Senate committee advances bill to let land trusts and water districts access ag‑loan program

Senate Bill 64, which would add a new eligible‑entity definition and loan category to the Colorado Agricultural Future Loan Program, was advanced by the Senate Agriculture & Natural Resources Committee on a 7‑0 vote on Feb. 25, 2026.

Sponsors and witnesses told the committee the change would let organizations that qualify for the state conservation easement tax credit — including state‑certified land trusts and water conservation and conservancy districts — apply for short‑term loans that can be used to buy, protect and resell farmland at agricultural value.

Why it matters: Senators and multiple witnesses said the bill is designed to prevent further loss of working farmland by giving conservation partners rapid access to capital when properties come on the market. Senator Simpson said Colorado lost roughly 1,600,000 acres of farm and ranch land over the past five years and that an agile loan product is needed to keep land in agricultural production.

What sponsors said: Senator Simpson described SB 64 as a modification of the existing program (originally established in earlier legislation) and provided program figures: ARPA initially seeded $30 million, with $7 million in grants and a $23 million revolving fund; as of January 2026 about $22.8 million had been loaned in roughly 100 loans, with an average loan of about $228,000. Senator Roberts said the bill creates a new loan category and adds eligible entities but does not request additional state funds; the Department of Agriculture could leverage gifts and grants to support transactions.

Witness testimony: Evan Caviness, Conservation Services Division director at the Colorado Department of Agriculture and a rancher, said the program provides a short‑term financing option that can help beginning and next‑generation producers. Dylan O'Hare of Palmer Land Conservancy and Sarah Parmar of Colorado Openlands described buy‑protect‑sell transactions and urged that water entities (ditch companies, irrigation districts) be eligible participants. Addi Candib of American Farmland Trust and Madeline Robertson of Rocky Mountain Farmers Union cited similar programs in other states and urged passage to preserve agricultural access.

Program design and safeguards: Department staff (Jordan Beasley and program manager Brian Koppum) told the committee they expect loan terms likely between 12 and 24 months, the department would not itself make loans (it would work with lenders), and the bill is intended not to draw funding away from the existing loan pipeline. Witnesses and sponsors said the new loan category is expected to be used selectively — perhaps only one to three transactions a year depending on funding.

Committee action and next steps: Senator Roberts moved SB 64 to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation; the clerk polled the committee and the motion passed 7 to 0. The sponsors asked that the bill be placed on the consent calendar and no committee member objected. The bill will next be considered by the full Senate committee of the whole as scheduled.

The committee record contains technical questions about guardrails to prevent competition with existing applicants and a request from land‑trust witnesses to ensure water entities are clearly eligible; sponsors and the Department said those issues are part of program design and the bill is intended to enable, not supplant, existing programs.