New affordable housing in Boulder County if 1B passes probably won’t look like this, but the revenue should help many people better afford a place to live and possibly other expenses.

Boulder County Issue 1B, at its simplest, would extend an existing 0.185% countywide sales and use tax that was originally enacted to fund construction of an alternative sentencing facility, and use the revenue for the next 15 years to fund affordable housing programs in Boulder County. The tax extension would expire Dec. 31, 2039. Estimates say the tax would bring in more than $17 million in its first year, but revenue in future years would depend on economic activity. There is much more detail below, though.

The existing countywide total sales and use tax rate is 1.185%, so if 1B fails and nothing else happens to change county sales taxes, the rate would decline to 1.0% at the end of 2024 when the original 0.185% tax was set to expire. The ballot measure (1B) would pass with a simple majority.

What Would 1B Do?

The language in 1B regarding what the county might use the revenue for is fairly generic, but readers might be able to get the gist of it with the following sections from the county’s 1B resolution or the ballot measure title a little farther down the page:

  • the costs of development, operation, acquisition, preservation, renovation, maintenance and construction of for-sale and rental homes for low and moderate income households and local workforce;
  • services that support housing stability;
  • grants to housing authorities (such as Boulder County Housing Authority, Longmont Housing Authority and Boulder Housing Partners), nonprofit affordable housing organizations, and local municipalities.

For just a few ideas about the types of organizations or existing programs that work in the affordable housing space and might wind up receiving 1B money, try the following links:

Why Might 1B Be Necessary?

I think I can keep this part short because the answer to the above question is quite obvious. It’s simply really difficult for lots of people in Boulder County to find truly affordable housing.

Commonly accepted definitions say people are “rent-burdened” if they spend more than 30% of their income on housing, and “severely rent-burdened” at 50%. A Boulder County fact sheet on affordable housing says more than 16,000 households in the county spend more than 50% of their income on rent, when there are only about 7,400 permanently affordable homes in the county. That’s a gap that the county will try to narrow with 1B money and programs.

There is also money for affordable housing that could become available from last year’s state Proposition 123, and it is beyond obvious that housing agencies throughout the state are very aware of this tremendous problem. No small number of workers find it difficult to live near where they work because they can’t afford housing on the wages they earn, workers and students might have to commute longer distances for the same reasons, and many people will have very little money left for other expenses after paying rent even if they do find housing.

I think the old curmudgeon in me is right when he says, “that’s just not how it used to be.”

What Will You See On the Ballot?

WITH NO INCREASE IN ANY COUNTY TAX, SHALL THE COUNTY’S EXISTING 0.185%
SALES AND USE TAX APPROVED IN 2018 PURSUANT TO RESOLUTION NO. 2018-76
BE EXTENDED FOR 15 YEARS FOR THE PURPOSES OF FUNDING AFFORDABLE AND
ATTAINABLE HOUSING AND RELATED SUPPORT SERVICES WITHIN BOULDER
COUNTY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: THE COSTS OF DEVELOPMENT,
OPERATION, ACQUISITION, PRESERVATION, RENOVATION, MAINTENANCE AND
CONSTRUCTION OF FOR-SALE AND RENTAL HOMES FOR LOW AND MODERATE
INCOME HOUSEHOLDS AND LOCAL WORKFORCE; SUPPORTIVE HOUSING;
SERVICES THAT SUPPORT HOUSING STABILITY; GRANTS TO HOUSING
AUTHORITIES, NONPROFIT AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROVIDERS, AND LOCAL
MUNICIPALITIES; AND SHALL THE REVENUES AND THE EARNINGS ON THE
INVESTMENT OF THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAX CONSTITUTE A VOTER-
APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE; ALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS’ RESOLUTION NO. 2023-070?

Richard’s Take

I will probably vote for 1B, but not without a few comments. Affordable housing is clearly one of the most pressing needs in Boulder County plus a lot of Colorado right now, and it is in part an issue that can be somewhat addressed in the short term with sums of money. 1B would provide a large amount of that funding, and it will help some real-life human beings become more likely to be able to live in the county. Hopefully it will also help a decent number of people be better able to “make ends meet,” by not having the cost of housing eat up all or most of their earnings. These are good things.

I don’t often predict outcomes in election guides, but based on past history I’ll guess that 1B will pass with 70-80% support. Nothing I can say will impact this probable margin by much, and I’m seriously not looking to talk people out of voting for 1B anyway. However, I’d like to dream a bit for a few paragraphs about one slap-us-in-the-face-obvious problem with housing I think lots of us are seriously disregarding right now.

One of the county’s statements in the resolution putting 1B on the ballot said, “Because of the high cost of land and construction and other market forces, the need for affordable housing cannot be satisfied without subsidies.” But why not? Have we finally just given in to “market forces” without a fight?

If Walmart hourly employees aren’t paid enough to afford food, health care, housing, or other needs, a lot of local part-time pundits have rightfully criticized the former king of retail – which still rakes in tons of revenue while Walton family members are worth unimaginable sums of money – for passing the literal costs of life for their workers on to the public sector. Nothing wrong with those criticisms, but why are some of the same people so silent on housing, and why so soft on the very wealthy individuals and corporations who disproportionately dominate “the market?”

In recent months, I’ve come across several reports of legal cases being brought against housing-related corporations for price fixing:

With 1B, we’re taking money from the poor in greater percentages than the rich through regressive sales taxes, admittedly to help fund housing for the poor – but couldn’t there be ways to get people and corporations who are raking on housing to help out proportionately? Real estate transfer taxes? Progressive income taxes? Rent control?

I shouldn’t need to beat the dead horse of how rent costs are rising way faster than wages, but here’s one quote among many from, yep, Real Estate Witch: “From 1985 to 2020, rent prices increased 149%, while income grew just 35%.” Those aren’t supply and demand numbers. That’s not inflation. This is private sector price-setting, and instead of going after those who set the prices, we’re saying the only possible solution is public money subsidy.

I’ll say it more directly this time, because I respect that Boulder County’s trying to make a difference. Vote for 1B, since it will help a bunch of living, breathing human beings over the next 15 years. Again, vote for 1B.

But without action more specifically targeted at those with disproportionate resources, economic gaps will only continue to grow and today’s renters will never have enough money for a down payment on their own home. Sorry, Bernie Sanders took over my keyboard for the last few paragraphs.