Committee advances bill to limit high‑water turf in new development after broad testimony and planned amendments

The House Agriculture, Water & Natural Resources Committee advanced House Bill 25‑11‑13 as amended to the Committee of the Whole on a 9‑3 vote after extensive testimony from developers, sod growers, landscape professionals, water managers and conservation advocates.

The bill, sponsored by Representative Smith with Representative McCormick as a co‑sponsor, would expand limits established in last year’s Senate Bill 5 by applying restrictions to new multifamily residential projects (apartments and condominiums) and by directing local governments that have land‑use authority to adopt regulations to limit nonfunctional, high‑water turf in new residential developments by Jan. 1, 2028. The sponsors and proponents emphasized the bill targets high‑water, non‑hybridized turf that is not used for recreation; hybridized or low‑water turf and functional uses such as playgrounds, sports fields and civic spaces remain exempt under the sponsors’ amendments.

“Headwater states depend on snowmelt and we need to be better stewards of that water,” said Representative Smith, sponsor of the bill. The sponsors added amendments during the committee hearing to clarify the definition of turf, to limit the measure to local governments with land‑use authority, and to emphasize the statute targets nonfunctional high‑water turf rather than all turf.

Supporters — including Western Resource Advocates, Conservation Colorado, Business for Water Stewardship, the ski industry and some water districts — said the bill helps reduce outdoor municipal demand, conserve scarce supplies and better position communities to apply for federal funding and adopt water‑wise landscapes. “This bill strikes a good balance to advance Colorado‑appropriate landscaping, define where and what turf is functional, and reduce outdoor water use overall,” said Chelsea Benjamin of Western Resource Advocates.

Opponents and stakeholders raised concerns about economic impacts, enforcement and unintended consequences. Sod growers and turf farmers told the committee the industry has invested in low‑water hybrid grasses and warned of job and farm closures if restrictions move too fast. David Schlup, speaking for Rocky Mountain sod growers, said the sector has invested in warm‑season, lower‑water varieties and asked for more time and clarity. Some landscape and home‑building trade groups urged more local control and study of stormwater and soil‑health implications if turf is widely replaced by hardscape or alternative groundcovers.

Industry representatives and synthetic‑turf vendors urged clearer language to avoid unintended bans on artificial turf in functional communal spaces. The Synthetic Turf Council said synthetic turf “requires 0 water” and argued prohibiting artificial turf where appropriate would run counter to water‑conservation goals. Several testifiers described residential installations that substantially reduced homeowner water bills.

State agencies and local government associations sought clarifying amendments and more implementation time. The Department of Natural Resources said it would be in an amendment posture, noting concerns that the bill could impose additional burdens on local governments already updating codes under last year’s law; DNR requested clearer definitions, a carve‑out to ensure urban tree planting is not discouraged, and a delayed effective date in some provisions. Colorado Counties Inc. asked the General Assembly to respect local capacity to enforce private‑property landscaping rules and cited potential conflicts with homeowner association covenants.

Committee action: Representative Smith moved the amended bill to the Committee of the Whole. The roll call recorded 9 yes, 3 no and one excused (Representative Soper). Yes votes included Lindsay, Lukens, Martinez, Smith, Stewart, Story, Velasco, McCormick and the Madam Chair; no votes included Johnson, Zukla and Winter. The motion passed and the bill will receive further floor consideration with sponsor‑filed amendments expected.

Next steps: Sponsors said they are negotiating additional clarifications — including a final amendment to make clear the requirement applies only to local governments that have land‑use planning and ordinance authority — and to explicitly protect hybridized low‑water turf, urban trees and childcare/sports/play areas. The committee’s action moves the bill to the Committee of the Whole for further debate and potential floor amendments.