors — preparing sites for home construction — went belly-up, and their house was foreclosed upon.

In spring 2020, “I had to start going to food banks and stuff to get food,” she said. “And we had to sell a car, and just stuff like that to, like, to make ends meet.”

By 2021, her husband, Austin, had found a job at Walmart making $19 an hour, while she was promoted at Starbucks, becoming a manager at $18 an hour, plus bonus — and “we had our child tax credit,” she added.

“I started looking for a house because we had really great income,” roughly $80,000 before taxes, she said. “I grew up in poverty, since 2008 especially, and we’d been living with food insecurity and stuff, so I was like ‘Look at us, we made it!’”

But almost as soon as she started house hunting, she realized that, within months, the booming housing market had far outpaced the good labor market. They had been priced out of their sleepy, snowy town, after merely a few bidding wars. The average home price — $340,000 at the start of 2019 — is up 66 percent. Higher mortgage rates hurt, too.


The average home price in Idaho Springs is up 66 percent since the start of 2019.

Many of the Starbucks employees Ms. Leatham managed owned their homes rather than rented, she said, and “half left because they were able to sell their house off for considerably more than they were when they bought.”

Hoping to buy or rent something bigger than what she called a “closet” apartment, Ms. Leatham, who now has a second child, is preparing for the cold reality of “having to move downhill” — though where exactly is unclear: 15 miles down the corridor, renters and buyers run into coveted areas near Golden and Denver.

Recently, a woman visited the Starbucks Ms. Leatham works at, she said, and was dressed very much like an out-of-towner. They chit-chatted at the register, and the woman mentioned she was in town to check on a recent property purchase.

Getting her hopes up for a nicer place, Ms. Leatham pried a bit:

“I was like, ‘Oh, nice, what are you going to do with it?’ And she’s like, ‘Oh, it’s for rental.’”

“And I’m like, ‘Oh, cool.’ And then she goes, ‘Short-term rental.’”

“And then, I went ‘Dang it!’ But really loud, and I made her feel awful — I didn’t mean to make her feel that way.”

Irresistible Allure, Harsh Reality
Back up the I-70 corridor in Frisco, a sprawling Walmart parking lot often occupied by unhoused people living out of their cars and campers is tucked in front of a commercial complex with a high-end furniture store, a Whole Foods and a craft microbrewery.


It’s one of the few places for the growing homeless population to go, since overnight parking is widely banned in Summit County, even in sparse hamlets like Blue River, perched just beyond Breckenridge above 10,000 feet.

The effects of the global and national wealth parked in the Rockies often cascade downstream like the snow melt that carves the rivers. But it’s a force that can be identified in any direction.

For many, if not most, homeowners in high-country counties like Summit, the hard truth is that only so much can be done if the very idea of mountain living — experiencing nature, removed from the bustling downhill hassles of the outside world — is to be maintained.

“It’s funny, on our little block, there’s probably, you know, 10 homes — and on a beautiful day, which we have a lot of, you’ll see all of us standing out in our driveway, taking pictures,” said Ms. Best of Breckenridge’s community development department. “I must have the same picture 100 times because it’s so stunning when you go out there, and you’re still in awe of where we live. So I totally get the folks that want to be here.”
pasayten
Ray Peterson
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 17 guests