A panel convened by the Boulder Housing Advisory Board on March 26 gathered representatives from nonprofits and the real estate sector to discuss “sharing housing” as a way to better use existing housing stock and expand affordable living options.

Panelists described a range of shared-housing approaches — from homemate selection and online matching platforms to cooperative rental houses and co‑buying — and said each approach can help people reduce housing costs, gain day‑to‑day support and reduce environmental impacts.

The panel was led by Philip (Housing Advisory Board member), who framed the session by asking whether Boulder is “full” or whether the city has housing that is simply underutilized. “There is actually plenty of housing. It’s just very poorly distributed,” Philip said while introducing the panelists and data trends he cited about increasing numbers of empty bedrooms nationally.

Anna Marie Pluhar, president of Sharing Housing Inc., said her nonprofit focuses on teaching people how to select compatible housemates — which she calls “homemates” — and on reducing the stigma attached to sharing housing. Pluhar said many adults live alone by social default and that shared housing provides financial benefits, practical help, companionship and improved “whole person health.” She suggested governments could help by removing legal barriers such as occupancy limits and by creating legal categories that distinguish shared‑housing arrangements from standard landlord–tenant relationships to make it easier to remove a problematic housemate.

Sabina Falkwist, executive director of HomeShare Oregon, described HomeShare Oregon’s platform and coordinator model. The organization buys and operates an online platform (formerly SilverNest) and pairs home providers with prospective housemates, offering free background checks, mediator referrals and a 37‑page lease template that can include a 30‑day notice-to-vacate clause tailored to shared‑housing situations. Falkwist emphasized outreach to older women, technology access issues for older applicants, and the value of local coordinators for rural areas.

Anne Marie Parsons, director of operations for Boulder Housing Coalition, explained how group equity cooperatives and rental cooperatives operate in Boulder. The Boulder Housing Coalition (BHC) owns four permanently affordable cooperative houses and works by having the nonprofit hold title while residents manage day‑to‑day operations. Parsons said co‑op residents benefit from shared food and utilities and tend to use less electricity and water per capita; she noted the organization’s houses serve educators, service workers and people with disabilities or who identify as LGBTQIA and would otherwise struggle to live in Boulder.

Bree Erger, a broker with LiveWork Denver, described co‑buying — multiple unrelated buyers purchasing property together — and hybrid models where some co‑owners live in the property while others invest. Erger said co‑buying increases purchasing power and allows buyers to access larger homes or properties closer to desired neighborhoods. She also described a practical issue with lender underwriting: mortgage lenders typically use the lowest credit score among applicants when determining rates, which can affect co‑buyer structuring (for example, placing a participant on the deed but not the mortgage).

Board members asked about conflict risk as household size grows; Parsons said conflict is more dependent on resident fit and yearly lease cycles than simply the number of residents. Falkwist and Pluhar noted careful screening and explicit agreements reduce later disputes.

Panelists provided resources, from online platforms and lease templates to coordinator and mediation programs, and suggested local governments can help by adjusting zoning/occupancy rules, supporting matching services or coordinators, and clarifying how landlord–tenant law applies to informal shared living.

The board discussed potential next steps including outreach, normalization of shared housing in local messaging, and incorporating shared‑housing options into the board’s work plan. Several panelists offered follow‑up contacts and newsletters for Boulder residents and providers interested in learning more.

Panel evidence: the meeting’s public‑participation and panel segments included the presentations and Q&A summarized above; the recording and meeting materials contain slides and a link to Sharing Housing’s resources.