Foothills developers offer land and housing to school district

Make pitch to board seeking support

Land and a lease in exchange for a letter of support: that was the deal proponents of the proposed Foothills subdivision north of Crested Butte were hoping to strike at a regular meeting of the RE1J school board on Monday, September 15.

The proposal was made by developers Cliff Goss and Kent Hill of Fairways GH Paradise, LLC, which is currently proposing the 68-acre Foothills annexation to the town of Crested Butte.
According to Goss, 40 percent of the 300- to 350-unit subdivision would be reserved as affordable housing, available to buyers or renters who do not exceed set income levels.
To encourage school district support, Goss and Hill suggested an arrangement that would allow the school district access to some of that housing for its Crested Butte teachers and land that it could sell, or they could provide cash in lieu of the land.
“Many of these affordable units could be put in [holding] for you and we have found some very good money—40-year fixed-rate loans—so that once those units are built we’ll know what the cost of those will be for a very long time,” said Goss.
It was a tactic that was new to board member Bill Powell.
“It’s quite common for a developer to offer land to a school district or cash in lieu of land, but this idea of offering housing for teachers is something I’ve never heard,” he said.
For Goss, it is the solution to a decades-old affordability problem that some people moving to Crested Butte encounter, and an asset for the school district.
“We think that would be a very good benefit to you as a school district that when your teachers come into Crested Butte, where there aren’t a lot of places to live, if you wanted to bring a teacher in on a three- or five-year contract, then you could match housing with that contract,” said Goss.
When the contract was up, a teacher could renew the housing agreement if he or she continued to be employed by the school, or could move on, returning the housing lease to the district.
The board and the developers had several suggestions about how the housing might be managed, including a long-term lease to the district that could be transferred teachers and a lease that would be restricted to public employees.
In addition to the housing access, the developers suggested that there could also be some land in the subdivision set aside for the district, which could be sold, as extra money is needed.
“We also thought about land,” said Goss. “Not land that might be used to build on but land that you could convert to cash. But we’re very open. I have no preconceived notion of what you need.”
Although the idea of housing for teachers and possible other public employees was well received, school board president MJ Vosburg said it was land that the district needed.
“I think this group has learned some lessons from all of the development that has happened in our valley in the last 20 years. I think the general feeling is that it is always a good thing to secure the land first,” said Vosburg. “We would certainly be interested in hearing more about housing opportunities and supporting it, but we need flexibility so land is at the top of the list.”
Goss recounted his own school days and the importance the schools have to his family, concluding his thought with, “So you’re kind of on the top of our list, too.”
But the reality is that the development is restricted in space, he said. He added that with the uncertainty that comes from working through the town process, there are no guarantees to be made.
“It’s hard for me to sit here and tell you what to expect today because we thought the plan we had in place six weeks ago was great. After just two or three meetings we’re a little less sure,” he said.
And after just a few meetings with the town and developers, and with such a long way to go, the school board wanted to know what Goss was looking for when he came to the meeting.
“I would encourage you to be very vocal. I would push the town so you were heard. It has been said that we’ve been trying to make deals with all different groups to get support, and that’s not the case,” said Goss. “We can only offer certain things. Then it is the city council’s job to decide where we go with it.”
The board members said they would return to the issue of whether or not to send a letter in support of the development before January 1 and after a letter was drafted detailing the district’s requests. After deciding what elements of the proposal were in the district’s best interest, the letter would be sent to the developers and the town.