By Sarah Melotte for The Daily Yonder.
Broadcast version by Eric Galatas for Colorado News Connection for the Public News Service/Daily Yonder Collaboration

Migrants to Pitkin County added a quarter billion dollars to the county's Adjusted Gross Income in 2020. Pitkin's recreation economy is thriving, but what does that mean for middle- and low-income families?

Outdoor enthusiasts from all over the world visit rural Pitkin County for year-round recreation. Skiers and snowboarders flock to Aspen's world-famous slopes in the winter and the summer months bring even more opportunities for outdoor adventure. Tourists engage in hiking, tubing, rafting, kayaking, fishing, and camping in the Rocky Mountains that tower over the rural town.

From 1998-2019, industries related to travel and tourism increased 12% in Pitkin County. Some reports cite the benefits that recreation bring to a rural economy, such as economic diversification and the migration of young workers into the area. A 2018 Pew Trust analysis found that a recreation county in Montana had more high-paying full-time employment and a 29% increase in jobs from 2000 to 2015 all due to recreation. Recreation-dependent counties, which are defined by the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS) as having a certain share of their economy dependent on recreation related industries, also have lower persistent poverty levels. But the effects of recreation are complex and vary county to county.

Recreation Can Dislocate Residents

Recreation can cause dislocation, which occurs when people who can no longer afford to live in an area move, according to a recent Daily Yonder analysis.

A 2005 ERS report stated that although recreation can attract permanent residents and produce a diverse economy, it can also introduce seasonal, low- wage and low- skilled jobs while simultaneously increasing housing prices. Aspen, one of Pitkin County's resort towns, was named the most expensive neighborhood in the country in 2020.

Over 900 households migrated to Pitkin County in 2020, resulting in a net gain of $283 million in Adjusted Growth Income, when factoring in the income lost when people left the county.

The migration of high-income residents and rising costs of living, combined with the share of homes intended for seasonal use, increases housing competition in rural recreation counties. Workers from outside the county could be commuting into Pitkin County for a variety of reasons, but often it is because of an increased cost of living, said Megan Lawson, Ph.D., of Headwaters Economics in an interview.

"In non-metro counties, as the net migration rate increases by 10%, the share of wages spent on mortgages increases by 7%" Lawson wrote in a 2020 housing analysis on rural recreation communities. As Pitkin County grew 1.2% in the last decade, households struggling to pay rent increased by 3.7%.

A five-year estimate of the American Community Survey (ACS) released in 2015 found that 3,219 workers commuted to Pitkin County from Eagle County, while 4,201 workers commuted from Garfield County. ACS 5-year estimates are data collected over a 60 month period and describe the average of that period. The population in Pitkin County 16 years and older during the same collection period was about 14,911, meaning that the number of commuters into Pitkin was equal to about half the population that was of age to work.

Pitkin County has more employees that commute from outside the county than the state average. The average percentage of people who work outside their county of residence in Colorado is 22%. But only 11% of Pitkin County residents commuted outside the county for work.

Pitkin County has a lower percentage of people who commute outside the county to work than the state average, suggesting that Pitkin County has a higher share of employees that come from outside the county than other Colorado counties.

Possible Solutions

While recreation is often touted as a cure for rural poverty and economic stagnation, locals can find themselves pushed out of their homes to make space for new development. Experts suggest there are solutions to the problem. Constructing new housing priced for low-income families can reduce the burden of competition for those experiencing housing insecurity, for example.

Other solutions include revising zoning policies that regulate the supply of housing for low - income households, giving tax credits for more densely developed housing units, removing square footage requirements for units, and eliminating impact fees (fees developers pay a local government for infrastructure offsets) for affordable housing.

These solutions can be hard sells because people who own homes in a neighborhood of single family units often resist affordable housing developments, citing fears of urbanization and decreasing home values, among other things. Community development specialists suggest that circumventing a NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) attitude is easier than fighting it. Purchasing buildings for units that accept housing vouchers (instead of constructing new ones) is one approach, says former director of The National Housing Trust Michael Bodaken in an interview with Shelter Force. Some states also enact Fair Share laws that require municipalities to provide enough affordable housing for middle and low income residents or risk losing zoning and permitting privileges.

Local housing authorities and non-profits can organize to provide affordable housing as well. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) provides Pitkin County workers affordable housing by offering deed-restricted units - units that must be sold or rented to qualified individuals at an affordable price. Residents may be eligible for the bidding lottery if they have worked in Pitkin County for at least four years. APCHA also allows employers to buy affordable units to rent or sell to their full-time employees. Their interactive map shows units organized by APCHA for interested participants.

Rural recreation communities confronting the prospect of affordability issues may plan ahead to protect their long-term residents. Harvard's Joint Center for Housing Studies provides information on how communities can create incentives for affordable housing.

Methods

Recreation-dependent counties are defined using a weighted index that considers three components - 1) jobs; 2) earnings in entertainment, recreation, accommodations, food/drink, and real estate; and 3) the percentage of housing set aside exclusively for seasonal use. Recreation counties are counties with a weighted index one standard deviation or more above the mean.

The tourism data was compiled and organized by Headwaters Economics, which provides a free tool to download socioeconomic data by county. Data sources include Census Bureau, American Community Survey annual and 5-year estimates, and Zillow housing data. To review their full methods, download a report.

Sarah Melotte wrote this article for The Daily Yonder.


get more stories like this via email

Residents in a rural North Carolina town grappling with economic challenges are getting a pathway to homeownership.

In Enfield, the average annual income is about $25,000, while the average home price in the state exceeds $300,000. The significant gap between income and housing costs makes homeownership unattainable for many residents.

Mondale Robinson, mayor of Enfield, said it is an issue with which he is all too familiar, having grown up in the town. He acknowledged the dire housing conditions faced by many residents.

"Housing there is third-world," Robinson asserted. "And I know that term is not politically correct, but I use it intentionally to remind people that while we may be in the so-called richest country in the world, my people are suffering from houses that are killing them."

He pointed out many people in the town are living things like severe mold or failing foundations. Recognizing the challenges posed by limited resources both on a town and federal level, Robinson explained he is tackling the issue by forming partnerships with construction firms and lending institutions. He noted through the Horizon Project, they aim to build energy-efficient homes priced affordably at about $105,000.

Robinson highlighted historically, the majority of Black residents there have been marginalized from experiencing positive changes in their neighborhoods. He explained previous investments focused on constructing homes that were unaffordable for the community. Robinson expressed optimism the initiative will serve as a foundation for achieving long-term equality and stability.

"We had a qualification seminar where we brought people in to see if they qualify for homes," Robinson recounted. "Of those 400 people that showed up, 174 already prequalified and have already started ordering their model homes and on the process to become homeowners."

He added families who qualify will receive smart homes with two to four bedrooms, an opportunity most people living on an hourly wage in the town would not have had access to.

In addition to the housing aspect of the project, Robinson emphasized the importance of economic development and sustainability. He said they will offer training to help new homeowners maintain their property.

He stressed another major part of the Horizon project is meant to help promote growth in the town and return ownership to the people who live there.

"When all of these new houses pop up in this rural space, we know what's to follow, businesses to follow," Robinson projected. "Also, we're looking for the mental victory that folk feel when they've purchased a home, alleviating the fact that you have a landlord that is not concerned with how your health is affected by the house you're living in."

By addressing housing affordability and promoting economic empowerment, Robinson hopes the Horizon Project will serve as a blueprint for similar initiatives across North Carolina and beyond. Qualified families will move into new homes by June, while ongoing support aims to assist others in future qualification.


get more stories like this via email

New York State housing advocates say they are furious about the so-called "good cause eviction bill" in the new state budget.

It grants tenant protections to people in New York City but all other municipalities will need to opt in. It also requires renters to know their landlord's portfolio to determine eligibility for "good cause" eviction protections and the information can be hard to find.

Ritti Singh, communications organizer for the group Housing Justice for All, said previous iterations would have balanced tenant and landlord interests.

"What it required landlords to do was to show they had a valid cause of eviction, which would include nonpayment, violating the lease, causing trouble, if the landlord wanted to move into the unit," Singh outlined. "It also allowed tenants to contest rent increases over 3%, or 1.5 times the rate of inflation."

For all its potential benefits, a New York University study noted "good cause" eviction comes with just as many drawbacks. It can discourage maintenance investments in buildings, and increase the cost of resolving landlord-tenant disputes. Singh noted the bill was not designed to crimp a landlord's ability to do business but to make the housing system fairer.

Cities like Rochester and Ithaca are close to declaring housing emergencies due to rising rents. Municipalities must have a vacancy study rate below 5% to declare a housing emergency. Singh pointed out the housing crisis affects renters statewide.

"Rents are rising faster in Syracuse than they are in New York City," Singh emphasized. "In March, rents hit record highs in New York City. Rural New York is expected to see a surge of evictions over the next decade, and Long Island renters face the highest cost burdens in all of New York State."

Newburgh declared a housing emergency last year but the Orange County Supreme Court recently overturned the decision. The petitioners' attorney argued Newburgh's vacancy study was inaccurate. The Emergency Tenant Protection Act does not cover the city's renters now and jeopardizes other tenant protections the city has proposed.


get more stories like this via email

Oregon lawmakers passed a major housing package in this year's session, but said easing the state's housing crisis will take more work.

Bills passed during the short legislative session will send a total of $376 million to address the state's housing shortage, including Senate Bill 1530 and Senate Bill 1537, priorities for Gov. Tina Kotek.

Shannon Vilhauer, executive director of Habitat for Humanity of Oregon, said the governor's housing package is groundbreaking.

"We also see important investments in emergency housing assistance, addiction recovery support and renters protections," Vilhauer pointed out. "Those are all investments that are going to help stabilize Oregonians in need of housing assistance and benefit the communities we all share."

The housing package includes funds for housing and homelessness projects and to support counties buying land and developing properties.

However, Vilhauer argued there is still more to do to address the crisis. During the next legislative session, she hopes the state will help first-time homebuyers, as well as make other investments.

"Preserving affordable rental homes that exist now but are at risk of terming out of their affordability and going market rate," Vilhauer explained. "We'd love to see that affordable housing preservation investment move forward in a strong way."

Vilhauer acknowledged the housing issue in Oregon cannot be solved immediately. It is a problem decades in the making.

"It will take a concerted effort over time to continue to make headway," Vilhauer stressed. "We're starting to get there but we need to keep going with a sustained effort."


get more stories like this via email