The bill amends the language defining the crime of human trafficking for sexual servitude to include that a person who knowingly advertises, offers to sell, or sells travel services that facilitate activities defined as human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude commits the offense of human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude. 'Travel services' are defined in the bill. Current law requires a person convicted of human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude to be placed on the Colorado sex offender registry; the bill extends that requirement to persons convicted of human trafficking of any person of any age. The bill adds a provision to law allowing a person who was convicted of human trafficking for sexual servitude to petition the court to discontinue the person's duty to register on the sexual offender registry if he or she can establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that at the time he or she committed the offense, he or she had been trafficked by another person for the purpose of committing the offense. (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)
Sponsored bills
To promote demand-side management programs for electricity, the public utilities commission (commission) was authorized in 2007 to establish the following electricity goals for investor-owned electric utilities to achieve by 2018: A demonstrated reduction of peak demand by at least 5% of the retail peak demand level in 2006; and Demonstrated energy savings of at least 5% compared to the energy sales in 2006. The bill extends the programs to 2028 and requires the commission to set goals of at least 5% peak demand reduction and 5% energy savings by 2028 for demand-side management programs implemented during 2019 through 2028 when compared to 2018 numbers. (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)
The bill contains a legislative declaration about the difficulties small businesses encounter when attempting to stay current with changing rules and new rules that affect their businesses. The bill identifies 4 specific actions that the executive branch could take to inform small businesses about proposed and new rules. The bill creates a system that gives state agencies discretion in imposing fines upon a business for a first-time offense of a minor violation. The agency's discretion applies to small businesses with 50 or fewer employees (business). Unless specifically stated otherwise in statute, a state agency has discretion to give the business an opportunity to cure the violation in 30 business days and to waive the penalties or fine if the minor violation is cured. If the business: Cures the minor violation within 30 days, the agency shall waive the penalties or fine or both; or Cures the minor violation after the 30-day cure period has run, the agency may reduce the penalties or fine in full or in part. The opportunity to cure a minor violation does not apply in cases where an agency is required by statute to assess a fine for noncompliance. The bill defines 'minor violation' as a violation that: Relates to operational or administrative matters such as record keeping, retention of data, or failing to file reports or forms; and Is enforced by a fine, either in total or in the aggregate, of $500 or less; and Meets one of the following conditions: The violation relates to a rule promulgated within the 12 months immediately preceding the alleged violation; or The violation relates to any rule and the business that has committed the minor violation has been operating as a business for less than 1 year prior to the violation. 'Minor violation' does not include: Any matter that places the safety of employees; other persons; or the public health, safety, or environment at risk; or Violations relating to: The issuance of or denial of benefits or compensation to employees; or Activities required by federal law. Each state agency shall conduct an analysis of noncompliance with its rules to identify rules with the greatest frequency of noncompliance, rules that generate the greatest amount of fines, how many first-time offenders were given the opportunity to cure a minor violation, and what factors contribute to noncompliance by regulated businesses. The agency shall consider and review what actions should be taken to address the issues identified. Any principal department that conducts an analysis of noncompliance with rules shall forward that analysis to the department of regulatory agencies, who shall compile and summarize those analyses into one combined analysis of noncompliance with rules. The department of regulatory agencies shall include that compiled analysis in its departmental presentation to the oversight legislative committee pursuant to the 'SMART Government Act'. (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)
The bill states that upon a court order, the department of human services (DHS) may transfer to the department of corrections (DOC) an individual who is at least 18 years of age and committed to the custody of the division of youth corrections within the DHS if: The individual is convicted of possession of contraband in the first degree when the contraband at issue is a deadly weapon; any crime of violence; first-, second-, or third-degree assault; or any offense for the possession or distribution of a controlled substance; and The DHS has certified that the individual is no longer benefitting from its programs or is unfit or unsafe for continued placement in a juvenile facility. Upon entering an order for such a transfer, the court shall issue a mittimus transferring all further jurisdiction over the individual to the DOC. Thereafter, the individual shall serve the unserved portion of his or her juvenile sentence as if he or she had been sentenced as an adult offender for such unserved portion. (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)
The bill makes various amendments to statutes concerning the rights of crime victims, including the following: The definition of 'crime' is amended to include: Failure to stop at the scene of an accident that results in serious bodily injury of another person; Violation of a protection order issued against a person charged with stalking; and Posting a private image for harassment or for pecuniary gain. The definition of 'critical stages' is amended to include any full parole board review hearing. The definition of 'modification of sentence' is amended to include a resentencing following a probation revocation hearing or a request for early termination of probation. The bill creates a victim's right: To be heard at any court proceeding at which the court considers a request for progression from a person accused or convicted of a crime against the victim and who is in the custody of the state mental health hospital. 'Progression' includes off-grounds supervised or unsupervised privileges, community placement, conditional release, unconditional discharge, or a special furlough. To be informed of the results of a probation or parole revocation hearing; and To be informed of the governor's decision to commute or pardon a person convicted of a crime against the victim before such information is publicly disclosed. The bill requires a district attorney's office, if practicable, to inform a victim of any pending motion to sequester the victim from a critical stage in the case. Unless a victim requests otherwise, the district attorney shall inform each victim of the right to receive information from the state mental health hospital concerning the custody and release of a person convicted of a crime against the victim and ordered by a court into the hospital's care, including how the victim may request notification from the hospital. Upon the written request of a victim, the Colorado mental health institute at Pueblo or the Colorado mental health institute at Fort Logan shall notify the victim of certain information regarding any person who was charged with or convicted of a crime against the victim. The bill requires the juvenile parole board to report additional information concerning juvenile parole hearings. The court shall inform the probation department before any hearing regarding any request by a probationer for early termination of probation or any change in the terms and conditions of probation. (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)
The 'State Administrative Procedure Act' (APA) currently defines a small business as a business with fewer than 500 employees. The bill redefines 'small business', for purposes of the APA, to mean a business entity, including its affiliates, that: Is independently owned and operated and employs fewer than 500 employees; or Has gross annual sales of less than $6 million. Prior to adopting rules, an agency is required to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis in which the agency considers using regulatory methods that will accomplish the objectives of applicable statutes while minimizing the adverse impact on small businesses. For purposes of the regulatory flexibility analysis, the bill defines 'small business' as a business that is independently owned and operated and employs 100 or fewer employees. When preparing the regulatory flexibility analysis, the agency shall consider methods to reduce the impact on small businesses, such as: Establishing less stringent compliance or reporting requirements; Establishing less stringent schedules or deadlines for compliance or reporting; Consolidating or simplifying compliance or reporting requirements; Establishing different performance standards; and Exemptions for small businesses. The agency shall also: Determine the necessity for the proposed rules; Identify the fiscal impact of the rules; Identify and analyze the least costly alternatives to the rules and adopt the least costly alternatives unless the agency provides written justification for adopting a more costly regulatory approach; and Analyze whether small businesses should be exempted from the rules or whether less burdensome rules should be applied to small businesses and adopt exemptions or less burdensome rules, unless the agency provides written justification for a more burdensome regulatory approach. The agency shall file the regulatory flexibility analysis with the secretary of state for publication in the Colorado register at the same time that it files its notice of proposed rule-making and the draft of proposed rules. The existing provision in the APA on forming representative groups to give input on proposed rules is amended to require any state agency (agency) proposing rules that are likely to have an impact on small businesses to expand outreach to and actively solicit representatives of small businesses to participate in the representative group and in the rule-making hearing for the rules. The agency must make good faith efforts to expand outreach and notification to small businesses that lack a trade association or lobbyist to represent the types of small businesses impacted by the proposed rules. The executive director of the department of regulatory agencies, or his or her designee, shall develop a one-stop location on the department's website that provides a place for small businesses and the public to access the regulatory flexibility analyses that are prepared by state agencies. A small business that is adversely affected or aggrieved by the failure of the agency to comply with the regulatory flexibility analysis requirements may file a request with the executive director of the department of regulatory agencies to require the agency to prepare a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed rules and to direct the agency to adjust the rule-making schedule to allow for the preparation of the cost-benefit analysis. For the 2017-18 fiscal year, the bill appropriates the following money for the implementation of the bill: $323,886 to the department of revenue; $102,664 to the department of public health and environment; $86,926 to the department of regulatory agencies; $8,240 to the department of state.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)
Current law allows a third party, 'on behalf of' the insured, to claim double damages and attorney fees from a property and casualty insurer for an unreasonable delay or denial of benefits. The bill eliminates the 'on behalf of' language so that only the named insured may claim double damages and attorney fees from a property and casualty insurer. The bill also requires an insured to provide notice to the property and casualty insurer of the insured's intent to file for double damages and attorney fees under the law.(Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.)
Current law requires each principal department to review all of its rules, in accordance with a schedule established by the department of regulatory agencies (DORA), to assess, among other things, the continuing need and cost-effectiveness of each rule. The bill repeals the DORA schedule-setting and instead requires each department to complete or have completed, by November 1, 2018, an initial comprehensive internal rule review. Commencing in 2021, the bill imposes a triennial schedule for such reviews to be conducted. The bill further specifies that the public and certain state agencies must be accorded no fewer than 14 business days to provide input regarding an agency's rules during its review, and that any input received must be attached to the report setting forth the results of the rule reviews included in each agency's departmental regulatory agenda. Additionally, the bill encourages each principal department to undertake an annual review of rules to ensure that the rules conform to any federal or state laws enacted, or any federal or state rules promulgated, within the previous year. (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)
The bill modifies certain statutory requirements applicable to a downtown development authority (authority) in the following respects: In all cases where any plan of development managed by the authority includes an allocation of property tax increment generated by the mill levy imposed by one or more public bodies that are not municipalities, the bill requires that one director of the board of such authority be appointed by agreement of the boards of county commissioners of each county other than a city and county whose property taxes are subject to allocation under any such plan. One director must also be appointed by agreement of the boards of education of each school district whose property taxes are subject to allocation under any such plan and one director must also be appointed by agreement of the boards of directors of each special district whose property taxes are subject to allocation under any such plan. The bill specifies additional requirements applicable to the appointment of board members. In connection with existing statutory procedures permitting an authority to allocate taxes it collects to a special fund to finance a plan of development, the bill clarifies that the taxes that may be allocated are the property taxes of specifically designated public bodies. Before any plan of development containing any tax allocation provisions that allocates any taxes of any taxing entity other than the municipality may be approved by the municipal governing body, the bill requires the authority to notify the governing boards of each other taxing entity whose incremental property tax revenues would be allocated under such proposed plan. Representatives of the authority and the governing body of the municipality and of each taxing entity are then required to meet and attempt to negotiate an agreement governing the sharing of incremental property tax revenue collected within the plan of development area. The agreement may be entered into separately among the municipality, the authority, and each such taxing entity, or through a joint agreement among the municipality, the authority, and any taxing entity that has chosen to enter into that agreement. Any such shared incremental tax revenues governed by any agreement are limited to incremental revenue that may be allocated to a plan of development. The bill gives the parties 120 days to negotiate an agreement. If, after such period has passed, the parties fail to enter into an agreement, the bill requires the parties to participate in mediation on the issue of the appropriate sharing of incremental property tax revenues and the costs of a development project among the municipality, the authority, and any such taxing entities whose incremental property tax revenues will be allocated pursuant to a plan of development and with whom an intergovernmental agreement with the municipality and the authority has not been reached. The mediation is to be conducted by a mediator jointly selected by the parties. If the parties are unable to agree on the appointment of a single mediator, the bill specifies requirements governing the appointment by the parties of a 3-mediator panel, payment of the mediator's fees and costs, and issues the mediator is to consider in making his or her determination. Within 90 days, the bill requires the mediator to issue his or her findings of fact as to the appropriate sharing of costs and incremental property tax revenues, and to promptly transmit such information to the parties. With respect to the use of incremental property tax revenues of each other taxing entity, following the issuance of findings by the mediator, the governing body of the municipality is required to: Incorporate the mediator's findings on the use of incremental property tax revenues of any taxing body into the plan of development and an intergovernmental agreement and proceed to adopt the plan; Amend the plan of development to delete authorization of the use of the incremental property tax revenues of any taxing body with whom an agreement has not been reached; or Direct the authority to either incorporate the mediator's findings into one or more intergovernmental agreements with other taxing entities or enter into new negotiations with one or more taxing entities and enter into one or more intergovernmental agreements with such taxing entities that incorporate such new or different provisions concerning the sharing of costs and incremental property tax revenues with which the parties are in agreement. The bill prohibits any incremental property tax revenues from being allocated to and paid into the special fund of the authority unless the municipality and the authority have satisfied the mediation and other requirements of the bill.(Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.)