There is a moment early in every policymaker’s career where when tackling a problem, you arrive at a neat and elegant solution, brilliant in its simplicity and devoid of unintended consequences. Not only is it a win–win but, in the words of Michael Scott, it is a win-win–win. 

Of course, this delusion smacks up against the harsh wall of reality, when one of the constituencies you believed would absolutely be in support of your brilliant solution announces they will do everything in their power to stop it.

It’s the moment you learn every decision has winners and losers and nothing is as simple as it seems on the surface. You also learn that solutions aren’t neat and often don’t fit within nicely designed ideological boxes.

Complex problems have a multiplicity of causes and symptoms and therefore often require multiple solutions.

Summit County’s housing issues aren’t simple in their cause and won’t be simple in their solutions.

Yes, we have a plethora of short-term rental units that are pricing out locals. We also have a transient and seasonal workforce. We also have to balance the needs of the visitors to the county who fuel our economy.

I vigorously support our county’s and town’s attempt to rein in and control the growth of short-term rentals, including the numerous restrictions and fees that have been imposed. The proposal for the county to work with short-term rental sites like AirBNB and VRBO to remove listings that are unlicensed is another good step being taken by our local government. But we can’t simply regulate our way out of this problem. Summit needs to build.

Dillon voters face a referendum on Oct. 1 on a plan to develop its waterfront. I appreciate the work of the community activists who spent their time gathering the necessary signatures to put this on the ballot. Nothing should ever trump the democratic voice of residents. And judging by the letter to Summit Daily, at least the most local voices in the community oppose this proposal. 

I am extremely sympathetic to concerns about local development and its ability to reshape the character of the town, especially when it comes to a project of this size. But at a certain point the regulatory process needs to end and ground needs to be broken. If every major development project needs to go through this many rounds of approval, including ballot measures it will discourage future development in a way that harms Summit County. 

At the moment our bias in Summit County should be towards building more units. While regulatory approvals are important, creating a precedent where every large project must go through a referendum process, would be unconducive to development in general. 

The Dillon Council must hold the project’s developer, Jake Porritt, to his pledge to use some of the revenues from this project to build 143 units of workforce housing. In fact I would vigorously support an effort by the activists behind this measure to pass a local ordinance requiring developers to build such housing as a part of large projects. 

Many of the objections to the project from proponents of voting “no” seem to revolve around complaints about members of the Dillon Council and their effectiveness as elected officials. The way to disapprove of their actions is not through a ballot measure designed to kill a single project but by voting them out if they seek reelection. 

Would I prefer a development like the Dillon Reservoir project be all workforce housing? Absolutely. But that’s not the choice voters are facing. Voting “no” won’t halt building on the site and magically produce that outcome. In fact, the developer has suggested that even in the event of a “no” vote the project will simply continue in a different form that simply doesn’t require changes to the area’s zoning.

At this moment voters in Dillon should consider that more is more. If these units follow existing short-term rental regulations and our elected officials hold the developer to his words, the project is more likely than not to be a net positive for the county. 

It’s not the position I started from when I began to research this column. I generally favor restrictions on short-term rentals and a strong regulatory process. But after weighing the pros and cons, I encourage all residents of Dillon to vote in the Oct. 1 referendum and vote yes.