Monument Town Council received a comprehensive overview on how recent state legislation may impact local land use and planning authority, with particular attention to a new law mandating support for accessory dwelling units (ADUs).

During the regular meeting of the council on July 21 at Monument Town Hall, Director of Planning Dan Ungerleider delivered a detailed presentation outlining how a slew of new bills passed by the Colorado General Assembly in the last two legislative sessions could affect Monument.

The discussion highlighted tensions between home-rule authority and statewide mandates.

Mayor Mitch LaKind opened by noting that he and Mayor Pro Tem Steve King had closely monitored several bills during the session which carried deadlines or compliance conditions for municipalities. He highlighted a July 9 email from the Colorado Municipal League warning members about potential noncompliance with House Bill 24-1152, the new state law requiring administrative approval of ADUs.

Ungerleider explained HB24-1152 requires cities to not only allow but actively promote the development of ADUs which are small, secondary housing units on single-family lots. He noted Monument is mostly in compliance already, with ADUs permitted administratively in current zoning code, but several changes would need to align with the new law’s requirements.

These include eliminating local parking restrictions as a barrier to ADU approval and establishing design standards which meet the state’s allowances.

“We’re going to have to come up with a program to show how we’re supporting and encouraging it for workforce housing,” Ungerleider said.

Options may include providing free ADU design plans or offering local incentives. Ungerleider also acknowledged local concerns, including impacts on stormwater infrastructure, increased impervious surfaces, parking limitations and the potential for absentee owners using ADUs as revenue properties.

Councilmembers questioned whether Monument could impose limits such as owner occupancy requirements or fees to mitigate service burdens. Ungerleider said such measures may be allowed under the law and said he would research what protections are still permitted.

“It’s not that we’re against ADUs,” LaKind noted. “It’s that the state is now telling us how we must manage them administratively without local oversight.”

Council members raised broader constitutional concerns, including whether the mandate conflicts with Monument’s home-rule charter. Ungerleider and Town Attorney Bob Cole’s office indicated the main penalty for noncompliance may be loss of access to state grants, such as the one currently funding Monument’s comprehensive plan update.

The ADU law was just one of several new measures reviewed. Senate Bill 24-174 requires municipalities to adopt a housing action plan. This is something the Town of Monument is already doing as part of its comprehensive plan update. House Bill 24-1173 mandates streamlined permitting for Electric Vehicle (EV) charging stations by year-end, a compliance deadline Ungerleider said the town may already meet via its regional building partner.

Another law, HB25-113, requires limitations on turf use in new residential developments; however, Monument is expected to update its code by 2028. Council members expressed general support for xeriscaping and water conservation but noted limited staff capacity to administer related state grants.

A series of other new laws will require Monument to adjust its local code. House Bill 24-1007 prohibits municipalities from limiting residential occupancy based on familial relationships, effectively requiring Monument to remove or revise any such definitions in its code.

Senate Bill 25-002 mandates factory-built housing, such as tiny homes, be allowed in all residential zones, reinforcing the state’s push for diverse and affordable housing options. House Bill 24-1093 gives municipalities the ability to seek judicial review of anti-growth initiatives which come through citizen petitions, offering local governments a new tool to challenge potentially restrictive land use measures.

Perhaps most controversially, House Bill 24-107 allows prevailing government entities to recover attorney’s fees in certain land use lawsuits but excludes such a provision when the challenger is a developer. This disparity drew criticism from council members who view it as unfair and unbalanced.

Councilmembers expressed frustration with what they saw as one-sided legal protections and erosion of local control.

“The legislators did it anyway,” Mayor LaKind said. “Whether they can legally withhold funds remains to be seen. But there will be challenges. There already are.”

Several council members indicated interest in supporting other municipalities suing the state over these perceived overreaches. Others emphasized the need to protect neighborhoods while complying with unavoidable mandates.

In wrapping up the presentation, Ungerleider acknowledged the state passed more than 500 new laws this year. While only a fraction directly affects Monument, he said his department, in coordination with the town attorney, will continue updating local code to meet new requirements while preserving local values where possible.

“We’re promoting,” he said. “But we’re also protecting.”