Gov. Jared Polis’ signature housing bill on Tuesday night advanced past its first legislative hurdle, winning a 4-3 party-line vote from the Colorado Senate Local Government and Housing Committee.

But committee testimony, as well as conversations around the Senate, show the bill has split the Democratic caucus. And its next stop in Senate Appropriations could be just as tough, depending on who’s on the committee that day.

The appropriations panel’s next meeting is scheduled for Friday morning, and Senate Bill 213 could be on the agenda.

The committee’s membership when the bill comes up could play a critical role.

The panel is chaired by Sen. Jeff Bridges, D-Greenwood Village, with Sen. Rachel Zenzinger, D-Arvada, as vice-chair. Both have told Colorado Politics they are “no” votes on the bill as introduced, but as of Wednesday had not seen the changes made to the measure Tuesday night.

City councils in Bridges and Zenzinger’s districts have voiced strong opposition to the measure. Those include local governments in Englewood, Lone Tree, Sheridan, Greenwood Village and Arvada. 

But Bridges is expected to be excused Friday, leaving Zenzinger in the chair. Bill sponsor Sen. Dominick Moreno, D-Commerce City, is also expected to sit on the committee Friday, replacing Sen. James Coleman, D-Denver.

Moreno told Colorado Politics Wednesday he was unaware of any plan to remove Zenzinger from the committee, and that he would have a conversation with her on her position on the bill. 

SB 213 was heavily changed by Democratic amendments on Tuesday to begin to address concerns from Democrats that could make or break the bill. But even with the amendments, two committee Democrats indicated they will need to see more changes to support the bill before final passage.

The committee adopted 18 amendments and rejected two. Among those rejected was a strike-below offered by Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, R-Brighton, that would have stripped a provision allowing the state to impose zoning and other requirements on municipalities, as well as rural and resort communities. 

That’s led opponents to claim the bill is unconstitutional, because it would conflict with 50 years of Supreme Court decisions that protect the right of local governments to set their own land use and zoning regulations. 

The amendments adopted Tuesday did not move opponents off that position.

Kevin Bommer, executive director of the Colorado Municipal League, told Colorado Politics last night he is still hopeful for an “win-win” situation, as presented in Kirkmeyer’s amendment.

“Nothing is changed. The bill, even in its pre-amended version, is an unconstitutional preemption that tramples local control,” Bommer said. “So if the proponents and the governor want to see something that does more housing now, they need to look real hard” at the Kirkmeyer amendment.

“We want it to succeed,” he added. “We want it to work. But they’ve put this bill on a collision course with the courts.”

While the hours-long hearing was delayed while committee Democrats negotiated behind closed doors over amendments, Moreno said standing in opposition to “local government friends” was “not an easy place to be.”

He told the committee that the work on SB 213 doesn’t stop Tuesday.

“There will be further fine-tuning to address very valid concerns,” Moreno said.

The most consequential of the Democratic amendments offered Tuesday removed the bill’s section on “middle housing” and replaced it with a section on “corridors and centers requirements.”

Middle housing, as defined in the introduced version, include townhomes, duplexes, fourplexes and sixplexes and “cottage clusters,” defined as four detached housing units with a common courtyard. 

Middle housing is still included in the new section, but with sixplexes removed. Moreno also claimed the new section would remove state preemption from that section of the bill, and would change middle housing to a minimum standard for transit-oriented communities. 

The amendment, however, raised concerns among the Republicans on the panel, all of whom are former county commissioners. The GOP members talked at length about the lack of a public process and citizen input on land use decisions, saying those are often a hallmarks of county and municipal land use hearings. 

The Department of Local Affairs would be required under the amendment to developed model codes, based on recommendations from a 13-memer “multi-agency advisory committee.” The multi-agency committee, made up of gubernatorial appointees from several state agencies, would also have the ability to employ a “public hearing and comment process” in developing those recommendations.

Sen. Byron Pelton, R-Sterling, a former Logan County commissioner, pointed out that those hearings would be led by bureaucrats, not elected officials who are responsible to their constituents and voters.

Other amendments were offered in order to win support from the two wavering committee Democrats.

For Sen. Dylan Roberts, D-Avon, that meant protection for the affordable housing efforts already underway, or other aspects of the bill that would produce undesired results.

He said he is proud of the work being done in mountain towns such as Vail, Craig, Eagle, Steamboat Springs, Blackhawk, Central City and Silverthorne, pointing out that has been supported by the General Assembly.

His main concern is whether the bill would disincentivize the work already happening, or worse, would get in the way of those efforts.

The amendments added Tuesday night, he said, will give rural communities credit for what they’re already doing, without mandates from the state.

The amendments also removed as requirements for resort communities accessory dwelling units, known as “granny flats” or in-law apartments, and as defined are stand-alone units on existing single-home property. Roberts said ADUs could wind up as short-term rentals in those resort communities, which isn’t the intention of the legislation.

He also told the committee he wants guarantees, which aren’t in the bill yet, that there would be no more transmountain diversions in order to supply water to Front Range communities that would be covered under the bill. 

One amendment adopted Tuesday aligns SB 213 with the state water plan. Under that amendment, local governments covered under the bill would be required to develop a “water supply element,” to include water supplies and conservation policies as a condition of approval for the development.

Rural resort communities also were exempted from developing housing needs plans, under another amendment adopted by the committee.

Sen. Julie Gonzales, D-Denver, said she also has big concerns with the bill centering on how it addresses displacement – moving people out of their communities through gentrification or other means. 

Gonzales won approval for an amendment that would identify communities that are vulnerable to displacement, tied to the bill’s affordability strategies. The amendment stated that urban municipalities would be provided with tools to prevent displacement from high-risk communities. Another amendment requires a displacement analysis, in conjunction with community groups with experience in working with displaced individuals. 

She said once the bill was introduced, she gathered people who “live, eat, breathe and sleep zoning, affordable housing, displacement mitigation work” in her district to evaluate the policy outlined in the bill, and to craft amendments to address the gaps. 

The work should not just include affordable housing for teachers who want to live where they teach, she said, but for renters who find themselves vulnerable to homelessness, as well as the chronically homeless. 

She said there’s “still more work to do on this,” including more strategies to combat displacement and to accurately include the full range of affordability strategies.

Finally, the bill as amended will include a 10-year sunset review, one of the few to win support from the entire committee.

Kirkmeyer, a former Weld County commissioner and formerly executive director of the Department of Local Affairs under Gov. Bill Owens, told the committee prior to them rejecting her amendment on a party-line vote that SB 213 “will never get us to affordable housing.”

“All it will do is preempt local government and tell citizens they can’t decide the character of their local community,” she said. “We’ll either end up with urban sprawl or no affordable housing at all…this bill is not good public policy.”

There were aspects of her amendment that got favorable comments from committee Democrats, including the idea of a statewide housing summit. But that would have to allow local governments to be a partner with the state, rather than operating under a statewide mandate, she told Colorado Politics Wednesday.

That said, she told the committee that there is still a chance to do something good on the affordable housing issue. But if SB 213 is what they end up with, the end result will be an unconstitutional measure that sets the state up for lawsuits. 

To that, Sen. Tony Exum, Sr., D-Colorado Springs, said if the bill is found unconstitutional, they’ll head back to the drawing board.