Sen. Jerry Sonnenberg

For ground leases for the construction and operation of telecommunications towers on state land managed by the state board of land commissioners (board) in rural areas of the state, the bill requires the board to set a lease rate based on a local market-based appraisal of telecommunications lease rates in the rural area. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.) , Read More

Section 1 of the bill amends the definition of "broadband network" to increase the speed of downstream broadband internet service from at least 4 megabits per second to at least 10 megabits per second and the definition of "unserved area" to refer to areas that are unincorporated, or within a city with a population of fewer than 7,500 inhabitants, and that are not receiving federal broadband support. Section 2 requires the public utilities commission, on January 1, 2019, to allocate 20% of the total amount of high cost support mechanism (HCSM) money that nonrural incumbent local exchange carriers would otherwise receive to the HCSM account dedicated to broadband deployment, and to allocate an additional 20% of the total money that nonrural incumbent local exchange carriers would otherwise receive on January 1 of each subsequent year until, on January 1, 2023, all of the money that nonrural incumbent local exchange carriers would otherwise receive is allocated to the HCSM account dedicated to broadband deployment. Section 2 also removes a requirement that the commission reduce the amount of the HCSM surcharge by a certain percentage of the money transferred from the HCSM to the broadband fund for the deployment of broadband into rural areas. Section 2 requires that the HCSM surcharge amount that existed on January 1, 2019, be maintained as the surcharge amount; except that, on and after July 1, 2023, the commission may reduce the rate to ensure that the amount of money collected by the surcharge does not exceed $25 million per year. Finally, for the period of January 1, 2019, through January 1, 2023, section 2 maintains the amount of support received by rural telecommunications providers for basic service at the level of support they received on January 1, 2016. Section 3 updates language regarding the use of money from the HCSM for broadband deployment grant applications approved by the broadband deployment board (board) to have money transferred directly from the HCSM to approved broadband deployment grant applicants. Section 3 also allows a grant applicant to apply for grants for multiple projects in a single year; however, the broadband deployment board may only award an applicant grants for more than one project if money is available for broadband deployment grants after the first round of broadband deployment grants have been awarded and disbursed in that year. Section 3 also prohibits the department of local affairs from implementing a broadband deployment program or approving a grant application concerning broadband deployment unless the board has determined that the program or application does not involve the same or a duplicate of any projects approved and funded. Section 4 repeals the public utilities commission's functions of administering the high cost support mechanism on September 1, 2024, subject to the department of regulatory agencies' review of the functions through its sunset review process.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.) , Read More

Current law allows a taxpayer to claim a state income tax credit for a portion of the value of a perpetual conservation easement that is granted by the taxpayer on real property located in the state. The bill places a 3-year moratorium on the ability of a taxpayer to claim the credit from January 1, 2019, through December 31, 2021.(Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.) , Read More

A conservation easement is an agreement in which a property owner agrees to limit the use of his or her land in perpetuity in order to protect one or more specified conservation purposes. The instruments creating the easement are recorded in the public records affecting the ownership of the property. The easement is held by a third party (holder), which monitors the use of the land and ensures that the terms of the agreement are upheld. Current law allows a taxpayer to claim a state income tax credit for a portion of the value of a perpetual conservation easement that is granted by the taxpayer on real property located in the state. The aggregate amount of credits that may be claimed each year by all taxpayers is capped at $45 million; except that the amount of credits allowed in recent years has been substantially lower than that amount. There is currently no centralized public source of information to identify the number, size, location, or validity of conservation easements in the state and whether the conservation purposes of the easements are being monitored and defended. The bill requires a comprehensive accounting of the conservation easements that have been created in the state since 1998. The state auditor shall contract with an independent contractor to perform the accounting. The accounting includes information about the instruments creating each easement, the size and location of each easement, the grantors and holders of each easement, tax credits claimed for the donation of each easement, and whether the conservation purposes of each easement are being protected. The accounting includes the creation of a corresponding map showing the location of each conservation easement in the state. Certain public entities are encouraged to provide information and input into the preparation of the accounting. The state auditor is directed to review the accounting and present it at a public meeting to the legislative audit committee by a specified date. The committee is required to conduct a subsequent meeting to allow public testimony on the accounting. The auditor is further directed to annually update the information in the accounting and make it available to the public on the auditor's website. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.) , Read More

A conservation easement is an agreement in which a landowner agrees to limit the use of his or her land in perpetuity in order to protect one or more specified conservation purposes. The easement is held by a third party (holder), which monitors the use of the land and ensures that the terms of the agreement are upheld. Current law allows a taxpayer to claim a state income tax credit for a portion of the value of a conservation easement that is granted in perpetuity. A landowner must submit an application for the tax credit along with a fee, an appraisal setting forth the value of the easement, and other materials to the division of real estate in the department of regulatory agencies (division). The division reviews the application and, if the easement and its appraised value meet the applicable statutory requirements, grants the application to claim the tax credit. Section 1 of the bill freezes the amount of the application fee to the amount charged as of January 1, 2018. Fees are not allowed to be reduced for multiple applicants. If the director of the division believes that the appraisal submitted by the landowner is not credible, the bill allows the landowner to submit 2 additional appraisals and the director must accept the average amount of the 3 appraisals as the value of the easement. The director is required to consider the appraisals as submitted and not attempt to influence the substance of the appraisals. Section 2 requires the governing body of a local government in which a conservation easement is located to hold a public hearing before a conservation easement is created, modified, or transferred. Public notice is required prior to the hearing and the grantor of the easement, the holder of the easement, and the public are allowed to testify. Section 3 limits the terms of conservation easements to 20 years. The instrument creating an easement is required to clearly set forth the conservation purposes of the easement and require the holder to provide a monitoring and compliance report to the landowner not less than annually. Prior to creating an easement a landowner is required to execute a disclosure form acknowledging certain specified consequences and risks associated with creating the easement. Prior to incurring any costs associated with creating an easement, a landowner must sign a good faith estimate of the costs associated with the creation of the easement. The landowner cannot be held liable subsequently for any costs that exceed amounts in the estimate. A holder of a conservation easement is prohibited from permitting or benefiting financially from any type of development on the property subject to the conservation easement including the development of wind, solar, oil, gas, or mineral resources on the property. Section 4 specifies that any instrument modifying the terms of an easement must be recorded in the public real property records. Section 5 allows a landowner to transfer or extinguish a conservation easement if the holder becomes insolvent, dissolved, or delinquent or otherwise fails to monitor and protect the conservation purposes of the easement.(Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced.) , Read More

Read More

Current law allows a service retiree of any division of the public employees' retirement association (PERA) to work for a PERA employer for limited periods and to receive a salary without reduction in benefits under certain circumstances. Several rural school districts in the state have recently experienced a shortage of teachers, school bus drivers, and school food services cooks and would ideally address the shortages by hiring service retirees. PERA's employment after retirement provisions, including the limitation on the number of days in a calendar year that a service retiree may work for a PERA employer without a reduction in benefits, make it difficult for school districts to fill their vacancies with retired teachers, school bus drivers, and school food services cooks. The bill modifies the current PERA employment after retirement provisions for certain retirees hired by an employer in the school division if: The employer that hires the service retiree is a rural school district as determined by the department of education based on certain criteria and the school district enrolls 6,500 students or fewer in kindergarten through 12th grade; The school district hires the service retiree for the purpose of providing classroom instruction or school bus transportation to students enrolled by the district or for the purpose of being a school food services cook; and The school district determines that there is a critical shortage of qualified teachers, school bus drivers, or school food services cooks, as applicable, and that the service retiree has specific experience, skills, or qualifications that would benefit the district. A service retiree who is a teacher, a school bus driver, or a school food services cook and who is hired by an employer in the school division that satisfies the criteria above may receive salary without a reduction in benefits for any length of employment in a calendar year if the service retiree has not worked for any PERA employer during the month of the effective date of retirement. In addition, the bill requires the employer that hires the service retiree to provide full payment of all PERA employer contributions, disbursements, and working retiree contributions. The bill also specifies that a service retiree who is a teacher, school bus driver, or food services cook and who is hired by an employer in the school division: Is not required to resume PERA membership; Will not receive a PERA health care premium subsidy; Is eligible to participate in the health plan offered by the employer; May not receive salary without reduction in benefits and without limitation in a calendar year for more than 6 consecutive years; and May not be employed by the school district from which he or she retired until 2 years after retirement if he or she retired without a full service retirement benefit. By December 1, 2020, PERA is required to submit a report including specified information to the general assembly regarding the additional employment after retirement provisions for teachers, school bus drivers, and food services cooks. (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)

The bill creates the state veterinary education loan repayment council (council), which consists of 5 directors appointed by the governor. The council administers the veterinary education loan repayment program (program) by use of funds from the veterinary education loan repayment fund (fund), which program and fund are also created in the bill. Through the program, the council provides veterinary education loan repayments from the fund to eligible veterinarians who: Have graduated from an accredited doctor of veterinary medicine school; Currently live in Colorado or, at some point, have lived in Colorado for at least 3 years; and Agree to practice veterinary medicine for up to 4 years in a rural area of the state that is experiencing a shortage of veterinarians that the council designates for participation in the program. To implement the program, the council enters into a contract with an eligible veterinarian and the rural area of the state in which the veterinarian will practice veterinary medicine. (Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)

Section 16 of the bill repeals the existing hospital provider fee program, effective July 1, 2017, and section 17 creates a new Colorado healthcare affordability and sustainability enterprise (CHASE) within the department of health care policy and financing (HCPF), effective July 1, 2017, to charge and collect a healthcare affordability and sustainability fee that functions similarly to the repealed hospital provider fee. Because CHASE is an enterprise for purposes of the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights (TABOR), its revenue does not count against the state fiscal year spending limit (Referendum C cap). Section 17 of the bill also requires CHASE to seek any federal waiver necessary to fund and, in cooperation with HCPF and hospitals, support the implementation, no earlier than October 1, 2019, of a health care delivery system reform incentive payments program. Sections 2, 3, 6, 7, 11, 13, 15 through 20, 22, and 32 make conforming amendments, with section 32 extensively modifying FY 2017-18 appropriations to reflect the repeal of the hospital provider fee program and the creation of CHASE. Section 34 specifies that the effective date of sections 2, 3, 6, 7, 11, 13, 15 through 20, 22, and 32 of the bill is July 1, 2017, and that those sections do not take effect if the centers for medicare and medicaid services determine that they do not comply with federal law. Section 11 of the bill permanently reduces the Referendum C cap by reducing the FY 2017-18 cap by $200 million and specifying that the base amount for calculating the cap for all future state fiscal years is the reduced FY 2017-18 cap. As is the case under current law, the reduced cap is annually adjusted for inflation, the percentage change in state population, the qualification or disqualification of enterprises, and debt service changes. Section 24 of the bill specifies that for any state fiscal year commencing on or after July 1, 2017, for which revenue in excess of the reduced Referendum C cap is required to be refunded in accordance with TABOR, reimbursement for the property tax exemptions for qualifying seniors and disabled veterans that is paid by the state to local governments for the property tax year that commenced during the state fiscal year is a refund of such excess state revenue. The exemptions continue to be allowed at current levels and the state continues to reimburse local governments for local property tax revenue lost as a result of the exemptions regardless of whether or not there are excess state revenues. Section 27 prioritizes the new TABOR refund mechanism ahead of the existing temporary state income tax rate reduction refund mechanism as the first mechanism used to refund excess state revenue. Section 12 of the bill requires the state, on or after July 1, 2018, to execute lease-purchase agreements, including associated certificates of participation (COPs), for up to $2 billion of eligible facilities identified collaboratively by the state architect, the office of state planning and budgeting (OSPB), and state institutions of higher education for the purpose of generating funding for capital construction projects and transportation projects. The lease-purchase agreements must be issued in increments of up to $500 million in FYs 2018-19, 2019-20, 2020-21, and 2021-22. The first $120 million of lease-purchase agreement proceeds from the FY 2018-19 issuance must be used to fund capital construction projects with most of that amount being dedicated for funding of level I, II, and III controlled maintenance projects. The first $120 million of lease-purchase agreement proceeds from the FY 2019-20 issuance must be used for capital construction projects as prioritized by the capital development committee. Remaining proceeds are credited to the state highway fund and are required by section 31 to be expended to fund state strategic transportation project investment program projects that are designated for tier 1 funding as 10-year development program projects on the department's development program project list, with at least 25% of such proceeds being expended to fund projects that are located in rural counties. At least 10% of such proceeds must be expended for transit purposes or for transit-related capital improvements. The maximum term of the lease-purchase agreements is 20 years, and the maximum total annual repayment amount for lease-purchase agreements is $150 million. Lease-purchase agreements must be paid, subject to annual appropriation by the general assembly or annual allocation by the transportation commission, first from up to $9 million from the general fund or any other legally available source of money, next from up to $50 million of legally available money under the control of the transportation commission solely for the purpose of allowing the construction, supervision, and maintenance of state highways to be funded with the proceeds of lease-purchase agreements, and last from up to $85 million from the general fund or any other legally available source of money. Sections 5 and 8 of the bill specify that an academic facility is not eligible for controlled maintenance funding if it is acquired or constructed, or, if it is an auxiliary facility repurposed for use as an academic facility, solely from a state institution of higher education's cash and operated and maintained from such cash funds and if the acceptance of construction or repurposing occurs on or after July 1, 2018. Section 29 of the bill, in accordance with previously granted voter approval, increases the rate of the retail marijuana sales tax, which is currently 10% and is scheduled under current law to decrease to 8%, to 15%, effective July 1, 2017. Section 30 holds local governments that currently receive an allocation of 15% of state retail marijuana sales tax revenue based on the current tax rate of 10% (i.e. the amount attributable to a 1.5% tax rate) harmless by specifying that on and after July 1, 2017, they receive an allocation of 10% of state retail marijuana sales tax revenue based on the new rate of 15% (i.e., the same amount attributable to a 1.5% tax rate). Of the 90% of the state retail marijuana sales tax revenue that the state retains for state FY 2017-18: 28.15% less $30 million stays in the general fund; 71.85% is credited to the marijuana tax cash fund; and $30 million is credited to the state public school fund and distributed to rural school districts as specified in section 4. Of the 90% of the state retail marijuana sales tax revenue that the state retains for state fiscal year 2018-19 and for each succeeding state fiscal year: 15.56% stays in the general fund; 71.85% is credited to the marijuana tax cash fund; and 12.59% is credited to the state public school fund and distributed to all school districts as specified in section 4. Section 4 of the bill requires the $30 million of state retail marijuana sales tax revenue that is transferred to the state public school fund for FY 2017-18 to be appropriated to the department of education and allocated 55% to large rural school districts and 45% to small rural school districts and then distributed to the large and small rural school districts on a per pupil basis. Section 4 requires all of the state retail marijuana sales tax revenue that is transferred to the state public school fund for FY 2018-19 and for each subsequent fiscal year to be distributed to all school districts and institute charter schools as part of the state share of total program funding. On and after July 1, 2017, section 28 offsets a portion of the state retail marijuana sales tax rate increase by exempting retail sales of marijuana upon which the state retail marijuana sales tax is imposed from the 2.9% general state sales tax and section 23 makes a conforming amendment to ensure that local governments can continue to impose their local general sales taxes on retail sales of marijuana. Section 9 of the bill requires each principal department of state government, other than the departments of education and transportation, that submits an annual budget request to the OSPB, when submitting its budget request for FY 2018-19 to the OSPB, to request a total budget for the department that is at least 2% lower than its actual budget for the FY 2017-18. The OSPB must strongly consider the budget reduction proposals made by each principal department when preparing the annual executive budget proposals to the general assembly for the governor and must seek to ensure that the executive budget proposal for each department for FY 2018-19 is at least 2% lower than the department's actual budget for FY 2017-18. Section 10 of the bill eliminates FY 2018-19 and FY 2019-20 general fund transfers to the highway user tax fund required by current law. The eliminated transfers are in the amounts of $160 million on June 30, 2019, and $160 million on June 30, 2020. Section 14 of the bill specifies that on and after January 1, 2018, for pharmacy and for hospital outpatient services, including urgent care centers and facilities and emergency services provided under the 'Colorado Medical Assistance Act', HCPF rules that specify the amount of copayments for such services must require the recipient to pay: For pharmacy, at least double the average amount paid by recipients in state fiscal year 2015-16; or For hospital outpatient services, at least double the amount required to be paid as specified in the rules as of January 1, 2017; except that For both pharmacy and hospital outpatient services, the amount required to be paid by the recipient may not exceed any specified maximum dollar amount allowed by federal law or regulations as of January 1, 2017. Section 21 of the bill requires HCPF, within 120 days of the enactment of the federal 'Advancing Care for Exceptional Kids Act' (ACE Kids Act) and subject to available appropriations, to seek any federal approval necessary to fund, in cooperation with hospitals that meet the specified requirements, the implementation of an enhanced pediatric health home for children with complex medical conditions. HCPF must comply with ACE Kids Act requirements for its participation. Section 25 of the bill terminates an existing temporary income tax credit for business personal property taxes paid that is available only for income tax years commencing before January 1, 2020, one year early so that it is available only for income tax years commencing before January 1, 2019. Section 26 replaces the terminated temporary credit with a more generous permanent income tax credit for business personal property taxes paid on up to $18,000 of the total actual value of a taxpayer's business personal property. Section 1 of the bill makes a legislative declaration that all provisions of Senate Bill 17-267 relate to and serve and are necessarily and properly connected to the General Assembly's purpose of ensuring and perpetuating the sustainability of rural Colorado.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)

In the case of St. Jude's Co. v. Roaring Fork Club, LLC, 351 P.3d 442 (Colo. 2015) ( St. Jude's Co. ), the Colorado supreme court held that direct diversions of water from a river to a private ditch for aesthetic, recreational, and piscatorial purposes on private property, without impoundment, are not beneficial uses of water under Colorado water law. The bill provides that the decision in the St. Jude's Co. case interpreting section 37-92-103 (4) does not apply to previously decreed absolute and conditional water rights or claims pending as of July 15, 2015. The interpretation of section 37-92-103 (4) in St. Jude's Co. applies only to direct-flow appropriations, without storage, filed after July 15, 2015, for water diverted from a surface stream or tributary groundwater by a private entity for private aesthetic, recreational, and piscatorial purposes.(Note: This summary applies to the reengrossed version of this bill as introduced in the second house.)