CB council ponders rental rates for town employees

Should town actively keep its employees in the North Valley?

By Mark Reaman

Not all, but some employees of the town of Crested Butte have a sweet housing deal and the town council wants to talk about it. The town owns 13 residential units that they rent, 12 of which are dedicated for full-time town employees and one which is set aside for the town manager.

The 12 employee units are awarded via lottery, and most rents are below what is typically considered to be market rate or even what is typical for deed-restricted units in town rented to the general qualifying workforce. For example, a one-bedroom, one-bath unit in town would go for somewhere near $1,000 a month these days. A similar town employee unit could go for about 60% of that.

Crested Butte housing director Erin Ganser and town manager Dara MacDonald wrote a memo to the council detailing the policy and rationale of the employee units. Chief among them was the attraction and retention of good employees given the overall housing situation in the valley.

Currently, 17 employees or 29% of the 58-member town staff live in the 13 units. The salary range of the tenants falls between $55,365 and $90,951.

The staff memo noted that “over the last eight years, 10 employees have used the town employee housing program as a springboard to purchase deed-restricted or market rate affordable housing in the valley.” Each lottery normally draws between five and seven employees vying for the most popular two-bedroom units.

As for finances, the town loses about $237,000 a year on its town employee rental units after rents and maintenance and capital repair costs.

While councilmembers generally agreed that the town employee housing program was a good incentive to attract employees, they had several questions on how the rents were decided and why they didn’t more closely reflect other deed-restricted affordable housing rents. Several also questioned the equity aspect of why some employees had a sweet rent deal while others didn’t.

Ganser explained that a base plan was put in place in 2023 to replace a hodgepodge of rents. The goal of this first policy update was to create a transparent rent structure with predictable annual increases and not shock a tenant’s household budget by pushing an unreasonable increase.

One basic national formula uses Area Median Income figures along with the metric that a household can normally afford to spend 30% of its income on housing. However, Ganser repeatedly said that doesn’t work in a resort community where the cost of living is more expensive than most other places. “One of the topics that we are going to explore further in the 2026 update to the Affordable Housing Guidelines, is the 30% burden metric,” she explained. “That work would certainly illuminate how we price employee rents, as well as prices on deed restricted units.”

Councilmember Mallika Magner suggested that while “town units are a valuable tool in attracting employees, I think we should allocate rents to be treated equally as other deed-restricted affordable housing in similar units in town.”

“I can see the differentiation in rents as a benefit to the organization (town),” said councilmember Kate Guibert. “It is a way to attract employees.”

“The inequity part is hard to solve,” said councilmember Beth Goldstone. “It is an unfortunate part of the market.”

Councilmember John O’Neal asked if salary could be a factor to determine rents. Ganser said some jurisdictions use tiered layers of rent based on income. “The housing market is broken, and we know inequity exists in all of the housing programs. There is far more demand than there is supply,” she said. “When we hold a lottery there is one winner and others walk away disappointed. In addition to continuing to grow attainable housing opportunities to address the below 1% rental vacancy rate in the valley, there are other ways the town could level the playing field for employees that are facing market rate prices, like providing rental assistance or down payment assistance.”

“Is the town owning units the only way to attract and retain employees?” asked O’Neal. “Could we give out housing subsidies to all employees? It makes it more equitable and helps everyone.”

Mayor Ian Billick asked if there were ways to target employees on the lower end of the income scale. Magner said housing is an issue for even well-paid department heads. Citing the search for a finance director, she noted that while someone might want the job, they might not be able to find a place to live. “That’s the other part of the tension,” she said.

Billick asked the council if they should be considering a policy that addresses keeping a certain percentage of town employees living in the North Valley. “There are many advantages to that,” he said. “Citizens appreciate town employees living in the area. It helps with internal communication and in emergencies. It might not be a big issue right now, but we might want more town employee housing units in 10 years.”

The council hopes to get information on where town employees live in the valley; what regular maintenance costs are; see what type of incomes are in what sort of town-owned units; and see how low rents tie into compensation packages as well as salary and healthcare benefits.

“I believe in the program and see its importance. I just want to understand it more,” said O’Neal.

“I am okay with the town subsidizing housing and spending a couple hundred thousand dollars for it given the benefits,” said councilmember Kent Cowherd. “It makes sense to me.”

“I agree it is a wonderful tool to attract employees,” said Billick.

Given Ganser’s necessary focus on transitioning the administration of deed restrictions in-house from the Gunnison Valley Regional Housing Authority, she suggested council fold the town employee housing discussion into the overall town housing plan that is just starting to ramp up. She said council will see preliminary discussion in January with the hope to approve changes to the affordable housing guidelines in early summer of 2026. Magner voiced a desire to address the employee rent situation sooner than that, but the rest of the council was comfortable with the suggestion.