A recent Camera guest opinion attacking rent control was brimming with myths and stereotypes that need addressing.

For more than 40 years, Colorado has been a case study in what happens when rent control is banned, and it can be said that prohibition has aggravated a statewide affordable housing emergency: Rents have increased dramatically.

The author’s opposition to rent control relies on oversimplified economic theory while ignoring real-world evidence and the human cost of our housing crisis. While he presents basic supply-and-demand concepts from Economics 101, the reality of housing markets — particularly in places like Boulder and throughout the Front Range along with mountain towns — is far more complex.

First, let’s address the author’s central claim that housing follows simple market economics. In Boulder and similar high-demand areas, housing is what economists call an “inelastic market” — one where supply and demand don’t function as textbook theory suggests. That leads to the prevailing myth that we can build our way out of this affordable housing crisis, with more housing. We’ve seen this firsthand: Despite thousands of units being added to Front Range cities, rents continue to rise well beyond inflation.

The opinion’s characterization of rent control advocacy as simply blaming “greed” misses the point entirely. Nearly half of all renter households nationwide are now cost-burdened, spending more than 30% of their income on housing. In Boulder, the situation is even more dire, with 62% who are cost-burdened, and many renters spending 50% or more of their income on housing.

The author argues that rent control reduces housing quality and supply. Yet a number of studies found that modern rent stabilization policies, when properly designed, don’t significantly impact housing production, since new construction is often exempted. Boulder’s own historical experience with rent control (1947-1952) demonstrated this — during that period, the city maintained both housing quality and continued development.

Rather than engaging with the nuanced reality of housing policy, the opinion presents a false choice between unrestricted markets and heavy-handed government control. Other studies have found that cities with well-designed rent stabilization policies maintained healthy rental markets while reducing displacement.

The housing crisis facing Boulder and Colorado demands serious solutions beyond simplistic free-market theory. While building more affordable housing is crucial, we can’t ignore the immediate need to protect the 54% of Boulder residents who rent their homes.

It’s time to move past ideological arguments and focus on practical solutions that work — including giving cities back their right to implement moderate rent stabilization policies.

Our community deserves a full and honest discussion about all available tools to address the housing crisis, including rent stabilization. The evidence shows that thoughtful rent stabilization policies can be part of a comprehensive solution to our housing challenges.

Mark Fearer is a tenant activist, former director of the Boulder Tenants Union, and one of the original petitioners in 1981 who attempted to place rent control on the Boulder ballot.