Editor’s Note: State Bill premium users may stream or download the audio file of the full Tuesday House floor session by clicking on the player below.

A bill that would limit an enterprise zone tax credit for the state’s largest companies narrowly cleared the House by a 33-32 vote on Tuesday after a debate over whether the Democratic-led legislature was attacking business, The Denver Post reports.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Dickey Lee Hullinghorst, D-Boulder County, would limit to no more than $250,000 a year an income-tax credit that companies with investments in enterprise zones can take.

In other coverage:

The Pueblo Chieftain: By one vote, the House passed a bill on Tuesday that temporarily limits enterprise zone tax credits. Evraz Rocky Mountain Steel’s mill in Pueblo is among the businesses that would be impacted. Evraz receives an annual tax credit of $595,634 from the state as an enterprise zone, according to a state document cited in the House. Under HB1200, enterprise zone tax credits would be capped at $250,000 for the tax years 2011, 2012 and 2013, but the businesses could claim the difference in subsequent years.

The Durango Herald: The House of Representatives has voted to delay tax credits for big companies in order to help the state government cope with the recession. House Bill 1200 passed on a 33-32 vote. The bill targets tax credits for big companies that participate in Colorado’s enterprise zone program. Some Democrats have railed against the program as “corporate welfare” with no benefit for the state.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

The Colorado House of Representatives has passed a bill that may have the unintended consequence of driving insurers that provide contractors coverage out of state, according to the Professional Independent Insurance Agents of Colorado, Insurance Journal reports.

House Bill 1394 attempts to address a court decision in General Security Indemnity Company of Arizona v. MountainStates Mutual Casualty Company, 205 P.3d 529 (Colo. App. 2009), that excluded claims for certain construction defects claims and imposed no obligation to defend in a contractor’s professional liability insurance policy.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

By Debi Brazzale, COLORADO NEWS AGENCY

Calling the bill innovative and affordable, lawmakers Tuesday signaled their approval of a short-term solution to a long-time problem–congestion along the I-70 corridor through Colorado’s ski areas.

Senate Bill 184, sponsored by Democratic Senators Dan Gibbs of Silverthorne and Chris Romer of Denver, would allow the Colorado Department of Transportation to create a “zipper” lane along I-70 — a reversible lane utilized to accommodate overflow traffic in either direction.

Gibbs said the zipper will allow the flow of mountain rush-hour traffic to increase by fifty-percent, also noting that studies he has seen indicate for every hour traffic is at a standstill correlates to $1 million in lost revenue for Colorado’s tourism industry.  Gibbs also stated that contrary to popular belief, the busiest months for the corridor are July and August, not the winter months.  On average, 500,000 vehicles travel through the Eisenhower tunnel monthly.

Romer emphasized that this is bill is only a temporary fix.

“This is a common sense way to put a down payment on a long term solution,” said Romer.

Republican Minority leader Josh Penry of Grand Junction said he supports the measure because it gives CDOT the flexibility to apply the zipper as needed at a relatively low cost.

“This allows us to take a big step forward and do it through innovation rather than asking for more money,” said Penry.

Although there wasn’t any opposition to the measure, a couple of lawmakers reminded their colleagues that while the zipper seems like a good idea, it could ultimately bring back the traffic jams it is intended to cure.

“In reality what’s going to happen is more people will travel to the mountains–of course it’ll be good for the tourism,” said Rep. David Schultheis, R-Colorado Springs. “But it’ll be jammed again within a couple of years.”

Dovetailing Shultheis’ observations, Rep Joyce Foster, D-Denver, said she agreed with Schultheis, and lamented that the traffic issues weren’t addressed years earlier when discussions first emerged in the 1970’s about building a rail line.  For some, like Foster, a rail line is inevitable as a long-term solution

This state has to make a commitment to the trains sooner than later and unfortunately it’s going to be much later,” said Foster.

SB184 is on the calendar for 3^rd Reading Wednesday for an up or down roll call vote.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

By Debi Brazzale, COLORADO NEWS AGENCY

Senate lawmakers voted Tuesday on a measure that clarifies who may and may not vote in an election—for those convicted of, and those still serving time, for felony crimes.

Senate Bill 179, by Sen. Pat Steadman, D-Denver, debated on Monday, was given final approval in the Senate today, and will now head to the House for consideration.

The Colorado state constitution says that anyone that is confined in the prison system cannot vote, but that provision predates the concept of parole. Current state statute says that parolees, still serving their sentence but living outside of prison within communities, cannot vote.  However, people who are on probation, which is supervision after they have served their sentence, are allowed to vote.  Steadman believes that the parolees are disenfranchised and wants to change current law to clarify who may and may not vote in the criminal justice system.

“There’s a lot of urban legend out there, there’s a lot of misinformation about who may and who may not vote,” said Steadman.  “These people who are expected to have a job, expected to pay their taxes, should be able to exercise their voting rights under the TABOR amendment to vote on their taxes.”

Sen. Kevin Lundberg, a Republican from Berthoud, said he couldn’t support the measure, arguing there would be unintended consequences arising from voters who are not actually a resident of a community, but have been assigned to a half-way house as part of their integration back into society.

“This is a significant policy change,” said Lundberg.  “They are not residents of that area, but they have been placed there. I see this as a skewing of local elections which I believe is inappropriate.”

GOP Senate minority leader Josh Penry of Grand junction took the debate a step further in a prepared statement by characterizing the measure as a vote-seeking strategy by Democratic lawmakers.

“This is just the latest in a string of Democrat efforts to undermine the integrity of Colorado’s election process,” said Penry. “Democrats don’t support requiring the use of an ID to vote, but they advocate for same-day voter registration. No matter how extreme the proposal, Democrats are doing everything they can to improve their chances this November.”

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

 
Video: KDVR

By Gene Davis, DENVER DAILY NEWS
The proliferation of medical marijuana dispensaries has led to an increase in marijuana use by children who are vulnerable to the drug, according to multiple law enforcement officers and mental health professionals who testified yesterday before a Senate committee.
Adams County Sergeant Jon Van Zandt said school resource officers are now dealing with 10-year-olds bringing marijuana to schools.
“Milk money has been replaced with drug money,” he said.
Adams County District Attorney Don Quick added that kids who use marijuana are more likely to drop out of school and wind up in jail, which ends up costing the state more money than any potential economic benefits that taxing marijuana might bring.
The law enforcement community’s views were in sharp contrast to the patients and medical marijuana activists who also testified before the Local Government and Energy Committee. The committee held more than six hours of public testimony before voting on House Bill 1284, which looks to regulate Colorado’s medical marijuana industry. A proposed amendment would have forbid people under the age of 21 from going in a dispensary; the committee had yet to vote on the bill or its amendments by deadline for the Denver Daily News.
Medical marijuana lawyer Brian Vicente said that prohibiting people under the age of 21 from going in a dispensary would be a form of age discrimination. HIV patient Damien LaGoy added that the amendment would have made young AIDS patients jump through more hoops to get medicine that could help their condition.
Mark Simon, who testified on behalf of Colorado’s disabled community, said that while there may appear to be abuse in Colorado’s medical marijuana system, there is no data to support that claim.
“I’m concerned that we’re making public policy based on guesses,” he said.
However, psychiatry professor T.J Crawley argued that marijuana is an addictive drug, and that increasing the availability of the drug increases the use, which then increases the adverse effects he believes marijuana has.
“I’m now sad for what’s happening in my state,” he said of the proliferation of medical marijuana dispensaries. “I think it’s a very serious risk for the future.”
HB 1284 would create a state medical marijuana licensing board run by the Department of Revenue. Under the bill, dispensaries — referred to as “centers” in the bill — would have to get a state, local, and cultivation license to sell medical marijuana to patients. The measure passed out of the House last week.
HB 1284 is the second medical marijuana reform bill to make its way through the Legislature this session. The first bill from Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, would require patients under the age of 21 to get a second doctor’s opinion before being able to obtain a medical marijuana card and forbid doctors from receiving money from medical marijuana dispensaries.
Denver City Council in January unanimously approved a bill that limits where dispensaries can be located, who can run them, and what safety measures dispensary owners must have in place. All of the bills seek to clarify Amendment 20, the measure approved by voters in 2000 that allows for seriously ill Coloradans to use medical marijuana.

9News: A new proposal at the State Capitol could bar any one who is under 21 from going inside a medical marijuana dispensary. It was one of the several new regulations discussed on Tuesday when hundreds of people showed up to testify at the hearing in front of the Senate Local Government and Energy Committee. The committee took testimony late into the night and had not yet voted on whether to endorse the new regulations.

KDVR: Another huge crowd packed into a hearing room at the Capitol Tuesday for another showdown over a bill aiming to regulate medical marijuana dispensaries that remains as controversial as it is confusing, especially with a slate of new amendments up for debate. “Today is the day we begin to get control of the Wild West,” said Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, the co-sponsor of House Bill 1284 who was the first state lawmaker to wade into the murky waters of this debate last fall.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

By Peter Marcus, DENVER DAILY NEWS
A House committee Tuesday backed legislation that would repeal the criteria courts consider when weighing in on congressional district boundaries.
The controversial measure — House Bill 1408 — is opposed by some Republicans who believe Democrats are attempting to influence redistricting with partisan politics when the process should be a completely non-partisan issue.
The measure was backed by the House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee Tuesday 8-2.
The bill’s sponsor, House Majority Leader Paul Weissmann, D-Louisville, says he is only looking to repeal language that he believes attempted to bias the courts in favor of the Republican Party.
Democrats refer to a last-minute move by Republican lawmakers in 2003 — when they controlled the Legislature — that requires judges to weigh a certain set of criteria when determining congressional redistricting. The Legislature is constitutionally responsible for designating the boundaries, but judges are required to weigh in when the Legislature fails to do so.
Weissmann’s bill would repeal the 2003 law requiring courts to consider six factors — ranked by priority — in considering the legality of a redistricting plan.
The factors are:
• Ensuring districts are comprised of contiguous voting precincts;
• Compliance with the federal Voting Rights Act;
• Keeping cities and counties wholly within districts;
• Preserving communities of interest within districts;
• Keeping districts as compact as possible; and
• Keeping disruption of prior district lines at a minimum.
Weissmann added an amendment to the bill Tuesday that does not necessarily require the courts to consider the six factors, but to “lead their eyes to these areas,” he said.
HB 1408 would eliminate language in the 2003 law that prohibits courts from considering “non-neutral” criteria when determining the fairness of redistricting plans that include “political party registration, political party election performance and other factors that invite the court to speculate about the outcome of an election.”

Concern about rural communities
Republicans are especially concerned about rural communities, worried that the measure would remove a requirement that the eastern plains and western slope are seen as “communities of interest” and therefore should not be split into several congressional districts.
Weissmann and his supporters believe the courts should be kept at a distance when deciding redistricting boundaries — he says that is his motivation, not politics.
“There’s no way to separate out the politics in redistricting, I understand that, but I tried to,” Weissmann testified Tuesday. “It’s just one of those issues that when you say redistricting, political feathers go up, or whatever goes up that’s political … I’m trying to cut through as much of that as I can.”
Redistricting in Colorado and the rest of the nation takes place every 10 years to coincide with population counts derived from the census. The next redistricting will take place in 2011 after the 2010 census.
Republicans argue that their 2003 law created “guardrails” to prevent gerrymandering, or the act of redistricting for political gain.
“Right now what we have is common sense nonpartisan standards,” Rep. Brian DelGrosso, R-Loveland, commented Tuesday during the hearing.
But Rep. Joe Miklosi, D-Denver, says HB 1408 would remove “handcuffs” placed on the courts.
“The reason we’re here today is to correct this unjust, midnight, Karl Rove-initiated law from 2003,” he said Tuesday. “This bill restores a sense of fairness, removes the handcuffs and allows the courts to do their job.”

In other coverage:

The Denver Post: What was supposed to be open warfare over a Democratic proposal to alter congressional redistricting law has simmered down some after the sponsor agreed to softer language. The legislation, House Bill 1408, passed the House State Affairs Committee on Tuesday on a 7-3 vote, with one Republican, Rep. Carole Murray, R-Castle Rock, supporting it.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

State lawmakers are close to cracking down on shady doctors who are writing medical marijuana recommendations but, with just about two weeks to go, they’re still trying to figure out how — and whether — to regulate dispensaries, the Associated Press reports.

A proposal to license dispensaries, require owners to undergo criminal background checks and to grow most of the marijuana they sell (House Bill 1284) is set to get its first hearing in the Senate on Tuesday. Sponsor Sen. Chris Romer, D-Denver, thinks about 80 percent of the estimated 1,000 dispensaries in the state wouldn’t be able to pass muster and would have to close. He believes about 200 dispensaries would be enough to provide medical marijuana to the estimated 100,000 people entitled to use the drug legally.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

Republican operatives have started duplicating the political fundraising and organizational structure that catapulted state Democrats to power in 2004 and has helped keep them there since, The Denver Post reports.

A network of at least a half-dozen entities has taken shape in the past 16 months. And while there are no records with the secretary of state’s office showing what they’ve raised so far, the presentation puts that total at $702,000 from a handful of corporate and industry donors, with prospects for $8.8 million.

In Common Sense Colorado’s crosshairs are six state House seats and four state Senate seats, enough to flip control in the chambers. And the biggest target in terms of proposed spending — a planned $800,000 — is sitting Senate Majority Leader John Morse, D-Colorado Springs.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

By Debi Brazzale, COLORADO NEWS AGENCY
After a brief hiatus, the elimination of tax credits has once again stirred up controversy at the capitol.
During House debate Monday, it was a bit of déjà vu with Republicans pushing back against a Democratic measure seeking more revenue for a cash-starved state.
House Bill 1200, sponsored by Rep. Dickie Hullinghorst, D-Longmont, is part of Governor Bill Ritter’s 2010-11 budget-balancing package, eliminating certain tax credits and tax exemptions. The credit addressed in HB1200 is currently offered through the Colorado Enterprise Zone Program, specifically the Investment Tax Credit (ITC). The credit equals 3 percent of a qualified investment. HB1200 places a cap on the credit in 2011, and defers the credit in subsequent years. Estimates suggest passage of HB1200 would generate around $11.8 million in FY2010-11 and $24.6 million in FY2011-12.
Hullinghorst told House members that the passage of HB1200 is necessary to balance the budget—the budget already approved by lawmakers and sent to the Governor earlier this month, known as the “Long Bill.”
“If we don’t find that $11.million we need to find another spot to balance that. If we don’t pass this, it’ll be difficult for the governor to sign the long bill,” said Hullinghorst.
GOP members questioned Hullinghorst on the necessity of eliminating a portion of the ITC credit to balance a budget that has already been submitted to the governor. Hullinghorst said that the budget is not based on actual spending and revenue, but rather on anticipated future spending and revenue, and that the $36.4 million will ensure that the budget is balanced.
“We balance the long bill based on projections,” replied Hullinghorst. ”The long bill is a dynamic document.”
Republican Rep. Brian Del Grosso of Loveland pointed out to Hullinghorst that there is also a dynamic at play in business that he believes would be harmed if the measure were to become law.
“Based on a hypothetical, we’re going to ask businesses once again to pony up–almost 12 million dollars–increas[ing] the cost of doing business, and cost jobs,” said Del Grosso.
Democratic Joint Budget Committee Chairman Jack Pommer of Boulder, who oversaw this year’s budget process, said that the nexus between the tax exemptions and jobs just isn’t there and supports the measure as the prudent thing to do to ensure a balanced budget.
“The idea that this is going to throw anybody out of work is just plain goofy,” said Pommer, “There’s been this tendency to make this false equation between these special tax breaks and jobs, and there’s no connection between them whatsoever.”
Pommer believes that the extra $36.4 million (over two fiscal years) will help provide a “margin of error” in the budget if projections are wrong considering that the governor’s projections are slightly underbalanced, and the legislatures projections are slightly over balanced.
Yet Rep. Cory Gardner, a Republican of Yuma, believes that tinkering with the ITC will do more harm than good for Colorado’s overall economic health, regardless of how well the budget is balanced, saying elimination of the ITC could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
“Taxes have been increased on businesses by over $100 million this year. Enterprise zones do create jobs,” said Gardner. “If this bill passes we’re simply pushing a boulder down a mountain that’s already falling.”
The bill passed a voice-vote Monday, and is now on the calendar for a full roll-call vote on Tuesday.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >

Editor’s note: State Bill premium subscribers may listen to or download audio of the floor debate here.

By Kristin Pazulski, DENVER DAILY NEWS
Parolees could be able to vote in the next elections if a Senate bill, which passed a second vote on the floor yesterday, makes it to law.
Republicans criticized Senate Bill 179, sponsored by Sen. Pat Steadman, D-Denver, saying the Democrats are just trying to “increase their chances this November.”
Steadman responded that the Republican reaction was “predictable,” and he just wants to see taxpayers given their right to vote.
The bill, which will face its third senate reading today and move onto the House if passed, permits criminals on parole and in a community correction program to vote. It also requires jail administrators, sheriffs, probation and parole officers and others to inform persons of their voting rights and to make the necessary voting materials available to them.
Steadman said that, like probationers who are allowed to vote, parolees should have the same opportunity.
“Just like probationers, they are living and working in the community,” he said. “There are a whole class of voters who are disenfranchised and cannot vote on their taxes even though they are paying them.”

GOP blasts measure
In a release sent out by the Republican Senate, Sen. Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, said: “This is just the latest in a string of Democrat efforts to undermine the integrity of Colorado’s election process … No matter how extreme the proposal, Democrats are doing everything they can to improve their chances this November.”
Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, said that people lose their right to vote when they break the law.
“We should not give voting rights back to them until they are done serving their sentence,” he said, according to the release.
Steadman said of the Republican comments, “Its predictable.”
“I just think it’s a shame that the right to vote is not as important to them as it is to me, the people that voted for Senate Bill 179 and the people who are disenfranchised,” he said. “Voting is pretty fundamental.”
The difference between probation and parole in when it is granted — prisoners in jail are granted parole when their sentence is reduced for good behavior. Probation is given when a lawbreaker is sentenced.

Stay ahead by signing up for State Bill E-News! >