Boulder County has long embraced the ideal of affordable housing. The goal is admirable: create a community where people of all income levels can live and thrive in one of the most naturally beautiful and economically vibrant regions in the country. But for all the effort, funding and policy attention devoted to the issue, one truth has become inescapable — affordable housing in Boulder, as currently pursued, is not working. And more importantly, it may never work in the way advocates intend.

Let’s start with the numbers. The Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) estimates that Boulder County will need 10,700 new homes by 2032 just to meet projected demand. A large portion of this shortfall is in units affordable to low- and middle-income households. Meanwhile, nearly 60% of renters in Boulder County are cost-burdened — spending more than 30% of their income on housing. And while Boulder has set a target to make 15% of its housing stock deed-restricted and permanently affordable by 2035, we’re only about halfway there.

But the bigger problem isn’t just about goals — it’s about structure. Boulder’s geography and regulatory framework are fundamentally misaligned with the vision of broad affordability. Over 60% of the county’s publicly owned land is preserved as open space, limiting developable land. Strict zoning laws restrict building height and density in most neighborhoods. Resistance to growth and change is common, particularly when it comes to proposals that would significantly increase housing stock.

Meanwhile, the housing that is being added often replaces older, modest homes with larger, more expensive ones — further reducing the stock of entry-level housing. Developers are asked to build below-market units or pay large fees to the city, adding cost and complexity. Even when affordable units are created, they’re often insufficient in number, hard to access due to long waiting lists, or disconnected from employment and transportation hubs.

Despite the good intentions, the math doesn’t work. Subsidies, deed restrictions, and inclusionary zoning may create a few hundred affordable units over time — but that’s a drop in the bucket compared to the thousands of units needed. If Boulder continues down this path, we will be stuck in a cycle of symbolic wins and practical failure.

It’s time to take a more realistic approach.

Boulder is a high-demand, high-cost community. That doesn’t mean we stop trying to expand opportunity — but it does mean we need to shift our strategy. Instead of trying to force affordability where it simply may not scale, we should be leading the way in regional housing coordination, supporting denser, transit-connected communities just outside Boulder’s borders. We should prioritize investments in regional transportation and job access. And we should be transparent about the limits of what local affordable housing policy can achieve without broader reform.

None of this suggests we abandon care or compassion. On the contrary, it means we stop offering false hope through policies that cannot deliver at scale. Let’s stop pretending that Boulder can remain a low-density, low-growth community while also solving a massive affordability gap. Those two realities don’t coexist.

Boulder can still be a leader. But that leadership needs to be based on truth — not idealism. If we continue clinging to the notion that this city can be both exclusive and accessible without hard trade-offs, we’ll not only continue to fail — we’ll be failing the very people we claim to be helping.

Let’s build a future rooted in practical solutions, regional cooperation, and honest dialogue. That’s a future worth working toward.

Michael Mastous lives in Lafayette.