Colorado: Capital Development Committee

Chris Richardson

Capital Development Committee will come to order. Mr. Almazada, please call the roll.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Committee members, Hinrichsen?

Chris Richardson

Here.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Mauro?

Chris Richardson

Excused.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Pelton— or Pelton B?

Chris Richardson

Excused.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Richardson?

Chris Richardson

Here.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Story?

Tammy Story

Here.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Mr. Chair?

Chris Richardson

Here. Members, first thing on the agenda today is consideration of higher education cash fund requests from Pueblo Community College. Do we have President Hazelbecker here? Come on up. Welcome to the CDC. President Hazelbecker, do you want to start us off?

Hazelbecker (Pueblo Community College)

Chair and members of the committee, thank you so much for the opportunity to talk about this important project for Pueblo Community College today. So today I'm requesting your authority to purchase and remodel a building in Pueblo West, Colorado. We're currently calling this the Pueblo West Trade Building. The acquisition would allow us to get about 16,000 square feet, 2.679 acres. The keys for us are really— there's kind of 3 keys why we were asking for the authority to spend this $3.75 million. The 3 key messages for us are, as Senator Henrikson will know, the fastest area of Pueblo is Pueblo West. This facility will specifically serve welding and automotive students. Those are 2 of the fastest growing programs at Pueblo Community College. And there's really 3 key points on this for us. Number one is, is this is pure growth for us so that we actually have 140 students ready to go— 160 students, I'm sorry, 160 students ready to go in these programs today that we don't have capacity to serve. So when we open the building in Pueblo West in the fall, with your permission, we will be actually adding 160 students to our rolls that are currently on waiting lists either at Pueblo West High School or at Pueblo Community College. So we have the students. This is also the happy project where you also have the employers. So if you look at the employment numbers, we have— Pueblo is still highly reliant on manufacturing. And we know that we have employers ready to hire these folks. Had a meeting, for instance, with CS Wind, one of our important local partners. And they told me the other day that they would take 120 welders if I could turn them out tomorrow. Frankly, I can't turn them out tomorrow because I don't have the space to do that. So that we know that we have employment in these areas. And then the final key point for us is this allows us to expand our facility into the largest growing area of the county, into a facility that doesn't have any restraints in terms of what we can do there in terms of welding and automotive. It's already industrial. It's already being used by a for-profit education provider to provide similar training, though they're not doing welding there. They are doing automotive there. So it provides us a good space in an area of the county that's growing. So really appreciate your consideration of this project and happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Chris Richardson

Does this committee have any questions for the President? Madam Vice Chair.

Tammy Story

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't really have any questions, but I'm glad you figured out a path going forward. I think this is great just given the workforce need that's out there. And so yeah, I think it'll be great. Thank you.

Hazelbecker (Pueblo Community College)

We're very excited.

Chris Richardson

Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Let the record reflect that Representative Mauro is with us. I do have maybe one or two questions. Sure. The cost, is that the cost of the property coupled with the cost of any retrofitting? Is that all in?

Hazelbecker (Pueblo Community College)

Yep. So $2.85 million is the purchase price for the property, and then it's a little, a little under $1 million is what the retrofit will cost us.

Chris Richardson

What is the property appraised for? Do we know that?

Hazelbecker (Pueblo Community College)

I don't know that.

Chris Richardson

Okay.

Hazelbecker (Pueblo Community College)

Yeah, the property was originally put on the market at $3.5 million. We did work with the owner of the property to get down to that $2.85 purchase price, but I don't have a current appraisal for you.

Chris Richardson

And then your partnership with Pueblo District 70, is that support essentially just kind of paying tuition for those students to come, or is there any other type of support that comes along with that partnership?

Hazelbecker (Pueblo Community College)

The partnership will include busing. So they're willing to bus their students from Pueblo West High School to the facility. And then Pueblo West has also been a school district that has been particularly helpful in providing the cost of materials, books, for their students, which, you know, isn't covered under the CE funding model. So it's a relatively minor investment on their end, but the partnership is a little bit more than just sending students.

Chris Richardson

Perfect. Any further questions for the president? Seeing none, Madam Vice Chair.

Tammy Story

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that CDC approve the new project listed on the Pueblo Community College 2-year projection of cash need.

Chris Richardson

That is a proper motion. Mr. Amazada, please call the roll.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Committee members, Hinrichsen?

Nick Hinrichsen

Aye.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Mauro?

Tisha Mauro

Yes.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Pelton be excused. Richardson? Yes. Story?

Tammy Story

Yes.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Mr. Chair?

Chris Richardson

Yes. Congratulations, that passes unanimously.

Hazelbecker (Pueblo Community College)

Thank you so much.

Chris Richardson

Thank you. Thank you for coming up and visiting with us today. Next up, members, we have consideration of property transaction proposals from CPW. Welcome. I'm not sure, do we have these other folks online then? Okay. We have Ms. Hamming in person. Looks like I have Kim Rogers, and then these other 4 will speak to the individual ones. But if we can just bring them up so we're ready. Chris Mettenbrink, Rick Basagoitia, Crystal Dreiling, and Todd Cozard. While they're doing that, do you want to start us off, Ms. Hamming?

Sarah Hamming (Department of Natural Resources)

Yes, thanks so much, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. It's great to see you after a bit of a brief hiatus this summer. Sarah Hamming, I'm the Director of Legislative Affairs with the Department of Natural Resources, and I'm here today to present 4 separate property transaction proposals for Colorado Parks and Wildlife alongside several of my CPW colleagues that are joining me online to help answer any questions that the committee may have. This morning, I will be starting with the Lahara Reservoir State Wildlife Area fee title acquisition. Joining me online for this project, we have Kim Rogers, CPW Real Estate Section Manager, and Rick Bazagoitia, CPW Area Wildlife Manager. CPW is seeking to purchase 2,427 acres surrounding the existing Lahara Reservoir State Wildlife Area in fee title from the State Land Board. CPW currently owns and manages approximately 700 acres in and around this reservoir, and this fee title acquisition will grow the state wildlife area to over 3,000 acres, giving CPW direct management control of the reservoir and the surrounding basin. CPW will be responsible for $4.85 million of this purchase cost, which will be paid for using Habitat Stamp dollars. An additional $1.2 million will be matched with funding from our partners, including Great Outdoors Colorado, or GOCO, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and the Rio Grande Headwaters Land Trust. The 2,427 acres that CPW is seeking to acquire have been owned by the State Land Board since 1881, but CPW has leased these lands for multiple decades through the State Trust Lands Hunting and Fishing Access Program. Under CPW ownership, the property will continue to provide public access for hunting, fishing, camping, and wildlife viewing, as CPW recognizes the recreational opportunities provided by this property are incredibly important to the residents of Conejos County. Direct management and control of the reservoir and surrounding shoreline will allow CPW to preserve and enhance the wildlife habitat, continue public access, and allow for continued continued seasonal grazing in a manner that will improve and maintain grass conditions and wetland habitat. In your packet, you'll find a letter of support from the Kaneos Board of County Commissioners, along with a letter of support from Minority Leader Simpson. And with that, I ask for your support on this property transaction proposal, and our team is happy to take any questions that you might have.

Chris Richardson

Thank you, Ms. Hamming. I do have Kim Rogers, uh, and, um, Rick Basigodia to speak to that. Are they just here for questions only on those projects?

Sarah Hamming (Department of Natural Resources)

Correct. Yes. Okay.

Chris Richardson

Um, maybe what we'll do is if we'll just go through them and then we can— committee, we can just raise our hands if we have questions as the projects go along. Um, do we have any questions on this project? Yes, Madam Vice Chair.

Tammy Story

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I just am curious if there's anybody on the team that knows what the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management will be doing with their Ms.

Chris Richardson

Hamming.

Sarah Hamming (Department of Natural Resources)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And my colleague Rick Fazagoitia will be able to speak to this in more detail, but I did want to mention that there is, as you have mentioned in the packet, some detail about additional parcels that will be sold from the State Land Board to the federal government. So the, the U.S. Fish— the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management, those parcels are a separate exchange, and the State Land Board is hoping to finalize that sometime before the end of October. So that is also in the works. But I can turn it over to my colleague Rick to kind of speak to your question in more detail.

Chris Richardson

Mr. Basagoitia.

Rick Basagoitia (Colorado Parks and Wildlife)

Good morning, Chair, Vice Chair, members. Rick Basagoitia, Area Wildlife Manager in the San Luis Valley. Yes, with regard to the Forest Service and BLM, they'll both be acquiring portions of this property. They will essentially be managing them as they typically would forest and BLM lands, public lands. We are working closely with them because close coordination on this is going to be important. It's very, it's critical wildlife habitat, especially in the wintertime, and a very, very popular remote hunting and other outdoor recreation property. So they will continue to manage for multiple uses and most importantly, they'll be taking over the grazing management there that CPW just wouldn't be able to handle. At that scale.

Chris Richardson

Thank you. Any further questions on this project? Seeing none, we'll move on to the next one.

Sarah Hamming (Department of Natural Resources)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Moving on to the proposed Garluzzo fee title acquisition at Fishers Peak State Park. I am joined online for this proposal by, again, Kim Rogers, CPW Real Estate Section Manager, and Crystal Drewing, Park Manager with Fishers Peak State Park. To help answer any questions that you may have on this proposal. CPW is seeking to acquire a 13.3-acre parcel adjacent to Fishers Peak State Park. The property was valued at $230,000 and will be paid for from lottery funds. The current property owners wish to sell this property to CPW for the purposes of contributing to meaningful outdoor recreation at the park. With the acquisition of this property, CPW will be able to design and build an attractive and functional entrance gate experience for visitors. The new park entrance will be accessed from the existing frontage road off of I-25, allowing for safe, accessible, and scenic access to Fishers Peak State Park. In your packet, you'll find a letter of concurrence for this transaction from the Los Animas County Board of Commissioners. And with that, I ask for your support on this property transaction proposal, and we're happy to take any questions.

Chris Richardson

Does the committee have any questions on this proposal? Seeing none, we'll move on. Miss Amy.

Sarah Hamming (Department of Natural Resources)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Next, I will be presenting a property transaction proposal for CPW located within Weld County to establish a new state wildlife area that we are looking to call the Paloma Prairie State Wildlife Area. For this proposal, I am joined again by Kim Rogers, CPW Real Estate Section Manager, and Chris Mettenbrink, CPW Assistant assistant area wildlife manager to help answer any questions. CPW is looking to acquire approximately 640 acres of land in Weld County. The property was formerly used as a research site for the National Aeronautics and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA. However, the property has not been used for decades and the building on the property has since become dilapidated. Pursuant to an act of Congress approved in 1948, the federal government is authorized to transfer surplus federal property to state wildlife and agencies for the purpose of wildlife conservation. CPW applied to receive this specific property under this federal provision and was approved for the exchange, which will be of no cost to CPW to acquire. This exchange will allow CPW to establish a new statewide wildlife area in an area of the state that has great demand for hunting but rather limited opportunities. The property is suitable for hunting small game and deer and will also provide the opportunity for grazing every couple of years to help improve the habitat on the parcel. The building currently located on the property will need to be demolished for safety purposes, which is estimated to cost CPW approximately $200,000. In your packet, you'll find a concurrence letter for this transaction from the Weld County Board of Commissioners. And with that, I ask for your support and I'm happy to take any questions.

Chris Richardson

Any questions on this project from the committee? Senator Hinrichsen.

Nick Hinrichsen

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Ms. Hamming. So this is one, I mean, 640 acres, it's one square mile. It looks like from the satellite images that there is not, in the adjacent 640-acre blocks, it looks like there is not agriculture ongoing right now. Is there potential opportunity for— Yes. For a land trust later on so that the hunting opportunities on the land could be expanded to the greater property adjacent to it?

Chris Richardson

Tammy.

Sarah Hamming (Department of Natural Resources)

Thank you for that question, Senator Henrikson. I will turn that over to Kim Rogers, CPW's real estate section manager.

Chris Richardson

Ms. Rogers. You're muted, Ms. Rogers.

Kim Rogers (Colorado Parks and Wildlife)

Thank you. Good morning, Chair and committee members. Kim Rogers, Real Estate Section Manager for Colorado Parks and Wildlife. There isn't any other protected land around this property, so it would be Purely a guess on my part as to whether or not we could expand this in the future. And if I may respectfully remind the committee that generally we vote after each project. Thank you. Thank you.

Chris Richardson

We will, we will make a motion after the presentations for each project. Miss Hamming, is there any further questions from the committee? Seeing none, I just, I, I would like to say, uh, just credit to your department, Miss Hamming. I think it's pretty neat that you're able to, to kind of find this and, and take advantage of, you know, this, the program from the federal government to be able to acquire this and add it to the assets of CPW and you know, be able to have a, a piece of land, you know, in Weld County that folks will be able to access for a number of different reasons. And so, um, kudos to you all for, for taking advantage of that.

Sarah Hamming (Department of Natural Resources)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, we're always incredibly excited at the opportunity to open up more access, uh, to hunting and other recreation to folks across the state, especially in this area of the state. So perfect.

Chris Richardson

And we are to the final project, I believe, before us, uh, with the Cottonwood State Wildlife Area. Miss Amy.

Sarah Hamming (Department of Natural Resources)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Finally, we'd like to present a property transaction proposal to secure a water pipeline easement at Cottonwood State Wildlife Area. For this proposal, I'm joined online by Kim Rogers, CPW Real Estate Section Manager, and Todd Kozad, CPW Area Wildlife Manager, to help answer any questions that the committee may have. CPW is seeking to acquire a perpetual irrigation water conveyance easement across private land in order to deliver water to the Cottonwood State Wildlife Area for a total consideration of $7,500 paid for from wildlife cash. CPW retains ownership of ditch shares and well pumping rights on Cottonwood State Wildlife Area. However, utilization of CPW's irrigation water has been challenging due to the creation, operation, and maintenance of an open irrigation ditch aligned through a center pivot irrigation field on privately held property located just south of the state wildlife area. A formal easement will allow CPW to continue to move water to the state wildlife area for the beneficial use of wildlife. without damaging any of the crops on the private property to its south. In your packet, you'll find a letter of concurrence from the Morgan County Board of Commissioners on this property transaction proposal. And with that, I ask for your support, and I'm happy to take any questions.

Chris Richardson

Thank you, Ms. Hamming. Does the committee have any questions on this project? Seeing none, that concludes the presentations for the projects. We are to the motions, and the first one up that we have is the Lahara Reservoir. Madam Vice Chair?

Tammy Story

I move that CDC recommend support for the fee title acquisition of 2,427 acres surrounding the Lahara State Wildlife Area from the State Land Board, 6,000— or 6,067,500 acres for 2,427 acres. Dollars. I'm so sorry. Yep, yep. $6,067,500 for 2,427 acres.

Chris Richardson

That is a proper motion. Mr. Amazada, please call the roll.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Committee members. Hinrichsen? Aye. Mauro? Yes. Pelton be excused. Richardson?

Chris Richardson

Yes.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Story?

Tammy Story

Yes.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Mr. Chair?

Chris Richardson

Yes, and that passes unanimously. Next up is the Fisher's Peak project. Madam Vice Chair.

Tammy Story

I move that CDC recommend support for the fee title acquisition of 13.31-acre parcel adjacent to Fisher's Peak State Park, $230,000 for 13.31 acres.

Chris Richardson

That is a proper motion. Mr. Amazato, please call the roll.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Committee members? Hinrichsen.

Nick Hinrichsen

Aye.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Morrow? Yes. Pelton, excused. Richardson?

Chris Richardson

Yes.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Story?

Tammy Story

Yes, Mr. Chair.

Chris Richardson

Yes, and that passes unanimously. Next up, we have the Paloma Prairie State Wildlife Area. Madam Vice Chair?

Tammy Story

I move that CDC recommends support for the fee title acquisition via donation of 17065 Weld County Road 28 Platteville, Colorado for no cost for 640 acres.

Chris Richardson

That is a proper motion. Mr. Almazada, please call the roll.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Committee members, Hinrichsen? Aye. Mauro? Yes. Pelton, excused. Richardson?

Chris Richardson

Yes.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Story?

Tammy Story

Yes.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Mr. Chair?

Chris Richardson

Yes, and that passes unanimously. And last up, we have the Cottonwood State Wildlife Area. Madam Vice Chair?

Tammy Story

I move that CDC recommends support for the acquisition of a perpetual irrigation water conveyance easement for the Cottonwood State Wildlife Area, $7,500 for less than 1 acre.

Chris Richardson

That is a proper motion. Mr. Amazada, please call the roll.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Committee members, Hinrichsen? Aye. Mauro? Yes. Pelton, excused. Richardson?

Chris Richardson

Yes.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Story?

Tammy Story

Yes.

Almazada (Colorado General Assembly)

Mr. Chair.

Chris Richardson

Yes, and that passes unanimously. Thank you for being here today.

Sarah Hamming (Department of Natural Resources)

Thank you very much.

Tom Kurek (P3 unit)

Next up, members, we have a presentation from the P3 project department for updates. Do we have Tom Kurek here, Cameron Kennedy, and Luke Cordova? Who wants to start us off? Good morning, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Mr. Kuhrick. Thank you for taking the time to listen to my update. On the P3 units progress today, I want to give you a clear view of where the portfolio stands, the value these projects can create for Colorado, and this— and the work still required to deliver them. Thank you, Tony. We have moved forward from building a new program to managing a substantial statewide pipeline. That's meaningful progress for our office. It also means that for some of these projects, we are now doing the difficult but necessary middle-stage work. where entitlement, infrastructure financing, and community issues have to be solved before construction can begin. The unit exists to turn public assets and public priorities into viable projects that the state cannot deliver alone. This update shows a portfolio with real scale, strong development partners, and a disciplined path from opportunity to implementation. This is— this shows our statewide P3 delivery platform. SB 22130 gave the state a dedicated platform for developing public-private partnerships. We do much more than just identify the land. We test feasibility, run competitive procurements, negotiate agreements, coordinate agencies, local governments, And we stay involved throughout the implementation. Each one of these steps listed here takes time throughout the process. Our measure of success is not the number of ideas announced. It is the number of well-structured projects that deliver public benefit while protecting the state. Current portfolio outlook. The portfolio now includes 8 active projects. More than 1,600 proposed affordable and attainable homes, at least 4 childcare facilities, more than $390 million in expected private investment, and more than $13 million in projected program revenue over 10 years. We are also honored that the unit was named a 2026 P3 Awards finalist for Public Sector Procurer of the Year by the P3 Bulletin. That recognition is significant because it comes from the international P3 industry and reflects the quality of the platform Colorado has built in a short period of time. Thank you. It recognizes the hard work of our team, our agency partners, and the private and community partners helping move these projects forward. We're proud of it while recognizing that the ultimate measure of success will be delivering these projects for Colorado. These numbers show the promise of the portfolio.

Tammy Story

Can I just ask a quick question? I'm sorry, we were having a few words for a moment. Thank you. I just took liberty while you were away. I'm curious, like, who is awarding the award? And you might have stated it, and I apologize for our sidebar.

Tom Kurek (P3 unit)

Mr. Kirk. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Madam Vice Chair, it's the P3 Bulletin. They're an industry magazine/consortium. So they do an award for The public-private partnerships around the, around the world. This is an award for the Americas, so we're actually going up against the University of Kansas, the Brazil Land Transformation Agency, and the Guatemalan Infrastructure Agency.

Tom Kurek (P3 unit)

Thank you. Obviously, these numbers, these are not guaranteed outcomes, so our responsibility is to convert the promise into durable agreements and complete a project. Repeatable P3 delivery model. This is something we have developed since the beginning of our office, and this slide explains why major P3 projects take time. A good concept must survive feasibility work, market testing, procurement agreement negotiations, public approvals, entitlement financing, and construction. Each step protects the state and improves the likelihood that the project can actually perform. As you can see from the timelines listed, each phase can move quicker or slower depending on the project and the project circumstances. Speed matters, but durability matters more. Skipping diligence might make a project look faster at the beginning and creates much greater cost and exposure later. I'll go over some of our projects that are active right now. The AHEC Ball Field project. AHEC's moving toward financial close on a high-valuable mixed-use project, 168 homes serving households from 60 to 100% of AMI. Along with an early childhood education center that will serve the campus and its surrounding community. Because of the rise of interest rates and construction costs since the inception of this project 4 years ago, the project has gone through many iterations to go where we are today. The P3 unit's continuous spending authority allowed us to be a flexible partner for them and help preserve a project with significant housing, workforce, and childcare benefits. The immediate focus going forward now is financial close followed by groundbreaking early next year. So our Artline Village project— Artline Village will turn 14.4 acres of underutilized state property into approximately 195 homes. Including 120 affordable rentals and 75 for-sale homes, plus a childcare center, 2 in-home childcare spaces, and artist studios. Thanks to the CDC approval earlier this year, we continue to work diligently on moving forward on this project. The local zoning code repeal in Lakewood earlier this year did set back the timeline for the project, and that was outside of our control, but it did not erase the project's value. We adjusted the timeline, retained the team, and continue working toward agreements and entitlements. This is exactly the kind of real-world risk a long-term development program must be equipped to manage and really shows the benefits of having a committed partnership in projects like these. We are currently starting the community engagement process for the rezoning of the parcels.

Chris Richardson

Madam Vice Chair.

Tammy Story

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Kiryk, would you mind sharing a little bit more about the Um, the change in the zone, the repeal of the zoning code in Lakewood, and why that impacted this project, just, just for fun.

Chris Richardson

Mr. Kurek.

Tammy Story

Gotcha. Sorry.

Tom Kurek (P3 unit)

Governor's Mansion parking lot. This compact site shows how a small state asset can produce several benefits at once. The proposal adds approximately 67 middle— mixed-income rental homes, preserves 28 parking spaces for mansion operations, and directs ground lease revenue to long-term mansion maintenance. The strengths of this proposal is its alignment, housing in central Denver, continued mansion functionality, and a permanent revenue source for a historic state asset. We have had supportive conversations with the local neighborhood groups and city councilwomen for this project, and the goal for, for us will be to come for approval for before CDC in October.

Tammy Story

Madam Vice Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, is this somewhat a conceptual picture of what it might look like?

Chris Richardson

Mr. Kierk.

Tom Kurek (P3 unit)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, this is a conceptual idea of the, of the design from, um, Adam Berger Development.

Tammy Story

Great, thank you.

Nick Hinrichsen (Colorado General Assembly)

I have a quick question.

Nick Hinrichsen (Colorado General Assembly)

Just looking at the page that was given to us and kind of a A spreadsheet listing out kind of the— where, where every project is in the process and whatnot. You know, developer partner procured, development agreement executed, site evaluation feasibility, et cetera, goes through. I guess I'm just curious in there on these projects, was there any thought about putting a column in there about where it is in regards to approval by— the CDC or in regards to kind of state approval or—

Cameron Kennedy (Department of Personnel and Administration)

Thank you, Senator Mahalka. Cameron Kennedy, Director of State Properties with DPA. We have issues we have to manage that are both interior and exterior. And the table you were provided contemplates the exterior issues. The interior issues include procurement, CDC approval, and other issues that we have to address within the state as we move forward through these projects. But we can certainly put that together and have that to you pretty quickly.

Tom Kurek (P3 unit)

Yeah, I just speaking for myself as a member of the committee, I think there would be some value to it just to see where you all are internally on the projects as well. This is valuable as well, obviously, but I think the internal information is just as valuable. So. I appreciate it. Thank you. Golden Range. Golden Range is the largest housing initiative to date for the P3 unit. It's approximately 378 homes across rental and for-sale products serving households from 30 to 140% of AMI. It creates both affordable rental options and attainable paths to homeownership in a very constrained market. We have had productive conversations with the City of Golden staff, and they have pledged some of their private activity bonds in support of the project as we move forward.

Tom Kurek (P3 unit)

The scale makes Golden Range especially compelling, and it also makes careful phasing essential. We engage—

Tom Kurek (P3 unit)

we are engaging on-site and community issues now so the state can make informed decisions before entering binding long-term agreements. This project is on track to complete zoning in late 2027, and hope to commence construction in 2028. From that point, since some phases of the project depend on competitive funding rounds, the project completion timeline for all phases is expected to be 4 to 7 years. Madam Vice Chair.

Tammy Story

I'll just insert a question, and it doesn't matter, like, when, you know, you address this in your presentation, but in these residential properties where there's a range of AMI units that are going in. I'm curious for each of the projects, like, what percentage, um, of the units will be, you know, the various AMI, you know, elements in them, just to get, you know, a sense of what it might look like. But it, you know, it can happen at the end or whenever.

Tom Kurek (P3 unit)

Mr. Kirk. Yeah, unfortunately, because of the way the financing works, it's hard to nail that down up front. As we get closer to CDC approval, we'll have a better understanding of kind of the project. It still won't be exact, but we'll have a better understanding of buckets. But we can try to work on that for you.

Tammy Story

That'd be great. Thank you.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Can I ask a quick question, Mr. Kirch? So the process is kind of makes you a little dizzy to think about that they buy it and then give it and then lease it back and Whatnot. And so that aside, I'm sure we can get into details in the future on this. Would the— is the proposal then that that company, Mortenson, it would only be their employees that would be eligible to utilize these units, or how would that operate?

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

No, the whole community, anyone would be able to rent those units.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

So, Then that, I guess that makes my question, like, that makes that first question even bigger then, I guess, where, why would a company purchase property, donate it, and then pay to lease it back? I don't understand.

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

There's a couple reasons. One is that they want to do workforce housing. That's kind of their social part of their company that want to do this. The second reason is Provident Resources Group does these type of social infrastructure projects across the country. They've done hospitals, they've done projects, student housing, and they are— if it's state land, they are able to get tax-exempt bonds. Okay. And that makes these projects feasible for them to build with the lower interest rates. And that's kind of where the ability to do the project comes from.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Yeah. And I'm still confused. Would Mortenson then be the company that builds it? Would that be part of the deal, or—

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

They would build the project.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

So, okay. So now that's kind of coming together. They purchase the land, donate it, lease it back, but part of the deal is, is they are the— they're the organizer or the company that would build the units? Correct. Okay, okay. Thank you. Madam Vice Chair.

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, but it's, it's financed by Provident Resources Group, and they're the nonprofit?

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

Correct.

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

Mortenson is not a nonprofit.

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

Not nonprofit. So they would, they would, they would make some profit off the project?

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

Yeah. Of course.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

But the state would own the land and the state would receive revenue as a lease.

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

The state would— so the state would receive the revenue as a ground lease until the— they would— all net operating income after the— not just the lease, but until the— once the project's stabilized. We would receive all net operating income after debt is paid and after operations are, are paid. So in the first 10 years, we would receive around $8.7 million. Um, after year 30, about $42 million. And after year 50, about $213 million.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

And what would the— so it's, it's saying federal Grants, or, or, you know, it's talking about federal dollars potentially coming in. Will the state be spending any money then, or is that just pure— Yeah, Mr. Kirk.

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

No, so the, the property would pay for it for itself. The, um, the property would pay for all operations, and you would just pay for the property to manage it itself.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

And so those dollars are just pure profit to the state, or to the program? I assume it would stay within the P3 program, is that correct?

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

Unused state property fund. Okay, would be the idea.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Madam Vice Chair?

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

And all while adhering to the 80 to 100% AMI throughout, from now until forever.

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

And eventually, once the bonds were paid off, um, there would be flexibility to lower those AMIs if we decided to, um, because we were— we wouldn't be needing to pay off that debt service.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Gotcha. But you— but the state would be responsible for maintenance of the facility?

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

We would not be maintenancing ourselves, but we would be responsible for— we would work with a board to hire—

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

The money it would take to maintain the property would be the responsibility of Coming out of those revenues?

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

Mortensen is, is right now, um, proposing Michaelson— Michael's company, which is a maintenance company.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Okay. Um, again, kudos. I think that's a really interesting project. Madam Vice Chair?

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

Um, I might have read it somewhere, but now I don't remember. Where is this location happening?

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

So this site is located in Lakewood, um, and it's right near the Red Rocks Community College station.

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

Oh, gotcha. Okay.

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

And we would like to return in October, uh, with more details on this project, um, before we, uh, spend any budget on it or anything. I wanted to really get— kind of bring it by you guys and, and get your perspective before we move forward.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Is there any other questions or comments on this? No, I think it's— yeah, I'm excited to get more information on it. It seems, seems exciting.

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

So thank you. Yeah. I will now pass it over to Lou, um, Lou Cordova. I'm here. Cordova. Hi, everyone.

Lou Cordova

Hi, everyone. It's good to see you again. Um, we have taken a bipartisan approach to the new development contract. We're still building a global energy park, but with a security focus. So we believe that energy and grid security is critically important. And Colorado has a chance to leverage our labs and universities and take a leading role in this type of research and commercialization of innovative technology. So the first phase will be about 60,000 square feet. Now, 20,000 of that will be at the highest level of security. It's called a SCIF, which is a sensitive compartmented information facility. And the other 40K will surround that most secure part with various levels of security. Additional phases are expected in future years based on demand, and we're, we're happy with this sort of much more focused approach on energy security. We think it gives the local county a chance to absorb this first phase in terms of traffic and economic stimulus. And in 2026, we are working on tenant recruitment now. The contract has been signed with Kaplan. Development and Bryan Construction that has built these kinds of secure facilities before. And we will be moving to the location and extent process with Jefferson County shortly, and that will involve continued community engagement.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

That's it for now. Thank you, Ms. Cordova. Does the committee have any questions?

Lou Cordova

That's all I have for today. If you have any questions.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Perfect. Thank you. Does committee have any questions on this update?

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

I had one more.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Madam Vice Chair.

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

So I know you gave kind of a schedule or amounts of time that certain projects, you know, that projects take, like general You know, and years of work to get these projects done. But going back to the Golden Range project where there are numbers of different phases, and so are, are you anticipating like one phase at a time is being built, or potentially multiple phases are in different phases of construction? Like ongoing at the same time but staggered? Like, I'm just curious, like, how long would you anticipate to build out all these phases of property, you know, residential housing?

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

Mr. Kirk. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, there could be multiple phases being built at once. It really depends on the competitive funding rounds, and there's 3 separate developers working on it. So some developers have 2 phases, so they may not build both phases at once. There may be one after the other, but we expect from the time construction begins in 2028 that we would complete the final phase in about 4 to 7 years depending on that financing.

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

Okay, I have one more weird question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Would any of this development that the P3 is doing with, you know, developers who would be actually constructing the projects, are any of them going to be wrapped up in Metro District form?

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

Mr. Kirk. Thank you, Mr. Chair. At this time, there's, there's not a plan to do that. Um, we, we've not gone that route yet, and there's no plan in place. Um, I can't say that, that, that won't happen for any of them, um, if, if we go to explore that for some infrastructure costs, but at this time, that is not the plan.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Madam Vice Chair?

Tom Kurek (State P3 Unit)

Good to know. Okay, seeing no further questions, uh, just really want to give credit to you all. I, I think that these updates are valuable, um, and so kind of keeping this line of communication open with this committee, um, a lot of credit to you. And I think that helps, uh, as we get into session when things start getting busy, um, that we're getting these updates, uh, periodically so that You know, we know where the projects are and whatnot.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

And I just think that helps out with the process a lot. And so really appreciate you coming before us today and this information. It seems like you got a couple pretty exciting projects on the horizon, and I know I'm excited to hear more about them. But more importantly, I think just for the work that we're doing as a committee, I appreciate you coming before us like this and keeping this line of communication open. So thank you.

Tammy Story (Capital Development Committee)

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I'd just tack on similar comments. I really appreciate the depth of detail that you're getting into. And of course, it's, it's still sort of overview, but it's enough to help us understand where projects are going and how they're developing. And it's certainly more helpful than where we have been with previous projects where there were so many questions. And I think in many cases we didn't know enough to even know what questions to ask. But I appreciate the level of detail that you're sharing. It's super helpful.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. Thank you. Thank you for being here, members. We do— are going to do a staff update before we adjourn, but I also want to make a couple of announcements. One, I wanna welcome Mr. Armstrong to the Capital Development Committee. Really excited to have you, Mr. Armstrong. Gonna miss Mr. Fong, but really excited to have you on the team working with us. And so— Happy to serve. Yeah, thank you. And members, we also, I wanna, before we get into staff update, just wanna welcome some guests that we have here with us from the State of Wyoming Research and Evaluation Division. We have Matthew Petrie, who heads up their division. And then we have some research analysts, Pierre Chesnay, Libby Miles, Jesse Schaefer, regulatory impact analysts, Corey McAuliffe and Oliver Watson. And so, thank you for joining us today in our committee, and hopefully we didn't scare you all away with our craziness here today, or lack thereof. So, but welcome to Colorado, and thank you for joining us. Ms. Forbes.

Nina Forbes (Legislative Counsel Staff)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Nina Forbes, Legislative Counsel staff. You already gave part of the update I was gonna give, but just to reiterate, Mr.

Nina Forbes (Legislative Counsel staff)

Fung has moved over to JBC staff. So you'll still see him around, but not in this particular committee. Yeah, and John Armstrong has joined us as our fiscal analyst on CDC staff.

Nina Forbes (Legislative Counsel Staff)

And then also on the OLS side, we have 2 new folks there as well. We have Stephanie Schraub and then Richard Sweetman joining us for our OLS CDC folks. So yeah, just excited to have this team together.

Chris Richardson (Capital Development Committee)

Perfect. Welcome. Thank you all for joining us. It's gonna be an exciting year. Any final comments or questions before we adjourn? Seeing none, that completes our committee and the Capital Development Committee is adjourned.