HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.worksession.20241111AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
November 11, 2024
4:00 PM, City Council Chambers
427 Rio Grande Place, Aspen
I.Work Session
I.A APCHA Interviews
I.B Entrance to Aspen (ETA) Polling Project Update
I.C City of Aspen Employee Housing Strategic Plan & Employee Housing Stipend Pilot
Program
Zoom Meeting Instructions
Join from a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android device:
Please click this URL to join: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/86074321997?
pwd=Ttr2QZ44CY4ZAOmv8zEcsz9Fj4WCpD.1
Passcode: 81611
Or join by phone:
Dial:
US: +1 346 248 7799
Webinar ID: 860 7432 1997
Passcode: 81611
International numbers available: https://us06web.zoom.us/u/k5Vg3xNRi
Board & Commission Interviews MEMO - 11.11.24.pdf
2024 11-12 Castle Creek Bridge Polling Memo.docx
Probolsky Research - City of Aspen - Voter Poll - Questionnaire.docx
City Internal Emp Strategic Hsg Plan - Memo.docx
Exh. A - Strategic Housing Plan.pdf
EE housing program 11-04-2024 FINAL.pdf
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
MEMORANDUM
TO:w Mayor and Council
FROM:Jenn Ooton, Senior Project Manager
Lynn Rumbaugh, Mobility Division Manager
Carly McGowan, PE, Senior Project Manager
THROUGH:Sara Ott, City Manager
Tyler Christoff, PE, Public Works Director
DATE OF MEMO:November 4th, 2024
MEETING DATE:November 11h, 2024
RE:Entrance to Aspen (ETA) Polling Project Update
REQUEST OF COUNCIL:
This is a presentation by Probolsky Research, which has been selected to conduct
opinion research/polling services on the topic of the Entrance to Aspen. City Council
during the work session will have an opportunity to help refine questions that will be asked
to voters.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND:
Aspen City Council, on Sept. 10, 2024, gave direction for staff to initiate an
Environmental Impact Statement or Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for
the Entrance to Aspen, hire outside legal counsel with expertise in the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and hire outside polling experts conduct a poll of
registered voters in Aspen that will be completed prior to the deadline for submission of
ballot questions for the March 2025 ballot.
DISCUSSION:
Attached to this memo includes about 30 questions that Probolsky Research will use to
provide Council a better understanding of community sentiment regarding the Preferred
Alternative, other potential alternatives for the Entrance to Aspen corridor, and whether
the values that determined the Preferred Alternative still meet today’s needs for the
community.
The following is the schedule for the polling that will be conducted through a multi-mode
survey technique (telephone with live professional interviewers and online via a digital
platform):
21
In-Person City Council Work Session -
Discuss survey questionnaire with City
Council and accept feedback
November 11, 2024
Conduct Survey and Monitor Data
Collection
November 13-22, 2024
Presentation to City Council – Survey
results report
December 16, 2024
FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
The ETA project fund has a lifetime budget of $8.5 million dollars, and the contract for
the project is $22,500.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
For any construction of the Entrance to Aspen project, the project must follow National
Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) requirements. The environmental impacts of the
Preferred Alternative were heavily examined during the EIS process in the 1990s.
Should the Council choose to deviate from the Preferred Alternative with an alternative
solution, the environmental impacts will be required to be studied during a new or
supplemental EIS process. The City of Aspen must follow this federal process that
involves the greater community’s input in a similar fashion to the 1998 Record of Decision
and cannot be fully decided by Aspen City Council alone.
This opinion research will be used to determine a direction related to the Entrance to
Aspen NEPA process.
RECOMMENDATION:
This is a work session discussion, and Council refinements to the polling questions will
be included within the final questionnaire asked of voters. This timeline for polling in
advance of the January 10 certification deadline, considering Council meeting schedules
and holidays, is extremely tight. Staff recommends not delaying the polling, which could
impact the ability to provide Council with requested information before the deadline for
January ballot certification, should Council wish to place a question or questions on the
spring ballot.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
22
Attachments:
Draft Entrance to Aspen questionnaire
23
1
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Project: City of Aspen –Castle Creek Bridge Voter Poll
Field Dates: November 2024
Universe: City of Aspen registered voters
Language: English and Spanish
N =300
Margin of Error =+/-5.8%
Draft
ONLINE:
We are Probolsky Research a national opinion research organization and we are conducting a survey on behalf of the
City of Aspen about the entrance to Aspen. Your opinion is important, and your responses are confidential.
TELEPHONE:
Hello, may I speak with __________? [IF NOT AVAILABLE—SCHEDULE CALLBACK]
This is __________ with Probolsky Research a national opinion research organization. We are conducting a survey
on behalf of the City of Aspen about the entrance to Aspen. Your opinion is important, and your responses are
confidential.
1.In your own words, what do you feel is the most important issue facing Aspen today?
[CAPTURE AND CODE]:____________________
2.How would you rate the overall quality of life in Aspen?
Good [NET]
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor [NET]
Poor
Very poor
Unsure [NOT READ]
The Castle Creek Bridge, at the entrance to Aspen,needs attention. The bridge, built in 1961,was designed for a 50
year lifespan.This means that it past the end of its design life. The bridge was not designed for today's volume of
traffic and was recently identified as being in “fair” condition by CDOT. There is an increasing need for repairs and
there will be a need to replace the bridge soon. A 1998 plan, known as the Preferred Alternative, to replace the bridge
was approved by the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) and Federal Highway Administration. In 1996
Aspen voters approved transportation use across the Marolt-Thomas Open Space for two lanes for automobiles and
a light rail system.There has been more recent discussion about alternatives.
3.How concerned are you about the safety of Castle Creek Bridge?
Concerned [NET]
Strongly concerned
Somewhat concerned
Unconcerned [NET]
Somewhat unconcerned
Not at all concerned
Unsure [NOT READ]
4.How concerned are you about the threat of wildfires in Aspen?
24
2
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Concerned [NET]
Strongly concerned
Somewhat concerned
Unconcerned [NET]
Somewhat unconcerned
Not at all concerned
Unsure [NOT READ]
If anything other than the approved 1998 replacement plan for the Entrance to Aspen bridge is to be considered, a
new federal process would need to be started, and a new Environmental Impact Statement would need to be studied
and developed. And there are some important questions for residents to consider.
For the following questions, rate how important or unimportant you believe it is for the City of Aspen to promote the
following values if considering alternative plans for replacing the bridge.
[RANDOMIZE Q5 –Q15]
5.How important is it to you that the process is community-led and inclusive of all residents when addressing
the Entrance to Aspen?
Important [NET]
Very important
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
6.How important is it to you that traffic congestion is addressed in a solution for the Entrance to Aspen?
Important [NET]
Very important
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
7.How important is it to you that transit solutions are considered for the Entrance to Aspen?
Important [NET]
Very important
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
8.How important is it to you that the city ensures that motorists can safely navigate the roadway in the solution
for the Entrance to Aspen?
Important [NET]
Very important
25
3
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
9.How important is it to you that there is a commitment to the environment and protecting wildlife when
addressing the Entrance to Aspen?
Important [NET]
Very important
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
10.How important is it to you that any alternative selected for the Entrance of Aspen has wide acceptance from
the Aspen community?
Important [NET]
Very important
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
11.How important is the cost of a potential alternative when addressing the Entrance to Aspen?
Important [NET]
Very important
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
12.What if you knew that the Entrance to Aspen bridge, which would cost approximately $150 million,would be
paid for by the city?
Important [NET]
Very important
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
13.How important is it to you that any Entrance to Aspen alternative results in cleaner air for the Aspen
community?
Important [NET]
Very important
26
4
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
14.How important is it to you that any Entrance to Aspen alternative ensures redundant ways for residents to
leave the city in times of emergencies?
Important [NET]
Very important
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
15.How important is it to you that any Entrance to Aspen alternative fits the character of the community and is
aesthetically acceptable to the public?
Important [NET]
Very important
Somewhat important
Unimportant [NET]
Somewhat unimportant
Very unimportant
Unsure [NOT READ]
16.Out of the list of values initially put together by the Aspen community during the 1990s federal process, please
indicate which values you think are very important to you personally. Please select your top two.
[RANDOMIZE]
Community-based Planning
Transportation Capacity
Safety
Environmentally Sound Alternative
Community Acceptability
Financial Limitations
Clean Air Act Requirements
Emergency Access
Livable Communities
Project Phasing (for future transit options and upgrades)
Other [CAPTURE AND CODE]:____________________
None of these
Unsure [NOT READ]
Now we want to know your opinion about the planned bridge replacement alignment through Marolt Open Space.
Please consider each message and indicate if it makes you concerned or unconcerned.
[RANDOMIZE Q17 –Q22]
17.[Construction traffic] How concerned are you about increased traffic and congestion during construction?
Concerned [NET]
Strongly concerned
27
5
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Somewhat concerned
Unconcerned [NET]
Somewhat unconcerned
Not at all concerned
Unsure [NOT READ]
18.[Dogs]Marolt Open Space has become a place of gathering for dog owners and their pets. How concerned
are you that these residents might be impacted?
Concerned [NET]
Strongly concerned
Somewhat concerned
Unconcerned [NET]
Somewhat unconcerned
Not at all concerned
Unsure [NOT READ]
19.[Wildlife]Wildlife use the Marolt Open Space for fawning, nesting, resting, and foraging. How concerned are
you about possible impacts to wildlife?
Concerned [NET]
Strongly concerned
Somewhat concerned
Unconcerned [NET]
Somewhat unconcerned
Not at all concerned
Unsure [NOT READ]
20.[Trails]Marolt Open Space contains a variety of hard and soft surface trails in the summer months,and also
has multi-use winter trails for skiing, fat biking and walking in the winter.How concerned are you about
changes to trails while a new Entrance to Aspen bridge is built and once the project is completed?
Concerned [NET]
Strongly concerned
Somewhat concerned
Unconcerned [NET]
Somewhat unconcerned
Not at all concerned
Unsure [NOT READ]
21.[Financial]How concerned are you about the financial impact to the City of Aspen of addressing the Entrance
to Aspen?
Concerned [NET]
Strongly concerned
Somewhat concerned
Unconcerned [NET]
Somewhat unconcerned
Not at all concerned
Unsure [NOT READ]
22.[Local Control]The bridge inspection rating is currently 50.3 out of 100. If the rating falls below 50 then CDOT
can implement the approved 1998 preferred alternative. How concerned are you about CDOT moving the
process forward with addressing the Entrance to Aspen without input or approval by Aspen voters?
28
6
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Concerned [NET]
Strongly concerned
Somewhat concerned
Unconcerned [NET]
Somewhat unconcerned
Not at all concerned
Unsure [NOT READ]
Now let’s look at a possible ballot measure could come before Aspen voters in March 2025 that would address the
future of the bridge. Please indicate if you would vote yes or vote no on the measure.
23.Shall the City Council be authorized to amend the conveyance to the State of Colorado, Department of
Transportation of the easement over and across City owned property including, but not limited to, the Marolt
and Thomas properties, acquired for open space and transportation purposes, for a two lane parkway, and
separate transit lanes to be used exclusively for buses until such time as the community supports the
construction and funding of a light rail transit system, as permitted by the 1998 Colorado Department of
Transportation Record of Decision for the State Highway 82 Entrance to Aspen Project?
Vote yes [NET]
Definitely vote yes
Probably vote yes
Vote no [NET]
Probably vote no
Definitely vote no
Unsure [NOT READ]
If the community does not want to build the Preferred Alternative (also known as Modified Direct) and wants to explore
another alternative, it will require a new process. It was estimated in 2024, that the process would cost approximately
$2-3 million and take two to three years to complete. Now let’s consider some of the alternative alignments for
addressing the Entrance to Aspen. After each one, please indicate whether you support or oppose the alignment.
24.[Modified Direct] Entrance to Aspen Option One:The preferred alternative would be a new roadway across
the Marolt Open Space, bypassing the S-curves and connecting with Main Street at Seventh Street. The
roadway would be four total lanes, one lane in each direction for general traffic and one lane in each direction
reserved for transit. This plan includes constructing a "cut and cover" tunnel beneath the Marolt Open Space
which would introduce a trail connection and preserve the open space above, maintaining its natural
appearance and usability.Do you support or oppose this option?
Support [NET]
Strongly support
Somewhat support
Oppose [NET]
Somewhat oppose
Strongly oppose
Unsure [NOT READ]
25.[Split Shot] Entrance to Aspen Option Two:This option is known as the “split shot” and would build a new
inbound two-lane road across Marolt Open Space and keep outbound traffic on the S curves. It also includes
building a tunnel and additional bridge (cut and cover) within the Marolt Open Space. Each two-lane alignment
would become one-way and include a lane for general traffic and a lane for buses, reconnecting as a four-
lane highway west of Cemetery Lane. This option cuts off inbound Colorado Highway 82 traffic from Cemetery
Lane and directs all traffic through the roundabout. Do you support or oppose this option?
29
7
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Support [NET]
Strongly support
Somewhat support
Oppose [NET]
Somewhat oppose
Strongly oppose
Unsure [NOT READ]
26.[3 LANE SHIFTED] Entrance to Aspen Option Three:This option called the three-lane shifted alternative
would keep the S curves and replace the two-lane overpass bridge over Castle Creek in its current location
with three lanes. This includes one general traffic lane going into town, one general traffic lane out of town,
and one dedicated bus lane outbound. Do you support or oppose this option?
Support [NET]
Strongly support
Somewhat support
Oppose [NET]
Somewhat oppose
Strongly oppose
Unsure [NOT READ]
27.[Modified Split Shot] Entrance to Aspen Option Four:This option called the modified split shot would build
a new two-lane inbound road across Marolt Open Space and keep outbound traffic on the existing bridge and
roadway using the S curves. It also includes building a tunnel and additional bridge (cut and cover) within the
Marolt Open Space. Like the split slot, each two-lane alignment would become one-way and include a lane
for general traffic and a lane for buses, reconnecting as a four-lane highway west of Cemetery Lane. It also
would create a turn-around between Cemetery Lane and the roundabout to allow inbound traffic to bypass
the roundabout. Do you support or oppose this option?
Support [NET]
Strongly support
Somewhat support
Oppose [NET]
Somewhat oppose
Strongly oppose
Unsure [NOT READ]
28.From the following four Castle Creek Bridge replacement alternatives, please rank the options with 1
representing your top choice, two your second choice, and so on.
Modified Direct -four total lanes, one lane in each direction for general traffic and one lane in each direction
reserved for transit
Split Shot -build a new inbound two-lane road across Marolt Open Space and keep outbound traffic on the
S curve
3 Lane Shift -keep the S curve and replace the two-lane overpass bridge over Castle Creek in its current
location with three lanes
Modified Split Shot -new two-lane inbound road across Marolt Open Space and keep outbound traffic on
the existing bridge and roadway using the S curves, with a bypass of the roundabout back into town.
29.Is there anything we did not cover in the survey that you would like to share?
[CAPTURE AND CODE]:____________________
30.How would you describe yourself?
30
8
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Latino/Hispanic
White/Caucasian
Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
Prefer not to answer [NOT READ]
31.What is the highest level of education you have completed?
Some high school
High school
Some college
Associate’s degree
Bachelor’s degree
Master’s degree
Doctoral degree
Prefer not to answer [NOT READ]
32.For demographic purposes only, with which gender do you identify?
Male
Female
Other
Prefer not to answer [NOT READ]
Thank you for your time. Have a great (day/evening).
CROSS TABULATIONS:
Gender (from Q32)
Male
Female
Other
Age group (from sample)
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65+
Ethnicity (from Q30)
Latino/Hispanic
White/Caucasian
Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
Education level (Q31)
Non-college (Prefer not to answer, Some high school, High school, Some college, Associate’s degree)
College (Bachelor’s degree, Master’s degree, Doctoral degree)
Party (from sample)
Democratic
31
9
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Republican
Unaffiliated
Initial Preferred Alternative vote (Q24)
Initial support
Initial oppose
Initial unsure
Initial Split Shot vote (Q25)
Initial support
Initial oppose
Initial unsure
Initial 3 Lane Shift vote (Q26)
Initial support
Initial oppose
Initial unsure
Initial Modified Spit shot vote (Q27)
Initial support
Initial oppose
Initial unsure
Vote propensity (from sample)
5 out of 5
4 out of 5
3 out of 5
2 out of 5
1 out of 5
New Perfect Voter
New Registrant
Voter registration date (from sample)
0-2 years
3-5 years
6-10 years
11-19 years
20+ years
Mode
Phone [NET]
Landline
Mobile
Online [NET]
Text
Email
Language
English
Spanish
Phone [NET]mode
(Gender)
Male
Female
32
10
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Other
(Age group)
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65+
(Ethnicity)
Latino/Hispanic
White/Caucasian
Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
(Party)
Democratic
Republican
Unaffiliated
Landline mode
(Gender)
Male
Female
Other
(Age group)
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65+
(Ethnicity)
Latino/Hispanic
White/Caucasian
Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
(Party)
Democratic
Republican
Unaffiliated
Mobile mode
(Gender)
Male
Female
Other
(Age group)
18-29
30-39
33
11
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
40-49
50-64
65+
(Ethnicity)
Latino/Hispanic
White/Caucasian
Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
(Party)
Democratic
Republican
Unaffiliated
Online [NET] mode
(Gender)
Male
Female
Other
(Age group)
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65+
(Ethnicity)
Latino/Hispanic
White/Caucasian
Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
(Party)
Democratic
Republican
Unaffiliated
Text mode
(Gender)
Male
Female
Other
(Age group)
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65+
(Ethnicity)
34
12
SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Probolsky Research
23 Corporate Plaza Drive
Newport Beach CA 92660
Newport Beach (949) 855-6400
San Francisco (415) 870-8150
Washington DC (202) 559-0270
Latino/Hispanic
Latino/Hispanic
White/Caucasian
Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
(Party)
Democratic
Republican
Unaffiliated
Email mode
(Gender)
Male
Female
Other
(Age group)
18-29
30-39
40-49
50-64
65+
(Ethnicity)
Latino/Hispanic
White/Caucasian
Black/African American
Asian/Pacific Islander
Other
(Party)
Democratic
Republican
Unaffiliated
35
1
MEMORANDUM
TO:Mayor and City Council
FROM:Pete Strecker, Finance Director
Alissa Farrell, Administrative Services Director
Liz Axberg, Housing Policy Analyst
THROUGH:Sara Ott, City Manager
MEMO DATE:November 4, 2024
MEETING DATE: November 11, 2024
RE: City of Aspen’s Internal Employee Strategic Housing Plan – Pilot
Housing Stipend Program
_____________________________________________________________________
REQUEST OF COUNCIL:
This work session’s purpose is to provide Council with an overview of the city’s 2024-
2026 Internal Employee Strategic Housing Plan, which can be found in Attachment A.
Staff seek feedback on the Internal Employee Strategic Housing Plan, particularly
regarding the proposed pilot housing stipend benefit.
SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND:
Currently, the city owns 74 employee housing units, with priority given to emergency
and essential services personnel. Additionally, the city offers a rental assistance loan
program, limited units designated for transitional housing assistance, and a restricted
down payment program. While these housing initiatives, alongside the city’s owned
units, are designed to provide an array of options for city employees, the eligibility
criteria for some programs are narrow and specific. Consequently, evaluating and
refining these housing options has been identified as a priority area in the city’s strategic
plan.
In 2023, stakeholders from multiple departments at the city of Aspen convened to
discuss the city's internal employee housing programs. Approximately twenty
employees developed an employee housing strategic plan (Attachment A) outlining a
mission, vision, and action plan for the city's internal housing program. The departments
represented include Asset Management, City Attorney, Community Development, City
Manager’s Office, Finance, Human Resources, Parks and Open Space, Police, and
Public Works.
36
2
The city's internal employee strategic housing plan has four main objectives with
specific action items, as detailed in Attachment A:
Program Growth and Sustainability
Operational Excellence
Administrative Orders/Policy Advancement
Communications (Internal)
DISCUSSION:
During the culture organizational listening sessions, a number of employees requested
an employee housing stipend to be added to the city’s benefits package. Concurrently,
the internal employee strategic plan included a draft action item under the objective
“Program Growth and Sustainability” for staff to evaluate a pilot employee housing
stipend program. This evaluation process involved staff researching various elements,
such as eligibility criteria and options for stipend levels. Providing a stipend as a benefit
would likely be a more broad-reaching and cost-efficient option for a larger number of
employees than current city housing options. Additionally, because of the wide number
of employees impacted, a housing stipend may help with recruitment and retention
efforts.
QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL:
1. Does Council support the overall approach of the Employee Strategic Housing
Plan presented?
2. Does Council support the pilot stipend program as another housing solution for
ensuring essential and reliable community services?
FINANCIAL IMPACTS:
Funding for the internal housing program is derived from a per head charge on all
departments, which is assessed and deposited into the 505 Employee Housing Fund.
This charge of $10,500/FTE equates to approximately $4M for 2025 and is utilized to
support all housing solutions currently offered.
As staff implement the city’s Internal Employee Strategic Housing Plan, a proposal has
been made to allocate $600,000 in the 2025 budget for a pilot employee housing
stipend benefit. If Council supports the proposed housing stipend program, eligibility
and stipend amounts will be further evaluated to determine how to best tailor the
housing stipend within the city’s benefits package.
37
3
ALTERNATIVES:Council may not support a stipend program at this time. If this is the
route chosen, staff will continue to acquire units at a pace that can be supported under
current funding, though this will not address the broader needs of the city workforce.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: City of Aspen Employee Housing Strategic Plan
38
CITY OF ASPEN EMPLOYEE
HOUSING STRATEGIC PLAN
2024
39
Table of Contents
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................1
Background Information........................................................................................................................2
Assessing the Need for City Employee Affordable Housing.................................................3
Total Compensation Philosophy........................................................................................................6
Organizational Mission and Values...................................................................................................7
Housing Action Plan 2024-2026.........................................................................................................8
Appendices.................................................................................................................................................11
40
Introduction
Housing scarcity remains a top concern for staff retention, recruitment, and quality of life in
the upper Roaring Fork Valley. Like many other employers, the city of Aspen has hundreds
of employees, some commuting more than 80 miles in one direction to reach work locations.
While flexible work arrangements have been implemented in the organization, there remain
many essential and critical jobs that need to be performed within city boundaries. While
Aspen and Pitkin County have one of the nation’s most comprehensive affordable housing
programs, it is insufficient to meet all employees’ current and future needs. Free market
home ownership in Pitkin County and even the Roaring Fork Valley is beyond reach for the
vast majority of the community’s workforce.
While historically the city has invested in employee housing, to respond to this accelerating
critical need for housing city staff, the city is advancing a more transparent and targeted
approach to housing-related employment benefits through the city of Aspen Employee
Housing Strategic Plan. This comprehensive plan is intended to provide a roadmap for the
city’s employer-sponsored housing program.
The goal of this document is to provide a strategic housing plan designed to be flexible and
adaptable to ever-changing housing circumstances and community needs, ensuring it
remains relevant and effective for years to come. This plan summarizes the current
situation, including employee feedback, and provides a blueprint for utilizing the city’s
housing resources responsibly and sustainably. While the plan includes increasing the city’s
housing inventory, it also encourages evaluating a housing stipend and expanding its down
payment assistance program. Furthermore, this plan provides direction and clarity on
workforce needs, housing options, and policies and procedures.
In 2023, city of Aspen stakeholders from multiple departments joined to discuss the city’s
internal employee housing programs. This group of approximately twenty employees
developed a mission, vision, and action plan for the city. Departments represented include
Asset, City Attorney, Community Development, City Manager’s Office, Finance, Human
Resources, Parks and Open Space, Police, and Public Works. The result of this group’s
efforts is an actionable plan designed to achieve the following goals:
Maintain a healthy and sustainable city internal housing program.
Strengthen trust in the city’s internal employee housing program through
communication and transparency.
Achieve a flexible and responsive internal employee housing program for the
community by focusing on employee sustainability.
1
41
These housing options include a rental
assistance loan program, transitional housing
assistance, and a limited down payment program
(Appendix A). While these housing options, in
conjunction with the city’s housing units, are
intended to offer a broad range of options for city
employees, the qualifications for eligibility
(Appendix B) are narrow and specific for some
programs. Therefore, evaluating and refining
options is targeted as a priority area for the city’s
housing strategic plan.
While the city of Aspen’s internal employee
housing program has helped hundreds of
employees over the years, more work needs to
be done as the price acceleration in the free
market continues to outpace our current housing
program’s ability to meet the needs of
employees unable to find free market units for
rent or purchase. The following strategic plan
was created to provide innovative solutions
towards the city’s commitment to improve the
housing situation for city employees.
Background
Like other local employers, the city of Aspen’s internal housing program is employer
sponsored housing program, separate from the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority
(APCHA), available solely to city employees and their families. The city employee housing
program is a fundamental tool for recruitment and retention, given the cost of entry into
Roaring Fork Valley free market housing. A robust, adaptable, and equitable housing
program is essential to maintain a critical workforce to meet community needs and business
continuity, including but not limited to providing emergency and essential services.
As of March 2024, the city owned 74 housing units for its employees, also referred to as
“internal housing units,” to distinguish them from city-owned housing units, such as those at
Aspen Country Inn, Truscott, and Marolt, which are available to the public through the
APCHA. All internal housing units were acquired to recruit and retain an exceptional and
responsive workforce to preserve Aspen’s community needs. In addition to offering city
housing units, various housing assistance options are available to meet the diverse housing
needs of city employees.
Program Funding
The city’s employee housing fund
(505 fund) is an internal service fund
that supports both existing and new
units developed or acquired by the
city and is the primary funding source
for the city’s internal housing program.
Revenues associated with this fund
are generated by collecting rent from
employees in current units, sales
proceeds from the purchase of a unit
sold to an employee, and through an
internal per full-time equivalent (FTE)
charge assessed annually to each
department. For 2024, the charge
equates to $10,000 per FTE.
2
42
ASSESSING THE NEED FOR CITY EMPLOYEE
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
For most of our community’s workforce, including city of Aspen employees, it is now
unattainable to buy or rent a free market-rate home, apartment, or condominium in Aspen.
Rental costs continue to shift upward, with sharp increases between 2019 and 2021.
Increasingly, the down valley communities of Basalt, Carbondale, and Glenwood Springs,
while less expensive than Aspen, are out-of-reach for the vast majority of city employees.
Although evaluating average rents in the region is complex, the following table summarizes
median single-family homes and condominiums. Even in Glenwood Springs, buying a
median-priced, single-family detached home, currently valued at $1.3 million, would require
approximately a $260,000 down payment with a resulting mortgage of more than $7,000
monthly (interest rates as of January of 2024).
Additionally, a household that spends more than 30% of their income on housing is
considered at the top end of what may be an affordable percentage to contribute towards
housing. At the 30% housing affordability metric, a city employee would need a household
income of more than $390,000 to purchase a single-family home in Glenwood Springs.
Aspen
Basalt
Carbondale
Glenwood Springs
$12.5M
$2.1M
$2M
$891M
$4.3M
$1.1M
$850K
$738K
As of early 2024, 344 employees were in full-time positions at the city of Aspen. When city
housing units are at total capacity, around 22% of full-time employees are housed in city
units (Table 2). Additionally, 20% of full-time city employees reside in APCHA affordable
housing. This equates to 42% of full-time city employees housed through APCHA or the
city-owned affordable housing program.
Median Housing Prices in
the Roaring Fork Valley –
2024
Source: Aspen Board of Realtors
Single Family Homes Townhouse/Condo
Table 1: Median Housing Prices
3
43
Number of
Employees Housed
in City-owned units
(full capacity*)
% of Total
Employees Housed
% of Total
Employees
Housed in City-
owned units (full
capacity)
Number of
Employees
in APCHA
units
% of Total
Employees
in APCHA
units
Full-time 74 22%74 20%
It is commendable that 43% of full-time employees receive subsidized housing in or near
Aspen. However, with the increase in free market housing costs across the Roaring Fork
Valley and the impending retirement of many employees who own such homes, the city
anticipates the need to provide additional housing support to a rising number of city
employees. To meet this demand and fulfill its mission, the city is evaluating and refining the
number of housing units and exploring new and innovative employee housing options. The
table below shows where all full-time employees currently reside.
Please note that employees with addresses or P.O. boxes in one location such as Aspen who
live elsewhere may impact the results above.
Table 2: Percentage of City Employees Living in City vs APCHA
Housing
*Some units, such as the Animal Shelter, are sub-leased and have rotating availability to city staff.
Additionally, given turnover at any given time, units may be temporarily vacant.
Table 3: Percentage of Employees by Location
4
44
Figure 1: Heat Map of Employee Locations in the Roaring Fork Valley
and I-70 Mountain Corridor
A key takeaway from where city employees are
located is that 49% of the city’s 344 full- time
employees reside in Aspen, and 92% of the 167
employees in Aspen live in subsidized housing.
In 2024, purchasing a median single-family
detached home in Glenwood Springs at $1.3M
will become increasingly difficult, resulting in city
employees moving into the Colorado River
Valley. To maintain emergency services and
business continuity, it is vital to retain new and
current city employees by providing various
housing options as part of the city’s total
compensation package.
5
45
Two housing-specific elements of the
philosophy are:
Respond to the high cost of living and
lack of affordable housing through an
array of housing program options.
1.
Review creative and innovative
opportunities on an ongoing basis to
further enhance employee support with
housing challenges.
2.
Vision: To be a leader in preserving the Aspen community by providing an
exceptional city employee housing program.
Mission: To support the city’s workforce in delivering essential and
emergency community services through a forward-thinking,
comprehensive, and transparent city employee housing program.
What does the housing plan aim to achieve?
Total Compensation philosophy
When evaluating the city’s employee housing program and benefits, the city’s Total
Compensation Philosophy (TCP) is a guidepost for developing the housing plan.
Additionally, employee housing is a tenant of the city’s Council-supported TCP (Appendix
D), a framework designed to guide compensation and benefits decision-making.
The 2024 City Employee Housing Strategic Plan is based on the newly developed city
housing mission and vision statements.
Moreover, when formulating the city employee
housing plan, it is essential to consider the
city’s mission, vision and values to guide
strategy development and inform the action
plan. A long-term roadmap is maintained through alignment in all these areas, and a focus
on a common organizational direction is achieved.
6
46
The city’s organizational mission and values reflect our beliefs and actions as we strive to
serve the Aspen community. These values act as a compass to guide us in our decision-
making process, particularly when developing the housing action plan and managing the
city’s employee housing program.
organizational Mission and
values
Service: We serve with a spirit of excellence, humility, integrity, and respect.
Partnership: Our impact is greater together.
Stewardship: Investing in a thriving future for all by balancing social,
environmental, and financial responsibilities.
Innovation: Pursuing creative outcomes, grounded in Aspen’s
distinctive challenges and opportunities.
To engage with positive civil dialogue, provide the highest quality innovative and
efficient municipal services, steward the natural environment, and support a
healthy and sustainable community for the benefit of future generations with
respect for the work of our predecessors.
M I S S I O N
V A L U E S
7
47
The 2022, city of Aspen employee survey data concluded that the two driving factors that
would move city employees out of the Roaring Fork Valley include the lack of affordable
housing and the cost of living (Appendix E). This survey data aligns with exit interviews of
staff members leaving the organization.
In addition to the survey data collected, a SWOT Analysis (Appendix F) was completed in
the Spring of 2023 during the housing workshop with internal stakeholders. The SWOT
analysis is a tool in which an organization identifies, at a high level, internal and external
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. The SWOT provided a baseline
analysis of the existing employee housing program.
The primary focus areas of this action plan are:
Improve employee and community understanding of the program
Expand creative housing options to meet the diverse needs of the city’s workforce
Revise and expand the housing administrative orders (policies)
Increase communication and transparency
Assess resources while also leveraging opportunities within the current housing
program
While some of the actions in this plan are ready for implementation, like creating a housing
page on the new intranet, City Connect, others, such as evaluating a housing stipend
program or purchasing additional housing units, require further exploration and analysis.
HOUSING ACTION PLAN
2024-2026
With less than a quarter of full-time employees in city
employee housing, there is a growing concern
around the shrinking number of city employees
available to meet future business continuity and
community needs, including the need for city
employees to respond during an emergency. Given
the current housing situation, the city must consider
solutions to address the housing issues and foster a
sustainable workforce. To this end, the inaugural
internal housing action plan offers a clear roadmap for 2024 through 2026.
8
48
Action Plan
ITEM DESCRIPTION
1. Continue to increase
inventory
2. Update the down payment
assistance program
3. Evaluate a housing stipend
program
4. Complete extended range
financial plan to support the internal
housing program
Objective: Program Growth & Sustainability
Review the program’s utilization and
evaluate program design options, including
options for program and eligibility expansion.
Research various potential elements of a
housing stipend program, including eligibility
criteria and options for stipend levels (flat
rate, sliding scale, calculation, etc.).
Develop alternatives to the current funding
model, including evaluating department-level
funding based on staff utilization of various
housing program elements.
Establish a financial benchmark for
maintaining and updating the city employee
housing program.
Evaluate adding to the existing inventory
through purchase, buy down, or other means.
Objective: Administrative Orders/Policy Advancement
ITEM DESCRIPTION
2. Establish finish levels for all
units
1. Develop Housing Administrative
Directives
Assess, revise, and add housing
administrative orders (policies) as necessary.
Update the current housing guidelines.
Develop clearly defined and transparent
policies for completing unfinished
basements and general finishing standards
such as fixtures, appliances, flooring,
lighting, and windows.
9
49
Objective: Operational Excellence
ITEM DESCRIPTION
4. Owner responsibilities
1. Evaluate and reduce turnover time
for units
2. Update deed restrictions for city-
owned units
3. Update lease agreement for city-
owned units
Create and implement a new owner
training document and program.
Review metrics and information regarding
unit turnover time. Work with Asset, HR,
and APCHA to understand factors that
affect turnover time.
Establish a protocol for periodic evaluation
of all units held for hard-to-fill positions in
critical service areas.
Evaluate and refine language in purchase
contracts. Review and revise maintenance
responsibilities between owner and
employer. Add dispute resolution language.
Review and revise lease agreements by
auditing current agreements and reviewing
best practices. Ensure dispute resolution
language is included into lease agreements.
Objective: Communications
ITEM DESCRIPTION
Increase housing program transparency. 1. Develop internal housing communications
through strategic communications plan
Provide a single location for all information
about the internal housing program,
including program details, administrative
directives, and unit availability updates.
2. Create a housing page on the new
intranet, City Connect
3. Develop a Renters/Buyers Guide for
internal housing units
Create a guide for city staff renting or
buying a city-owned unit. This will include:
How to apply
Selection process
Expectations of renters/buyer
Information on renting and purchasing
Costs and buybacks
10
50
Appendix A: City of Aspen Employees Housing Programs
City-Owned Units
Rental Advance Loan
Subsidized Loan Program
The city currently owns 74 housing units for city of Aspen employees. Most of these units
are located within the city, but some are outside city limits and within Aspen’s urban growth
boundary.
In addition to the city’s housing inventory, the city of Aspen helps to provide a secured,
subordinate, and subsidized loan to assist regular full-time employees in good standing with
down payment assistance, closing costs, and interest rate buy-down of a primary mortgage.
This program can be used to purchase an APCHA or a city housing unit for 10% of the
purchase price or $30,000, whichever is less. The maximum loan term is 15 years, and the
fixed interest rate equals the most recently published 10-year U.S. Treasury rate.
Full-time or part-time employees may apply for an interest-free rental advance loan for up to
50% of the cost to secure rental housing, including first and last month’s rent and a damage
deposit. The loan is repaid in biweekly payroll deductions within one year.
APPENDICES
Appendix B: City of Aspen Employee Categories
All categories listed below are considered to have priority for city housing before a unit is
made available to all full-time employees. Emergency response employees receive the
highest priority based on organizational and community needs. These categories were
established to support the continuity of the municipality’s operations and add transparency
and consistency to the selection process.
Employee Categories:
Emergency Response Employees are those who are regularly required to be on
standby outside of regular working hours or other emergency response activities. These
positions include but are not limited to, police officers, electric line technicians, certain
utility and streets positions, or positions designated by the City Manager. Positions may
vary depending on the city’s needs.
11
51
Agency Director and Department Head positions. An Agency Director is a senior
position that oversees one or more departments and typically reports directly to the
City Manager (reference Ordinance No. 01, Series of 1985). A Department Head or
Department Director is defined as a manager who oversees a department.
City employees applying for most units are first reviewed based on the above criteria. If the
above criteria are unmet, units may be made available to all full-time employees.
Units such as Alpine Grove, the Animal Shelter, the Aspen Recreation Center, Anderson
Park, the Parks Campus, Marolt, and Truscott units have specific criteria for prioritization.
These requirements include but are not limited to, prioritization given to parks, maintenance,
or recreation employees for fulfilling occasional after-hour work requirements, rental income-
specific categories, intergovernmental agency agreement obligations, and transitional units.
Transitional units are defined as units that may be available for six months to a year for an
employee who is new or is working through a difficult life transition, such as a divorce or an
unforeseeable situation.
On occasion, housing units may be held for a brief period of time in support of critical
recruitments or units that may need significant renovations before being filled.
Additionally, the City Manager reserves the right to prioritize housing units based on city
organizational needs.
Critical Recruitment and Retention of Employees includes but is not limited to
assessing the number of qualified applications for a position, the specific job
qualifications, and the length of time it has taken to fill similar positions in the past.
Applicable positions shall vary depending on the job market. Other criteria may be
included in the assessment and approved by the City Manager.
12
52
Appendix C: City of Aspen Employee Housing Inventory as of
March 2024
Location # of Units Unit Types Unit Categories Priority / Use
Truscott
Burlingame
Water
Place
Alpine Grove
Parks
Campus
Marolt Open
Space
Anderson Park
Cemetery
Lane
Animal
Shelter
East
Hopkins Ave
Aspen
Recreation
Center (ARC)
Animal
Hospital/ AABC
City leases unit
1
1
1
8
1
3
1
4
2
1
14
24
Studio
Studio
2-bedroom
One 2-bedroom
One 3-bedroom
One 1-bedroom
Three 2-bedroom
One 1-bedroom
One 2-bedroom
Two 2-bedroom
Two 3-bedroom
Three Studio
Six 1-bedroom
Seven 2-bedroom
Six 3-bedroom
Two 4-bedroom
Three Studio
Eight 1-bedroom
Three 2-bedroom
Two 1-bedroom
Four 2-bedroom
Two 3-bedroom
Category 2
Category 2
Category 3
Fluctuates Based
on Income
Rental Only
No Stated Priority
Rental Only
Existing
Agreement
Rental Only
No Stated Priority
Rental or Ownership
Priority for Recreation
& Police Staff
Rental Only
Category 3
Category 2
(1 bedroom)
Category 3
(2 bedroom)
Animal Shelter Staff
Rotating Prioritization
with Pitkin
Rental Only
Rental Only
Parks Staff Prioritized
Rental Only
Parks Staff
Prioritized
Rental Only
Fluctuates Based
on Income
No Stated Priority
Rental or Ownership
Fluctuates Based
on Income
Fluctuates Based
on Income
Fluctuates Based
on Income
No Stated Priority
Rental or Ownership
Fluctuates Based
on Income
Fluctuates Based
on Income
No Stated Priority
Rental or
Ownership
Fluctuates Based
on Income
13
53
Deer Hill
S. West End
550 Main
Street
Marolt
Seasonal
3
1
1
8
One 1 bedroom
One 3-bedroom
Three 1-bedroom
Three 1-bedroom
Three 2-bedroom
Two 3-bedroom
Fluctuates Based on
Income
Fluctuates Based on
Income
Six-Month Transitional
Rental Only
No Stated Priority
Rental or
Ownership
All Units 74
Fluctuates Based on
Income
Fluctuates Based on
Income
No Stated Priority
Rental or
Ownership
No Stated Priority
Rental or
Ownership
14
54
Appendix D: Total Compensation Philosophy
15
55
2022 City Employee Survey Results
Appendix E: 2022 City of Aspen Employee Housing Survey
Summary
Responses to one question in the employee survey about housing showed contrasting stress
levels related to housing circumstances. The chart below shows a wide split in the amount of
stress experienced, likely corresponding to whether or not employees have long-term secure
housing.
For employees, the two driving factors that would move them out of the Roaring Fork Valley
are the lack of affordable housing and the cost of living.
The survey asked employees about their interests in specific programs or housing
opportunities that may alleviate their stress and concerns.
Percentage of Responding Employees Interested in City Housing Programs or
Opportunities:
Down Payment Assistance Program – 59%
Shared Equity Program – 51%
Employee Housing Unit in Aspen – 64%
Employee Housing Unit in Basalt – 56%
In June 2022, the city distributed an employee housing survey to better understand the type
of housing needed by the city’s employee base. The objectives of this survey were to learn
more about city employees, their housing situations and needs, and how their housing
circumstances potentially impact their employment status with the city. The survey received
184 responses, which is a 58% response rate.
Highlights from the survey include:
53% of responding employees live in Aspen, and 24% live in Carbondale or farther
down valley.
80% of responding employees believe that if their housing situation improved, it would
be very likely to influence their decision to remain employed with the city of Aspen.
97% of responding employees prefer to own a home, while only 64% own.
16
56
Appendix F: City SWOT Analysis
2023 SWOT A nal ysis
Length of program – the city is ahead of
other cities/counties because the
program is one of the first of its kind.
Recruitment and retention tool
Internal maintenance program
Variable sizes of housing units and a
variety of locations
Employees have a community
connection within the city
Understanding of the program,
specifically the eligibility criteria.
Evaluating the impact of flexible work
arrangements on the program.
The down payment assistance program
is limited in eligibility.
Limited ability to provide more housing
options to meet employee needs.
Many departments, including but not
limited to Asset, Finance, Human
Resources, Attorney, and the City
Manager’s Office (CMO), have a role
within the city’s internal housing program,
which may sometimes be challenging for
oversight, management, and coordination
of tasks. Refinement of guidelines,
eligibility criteria and policies.
A SWOT Analysis tool helps an organization identify, at a high level, internal and external
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. The SWOT conducted in the Spring of
2023 provided a baseline analysis of the existing program. The following chart summarizes
the results.
Strengths and Weaknesses are focused internally. What do we do well, and where
could we improve?
Opportunities and Threats are externally focused. What opportunities exist out-side
of the city of Aspen? What threats could harm our efforts? What is happening outwardly
that could hurt the city?
STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
17
57
Innovative down payment assistance
program with possible expansion.
Expand geographical locations to expand
housing options when appropriate.
Continually review employee and
organizational housing needs and adapt
to future changes based on changing
housing market landscape and total
benefits package.
Further explore transitional housing unit
options and policies.
Review the qualifications and categories
structure to ensure they meet the
recruitment and retention needs through
a balanced organizational lens.
Cost of construction.
Changing housing market conditions.
Aging properties are difficult and expensive to
maintain.
Escalating cost of land and houses.
Increasing need with limited resources in
property management and administrative duties
as housing inventory increases.
A summary of the SWOT Analysis:
Celebrate and recognize that challenges exist by recognizing that Aspen’s city
employee housing program is leaps and bounds ahead of other regional jurisdictions
and private sector employers.
Ensure that the program’s eligibility description is transparent and that the city actively
informs new and current employees of the available benefits.
Continue to find solutions to the affordability of market-rate housing options valley-wide
and the limited inventory within the APCHA program – to meet employees’ current
needs and recruitment needs in the foreseeable future.
Evaluate and refine management practices and philosophies in maintaining and
funding the housing units in the city’s inventory.
Respond to employee needs and changing market conditions with flexible and
strategic program components.
Identify and address employee housing program priorities to the extent possible.
OPPORTUNITIES THREATS
18
58
Employee Housing Program
November 11, 2024 59
2
EE Housing Program Overview
•74 Employee Housing Units
o City jobs are prioritized based on organizational and community needs with
emergency response employees receiving the highest priority.
•Down Payment Assistance Program
o Up to $30K loan, 15-year maximum payback, interest rate tied to 10-year treasury,
currently only APCHA & city deed restricted units allowed.
•Rental Loan Assistance Program
o Loan to help cashflow lease requirements of first, last and security deposit, 12-
month payback terms.
60
3
Employee Housing Plan Purpose
Mission: To support the city’s workforce in delivering essential and emergency
community services through a forward-thinking, comprehensive, and
transparent city employee housing program.
Vision: To be a leader in preserving the Aspen community by providing an
exceptional city employee housing program.
61
4
EE Housing Strategic Plan Goals
1. Maintain a Healthy and Sustainable City Housing Program
2. Strengthen Trust in the City's Employee Housing Program
through Communication and Transparency
3. Achieve a Flexible and Responsive Employee Housing
Program for the Community by focusing on Employee
Sustainability.
62
5
EE Housing Action Plan
•EE survey data concluded 2 driving factors
are impacting current turnover at 14%: (1)
Lack of affordable housing & (2) Cost of
living
•Less than 1/4th of FT employees are in city
housing. Growing concern about employees
available to meet future business continuity
and community needs.
•Given this, action plan developed with 4
objectives: Sustainability, Operational
Excellence, Policy Advancement, &
Communications.
Hsg. Program Sustainability Action
Items
Continue to increase inventory
Update down payment assistance
program
Evaluate a housing stipend program
Complete long-term financial plan to
support the internal housing program
63
Current EE Housing Inventory
6
Total Unit Count 74
Alpine Grove 3
Anderson Park 1
Animal Shelter 2
Aspen Animal Hospital 1
Aspen Recreation
Center 1
Burlingame 8
Cemetery Lane 4
Deer Hill 1
E. Hopkins Ave.1
Main Street 8
Marolt Open Space 1
Marolt Seasonal 3
Parks Campus 1
S. West End St.1
Truscott 14
Water Place 24
More Recent Acquisitions
Jul 2022: 418 AABC Alpine Grove – Unit F
o $1,095,000 / 2-bedroom unit
Dec 2023: Five Units at BG III
o $563,327 / 1-bedroom unit (two)
o $817,221 / 2-bedroom unit (three)
Feb 2024: 601 S West End Street - Unit 13
o $1,091,125 / 1-bedroom unit
64
EE Housing Program Utilization
7
17
11
7
5
5
5
4
4
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
Police
Utilities
Parks & Open Space
Recreation
Engineering/Stormwater
Com Dev / Env. Health
Wheeler Opera House
Vacant
Non-City Employee
Manager's Office
IT
Finance
APCHA
Clerk
Attorney's Office
Streets
Parking
Human Resources Four Units Currently Vacant
o Two held for critical recruitments
o Two vacant and advertised for lottery
65
Current Housing Environment
8
Opportunities are limited and expensive throughout Valley
Median 1-Bedroom
Rent
Median 2-Bedroom
Rent
Vacancy Rate
Aspen $4,750 $7,500 0.2%
Basalt $2,495 $4,004 1.3%
Carbondale $2,457 $3,749 1.2%
Glenwood Springs $1,542 $2,588 1.0%
Data Source: WMRHC 2023 Rental Study, Ribbon Demographics LLC (Oct 2023)
Median Sale Price
Single Family Home
Median Sale Price
Condominium
Aspen $12.5M $4.3M
Basalt $2.1M $1.1M
Carbondale $2.0M $850K
Glenwood Springs $891K $738K
https://www.aspenrealtors.com/statistical-reports-by-town/
66
Assessment of Housing Cost
9
Example 1-Bedroom Rent
Rent:
Hourly Rate Equivalent
Needed Hourly Wage
(if Rent is 30% of Gross)
Aspen $4,750 $27.40 $91.35
Basalt $2,495 $14.39 $47.98
Carbondale $2,457 $14.18 $47.25
Glenwood Springs $1,542 $8.90 $29.65
53
111
75
43
31
18 9 1 5
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
$20-$29 $30-$39 $40-$49 $50-$59 $60-$69 $70-$79 $80-$89 $90-$99 $100+
Co
u
n
t
o
f
F
T
E
s
City of Aspen Employees by Hourly Rate
Can “afford”
Aspen rents
Can “afford” Basalt
/ Carbondale rents
Can “afford”
Glenwood rents
67
10
Where Do City Staff Reside?
Location # of EEs
Aspen 167
Woody Creek 4
Snowmass Village 20
Basalt 41
El Jebel 7
Carbondale 58
Marble / Redstone 3
Glenwood Springs 21
Beyond Glenwood 23
Total 344
68
Employees By Wage & Housing
11
346 filled permanent positions
(114 in affordable housing*)
232 in free market options
% of AMI Area Median
Income
All
Employees
Ees Not in
Subsidized
Housing
% of Ees Not in
Subsidized
Housing
< 60%$58,680 17 12 71%
< 80%$78,240 79 54 68%
< 100%$97,800 86 60 70%
< 120%$117,360 64 46 72%
< 140%$136,920 36 23 64%
< 160%$156,480 23 13 57%
Above 160%41 24 59%
All EEs 346 232 67%
https://dlg.colorado.gov/area-median-income-limits-table
*Includes City owned units and APCHA
deed restricted units
69
Alt. Explored by Other Communities
12
Glenwood Springs has stipend program already in practice…
•Eligibility = staff earning under $70,000
•83 qualified (of 198 full time staff)
•$120,000 pool of funds spread evenly ($~120/month)
Pitkin County has shared equity program…
•Up to 40% of home value (max $300K-$400K pending location)
•Appreciation split between County & EE (simple interest)
•22 instances thus far; ~13 still active (mostly in GWS)
70
EE HOUSING REVENUES
13
Rental
Income
7%
Refund of
Expenditures -
Housing
4%
Transfers In
89%
2025 2026 2027 2028 2029
Request Projection Projection Projection Projection
Opening Balance $5,328,990 $8,435,660 $11,583,490 $14,126,720 $17,648,210
Rental Income $309,000 $315,180 $321,480 $327,910 $334,470
Investment Income $158,900 $168,710 $231,670 $282,530 $352,960
Refund of Expenditures $162,700 $166,500 $170,400 $174,300 $178,200
Revenues In $630,600 $650,390 $723,550 $784,740 $865,630
Transfers In $3,905,500 $3,998,700 $4,091,800 $4,184,800 $4,277,900
Total Revenues $4,536,100 $4,649,090 $4,815,350 $4,969,540 $5,143,530
Per FTE charge of $10,500
71
Stipend Pilot Program
14
Sample Options Individuals Cost Stipend Range
1: Flat Stipend up to $100,000 earners 163 $586,800 $300/mo
2: Based on APCHA Categories < 50% up to 130% AMI (graduated)186 $555,600 $200 to $400/mo
3: Based on AMI < 60% up to 100% AMI (graduated)124 $547,200 $300 to $500/mo
4: All EE’s In Free Market – no income verification 226 $542,400 $200/mo
Sample options not reflective of a recommendation at this time…
•Awards and eligibility will vary pending on decision
•Intended for employees not otherwise benefiting from price-controlled housing
•Balance supporting emergency response and other service delivery
•Not full shift of program ’s priority; rather another alternative to address housing
affordability issue - targeted acquisition would continue
72
Questions?
15
Does Council support the overall approach of the Employee
Strategic Housing Plan presented?
Does Council support the pilot stipend program as another
housing solution for ensuring essential and reliable community
services?
73