March 19, 2026 · Agriculture & Natural Resources · 7,962 words · 9 speakers · 139 segments
Good afternoon. The Senate Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee will come to order on Thursday, March 19th. Ms. Jackson, please call the roll.
Senators, Catlin.
Here.
Henriksen.
Here.
Kip.
Here.
Felton B.
Here.
Felton R.
Excused.
Danielson.
Excused.
Mr. Chair.
Here.
All right. I know our other two colleagues are nearby and will be here very soon, but we're getting started a little late, so I want to get going. We have confirmation and two bills on our agenda, so we're going to get started with our confirmation hearing for the State Board of Land Commissioners.
Director Rosmarino, if you want to bring our appointee forward. Good afternoon. Director Rosmarino. Yes, good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. I'm Nicole Rosmarino, Director of the Colorado State Land Board, and I'm very pleased to be before you today to introduce Deb Frobe for your consideration for confirmation of State Land Board Commissioner. Deb has served on the board since her initial appointment in 2022. She was reappointed on July 1st of last year to serve another four-year term. Our board is made up of five citizen volunteers, and the Colorado Constitution requires that four of the five have substantial experience in four separate areas. they do not represent the interests of a particular sector, but represent the interests of all of our beneficiaries. The backgrounds are public K-12 education, production agriculture, local government, and natural resources, and the fifth seat is a citizen at large. Today, I'm pleased to present Deb Frobe to continue serving in the natural resources seat. A testament to her leadership, Deb was unanimously elected by her fellow commissioners to chair the Colorado State Land Board of Land Board Commissioners in 2024, was unanimously re-elected in 2025, and continues to serve in that capacity today. Deb also represents the State Land Board on the Public School Fund Investment Board, which is chaired by the State Treasurer. this fund is a critical asset for our beneficiaries. In all of the ways that she serves the State Land Board, Deb brings tremendous experience in conservation and finance, both of which are central to the success of our agency. The State Land Board is tasked with managing trust assets to provide financial support to public schools and other public institutions, which the board has done since its inception in 1876 through the state constitution. Our agency must manage these assets to generate reasonable and consistent income over time while also ensuring the long-term productivity and sound stewardship of state trust lands. Deb's background thus mirrors our agency's dual obligation to generate revenue and sustainably manage state trust lands The state land board holds 2 million acres of surface land and 4 million acres of subsurface mineral estate which we lease for agriculture oil and gas recreation renewable energy ecosystem services and more We continue to break revenue records through these vigorous lines of business. In total, we generated $2 billion to benefit Colorado's public school children. Deb is committed to the State Land Board's continued financial success and to the benefits we provide for our beneficiaries. As board chair, Deb very ably leads our monthly board meetings, helping to ensure good governance, organizational excellence, sustainable land management, and growing financial returns. Deb's invaluable leadership at the State Land Board comes at a critical juncture. We are creating a strategic plan to guide our agency for the next five years. We're building an asset allocation model to optimize how we allocate assets across the trust. And we are supporting the State Trust Lands Conservation and Recreation Work Group, which I know that Tara Roberts was a prime sponsor of that legislation. We're looking forward to the recommendations from that body in September. We appreciate your consideration of Deb's confirmation. and hope for this committee's and the Senate's confirmation of Deb Frobe so that she may continue to serve our agency as she does so well. And with that, I'm grateful for Deb's past and current public service, and I would ask for your permission, Mr. Chair, to turn it over to Deb Frobe to introduce herself and answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Thank you, Director. Commissioner Frobe, welcome.
Thank you very much, Chair, and hello to the rest of the committee. I'm honored to be here today to be considered for reappointment to the Colorado State Land Board. I first became acquainted with the land board when I started my second career in conservation with the Nature Conservancy in 2008. I feel fortunate that I was able to take my first career of business, finance, and investments and turn those skills and talents into supporting conservation in Colorado and beyond. It was in Colorado that I gained my appreciation for and my dedication to grasslands. As reflected in my submission to the board, in my tenure with the Nature Conservancy, I've had the privilege of working with and supporting ranchers and agriculturalists all over the world, and also including North America. I've worked in Brazil, Argentina, and Mongolia, generally with ranchers around sustainable grazing and regenerative agricultural practices. My conviction of the critical role of ranchers in maintaining and sustaining these important grassland systems led me to team up with a number of other colleagues at the Nature Conservancy and push to make grasslands a global strategy for that international organization. From my perspective as a commissioner, decision-making, which is what we're charged with doing, rests upon a few core principles. The first is transparency of the process. The other is informed discussion making sure we have the inputs and insights to help get to good decisions And then as always considering the value creation for not just our institution but for all other stakeholders our beneficiaries of course and other partners and citizens in the state As Chair and Director Rose Marino touched on this, but I feel like my job is to support effective decision-making and responsible decision-making by the entire commission. Leadership at our public board meetings involves balancing active listening and engagement with the public with execution of a full business agenda. And I also feel my responsibilities are to help our other commissioners, particularly the new ones, by providing context for the matters at hand and then clarity around the decisions that we're actually being asked to make. As Nicole pointed, or Director Rosemarino pointed out, this is a very exciting time for the institution. I would argue it's pivotal. The director has outlined a couple of important initiatives of which I'm very involved, and I would add to that the intentional expansion of our strategic partnerships and much more ambitious outreach to policymakers, NGO partners, research institutions, even our beneficiaries to, again, continue and build that dialogue to help us make informed decisions. So I'm looking forward to, I've really enjoyed my first term and my contributions to the State Land Board. I'd be honored, and I'd be very eager to serve for a second term, so much so that I have given my resignation notice to the Nature Conservancy, so I have even more time to dedicate to some of these initiatives. And I'd be lying if I didn't say that I'd also like to get out there and do a little more fishing, camping, and bike riding. So with that, I'll turn it over to you all for questions.
Thank you so much, Commissioner Frobe. Committee, any questions? Senator Pelton.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Commissioner Frobe, for willing to do this again. So you talked about management of grasslands. In Logan County alone, when I was a county commissioner, the majority of my district was District 1 around Fleming area. We had a lot of state land board land out there. Our producers, our ag producers rely on that state land board land. I've had several come up to me and say that they are no longer to manage the rodents that are on some of that state board land. Is that a decision that the board made? Did you decide that at any time when you were sitting on the board?
Commissioner.
Thank you. The question. I do not recall being involved in a decision about rodent management, but I'm going to defer to Director Rosemarino because I don't remember that.
Director.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the question, Senator Pelton. There has not been a policy change on the management of rodents. We are looking at a number of wildlife issues, and wildlife and biodiversity are one of the issues named in HB 251332. But any change on that score, we would thoroughly vet with stakeholders, with CPW, and we would bring it to the board in a formal policy. So we can keep you posted. Nothing has happened there yet.
Senator Pelton.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for that answer I appreciate that My next question for you is we are reaching a point here where especially in lands where I live and where Senator Pelton lives as well that there is going to be times where private property is not going to be the place to put green energy projects. People are going to say we're not going to do that anymore. They're going to try to go on state land board property or that sort of thing. I'll bring an example of Norwood. when there was a time where the people were going to no longer be on that lease and they were going to change it with solar panels, take away grazing properties, that sort of thing. What is your thoughts of, and it didn't happen, thank God for the local government, it did not happen, so they pushed that away. What are your thoughts of making sure that we keep agriculture in production and not replacing it with green energy projects? What is your thoughts on that?
Commissioner Frobe.
Thank you for that question. A couple things quickly. One is I'm glad you touched on local control because that was something I had to learn when I came to St. Lambert was we absolutely do on our transactions defer to local control. So that is an important principle. On renewable energy, you know, we, as I've observed the staff's presentation and before we make any decisions, which primarily the commission does need to make on renewable energy, we have looked at and evaluated that renewable energy use on a given piece of property. And we analyze it from all kinds of different perspectives. And so to your point on agricultural productivity and forage quality, those are very important elements, much like we consider endangered species habitat and we consider other implications for the community and a whole host of other things that go through our evaluation process before it ever even comes to the commissioners. I am aware of at least one situation where we declined a solar project due to the high quality of forge that was involved. And one little PS to that is that's one reason I am particularly excited, and I believe my fellow commissioners and I know the staff are, is pursuing and unlocking the potential for pairing agrovoltaics and energy. Now, that's one of those things that sounds great on the surface and abstract. It's when you bring it down to the ground that there are challenges. But the land board is actually a perfect place to try and experiment with some of that to see if we can unlock the potential. So all to say, I don't have a blanket black and white position on it, but I am dedicated to preserving our agriculture productivity because the portfolio we have requires that.
Senator Pelton.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for that answer. I do appreciate that. And I would like, if you ever have a chance to speak to the governor on the first floor, will you remind him how important that local control principle is and how we should keep that? So thank you.
All right, Director.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would just like to add, just for clarification, that through the Constitution, the state land board is required to follow all local land use regulation. And so what happened in Norwood, I think, was an example of the system working. We can issue leases, but our lessees still need to follow any applicable federal, state, or local regulatory processes. And in that instance, the community of Norwood was able to say what they wanted in their community, and that project was rejected. But thanks for the question.
Senator Pelton R.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for your willingness to serve some more. My questions go more along the political landscape. As you know, no board can have more than a certain number of party-affiliated members. You're unaffiliated, it says, but some of your contributions and some of your activities point towards being a Democrat. Does that, how do you square that up? I mean, it's one thing to put something on a piece of paper, but are all your decisions made with your fellow Democrats?
Commissioner Froben.
Thank you, Chair. And thank you for the question. No, my decision-making is really from my own background. We all have bias background experience, and I come from the business world and the finance world, and I have a strong belief in the strength and guidance of markets and the discipline, financial discipline. I also feel strongly that the environment that we have and are charged with stewarding as humans is a really heavy responsibility, and that that world needs to have other creatures besides humans on it. So those are two sort of different, I suppose, bookends of my personal philosophy and how I approach decision making. So I'll stop there and see if you have a follow-up question.
All right. Thank you. Any other questions?
Senator Catlin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for being here today and thank you for serving. In the last four years, do you have any idea how many ag operations have been moved off of state lands?
Commissioner, if you know.
Thank you for the question, and I'm not sure I understand it. Would you elaborate?
Well, let me explain it then. And what I'm getting at is, have there been any ag operations that their bid was not commensurate with what you had priced the properties at, so they had to move their ag operation, for example, from Colorado to Wyoming or some other state? Do you have any idea how many of those occasions have happened?
Commissioner Frobe.
Thank you for the question. I don't at hand have an idea of how many of decisions have been like that. I do know there have been a few where all the factors that the staff evaluates the bids on, particularly if it's a request for proposal property, of which we have seven, or even if it's a renewal pursuant to 118 rights, There have been a few circumstances where the evaluation and recommendation has been for a new operator, but as to the number, no. May I turn to Director Rosemarino and?
Director.
Thank you Mr Chair So ag remains very central at the State Land Board 96 of our land is leased for agriculture And since July, we've activated 11 of 19 vacant properties for ag. So we are searching for opportunities to make sure that ag does continue to remain central. As Deb mentioned, there are RFP properties where ranchers may be competing for the lease to graze those properties. Ag is not displaced from the land, but there are definitely winners and losers in that process. We deliberately structure it so that the board is taking into consideration the revenue from a given application, the contribution to community stability, and the stewardship of that operator. And so the board is always taking those three factors into consideration, not purely financial return. So we pride ourselves on working closely with our agleses. They're crucial partners. and believe were critical to agricultural operations in the state of Colorado.
Thank you. All right. Thank you so much for the discussion this afternoon. Madam Vice Chair. Thank you so much for being here today. I move for the appointment of Deborah Frobe of Denver, Colorado, to serve as the representative of the Natural Resource Conservation, sorry, on the State Board of Land Commissioners with a favorable recommendation to the Senate, to the full Senate. Thank you. That's a proper motion. Thank you, Commissioner Froe, for your service thus far and your willingness to continue serving the state. Any comments before we vote? Seeing none, Ms. Jackson, please poll the committee.
Senators, Catlin.
Yes.
Henriksen.
yes yes yes yes yes
hi that passes unanimously
thank you mr. chair seeing no objection I'd like to place this appointment on the consent calendar seeing no objection this appointment will be placed on the consent calendar congratulations thank you thank you very much thank you mr. chair members of the committee have a good day Okay, we'll move on to the legislation portion of our committee hearing, starting with House Bill 1205. Good afternoon, Senators Cutter and Baisley.
Whenever you're ready, please go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks to all of you for hearing this bill today. House Bill 26-1205 came out of the Wildfire Matters Review Committee, and it provides a straightforward but important update to Colorado statute to reflect the federal expansion of good neighbor authority as it relates to recent passage of the Explorer Act in Congress. House Bill 1205 does not create a new program, nor does it expend any regulatory authority. It modernizes statutory language so that the Colorado State Forest Service can continue implementing cross projects efficiently and at scale It a really important program So this piece of legislation comes forward following the hard work of the Colorado Forest Health Council, which is a volunteer stakeholder body whose role is to provide a collaborative forum to advise the governor through the executive director of the Department of Natural Resources and the Colorado General Assembly on issues, opportunities, and threats to Colorado's forests. Their 2025 annual report included this legislative recommendation, which was presented to us in the Wildfire Matters Review Committee and passed unanimously. So, yeah, the Forest Health Advisory Council gives us a lot of good input on legislation, and this piece, I think, could be particularly helpful. And I will pass it to my co-crime. Senator Baisley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members. So what is this Good Neighbor Authority? It's a federal provision that allows states to enter into agreements with federal land management agencies to perform certain land management activities on federal lands. So as many of you know, wildfire risk, insects and disease, and watershed protection challenges do not stop at jurisdictional boundaries. In Colorado, many of our highest risk landscapes are a patchwork of federal, state, and private lands. So that reality requires us to have tools that allow for seamless coordination across ownership lines. So at a time when wildfire risk remains one of Colorado's most pressing challenges, this is a practical and common sense alignment of state and federal law. And I'll just add that maintaining our forests, tending the garden, managing wildfires, certainly a responsibility of the state. And this has a zero dollar fiscal note. This is simply a formal partnering vehicle with the federal government called the Good Neighbor Authority. And we're ready to answer your questions.
Thank you. Committee, any questions for the sponsors? All right. Seeing none, we'll move to the witness testimony phase. we have four folks signed up they're all online they're all online if you want yeah if you want to Everett Merritt, Commissioner P.T. Wood Commissioner Jody Shattuck-McNally and Devin Reynolds All right. Everett Merritt, we'll start with you. Please go ahead and introduce yourself and then you can begin your testimony. Is he muted or is he muted on our end? We still can't hear Mr. Merritt. So we switch to Commissioner Wood and we'll come back to you, Mr. Merritt. Can't hear him either. All right, it's probably a problem on our end. Just one moment, everybody. Which one of you was the AV geek in high school It was me Fine. This is an easy bill. You're going to love it. I mean, an unlikely duo. It's not the first time, no. No, we team up when it comes to... See, that's why Wildfire Matters is the absolute best committee. It is. Yeah. Clean up the cow manure. Yeah. Which is flammable, as I understand. See, that's what I'm thinking. Yeah. All right. You know what? My other bill is up. We should be fine, right? You got it. I got it. Okay. Okay. I just had to go vote myself, so yeah. Bring it home, Mark. Bring it home. All right, we're going to go into a recess while we figure out the audio. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Okay we back We are to our witness testimony phase. Mr. Everett, please go ahead.
Thank you. Mr. Chair and esteemed members of the Senate Agricultural and Natural Resources Committee, Thank you for the opportunity to speak in support of House Bill 26-1205, which has already passed the House with strong bipartisan support. My name is Everett Merritt, and I'm here on behalf of the Colorado State Forest Service as the Good Neighbor Authority and Watershed's Program Manager. As the Chair mentioned in his remarks, wildfire risk, forest health concerns, and watershed protection needs extend beyond jurisdictional lines. In Colorado, many of our highest risk forested landscapes exist in a patchwork of federal, state, and private lands. This really underscores the need for tools that help us support coordinated action across ownership lines. House Bill 261205 ensures that Colorado's statute reflects the full scope of the federal good neighbor authority. By aligning state law with the expanded federal authority through the EXPLORE Act, this bill strengthens our ability to partner with the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, and other federal land management agencies to implement priority forest management projects efficiently and at scale. For the Colorado State Forest Service, this authority is really one of the primary ways we implement shared stewardship of Colorado's forests. It's a practical, on-the-ground tool that allows us to accelerate fuels reduction, improve forest resilience, protect watersheds, and support rural economies. When we can implement projects across federal boundaries under a single agreement, we reduce delays, lower administrative friction, and deliver outcomes faster to the communities that depend on these landscapes. In July of 2024, a wildfire ignited near the 250-home Wellington neighborhood in Breckenridge on a day with high winds and low humidity, which really could have been a recipe for disaster. However, a recently completed Good Neighbor Authority fuel break helped crews contain the fire and prevented a potentially catastrophic wildfire in the wildland urban interface. This is a tangible demonstration that when we do the right work at the right place at the right time, the impacts to Colorado's forests and communities can be profound. This bill doesn't create new programs or obligate new funding. Instead, it simply modernizes statute so we can fully utilize existing federal authorities to better serve Colorado at no additional cost. We appreciate the committee's consideration and respectfully ask for your support. Thank you.
Thank you. Commissioner Wood.
Thank you, Chair Roberts and committee members. I am Chafee County Commissioner P.T. Wood, speaking today on behalf of Colorado Communities for Climate Action and counties and commissioners acting together. Both CC4CA and CCAT support this bill. Colorado needs to take advantage of federal regulations passed in January 2025 that allow restoration services to occur beyond federal lands if authorized by state, county, or tribal governments. Forest fires are increasingly a part of life in Colorado They don recognize borders Climate change in Colorado is increasing fire danger across the state and we need to prepare in a way that considers entire landscapes. Good neighbor authority agreements will allow local governments like mine to more easily work with the United States Departments of Interior and Agriculture to look at the whole picture. The work we are currently doing in wildfire mitigation and resiliency often covers a web of state, local, private, U.S. Forest Service and BLM lands that require extensive contractual jujitsu to pull off. 1205 will make it considerably easier to coordinate all the agencies that are needed for meaningful work at the landscape level. You know, seven of the 10 largest fires in Colorado history have happened over the last 10 years, with the top five all happening in the last five years. Chafee County has already had our first wildfire this season in an area that should be under multiple feet of snow. Our climate is changing, and we need the tools that allow the cooperation needed to address this new reality. So on behalf of the members of CC4CA and Seacott and Chafee County, I ask for a yes vote on House Bill 1205. I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you.
Commissioner Shattuck-McNally. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and honorable members of this committee. I am Larimer County Commissioner Jody Shattuck-McNally. I'm also a member of the Colorado Forest Health Council appointed by the governor twice. and I chair the legislative committee. But I'm here today only as an individual commissioner and a member of CCAT where I chair the natural resources and wildfire committee and for CC4CA as we are also a member of that. Myself and both of these organizations are in strong support of House Bill 261051. I'd like to thank the sponsors and champions of these efforts, Senator Cutter and Senator Bazley for their efforts with this legislation along with representatives Velasco Amaro truly thank you all for your tireless work in this space. This bill as we talked about in the Forest Health Council and we really appreciate the Walford Matters Review Committee and Senator Cutter and partners bringing this forward is that it really is important for the state law to reflect the changes and expansion from the federal law to expand this authority to allow us to have all the tools in the toolbox. I echo many of the comments made by the state forest service earlier and my colleague, Commissioner Wood. I won't repeat those that I was going to say in my testimony. But I think we share this value of shared stewardship in Colorado and it will take all hands on all lands for the increased pace of mitigation and restoration, reduce our wildfire risk especially for mega fires and really improve already the fantastic collaboration that this will help us improve it overall. I really ask you to urgently to plan to approve this bill, support this bill. It is important for us to have this as we know we've already had two or three wildfires in Laramere County. This season is going to be a very very concerning one and I will, as the person who's had the largest wildfire in Colorado history in my county, we understand the risks and the consequences of a mega fire thank you so much and i'm here for questions
thank you commissioner committee any questions for our witnesses okay seeing none thank you all so much and thanks for hanging with us through the tech issues Last call for witnesses on House Bill 1205. Seeing none, the witness testimony phase is closed.
Senator Baisley, any amendments? No, sir.
Okay. Any amendments from the committee? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Any wrap-up comments, Senator Baisley?
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, yeah, here we are in natural partnership with the federal government because we are the mountain state. We are the place that houses most of their forests, it seems. And so having this partnership through this vehicle makes good sense. It received almost unanimous support in the House. There was one no vote. And I will be having a talk with – no, I'm kidding. I want to say thanks to the witnesses who stuck it out, and thank you all for hearing it out. And I just ask you for an aye vote for this good bill.
Thank you. Thank you. All right. Would anybody like to make a motion?
Senator Hendrickson. Mr. Chair, I move House Bill 26-1205 to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation.
That is a good motion.
Ms. Jackson, please poll the committee.
Senators, Catlin. Yes.
Hendrickson. Yes.
Yes.
Pelton B. Aye. Pelton R. Aye.
Danielson. Excused. Mr. Chair. Aye. That passes unanimously. Thank you, Commissioner.
Mr. Pelton B. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
May I make a motion for the consent calendar? Seeing no objection, that bill will be placed on the consent calendar. Thank you, Senator Cutter.
Senator Baisley. Okay.
Basically trusting the federal government.
I do. I give it to him. And I've got the talking points on it, too. Yep.
Okay. Wow. There she is. Okay. Moving on to our final bill of the day, which is House Bill 1034 by Senators Pelton,
R. and Hendrickson, who would like to start. Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, committee, for considering 1034 today, and thank you to my co-prime for being on this bill with me. 1034 is a targeted technical fix to unintended consequences of House Bill 231161. This bill is not a rollback of water efficiency goals. It is about making the law workable, enforceable, and practical for Colorado. What went wrong with 1161 is it created a point-of-sale mandate for irrigation controllers and added check valve requirements that were never fully vetted with manufacturers, distributors, or regulators. As a result, the law created confusion, higher costs, and product availability gaps with no clear enforcement pathway. The key concerns were there was no recognized testing or certification standard for irrigation check valves, leaving CDPHE with a clear way to enforce the law. Many compliant products simply did not exist, especially for shrub systems, modular controllers, and cold climate applications. Colorado would be the only state in the nation with these combined requirements disrupting national supply chains It's an increasing cost for Colorado consumers. ...scheduled to take effect before these issues could be resolved administratively. Without legislative clarification, businesses face enforcement risk even while the state acknowledges the problems. And then there will also be amendment coming later.
Senator Hendrickson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Senator Pelton. I'm taking a little bit of liberty here in speaking for my own view, but 2311-61 is a great law. I voted for it, and it sets environmental safeguard standards on a variety of appliances, and that's certainly important, and I'm glad that we have that in Colorado. I just want to sort of reiterate what my co-prime was saying, that there is this narrow section of it dealing with the irrigation appliances where the intent of the law doesn't marry perfectly up to what is currently now practical three years later in the industry. And so what 1034 looks to do is to marry what is the practical requirements to get at the efficiency safeguards of 1161 with what is feasible rather than what was conceptualized so that we're still in compliance with that spirit, if not the letter as it exists right now. Great. Thank you.
Committee, any questions for the bill sponsors?
Senator Pelton. Would you like me to kind of tell you what the amendment will be about?
Sure, you can do that right now.
Okay. So the amendment that's before you now is brought to you by CDPHE. They thought that the language in the bill still was going to cause some hurdles for them when it came to clarity and regulatory consequences. So this is just kind of a cleanup. It removes the spray sprinkler bodies from the environmental standards and makes it easier for the department to enact and enforce this.
Okay. Thank you. All right. We'll go to witness testimony phase now. We can call everybody up. Actually, we do have one person opposed. You want them to go first? Okay. Is Melissa Coleman here? All right. Good afternoon, Ms. Coleman. Wherever you'd like, thank you for your patience this afternoon. So whenever you're ready, please go ahead and introduce yourself, and then you can begin your testimony. And could you press the little gray button where the cord goes into the table? There you go. Okay.
Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Committee. I'm actually honored to be here. My name is Melissa Coleman, and I'm a constituent in Wheat Ridge, and I am an independent voter. And I oppose, I'm just against this HB 261034. I find it, it's not sound stewardship. and it's actually a breach of ethical, the Constitution, Amendment 16, and I might have the article wrong but it states in there that you have to protect and for the future of generations and I find that wasting millions of gallons of water by removing these check valves is waste and it's a violation of your oaths to be stewards of the land. And I feel that's so important. And if I could, could I address Senator Kipp?
Yes. I mean, you're speaking to the whole committee. All right.
The bill was your bill, right? I mean, why are you going against it? I mean, it's your baby. You were so happy to get it to pass back in 2023. I mean, what changed your mind?
So is that the end of your testimony? And then feel free to finish your testimony, and then we'll get to questions from anybody on the committee. It looks like Senator Kipp will have an opportunity to respond and ask.
Okay, so you want me to just finish?
Yeah, please finish first.
All right, so I apologize. This is, like, new to me. Okay. All right, so I'm just, okay. I'm here to testify to oppose. The bill is a direct violation of sound stewardship mandated by Amendment 16 of our state constitution. By repealing the environmental standards for irrigation equipment and removing the requirement for check valves, you're failing in your role as stewards of our state's water. you all took an oath to uphold the constitution sound stewardship is not a suggestion it's a mandate and I just I don't understand why you want this to pass I mean it's millions of gallons of water that will be wasted if those checked valves are removed we haven't even given it a chance to even prove itself So, I mean, can't we just do that? Can't we give it a chance to prove itself?
All right.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Coleman. We appreciate your testimony today. Committee members, questions?
Perhaps I can just say what I would have said at closing now, if that's okay. So, yeah, I was alarmed when I first saw this bill come across. Like, hey, they're repealing part of my bill. That's a problem. But then I went and checked with people. I mean, so honestly, I will just say 1161 is one of those laws that I have received more emails about probably than any other bill I passed in the past as it was about to go into effect. But here are what the people who helped to write the law said. They said that it's okay. So an organization called the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, which works on a lot of these, and the WRA, the Western Resources Alliance, they are the people who originally put these provisions in. And they said the irrigation folks really did try to find technical solutions or exceptions, short of a full repeal for those two items. I give them credit for that. They weren't just like regulation bad, so we don't want to do it. they did try and there are just everything else in the law will stay there. But when things actually physically don't work, we do like to come back and correct them. So I appreciate your concern. I still, you know, stand behind the rest of my bill. And really what we want is we don want people to just come and say well this is hard to comply with We don want you to do it We want people to try and comply And we do think that laws like this 1161 were really important especially now when we looking at all of the federal rollbacks of all of the efficiency rules so that we still have them here in Colorado. I appreciate your concern, but because the people who were really the experts in this area are okay with it, I will actually be a yes vote today. So I don't want to give that away in the end, but that's where I am on it.
All right. Thank you. I'm seeing no further questions. Thank you, Ms. Coleman, for your testimony today.
Thank you.
Okay. All right, next, we'll just call up the rest of our witnesses. Everybody here is in favor, and everybody is remote, I believe, unless you're here in person. Come on up. Andrew Morris, Amber Clark, John McMahon, and Ben Sachs. Okay, we'll start with…
Mr. Chair.
I'm sorry. Go ahead, Mr. Morris.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sorry, I was switching over to a panelist. Thank you all for joining together to hear this bill. We're in support of HB 261034 here at the Irrigation Association. We are a national association, about 80 years old. We primarily focus on education and certification of professionals who design and install irrigation systems. We also do work on policy, and that's my focus area, but I'm just one person. Really, our push is education certification, much of which we do in Colorado. Just a couple points that haven't been raised yet. One of the things that was challenging for us is a common way people upgrade existing irrigation controllers is by plugging in or adding on devices to them to make them more efficient, and we were concerned that those weren't going to be able to be sold on a standalone basis. So that's an example of why the repeal could actually improve efficiency, because we're allowing people to add those weather sensors, those soil moisture sensors, to their existing controllers, which is a pretty big part of the market. As already been stated, we worked with CDPHE. We worked with a number of environmental advocacy groups and some other technical groups to try to find solutions at the administrative level, rather than coming back and asking, being part of the ask for this fix. But we really just couldn't make it work given the current products that are available. Our members are really committed to delivering innovative and efficient products to our customers. And we would love to develop more efficient products that would work with bills like this down the road. But right now, the product offerings are limited. In the case of shrub bodies that was already mentioned, there just aren't products that meet the requirements of the law on the marketplace. So we're looking forward to continuing our efforts to educate and certify professionals in Colorado and around the country. And we appreciate your consideration of this bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Morris. Amber Clark.
Good morning, Chair Roberts, the rest of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Amber Clark. I'm an irrigation designer and product specifier. I support 26-1034 because I support water conservation and irrigation efficiency. This bill improves how we achieve those goals in real-world conditions and across a wide range of site conditions. As mentioned in many retrofit projects and temporary systems advanced controller requirements can lead to systems being installed without full functionality or not installed at all Colorado is investing in water development native landscapes green roofs stormwater facilities and urban green infrastructure Many of these projects operate under significant constraints. Temporary establishment systems for native landscapes are increasingly common. In dense urban retrofits, bringing reliable power and connectivity is often difficult or financially limiting. In these situations, a solar or battery-operated controller may be a better fit than what the current regulation requires. In regards to the check valves, those are appropriate where elevation changes cause drainage. I use them in a majority of my projects. However, in flat or shallow profile installations, like green roofs, check valves can add complexity without improving performance and may increase building structural demands. The bill maintains alignment with EPA Water Sun's program, ensuring products meet recognized efficiency standards while allowing professionals like myself to select the right product for the site. The key point is not that the tools are ineffective, but professional evaluation ensures the best outcome. Thank you.
Thank you. John McMahon.
Good afternoon, Senator Roberts and members of the committee. I am John McMahon, the CEO of the Associated Landscape Contractors of Colorado, otherwise known as ALCC. As many of you know, we represent 400 companies across Colorado, along with our supplier manufacturer partners. And of course, we're strong partners to Andrew Morris with Irrigation Association. Many of the people are speaking. I'll try not to duplicate any of my comments today. But overall, the industry, of course, strongly supports water efficiency. In fact, we're in the front lines of helping reduce outdoor water use across the state. There is actually a new program that's just launched to back that up a little bit further, and that's the Colorado Escaping Certification just released. It's a Colorado-built program in partnership with CSU, focused on water efficiency, sustainable landscapes, and long-term solution for landscape professionals, and the certification is a critical part of the current drought situation that will go on for the duration of Colorado. HB 23-1161, as you heard, have really good inventions. Just from a practicality standpoint, and some of the comments you heard from Senator Pelton and others today, it had unintended consequences with irrigation. So with the HB 26-1031, along with the forthcoming amendment that was described by Senator Pelton, is a practical course of correction. It removes the controller point of sale mandate, aligns requirements with the water zone certification. This contains strong conversational goals while creating a system that is clear, enforceable, and workable across the entire industry. So on behalf of ALCC and our partners, we support HB 261034 in the forthcoming amendment that was already described. It delivers water efficiency with clarity and consistency. Thank you very much for your time.
Thank you. And then Mr. Ben Sachs.
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. Thank you for your time and for hearing us out here on House Bill 26-1034. My name is Ben Sachs. I represent Hunter Industries, a global landscape irrigation manufacturer based in San Marcos, California. Today, I'll be talking mainly about the controller portion of this bill. As a manufacturer in the green industry, we truly support water efficiency and conservation, and we invest heavily in research and development, as well as certification to meet the likes of EPA WaterSense approval and other performance standards. We offer a variety of smart irrigation control products today, some of which are prepackaged and available right out of the box, but often require Internet connectivity. We also offer many other products that are sold as add-on or plug-in modules, which help increase the efficiency of our standard irrigation controllers. These products include rain sensors, freeze sensors, soil moisture sensors, flow sensors, and even on-site weather stations that can measure real-time of EPO transpiration. The main reason we are supporting House Bill 261034 is because its predecessor, HB 231161, honestly really overcomplicates many of the best practices and standards for water savings that are already in place today, such as the EPA WaterSense approval. Some of these issues relate to the application and site limitations that we run into in the field. You know, sports fields, nursery and ag applications, golf courses, public agencies, municipal department of transportation customers and even new home construction projects are prime examples of this You know what good is a wi connected controller on a new home construction build if there won be any Wi available until months later when the homeowner moves in And as some of my colleagues mentioned, battery operated controllers and solar powered controllers are also frequently used in areas where dedicated power is either unavailable or densely populated areas where running wire is complicated and costly and invasive. You know, think business parks, retail shopping centers, multifamily properties, urban landscapes, hotels, roadways, et cetera. These battery operated controllers are a necessity in our world, especially in phased construction and repair projects. And House Bill 231161 currently prevents the sale of these necessary battery controllers. Long story short, we support House Bill 261034 because it allows irrigation professionals and homeowners alike to deliver water efficiency without disrupting the existing smart control products or the future development of product or availability. Thank you all for your time.
Thank you. All right committee any questions for any of these witnesses? Seeing none thank you all for your time this afternoon we appreciate it. Okay last call for witnesses on House Bill 1034. Seeing none the witness testimony phase is closed We are to the amendment phase We have L2 in front of us If you would like to move that Senator Pelton Thank you Mr Chair
I move amendment L002.
Any further explanation?
No, I think it just helps CDPHE with compliance.
Right. Any objection to L002? Seeing none, L002 is adopted. Any further amendments? Bill sponsors committee? Seeing none. the amendment phase is closed. Any wrap-up comments? Senator Pelton.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Senator Kipp, for giving us your vote already. This is a good bill, common sense bill, just to show that there was some hiccups with the original bill, and it's not repealing the whole bill. It's just going in and picking the part that doesn't work and trying to fix it. and you've heard the industry already works real hard to work on conservation so with that i'd ask
for an aye vote on the bill thank you senator henderson in the words of the infamous senator
mark catlin goodwill vote yes all right uh somebody can move it as amended to the committee of the whole uh you Mr Chair I will move House Bill 1034 as amended to the Committee of the Whole with favorable recommendation
Proper motion. Any comments? Senator Kipp?
I do want to thank everybody for coming out and testifying today because I think that water efficiency is something we should all care about in this state and just really appreciate you giving us the opportunity to explain that, you know, sometimes we don't always get it right here. And I appreciate you guys bringing the fix. Okay.
Thank you.
Ms. Jackson, please poll the committee. Senators, Catlin.
Aye.
Henriksen.
Aye.
Kip.
Yes.
Pelton B.
Aye.
Pelton R.
Aye.
Danielson.
Yes.
Mr. Chair.
Aye.
That passes unanimously.
Senator Pelton.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Without objection, I would like to have this placed on the consent calendar.
Seeing no objection, House Bill 1034 will be placed on the consent calendar. All right, that concludes our work for today. Next week, I do believe we'll exercise both of our days, Wednesday upon adjournment, and Thursday afternoon. So check the calendar, and with that, we are adjourned.