Southwest Colorado housing: House Bill 26-1001 left private builders outside the gate

By Naomi Riess | Guest Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice

A teacher, nurse, deputy or young family should be able to buy a home in Southwest Colorado. Too often, they look at the listings and realize that even with a steady paycheck, they cannot. Why have homes local working people can afford become so difficult to build?

We often use “affordable housing” to describe homes built with public support and reserved for buyers or renters within certain income limits. Those homes serve a real need. But people also want to buy a modest home in the regular market and find nothing within reach. That is what I mean by “attainable housing”: a home whose price and monthly costs fit a local household’s income, without requiring qualification for a housing program.

I know the difference between a regulation that protects neighbors and a process that adds time and expense without solving a problem. Private builders are not choosing to build only expensive homes because working families do not matter. Land, construction, financing, permits and utility connections have become so costly that a modest home may not pencil out.

The state should examine its own costs. In 2025, Republican Senator Paul Lundeen introduced Senate Bill 25-131, the Reducing the Cost of Housing bill. Among its proposals was a requirement that local energy-code provisions be cost-effective. The bill did not pass, but the housing cost question in it is the part I would focus on. Its central question deserves an answer before lawmakers add another requirement: What will this do to the price of a home, and are the benefits worth the cost?

We should ask the same question about Colorado’s housing programs. House Bill 26-1001, signed into law in March, creates a special administrative path for housing on certain properties owned by public entities or qualifying nonprofits. Why should a private owner willing to build homes local workers can afford be left out? I would let local governments offer a predictable review process to private owners proposing smaller, lower-cost homes, while keeping local decisions about lot sizes, density and infrastructure.

Water, sewer and roads are where this discussion becomes real. In parts of Archuleta County, infrastructure is already a constraint on new development. San Juan County faces similar challenges. La Plata and Montezuma counties have multiple water and sewer providers, and some parcels outside town boundaries may still be able to connect to central systems.

Before more homes are approved, providers should identify available capacity, needed connections and necessary upgrades. Those numbers, along with applicable road requirements, should be clear and available to the public. New projects should pay the costs they create. Existing customers and taxpayers should not absorb the cost of new connections and infrastructure.

At the same time, local governments should have flexibility to adjust road and infrastructure requirements when conditions allow, without compromising safety. When a project receives a property-tax exemption, its fiscal impact should be accounted for rather than shifted to other taxpayers. But new homebuyers also should not be charged for replacing an aging system that serves the entire community. When an upgrade benefits both new and existing users, the costs should be shared.

I would bring property owners, private builders, entitlement professionals, surveyors, utility providers and local governments together to identify buildable sites – and the regulations, standards and costs that keep modest homes and diverse housing types from moving forward. That means making room for smaller homes, duplexes, fourplexes and other housing local families can afford.

Fix the barriers we can document. Keep realistic local safety and infrastructure standards. Then judge the result by homes completed and what local people actually pay – not another target on paper, mandate or study.

Our region needs income-restricted housing, and it needs a path back to ordinary homeownership. We can make room for both while respecting private property, local decisions and the infrastructure our neighbors already depend on.

Naomi Riess is the Republican candidate for Colorado House District 59. A Southwest Colorado land-use consultant and small-business owner with more than three decades of experience, she has worked with property owners, farmers, ranchers, businesses and local governments on land use, water and development issues while serving in a variety of community leadership roles.

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.