Color Farm Impact · The Dharma Project

The Suppression Weight · Aspen, CO

Sourced data
Confidential

View through:

Dharma verdict

86–96. Fully priced. Capital without trust.

Recommendation: pass. A gap of +5 — little latent value left to surface, and the trust base is missing. This is the extractive pattern, not the Dharma Zone. (Gap +5)

What's holding the 86 down

Resort-worker housing exclusion / down-valley commute

+3.7

Second-home / absentee-ownership concentration

+1.6

CC 86 + uplift +5LV 86–96

Current Conditions 86 + sourced suppression +5 = Latent Value 86–96. Click any factor to see the receipt.

Capital × Community Trust

Amber dot = Aspen, CO · dot size = latent gap (LV − CC) · click any dot to open its report.

Trust is a core axis of this thesis, not a footnote. High capital with low trust is exactly the pattern the Suppression Weight is built to surface — the Dharma Zone is where capital and trust move together.

LATENTlow capital · high trust

Trust is high but capital hasn’t arrived yet — the upside the thesis chases.

DHARMA ZONEhigh capital · high trust

Capital and community trust move together — the healthy target state.

SUPPRESSEDlow capital · low trust

Both capital and trust are held down — the starting condition suppression creates.

EXTRACTIVEhigh capital · low trust

Money is flowing in but the community doesn’t trust it — value is pulled out, not built.

v1 placeholder calibration (rho=0.80, ceiling=100). No headlineBand pinned (no external pitch value supplied); the engine derives the band from mean confidence. cc=86 is grounded in Census ACS 5-year estimates for Aspen/Pitkin County, which show median home values among the highest of any county in the US, driven heavily by second-home/absentee ownership — an archetypal ultra-affluent ski-resort enclave, not a suppression showcase. quadrant.capital/trust are a qualitative placement, refine with the content owner: capital (92) reflects Aspen/Pitkin County's concentrated real-estate and second-home wealth; trust (30) reflects the documented resort-worker housing exclusion / down-valley commute crisis and the second-home/absentee-ownership concentration as genuine low-cohesion/extractive signals, placing Aspen in the high-capital/low-trust EXTRACTIVE quadrant outside the Dharma Zone. Several candidate suppression-factor domains were researched and dropped under the kill rule as near-baseline or inverted for an ultra-affluent resort county: housing/appraisal bias (Aspen-area tracts were not subject to 1930s HOLC redlining maps, and no appraisal-devaluation residual analogous to Bankhead/Durham was found), credit denial-rate gaps (HMDA data for Pitkin County tracts show denial rates at or below the Colorado state average, consistent with the area's high-income, high-credit-quality applicant pool), health-care avoidance/distrust (CDC PLACES indicators for Pitkin County sit at or above the state baseline, with well-resourced local healthcare access, e.g. Aspen Valley Hospital), environmental burden (no EPA EJScreen pollution/siting flag or USDA food-desert designation for Aspen-area census tracts), and data undercount (Pitkin County is well-surveyed in ACS estimates, with small margins of error at this income/response-rate level, the structural opposite of an under-counted community) — see docs/dharma-lens-v2/places/aspen-co.md for the full kill-rule notes. Over-representation shown as low latent gap + extractive quadrant; the engine does not model LV<CC (over-valuation).