Senate committee advances 'HOME Act' after hours of testimony and amendments

The Senate Local Government and Housing Committee voted 4–3 to advance House Bill 26-1001, known as the HOME Act, after a half-day hearing marked by competing accounts of whether the bill would unlock stalled affordable housing projects or improperly usurp local land-use authority.

Senators sponsoring the bill said it creates an administratively reviewed pathway for qualifying nonprofits, housing authorities, transit agencies and educational institutions to develop up to 5 acres of underused land for housing. "This bill could enable the redevelopment of that land for affordable and attainable housing to support their communities," sponsor Senator Exum said in his opening remarks, noting Colorado faces a large housing shortfall.

Co-sponsor Senator Gonzales pointed to data from the state demographer and past experience: "Colorado needed 106,000 housing units as of 2023 to overcome the housing shortfall," she said, and described amendments that add definitions, wildfire-resiliency code coordination, solar access design standards and incentives tied to affordability.

Supporters — including nonprofit housing developers, architecture and climate groups, and local elected officials — said the bill addresses a real barrier: lengthy, unpredictable local review processes that can add time and cost to affordable developments. Aaron Meeropol, president and CEO of the Urban Land Conservancy, told the committee, "Affordable housing is not a taking. Affordable housing is an economic driver in this state." Testimony from developers and affordable-housing providers emphasized that administrative review can save months or more per project, preserving financing windows for low-income housing tax credits and other subsidies.

Opponents — ranging from small-city mayors and county commissioners to municipal leagues — argued the bill as written would reduce public input and override locally adopted comprehensive plans. Longmont council member Jake Marsing warned the committee that "Projects like true north succeed because of local coordination," and said the bill "takes away many of the tools from communities that already are doing this work and building this housing." Cherry Hills Village Mayor Katie Brown told senators the measure could be "an unworkable, unfunded mandate" for small towns that rely on property tax revenue and limited service capacity.

Several local-government witnesses and county officials asked for stronger, enforceable affordability guarantees (such as deed restrictions and AMI thresholds) and tighter definitions so that only experienced nonprofit affordable-housing developers benefit. Concerns also surfaced about infrastructure capacity, groundwater and wildfire or oil-and-gas adjacency; sponsors responded with amendments that the committee adopted to address many of those concerns.

Amendment work and votes

Senator Linstead moved a package of amendments to narrow the bill's scope and add safeguards. Among the changes adopted were L021 (which excludes industrially zoned parcels and clarifies annexation‑agreement coverage), L024 (adds riparian, stream corridor, wetland and sensitive wildlife protections and clarifies oil-and-gas standards) and L025 (which preserves local public comment while directing decisions to follow objective standards). Technical and intent clarifications (including L019 and L020) were also adopted, the latter on a roll call vote.

Sponsors also won contested votes on several other targeted limits: L022 exempted agricultural/open-space/floodplain lands; L026 and L027 clarified local‑plan alignment and lowered a building-height threshold; L028 set a 5‑acre cap and added guardrails against subdividing larger parcels to evade limits.

Committee action

After closing remarks in which sponsors underscored extensive stakeholder negotiation, Senator Exum moved that the committee recommend the bill as amended to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation. The motion passed on a 4–3 roll call vote; the committee then adjourned.

What remains

The bill's next stop is the Committee of the Whole, where the full Senate will consider it. Sponsors said they believe the amendments strike a balance between preserving local safety and design standards and creating a predictable path for nonprofit and public partners to build affordable housing. Opponents said they will continue to press for stronger, project-level affordability requirements and protections for comprehensive-plan alignment.

The bill and the adopted amendments reflect several recurring themes from the hearing: the state's large housing shortfall; the high cost and time associated with land and discretionary local approvals; and a persistent tension between statewide housing goals and local land‑use authority.