Denver Colorado downtown with City Park

In previous articles, we took a look at how an explosion in the number of people who call Colorado home has affected transportation and affordable housing.

In this third installment, we dive deeper into an anti-growth sentiment gaining momentum in Colorado.

This small, but significant sentiment is manifesting in various forms on local election ballots across the state. The steady influx of new people has led many longtime Colorado residents to question whether the state can handle the strain on its resources, both natural and fiscal. Perhaps equally as important, some are nervous about the impacts so many new residents will have on the state’s culture and the character of its communities.

In Lakewood, Colorado’s fifth largest city, this apprehension has led one group to the ballot box, where they hope to limit growth within the city’s boundaries. Their proposed initiative, which is currently in legal limbo but may appear on the 2018 ballot, would cap annual housing growth at 1% of existing units. While the proponents argue that this effort would lead to more responsible growth, most civic and business leaders believe there would be considerable negative consequences if such a measure were to pass. With rent and home prices along the Front Range continuing to climb skyward, artificially constraining new housing inventory is likely to only exacerbate the problem.

Nevertheless, the Lakewood initiative and others like it in Denver suburbs such as Greenwood Village and Wheat Ridge have gained traction among voters. This has placed Colorado economic development leaders in the awkward position of trying to woo large employers, such as Amazon HQ2, to the state despite a growing contingent of the public that might prefer those companies go elsewhere.

Perhaps the largest threat to Colorado’s continued growth is Ballot Proposal No. 66 (Initiative 66), a potential statewide ballot initiative that, much like Lakewood’s, would limit new construction permits in Colorado’s 10 most populous counties to 1% annually. Initiative 66 was initially contemplated as a state constitutional amendment, but as a result of recent changes making it more difficult to amend the constitution the proponents decided to pursue a statutory change. Now, after clearing their initial procedural hurdles, the proponents must gather the necessary 98,000 signatures to officially claim their spot on the ballot this November.

One need only witness the morning commute on I-25 or experience the Saturday westward crawl of the I-70 corridor to understand the desire for less congestion. It’s why business leaders and home building industry stakeholders are taking the initiative very seriously. There is broad consensus on the need for responsible growth policies, but limiting new housing permits is not the answer.

There have been a number of studies that demonstrate that artificially limiting housing supply raises costs across the board, often boxing out lower income families from the housing market. With Colorado already facing a tight housing market, the evaporation of workforce housing would have businesses large and small looking elsewhere. While this may be okay with the proponents of Initiative 66, it would be devastating for Colorado’s economy and have lasting impacts on the state’s long-term vitality.

1 COMMENT

Comments are closed.