Littleton City Council members discussed the concept of preemption, the value of punishment and the need for affordable housing as they evaluated three state bills this week.
The most contentious discussion centered around House Bill 24-1313, which focuses on building housing near areas of transit.
A resolution to oppose the bill – unless it was amended to remove the threat to local control and the threat to certain funds – narrowly failed. The vote was 3-4, with Mayor Kyle Schlachter, District 1 Councilmember Patrick Driscoll and District 4 Councilmember Andrea Peters voting to oppose the bill as written.
The result of the vote means the city took no official stance on the bill.
The bill mandates the rezoning of certain areas around rail and bus transit corridors by some local governments to allow more housing development in those areas.
Although many city council members supported the idea behind the bill, some were opposed to the punishment, or “stick,” as they called it, that the bill includes.
“There are components of this that really align with the vision and direction of council,” Assistant City Manager Kathleen Osher said. “Our concern, of course, is that the forced rezoning of so many parcels in the city is just a very difficult position to be in. And particularly, with this, they are putting in jeopardy the very vital dollars that we require (from) the Highway Users Tax Fund.”
If a community fails to meet the requirements of the bill, the state will withhold and redistribute its Highway Users Tax Fund allocation. These dollars — collected from motor fuel taxes and fees, vehicle registration fees and more — help counties and municipalities fund transportation projects.
“Those dollars are so significant to us in terms of addressing the maintenance and transportation needs and, to some extent, the backlog that we have in terms of creating infrastructure,” Osher said.
The bill also stipulates that the state Department of Local Affairs has the authority to seek an injunction against jurisdictions that do not meet the expectations of the bill.
Some council members said they were concerned about preemption, or the idea that the bill would limit the power of local governments to make their own decisions about transit-oriented development.
“I think we all do share a burden on this and have to do it, but to say we have to build the exact same way Denver does, and the exact same way that Glendale does and the exact same way that Broomfield does is difficult because we have differences,” Mayor Kyle Schlachter said.
District 2 Councilmember Robert Reichardt said he was frustrated with the preemption argument for opposing the bill.
“I just wish we were proposing a more forward-thinking solution to the problem, more than just ‘Don’t tell us what to do,’” he said. “I don’t feel like we’re being solution-oriented.”
Littleton resident Spencer Hanks said he thinks the bill is strong, despite some of its imperfections. If Littleton decided to oppose the bill to maintain local autonomy, he said, the city should implement similar practices on its own.
“The last half-century has really demonstrated that, while we hold in high regard our home rule and our autonomy, that kind of means that things don’t really get done,” he said. “Even if we do not (support) some of the future and state-led efforts to come … we should look seriously at what this means for Littleton and implement them in our own unique way.”
Mayor Pro Tem Stephen Barr said he understands the concerns with the bill, but he thinks they need to be compared to the need for housing.
“These concerns have to be weighed against the severity of the housing crisis that we’re currently facing,” he said. “What is the give and take?”
Although maintaining local control has been held “sacrosanct” by the Colorado Municipal League, which represents many local governments across the state, Barr said, “that kind of relation to our local planning and zoning has not necessarily borne the fruits of the housing that our residents and our citizens actually need.”
The Colorado Municipal League voted to oppose the bill unless amended “to remove punitive language that allows the state to withhold vital HUTF funding from local communities and removes local elected officials’ ability to make decisions for their communities,” according to its website.
Barr also said he thinks the demands of the bill are narrow and do not exceed anything that the city council wouldn’t do on its own. He added that the bill includes incentives, not just punishments, as it offers a grant program to support local governments in meeting these goals.
Osher said another concern with the bill is that the transit system in Littleton isn’t “as vibrant” as it was in recent years. City Attorney Reid Betzing said planning around RTD, a transportation system that has “challenges,” is a challenge of the legislation.
The council passed resolutions in support of two other bills — Senate Bill 24-106 regarding a right to remedy construction defects and Senate Bill 24-174 regarding sustainable affordable housing assistance.