Boulder Council Candidates Q & A

What does ‘affordability’ mean to you in the context of housing?  And what do you perceive is the missing middle? How do you propose to address the missing middle housing both for sale and rent?

 

MATT BENJAMIN:

When I talk about “affordability” in housing, I mean more than just deeply subsidized affordable units. It also means the challenges with the “attainability” of our housing supply. Affordability is about ensuring that people across the income spectrum, teachers, nurses, service workers, small business owners, and young families, can actually live in Boulder. Right now, our market is skewed: it produces high-end luxury units at one end and regulated affordable housing at the other, while leaving out the broad swath of middle-income households who earn too much to qualify for subsidies but too little to compete in Boulder’s market.  That gap is what we call the“missing middle.”It includes modest condos, townhomes, duplexes, and smaller single-family alternatives that used to be common but have become almost impossible to build under our current zoning and economics. These homes are essential for retaining the workforce and keeping Boulder from becoming an enclave of only the very wealthy.

 

To address this, I support three key strategies:

1. Reforming zoning and land use to allow more middle-density housing types in appropriate areas, especially along transit corridors. We have already started moving in this direction with the Family Friendly Vibrant Neighborhoods ordinance and the land use changes proposed in the early stages of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan.
2. Aligning our Inclusionary Housing ordinancewith tools like the state’s Middle-Income Housing Tax Credit so developers are incentivized to build middle-income units rather than penalized. We also need to make sure we change our inclusionary housing ordinance to create the middle-income housing we desperately need.
3. Leveraging partnerships and city-owned land for mixed-income projects that guarantee both rental and ownership opportunities for middle-income families.

Affordability must include the middle, and if we want Boulder to remain a diverse and thriving community, we must make it possible for the “missing middle” to find a home here.

 

LAUREN FOLKERTS:

Affordability, to me, means that the people who make Boulder work, teachers, nurses, service workers, first responders, young families, and seniors, can actually live here without being pushed to the financial brink. It’s not just about building a few “affordable” units, it’s about ensuring that housing options exist across the income spectrum, so people aren’t spending 50% or more of their paycheck on rent or a mortgage.

 

When we talk about the “missing middle,” it can mean either a housing type or a price point, and in Boulder, the two often overlap. Housing types like duplexes, triplexes, ADUs, and cottage courts naturally provide more attainable price points than large single-family homes. At the same time, “missing middle” also describes the households who earn too much to qualify for income-restricted affordable housing but not enough to afford what the current market produces. In both cases, Boulder has left a gap that pushes out the very people who keep our community running.

 

To address this, I’ve worked on land use reforms to make smaller, more attainable homes legal and feasible to build, and I pushed to change how we assess affordable housing fees so smaller units aren’t penalized while oversized homes get a pass. For rentals, we need to continue supporting permanently affordable units and explore incentives for landlords to maintain mid-range pricing. For ownership, finding a way to make market rate housing more affordable is key, and encouraging redevelopment of underutilized sites into mixed-income neighborhoods near transit and services helps our community move forward on a variety of fronts. We can expand programs that help middle-income buyers get a foothold, but deed restricted programs for this income threshold have some significant drawbacks.

 

The bottom line: Boulder’s future depends on creating real pathways for the missing middle to stay and thrive here. If we fail to do that, we fail the very people who make our community vibrant.

 

RACHEL ROSE ISAACSON:

Affordability, to me, is about more than just price, it’s also about accessibility, stability, and belonging. A home is affordable when people who work and contribute to Boulder such as teachers, nurses, nonprofit workers, service industry staff, young professionals, and families can actually live here and there are a variety of options available to meet a wide range of needs.  The “missing middle” refers to the gap between subsidized affordable housing and the high-cost market-rate units that dominate our city. Middle-income households are increasingly priced out, leading to a loss of diversity in our workforce and weakening the fabric of our community.

 

To address this missing middle, both for rent and for sale, we need a multifaceted approach:

• Zoning flexibility and gentle density: Encourage duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, small-scale multifamily housing, and other creative options in appropriate neighborhoods to diversify housing stock.
• Partnerships with mission-driven developers: Incentivize projects that include attainable price points for middle-income families, not just luxury units.
• Creative financing and ownership models: Support community land trusts, shared equity programs, and co-op style ownership that reduce barriers to entry while building long-term
• Rental protections and supply expansion: Expand mid-range rental options through mixed-income developments and adaptive reuse of underutilized properties.

As a Political Economist, I see housing affordability not only as a matter of supply and demand but as a question of how we distribute opportunity. Ensuring the middle class can thrive here is essential for Boulder’s long-term vitality.

 

ROB KAPLAN: 

To me, affordability means that people who work in Boulder: teachers, firefighters, service workers, nurses, small business employees, can also afford to live in Boulder without being cost-burdened. Right now, too many of our workforce spends over 30% of their income on housing or must commute from outside the city.

 

The ‘missing middle’ is exactly that group: households earn too much to qualify for traditional affordable housing programs, but not enough to afford Boulder’s market prices. For a family of four, that’s roughly 80–150% of AMI, which equates to $90,000 to $175,000 a year. These are the families and individuals getting squeezed out of Boulder.

 

To address the missing middle, I support expanding homeownership tools like down payment assistance and land-lease models that reduce the cost of entry. I also support more diverse housing types to include townhomes, duplexes, and condos along transit corridors where we can add density responsibly. For rentals, we should be exploring incentives for property owners to create and preserve middle-income units, as well as public-private partnerships that blend city land or tax credits with private investment.

 

If we want a vibrant local economy, we need to make sure the people who serve and power our community have a place here. That means policies that fill the gap for the missing middle both for rent and for ownership, not just subsidized housing on one side and high-end luxury homes on the other.

 

MAXWELL LORD:

Affordability means that the people who work in this city can afford to live here. When that is impossible, we all feel it. Whether that is increased costs at restaurants and cafes, or massive traffic delays on the diagonal or 36.

 

In general, the middle class is vanishing in this country, through decades of erosion. As a vibrant hub of economy, talent, and vitality, Boulder does have the ability to create, and house middle class earners. The biggest challenge is housing. Even I, at the age of 32, would be an example of “the middle class”. I have a moderately successful business, I am able to live comfortably renting a shop and an apartment, but I am very aware of the massive challenges that I face to make this a possibility.

 

I recognize that a “middle earner” is going to have a hard time affording a house in most neighborhoods in Boulder, and that's not going to change anytime soon. That's why we need to insure good transportation between Boulder and our neighboring cities. We also need to provide more affordable rental units, for the people who are at a phase in their life where walking to work or to the university is a good option. This means allowing the construction of apartment buildings at the fringes of town, and making it easier for updates like townhomes, duplexes, etc. to be built, rather than exclusively luxury condos that we are seeing crop up in every area of town.

MONSERRAT PALACIOS:

• Affordability means creating housing options that working families can realistically purchase or rent without being cost-burdened.
• Increase housing density while protecting Open Space.
• Update zoning to allow more diverse housing types.
• Encourage developments like Holiday that balance community, affordability, and livability.
• Support small-family homes as alternatives to large apartments, giving families options that better fit their needs.

JENNIFER ROBINS:

There are many different ways to define affordability when it comes to housing. At one end, we have permanently supportive housing for our most vulnerable residents who need services alongside shelter. Then there’s deeply affordable housing for households earning below 30% of AMI and income-restricted affordable housing for those around 60–80% AMI. On the other end of the spectrum, we have market-rate housing.

What Boulder is missing is the “middle” duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, condos, and smaller apartment buildings. These are the kinds of homes that are more attainable and attractive for first-time buyers and families. But our zoning and fee structure don’t make them easy or attractive to build.

I would work directly with developers to find ways to make building the missing middle more attractive. That includes looking at zoning flexibility, including by-right, streamlining approvals, and providing incentives like lower impact fees for deed-restricted homes that keep units affordable long-term. On the rental side, I’d encourage more mid-range projects instead of just luxury apartments. On the ownership side, I’d support tools like down-payment assistance so middle-income families can actually buy and stay in Boulder.

ROB SMOKE:

I have some deeply held opinions regarding the disparity between need and availability of all types of "affordable" housing; however, I support legislative initiatives that would mirror NY State's 1955 Mitchell-Lama legislation, which enabled the State of New York to effectively partner with entities like labor unions or bonded NGO’s.

 

These types of legislative agreements can break the stasis of non-availability to be replaced by multiple parties with substantial equity interests.

 

NICOLE SPEER:

My goal, and the city's goal, is that people across income levels can find homes in Boulder that meet their needs, whether they’re renting, buying, downsizing, or just starting out. "Affordability" means that a family's housing does not require more than 30% of their income devoted to rent or mortgage. However, direct housing costs are not the only important factor to consider. We also need to address access, stability, and overall cost of living so that individuals and families can thrive here without being financially overburdened. When we talk about the “missing middle,” it’s important to distinguish between two related but distinct challenges:

• Missing middle housing types refer to the kinds of homes that fall between single-unit homes and large apartment buildings, such as duplexes, triplexes, cottage courts, townhomes, and small-scale multifamily. These forms are often more space-efficient, cost-effective, and better suited to evolving household needs.
• Missing middle income housing refers to homes that are affordable to people earning around the area median income (AMI), such as teachers, nurses, tradespeople, police, fire-fighters, early-career professionals, and retirees. These residents typically earn too much (or, in the case of retirees, have too many financial assets such as retirement accounts) to qualify for subsidized housing but still cannot afford most of Boulder’s available market-rate homes.

We’ve already taken steps to expand building options. The next phase of the city’s affordability work must focus on policy changes that make it easier for middle-income families to achieve their housing needs. That includes:

• Monitoring recent zoning changes and updating as needed to ensure we are getting the missing middle housing that is more affordable than single-family homes and more in line with the housing type needs of middle-income workers than standard apartments.
• Exploring land trusts, shared equity models, and community land banking to reduce land costs and keep homes affordable over time.
• Supporting targeted down payment assistance and financing tools that help middle-income buyers compete in Boulder’s high-cost market.
• Preserving existing naturally affordable housing, especially aging condos and townhomes that serve as entry points for middle-income households.

Middle-income affordability is more than just housing. It’s the full ecosystem that allows families to thrive. For Boulder’s missing-middle income residents, we need to look beyond the cost of a mortgage and address the policy barriers that make everyday life unaffordable. That means advocating for state and regional solutions to reduce the burden of childcare, healthcare, and transportation costs, which often rival or exceed housing expenses. When families spend more than 20% of their income on childcare alone, as many do in Colorado, it’s not just a housing issue, it’s a systems issue.

 

I’m committed to exploring land use reforms, zoning flexibility, and preservation strategies that support middle-income housing options. But I also believe we need to treat affordability as a network of interdependent policies, not a single lever.

 

AARON STONE:

It means that young people getting out of college can pay reasonable rent for a short time while they save to buy a house. It means they can pay their bills, buy food and still have a good quality of life.  As a society we are very far from that.  Boulder is a very expensive place to live. I want to reduce costs by helping homeowners add ADUs to their properties by removing red tape and onerous requirements providing informational resources to accomplish that.  This will enable homeowners to rent the ADU to help them afford their mortgage.  I also want to make sure that permanently affordable housing is being built at higher percentage rates, especially if we agree to allow commercial property to be converted to residential.

MARK WALLACH:

Affordable housing is generally defined as being affordable to those making 30-60% of Adjusted Mean Income and that amount can vary greatly with the size of the family being served. Middle-income housing is for those making 80-120% of AMI. While Boulder Housing Partners creates affordable housing, there is no one who is creating middle-income housing, at least in the deed-restricted for-sale category, because while there are (were?) subsidies for affordable housing under tax credit programs, there are no such subsidies for middle-income housing.

The City now defines “missing middle” in terms of housing typology: duplexes, triplexes, townhomes, etc. I disagree with this concept, as it does not produce housing that will be accessible to families who work here, commute in daily, but cannot afford to live here. Defining “missing middle” only by housing types is a tacit surrender to our failure to actually build middle-income housing. And building more units, 90% of which are stacked flat rentals, will not address the problem. Families cannot afford and cannot live in, 900sf 2BR apartments with 2 kids and a dog. That is why we have an emigration of young people who leave Boulder when they want to buy a home or a townhome. The cost of land drives the expense of housing development more than any single factor. That is why I have been an advocate of repurposing our lightly used 179-acre airport for the purpose of middle-income housing. Boulder actually owns that land under the airport and can make it available to developers at nominal prices in exchange for a commitment to produce duplexes, triplexes, starter homes, etc. that are actually at prices that can be afforded. Not extremely cheap homes: we will not see any “starting at $395k” signs. But we could develop hundreds or thousands of units at prices we will never see again in Boulder, units that can be sold to our 60,000 daily in-commuters.

 

Local businesses and rental property owners are already facing rising costs, and with declining city budgets, there’s concern about the potential for new fees or taxes. What are your top priorities as a councilmember to balance protecting these groups from additional financial burdens while maintaining essential public services?

 

MATT BENJAMIN:

I hear the concern from local businesses and property owners loud and clear: costs are rising, margins are thin, and city budget pressures create real anxiety about new fees or taxes. My top priority as a councilmember is toprotect the backbone of our economy—our small businesses and workforce, while ensuring Boulder can still deliver the essential services our community relies on.

 

First, I believe we must focus ongetting the basics right—public safety, street repair, snow removal, and fire mitigation-before we add new programs or costs. If we are asking businesses and residents to contribute, they need to see tangible results in their day-to-day lives.

Second, I will push forfiscal discipline and smarter prioritization. That means re-evaluating major capital projects to ensure they still align with today’s fiscal realities, eliminating inefficiencies in our permitting and regulatory processes, and seeking state and federal dollars to leverage local investments.

 

Boulder’s economic vitality depends on keeping our businesses and property owners healthy. As a councilmember, I will remain committed to balancing progressive values with pragmatic governance, delivering essential services without placing disproportionate burdens on those who power our local economy.

LAUREN FOLKERTS:

My top priority is to make sure Boulder delivers essential services, like safe streets, clean water, and effective emergency response, without placing unnecessary new burdens on local businesses and property owners. With sales tax revenues flattening and costs rising, we can’t afford to simply layer on new fees without looking first at how we use the resources we already have.

 

That’s why I’ve been a strong advocate for outcome-based budgeting. Every dollar should be tied to clear, measurable results that the community can see and trust. If a program isn’t delivering, we should rethink it before we ask anyone to pay more. At the same time, we need to explore more stable and equitable funding models, like a Transportation Maintenance Fee that spreads costs fairly, so we’re not over-reliant on volatile sales tax revenue.

 

For businesses and property owners, predictability is key. I’ll continue to push for streamlining city processes, cutting unnecessary red tape, and supporting adaptive reuse so it’s easier and less costly to invest in Boulder. Protecting affordability and economic vitality go hand in hand, and the city needs to model fiscal discipline if we’re going to ask our community to do the same.

RACHEL ROSE ISAACSON:

I recognize the pressure that rising costs place on both local businesses and rental property owners, especially at a time when city budgets are tightening. My top priority is to ensure that we maintain essential public services without pushing additional financial burdens onto those who are already stretched.

 

We need to be creative about leveraging partnerships, collaboration, and public-private initiatives, so that Boulder isn’t carrying the full load alone and lessening the need to implement fees and taxes on our community that could disproportionately hinder smaller, “mom and pop” operations. I believe in broad-based, equitable solutions. Our economic vitality depends on a thriving small business sector and a healthy rental market. Protecting those foundations while keeping services strong is not a trade-off, but a balancing act that requires disciplined budgeting, transparency, and prioritization.

ROB KAPLAN:

I know local businesses and housing providers are already carrying rising costs, and with the city facing budget pressures, the instinct can be to add new fees or taxes. I don’t believe that’s sustainable. As a councilmember, my top priority would be to focus city spending on core services, safe public spaces, reliable transportation, and emergency preparedness while holding off on ‘nice-to-have’ projects when our budget is tight.

 

We also need to improve efficiency: streamline permitting, reduce duplicative programs, and look for ways to make city processes less expensive for property owners and businesses. At the same time, I’d push for creative revenue strategies that grow the pie, like supporting downtown vitality, office-to-housing conversions, and events that generate sales tax instead of simply charging existing businesses more.

 

My approach is to protect the essentials, avoid unnecessary new burdens on businesses and property owners, and make sure every dollar we do spend delivers visible results for the community.

MAXWELL LORD:

I think there are a variety of ways we can protect rental property owners, while also facing the reality that pocketbooks are going to be tight for everyone within the city. For starters, we need better metrics for how the money we spend as a city is going back to our citizens. We also need to be prepared to make sacrifices, so that we are not inflicting further financial hardship on our citizens via taxes and fees.

 

I think we can make it easier on homeowners to update their homes, by reducing the bureaucracy around the permitting process, that way, folks who own rental units are able to keep them up to date and sustainable without too big a portion of the budget going towards the city.

 

In exchange, we are going to need to reexamine our infrastructure projects and identify wasteful spending. We have allowed developers to run away with budgets, unmetered. We need to prioritize our homeowners and renters, rather than developers who do not live in, and do not serve our city.

MONSERRAT PALACIOS:

• No need for new taxes on businesses or commercial properties.
  • Focus on strengthening local business vitality as a sustainable way to fund essential services without raising taxes.

• Reduce commercial vacancies to grow the city’s revenue base.

  • Encourage landlords to adopt flexible leasing models such as sliding scale rents for local small businesses to help them compete with large chains.

JENNIFER ROBINS:

I don’t believe the answer to the declining sales and use tax is simply adding new taxes or fees. With a $590 million budget, the challenge isn’t that Boulder doesn’t have enough money, it’s that we need to spend it more wisely. That means auditing consultant costs and tying budgets to clear outcomes. In addition, I believe that we need to create a Budget Accountability Committee, staffed by community members, similar to POP, to create more opportunity for transparency. 

At the same time, we need to create a more vibrant city that people want to live in, work in, and visit. That means supporting events and cultural programming, keeping our downtown and neighborhood centers safe and welcoming, improving walkability and transit, and making it easier for small businesses to succeed. A healthy local economy grows our tax base organically, without constantly going back to residents and business owners for new fees. I have brought this up on numerous occasions in our PRAB meetings in regard to deferred maintenance and rising park facility entrance fees. 

 

I’d also work to cut red tape, reducing permitting delays, streamlining approvals, and removing barriers that make it harder to build housing or run a business. In my experience in the private sector, I have worked with many jurisdictions, I can confidently say that Boulder has the most complex land use code I have seen. 

 

ROB SMOKE:

When it comes to fees and taxes, I support maximum accountability for the dispensation of funds. In 1998, I created a public group that took the City of Boulder to task regarding the dispensation of "tax increment financing". Rejection of the deal by the sitting council on a close vote, led to Boulder saving tens of millions of dollars in sales tax revenue that would have been diverted by the TIF deal.

 

NICOLE SPEER:

As local businesses and rental property owners face rising costs, from insurance hikes to vacancies and labor shortages, I’m committed to keeping Boulder’s housing and commercial spaces in the hands of people who live and work here. That means partnering with landlords and business owners who are committed to Boulder’s long-term wellbeing and being mindful of policies that could unintentionally accelerate consolidation or displacement.

We’re in a moment of economic transition. Rents and home prices are softening, job losses are mounting, and city revenues, especially sales tax, are declining. At the same time, the cost of maintaining essential services and infrastructure is rising. Boulder cannot close this gap by placing the full burden on property owners, nor on renters, workers, or retirees. We need a thriving local economy to fund climate resilience, safety, and community wellbeing.

 

I don’t have easy answers because we are not facing easy challenges. However, I believe in our ability to tackle hard problems together because I know how much we all care about our city. I am committed to:

• Using the city’s Long-Term Financial Strategy, Fund Our Future, and Sustainability, Equity, and Resilience (SER) frameworks to guide tough decisions. These tools help us prioritize spending, assess trade-offs, and ward off unintended consequences that will do more harm than good.
• Keeping a critical eye on new fees or regulatory programs, especially those that might be worthwhile in easier times but could be counterproductive now. I’m open to delaying or restructuring proposals that would add financial strain without clear, equitable benefit.
• Identifying cost-saving opportunities and streamlining regulations in collaboration with housing providers, business owners, and city staff. That includes reducing administrative burdens, improving permitting processes, and ensuring any new policies are developed transparently and with input from those affected.
• Protecting Boulder’s economic diversity by supporting local businesses and housing providers who help maintain affordability, stability, and community connection.

We all want Boulder to remain a place where people can live, work, and belong. That vision depends on a well-functioning downtown, a resilient business community, and a stable rental economy. Every city needs these elements to attract residents and workers who want to put down roots and invest in our community. If we stay grounded in that shared goal, and use our existing frameworks to guide us, we can emerge as a more connected and resilient city.

AARON STONE:

I agree.  My team did a survey of storefronts on Pearl Street from 9th to 19th Streets. There were twenty-one vacant storefronts out of 167 total stores. One out of every eight stores on our premier commercial street were vacant!  My goal is to find ways to reduce commercial rent where I can find them and avoid adding any new burdens on business owners.  I'm particularly concerned with the creation of the DDA.  While there are many benefits to its creation, the funding for it can't fall onto business owners.

MARK WALLACH:

We are always looking for additional revenue sources because we are a compassionate community and we try to help many people in a great number of ways. I support that. However, I do not regard property owners as oranges to be continually squeezed for more juice. We are currently a highly taxed community, and I regard additional taxes with a good degree of skepticism.

 

I believe in living within our means and reallocating our efforts when we need to, rather than simply adding to the financial burden of businesses and property owners.