The question before Steamboat Springs voters regarding the proposed annexation of the Brown Ranch is not whether or not Steamboat Springs needs affordable housing.

The only question for voters is whether the current Yampa Valley Housing Authority’s proposed Brown Ranch plan is the best plan for affordable housing and Steamboat Springs’ future over the 20-year development of Brown Ranch.

Citizens for a Better Plan, a grassroots organization of longtime Steamboat residents with expertise in affordable housing, public policy, commercial real estate finance and development, advocates for a better plan: fewer units, more for-sale and some free market homes; density and scale that doesn’t change community character and cause problems for our city; important amenities such as city parks and reliable transit; and a responsible financial plan.

The following facts are indisputable. The proposed Brown Ranch will add 2,264 units, and an estimated 6,100 people to Steamboat’s population, a 45% increase in population. A January 2024 traffic study commissioned by YVHA found that Brown Ranch will add 9,100 new vehicle trips per weekday on U.S. Highway 40 between Brown Ranch and the city in Phase 1, and over 17,000 new vehicle trips per weekday at buildout. Thirteen percent of the units at BR will be single-family detached, and some will be rental. The majority of Brown Ranch will be rental, with most rentals in multi-family buildings. The entire project is government-subsidized and deed-restricted, with all ownership units restricted by a 2% annual appreciation cap.

YVHA and their issue committee, House Our Community, have made misleading statements to our community. Here are three examples.

First, YVHA’s Housing Needs study does not conclude that Steamboat Springs immediately needs 1,400 units of affordable housing. Obtained through a Colorado Open Records request after discovering the needs study had been rewritten for YVHA’s BrownRanchSteamboat.org website, the actual 2022 Housing Needs Assessment states: Routt County (not just Steamboat Springs) needs an estimated 1,300-1,400 local housing units. Local housing units are defined as housing for households earning up to $281,580 for a four-person household. No development timeframe is mentioned.

The study’s findings begs three questions: 1. Why is Steamboat Springs responsible for all of Routt County’s housing needs? 2. Why are all housing units government-subsidized and deed-restricted when the study doesn’t recommend this? 3. Why was the study rewritten?

Second, YVHA and House Our Community’s communicated policy that Brown Ranch is only for workers and retirees from local businesses and nonprofits would be a violation of federal Fair Housing Law for all federally funded housing, including tax credit units and federal housing grants administered by the state. YVHA actually agreed that 80% of Brown Ranch residents would be from outside Steamboat for the city’s fiscal impact study. Steamboat locals are going to have to join the lottery for Brown Ranch housing with anyone who wants to live in Steamboat.

Third, YVHA has falsely and publicly denied the city’s $52 million budget gap — despite being at all City Council hearings when the budget gap was outlined by city staff. Their false statements have been presented to the Steamboat Springs Board of Education on March 4 when the YVHA board president said the budget gap “doesn’t exist,” and at 40 different community meetings when they presented a PowerPoint that included, “There is no gap in funding.” Contrast YVHA’s false statements with the city staff summary for City Council: “Staff continues to have serious concerns about proceeding with the annexation based upon the current understanding of the city’s share of capital infrastructure costs and available revenues.”

There’s a better Brown Ranch plan, and YVHA has pledged to pursue a new plan if the vote fails. YVHA Executive Director Jason Peasely told their Feb. 28 community meeting, “If we’re unsuccessful in the election, the conversation doesn’t stop. This is an opportunity for feedback. This is not something the Housing Authority is going to end.”

Respected Colorado and national housing authorities demonstrate how the current plan could be improved. In major U.S. cities, housing authorities are tearing down old public housing complexes and replacing them with mixed income deed-restricted and market rate housing, city parks and access to reliable transit.

Boston, NYC and Denver housing authorities provide great examples of this redevelopment model. New developments are designed to maintain community character, provide important amenities and integrate people of different incomes. Brown Ranch would be the second-largest government, all deed-restricted housing development in the U.S., a sharp departure from emerging affordable housing models. In contrast with Brown Ranch housing design, Breckenridge planning manager Laurie Best told the New York Times she staunchly opposes taller, dense multifamily buildings because they are not “consistent with the character of the town.”

Breckenridge has built a significant amount of affordable housing. Housing authorities have also created different types of deed restrictions to attract and retain employees, including ownership deed restrictions focused on first time homebuyers, or buyers up to a certain income, and deed-restrictions limited to employment in the jurisdiction. Colorado municipalities have pursued inclusionary zoning and linkage policies in collaboration with housing authorities to increase the supply of affordable housing. YVHA can look to neighboring resort communities and high cost U.S. communities to find better and more sustainable models than BR.

As the March 26 decision looms, let us voice our collective demand for a plan that truly reflects the aspirations and values of our community. Let’s get it right, Steamboat.

This guest column was submitted by Citizens for a Better Plan.