Gov. Jared Polis' signature housing bill got its first airing in a Senate committee last week, when opponents warned they would tie the measure up in the courts for years to come.
But the bill, as introduced, is unlikely to look the same, as more than a dozen amendment "concepts" are planned in the coming weeks. The measure requires high-density housing primarily along the Front Range and in rural resort communities.
Sen. Dominick Moreno, D-Commerce City, sponsor of Senate Bill 213, told the Senate Local Government and Housing Committee it is intended to resolve the state's affordable housing crisis. The goals, he added, include increasing housing supply, improving affordability, cutting red tape, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and ultimately lowering costs.
Litigation on the horizon
During the committee hearing on April 6, several local government officials, including Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers, warned that, should the bill pass in its current form, cities would tie up the measure in "years of contentious litigation" that could grind the Polis administration plans for affordable housing to a halt.
Kevin Bommer, executive director of the Colorado Municipal League, who has been among the most vocal opponents of SB 213, sounded an almost conciliatory tone in the hearing, pleading with lawmakers to help create a "win-win" situation.
"There is a path forward that can achieve more housing very soon without the conflict confusion and concentration of power," he told the committee.
The Colorado Municipal League could support a bill that doesn't interfere with local control or create mandates on local governments, Bommer said.
The group supports the statewide housing needs assessment, so long as it comes with no strings attached and DOLA remains as a helping hand, not a regulatory one, he said.
Also on the group's wish list is "meaningful reform" to the state's construction defects laws, which have been a major impediment to building condos, often the first housing for young families or the last for seniors hoping to downsize.
"More Housing Now," which is what Polis calls the plan, "is a misnomer," Bommer said.
He said that Polis, along with government and development experts, already acknowledged the issue is really ensuring more housing later, maybe in five or 10 years — or even longer than that.
"It's not the Colorado way. If we are going to do something, let's do it together now and build on the successes and planning already occurring," he said, asking the lawmakers to be "partners, rather than adversaries."
Local governments weigh in
The hearing drew the largest audience so far in the 2023 session — with nearly 450 signed up to testify.
They included representatives from more than three dozen communities, ranging from resort communities that in the past have backed Democrats on a variety of issues to some of the Front Range's largest cities. Almost all of those representatives either oppose SB 213 or seek substantial amendments.
Others came to defend the measure.
DOLA'a Andy Hill, who manages the community development office, told the committee local governments are finding their land use regulations are an impediment and don't work as effectively as they would like in attracting affordable housing.
"They come to us for help with that," Hill said.
Demand for DOLA grants on affordable housing have grown, he said, adding that shows that local governments want permanent solutions for a range of residential housing types, including affordable housing.
"This bill takes a regulatory step in tandem with existing incentives," Hill said.
Adams County Commissioner Eva Henry, a Democrat, was one of several county officials at the April 6 hearing who said she supports the measure in its current form, although, as introduced, it doesn't actually affect county governments.
She said the bill respects the role of municipalities in land use decisions and gives them the option of flexible minimum standards.
"Our cities and towns will be able to fine-tune their standards to meet local needs and will also be able to keep the codes they have if they meet the minimum requirements," Henry said.
She blamed the lack of affordable housing on "sporadic land use decisions" made by "inexperienced" local politicians.
As a local elected official and mother, she added, "I understand the fear of losing control of what I had control of for a long time."
"I know that in order to mature and grow, we have to let go of things that no longer work. Our sporadic land use regulations in the state no longer is working and we need to move forward," she said. "The decisions this committee is making is making a choice between moving forward in a solution that will help in the crisis or protecting an age old belief that has shown that it is broken."
The Adams County commission, however, is seeking amendments, not supporting, SB 213.
State standards versus local control
Under SB 213, municipalities have the option of either adopting "flexible minimum standards" or facing a mandate to use a state-developed model, which would include zoning changes.
The Colorado Department of Local Affairs, which for years has had a collaborative relationship with local governments, will be put in the position of enforcing those mandates for municipalities that don't go along with the flexible option.
The department's role in implementing SB 213, which referenced 110 times in the 105-page bill, also includes conducting a statewide, regional and local housing needs assessment. That assessment wouldn't show results until 2026, as the bill requires only a methodology to be developed by the department by the end of 2024.
The flexible standards include accessory dwelling units or ADUs — also known as in-law apartments or granny flats — and so-called "middle housing," such as duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and townhomes.
Under those standards, the municipality can't require parking but the developer can add it. Resort communities have additional flexibility to work regionally on housing strategies that would allow them to find the best places for more dense housing.
For renters, municipalities can regulate short-term rentals for the housing listed above — with "affordability strategies."
The standards are different for non-urban municipalities of more than 5,000 residents — with only ADUs required under the bill to deal with affordable housing issues.
Another facet of the plan focuses on transit-oriented communities, which also primarily target urban communities along the Front Range, including those with fixed rail, as well as rural resorts.
It could also include more dense housing near bus rapid transit or walkable commercial districts.
The bill outlines a series of either flexible minimum standards or state-mandated standards that apply to transit-oriented communities, with a goal of reducing housing and transportation costs.
A final facet deals with cutting red tape, which the aim of allowing faster deployment of manufactured homes that can be built in just a few days but often have to wait a year or more to be placed on site. It would remove limitations for minimum unit sizes in urban communities, so long as those units comply with fire and building code standards.
Amendment 'concepts' on the horizon
The hearing on SB 213 took more than 12 hours, but it was set up only for witness testimony, not committee action.
Those who testified did so on the bill's current form — not how it would look in the next few weeks once amendments have been offered and adopted.
In an email to stakeholders the day before the hearing, Moreno outlined a number of amendment "concepts" the sponsors are considering. It's not an exhaustive list, Moreno said, but an attempt to be transparent about what's to come.
The committee testimony would also likely raise concerns that could form additional amendments, he said.
The amendment concepts address affordability, something the bill doesn't currently tackle; revisions to the bill's rural resort provisions; more flexibility in housing options; bolstering implementation; and, strengthening stakeholder input.
Many local government officials pointed out that land use decisions made at the local level is a very popular and direct way for constituents to weigh in on the housing issues, and that SB 213, as introduced, would strip away that local input.
The amendment concepts include creating an "affordability menu" in the law, adding affordability requirements to the statewide model codes, revising minimum standards for size and setbacks for accessory dwelling units, reducing middle housing size from a maximum of sixplexes to fourplexes, establishing a waiver process for small urban communities that would allow them to opt out of the housing needs plan, and creating a "compromise option" to enable limited minimum parking standards in middle housing.
A hearing date for action on the bill, including amendments, has not yet been announced.
