Pitkin County begins spending from new housing tax; Crown Mountain land trade and Crown parcel remain unresolved

Pitkin County officials outlined early uses for a voter‑approved housing property tax and summarized ongoing limits on a long‑pursued Crown Mountain land trade for employee housing.

Pitkin’s housing tax, approved by voters in November, creates a revenue stream the county estimated at roughly $8.5 million over 25 years (about 1.5 mills per year). The county said the ballot language intentionally allows broad uses, including senior housing, homelessness services, preservation and conversion of market units to deed‑restricted units, capital reserves and construction support — not only traditional workforce housing development.

Ashley Pearl, Pitkin County’s resiliency and housing director, said the county’s first board‑level spend will be a proposed $1.0 million contribution to a regional deed‑restriction buy‑down program administered by the West Slope regional housing coalition (a program modeled on a similar local approach). She said the coalition is aggregating local contributions to scale up deed‑restriction conversions and affordability buy‑downs.

County commissioners also discussed internal policy guidance for prioritizing limited local units. The board adopted an initial "tiered" priority framework to favor emergency responders and human‑services responders in the first tier (including transit drivers, snowplow operators and child/adult protective services), the second tier to include school and hospital staff, and the third tier to include people who work full time in the county in general. Staff said the priority tiers are still being refined and will factor into future partnership and project negotiations.

On a separate agenda item, county staff and commissioners recapped long‑running work on the Crown Mountain property (a Forest Service‑associated parcel long discussed as a site for employee housing). County staff said legal review and the original patent language for the parcel do not currently permit housing development on that parcel and that enhanced use leasing or congressional action would be required to change those constraints. Pitkin staff said they had considered an appraisal but the Forest Service declined to fund one because negotiations were not at the stage the agency requires; staff noted the district¬‑level personnel changes and procedural limits that complicated the effort.

Ending: With the housing tax now producing funds, staff said the county will prioritize partnership projects (deed restriction buy‑downs and capital reserve work) and continue outreach to municipalities, school districts and hospital partners. Crown Mountain remains legally constrained; staff said they will re‑engage the Forest Service and legislative channels if a viable path for leasing or legislative change emerges.