Colorado LegiSource

An informational and educational resource for the Colorado General Assembly by the Office of Legislative Legal Services.

Month: February 2021

  • CCUSL Moves Several Uniform Acts Forward for Introduction

    by Patti Dahlberg and Thomas Morris

    The Colorado Commission on Uniform State Laws (CCUSL) is Colorado’s delegation to the national Uniform Law Commission (ULC). The ULC is comprised of more than 300 commissioners appointed by all 50 states, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico. The CCUSL meets each year during the ULC’s annual conference in July to identify a preliminary legislative agenda of approved uniform acts for potential introduction in Colorado. The CCUSL then typically hosts two or three public meetings at the state capitol to discuss its proposed legislation, listen to interested parties, and finalize its legislative agenda. The CCUSL sends advance notice of the meetings held in the capitol to interested parties, posts meeting information on the General Assembly and the CCUSL websites, encourages public testimony at the meetings, and broadcasts the meetings over the internet.

    The CCUSL held meetings to discuss its legislative agenda on September 18, 2020, and December 16, 2020, and approved eight uniform acts for introduction as commission bills during the 2021 legislative session. The links to the acts provided below are to the ULC version of the uniform acts (unless identified with a bill number), and uniform acts are routinely amended prior to introduction. Links to the Colorado versions of uniform acts will be available on the CCUSL Additional Information page as the bills are introduced. One of the uniform acts approved for introduction was a ULC act newly approved at the 2020 annual meeting and the other seven uniform acts were ULC-approved acts from prior years, a couple of which were introduced during the 2020 legislative session but were sidelined due to the COVID-19 pandemic and shortened legislative session. The eight uniform acts approved for introduction in 2021 in Colorado are:

    • Uniform Electronic Wills Act (UEWA).  Most documents traditionally printed on paper can be created, transferred, signed, and recorded in electronic form. The Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) and a similar federal law, E-SIGN, provide that a transaction is not invalid solely because the terms of the contract are in an electronic format. But UETA and E-SIGN both contain an express exception for wills, which, because the testator is deceased at the time the document must be interpreted, are subject to special execution requirements to ensure validity and must still be executed on paper in most states. Under the UEWA, the testator’s electronic signature must be witnessed at signing (or notarized simultaneously in states that allow notarized wills) and the document must be stored in a tamper-evident file. States will have the option to include language that allows remote witnessing and the act addresses recognition of electronic wills executed under the law of another state. For a generation that is used to banking, communicating, and transacting business online, this act will allow online estate planning while maintaining safeguards to help prevent fraud and coercion. The Colorado General Assembly enacted the Colorado Uniform Electronic Wills Act (HB21-1004) during the first three days of the 2021 legislative session.
    • Uniform Easement Relocation Act (UERA). An access easement gives the owner of one parcel of real estate the legal authority to travel across another person’s property. Think of a driveway that runs from a public road across one property to access another. In many, but not all, states, the owners of both properties must consent to relocate an easement. When the owner of the burdened property asks to relocate an access easement to allow further development, an easement holder in a state that follows the mutual consent rule can withhold consent to prevent the development or demand a ransom payment before agreeing to the change. The UERA allows the burdened estate owner to obtain a court order to relocate an easement if the relocation does not materially impair the utility of the easement to the easement holder or the physical condition, use, or value of the benefited property. The burdened property owner must file a civil action, give other potentially affected real-property interest owners notice, and bear all the costs of relocation. These conditions build upon the rule contained in the Restatement (Third) of Property: Servitudes, whose approach to easement relocation has been fully or partially adopted in a number of states. The act excludes conservation easements and public-utility easements from its scope and contains a number of additional safeguards, not found in the Restatement, to protect the easement holder’s interest in the use and enjoyment of the easement during and after the relocation.
    • Uniform Recognition and Enforcement of Canadian Domestic-Violence Protection Orders Act. This act provides for the enforcement of domestic violence protection orders issued by Canadian courts. Reflecting the friendship between the United States and Canada, citizens move freely between the two countries, freedom that in certain limited circumstances can work against victims of domestic violence. Canada has granted recognition to protection orders issued in the United States and other countries in the Uniform Enforcement of Canadian Judgments and Decrees Act. By this act, enacting states accord similar recognition to protection orders issued in Canada.
    • Uniform Fiduciary Income and Principal Act (UFIPA). This act is a revision of the former Uniform Principal and Income Act with a new name to differentiate it from predecessor versions. While older trusts often had clear delineation between income and principal interests, modern trust accounting requires flexibility. Trustees now tend to invest for the greatest total return and then adjust between interest and principal to produce a fair result for all the beneficiaries. UFIPA recognizes this trend toward total-return investing and includes unitrust conversion rules to allow even older trusts to take advantage of modern investment trends. UFIPA gives estate planning attorneys additional flexibility to tailor a trust for each client’s needs and includes a new governing law section to help avoid jurisdictional disputes.
    • Uniform Trust Code, Part Five. The Uniform Trust Code (2000) was the first national codification of the law of trusts. In 2018, after significant review of the uniform act by the legal community and with some amendments, the Colorado General Assembly enacted the Colorado Trust Code (SB18-180), deliberately leaving part five out to allow for additional review. The Colorado Bar Association has completed its additional review of part five and suggested amendments, and part five is ready to be considered for inclusion in the Colorado Trust Code.
    • Uniform Automated Operation of Vehicles Act. Automated and partially automated vehicles are already on the roads; this act reconciles automated driving with a typical state motor vehicle code. Many of the act’s sections – including definitions, driver licensing, vehicle registration, equipment, and rules of the road – correspond to, refer to, and can be incorporated into existing sections of a typical vehicle code. This act also introduces the concept of automated driving providers (ADPs) as a legal entity that must declare itself to the state and designate the automated vehicles for which it will act as the legal driver when the vehicle is in automated operation. The ADP might be an automated driving system developer, a vehicle manufacturer, a fleet operator, or another kind of market participant that has yet to emerge. The act uses the motor vehicle registration framework that already exists in states and applies it to both conventional and automated vehicles. By using an existing framework, the act also seeks to respect and empower state motor vehicle agencies.
    • Uniform Collaborative Law. This act provides attorneys guidance in determining whether collaborative law is appropriate for a particular dispute or client. As a uniform state law, the act helps establish uniformity in core procedures and consumer protections, while minimizing the patchwork spread of varying approaches and definitions. The collaborative law process provides lawyers and clients with an important, useful, and cost-effective option for amicable, non-adversarial dispute resolution. Like mediation, it promotes problem-solving and permits solutions not possible in litigation or arbitration. Collaborative law is a voluntary process in which clients and their lawyers agree that the lawyers will represent the clients solely for purposes of settlement, and that the clients will hire new counsel if the case does not settle. The parties and their lawyers work together to find an equitable resolution of the dispute at hand, retaining experts as necessary. No one is required to participate, and parties are free to terminate the process at any time.
    • Revised Uniform Athlete Agents Act (RUAAA). As a 2015 update to the 2000 Uniform Athlete Agents Act (enacted in 42 states, including Colorado), the RUAAA updated the 2000 act to expand some definitions, provide for reciprocal registration between states, add new requirements to the signing of an agency contract, and expand notification requirements. The 2019 Amendment to the Uniform Athlete Agents Act responds to the 2018 changes made to the NCAA bylaws to provide student athletes with more freedom and flexibility to explore the possibility of going professional while retaining their college eligibility. Under the new NCAA bylaws, certified sports agents can cover limited expenses of a prospective or enrolled student athlete and the athlete’s family for meals, hotel, and travel in connection with the agent selection process. Because the NCAA bylaw changes conflicted with the Athlete Agents Acts, the NCAA asked the ULC to amend the two Uniform Athlete Agents Acts so they will not conflict with the bylaw changes. The Section 14 amendment was drafted to clear up the conflict; it was also drafted so that it applies beyond the current bylaws to ensure that the ULC will not have to go to state legislatures every time the NCAA broadens its bylaws. The amendment includes appropriate safeguards so that it applies only if the NCAA makes further changes.

    For more information concerning the ULC and CCUSL, check out these articles:

  • Nonpartisan OLLS Staff Help With More Than Just Bill Drafting

    by Sharon Eubanks

    Although the 2021 legislative session is just now under way again, legislators have already been interacting with the staff of the Office of Legislative Legal Services for their bill and amendment requests, although on a more remote basis. While the pandemic is impacting the manner in which we interact with legislators for the time being, it does not impact what we can do for legislators. The Legislative Legal Services staff, comprised of attorneys and other professional staff, provides a variety of written materials and services to legislators in addition to their bill and amendment drafting needs.  We encourage legislators to learn more about and make full use of the products and services we can provide.  Please visit our web page.

    Legislative Legal Services is the General Assembly’s nonpartisan legal staff agency. Nonpartisanship provides the foundation for how we serve the General Assembly through our interactions with legislators, partisan staff, agency officials, lobbyists, and the public. Legislative Legal Services aims to serve all legislators fairly and impartially, regardless of party or rank, and to ensure our work is objective, balanced, and accessible.

    As legislative lawyers, we maintain an attorney-client relationship with the General Assembly, as an institution, and not with each legislator. Therefore, we are obligated to serve the best interests of the institutional client, the General Assembly, as distinguished from the individual interests of any legislator. However, when working individually with legislators, we are statutorily bound to maintain the confidentiality of all bill and amendment requests before introduction, and we are ethically bound to maintain the confidentiality of the communications we have with each legislator, as a constituent of the institution.

    In addition to our primary function of drafting bills, resolutions, and amendments, the Legislative Legal Services staff, upon request, can provide legislators with written materials to help them understand Colorado law and what other states are doing to address various issues and to help them explain their bills. Due to time constraints created by bill and amendment drafting demands, which are our first priority during the legislative session, our staff may not always be able to respond immediately to every legislator’s request. But we do our best to provide the requested materials as soon as practicable, time permitting, and on a first-come, first-served basis. Examples of ancillary materials available upon request include:

    • More-detailed, written explanations of bills;
    • Summaries of changes made to a bill in committee, in the first house, or in the second house;
    • Tables comparing bill provisions;
    • Explanations of state or federal statutes;
    • Summaries of case law relevant to a bill;
    • Summaries of case law interpreting a particular statute or issue;
    • Legislative histories of issues or bills;
    • Legislative histories of constitutional or statutory provisions;
    • Comparisons of Colorado law with the law of other states on particular issues; and
    • Lists of all Colorado statutes addressing an issue.

    Our office also provides written legal opinions, including written legal opinions on issues relating to pending legislation. We hold legal opinion requests in strictest confidence. We will not release a written memorandum to other persons without the permission of the legislator who requested it. But we will give the same answer if another legislator asks us the same question, which will result in identical legal opinions for different legislators.

    There are some limitations on the materials and services we can provide to legislators due to our role as nonpartisan legislative staff. Examples of the documents and tasks that Legislative Legal Services staff cannot provide include:

    • Voting records on an issue or bill;
    • Talking points advocating for or opposing a policy position;
    • Conveying messages that encourage a legislator to vote for a bill or discourage a legislator from voting for a bill;
    • Soliciting legislators as joint prime sponsors, cosponsors, or second house sponsors;
    • Violating confidentiality, e.g., telling a legislator about amendments prepared for other legislators to his or her bill, telling a legislator what another legislator said or told others about the legislator’s bill, or telling a legislator what legal advice our office gave another legislator;
    • Assisting a legislator in counting votes; and
    • Advocating for passage or defeat of legislation on policy or any other grounds.

    These lists illustrate the materials or services we can and cannot provide, but they are not exhaustive. If a legislator has a request for materials or assistance, please ask us. If it’s something we can provide, we will do so.

    The Legislative Legal Services staff is ready to provide the services and support necessary to help the members of the Seventy-third General Assembly have a productive and successful legislative session in 2021. Whether by phone, video meeting, or an in-person visit to our main office in Room 091 on the ground floor of the Capitol, we encourage legislators to utilize the Legislative Legal Services staff for all their legislative needs, not just for bill and amendment drafting.

    Also, for your convenience, you can access the schedule of all of the deadlines established by the Executive Committee for the 2021 legislative session at https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/2021_session_jr_44_executive_committee_full_deadlines_schedule.pdf. Since Rule 44 of the Joint Rules of the Senate and House of Representatives was amended at the beginning of the 2021 session, legislative days are now counted consecutively unless the General Assembly temporarily adjourns again for more than three days. The 120th legislative day is currently anticipated to be June 12, 2021, which is the deadline for the General Assembly to adjourn sine die.

  • Constituent Services: Here to Help!

    by Ashley Athey

    Members of the General Assembly, as elected officials representing their respective districts, often receive a number of phone calls, emails, and, at least pre-COVID, in-person requests, questions, comments, and more from their constituents. While office staff help field the initial calls and emails, sometimes constituent requests and questions require a little more research.

    That’s where the Constituent Services Unit of the Legislative Council comes in. They assist members of the General Assembly by providing information to respond to constituent requests. The Constituent Services staff strive to provide quick responses that are short, accurate, objective, and understandable to the constituent. Either a member or the member’s legislative aide, intern, or volunteer may submit a request. Responses may come from the Legislative Council Staff or from an appropriate person in federal, state, or local government.

    Constituent Services staff help with almost any type of constituent request, including requests related to:

    • Current state law or legislation pending before the General Assembly;
    • Operations and services of state government;
    • Federal and local government activity/federal law;
    • State issues, e.g., water, environment, tourism, the economy; and
    • Legislative Council “products” — fiscal notes, economic forecasts, issue briefs.

    The manner in which Constituent Services staff responds varies. They may:

    • Navigate the constituent to the right person in a state agency who can address the constituent’s concern;
    • Connect the constituent with the proper level of government to address the constituent’s concern;
    • Provide information about current law, pending legislation, or state policies;
    • Help someone better understand the law;
    • Directly help resolve the problem (e.g., getting a tax refund or getting a driver’s license ); or
    • Simply listen and acknowledge the concern.

    There are, however, some requests that Constituent Services staff cannot assist with, such as requests for:

    • Voting, attendance, and financial records;
    • Partisan research;
    • Press releases;
    • Legal opinions;
    • Opinion/position papers; or
    • District surveys.

    Only members of the General Assembly or a member’s legislative staff may submit a constituent request to Constituent Services.  A request may be initiated by telephone, fax, email, in writing, or in person.

    Elizabeth Haskell is the Manager of Constituent Services and can be reached at 303-866-6264 or by email. Requests may be submitted to the constituent services staff through email, by phone call, or in person at the Resource Center located at the foot of the main stairs on the ground floor of the State Capitol.

  • Do-overs in the Legislative Process

    by Julie Pelegrin

    Editor’s note: This is the sixth in a series of articles on the legislative rules that LegiSource is reposting during 2020-2021. This article was originally posted April 8, 2016, and has been edited as appropriate.

    A recent LegiSource article explained the rules for reconsideration that allow a committee of reference or the House or the Senate to reconsider the vote taken on a motion. But there are other routes a legislator may take to get a committee or the House or the Senate to take a second look at a bill or amendment.

    Amendments to the Committee of the Whole Report
    The most commonly used process for changing an action is an amendment to the committee of the whole report. Of course, this process only applies to actions taken on second reading in the House or the Senate.

    The second reading of bills is a two-step process. First, the House or the Senate passes a motion to sit as the committee of the whole. Considering bills as a committee that includes all of the Representatives or Senators allows the legislators to act under different rules than would apply if they were taking action formally as the House or the Senate. For example, while acting as the committee of the whole, debate cannot be limited, motions cannot be reconsidered, a decision of the chair of the committee of the whole cannot be challenged, and votes are not recorded.

    The committee of the whole adopts or rejects committee of reference reports and floor amendments to bills, generally debates the bills, and finally adopts, rejects, or refers each bill on a voice or standing vote. Once the committee of the whole has considered all of the bills on the calendar, or as many as it has time for, the majority leader moves that the committee of the whole “rise and report.”

    At this point, the House goes back to doing business as the House and the Senate goes back to doing business as the Senate, because they cannot complete the second reading process without a formal, recorded vote on the bills. This vote occurs when the House or the Senate votes on the committee of the whole report, which includes all of the amendments the committee adopted and all of the bills the committee considered. And, like any other committee report, the report of the committee of the whole can be amended.

    A legislator may offer an amendment to the committee of the whole report to change any action that the committee took – for example, to say that an amendment or bill that the committee passed, did not pass; or an amendment or bill that the committee rejected, did pass. All votes on amendments to the committee of the whole report are recorded. Once it has considered all amendments to the report, the House or the Senate finishes second reading by adopting or rejecting the entire committee of the whole report, as amended if any amendments passed.

    Under the Senate rules, a Senator can offer an amendment to the committee of the whole report to show that an amendment that was not offered in the committee of the whole did pass. Under the House rules, the committee must have actually considered an amendment for it to be the subject of an amendment to the committee of the whole report.

    Why would the House or the Senate adopt an amendment to the committee of the whole report to change something it just did? Since the votes taken in the committee of the whole are not recorded, a legislator may want an official count of the number of legislators voting for or against an amendment or a bill. Also, in the committee of the whole an amendment or bill passes with the approval of a majority of those present and voting. An amendment to the committee of the whole report and final adoption of the report requires the approval of a majority of those elected to the body: 33 in the House and 18 in the Senate.

    Referring bills from 2nd reading back to a committee of reference
    Sometimes, while debating a bill in the committee of the whole, a member will argue that a particular amendment under debate is so technical or substantive that it requires consideration by a committee of reference whose members have special expertise in the subject area. Or the committee of the whole may adopt an amendment that changes the fiscal impact of the bill. In this case, a legislator may move to refer the bill back to a committee of reference – usually the committee that originally considered the bill or the appropriations committee.

    Usually, a bill will be referred back to a committee before it is amended by the committee of the whole, but sometimes the committee of the whole will have already adopted the committee of reference report or other amendments. It is up to the legislators to decide whether the bill is referred back to the committee of reference unamended or as amended by the committee of the whole. In either case, the committee of reference may adopt a second committee of reference report that further amends the bill or changes the amendments adopted by the first committee of reference.

    Referring bills from 3rd reading back to 2nd reading in the House or to a committee of reference in the House or the Senate
    Under House rules, if a member tries to offer a substantive amendment to a bill on third reading, the proper motion is to refer the bill back to second reading for consideration of the substantive amendment. When the committee of the whole considers the bill this time, it will be considering the bill as introduced in the House with any amendments adopted on second reading enrolled into the bill – the engrossed version if it’s a House bill or the revised version if it’s a Senate bill. If the committee of the whole amends the bill on the second consideration, there will be a second engrossed or revised version of the bill.

    At the third reading stage, the House or Senate may also vote to refer the bill back to a committee of reference. In this case, the committee of reference will consider the engrossed or revised version and any amendments that the committee of reference adopts will be to the engrossed or revised version. The committee of reference may then move the bill to the committee of the whole for consideration on second reading – again. But the committee of reference cannot move the bill directly to third reading because House Rule 25 (j)(3) and Senate Rule 22 (f) only allow a committee of reference to refer a bill to another committee of reference or to the committee of the whole or to postpone the bill indefinitely.