Rep. Javier Mabrey

Current law mandates insurance coverage of certain preventive health-care services (preventive services) in accordance with the recommendations of the United States preventive services task force, recommendations established by the advisory committee on immunization practices, or preventive care or screening as provided in the comprehensive guidelines supported by the health resources and services administration in the United States department of health and human services (authorities). The act requires that, in the event that any of these authorities is repealed, modified, or otherwise no longer in effect, the commissioner of insurance may adopt rules that require compliance with the recommendations and comprehensive guidelines regarding the coverage of those preventive services as the recommendations and guidelines existed in January 2025 or that comply with the recommendations of the nurse-physician advisory task force for Colorado health care (NPATCH). The act also tasks the NPATCH with making recommendations regarding updates or modifications to the current list of covered preventive health-care services. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as enacted.)

The"Freedom From Intimidation In Elections Act" is created and prohibits any individual from intimidating, threatening, or coercing or attempting to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any individual for: Voting or attempting to vote; Urging or aiding any individual to vote or attempt to vote; Exercising any powers or duties to administer elections, including vote counting, canvassing, and election certification; or The individual's status as a past or present participant in the administration of elections. The act specifies that an individual who carries a visible firearm, imitation firearm, or toy firearm while interacting with or observing any of the specified election-related activities is presumed, in the absence of any affirmative showing to the contrary by a preponderance of the evidence, to have engaged in intimidation prohibited by the act; except that the presumption does not apply to a law enforcement officer or a uniformed security guard acting within the scope of their authority, and mere possession of a holstered firearm by such an officer or guard while interacting with or observing any of the specified election-related activities does not violate the Act. An aggrieved individual, an election official, a designated election official, the secretary of state, or the attorney general may enforce the provisions of the act. A suit brought by an election official, a designated election official, the secretary of state, or the attorney general does not preclude a contemporaneous private suit by an aggrieved individual to enforce the provisions of the act. In a suit to enforce the provisions of the act, a court may grant relief enjoining the use or carrying of firearms by a defendant beyond the existing prohibitions on using or carrying firearms in or near polling locations drop boxes and in or on the property of ceratin types of government buildings. To prevail in a suit to enforce the provisions of the act, a plaintiff is not required to prove that a defendant intended to intimidate, threaten, or coerce any individual, except to prove an attempt to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, but a court may consider evidence of intent in determining the appropriate relief. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as enacted.)

A tap fee is a fee that is paid by a developer or property owner in order to connect a property to a public water or sewer system. State law allows the board (board) of any sanitation district, water and sanitation district, or water district to impose and set the amount of a tap fee. The act states that a board of a water and sanitation district or a water district (district) has a duty to provide water service if the district has the capacity to do so, with certain exceptions. The act also requires a board of a district, in determining the amount of a tap fee, to: Ensure that the amount of the tap fee is reasonably related to the costs incurred by the district in providing water service, which may include certain costs and do not include certain other costs; and Take into consideration at least one of the following factors in supporting the calculation and setting of proportional or reduced fees: Expected long-term water usage, both indoor and outdoor, including the existence of nonnative turf grass and use of water-wise landscaping, with an emphasis on native plants; The square footage of the unit or the number of bedrooms in the unit; The presence of low-water-usage appliances, if applicable; Per-unit fixture counts in bathrooms, kitchens, and other spaces, interior and exterior, that provide water or sanitation service; and The presence of graywater treatment works, as may be authorized within the district boundaries.(Note: This summary applies to this bill as enacted.)

A kei vehicle is the smallest road-legal, 4-wheeled vehicle in Japan and is imported into the United States as a used vehicle. The act defines a kei vehicle as a motor vehicle for the purposes of the "Uniform Motor Vehicle Law" and the "Certificate of Title Act". These acts govern issuing a certificate of title, registering a motor vehicle, and the rules of the road for motor vehicles. The act authorizes a kei vehicle to operate on the roads and requires a kei vehicle to be issued a certificate of title, be registered, and obey motor vehicle traffic laws. Driving a kei vehicle on a roadway that has a speed limit greater than 55 miles per hour or on a limited-access highway is prohibited. For emissions testing, a kei vehicle is tested not using a dynamometer but using a 2-speed idle test. The vehicle must pass the emissions standards for the year it was manufactured. The department of revenue, the Colorado state patrol, and the agents or contractors of these agencies may not require a vehicle to have an inspection because it is a kei vehicle or has the design or manufacturing parameters of a kei vehicle. And a kei vehicle may not be declared not roadworthy because of its design or manufacturing parameters. Kei vehicles are included in the motor vehicle dealer and powersports vehicle dealer statutes, and this requires a person to be licensed as a dealer to sell kei vehicles at retail. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as enacted.)

Under current law, a person engages in an unfair and unconscionable act or practice in violation of consumer protection laws if the person engages in price gouging during a declared disaster emergency. The act provides that a person engages in price gouging in the sale or offer for sale of certain goods or services if, after the governor declares a disaster emergency, which declaration may be based on a market disruption, the price of the good or service is increased by 10% or more above the price at which a similar good or service was sold or offered for sale before the disaster began. The act also establishes that seasonal pricing is not considered unreasonably excessive pricing and therefore is not price gouging. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as enacted.)

Maddy summaryHouse Joint Resolution 25-1027 designates a specific portion of Colorado State Highway 1 in Larimer County, from East County Road 60 to Interstate 25, as the "Commissioner Lew Gaiter III Memorial Highway." It authorizes the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to accept donations for the initial placement of signs and to explore a cooperative agreement with Larimer County for sign maintenance.

Maddy summaryHJR 25-1026 designates Colorado State Highway 402, from United States Highway 287 to Interstate 25, as the "Rep. Hugh McKean Memorial Highway." It also authorizes the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) to accept donations for the initial placement of signs and to explore agreements with Larimer County for sign maintenance.

The bill requires a subject jurisdiction, on or after December 31, 2026, to allow a residential development to be constructed on a qualifying property that does not contain an exempt parcel, subject to an administrative approval process. A subject jurisdiction shall not allow a residential development to be constructed on a qualifying property unless the residential development complies with certain affordability requirements. The bill specifies that a subject jurisdiction shall not: Disallow construction of a residential development on the basis of height if the tallest structure in the residential development is no more than 3 stories or 45 feet tall; Disallow construction of a residential development on the basis of height if the tallest structure in the residential development complies with the height-related standards for the zoning district in which the residential development will be built or any zoning district parcel that is contiguous to the qualifying property on which the residential development will be built; Disallow construction of a residential development based on the number of dwelling units that the residential development will contain, except in accordance with standards listed in the bill; or Apply standards to a residential development on a qualifying property that are more restrictive than the standards the subject jurisdiction applies to similar housing constructed within the subject jurisdiction, including standards related to structure setbacks from property lines; lot coverage or open space; on-site parking requirements; numbers of bedrooms in a multifamily residential development; or on-site landscaping, screening, and buffering requirements; or minimum dwelling units per acre. A subject jurisdiction shall allow the following uses in a residential development on a qualifying property: Childcare; and The provision of recreational, social, or educational services provided by community organizations for use by the residents of the residential development and the surrounding community. A subject jurisdiction may condition additional uses in a residential development on the uses being allowed only on the ground floor of the residential development and the uses occupying no more than 15% of the ground floor area of the residential development. The bill requires a faith-based organization, school district, or state college or university to notify the county assessor that a subject jurisdiction has allowed the construction of a residential development on a qualifying property within the county. (Note: Italicized words indicate new material added to the original summary; dashes through words indicate deletions from the original summary.) (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)

The bill affords a plaintiff and defendant the right to trial by jury to decide all issues of fact in any action brought for unlawful detention of real property; except that, an action brought against a defendant who is a tenant of public housing that is owned or operated by a public housing agency must be tried by the court. The bill requires at least one attempt on 3 2 separate days of personal service on the defendant in an action for unlawful detention of real property. The bill requires an affidavit of service to be filed with the court. The bill requires a defendant who demands a trial by jury to make the demand in accordance with the Colorado rules of civil procedure or file a separate jury demand with the defendant's answer. The bill requires the court to set the date for trial no sooner than 10 days after the answer is filed. The bill authorizes the court to continue the trial if a party demands a trial by jury. The bill authorizes the court, upon its own motion or the motion of either party, to strike a jury demand and set the action for a trial by the court if the court determines that the defendant's answer only asserts equitable defenses and there is no dispute as to any material fact regarding the plaintiff's claim for possession of the premises or damages. The bill authorizes the court to allow either party, counsel for either party, and any witness to appear remotely by phone or video at a jury trial as an accommodation for a person with a disability or upon adequate assurances that the remote participation will not cause unreasonable delay. If either party requests a delay in a trial longer than 14 days, the bill authorizes the court, in the court's discretion upon a showing of a party's substantial likelihood of suffering serious economic harm, to require either party to give bond or other security to the opposite party for the sum that the party may be harmed due to the delay. The party required to make payment to the court must be given at least 7 days after the court's order to make the payment. If the party fails to make payment within the time required, the bill authorizes the court to extend the time for compliance or reset the hearing or trial for the next available date, but the court is prohibited from entering a default against the party. Upon a showing of indigency by the party required to make payment, the bill requires the court to waive or reduce the bond or other security, provide additional time to make payment, and permit the party to make multiple partial payments. Current law prohibits a written rental agreement from including a waiver of the right to a jury trial, except when the parties agree to a waiver of a jury in a hearing to determine possession of a dwelling unit. The bill removes this exemption. (Note: Italicized words indicate new material added to the original summary; dashes through words indicate deletions from the original summary.) (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)

The act requires the state board of health (board) to allow the Colorado youth advisory council (council) to present to the board twice a year on issues regarding the youth opioid epidemic and other health issues. The act also allows the council to consult the prevention services division within the department of public health and environment during the stakeholding process for rule-making regarding opioid antagonists. Under current law, a school district, the state charter school institute, or a governing board of a nonpublic school may adopt and implement a policy that allows: A school to acquire and maintain a stock supply of opioid antagonists on school grounds or on a school bus; A school employee or agent who has received relevant training to administer an opioid antagonist to a person who is at risk of experiencing an opioid-related overdose; and A school employee or agent to furnish an opioid antagonist to any individual, including a student, if the student has received relevant training. The act: Permits a school to maintain an opioid antagonist in an automated external defibrillator or defibrillator cabinet in the school or on a school bus; Repeals the requirement that a school employee or agent must receive training prior to administering an opioid antagonist; and Creates an exception that a school employee or agent may furnish an opioid antagonist to a student who has not received relevant training if the employee or agent believes that the student is in a position to assist an individual who is suffering from an opioid-related drug overdose event or who is at risk of experiencing an opioid-related drug overdose event. Current law provides a specific list of eligible entities that a prescriber may prescribe or dispense an opioid antagonist to. The act eliminates the specific list and instead requires the state board of health to establish a list of eligible entities that a prescriber may prescribe or dispense an opioid antagonist to. The act permits a standing order allowing all eligible entities to distribute opioid antagonists. The act requires the department of public health and environment to furnish a report detailing youth overdose prevention during "SMART Act" hearings. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as enacted.)