A majority of House Democrats approved a bill Sunday that would require urban local governments to plan and implement state-approved housing “density goals.” The main goal, proponents say, is to create more housing near transit.
But the bill's fate is by no means certain. In fact, the measure revives much the same debate over state versus local regulations that doomed housing and zoning policy last year.
The focus is on “transit-oriented communities,” which are also part of the 2023 law.
Sponsors say House Bill 1313 would encourage more housing near public transportation and workplaces. The bill would create a grant program and technical assistance to support the campaign, to be paid for from the General Fund. However, municipalities that do not comply will also be subject to penalties, including the loss of state funding from the Road User Tax Fund.
The provision is also causing heartburn among Democratic House members who voted for the bill. Local governments also expressed reservations about this proposal, arguing that zoning issues should be left to local governments rather than the national government.
House Democrats approved HB1313 by a vote of 37-24. Seven Democratic legislators from the areas covered by the bill voted against the bill, many citing concerns that it would illegally deprive local governments of highway transportation funding.
And even those who voted for the bill have problems with some aspects of it and hope the Senate, which heads the bill, will address their concerns. One Democrat who voted yes vowed to work toward defeat if Democrats return to the Senate in its current form.
The heart of HB 1313 requires that housing built adjacent to public transit be affordable through public subsidies, “inclusionary” zoning ordinances, and deed restrictions. This also imposes limits on the maximum price for rental or sale. The bill also calls for establishing a specific period during which only low- or moderate-income households would be eligible.
The measure will apply to approximately 31 municipalities with a minimum population of 4,000 or more that are members of urban planning organizations (MPOs). There are five MPOs in Colorado. They are the Denver Regional Council of Governments, the North Front Range MPO, the Pikes Peak Regional Council of Governments, the Pueblo Regional Council of Governments, and the Grand Valley MPO of the Western Slope.
As such, the bill would apply to the state's largest metropolitan areas, primarily along the Front Range, and exclude mountainous and rural areas without transit centers.
The fiscal analysis said local governments are obligated to plan and implement housing density goals approved by the Colorado Department of Local Affairs. The analysis also said that in addition to being stripped of state funding from the Road User Tax Fund, communities in violation could face an injunction. The bill authorizes the Department of Local Government to obtain a court injunction against such municipalities.
Critics, including some House Democrats, see HB 1313 as the 2024 version of Senate Bill 23-213, the zoning mandate for local governments that was repealed on the last day of the 2023 session. The bill's repeal was a major defeat for Gov. Jared Polis.
The House of Representatives considered the bill on Friday, and more than 20 amendments were introduced, many of which attempted to water down the bill and remove the Road User Tax Fund penalty, without success.
The bill would cost the General Fund $35 million, an extremely high amount for a year with less than $22 million available for so-called “set asides” for bills still in process.
The fiscal analysis also noted that the current bill is expected to result in a decline in General Fund revenue over a 15-year period from fiscal year 2024-25 to fiscal year 2038-39.
Whether the bill passes the Senate will depend on whether the opposition to HB 1313 matches the intensity of opposition to SB 213 last year.
HB 1313 faces the same opposition outside Congress that the 2023 bill provoked, particularly from the Colorado League of Cities, Colorado Counties, and dozens of cities in metropolitan planning organizations. Masu.
Opposition parties were united last year on the same grounds, especially what critics say is a state effort to take over local control.
A March 28 letter from 90 cities and towns implored lawmakers to work with local communities, not against them.
“Last year, Colorado's municipal leaders committed to partnering with Governor Polis and the champions of affordable housing legislation toward common goals,” the group said. It was a missed opportunity,” he added.
As last year, lawmakers and the governor pushed a bill focused on mandating local government rezoning, which the group argued violates Colorado's Constitution. They say the constitution allows autonomous cities to be self-governing on many issues, especially zoning.
“We urge local governments to treat local leaders as partners, not adversaries, and pass meaningful legislation that builds on the success of Prop. 123 and the 200 communities we signed to achieve its goals.” said.
Regarding the transportation bill, local governments are asking lawmakers to “make a promise of safe and reliable transportation so that local leaders can attract developers willing to build the high-density developments that people want.” “Support the state's achievements,” and also respect state policies.home rule tradition
The local authority said it would use Household Regulations and “local control” to develop what it described as locally appropriate solutions to address housing affordability and availability issues.
The bill's sponsors, Democratic Rep. Stephen Woodrow of Denver and Rep. Iman Jodeh of Aurora, did not defend the bill in Sunday's debate, where it was criticized just as much as Republicans. Democratic lawmakers have expressed concerns about the bill.
Rep. Jenny Wilford, D-Northglenn, who supports the bill but whose city is in a “fix” position, said a geographically small city like hers relies on regional cooperation. .
“If one community is responsible for the rest of the water, those partners are not carrying the load,” she said.
Her northern community doesn't want more affordable housing, and she said it's unfair.
“We all need to work on solutions to address this issue.”
She said the bill provides local governments with reasonable, targeted and flexible options to improve affordability and air quality.
Ms Wilford said she didn't like the idea of taking Highway User Tax Fund money out of municipalities that refused to comply with the measures, saying it would impact her area.
She said she voted in favor of the bill because “we have a lot of work ahead of us” and because she didn't intend to kill the bill over the issue of the highway user tax fund.
Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Mark Snyder, D-Manitou Springs, who voted in favor of the bill, told reporters he was “angry” about the penalty to the highway tax fund, and said a better bill had been pushed back from the Senate. He said he expected it to be submitted.
There's a lot to like about the bill, added Rep. Julia Marvin, D-Adams County, who voted for it despite having concerns. She said she likes the housing goals, the flexibility in how municipalities can achieve them and the sources of their funding.
But her council has expressed concerns about Highway User Tax Fund penalties, which she said could result in large losses and jeopardize road safety for years to come. said.
An amendment that could have excluded opponents failed Friday, she said.
“This bill needs a little more work,” she said, adding that it must address many of the City Council's legitimate concerns as it moves to the Senate.
Snyder said he reluctantly voted for the bill in the House Finance Committee because he wanted the HUTF penalty to go away.
“I support transit-oriented development,” he said, noting that he has lived in such communities in the past. “I’ve seen it work,” he said.
Snyder said mayors around the state, including the mayors of Aurora and Colorado Springs, are supporting transit-oriented communities. (Both cities are listed as opposed to the bill). The city of Colorado Springs alone stands to lose $200 million from its share of the problem in the Highway User Tax Fund, assuming it balks at complying with the bill.
He said all Colorado residents pay money into the HUTF fund, but “we're telling you right now that we're withholding that money to make you believe this.” He described the clause as a “sword of Damocles” hanging over his head.
He also said the fine appears to be retaliation for last year's failed SB 213, adding that he would do everything in his power to defeat the bill if it were introduced in the Senate in similar form.
