Committee backs bill letting faith institutions and schools seek streamlined review to build housing on small parcels

The Senate Local Government and Housing Committee voted 4‑3 to advance House Bill 11‑69, a bill that creates a streamlined administrative review pathway for faith‑based organizations, schools and certain educational institutions to develop up to five acres of land for residential use. Sponsors and supporters said the measure will unlock underutilized land to produce affordable housing; opponents warned it broadly preempts local land‑use control and leaves insufficient safeguards against misuse.

Sponsor remarks and proponents’ testimony emphasized the opportunity posed by vacant church and school land. Senator Xochitl Axum (sponsor) said the measure “allows for churches, religious organizations, and also public schools and universities to develop up to 5 acres of their own land for affordable housing projects.” Zack Martinez, director of policy and advocacy at Gary Advocacy, told the committee Colorado is roughly 100,000 homes short and that existing administrative burdens routinely derail projects. Peter LaFari, CEO of Maker Housing Partners, said the bill provides predictable review that reduces cost and delay and helps projects progress to construction.

Supporters included affordable‑housing nonprofits, faith leaders and housing developers. Habitat for Humanity of Colorado’s executive director, Karen Kallenberg, said Habitat has successfully developed units on donated faith and school land and asked the committee to strengthen affordability requirements; several amendments before the committee responded to that request by increasing minimum homeownership affordability from 20% to 30% in one vehicle and clarifying deed‑restriction language.

Local governments, municipal leagues and county officials testified in opposition or amend positions. Gaylene Castriada, mayor of Broomfield and chair of the Metro Mayors Caucus, said the bill removes local decision making and community engagement that underpin comprehensive planning. Bev Stables with the Colorado Municipal League described the bill as creating a “special class of property owners” by allowing administrative rezoning for some landowners while exempting others from the same processes. County representatives said the measure could be exploited by entities formed to appear as faith organizations, and they raised concerns about property‑tax exemptions and infrastructure capacity.

The bill includes eligibility rules and guardrails adopted in the House. A qualifying property is limited to parcels five acres or smaller; sponsors said land must generally be owned by the faith or educational institution for a period (witnesses referenced a five‑year ownership threshold) and organizations must meet formal incorporation and tax‑exempt requirements. The bill requires private developments on qualifying properties to comply with state and federal nondiscrimination law; the Colorado Civil Rights Division would retain enforcement authority. Several witnesses also noted that the bill excludes properties served only by well and septic systems.

Committee members questioned mapping, infrastructure and the administrative review standard. CDOT and a sponsor‑affiliated planning staff said there was no statewide mapping presented to show exactly how many qualifying parcels exist; witnesses highlighted that the bill’s restrictions (parcels under five acres, properties on municipal water/sewer) will limit the universe of eligible sites. Supporters said administrative review would apply objective, code‑based checks by staff, not discretionary public‑hearing approvals, to reduce cost and delay for qualifying projects; opponents said that removes public input and diminishes comprehensive planning.

The committee adopted two amendments during the hearing. Amendment L22 clarified interaction with local rights‑of‑first‑refusal and raised the minimum homeownership affordability target (30% in one pathway) and added technical language to permit land‑lease models under community land trusts. Amendment L23 adjusted affordability definitions to align with state programs and clarified that a 140% statewide area‑median‑income reference applies where used. After amendment votes, the committee voted to advance the measure to the Committee of the Whole; recorded votes and the clerk’s announcement showed the motion passing 4‑3.

Supporters framed the bill as a modest, targeted tool to add housing on land already owned by institutions and to reduce sprawl by encouraging infill. Opponents framed it as an overbroad preemption of local zoning that could be subject to litigation and urged further work to tighten anti‑abuse safeguards, deed‑restriction duration, affordability levels and infrastructure protections.

Ending: The bill will move to the Committee of the Whole; sponsors and local government groups indicated they will negotiate further on amendments requested by municipalities and stakeholders prior to floor consideration.