Connect with us

Colorado

Can Colorado cities prevent thousands of apartments from losing affordability protections?

Published

on

Can Colorado cities prevent thousands of apartments from losing affordability protections?


Nine years ago, one of Silverthorne’s few income-restricted housing properties was sold to a private firm. The sale — at a price that was double the property’s assessed value — raised worries in the high-cost mountain community that the new owner of the Blue River Apartments might lift rent caps that had kept its 78 units affordable when the requirements lapsed.

That expiration had been set for this year, and local officials were sufficiently concerned that they struck a deal with the new Greenwood Village-based owners to extend the affordability protections through at least the end of 2025, in exchange for $650,000.

But if the town had known about the sale ahead of time back in 2015, said Ryan Hyland, Silverthorne’s town manager, then officials could have tried to cobble together the money to buy the apartment complex — or arrange its sale to someone else.

As Colorado faces a tidal wave of expiring affordability requirements in the coming years, state lawmakers hope to give local authorities the opportunity Silverthorne didn’t have. House Bill 1175, which has already passed the House, would grant municipalities a right of first refusal to buy subsidized-housing properties when they come up for sale and would also require more notice of expiring affordability covenants.

Advertisement

Once the owner reached a price with a private buyer, the town or city — or a group acting on its behalf — could step in and match the offer, ensuring the units wouldn’t convert to market-rate rents once affordability requirements expire.

“When those expire, (the new owner) could be charging market rents. That’s a smart business decision, if you’re purchasing a property and if you’ve got that on the horizon,” Hyland said. “As you can imagine, there’s those types of deals that happen and the local government has no idea they’re happening, so there’s no opportunity for conversation.”

In the case of Blue River Apartments, as the initial expiration date approached, the president of Tralee Capital in 2020 told the Summit Daily that he wasn’t ready to say how the rental rates would change.

The bill passed the House 38-23 earlier this month and is now headed to the state Senate. It’s the second attempt by a group of Democratic lawmakers to pass a right-of-first-refusal policy, which they say would give local governments the chance to protect renters from for-profit developers that purchase properties and hike rents.

The first swing at passing the policy was a more expansive approach that also would have applied to sales of market-rate buildings. It passed the legislature last year after extensive debate and negotiations.

Advertisement

But business groups successfully lobbied Gov. Jared Polis to veto it, sparking sharp criticism from the Democratic legislators who backed it.

The veto spurred supporters to narrow their approach this year. They focused on preserving the state’s existing subsidized housing stock, which is in danger of shrinking in coming years, said Rep. Andy Boesenecker, a Fort Collins Democrat.

Colorado is home to roughly 111,000 subsidized units with affordability requirements, according to Colorado Housing and Finance Authority data. It’s expensive and complicated to build subsidized housing projects, and developers lean largely on federal tax credits to make the financing work.

Those tax credits include requirements that rental rates be capped based on certain income levels.

But the requirements are time-limited, often lasting at least 30 years. In the coming decade, 15,000 affordable units here will no longer be subject to the caps that keep them within reach for lower-income Coloradans.

Advertisement

That doesn’t mean those properties will immediately be sold or switched to market-rate rents or prices. But the looming expirations are a warning sign for housing advocates as they scramble to protect the state’s affordable housing stock.

When subsidized properties with expiring affordability requirements are purchased by private companies, “we see quick and significant increases in rent — we see less of an investment in maintaining the property and caring for residents,” said Kinsey Hasstedt, the senior program director for state and local policy at Enterprise Community Partners. “So we are trying to disrupt that.”

AAron Ontiveroz, Denver Post file

Sherelle Slater and her daughter Charlie play outside of their apartment in Denver this 2015 file photo. They lived in income-restricted housing on 52nd Avenue near Federal Boulevard. Denver City Council later approved an expanded ordinance that aims to preserve affordable housing, including by giving the city a right of first refusal to buy expiring properties. (Photo by AAron Ontiveroz/Denver Post file)

Preserving housing or chilling markets?

Opponents and skeptics, representing business groups and property owners, have argued that the bill would hamper development in the state.

“Our biggest fear all along with this has been: Are we going to create a chilling effect on capital and the markets, and then we won’t get the results that we want, which is more housing in the marketplace?” said Ted Leighty, the CEO of the Colorado Association of Home Builders, in testimony during an initial committee hearing in February.

Advertisement

But supporters say preserving subsidized housing is particularly important now — not only because of the expiring affordability requirements but also because of Polis’ preferred solution to the housing crisis: more housing, built more densely, across Colorado cities.

While some of the advocates backing the right-of-first-refusal bill also support Polis’ land-use reforms, that policy approach, if successful, will take years to bear fruit. They repeatedly have stressed the need to provide help in the meantime, given the severity of the state’s housing affordability crisis.

“We have to start by preserving the existing affordable housing that we have,” Hasstedt said. “Otherwise, we’re just going to keep digging the hole deeper, and we’re never going to get out of it.”

The change in approach, along with amendments made during the bill’s journey through the House this year, has successfully neutralized some of last year’s opposition, including from groups representing bankers and title insurers.

But other old foes, including the Colorado Apartment Association and the powerful business group Colorado Concern, remain opposed. So do Republican legislators, who view the bill as an encroachment on property owners’ rights.

Advertisement

“If you’re thinking about investing $20 million into an affordable project in Colorado, then you’re still concerned about having this cloud on the title of what you develop, and (some may decide) to go elsewhere because of it,” said Drew Hamrick, the senior vice president of governmental affairs for the apartment association. “We still believe and worry about the stigmatizing effect it has on housing investment.”

Hamrick argued that the policy would depress prices on developments because would-be buyers wouldn’t invest as much time or money in researching and bidding on properties that may end up being owned by a local government anyway.

He said he supported another  piece of the bill that would give local governments a “right of first offer” on for-sale, market-rate properties. But he was flatly opposed to the rest.

Other groups and entities seeking changes to the bill have links to high-profile developers and property owners.

The path to governor’s desk

The bill now heads to the Senate, where the broader measure passed last year after delays and negotiations. If the new version passes, the bill will enact the first statewide right of first refusal of its kind in the country.

Advertisement

Some cities, counties and housing organizations have a version of the policy, and lawmakers in Maryland have advanced legislation that includes a right of first refusal for tenants to buy their residences.

Denver also has a similar policy that seeks to preserve subsidized housing properties. Renee Gallegos, the deputy director of housing opportunity for the city’s Department of Housing Stability, said it had been used twice in recent years, via a nonprofit partner, to buy properties and sell them as condos with affordability requirements.

Should HB-1175 clear the Senate, the final say would again rest with Polis.

In his veto letter last June, he said he didn’t support a right of first refusal “that adds costs and time to transactions.” Sponsors this year have worked to trim the timelines in the bill, expediting sales as well as local governments’ decisions on whether to exercise their right to step in.

In a statement to The Denver Post on Friday, Polis spokeswoman Shelby Wieman said the governor “appreciates the dialogue happening with sponsors and all stakeholders” and that Polis “will continue to monitor this bill as it moves through the legislative process.”

Advertisement

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.



Source link

Colorado

Where did Colorado’s wolves spend time in December? 

Published

on

Where did Colorado’s wolves spend time in December? 


While some of the wolves are part of Colorado’s four packs establishing territories in Pitkin, Jackson, Routt and Rio Blanco counties, others continue to search the landscape for mates and suitable food sources and habitat. 

Largely, however, wolf exploration of Colorado remains within similar northern counties in December, according to the latest wolf activity map shared by Colorado Parks and Wildlife on Dec. 23. 

The map — which shows the watersheds where the state’s collared gray wolves were located between Nov. 25 and Dec. 19 — shows that wolves continue to be most active in the northwest, while  also pushing into watersheds to the south and east. 



While the map continues to show activity in some Front Range area watersheds within Larimer, Denver, Boulder and Jefferson counties, the agency reported that “no wolves have crossed I-25 or spent time near urban centers.” 

Advertisement

If a watershed is highlighted, it means that at least one GPS point from one wolf was recorded in that watershed during the 30 days. GPS points are recorded every four hours or so. The latest map also shows activity in Routt, Rio Blanco, Eagle, Jackson, Larimer, Grand, Summit, Gilpin, Clear Creek, Park, Lake, Chaffee, Gunnison, Garfield, Saguache, Rio Grande and Conejos counties.   



While wolves have been exploring southern watersheds for months, Colorado saw its first wolf enter New Mexico and be returned by the southwestern state’s wildlife agency in December. Colorado has an agreement with Utah, New Mexico and Arizona in which any gray wolves from Colorado that enter these three states can be captured and returned to Parks and Wildlife. 

According to Parks and Wildlife, the male gray wolf was among those born to the Copper Creek pack in 2024 and dispersed from the pack in the fall. Dispersal is common for young wolves as they leave their birth pack, attempt to make it on their own and search for a mate. The animal was released in Grand County — a decision that sparked concerns from state and local elected officials as well as some wildlife advocates — in a location reportedly distanced from livestock and near to an unpaired female wolf as well as prey populations.  

The watershed map shows that there was wolf activity in Conejos County along the New Mexico state border. It also shows wolf activity brushing up against the Wyoming border. Parks and Wildlife does not have an agreement with its northern neighbor. Instead, wolves that enter Wyoming lose their protections as an endangered species and can be hunted in the vast majority of the state. Three of Colorado’s reintroduced wolves have died after going north. 

Colorado is nearly two years into its reintroduction of gray wolves, releasing a total of 25 wolves. Four packs had pups this year, but Parks and Wildlife has not released minimum counts of new wolf pups for all the packs. It says it will release the count in its annual wolf report, released each spring. Eleven wolf deaths have been confirmed. 
While the agency was looking to conduct its third year of wolf releases in the southwest this winter, Parks and Wildlife has yet to secure a source of wolves. The agency had planned to return to British Columbia; however, the federal government, under a new director, said it could no longer import the wolves from outside the country.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Colorado

Opinion: Colorado must invest in evidence-based policies to prevent harm from substances, not costly criminalization

Published

on

Opinion: Colorado must invest in evidence-based policies to prevent harm from substances, not costly criminalization


Across the nation, the opioid epidemic has wreaked havoc on the health and lives of far too many, and Colorado is no exception. According to Mental Health America, Colorado ranks fourth and seventh in the country for adults and youth with substance use disorders, respectively. That means thousands of our friends, neighbors and loved ones are living with addiction and can’t get the help they need. Overdose deaths in Colorado have risen sharply since 2019, largely due to the proliferation of fentanyl, with 1,603 deaths in 2024 alone, according to the state. 

It’s a public health crisis, and one we’re now at risk of making even worse. Last month, supporters turned in signatures to send Initiative #85 to the 2026 ballot, a measure that would increase criminal penalties for fentanyl crimes. We feel this threatens to drag us backward toward the failed policies and practices of the past rather than working toward a healthier future.

At the same time, state and federal funding for treatment and prevention is drying up. The recently passed federal spending bill HR1 will mean devastating changes to Medicaid, gutting the single most important source of funding for substance use treatment in the country. For the past several years, as more states have expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, Medicaid has emerged as the leading source of coverage for addiction treatment in the nation. 

A recent Brookings study found that nearly 90% of treatment for opioid addiction is paid for, at least in part, by Medicaid. These cuts will leave our already strained systems unable to meet the growing demand, particularly for low-income and disabled individuals who will have fewer treatment options and more barriers to care. 

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Colorado faced a $1.2 billion budget shortfall this year, and even more deficits are on the horizon for 2026. The state is stuck in a cycle of annual budget shortfalls of roughly $1 billion, making it increasingly difficult to cover existing programs and skyrocketing Medicaid costs. That means fewer resources to fill in federal funding gaps, a fraying behavioral health safety net, and an increasingly stressed population that is highly vulnerable to substance use and harm. 

Given this grim picture, it’s never been more critical to prioritize smart, effective policy to combat the overdose crisis. We should be focusing our scarce funding on evidence-based substance use prevention, treatment and recovery support, not costly, ineffective drug war criminalization policies that are historically discriminatory in their implementation and proven to fail. 

Mitigating and reversing the drug addiction crisis in Colorado and across the nation is complex and has to involve multiple strategies working in tandem to decrease supply and demand. While increasing criminal penalties related to drug addiction among individuals may seem like a tough-on-crime approach, it has not and will not resolve the drug addiction crisis nor dissolve the supply or the demand for illicit drugs.

Decades of data show that criminalizing substance users doesn’t reduce addiction or overdose. Recently, researchers at the University of Colorado Anschutz found the following: “Intensified drug enforcement laws have little deterrent effect on substance use and may worsen health outcomes. Fear of being arrested fosters riskier substance use behaviors and increased overdose risk. Incarceration and the subsequent stigma experienced by people with substance use disorder work in tandem to create barriers for treatment access and worsen mental health, creating a structurally reinforced cycle of isolation.” 

The research is clear. Harsh penalties haven’t protected our communities from the dangers of fentanyl. They have only compounded harm and pushed people deeper into the shadows, making it harder to seek help, and saddling individuals with felony records that create lifelong barriers to employment, housing, and recovery. 

Advertisement

Policies like the proposed 2026 ballot measure to increase felony charges for drug possession are not just misguided — they cost taxpayer dollars. They further overburden law enforcement agencies, flood jails, courtrooms and prisons that are already beyond their capacity, and ultimately do nothing to address the core of the opioid epidemic.

Instead of doubling down on punishing people who use substances, we need to expand what works: prevention programs in schools and communities, access to harm reduction tools like naloxone, and a robust continuum of care that includes outpatient and residential treatment. We need more support for peer recovery professionals, more public education and more investment in what keeps people healthy, which includes housing, food security and opportunities for connection. We need to act together, with assertive intelligence, to disrupt the black market drug trafficking that is the enemy of the people.

The opioid crisis is a public health crisis and demands a public health response. Colorado has the knowledge, data and tools to build a more effective and compassionate system. But we cannot do it if we are bleeding out resources to punitive policies that fail the people they claim to help.

Let’s not go backward. Let’s invest in health and safety and give Coloradans a real chance at recovery.

Vincent Atchity, of Denver, is the president and CEO of Mental Health Colorado.

Advertisement

José Esquibel, of Jefferson County, is the former vice chair of the Colorado Substance Abuse Trend and Response Task Force.


The Colorado Sun is a nonpartisan news organization, and the opinions of columnists and editorial writers do not reflect the opinions of the newsroom. Read our ethics policy for more on The Sun’s opinion policy. Learn how to submit a column. Reach the opinion editor at opinion@coloradosun.com.

Follow Colorado Sun Opinion on Facebook.



Source link

Continue Reading

Colorado

Bright Leaf helps grandparents raising grandkids in Colorado as they face holiday hardships

Published

on

Bright Leaf helps grandparents raising grandkids in Colorado as they face holiday hardships


At a kitchen table in Arvada, backpacks and homework papers take over. It’s a common sight for Carla Aguilar, but one she never expected to repeat.

“I thought I was all done raising kids, you know?” Aguilar said.

Carla Aguilar and her 8-year-old granddaughter, Athena.

Advertisement

CBS


For more than a decade, Aguilar has been raising her two granddaughters, Ava and Athena. Ava, 12, was too shy to appear on camera, but 8-year-old Athena proudly showed how her grandmother helps her learn.

“She helps me read,” Athena said. “She taught me how to write correctly.”

Aguilar, 55, is disabled and lives on a fixed income. She says every day is a balancing act, and this time of year is challenging.

“Holidays are hard, so we’re kind of dealing with that right now,” she said.

Advertisement

Aguilar’s story is far from unique. According to the latest data from the American Society on Aging and the U.S. Census Bureau, more than 2 million grandparents nationwide are primary caregivers for their grandchildren. In Colorado, more than 36,000 families face the same reality, often with limited financial resources and little support.

carla.png

Carla Aguilar

CBS


“Most of these seniors are on fixed income, social security, disability, and you can’t really stretch that too far in Colorado these days,” said Steve Olguin, executive director of Bright Leaf, a nonprofit that helps older adults across the state.

Bright Leaf started as a small community group and now provides free home repairs, food assistance, and other essentials to seniors statewide. Its newest initiative, GrandCare Alliance, focuses on grandparents raising grandkids — offering help with school costs, activity fees, and holiday wish lists.

Advertisement

“We’re just trying to help out so it’s not as rough for them,” Olguin said.

For Aguilar, that support is a lifeline. She says her granddaughters are her world, and she’ll never stop fighting for them.

“They’re my heart, my soul, everything,” Aguilar said. “I will take care of them until my last breath.”

steve-olguin.png

Steve Olguin, executive director of Bright Leaf.

CBS

Advertisement


Bright Leaf is asking for the community’s help in supporting the GrandCare Alliance and its other services. Those who want more information on how to volunteer and donate can visit their website. 



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending