Rep. Patrick Neville

, Read More

Commencing in 2018, section 1 of the bill requires signature verification for candidate petitions that are required to be filed with the secretary of state's office, describes the processes by which signatures are evaluated and candidates given an opportunity to cure a signature that is not verified, and authorizes the secretary of state to promulgate rules regarding such signature verification. Section 2 creates a procedure by which a major or minor party candidate who is required to file his or her petition with the secretary of state's office may cure errors or insufficiencies regarding circulator affidavits. Section 2 directs the secretary to promulgate rules to implement the cure process.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)

On and after July 1, 2017, section 4 of the bill requires 10% of the net revenue generated by existing state sales and use taxes to be credited to the highway users tax fund, paid to the state highway fund for allocation to the department of transportation (CDOT), and spent by CDOT first to make payments due on any transportation revenue notes (TRANs) issued, subject to voter approval, as required by section 7 and, to the extent not needed for that purpose, for highway purposes or highway-related capital improvements as specified in section 6. Section 7 requires the submission of a ballot question to the voters of the state at the November 2017 statewide election, which, if approved, requires the executive director of CDOT to issue TRANs in a maximum principal amount of $3.5 billion and with a maximum repayment cost of $5.5 billion. TRANs must have a maximum repayment term of 20 years and must be paid first from the net state sales and use tax revenue paid to the state highway fund and allocated to CDOT by section 4 and thereafter from any legally available money under the control of the transportation commission. Section 8 requires TRANs proceeds to be used only to provide sufficient funding for the completion of economically and regionally significant state highway system projects throughout the state, including a specific list of projects. Section 2 eliminates required statutory transfers from the general fund to the capital construction fund and the highway users tax fund for state fiscal years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20. Section 3 requires CDOT rules that govern the consideration of contractor bids for CDOT projects to require consideration of all bids submitted by prequalified contractors and prohibit shortlisting. Section 5 requires CDOT, with respect to any transportation projects for which it awards a competitively bid contract on or after July 1, 2018, to report on its public website within 30 days of the contract award and maintain on its website for at least one year thereafter all information, excluding specific corporate financial information, from all bidders submitted in response to its invitation for bids for the project.(Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.)

In 2010, pursuant to the enactment of federal law that allowed each state to establish a health benefit exchange option through state law or opt to participate in a national exchange, the general assembly enacted the 'Colorado Health Benefit Exchange Act' (act). The act created the state exchange, a board of directors (board) to implement the exchange, and a legislative health benefits exchange implementation review committee to make recommendations to the board. The bill repeals the act, effective January 1, 2018, and allows the exchange to continue for one year for the purpose of winding up its affairs. The bill also requires the board, on the last day of the wind-up period, to transfer any unencumbered money that remains in the exchange to the state treasurer, who shall transfer the money to the general fund. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.)

The bill enacts the 'Regulatory Relief Act of 2017'. The bill includes a legislative declaration about the importance of small businesses to the Colorado economy and acknowledges the difficulty these types of businesses have in complying with state rules that are not known or understood by these businesses. The bill requires a state agency (agency) to give a small business a period of time to cure a first-time minor violation of a rule instead of enforcing the rule by imposing a fine. When an agency determines that a small business has committed a minor violation of a rule, instead of imposing a fine, the agency is required to notify the small business in writing of the violation, including the steps to cure the violation, and give the small business 30 business days to cure the violation. Upon a showing of good cause, the business owner may request additional time to cure the violation. If the small business owner fails to cure the minor violation within the stated time period, the agency may impose the fine on the small business. This cure provision does not apply in cases where an agency is required by statute to assess a fine for noncompliance. For purposes of the cure provision, the bill defines 'small business' as a business that employs 100 or fewer employees. The bill defines 'minor violation' as a violation that includes operational or administrative matters, such as record keeping, retention of data, or filing of reports, and that is enforced by a fine; except that 'minor violation' does not include any matter that places the safety of the public, employees, or others at risk. The bill provides exceptions from the definition of 'minor violation' for certain types of rules or violations. Under current law, agencies are required to convene stakeholder groups to give input about proposed rules. The bill amends the stakeholder provision to direct agencies to make diligent attempts to notify and solicit input from representatives of small businesses (in this case small business is a business with fewer than 500 employees as defined under the 'State Administrative Procedure Act') about proposed rule-making, if the agency's proposed rule-making has a potential negative impact on small businesses. (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)

The bill clarifies that a certification or exemption letter required for exemption from a school immunization requirement may be from a licensed physician, physician assistant, or advanced practice nurse or a parent, guardian, emancipated student, or student 18 years of age or older. A person submitting a letter is not required to use a specified form. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.)

The bill allows a county sheriff to provide a handgun safety training course to any employee of any public elementary, middle, junior high, or high school who also possesses a permit to carry a concealed handgun. A sheriff who provides a handgun safety training course shall consult with the board of education of each school district in the sheriff's county, and, as may be appropriate, with the state charter school institute, to establish the curriculum for the course. The sheriff and each school district board, and, as may be appropriate, the state charter school institute, shall ensure that the curriculum includes consideration of any existing emergency response framework and satisfies insurability standards for armed school employees. A person who possesses a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun (permittee) who is employed by a school district, charter school, or institute charter school may carry a concealed handgun onto the grounds of any school or charter school of the district or of the institute charter school if: The permittee has successfully completed a school employee handgun safety course provided by a county sheriff; The local board of education of the school district (local board) or, in the case of an institute charter school, the state charter school institute, has approved the curriculum of the sheriff's department that provided the handgun safety course; The permittee has received written permission from the local board or, in the case of an institute charter school, from the state charter school institute, to carry a concealed handgun onto school grounds; and The permittee has notified the administration of the school, charter school, or institute charter school in writing that he or she may be carrying a concealed handgun on school grounds. Each local board and the state charter school institute may: Establish a maximum number of employees who may carry a concealed handgun in each school, charter school, and institute charter school; and Deny permission to carry a concealed handgun to any employee if granting permission to the employee would result in such a limit being exceeded.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)