Colorado LegiSource

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

Month: April 2025

  • Automatic Rule Changes During the Last Days of Session

    Editor’s note: This article was originally written by Julie Pelegrin and posted on April 18, 2019. This version has been expanded and updated where appropriate.

    On May 8, legislators, legislative staff, lobbyists, and capitol reporters can all hit the snooze button and roll over for another hour of sleep. But between now and then, there are several amendments to read, bills to consider, and differences to resolve. To help ensure that both houses can complete their work by midnight on May 7, the legislative rules automatically speed up or suspend certain procedural requirements in the last few days of the session.

    Last two weeks of session:

    • Senate Rule 22 (a)(2): A Senate committee must usually meet on the weekdays and at the times, and places specified in the Schedule of Committee Meetings, but a committee meeting may be held at a different time or place (but not day of the week) if the chair announces the meeting at least 24 hours in advance when the Senate is in session. During the last two weeks of session, the day of the week may be changed and the announcement may be made less than 24 hours if it is made as much in advance as possible.

    Last 10 days of Session:

    • House Rule 25 (j)(3); Senate Rule 22 (f): Each House and Senate committee chair must submit committee reports to their respective front desks as soon as possible after the committee acts on a bill. No more waiting for two, three, or five days to turn in the report. And during these last 10 days, at the request of the Senate Majority Leader or President, a Senate committee chair must submit the committee report immediately. If that doesn’t happen within 24 hours after the request, the committee staff person is required to submit the report to the Senate front desk on the chair’s behalf.
    • House Rule 33 (b.5): Usually, the House rules only allow technical amendments on third reading; offering a substantial amendment on third reading may result in the bill being referred back to second reading. During the last 10 days of session, however, a Representative may offer a substantial amendment to a bill on third reading.
    • House Rule 35 (a): Throughout most of the session, a representative may give notice of the intention to move to reconsider a question. In this case, the representative has until noon on the next day of actual session to move to reconsider. However, during the last 10 days of session, a member cannot give notice of intention to reconsider.
    • House Rule 35 (b) and (e): A motion to reconsider usually requires a 2/3 vote to pass. But in the last 10 days of session, a motion to reconsider—whether in a House committee or in the full House—requires only a majority vote.
    • House Rule 36 (d): The House can consider the Senate amendments made to a House bill without waiting for the members of the House to receive a copy of the rerevised bill and for the notice of consideration to be printed in the calendar.
    • House Rule 36 (d): Legislators can vote on a conference committee report once the report is turned in to the front desk—even if the report has not been distributed to the members and has not been calendared for consideration. The usual practice, however, is to try to distribute copies of conference committee reports to legislators before the vote.

    Last 5 Days of Session:

    • Joint Rule 7: One day after a bill is assigned to a conference committee, a majority of either house may demand a conference committee report, and the committee must deliver the report before the close of the second legislative day after such demand is made. But during the last five days of session, the report must be delivered by the close of the legislative day during which the demand is made. If a bill has been assigned to a conference committee at any time during the session and the committee hasn’t turned in a report, the committee must submit its report to the desk within the last five days of session.

    Last 3 Days of Session:

    • Senate Rule 26 (a): The Senate can consider the House amendments made to a Senate bill without waiting for the members of the Senate to receive a copy of the rerevised bill and for the notice of consideration to be printed in the calendar.
    • Senate Rule 26 (b): Legislators can vote on a conference committee report once the report is turned in to the front desk—even if the report has not been distributed to the members and has not been calendared for consideration. The usual practice, however, is to try to distribute copies of conference committee reports to legislators before the vote.
    • Senate Rule 18 (d): Throughout most of the session, a Senator may give notice of reconsideration, and the Secretary of the Senate will hold the bill for which the notice was given for up to two days of actual session. During the last three days of session, however, this rule is suspended, and a Senator cannot hold up a bill by giving notice to reconsider.

    Before the 118th legislative day, the President of the Senate may announce that the Senate is in the last three days of the legislative session. This does not mean that the Senate will adjourn sine die before the 120th legislative day, but it does trigger the rule changes that apply in the last three days of session. By contrast, it’s unlikely that the Speaker of the House will announce that the House is in the last 10 days of the legislative session before the 111th day. It’s more likely that on April 28th—the 111th legislative day—she will announce that the House is in the last 10 days of the legislative session. This announcement will remind the members of the House of the end-of-session procedural rule changes.

  • Reducing Conflicts Over Conflicts (of Interest)

    Editor’s Note: This article was originally written by Bob Lackner and published on April 27, 2017. This version has been updated where appropriate.

    As with many legislatures, the Colorado General Assembly prides itself on being a “citizen legislature,” which means it is comprised of citizens who take leave from their normal jobs and other duties every January to come to the State Capitol for 120 days to legislate for the people of the state. Not only is it presumed that legislators will continue to serve as teachers, farmers, ranchers, realtors, attorneys, and the like while serving in office, but this ability to bring the perspective, skill sets, and knowledge derived from working in these other fields to the job of being a legislator is seen as advantageous to representative democracy and desirable in a person who wants to serve as a legislator.

    The necessity of serving “competing masters,” however, means a certain amount of tension between legislators’ private lives and public responsibilities is built into the DNA of our citizen legislature. The law does not require that a member of the Colorado General Assembly sell all assets, renounce all worldly employment, and commit to a monastic existence when serving in the legislature (although it may seem that way to many legislators).  But the law does expect and require that when a legislator’s independence and objectivity may be compromised, the legislator will put the public interest first.

    The term “conflict of interest” generally means a legislator has a personal interest in some aspect of official action (most often a vote on a bill) sufficient to influence the objective exercise of the legislator’s public responsibilities. Stated differently, the legislator’s personal interest pulls the legislator in one direction while the public interest pulls the legislator in another direction. In this context, as codified in statute and legislative rule, “personal interest” generally refers to a financial interest in a bill or other measure. The legislator’s obligations as a public servant are supposed to trump any personal or financial interest in a public matter.

    How does a legislator know if the legislator a conflict of interest? The key to answering this question is to determine whether the situation at hand is likely to interfere or appear to interfere with the independent judgment the legislator. One test is the so-called trust test. Specifically, would the public trust the legislator’s judgment if they knew the legislator was in this situation?

    The Code of Ethics (24-18-101 to 113, C.R.S.) within the statutory standards of conduct—and specifically the ethical principles for members of the General Assembly—provide three criteria for a legislator to consider in determining whether a personal or private interest creates a conflict in a matter before the General Assembly:

    1. Whether the interest impedes the legislator’s independence of judgment;
    2. The effect of the legislator’s participation on public confidence in the integrity of the General Assembly; and
    3. Whether the legislator’s participation is likely to have a significant effect on the outcome of the vote.

    The ethical principles also declare that a conflict of interest situation does not arise from legislation that affects the entire membership of a class. This exception is very important and regularly applied in assessing potential conflict of interest situations. This so-called “class exception” allows teachers to vote on education bills, attorneys to vote on tort reform bills, farmers and ranchers to vote on water bills, and so forth. There is no magic number to determine whether a class is present.

    Members of the General Assembly are also subject to Joint Rule 42. Similar to the class exception, this rule requires the legislator to decide whether the passage of a bill will benefit the legislator personally in a way not shared by others in the legislator’s profession, occupation, industry, or region. If it will, then the legislator probably has a personal or private interest in the matter necessitating disclosure and abstention.

    What if a legislator has a personal or private (i.e., financial) interest in legislation? Under the state constitution and the House and Senate rules (HR 21 (c) and SR 17 (c), respectively), the legislator must disclose the fact and abstain from voting on the bill. What should a legislator do if the legislator has a conflict? A legislator who is concerned about a conflict of interest situation or about being too close for comfort should follow one or more of the following courses of action:

    1. Disclose the nature of the personal interest in the bill and abstain from voting. If there is a real conflict—i.e., a personal or private interest in the bill—under the law, the legislator is absolutely required to disclose the conflict and abstain from voting on the matter. But remember, constituents send legislators to the legislature to represent their interests and vote, especially on tough questions. Don’t allow abstention to become a way to evade tough votes.
    2. Talk the matter over with more experienced colleagues, especially in party legislative leadership. Sometimes it takes a third person’s perspective to really understand a difficult ethical situation.
    3. Be conscious of the appearance of impropriety. Legislators need to be conscious of how their actions will affect their personal reputations and the reputation of the General Assembly.
    4. Seek the advice of legal counsel, whether from the OLLS or a privately retained attorney.
    5. Consider seeking an advisory opinion from the Board of Ethics of the General Assembly.
    6. Consider reducing involvement on a particular matter. Although a legislator may vote on a bill, there may be appearance concerns with being a prime sponsor of the bill or otherwise serving as the “public face” of the bill.
    7. Finally, be prepared to defend a decision. More often than not, the public will respect an ethical decision honestly and thoughtfully arrived at if the legislator can clearly and credibly explain the basis for the decision.*

    The Office of Legislative Legal Services regularly consults with members of the General Assembly on how to avoid conflict of interest situations. If you are a legislator, we are happy to help you work through any conflict of interest situation in which you may be involved, especially before it becomes a problem. Please come see us!

    *Item 7 in the list of recommended actions was originally published in the July/August 2004 State Legislatures Magazine in an article entitled “How to deal with Conflicts of Interest”, by Peggy Kerns.

  • Understanding the Different Types of Colorado Public Schools

    Understanding the Different Types of Colorado Public Schools

    by Alana Rosen

    Have you ever gotten confused by what schools are considered public schools in Colorado? Join the club! The following is a simple guide on some of the different types of public schools offered in Colorado that may be subject to discussion during the legislative process.

    Neighborhood Schools

    Neighborhood schools are also known as public schools, traditional schools, or schools of a school district. Neighborhood schools are the most commonly known type of school maintained by school districts within the state. Resident students of the district can enroll in neighborhood schools. Nonresident students may apply to enroll in neighborhood schools pursuant to section 22-36-101 (1), C.R.S. Neighborhood schools are tuition-free public schools for both resident students and nonresident students. In addition to other revenue sources, neighborhood schools receive total program funding as determined by the school finance formula. For more information on total program funding, please see the following article on School Finance 101.

    District Charter Schools

    District charter schools are public schools that operate within a school district pursuant to part 1 of article 30.5 of title 22, C.R.S. A school district approves the charter application of a district charter school and enters into an authorizing contract with the district charter school. Families must apply to enroll their children in a district charter school. District charter schools may receive certain waivers as specified in law or rule. District charter schools are tuition-free public schools that receive state funding for each student through the school finance formula. District charter schools may receive a portion of additional revenue raised by taxpayers within the district.

    Institute Charter Schools

    Institute charter schools are public schools that are authorized by the state charter school institute, an independent state agency created in the Colorado Department of Education pursuant to section 22-30.5-503 (1)(a), C.R.S. The institute is authorized to approve or deny an application submitted for the establishment of an institute charter school. Enrollment is open to any child who lives in the state. Institute charter schools may receive certain waivers as specified in law or rule.[1] Institute charter schools are tuition-free public schools. Institute charter schools receive state funding for each student through the school finance formula, but do not receive additional revenue from districts because these schools are authorized by the institute, a state-created agency. Instead, the state provides additional state funds to institute charter schools.

    Innovation Schools

    The “Innovations School Act” was created in article 32 of title 22, C.R.S., and provides a pathway for schools of a school district to obtain greater control over educational programming, personnel selection, calendars and scheduling, and budgeting. To establish an innovation school, a public school or group of public schools that chooses to become an innovation school may submit to a local board of education an innovation zone plan outlining the innovative practices that the school or schools plan to implement. Innovation schools are tuition-free public schools. Because innovation schools are schools of a school district, these schools receive funding through the school finance formula. Innovation schools may also receive a portion of locally raised funds from taxpayers within the district.

    Alternative Education Campuses

    An alternative education campus is a public school that applies to the State Board of Education to be designated an alternative education campus as described in section 22-7-604.5, C.R.S. An alternative education campus has a specialized mission to serve a special needs or an at-risk population of students.

    Approved Facility School

    Approved facility schools are public schools that are authorized by the Department of Education’s Office of Facility Schools created in section 22-2-403, C.R.S. Approved facility schools are educational programs that are operated by an approved day treatment center, residential child care facility, a facility licensed by the Department of Human Services, a hospital licensed by the Department of Public Health and Environment, or a specialized day school that is authorized by the Office of Facility Schools. Approved facility schools are tuition-free public schools. Approved facility schools are state funded. Funding for approved facility schools are distributed under a formula that is not part of the school finance formula and is instead specific to approved facility schools. This formula is in section 22-54-129, C.R.S.

    Colorado School for the Deaf and the Blind

    The Colorado School for the Deaf and the Blind, established in 1874, is a state-funded institution that serves individuals under 21-years of age. Section 1 of article VIII of the Colorado Constitution, which was enacted in 1877, required the establishment and support of a school for the deaf and the blind. The Colorado School for the Deaf and the Blind was then created in article 80 of title 22, C.R.S. Children who qualify for special education services and who have hearing or vision loss may be considered for enrollment. There is a specific enrollment process for children who may attend this school, which is a tuition-free public school funded separately from the school finance formula.

    [1] Waivers for both district charter schools and institute charter schools may include waivers related to compulsory school attendance, employment, and educational programs and textbooks.