HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-04-24 EV Agenda and Packet Supplemental MaterialsFrom:Brit Fontenot
To:Mike Maas; Alex Newby
Cc:Jesse DiTommaso
Subject:FW: [EXTERNAL]Income levels
Date:Monday, December 2, 2024 8:52:14 AM
Attachments:income levels.xlsx
Mike, can you please add the attachment and email thread to the EV Board Laserfiche file?
Thanks,
Brit
Brit Fontenot | Director of Economic Development | Pronouns: he/him/his
City of Bozeman | 121 North Rouse Avenue | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT
59771
M: 406.579.1302 | E: bfontenot@bozeman.net | W: www.bozeman.net
From: Jesse DiTommaso <JDiTommaso@BOZEMAN.NET>
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 8:40 AM
To: Brit Fontenot <bfontenot@BOZEMAN.NET>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]Income levels
You might want to ask Mike to add it and your board email to the EVB Laserfiche folder so they don’t
get flagged for a quorum.
From: Brit Fontenot <bfontenot@BOZEMAN.NET>
Sent: Monday, December 2, 2024 8:37 AM
To: Craig Ogilvie <profcraigogilvie@gmail.com>; Katy Osterloth <kataytaysky@yahoo.com>; Jesse
DiTommaso <JDiTommaso@BOZEMAN.NET>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL]Income levels
I will forward to the full board Criag.
Brit Fontenot | Director of Economic Development | Pronouns: he/him/his
City of Bozeman | 121 North Rouse Avenue | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT
59771
M: 406.579.1302 | E: bfontenot@bozeman.net | W: www.bozeman.net
From: Craig Ogilvie <profcraigogilvie@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, December 1, 2024 2:14 PM
To: Brit Fontenot <bfontenot@BOZEMAN.NET>; Katy Osterloth <kataytaysky@yahoo.com>; Jesse
DiTommaso <JDiTommaso@BOZEMAN.NET>
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Income levels
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Brit, Katy
I am toying with options for income levels. The federal poverty level might have a few advantages
over AMI
1) Federal poverty level is more stable than AMI.
2) Federal poverty level better reflects the lower income tier in our community, i.e. as wealthy
people move to Bozeman, it can rapidly increase the AMI, whereas the wages of low-income
community members may not increase as much. Federal poverty level is designed to track the
lowest income tier.
Hence I am interested in discussing with other members of the EVB tying the income levels in the
AHO to the federal poverty level. My preference is 150% federal poverty level (currently at $46,800
) but realise others might argue for 200%.
What do you recommend in getting the attached document to my fellow EVB members?
Thanks
Craig
FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024
AMI (family of 4)81,200$ 90,300$ 90,400$ 88,900$ 104,700$ 126,400$ 109,000$
80% AMI 64,960$ 72,240$ 72,320$ 71,120$ 83,760$ 101,120$ 87,200$
60% AMI 48,720$ 54,180$ 54,240$ 53,340$ 62,820$ 75,840$ 65,400$
Federal poverty level (4 persons)25,100$ 25,750$ 26,200$ 26,500$ 27,750$ 30,000$ 31,200$
150% poverty level 37,650$ 38,625$ 39,300$ 39,750$ 41,625$ 45,000$ 46,800$
200% poverty level 50,200$ 51,500$ 52,400$ 53,000$ 55,500$ 60,000$ 62,400$
Source
https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html#year2024
https://aspe.hhs.gov/topics/poverty-economic-mobility/poverty-guidelines
$-
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
FY2018 FY2019 FY2020 FY2021 FY2022 FY2023 FY2024
4-person family incomes
80% AMI
60% AMI
200% poverty level
150% poverty level
From:Brit Fontenot
To:kataytaysky@yahoo.com; ssavage@thehrdc.org; profcraigogilvie@gmail.com; rogersmt@mail.com;
john.carey.jc@gmail.com; Malory Peterson; mona.c.schwartz@gmail.com
Cc:Emma Bode; Mike Maas; Jesse DiTommaso; Renata Munfrada; David Fine
Subject:AHO Survey Results
Date:Monday, December 2, 2024 11:37:34 AM
Attachments:AHO Surveymonkey Graphs.pdf
Homeowner Data.pdf
Renter Data.pdf
Affordable Housing Ordinance Community Engagement Survey Results.pdf
Good morning again EV Board,
Attached are the survey results from the AHO survey. It closed over the long weekend so we didn’t
have an opportunity to include them in your packet materials. We received 239 total responses. As
always, please do not enter into any board discussions over email, we can discuss the results at your
meeting on Wednesday. Feel free to contact me with questions and/or comments, at 406-579-
1302. Thank you,
Brit
Mr. Maas, can you please put this email and attachments into the EV Board folder in Laserfiche?
Brit Fontenot | Director of Economic Development | Pronouns: he/him/his
City of Bozeman | 121 North Rouse Avenue | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT
59771
M: 406.579.1302 | E: bfontenot@bozeman.net | W: www.bozeman.net
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 16
13.03%31
16.39%39
17.65%42
25.63%61
27.31%65
Q1 How would you rate your current housing affordability?
Answered: 238 Sk ipped: 1
TOTAL 238
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Ver y affordabl e
Somew hat
affor dabl e
Neutr al
Somewhat
unaffordabl e
Ver y
unaffordabl e
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Very aff ordable
Somewhat affordable
Neutral
Somewhat unaffordable
Very unaffordable
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 16
51.48%122
10.13%24
38.40%91
Q2 Would you be willing to participate in community meetings or forums
regarding affordable housing?
Answered: 237 Sk ipped: 2
TOTAL 237
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
M aybe
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
May be
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 16
Q3 What suggestions do you have for improving affordable housing
options in our community?If helpful, the following tools have been outlawed
in Montana and would require change to state law:• Rent control /
increased rental regulations • Rental increase caps • Luxury taxes • Taxing
second homes or out-of-state buyers • Construction excise taxes or fees •
Divert building permits or fees to affordable housing • Application fee
controls • Requiring income-targeted housing
Answered: 211 Sk ipped: 28
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 16
Q4 Looking forward, what do you believe is the most pressing housing
need for Bozeman?
Answered: 214 Sk ipped: 25
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 16
20.63%46
48.43%108
23.77%53
7.17%16
Q5 How familiar are you with Bozeman's affordable housing ordinance?
Answered: 223 Sk ipped: 16
TOTAL 223
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Ver y familiar
Somew hat
familiar
Not very
famil iar
Not at all
familiar
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Very familiar
Somewhat familiar
Not v ery familiar
Not at all familiar
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 16
63.26%136
36.74%79
Q6 The current median home price in Bozeman is $784,500, which means
it is affordable to a household making 208% of the area median income for
a 3-person household. Is it worth reducing minimum lot sizes to create
more for-sale homes that are affordable to households making 120% of the
area median income (i.e. a $410,000 home)?
Answered: 215 Sk ipped: 24
TOTAL 215
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
7 / 16
63.30%119
36.70%69
Q7 If the City Commission had to choose increasing building height, or
reducing minimum parking requirements, to increase the number of
affordable housing units, which would you prefer?
Answered: 188 Sk ipped: 51
TOTAL 188
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Incr ease height
Reduce
required
parking
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Inc reas e height
Reduc e required parking
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
8 / 16
56.31%125
54.05%120
26.58%59
58.56%130
53.60%119
38.74%86
Q8 What concerns, if any, do you have regarding the affordable housing
ordinance? (Select all that apply)
Answered: 222 Sk ipped: 17
Total Respondents : 222
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Not enough
affordabl e
units being...
Quality of
construct ion
Impact on
pr oper ty values
Lack of
par king /
traffic...
Neighborhood
character
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Not enough affordable units being created
Quality of cons truction
Impact on propert y v alues
Lack of parking / traffic c ongestion
Neighborhood character
Other (please s pecify)
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
9 / 16
Q9 What additional features or changes would you like to see in the
ordinance to better address affordable housing needs?
Answered: 150 Sk ipped: 89
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
10 / 16
36.82%81
56.82%125
2.27%5
0.00%0
4.09%9
Q10 What best describes your current housing situation?
Answered: 220 Sk ipped: 19
TOTAL 220
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Renting
Homeow ner
Living with
family/friends
Unhoused
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Renting
Homeowner
Liv ing with family /f riends
Unhous ed
Other (please s pecify)
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
11 / 16
3.64%8
7.73%17
8.18%18
17.73%39
17.27%38
32.27%71
13.18%29
Q11 Which range best describes your household income?
Answered: 220 Sk ipped: 19
TOTAL 220
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Less than
$20,000
$20,000 to
$34,999
$35,000 to
$49,999
$5 0,000 to
$74,999
$75,000 to
$99,999
Over $100,000
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Less than $20,000
$20,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
Ov er $100,000
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
12 / 16
59.55%131
30.91%68
1.36%3
0.00%0
8.18%18
Q12 Which best describes you? (Check all that apply)
Answered: 220 Sk ipped: 19
TOTAL 220
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Female
Mal e
Non-binary
Tr ansgender
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female
Male
Non-binary
Transgender
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
13 / 16
0.00%0
3.23%7
24.42%53
19.82%43
16.13%35
18.89%41
17.51%38
Q13 What is your age group?
Answered: 217 Sk ipped: 22
TOTAL 217
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Under 1 8
1 8-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 or older
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 or older
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
14 / 16
14.75%32
85.25%185
Q14 Do you have a disability?
Answered: 217 Sk ipped: 22
TOTAL 217
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
15 / 16
3.18%7
85.00%187
11.82%26
Q15 Are you Hispanic or Latino?
Answered: 220 Sk ipped: 19
TOTAL 220
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
16 / 16
0.46%1
1.37%3
0.46%1
77.63%170
0.00%0
1.37%3
3.20%7
15.53%34
Q16 How would you describe your race? (Check all that apply)
Answered: 219 Sk ipped: 20
TOTAL 219
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Amer ican
Indian or
Al aska Native
Asian or Asian
Amer ican (ex:
Chinese, Asi...
Black or
Afr ican
Amer ican
White
Nat ive
Haw aiian or
Pacific...
Some other r ace
Two o r mor e
r aces
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian or As ian American (ex: Chines e, Asian Indian, Korean, Japanes e)
Blac k or African Americ an
Whit e
Nativ e Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Some other rac e
Two or more races
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 16
18.40%23
20.00%25
28.00%35
16.00%20
17.60%22
Q1 How would you rate your current housing affordability?
Answered: 125 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 125
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Ver y affordabl e
Somew hat
affor dabl e
Neutr al
Somewhat
unaffordabl e
Ver y
unaffordabl e
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Very aff ordable
Somewhat affordable
Neutral
Somewhat unaffordable
Very unaffordable
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 16
46.40%58
13.60%17
40.00%50
Q2 Would you be willing to participate in community meetings or forums
regarding affordable housing?
Answered: 125 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 125
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
M aybe
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
May be
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 16
Q3 What suggestions do you have for improving affordable housing
options in our community?If helpful, the following tools have been outlawed
in Montana and would require change to state law:• Rent control /
increased rental regulations • Rental increase caps • Luxury taxes • Taxing
second homes or out-of-state buyers • Construction excise taxes or fees •
Divert building permits or fees to affordable housing • Application fee
controls • Requiring income-targeted housing
Answered: 113 Sk ipped: 12
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 16
Q4 Looking forward, what do you believe is the most pressing housing
need for Bozeman?
Answered: 117 Sk ipped: 8
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 16
20.16%25
58.06%72
19.35%24
2.42%3
Q5 How familiar are you with Bozeman's affordable housing ordinance?
Answered: 124 Sk ipped: 1
TOTAL 124
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Ver y familiar
Somew hat
familiar
Not very
famil iar
Not at all
familiar
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Very familiar
Somewhat familiar
Not v ery familiar
Not at all familiar
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 16
60.17%71
39.83%47
Q6 The current median home price in Bozeman is $784,500, which means
it is affordable to a household making 208% of the area median income for
a 3-person household. Is it worth reducing minimum lot sizes to create
more for-sale homes that are affordable to households making 120% of the
area median income (i.e. a $410,000 home)?
Answered: 118 Sk ipped: 7
TOTAL 118
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
7 / 16
66.00%66
34.00%34
Q7 If the City Commission had to choose increasing building height, or
reducing minimum parking requirements, to increase the number of
affordable housing units, which would you prefer?
Answered: 100 Sk ipped: 25
TOTAL 100
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Incr ease height
Reduce
required
parking
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Inc reas e height
Reduc e required parking
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
8 / 16
45.60%57
50.40%63
32.80%41
64.00%80
62.40%78
40.00%50
Q8 What concerns, if any, do you have regarding the affordable housing
ordinance? (Select all that apply)
Answered: 125 Sk ipped: 0
Total Respondents : 125
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Not enough
affordabl e
units being...
Quality of
construct ion
Impact on
pr oper ty values
Lack of
par king /
traffic...
Neighborhood
character
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Not enough affordable units being created
Quality of cons truction
Impact on propert y v alues
Lack of parking / traffic c ongestion
Neighborhood character
Other (please s pecify)
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
9 / 16
Q9 What additional features or changes would you like to see in the
ordinance to better address affordable housing needs?
Answered: 79 Sk ipped: 46
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
10 / 16
0.00%0
100.00%125
0.00%0
0.00%0
0.00%0
Q10 What best describes your current housing situation?
Answered: 125 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 125
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Renting
Homeow ner
Living with
family/friends
Unhoused
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Renting
Homeowner
Liv ing with family /f riends
Unhous ed
Other (please s pecify)
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
11 / 16
0.00%0
1.61%2
7.26%9
9.68%12
20.16%25
43.55%54
17.74%22
Q11 Which range best describes your household income?
Answered: 124 Sk ipped: 1
TOTAL 124
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Less than
$20,000
$20,000 to
$34,999
$35,000 to
$49,999
$5 0,000 to
$74,999
$75,000 to
$99,999
Over $100,000
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Less than $20,000
$20,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
Ov er $100,000
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
12 / 16
59.68%74
33.06%41
0.00%0
0.00%0
7.26%9
Q12 Which best describes you? (Check all that apply)
Answered: 124 Sk ipped: 1
TOTAL 124
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Female
Mal e
Non-binary
Tr ansgender
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female
Male
Non-binary
Transgender
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
13 / 16
0.00%0
0.00%0
8.87%11
19.35%24
22.58%28
25.81%32
23.39%29
Q13 What is your age group?
Answered: 124 Sk ipped: 1
TOTAL 124
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Under 1 8
1 8-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 or older
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 or older
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
14 / 16
8.94%11
91.06%112
Q14 Do you have a disability?
Answered: 123 Sk ipped: 2
TOTAL 123
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
15 / 16
0.81%1
86.29%107
12.90%16
Q15 Are you Hispanic or Latino?
Answered: 124 Sk ipped: 1
TOTAL 124
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
16 / 16
0.81%1
1.61%2
0.00%0
76.61%95
0.00%0
2.42%3
2.42%3
16.13%20
Q16 How would you describe your race? (Check all that apply)
Answered: 124 Sk ipped: 1
TOTAL 124
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Amer ican
Indian or
Al aska Native
Asian or Asian
Amer ican (ex:
Chinese, Asi...
Black or
Afr ican
Amer ican
White
Nat ive
Haw aiian or
Pacific...
Some other r ace
Two o r mor e
r aces
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian or As ian American (ex: Chines e, Asian Indian, Korean, Japanes e)
Blac k or African Americ an
Whit e
Nativ e Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Some other rac e
Two or more races
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
1 / 16
6.32%6
9.47%9
6.32%6
41.05%39
36.84%35
Q1 How would you rate your current housing affordability?
Answered: 95 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 95
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Ver y affordabl e
Somew hat
affor dabl e
Neutr al
Somewhat
unaffordabl e
Ver y
unaffordabl e
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Very aff ordable
Somewhat affordable
Neutral
Somewhat unaffordable
Very unaffordable
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
2 / 16
61.05%58
4.21%4
34.74%33
Q2 Would you be willing to participate in community meetings or forums
regarding affordable housing?
Answered: 95 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 95
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
M aybe
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
May be
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
3 / 16
Q3 What suggestions do you have for improving affordable housing
options in our community?If helpful, the following tools have been outlawed
in Montana and would require change to state law:• Rent control /
increased rental regulations • Rental increase caps • Luxury taxes • Taxing
second homes or out-of-state buyers • Construction excise taxes or fees •
Divert building permits or fees to affordable housing • Application fee
controls • Requiring income-targeted housing
Answered: 86 Sk ipped: 9
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
4 / 16
Q4 Looking forward, what do you believe is the most pressing housing
need for Bozeman?
Answered: 86 Sk ipped: 9
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
5 / 16
21.05%20
35.79%34
29.47%28
13.68%13
Q5 How familiar are you with Bozeman's affordable housing ordinance?
Answered: 95 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 95
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Ver y familiar
Somew hat
familiar
Not very
famil iar
Not at all
familiar
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Very familiar
Somewhat familiar
Not v ery familiar
Not at all familiar
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
6 / 16
68.82%64
31.18%29
Q6 The current median home price in Bozeman is $784,500, which means
it is affordable to a household making 208% of the area median income for
a 3-person household. Is it worth reducing minimum lot sizes to create
more for-sale homes that are affordable to households making 120% of the
area median income (i.e. a $410,000 home)?
Answered: 93 Sk ipped: 2
TOTAL 93
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
7 / 16
58.82%50
41.18%35
Q7 If the City Commission had to choose increasing building height, or
reducing minimum parking requirements, to increase the number of
affordable housing units, which would you prefer?
Answered: 85 Sk ipped: 10
TOTAL 85
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Incr ease height
Reduce
required
parking
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Inc reas e height
Reduc e required parking
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
8 / 16
72.04%67
61.29%57
19.35%18
50.54%47
43.01%40
37.63%35
Q8 What concerns, if any, do you have regarding the affordable housing
ordinance? (Select all that apply)
Answered: 93 Sk ipped: 2
Total Respondents : 93
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Not enough
affordabl e
units being...
Quality of
construct ion
Impact on
pr oper ty values
Lack of
par king /
traffic...
Neighborhood
character
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Not enough affordable units being created
Quality of cons truction
Impact on propert y v alues
Lack of parking / traffic c ongestion
Neighborhood character
Other (please s pecify)
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
9 / 16
Q9 What additional features or changes would you like to see in the
ordinance to better address affordable housing needs?
Answered: 68 Sk ipped: 27
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
10 / 16
85.26%81
0.00%0
5.26%5
0.00%0
9.47%9
Q10 What best describes your current housing situation?
Answered: 95 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 95
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Renting
Homeow ner
Living with
family/friends
Unhoused
Other (please
specify)
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Renting
Homeowner
Liv ing with family /f riends
Unhous ed
Other (please s pecify)
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
11 / 16
8.42%8
15.79%15
9.47%9
28.42%27
13.68%13
17.89%17
6.32%6
Q11 Which range best describes your household income?
Answered: 95 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 95
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Less than
$20,000
$20,000 to
$34,999
$35,000 to
$49,999
$5 0,000 to
$74,999
$75,000 to
$99,999
Over $100,000
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Less than $20,000
$20,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 to $99,999
Ov er $100,000
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
12 / 16
60.00%57
28.42%27
3.16%3
0.00%0
8.42%8
Q12 Which best describes you? (Check all that apply)
Answered: 95 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 95
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Female
Mal e
Non-binary
Tr ansgender
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Female
Male
Non-binary
Transgender
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
13 / 16
0.00%0
7.53%7
45.16%42
20.43%19
7.53%7
9.68%9
9.68%9
Q13 What is your age group?
Answered: 93 Sk ipped: 2
TOTAL 93
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Under 1 8
1 8-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 or older
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Under 18
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 or older
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
14 / 16
22.58%21
77.42%72
Q14 Do you have a disability?
Answered: 93 Sk ipped: 2
TOTAL 93
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
15 / 16
6.32%6
84.21%80
9.47%9
Q15 Are you Hispanic or Latino?
Answered: 95 Sk ipped: 0
TOTAL 95
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Yes
No
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Prefer not to answer
Affordable H ousing Ordinanc e Community Engagement Survey
16 / 16
0.00%0
1.06%1
1.06%1
79.79%75
0.00%0
0.00%0
4.26%4
13.83%13
Q16 How would you describe your race? (Check all that apply)
Answered: 94 Sk ipped: 1
TOTAL 94
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%1 00%
Amer ican
Indian or
Al aska Native
Asian or Asian
Amer ican (ex:
Chinese, Asi...
Black or
Afr ican
Amer ican
White
Nat ive
Haw aiian or
Pacific...
Some other r ace
Two o r mor e
r aces
Prefer not to
answer
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
American Indian or Alas k a Native
Asian or As ian American (ex: Chines e, Asian Indian, Korean, Japanes e)
Blac k or African Americ an
Whit e
Nativ e Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
Some other rac e
Two or more races
Prefer not to answer
What suggestions do you have for improving affordable housing options in our community?If helpful,
the following tools have been outlawed in Montana and would require change to state law:• Rent control
/ increased rental regulations • Rental increase caps • Luxury taxes • Taxing second homes or out-of-
state buyers • Construction excise taxes or fees • Divert building permits or fees to affordable housing •
- Reduce Min Parking Req - Improve public transit (add more buses/shorten routes) - Incentivize all Infill (not
!. don't fight it option. Let the market sort it out. Businesses complain they can't get help. They will eventually
have to pay more thus charge more. (I know vicious circle) 2. Require REIT financed builds to set aside 15% of
• Rent control / increased rental regulations • Rental increase caps • Luxury taxes • Taxing second homes or
• Taxing second homes or out-of-state buyers • Lifting zoning regulations to allow new homes instead of just
1. Mandate a certain number of affordable units in a development applying to pay cash-in-lieu of water rights. If
they bring their own water rights, by all means, build all the unaffordable market rate housing you want.
Otherwise require a certain number of units at affordable rates for Bozeman workers. Inclusionary zoning
doesn't crash the economy in other places currently using it. 2. Preserve NOAH! 3. Discourage the
redevelopment of existing housing through strict FAR regulations and a deconstruction ordinance. 4. In existing
neighborhoods grant a density bonus rather than a height bonus, while requiring that a percentage of the new
1. City provided, pre-approved housing plans (for triplexes, duplexes, cottages, tiny homes, ADUs) and expedited
review/approval for qualifying developments. https://www.cnu.org/publicsquare/2024/02/07/cities-moving-
ahead-pre-approved-house-plans 2. Revise the UDC to gently increase density and modestly reduce parking
1. implementing an affordable housing overlay in conjunction with inclusionary zoning 2. promptly investigating
how we can get a public developer and implement Social Housing, similar to the Montgomery County housing
model. Through thorough research and discussion with community members, Social Housing seems like it would
1. simplifying regulations 2. Reducing property taxes 3. Removing government subsidized housing 4. Stopping
A housing authority, city wide sales tax, find grants or other sources of subsidies.
Actual affordable houses not condos or apartments stacked on eachother
Adding subsidy, through the general fund or TIF districts, to projects that bring true and lasting affordability.
Incentivize development near downtown Bozeman which will filter over time to increase affordability in other
parts of the City. Revise the AHO to include stricter affordability measures and define things like bedrooms,
Affordable housing is a national problem, very unreasonable to expect local solutions to affordable housing.
Better to focus on maintaining a livable city with a focus on the environment and water issues.
Affordable housing needs to be incentivized. It would be helpful to have associated rental costs with an effective
minimum wage to create a variable that incentivizes both better pay and affordable rentals without raising
All of the above
All of the above
All of the above - but I’m most interested in controlling the market by building a community stock of housing.
All of the above … disallowing airbnbs in second homes, more accountability for landlords and regulations
around rent raises/ rental costs in general. Subsidized and affordable housing needs to be a priority.
ALL of the above plus much more licensure and limitation of Airbnb / VRBO units.
All of the above, except rent control and limiting increase rent caps. Those harm locals who have modest rental
units. The cost of rentals is driven by the cost of luxury units being built without impunity. It’s the market!
All of the above.
All of the above.
All of the options listed above would be extremely helpful. It seems like nearly all the apartment complexes built
now or in the last 10 years advertise as "luxury" so they can charge more - we need more "regular" apartments.
Regular studio apartments are absolutely needed here. As a single person living in Bozeman, I don't need a 1
All of these seem like great ideas. I'd like to see R1 zoning loosened up in my neighborhood between Wilson and
campus. I live across from a six plex, and half the places on my street are at least two units that I assume were
Allow for less ornate buildings that may decrease building costs, add more missing middle housing through
An oversight committee to monitor the use of "in-swap deals" so we can ensure the intentions are eventually
met. ie, if a developer gives the city an acre on which to build affordable housing, that housing is actually built.
App fee controls Divert bldg. permits or fees to affordable housing Requiring income-targeted housing
At the very least, look at rent issues.
Balance out the local economy- it is concentrated with low wage accommodations jobs. Workforce
training/retraining, attracting employers, etc. to get more high paying jobs that can better compete for housing
Better access to parking spaces plus better public transportation.
Biased question.
Build a big ass gravel parking lot for people to live in trailers. Affordable housing will never happen in the last
best real estate on earth. Stop dreaming. Stop the destruction of open space and farm lands to try and make
BUILD MORE HOUSES!!!
by building affordable age in place single family homes that allow older adults to sell their current larger high
maintenance homes they can no longer afford, it would increase inventory of single family home options for the
Can the housing crisis be fixed when state law favors developers and landlords? Tenants are reportedly 55% of
Bozeman’s population yet the state law heavily favors developers & landlords. Developers and people that own
investment properties have the means to obtain legal counsel to protect their property and interests. Odds are
stacked against tenants. Most of the 55% of renters cannot afford a $500 emergency expense or obtain legal
representation to protect them from a system of laws designed to exploit them. In 2018, my 60 year old father
passed 6 months after he was diagnosed with cancer. After paying for his cremation I had enough money to pay
rent or get a U-Haul to move 400 miles away and sleep on my sister’s couch. I’m a single parent and the child
support payments were withheld to punish me. I feared eviction would turn temporary homelessness into a
permanent situation Rents in the area increased and I was unable to afford a 2 bedroom apartment in the
ghetto on one salary. I have paid over $100,000 in rent for an apartment in Belgrade. I have resided in the same
apartment since I moved here in November 2019. Rent was $1,300 when I moved in and now it is $1,887 before
water, sewer, gas, and other utilities. I’m forced to beg with my landlord to make basic repairs. My windows are
currently open & have been for 2 weeks because the thermostat has a wiring issue they refuse to fix. It has been
as hot as 80 degrees in my apartment in November. I have no way to control the gas consumption and will be
stuck paying the bill. My water and sewer is allocated between 4 units. The water and sewer monthly expense
has doubled since 2019. I don’t know if that is accurate or the landlord has arbitrarily increased the expense. My
lease renewal asked for increased pet deposit of $300 for the same pet I already paid a deposit for when I
moved in. The lease included many new provisions such as the tenant is responsible for maintaining and fixing
Change the laws
Community come together to buy/develop an apartment complex to serve as affordable housing.
Community education on the housing crisis and how it is deeply affecting our community. Taxing second homes
Conduct social science research to understand people's fears surrounding affordable housing in their own
neighborhoods and work together to figure out way to mitigate fears so that affordable housing can be
distributed across the city and not just in certain areas. It seems like there needs to be some alignment with
Create a city run housing authority, an affordable housing overlay and limit the AHO to non-profits.
Create incentives for developers to construct affordable houses for sale. There's a large portion of the rental
market being taken up by people who cannot afford to buy a house and move up in the market. This makes it
Cut government regulation. Cut property taxes. Everything you all do just makes things worse.
Decreasing set backs and required parking if not already done. Having a smaller minimum lot size for single
Deferred or reduced impact fees based on percentage of property allocated to affordability. Development
deviations that COHESIVELY fit within surroundings rather than overshadowing them. Encourage thoughtful
define what is affordable housing. X dollars gets X housing in return. Peoples expectations / wants don't meet
Disincentivizing short term rentals, taxation for remote workers, taxation on second homes, use of public
funding for infrastructure implementation for affordable housing, incentives for home buyers working within the
Divert building permits or fees to affordable housing
Divert building permits or fees to affordable housing. Incentivisation for affordable housing for sale, not just
Do Not encourage teardowns of older homes. Encourage diverse housing units, and not luxury condos. Engage
with neighborhood associations to ask what they want to see in their neighbourhood. No upzoning in the
Don’t try to regulate it. The free market will fix itself. You will only make it worse. The real problem is zoning.
Zoning has limited the supply of housing not entrepreneurs. Allow mobile home parks everywhere. Allow more
densities in more places. Do anway with zoning. Allow short term rentals. Government created the problem and
Eminent domain. Properties like where the old Kmart was or the strip of land along W Babcock (11th-15th) for
instance. There certainly more properties like this within the city that could sustain affordable housing
Encourage development away from the city center. Consider increasing City investment in suburban
neighborhood amenities such as parks, bike routes, libraries for developments that include substantial numbers
Encouragement and incentive for smaller units Examine whether there are ways to structure impact fees and
code so that ADUs, tiny homes are more feasible infill types. I think a lot of us would do them if we could more
easily use a prefab tiny house and could work through water and sewer tie ins. Evaluate whether a low/no
Establish a public housing authority and public developer so we can build the city that working folks in Bozeman
need, ideally, social housing using municipal revenue bonds. Implement an affordable housing overlay zone to
Expedite building permits and lower impact fees. Both of these drive the cost of housing through the roof!!
Extremely high taxes on second homes, short term rentals, etc. where the owner does not live in the house at
least 11 months/year. EXTREMELY high. This will open up housing that already exists. Also, the extremely high
Faster permit processing
First,we must define what is afordable.
General Strategy. Ensure that all new development pays the full costs of development impacts to both the
neighborhood and the City of Bozeman. This would include all traditional infrastructure but also other costs that
have not been traditionally captured (e.g. as Bozeman has grown have other factors grown such as
homelessness? How much does this cost the City (services and medical responses, police) and how much do non-
profits to provide?) Why are developers not required to pay for problems they are causing? This is not a tax,
rather a requirement to pay for known and quantifiable impacts. This would apply to all development non-
affordable and affordable. Presumably the affordable housing would be shown to have a lesser impact and pay
lower fees. Improve and modernize the cost of new development on the impact on the neighborhood and
town for both development and make sure to include the cost of people becoming homeless, needing to
commute from out of town to work jobs (impacts on roads, carbon emissions, etc.). What impact does the
building of luxury apartments do on the capacity of Bozeman to provide public services to the new development
and the rest of the town. If the development bore the full cost of traditional infrastructure upgrades were
transferred to developers then money would be available from the general fund to start start a branch of
Get rid of AirBnB!
Having a sales tax to help or eliminate some of the tax burden from property taxes, helps buyers and renters.
Less regulation or restrictions to new developments, both fill-in to increase density and where cheaper land is
but need additional mass transit to get workers into town without having to drive/park. Obviously need to
Help increase the visibility of non-profits that are raising money to help teachers, policeman, fireman, child care
workers afford homes by buying down interest rates and offering downpayment assistance
How about some true affordable housing!
HRDC should focus their attention more on affordable housing for regular people who live here, rather than
I dont know how to fix the problem. My priority is protect downtown neighborhoods, and create more housing
for hte missing middle. Small starter homes. I no longer believe that infill and density reduces sprawl. Sprawl
I don't know, but I had to move once because my rent increased 50% after one year. I moved into a place that
was $1200 a month and one month before my lease was up he told me it would $1800 the next year. I would
I live in a Low Income Rent Apartment and each year they raise our rent 10%. Living on a fixed income that's way
to much. Thee should be a cap of 3% they can raise our rent. So, many seniors have had to leave Perennial Park
Apartments because of the rent increase. And, now with HRDC not helping with rent because it has closed. I
I recognize I am more fortunate than many where I make too much money to qualify for "affordable housing" in
Bozeman. However, home buying is still far out of my reach given the extreme prices of a "starter home" in
Bozeman. Given high interest rates and high purchase prices, down payment assistance would benefit me more
than any other conceivable program. HRDC has an existing program for first time home buyers, but this has the
I suspect that, given Bozeman's obvious commitment to voluntary incentives, that changes to state law are
I think bring in good paying industry job is more important than trying to control housing.
I think that all of the above should continue to be outlawed. Based on observation throughout the valley, there
are already a lot of building projects that are going up. Let supply and demand work - even though it can be
I think the City can have the greatest impact on affordable housing through 1) Implementation of the UDC
update, allowing increased density throughout the City in areas with adequate infrastructure and bike
lanes/trails 2) Updates to the inclusionary affordable housing ordinance to address the "what is a bedroom/unit"
issue that came up during the Guthrie hearing. It seems that a number of loud, aggressive landowners who
bought their homes for some spare change and pack of gum in 1975 are derailing these important planning
efforts and therefore preventing potential for more affordable units on the market. As the list above shows,
I think we need to work at the legislature to restore/create some tools like inclusionary zoning, differentiation in
property taxes for second + homes, and real estate transfer taxes that could be invested in affordable housing. I
do think we need to incentive affordable housing as the current ordinance does but right now we are giving too
much in return for too little. I also think we need to develop tools to KEEP current affordable housing (with the
I would love to see some of the outlawed practices put back into effect (ie taxing second homes/out of state
buyers and luxury taxes). Additionally, I would like to see more education on the usda 502 direct loans (rural
I would recommend unbanning all of the above except construction excise taxes; impact fees should take care of
that. I propose drastically lowering costs of land acquisition by lifting parking requirements citywide for all new
I would support any of the above
Incentives for local workforce
Incentives for providing affordable housing
Incentives that help developers to create affordable housing.
Incentivize builders/developers to include affordable units
Incentivize building and reduce constraints on development. The same people constantly complaining of costs
are also fighting new building projects and in doing so increasing costs. Stop wasting time telling property
owners what they can and can’t do with their property ie stop regulations on short term rentals. For every action
Incentivize low income housing development/developers with tax incentives and or subsidies from current
Incentivize owners of older, larger homes in Bozeman to remodel existing homes to create multi-family
residences. These will be neighborhood infill without changing the look and feel of the neighborhood. Allow
creative construction of ADUs. Encourage large employers (e.g. MSU, Bozeman Deaconess) who own land to
build employee housing that never goes on the market (housing in lieu of salary). Encourage MSU to build more
Income targeted housing, tax the developers
Increase housing supply
Increase mobile home parks, obviously! Stop subsidizing developers..
Increase worker’s wages. Then the housing will be affordable to our workforce.
Increased construction at all levels of affordability Increased density in the downtown core Improved non-car
transportation options to reduce transportation costs Remove parking minimums to reduce underutilized land
costs. Targeted energy efficiency incentives at landlords to bridge the gap between landlords paying for
Increased rental regulations. Rental increase caps.
Increased rental regulations. Not allowing developers to keep all units for rent - and making them sell to the
Increased taxes on out of state buyers and builders and second home taxes. Much greater scrutiny on
Increasing Application Fees to help fund housing budget Eliminate parking minimums city-wide Utilize parking
benefit zones city-wide to allow redirection of funds out of street costs to housing budget increase units
required for AHO incentives increase term of covenants to 50 years eliminate solid waste services and allocate
It is impossible to use the words affordable and housing in the same sentence in Gallatin County. Impossible!
Land costs alone to say nothing of development costs to land before even 1 cubic foot of concrete is poured are
stratospheric. Yet every land owner should be allowed to get the best price for their land! Also every proposed
solution to housing is headed toward subsidizing housing. To those who paid full bore for their present housing
this is a smack in the face. Land costs, materials costs, labor costs and especially regulatory costs are
It is mostly a supply/demand issue. If demand stays the same and supply goes up, prices will come down. Taxes
are also an issue. This state as a whole needs to find other ways to pay for things besides property taxes so that
It's NOT the role of city to "solve" this.
-Keep and strengthen the AHO. -Legalize "missing middle" housing (duplexes, quadplexes, ADUs, tiny homes,
etc) across Bozeman in the new UDC. -Ban type 2 and sunset legacy type 3 short term rental permits. -Remove
the permitting process and unnecessary criminal penalties for urban camping. -Provide legal representation for
those facing eviction. -Tax breaks for renters and people who own and live in their homes. -Require landlords to
refund application fees if the application is rejected (Minneapolis does this). -Help mobile homeowners form co-
Keep building all types of housing and let the free market and supply and demand determine values.
Kick the bum's out at the legislature, change lending and finance rules, and modify the federal tax structure to
Leave if you can't afford to live here. Eventually pric3s go.down if demand does. Quit destroying the land and
legalize multi unit apartments that maintain the original building's mass and scale
Less permitted use of short-term rentals, to create more available housing for full time permanent residents.
Limit government provided incentives for new housing to non-profit developers only.
Limiting or out-lawing short term rentals, creating city-owned rental properties that are rent controlled, and
-Limits on required security deposits -Housing credits for children under 18 -Increased resources for utility
Loan options with reduced interest rates and down payments, subsidized with grant or other state or local or
federal funding. Stop using the area median income as a criteria for what is affordable. The median or average is
way above what the low income earn due to the income of the wealthy. Local officials should start a statewide
Lobbying the legislature on a sustained and coordinated basis so they understand what Bozeman, Kalispell,
Billings, Missoula and even Helena are dealing with. A rancher from Two Dot who is a legislator won’t get it
Lower government costs and taxes, allowing employers to offer higher wages. Increase regulation of short-term
rentals to increase available inventory for rentals. Costs are controlled by the simple economic principal of
supply and demand, which the leaders of this city cannot seem to grasp. People facing housing challenges seem
to have trouble living within their means and this needs to be addressed within our education system with more
classes for children and also parents. Stop trapping people in poverty with governmental aid programs that
disincentivize upward mobility. Do not support these programs/initiatives. I have had several employees tell me
-Luxury tax -Taxing second homes -Reduced zoning restrictions -Allowing new developments to be on smaller
Luxury tax, tax second homeowners, application fee controls
Luxury taxes, taxing second homes or out of state buyers, incentives for existing houses into duplex etc, ADU not
Make it actually affordable. Many so-called affordable housing is not really that affordable. Hold state officials
Manufactured housing. Drive around Bozeman and you’ll find a number of manufactured home developments,
More transitional and supportive housing options
More trees and green space wherever possible. Any multiple unit housing should provide parking for each unit.
new construction ban
No affordability incentives for developers. Subsidize end users/tenant on Individual basis and allow them to live
No more airbnbs
No reasonable answer.
None.
None....let the free market sort it out!
Not allowing second homes or rental homes outside of primary residence. Bozeman should only have air b and
Not everyone is meant to live here. Quit with these hideous condos built by out of state labor. Start cracking
down on developers who hire "independent" subs that don't have to comply with MT and US labor laws
Offer greater incentives than before. It is unfair that a vocal minority makes it harder to provide affordable
housing because it will be in their backyards, or not perfect to them. Montana is a state of strong property laws,
Out of state developers exchanging money for parking etc.
Pet rent may only be charged if pet related amenities are not provided. Pet security deposit may be charged.
Total security deposit may not exceed a certain percentage of rent. Local legal assistance or at least
Place a limit on ST rentals which take away rental options for those looking for LT rentals plus they impair the
environment of the neighborhood in which they are located. Consider a 30-day minimum stay for all new ST
Place a Special Surtax over and above the normal property tax on second Homes and out-of-state buyers. The
wealthy can afford that. Presently those types of buyers are pushing the prices way up. Wages of workers do not
even come close to keeping up with huge market pricing increases. It is about time that we tax the new wealthy
immigration crowd. It is high time that the State Legislature passes a Sales Tax. Property Taxes bear the "brunt"
of taxation. Tourists use our roads and infrastructure free of charge and buy goods and services at a discount
compared to other tourist meccas that have sales tax revenues. Don't worry the tourists and visitors will keep
coming anyway. It is high time that they pay to play in Montana. Sales tax revenue with a direct and equivalent
decrease in property taxes would go a long way to stopping the huge increases in the tax load on homes, land,
etc. Property taxes are a huge burden for homeowners in addition to high mortgage rates. Relax most Impact
Please repeal and replace both the shallow and deep incentives, as they have functionally solidified
unaffordability instead of improved it by attracting large building projects with inappropriate AMI references
that destroy naturally occurring affordable housing. An Affordable Housing Overlay Zone, such as described by
Property taxes are definitely driving up housing costs.
Providing affordable housing now and in the future will require a blend of strategies, including, but not limited
to: - Luxury taxes - Taxing second homes - Construction excise taxes or fees - Divert building permits or fees to
affordable housing - Publicly-owned mixed-income housing (refer to Montgomery County, Atlanta, Boston,
Rhode Island's models for reference) - Mandatory inclusionary zoning, requiring developers to set aside a share
Providing incentives to build income-targeted housing, and housing for those without incomes. It saves money
Reduce the building requirements. Reduce Site improvements, and landscape requirements. Don’t hold to the
relaxing building standards- but in a thoughtful & intentional way that produces more of the product we need
(missing middle= townhomes, family housing, community focused) and less giant apartment buildings for
Rely on non-profits and philanthropy AND create city public housing for subsidized and very low income housing.
Out of state speculative builders are only interested in the high end housing they get in exchange for minimal
affordable housing. If we have the amount of truly affordable housing in the pipeline that you claim, it is time to
Remove Incentives IMMEDIATELY. REDO the UDC Affordable Housing ordinance AFTER consulting Bozeman
citizens in a meaningful way. About 500 survey results do not represent a city of 50,000 plus.
Rent caps. Eliminating REIT's Tax second or out of state owned homes higher.
Rent control / increased rental regulations • Rental increase caps • Luxury taxes • Taxing second homes or out-
of-state buyers • Construction excise taxes or fees • Divert building permits or fees to affordable housing •
Application fee controls • Requiring income-targeted housing Heres the deal,,, the people needing the housing
Rent control/increased rental regulations, luxury taxes, taxing second homes especially out of state buyers,
application fee controls (they’re ridiculous), require income target housing, limiting “luxury” condos and hotels
Rent increase caps, income targeted housing, Rent control
Rent increase caps, taxes on second/third/etc. homes, and luxury tax, application fee controls
Rental control. Landlords should only be able to increase rent by up to 2% per year. Taxing second homes and
out of state buyers. Affordable housing efforts. Incentivize developers to build affordable housing
Rental control/ increase rental regulations
rental increase caps, increased rental regulations, luxury taxes on second homes and out of state buyers
Rental increase caps, rent control, taxing second homes!!!
Repeal the Affordable Housing Ordinance entirely or move it to new greenfield development only. Implement an
Affordable Housing Overlay Zone for the NCOD to allow neighborhood friendly affordable housing in the NCOD.
Finally, modify BMC Chapter 38, Water Adequacy Sec. 38.410.130. such that it will not allow developers to pay
cash-in-lieu of water rights unless they agree to provide 33% of units (in any development of 3 or more units) at
60% AMI for rent or 100% AMI for sale, both in perpetuity. Also, deny outright the ability of developers to pay
Requiring affordable units in new developments, rental increase caps, application fee controls, housing vouchers,
building taller and denser, supporting public transportation so parking requirements are less extensive.
-Requiring income-targeted housing. Are you asking to remove this law from the books?
Requiring income-targeting housing rent control / increased rental regulations
Restricting AirBNB/short term rental of residences. Creating incentives for sellers to sell to first time buyers/long
Return the tools that have been outlawed.
sales tax in Bozeman
Severed land house deeds. Appreciation caps in new builds. Allow tiny home builds. State tax breaks to
companies who build affordable housing. Work with the big employers in the community to build affordable
Shame? A city-wide renter's union? Having a local government department to enforce ADA standards before
Simply tell developers you have no more need for luxury dwellings. Stop approving the developments we, as a
Slow down growth and change. Value long term ownership of all residential property with incentives.
Stating that you are not required to have affordable housing, doesn't mean you can't CHOOSE to incorporate
affordable housing. Why are you only putting 30% as affordable, or 5 apartments, etc? Why aren't you going the
Stop allowing cash in lieu of water rights without affordability. Actually enforce building codes for a change.
Respect existing neighbors MORE than careless developers with scary lawyers. Repeal deep incentives and roll
shallow incentives, with reconsideration, into UDC rewrite. Abolish TIFs. Pay as you go for
Stop allowing developers to build houses/condos for rent. People need to be able to buy. Allowing developers to
build new homes only to then turn around and rent them (Blackwood Groves) does not help anyone get ahead
Stop letting large companies purchase homes. Get rid of vacation rentals. Stop promoting Bozeman for
Stop wasting taxpayers' money on DEI and climate change policies. Report drug cartels businesses who employ
illegals to ICE and cooperate with deportations. Validate the number of empty apartments in newly built
Streamlining the process and costs to build. Have the university build more student focused housing so that they
have more affordable options. It seems to me that you can’t totally subsidize your way out of this. You need the
suitable and affordable student housing
Sunset STR units in around MSU so students can re-take the homes that have been turned into student housing
and then have been turned into STRs. When water and sewer service is extended to "raw" land, R-5 minimum
densities should be required. Don't waste infrastructure and enable future transit service to the area. Require
a transit impact fee for all new residential development within the new Transit District. If new industry,
support for community land trusts and other tools that generate permanently affordable housing
Tax 2nd homes
Tax credits for local businesses building houses for employees.
Tax Increment Financing (TIF): Use TIF to capture the increased property tax revenue from a development area
and direct it toward affordable housing initiatives. Community Land Trusts (CLTs): Support CLTs that acquire
land and provide affordable housing on a long-term basis. The land is held by the trust, and the homeowner
owns the building, which keeps the home affordable for future buyers. Affordable Housing Trust Fund:
Establish or contribute to a dedicated fund for affordable housing that can provide gap financing for affordable
projects or support nonprofit developers. Adaptive Reuse: Incentivize or facilitate the conversion of
underutilized commercial or industrial properties into affordable housing, such as converting old hotels, offices,
or malls into apartments. Employer-Assisted Housing Programs: Encourage or partner with large employers in
the area to provide housing assistance to employees, including down payment assistance or subsidized rent.
Tenant Opportunity to Purchase (TOPA): Give tenants the first right to purchase their rental units if the property
is put up for sale. This can be done in partnership with nonprofits to help convert rental units into affordable
housing cooperatively owned by tenants. Hotel-to-Housing Conversions: Facilitate the purchase of hotels and
motels for conversion into affordable housing units. This is particularly useful for transitional or supportive
Taxes on 2nd homes or luxury taxes is the biggest priority. Also, the city should not approve more luxury
apartment complexes without approving an equal number that are ACTUALLY affordable based on income. We
should also implement a sales tax to help offset property tax hikes and make it more afforable to purchase or
Taxing of out of state buyers
Taxing out of state buyers Increasing tourist taxes No more short term rentals in city
Taxing out of state buyers and second home owners Eliminate income targeted housing thereby eliminating the
need for raising rents to astronomical levels, it’s not a business rent just pays for the cost to build the residence
and following that just the cost to maintain it MSU should build more student housing and institute a
Taxing second home owners and out of state buyers. Taxing short term rental properties. Sales tax for tourists.
Taxing second homes Luxury tax
Taxing second homes (would require state law change) but not only do second homes create artificial scarcity in
Taxing second homes and out of state buyers, luxury tax, rent increase caps/regs
Taxing second homes and out of state buyers.
Taxing second homes and out of state buyers.
Taxing second homes and out of state buyers. Application fee controls. More affordable housing permits.
Taxing second homes and out-of-state buyers. Reduce redtape to increase supply.
Taxing second homes or out-of-state buyers Luxury taxes Rent control/increased rental regulations Rental
Taxing second homes or out-of-state buyers might not improve the overall affordability, but can help support
the City and provide services to those in need. Many of the tools to help "improve affordability" use income to
determine eligibility. This completely excludes the middle class families and individuals that work in this City that
Taxing second homes or out-of-state buyers!!!!!!!! Change zoning codes to allow for more density.
Taxing second homes, luxury taxes
Taxing second homes, Required income-targeted housing
Taxing short term rentals
That is so insane. The State legislature clearly is in the pocket of developers and does not care about the working
class. In lieu of meaningful options: change the definition of affordable housing to be a lower % of the median
area income, continue offering exceptions to regs such as building height limits, parking spaces per unit, or
The City and County need to work in conjunction with MSU to increase housing options on the university
property or obtain property near MSU and create housing options. Not a dorm situation, but housing students
The city has no business incentivizing affordable housing, the market and only the market should determine
what is to be built. I’m told there isn’t enough water for us to get all we need, why create a plan that has such a
huge use of water in a smaller footprint. Now you want to increase taxes to pay for additional police and
The city must reduce regulations, stop wasteful budgeting, reduce property taxes, encourage the creation of
better-paid jobs, and actively work with state and federal agencies to deport illegal immigrants, drug cartels, and
The city should stop trying to punish owners of rental properties which is contributing to a vilifying of landlords
The current laws need to change: Higher / additional taxes for all second, third, forth, etc. houses and all short
The first item that needs to be addressed is to define "affordable housing." Once we have a clear definition, we
the incentives have had a negative affect on affordability. they have allowed developers to raze currently
affordable houses and replace them with luxury residences in tall buildings that destroy neighborhoods, cause
The incentives program seems like one of the only viable options in this political and legal context. Maybe land
trusts. Maybe try again for the local AH tax (though based on the recent election and the last affordable
The state needs to step in with more accountability and money via subsidies for areas like Bozeman where rent
There is no such thing as a starter home anymore because the cheapest on the market is over $500,000. Provide
incentives to build small single family homes (2 bed) that single people or young couples could buy to start
Tourist sales tax, 3% or higher. Everyone with a MT Drivers License is exempt. Also, affordable housing in
Bozeman is not attainable and has not been attainable for a long time. It's always been the most expensive in
Montana. Please stop trying to make it affordable. The huge influx of apartment complexes does help, our
Try the affordable housing levy again after some property tax relief is provided
Vote out the people who created all the above laws. Short of that, there needs to be some kind of subsidized
Waive permit, SDC, TIF fees for all housing that falls within the definition of affordable construction
We don’t need it.
We need to change state law.
We need to continue to pressure legislature to fix their mistakes and re-allow cities to require income-targeted
housing for a percentage of each new development. In the interim, with the limited tools you currently have,
incentivising AH by allowing increased height is preferable versus decreasing parking requirements. However, if
We need to do a better job of controlling the airbnb, or out of state buyers who come in, buy a house, and then
don't live in it. They either airbnb it, rent it out, or just sit on it. We also need to do a better job of capping rent
We need to take steps that will decrease the price of market-rate housing, or slow the price increases.
Designated "affordable" units will never be able to serve everyone who needs housing that is less expensive. We
should remove regulatory requirements that drive up housing prices such as parking requirements, minimum lot
size, setback requirements, lot coverage, and overly restrictive height restrictions. The "affordable housing
We should establish a program to help middle-income households become homeowners by incentivizing them
to build their own homes, thereby increasing the housing stock. This program would offer incentives like reduced
fees and partnerships with developers willing to construct custom houses on an individual basis. By combining
these partnerships with a range of pre-approved, customizable blueprints that comply with updated UDC
Well that's the most bullshit thing ever, all those things the state outlawed is what we should be doing! That
means no-one new is gonna be able to afford a house. Stop tearing down old small places and building
Wish you could tax second home Require a minimum Percentage of new developments dedicated to affordable
housing. Bur don't offer government funding to the developers. Come to terms with the fact that there are few
opportunities for affordable housing within current Bozeman city limits. Employers will complain but let the
Would favor outlawing the Republicans in the state legislature. Beyond that: - it's time to cultivate a humble
group of developers, or NGOs who don't have greedy investors they need to please. - AMI is distorted by our
current gentrified population, it must be adjusted down so it includes all the poorer families who tried to stay in
town but could not afford to, their lower incomes are not reflected in the AMI, AMI should be calculated from
the wages of everyone working in town. - use all tools available to keep housing affordable ad infinitum - make
sure ALL housing is income restricted so it cannot be purchased by investors or the wealthy, building luxury units
then hoping for a trickle down effect (aka musical chairs) causes instability and eventually more expensive
housing, people want stability in their lives. - require ground floor parking that can also be used for storage,
there are too many commercial storage units in the county which are an inconvenient form of storage that uses
more time and gas, garages would be better for auto care and storage. - realize plopping big buildings into
neighborhoods messes up the transportation plan which will eventually create another transportation headache
You cannot incentivize developers with huge benefits that are detriments to the community and hope that
affordable housing gets built. You need to change the zoning so that neighborhoods do not become fodder for
multi-level out-of-character, luxury housing next to single family homes while bulldozing naturally occurring
affordable housing. That is nonsensical and diverting City and Community assets to developers. You need to
define affordability within the parameters of what is affordable for Bozeman residents currently living here
(about $48k/year wage/salary for renters according to your own 2023 Market study). This would put
affordability at something near 60% of AMI. Next, you need to force affordable housing rather than providing
juicy development incentives without accountability. You need to think about preserving Bozeman rather than
You need to go to the legislature and FIGHT for the above list. This list is being controlled by the elite rich most
likely to benefit from a lack of missing middle and low income housing. It is time to fight back. Also we need
affordable housing overlays, footprint or ratio regulations to keep naturally occurring affordable housing from
becoming McMansions, limit to the number of lots a developer can buy up, stricter demolition codes, better
transitions between business and residential zones, incentives to update naturally occurring affordable housing,
Zoning for increased supply in the core of the city. Floor area ratio rules to limit big single family homes and
McMansions. AHO/ incentive programs that make affordable housing more desirable/ feasible for developers to