DEAR EDITOR:

Short-term housing is an extremely important issue in Telluride. Ballot Initiative 300 attempts to solve the problem, but with the wrong solution. Initiative 2D is by far the best solution.

I am a Colorado resident who has visited Telluride once a year for 40 years. It is a uniquely, beautiful town. I remember when the community center was a Quonset hut next to the elementary school, there was no gondola, and the Jud Wiebe trail was once a quiet little hike. I've spent money at nearly every restaurant, contributed to the medical center, and happily paid the lodging tax. 

Initiative 300's attempt to limit short-term rental licenses would destroy one of many locally owned and operated businesses. Tom and Elaine Schroedl have been operating rentals for 33 years. They offer excellent units at an affordable price while other units managed by out of state investors charge extremely high rates. The Schroedls have contributed to the Valley Floor, the hockey rink, the Catholic Church, and have volunteered at many festivals. Their guests have contributed thousands through local sales taxes. This is not a side investment by a wealthy outside investor. These are friendly, kind locals you see on the street. Their business has supported a local family of three for years.

Let me ask, how many members of the Town Council would be willing to give up their primary source of income for housing? How many voters in Telluride would give up their job to improve housing? 

Question 2D is a far superior solution that preserves jobs and businesses and would contribute to the Affordable Housing Fund — a win for all.

Vote YES on 2D, NO on 300.

Sincerely,

Geoff Thompson

Boulder, Colorado