Public Radio’s incomplete story on Aspen’s taxpayer-subsidized housing

Beaton: Public Radio’s incomplete story on Aspen’s taxpayer-subsidized housing | AspenTimes.com: "Taxpayer-subsidized Colorado Public Radio likes taxpayer subsidies.
I know from personal experience that they even like Aspen’s taxpayer-subsidized housing program, where residents making as much as $186,000 receive million-dollar houses for dimes on the dollar.
...story was broadcast on Colorado Public Radio last week, is reproduced on its website and was circulated on social media.
The gist of his story is that the taxpayer-subsidized housing program is a success but needs more taxpayer money for more houses for more young people because the existing residents are aging and never move out. (Why would they?)
The article concluded that the program will become a taxpayer-subsidized retirement home unless the taxpayers cough up even more money.
That’s all true.
But the CPR piece failed to mention many other problems that I touched on in my conversation with the reporter and would have detailed in our follow-up conversation.
...The article contends that this is necessary because Aspen workers who don’t live in town spend “hours a day commuting in their cars.” 
In point of fact, however, the commute from Basalt (a very nice town, even though it’s not Aspen) is about 25 minutes each way — which is about the average commute in America.
That drive from Basalt is through the scenic Roaring Fork Valley, not the commute over Interstate 25 in rush hour that Denver commuters routinely endure.
Alternatively, the bus from Basalt runs every 15 minutes.
The bus stations are more like bus mansions.
They’re built of native stone with heated enclosures that cost $250,000 each. (No, that’s not a typo.) 
The buses themselves are equipped with free Wi-Fi.
Residents of the taxpayer-subsidized housing notoriously fail to maintain them. 
That’s because there’s no incentive to do so.
When they sell, after all, they get the same price set by the housing office regardless of whether the house is in perfect condition or falling down.
In fact, the city has determined that the homeowners’ association reserves are only 22 percent of what’s necessary.
The HOAs are now asking the city to make up the difference with additional taxpayer money.
For example, the residents of one project are threatening to sue the city because the taxpayer-subsidized stain on their taxpayer-subsidized decks is fading.
In another instance, a resident is complaining to the City Council that the sound insulation is defective because she hears her neighbor.
The $186,000 income cutoff for the program conveniently includes every city employee, top to bottom.
And indeed, lots of city employees live there.
A few years ago, four out of the five city council members lived there — including the mayor.
Fraud is rampant..."
Read on!