Earlier this month, Boulder County unveiled its spending plan for the Affordable and Attainable Housing Tax, a voter-approved measure projected to generate $16.7 million in 2025. The tax marks a significant boost in funding to address the region’s urgent need for affordable housing.
The county’s plan allocates $9.7 million to new affordable housing development, $5.2 million to supportive services aimed at helping residents remain housed, and $500,000 to a grant program for nonprofits and small cities and towns.
This new revenue comes at a critical time for Boulder County, where eviction filings are rising, housing costs remain high, and safety net services are increasingly strained.
But some supporters who championed the tax and work on local housing issues say they are disappointed with how the new funds are being allocated. They argue that too much is being diverted to existing programs and county administrative costs, leaving fewer resources for new initiatives to tackle the housing crisis.
“I think the county needs to find other ways to support their existing programs,” Kurt Firnhaber, Boulder’s director of Housing and Human Services, told Boulder Reporting Lab. He added, “If it gets spread out to cover lots of different existing programs, it’s going to limit the impact of the fund.”
Concerns over the new tax revenue coincide with financial challenges at the Boulder County Housing Authority, which manages more than 900 affordable housing units and is operating at a net loss of about $3 million, according to a recent presentation by county officials. Additionally, earlier this year, county commissioners cut grants for local safety net service providers, citing recent reductions in state and federal funding.
Amid these challenges, commissioners approved using a portion of the tax revenue to support existing county housing programs. This includes funding development costs at the 400-unit Willoughby Corner affordable housing project in Lafayette and supporting tenant services, such as a housing helpline and rental aid through the county’s housing stabilization program.
“Had we not had this dedicated funding, the reductions in funding would have been felt even harder,” Commissioner Ashley Stolzmann said during a recent county commission meeting. “So it couldn’t have come at a better time.”
Still, some proponents of the tax, including Firnhaber, a member of the Boulder City Council and advocates across the county, said they anticipated the money would fund new initiatives rather than fill gaps in existing county programs.
Under the county’s spending plan, the City of Boulder is slated to receive $3.1 million in 2025 for affordable housing development. This funding comes as the city grapples with a projected shortage of an estimated 10,700 homes over the next decade.
However, Firnhaber said the city’s share of these funds cannot be used to build permanent supportive housing, which is designed to help vulnerable people remain stably housed. When endorsing the ballot measure, the Boulder City Council specifically requested resources for permanent supportive housing. The request underscored the city’s desire to help homeless people dealing with a mental illness or addiction to substances get into housing.
In light of this, Councilmember Lauren Folkerts said she was frustrated with how the county decided to allocate the new funds.
“We’ve been finding more and more how important it is to not just help people get into housing but to provide services to support them as they are transitioning out of this really difficult time,” Folkerts told Boulder Reporting Lab.
Additionally, the county does not plan to spend any of the new funds next year on sheltering homeless adults, including those staying at All Roads, the city’s largest shelter. As winter approaches, the shelter has turned away a near-record number of people due to limited capacity.
Others had hoped the funds would support more innovative approaches to the housing crisis. Shakeel Dalal, founder and president of LAUNCH Longmont Housing, said he wished more money went toward loan guarantees for projects like accessory dwelling units (ADUs) or single-family home conversions into duplexes.
“I’m honestly a little disappointed in how the money is being allocated,” Dalal told Boulder Reporting Lab. “I don’t think we’re using it in the most creative way.”
The ballot language for County Issue 1B was broad, allowing funds to be used for existing programs. And county officials have cited a resolution referring the measure to voters that stated existing resources and revenues were “considerably insufficient” to meet Boulder County’s housing needs.
“There are many competing needs for that funding,” Gloria Handyside, a spokesperson for the Boulder County commissioners, told Boulder Reporting Lab in an email. “The supportive services being funded by the tax and delivered by the Boulder County Housing Department are essential to keeping our community members housed and able to work.”
“In terms of sheltering, the Affordable and Attainable Housing Ballot language is focused on creating affordable housing and keeping people in housing thereby preventing them from entering homelessness. The language does not include sheltering,” Handyside added.
Compounding frustrations is a perceived lack of transparency in the process for deciding how to spend the funds. On Nov. 13, a group of 10 organizations, including the Boulder Chamber, requested more opportunities to provide input on the spending plan. The next day, the county announced its spending plan, citing feedback gathered during six listening sessions and public work sessions.
Critics argue that those meetings should have been more accessible. Lydia Ferrante Roseberry, a community organizer with Together Colorado, a faith-based organization, said many meetings were held during work hours, making it difficult for renters or others most affected by high housing costs to participate.
Roseberry said that public involvement builds trust and helps residents understand the financial pressures facing the county, such as declining state and federal funding.
“At least when the decisions are made, the community as a whole is making some priorities,” Roseberry told Boulder Reporting Lab. “So for people who don’t get funded the things that they want, they can understand the bigger picture, versus just being handed down a dictum.”
Correction: A previous version of this story quoted Gloria Handyside as referencing existing Boulder County services when she was referring to both new and existing services.
“Concerns over the new tax revenue coincide with financial challenges at the Boulder County Housing Authority, which manages more than 900 affordable housing units and is operating at a net loss of about $3 million, …” Wonder how much of the loss is attributable to a bloated bureacracy?
Is it better to put some people out of housing – in order to explicitly fulfill the intent of the tax? A more thorough look at the numbers (current number of people in housing who would otherwise be homeless, trend in homelessness in Boulder County, units designated for decreasing homelessness) would be helpful to understand where the system is being stressed and why. Sheltering is often a first step to getting people off of the streets, isn’t it?
If the purpose of the tax is to house, and not merely shelter, people, and there are already far more people in the shelters than can be housed, how is it consistent with the purpose of the tax to add yet more people to the shelters? Both housing and sheltering need to be addressed and tax was meant for the former.
This we all know. The taxpayers foot the bill for the cycle of despair induced by developer subsidies incrementing the value of land and initiating the cycle. The numbers of unhoused increase, they resort to drugs that either destroy the housing they have with meth infiltration, die from fentanyl or their permanently unfixable condition locates them in underfunded jails temporarily or puts treatment funds to waste, while the city moves their encampments constantly with $6M/yr. of taxpayer funds. Public pays the cost. There isn’t enough to repair what’s been done. It’s a wealth inequality cycle that this matching funding perpetuates and Kurt himself can’t do anything about it. Making the taxpayers pay for deeper gaps over time just compounds their depleted reserves that feeds into the system. The services aren’t there, the treatment’s not there, the permanent housing’s not there and the developers are laughing all the way to the bank.
I’m reminded of the expression, “Don’t help me out,” with these taxpayer funded illusions of a solution.
The services for all the PSH units filled and with recently unhoused “high utilizers” is what I worry most about. There is no information available around what level of service will be provided. These are very costly services and need to be provided at a high level indefinitely in order to help the “high utilizers” stabilize and maintain housing. There is absolutely no guarantee that this will occur. Yet the zeal to build and fill PSH is the only thing that is driving housing policy at the city level.
We never get much of the big picture when it comes to housing and homelessness in Boulder so everything we do get just adds to the confusion. In City of Boulder the approach to housing is driven by HHS Director Kurt Firnhaber, and city council gets onboard with his policy choices because they don’t understand the big picture either. Kurt is solely focused on building Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) for the “high utilizers” in Boulder – those that chew up the most time and resources in the hospital and criminal justice systems. The purpose is to get them off the streets and housed. This approach also includes Boulder Housing Partners and All Roads, and they work with HHS to implement that strategy. This is why All Roads recently changed their mission to focus on housing rather than sheltering. The irony is that Kurt is critical of the county now for funding existing initiatives when that is the only thing that he wants to do – fund his existing “high utilizer” programs solely. Meanwhile, we have no adequate shelter system anymore.