The Steamboat Springs City Council has green-lighted next steps of the Brown Ranch Community Solutions process, moving the 40-member Deliberation and Stewardship Team into Phase 2 for a more tactical exploration of how and what might be developed at the contentious Brown Ranch site.

Council gave the direction to DST facilitators from consultants Community Builders and The Civic Canopy during a work session Tuesday night following discussion on how to balance community concerns of trust and transparency — both related to the Yampa Valley Housing Authority and city leaders themselves — with frustrations the about pace and process for local housing solutions. 

Results from Phase 1 report

The work session began with a presentation from Steamboat Springs Principal Planner Brad Calvert, Community Builders Executive Director Clark Anderson and The Civic Canopy Executive Director Bill Fulton on results from the Phase 1 report.

Fulton described Brown Ranch as a “puzzle within a puzzle,” pointing to both technical and interpersonal complexities within both the development and the broader landscape of local anxieties. The DST’s work resulted in structured dialogue, public workshops attended by hundreds, straw polls and engagement with technical experts.

“While disagreements and frustrations remained, in the end a nearly unanimous DST agreed that Brown Ranch remains a viable path worth pursuing into Phase 2,” stated the report’s executive summary. “Their final meeting underscored both the progress made — 29 of 36 key statements reached over 70% agreement — and the continued need for careful design to ensure a proposal voters can support.”

Phase 2, a process set to take place from September to March, will build on work from Phase 1 by moving from “if” to “how.” 

“Smaller action teams, new advisory structures and broader community engagement will focus on shaping scenarios that meet the principles identified in Phase 1,” stated the report. “The goal is not to predetermine outcomes, but to ensure that any future Brown Ranch proposal is grounded in shared values, transparent trade-offs and a process that the community can stand behind together.”

Community members weigh in

The public comment period painted a nuanced portrait of both aspiration and disillusionment. 

Community member John Tomasini opened public comment, voicing frustration at what he views as a misinterpreted reality of the housing market, and recommending that the city “separate (their) allegiance” from YVHA and return the Brown Ranch land to its donor to allow for open-market development. 

“There is no affordable housing right now, and there’s not going to be any more affordable housing as you have designated by price,” he said. “The can has gotten kicked down the road for over 30 years.”

“This community, they don’t trust you,” he said, pointing to council, “and they don’t trust you,” he added, pointing to YVHA Executive Director Jason Peasley sitting in the audience.

DST member Richard Mandell spoke next, advocating for infill development as a faster, potentially more feasible answer as the community engagement process continues, and called for more technical expertise in the next phase. 

“Brown Ranch will ultimately be a solution, I just think it’s going to take a whole lot of work and a whole lot of time,” Mandell said. “I think the ball’s in your court, and I hope you take it and run with it.”

Kelly Phillips, DST member and council candidate for District 1, was blunt in his diagnosis of the core problem of trust — both with City Council and YVHA — and how, irrespective of the successful DST process, “20% of the population of Steamboat would vote ‘No’ on anything just because of that.”

“The lack of transparency with YVHA during the referendum process, trying to get information from them … was like pulling teeth,” said Phillips, who also cited council’s 2023 vote against sending the Brown Ranch annexation proposal to the voters. “YVHA’s inflexibility to listen or talk to the petition committee during the referendum vote, it was silence. There were emails sent, nothing sent back.”

“It didn’t help that right after the referendum got voted down, The Michaels Organization, which Jason Peasley said would be a partner in any future developments — their CEO gets indicted with 13 counts of fraud,” he continued. “So I’m just unpacking those so everyone can remember where the trust issues come from in town.”

Noreen Moore, also a member of the DST, cautioned about the “pipe dream” of harmonizing community interests. 

“We want to have ourselves love each other, and we’re a real town and all of these things, but I think the anxiety that we all experience, and the fear over all these changes, have made us hostile toward each other — mistrusting,” she said, adding that she feels like certain folks are trying to “bury” the “soul” of Steamboat.

Council discussion: balancing urgency for solutions with concerns over process

Tuesday’s work session highlighted the tension between those calling for rapid action given the worsening housing shortage, and others insisting on careful deliberation to avoid repeating previous mistakes. 

Councilor Amy Dickson, who, along with Councilor Joella West, attended the final Phase 1 DST meeting, said she agreed with moving forward but was “deeply unsatisfied” with the current Phase 2 plan. 

“It’s this process from September through March … what does that get us? I don’t think the community will tolerate that, honestly,” Dickson said. “We need to do something now, or we need to stop. The vote was to move forward, and I think we need to have a more streamlined process.”

Councilor Michael Buccino echoed Dickson’s concerns, suggesting that council, city staff and YVHA take the insights and lessons learned from the Phase 1 report, as well as from past unsuccessful housing developments, and take it into their own hands.

“This community would like to see something tangible,” he said, adding that consultants are no longer needed. “We have all the data right now. We all need to sit in a room and have a discussion about it — our staff, the housing authority and ourselves.”

“We don’t need to hire technical people for what our staff already has a lot of data on,” he added.

West and Councilor Dakotah McGinlay stressed that bypassing Phase 2 in favor of staff-driven planning would risk alienating the community once again and repeating transparency lapses that plagued the first Brown Ranch proposal.

“I absolutely understand the impatience to get somewhere … there are four of us who ran on this four years ago,” said West. “What I’ve watched, for a variety of reasons, is this community tear itself apart over the whole question of whether Brown Ranch should exist.”

“We have just been through five months of enormous, time-consuming hard work, and there’s an understanding now that didn’t exist before … but that piece is fragile,” she said. “Snap your fingers and that will disappear, and we will be back where we started.”

Councilor Bryan Swintek said he was “indecisive,” torn between wanting a more expedited outcome and recognizing that community members are split over housing solutions.

“Perhaps our community just does not like high-density apartment style-buildings, and we only want to see townhomes and single-family homes,” Swintek said. “It means things are more expensive if we want to build them and make them affordable, but is that something the community truly only wants, or do they want high-density?”

He acknowledged his frustration of the slow pace of the process, but said he was “torn,” adding that Phase 2 may be necessary for further consensus-building. 

Swintek also brought up the “trust piece” voiced during public comment, calling it a “hot potato.”

“I don’t know what the solution is. I would just implore fellow councilors and the housing authority board and leadership to be aware that our decisions are under a microscope,” he said. “Policies that you may implement that are justified and normal still may not be the right decision given the context of what we are trying to achieve.”

After over three hours of discussion, council reached consensus to move forward with Phase 2 and instructed facilitators to prioritize a more streamlined, iterative process that results in a preferred Brown Ranch scenario that both reflects community values and addresses the notorious housing challenges affecting the entire valley. 

The timeline beyond Phase 2 remains open-ended as facilitators, city staff and DST stakeholders are tasked with building a process robust enough to avoid repeating divisions and missteps of the past.