In the search for solutions for the affordable housing issue, our commissioners should consider a municipal bond raising. This has not yet been discussed with the community.

The proposal of license restrictions to 90 days for neighborhoods over unlimited for resort areas will create haves and have-nots in the community. The county could use the licensing change instead in a fairer way to raise a considerable sum for affordable housing.

The idea: Issue a municipal bond and link the unlimited license to a requirement to hold a bond regardless of rental unit location.

If 50% of the short-term rental properties subscribed to the bond, about 2,000 units, it would raise $20 million for each coupon value of $10,000. Easy to verify during license application.

How much acceleration of the housing plan can come with raising $20 million? The linking to the unlimited license would create the demand for the bond, at a reasonable coupon for the county, that would otherwise be hard to generate.

A small tax increase could be designed to repay the bond in 10 years.

For our unit, a restriction of 90 days will be a large loss in annual income — money that is coming from out of state to stay at the property. Say 1,000 units get rented 30 days less rather than converted? That’s taking $5 million to $10 million a year out of the community — money from Ohio, Texas and Front Range visitors. Not smart.

It would be much smarter to put this into a bond toward affordable housing for one year. It’s still a sacrifice of liberty vs. over-regulation but one I would be more willing to take. We certainly won’t convert to long term. How would we do that and still use the property 60-plus days, all seasons each year?