By Todd Engdahl, EDUCATION NEWS COLORADO
Two top Senate leaders Wednesday unveiled a revised version of Senate Bill 10-003, the higher education flexibility bill, that would give state colleges and universities greater freedom to set their tuition rates and more flexibility in their financial affairs but also create new requirements for maintaining student access and affordability and for improving quality.
The proposal also would give advisory student members on college boards the right to vote – but only on budget matters. (That wouldn’t apply to the University of Colorado Board of Regents, whose members are elected by the voters.)
Also up consideration at the Statehouse is a resolution to allow video keno games in bars and restaurants, with revenue going to colleges.
The rewritten version of SB 10-003, originally introduced last Jan. 13, will have its first hearing, in the Senate Education Committee, on April 28, just 10 working days before the legislature must adjourn. It was unveiled during a “stakeholder” meeting Tuesday.
The bill has its origins in a study committee that met last summer but since January has been the subject of lengthy behind-the-scenes discussions about tuition policy, how much financial freedom colleges should have and how to best deal with an intensified financial crunch that’s expected to hit higher ed beginning in 2011-12.
Senate Majority Leader John Morse, R-Colorado Springs, and Minority Leader Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, have been leading the effort. College presidents, who’ve long sought more freedom to manage their budgets, the Department of Higher Education and the business-backed civic group Colorado Concern also have been part of the talks.
The proposed revisions to the bill cover a wide range of issues.
Tuition and budgets
Beginning in 2011-10, college boards could set their own resident and non-resident tuition rates. (Currently annual ceilings are set by the legislature.)
But, boards could not raise resident undergraduate tuition more than 9 percent a year unless a higher increase was needed to cover “significant decreases” in direct state support.
Beginning next Nov. 10 (and every Nov. 10 after that), each college and university would have to submit detailed, five-year financial projections to the Colorado Commission on Higher Education and the Joint Budget Committee. The projections would have to include projected tuition revenue, other sources of revenue and funding plans for various levels of increase or decrease in direct state funding.
Those reports also would have to include a governing board’s plan for preserving accessibility and affordability for low- and middle-income students, plans for use of need-based financial aid, and plans for improving student retention.
By next Dec. 10, and every December thereafter, the CCHE would have to give the JBC an overall higher ed system plan for handling reductions in state support.
College quality
The revised bill also would require each governing board to annually give the commission a five-year plan for performance goals in areas such as access and affordability, improved student success, improved quality of instruction, improved operational efficiency and substantial additional information.
The CCHE would be required to establish benchmarks by which to evaluate each institution’s plan and annually review progress. Those progress reports would have to be submitted to the JBC.
Institutions that failed to meet one or more benchmarks by 5 percent or more would lose some of its tuition-setting freedom.
(The bill would repeal the existing system of performance contracts.)
Enrollment
The bill also would change the current controls over numbers of resident and non-resident students, allowing colleges to admit as many non-residents as they chose. But, colleges would have to admit all qualified Colorado applicants based on admissions requirements, plus the additional 20 percent of Colorado students colleges can admit for other reasons. (That’s the so-called “window.”)
Financial operations
The revised bill also proposes various changes in the degree to which certain state construction, purchasing and financial rules and procedures apply to colleges and universities. It also contains some provisions that would apply only to the Colorado School of Mines.
The higher ed flexibility discussion comes at a time when college and university spending has been maintained only through increased tuition and federal stimulus funds. Some legislators fear higher education may have to be cut by $300 million in 2011-12, with a similar cut for K-12 aid.
It’s unclear how the bill might fit – or conflict – with the ongoing higher education strategic plan study that was commissioned by outgoing Gov. Bill Ritter. The administration in the past has urged that no major changes be made in higher education until after the strategic plan is finished at the end of this year.
College presidents and some legislators have been pressing for action to be taken sooner.

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

Erin Toll

Ted Harvey

By Don Knox, STATE BILL COLORADO
DENVER — The apparent benching of the state’s top real estate regulator by her higher-ups at the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies is shining a light on both the regulatory and legislative functions of state government.
Is the story of Erin Toll a case of a too-tough regulator overstepping her bounds? Is the story of Sen. Ted Harvey a legislator who’s also a regulated person improperly using the legislative process to strike back?
Is it both? Is it neither?
Today, State Bill Colorado encourages our readers to listen for themselves.
Toll, Colorado’s real-estate regulator, was put on leave last week, but neither she nor her bosses are talking about the reasons. She also was schooled by legislators in another way: Colorado’s Senate preliminarily voted March 12 to return mortgage regulation to a board instead of putting it in Toll’s hands.
What prompted such moves?
Toll, a lawyer and former state insurance regulator, found herself at the center of a political firestorm when she confirmed to the Associated Press earlier this month that she was investigating the mortgage company that employs the senator – and mentioned the senator by name.
That disclosure followed a legislative hearing at which Toll, Harvey and other Republican senators sparred – politely, it should be noted – about two issues concerning Toll’s regulatory behavior.
* Whether a board or a single individual should decide whether enforcement actions go forward for “appraisal management companies.” In Colorado, boards make many regulatory decisions but frequently act lightly upon the industries they regulate. But when it comes to mortgage brokers, Toll is the sole regulator – for which she’s been frequently criticized by the industry.
* A delay in the so-called “sunset review” of the mortgage-broker regulations, first passed in 2006. The review was to take place in 2011, but a pending bill drafted by regulators, including Toll, called for the review to occur three years later. Harvey called the delay “irresponsible.”
Both issues were the subject of a March 2 hearing of the Senate Business, Labor & Technology Committee. SB10-077, the bill regulating the appraisal management companies, was killed eight days later. HB10-1141, the bill making changes to mortgage-broker regulations, was amended to return regulation to a board model and away from a single regulator model. (The bill, as amended, has preliminarily passed the Senate but now conflicts with the version passed a month ago by Colorado’s House and would head to a conference committee.
The March 2 hearing prominently featured Toll and Harvey as well as Republican senators Shawn Mitchell and Mark Scheffel.
The story picks up nearly 10 minutes into the hearing, where Toll describes how the original appraisal-management company bill was amended to go to the director model, instead of the board model.

Press the audio player now.

Toll tells Harvey and the other legislators that the package of changes came at the request of the Colorado Bankers Association, which is why the new version “looks so different.”

At 10:54, Harvey responds: “Thank you Madame Chair. Director Toll, I have a problem with the director model, I was wondering if you can go further about who would be opposed to that, I think when you have a board that has the ability to be a buffer between the industry and a director, kind of an appeals process, if you will, you have a board that is accountable to the community at large, the business community at large. … When you have director scenario, you don’t. I think you can see that come into play with the appraisal board, with the realtor board, … when you have a director model as you do with the mortgage industry, you don’t have an appeals process, you have a dictatorial process where whatever the director says go, and I have a problem with that.

Toll then counters: “First of all, Sen. Harvey, there is a trend across the country and shows the board and commission models aren’t working because it’s foxes watching the henhouse. … You know I’m a robust regulator, this is not my idea, this was originally a board model, this request … was made by the bankers, they felt strongly and I understand that because there are appraisers on the board of real estate appraisers who are not friendly … toward … appraisal management companies, they felt that the appraisal management companies are not held in favor by some, many, of the mom and pop appraisers. … This wasn’t my idea, Sen Harvey.

At this point, 14:07 into the meeting, Sen. Mitchell says: “I guess following on that interesting line of discussion, you’ve commented on input received from the industry which prompted industry to go neutral or in some cases support the bill. That kind of agreement arises in different dynamics, one dynamic is … there are industries that agree to bills because they’re afraid of you, and they’re afraid of you targeting them and they would rather be in your good graces than otherwise.”

At this point, Toll, sounding flustered and with a nervous laugh, defends herself, saying she’s merely enforcing the laws that the legislators themselves have passed: “ I don’t know what to comment, I don’t know what to say, I’m just like I appear. (laughs). I’ve heard some things, and seen some things, and I’ll tell you Sen. Mitchell that I do what I think is right based on what you tell me you want, I don’t make laws I enforce the laws that you tell me are right, if you really want to get into my personal beliefs … we have more than enough laws … and the problem is no one’s enforcing what we have … “

At this point, pause the audio player above.

It’s an hour later, and Sen. Harvey has just questioned mortgage lender lobbyist and former Rep. Fran Coleman about the language moving the sunset date from 2011 to 2014 (or possibly 2013). Coleman tells the senator she agreed to a request to move it to 2013 because there’s a sunset of the entire Real Estate Commission then.

Harvey, who works in the industry, resists the effort to delay the review.

Now press the audio player below.

Harvey: “Like I said before, when we passed this bill in 2007, we said there would be $1.9 million coming in from licensing fees because 9,600 mortgage brokers, there’s a significant change in the market now … I think there’s a significant need to review that with the sunset review, the industry is totally different from when we passed the bill in 2007, to suggest we should push this back to 2014, three years beyond what the law required, is … what’s the word, irresponsible of this body … even pushing it back to 2013 is irresponsible.”

Coleman responds by saying the industry adopted a middle-ground position at the request of the Department of Regulatory Agencies.

Harvey then quizzes committee chair and HB10-1141 sponsor Sen. Lois Tochtrop about the date switch. She responds, in part, “I don’t have a dog in that fight” and Toll is asked to return to the committee to respond.

Toll: “The reason is efficiencies and the state of economy right now. … This will be the seventh mortgage broker bill passed since 2007, when DORA started to do the sunset review of the existing bill, there wasn’t enough time to view the effects of the bill. … the original registration bill was in 2006, in that bill there was a sunset in 2011. In 2007 four more bills were passed, and it stayed 2011. … it didn’t make sense after one year or two years after implementation to be doing a sunset review … 2013 sounded fine, too.

Harvey: But director, I beg to differ, the bill we passed last year was just a compliance bill, it wasn’t anything drastic … what is in statute is we’ll be doing a sunset review of the mortgage licensing 2006, 2007, when we had a fiscal note that said 9,000 mortgage brokers paying these fees and now we have less than 4,000 today we have a totally different industry than we did in 2007, I think it’s totally appropriate for us to have a sunset review to review what is the current industry out there … “

As you can hear, the meeting, at least as the audio record is concerned, is civil, if tense. Toll is at first easy-going and then later flummoxed; Harvey is intent and persistent. Sometime after the meeting, Toll’s interview with the Associated Press sets of an apparent chain of events that includes Harvey’s protests, DORA’s clarification and Toll’s being put on leave. But legislatively, roadblocks are thrown in Toll’s way: The appraisal management bill, SB10-077, is killed eight days later. And 13 days later, HB10-1141 is amended to move mortgage regulation in Colorado to a board model and away from the director model practiced by Toll.

THE MORAL OF THE STORY: From Toll’s vantage, tough regulators are unloved, and this is the clearest evidence yet. From Harvey’s vantage, it’s karma will eventually catch up with regulators who take the hardest possible line. And I’ll add a third moral: Don’t mess with a sitting senator.

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

Colorado Attorney General John Suthers said this week he will vote to kick out three of the four Colorado Supreme Court justices in November’s retention election, according to The Business Word blog.
In a statement at an Arapahoe County Republican Men’s Club breakfast, Suthers said he will vote not to retain Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey and Justices Michael Bender and Alex Martinez, while voting to retain Justice Nancy Rice. Suthers could not be immediately reached to confirm this report. Suthers has openly speculated about partisan motives of the Supreme Court in the past.
The move was praised by Clear the Bench Colorado, the group advocating the ouster of all four justices up for retention.

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

Photo: Tad Rickman
Gov. Bill Ritter, right, joined by Lt. Gov. Barbara O’Brien, addresses media, fellow lawmakers and others as Ritter announces he will not seek another term.

By Peter Marcus, DENVER DAILY NEWS
As a light snow fell outside the Capitol Wednesday morning on a gloomy Colorado day, Gov. Bill Ritter sent a chill of his own down the spines of his fellow Democrats.
As he entered the west foyer of the Capitol to explosive applause and cheers, the incumbent governor announced that he would not seek re-election this year in order to spend more time with his currently neglected family. He spoke of the toll politics has had on he and his family and said he did not want to put himself or his family through what is sure to be a “bitter” partisan gubernatorial battle.
“It is my family who has sacrificed the most,” said a relaxed Ritter, speaking of his wife Jeannie and four children, two of whom still live at home. “I have not found the proper balance where my family is concerned, and I have not made them the priority they should be.”
The news came as a “shock” to just about the entire Colorado political community. Much of Ritter’s own staff only learned of the decision Tuesday evening when the governor cancelled a fundraiser and reports leaked that he would bow out of the race.
Ritter called a meeting of his cabinet Wednesday morning where he joked, “I think we have a leak,” referring to the widespread reports that surfaced prior to his official announcement.
The governor shrugged off opinions that he is dropping out of the race because he has been trailing in the polls. He said he came to the decision over the holidays while spending time with his family.
“Never give a busy man time off,” he joked.
Ritter said he had carefully calculated his decision and determined that dropping out of the race would not destroy his party’s chances of beating the Republicans this year.
“The Democratic Party has a very deep bench, there are a lot of people who are able to step in and do this job,” said Ritter before being interrupted by thunderous applause and cheers from fellow Democrats. “It’s not like I didn’t make that part of my calculations, but I really do believe that at the end of the day, we have every opportunity to win the election.”

Republicans seize opportunity
The news was initially met with joy by top Republicans, including Ritter’s once opponent, former Congressman Scott McInnis.
A spokesman for McInnis was quick to tell the Denver Daily News Tuesday night that Ritter’s decision was a reflection of “the Democratic ticket falling.”
But McInnis himself issued a much more subdued statement following Ritter’s announcement Wednesday.
“(My wife) and I understand the pressures and sacrifices of public life and the toll that elected office can take on a family,” McInnis said. “We wish the governor, first lady and the entire family all the best in the years ahead.”
“Our message of job creation, economic security and fiscal responsibility, which is clearly resonating throughout Colorado, will remain steady and strong,” continued McInnis. “We will take this message of optimism and a deep belief in Colorado’s future, neighborhood by neighborhood, and won’t take one vote for granted.”

Democrats move forward
Meanwhile, Democrats were turning their attention to a new strategy for the state and the gubernatorial election. A meeting was originally scheduled Wednesday afternoon with Congresswoman Diana DeGette, party Chairwoman Pat Waak and senior Democrat elected officials to discuss “how to go forward as a party.” But the meeting was rescheduled so that all stakeholders could attend.
Top Democratic names are already being mentioned to fill the campaign role abandoned by Ritter, including state Democratic Party darling and former House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar and Congressman Ed Perlmutter. Salazar appears to be the favored choice.
At an afternoon news conference Wednesday, Hickenlooper said he has not made any decisions.
“We don’t know,” Hickenlooper said simply while standing in front of rows of cameras and reporters, flanked by his wife, Helen Thorpe, and son, Teddy.
Hickenlooper was eyed as a candidate for governor in 2006, but chose not to run. He said Wednesday that if Salazar chooses to run for governor, he would be his “first volunteer.”
“I think Ken Salazar has created a lifetime of public service, a career of doing what he thinks is right for the State of Colorado and now for the United States, and he has earned not only my respect and admiration, but also my deference,” said the mayor. “If this is something that he wants to put his heart and soul into, I will do everything I can to get him elected.”
Salazar dodged the question Wednesday when asked by reporters during a conference call to announce further onshore oil and gas leasing reforms. The teleconference occurred prior to Ritter’s official announcement.
“I’m not going to comment on that,” said Salazar. “The governor has not yet made his formal announcement, and there are other conversations that are going on in Colorado.”
Perlmutter issued this statement: “I am honored to have my name mentioned as a potential candidate. I love this state and I want to continue to serve my community and state and make it a great place to live for everybody. It’s a premature decision to make at this time, but one I will carefully consider.”
The congressman went on to say that Ritter’s decision is a “nightmare” for the Republican Party.
“This decision is a game changer, and I believe Colorado Democrats have a deep bench of potential candidates who can win this race,” said Perlmutter.
Romanoff, who is currently challenging U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet in a primary election for the Senate seat, issued only this statement: “I have known Bill and Jeannie Ritter more than 16 years, and I appreciate how much they and their children have sacrificed for the sake of our state. I join all Coloradans in thanking the governor and his family for their selfless service — and wishing them the very best in the years ahead.”
Romanoff did not return repeated phone calls by the Denver Daily News seeking comment on whether he is considering running for governor.

Not a sure thing for Republicans
Denver Daily News political columnist Aaron Harber does not necessarily believe that Republicans were handed a victory based on Ritter’s decision.
“It’s completely up in the air and it is anybody’s to win at this point,” he said.
Harber also dismissed rumors that Ritter is really dropping out of the race after pressure from top Democrats because he has been trailing in the polls.
“Anyone who attended (Ritter’s announcement) was present when he spoke and saw how sincere he was, and anyone who knows him personally and knows the importance of his family, you’d have to accept his statement at face value,” said Harber.
Democrats, however, may have trouble with fundraising considering they’re starting months after McInnis began his effort, said Harber. Ritter’s campaign contributions cannot be transferred to another candidate, but it can be donated to the Democratic Party, which can then transfer the money to another candidate, according to a spokesman for the Secretary of State’s office. Ritter’s ending balance as of a Nov. 2, 2009, filing is $609,909. But sources say his fundraising went very well last quarter, perhaps bringing his contributions to anywhere between $800,000 and $1 million.

Republicans not changing strategy
Dick Wadhams, chairman of the Colorado Republican Party, said he does not believe his party needs to change its strategy based on a new candidate. He said any of the mentioned Democratic leaders would be “formidable candidates.” But he believes the Republican message is resonating stronger with voters.
“The issues that will dominate this campaign will be the same whether it’s Bill Ritter, Ken Salazar, or whoever, because there’s not a dime’s worth of difference between Bill Ritter, Ken Salazar, John Hickenlooper or Andrew Romanoff,” said Wadhams. “I personally cannot cite any difference on the issues that those individuals have, and I don’t think there’s anything that Ritter’s done as governor that those individuals have disagreed with — if they did, they didn’t talk about it.”
But House Speaker Terrance Carroll said he believes his party will be able to step in right where Ritter is leaving off.
“I’m not necessarily concerned that this does anything to change the dynamics of the race,” said Carroll. “I always firmly believed that Bill Ritter was going to beat Scott McInnis in November 2010 É we have a lot of strong candidates, and I believe any of those candidates, whoever that candidate may be, is in a good position to beat Scott McInnis.”

Distributed by Colorado Capitol Reporters

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

The Denver Post columnist writes, “In a 4-3 decision last week, they overturned two lower court rulings and declared that, henceforth, unelected judges rather than elected legislators will determine how much money Colorado taxpayers must spend on K-12 education. The victorious plaintiffs in the case included the usual suspects: the teachers union and other educratic organizations.”

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

Geri Bader, right, AKA Judge Geri, with bailiff Michael Howk in front of the bench in her TV courtroom. LAW WEEK PHOTO BY MATT MASICH.

By Matt Masich, LAW WEEK COLORADO
DENVER — Geri Bader’s career as a TV judge was getting off to an auspicious start. The camera crew was in place, the studio audience was trickling in, and Bader, owner of Bader & Co. legal recruiters, arrived resplendent in a purple robe. Everyone was ready for the taping of the pilot episode of “Judge Geri.”
Well, almost everyone.
With cameras set to roll in 30 minutes, the plaintiff and defendant who had agreed to let Judge Geri adjudicate their small claims case were nowhere to be found. She turned to a couple of her friends in the audience.
“If they don’t show up, could you two sue each other really quick?” the would-be TV judge asked.
As the 6 p.m. camera time drew nearer with no litigants in sight, it became clear she wasn’t kidding.
The audience was mostly composed of Bader’s friends, along with a few people who had read about the taping in Penny Parker’s Denver Post column, and one Law Week Colorado reporter — that would be me.
Bader disappeared around the corner to consult with her producer while her two friends sitting in front of me debated whether they were up to improvising a lawsuit in front of the TV cameras. Julie Gelfond was, but her pal wasn’t, and no amount of “c’mons” could persuade her otherwise.
With 10 minutes to showtime, Bader returned with a final appeal for litigants. She did a quick roll call of the people she knew, with no one but Gelfond volunteering. Finally, Bader turned to me. We had met just moments before when I introduced myself as a reporter, there to cover the event.
“Matt, how about you?”
Momentarily stunned, I said the first thing that popped into my head.“Yeah, sure!”
(This is about the same way I ended up playing Creon, king of Thebes, in a college production of “Antigone” — trying to get to my history seminar when I accidentally walked into the room where they were holding auditions. “What the heck?” I thought, and next thing you know, I’m Creon.)

Look shifty and mumble
Sitting in the folding chairs, Gelfond, Bader and I had a quick huddle to get our stories straight.
“So who’s suing who?” I asked.
It was quickly determined that I looked more disreputable than Gelfond, so Bader assigned me the role of the defendant, predetermined to lose the suit.
“OK, now why is she suing me?” I continued.
It seems that I hit Gelfond’s parked Mercedes with my Toyota while in the parking lot at King Soopers — “No, the Safeway at Cherry Creek,” Gelfond interjected — and then just drove off. Gelfond followed me down 1st Avenue, honking and tailgating me until I pulled over. After a heated exchange, I denied that I hit her car and subsequently refused to pay the $1,700 needed to fix the damage.
“How could you not notice you hit me?” Gelfond asked, already getting into character.
“I, uh… I thought I had bumped a shopping cart,” I replied.
Shortly before we went on, Bader told Gelfond to remove her expensive-looking jewelry.
“You don’t look like someone who would be in small claims court,” Bader said.
And, Gelfond suggested I tone down my enunciation — people who flee the scene of accidents tend to mumble. I decided to do a Bill Murray in “Caddyshack” impression.
Bader took her place at the onstage bench. Michael Howk, Bader’s bailiff who in real life is a bartender at The Palm, introduced our case. Gelfond and I walked to our respective podiums. When I took my spot, I noticed there was another camera, not visible from the audience, pointed right at me.
Bader had a novel way of introducing the case: “In one sentence, tell me what happened.”
Gelfond told the court that I just slammed headlong into her parked car and drove off. In my mind, I had bumped into her while backing up, so I had to make up a new story on the fly. Shifty-eyed and mumbly, I gave the court my one-sentence account. I can’t remember exactly what I said, but I know I referred to the plaintiff as a “crazy lady.”

Don’t quit the day job
After some questioning from Bader, we litigants couldn’t agree on the most basic facts of the case. It was a classic “he said, she said,” and despite being the designated Washington Generals of the suit, I had a feeling I had cast enough doubt to get away scot-free.
But Gelfond had a witness, someone who had seen me hit the Mercedes and written down my license plate number. I did my best obfuscation routine, but that witness nailed me. Bader ruled in Gelfond’s favor and told me to pay her $1,700. In all, the case lasted about 10 minutes.
Gelfond and I apparently proved it’s not that hard to improvise a small claims case, and Bader successfully recruited a few more volunteers – this time over a dry-cleaning dispute. After shooting was over, the cast, crew and audience had a little wrap-party and debriefing. I skipped this, opting instead to call everyone I knew to tell them I was going to be star.
But after talking to Bader the next day, I was glad I hadn’t quit my day job.
“I realized last night when we were doing the two shows that no matter how unique my personality may be, if the cases are ordinary you become ordinary,” said Bader. “I think we’re going to take it to the next level, which is going to be dramatization based on cases.” In other words, she said, “Theres going to be a lot more yelling, screaming, crying, tantrums. We’re basically going to dramatize the hell out of it.”
Basically, Bader wants more crazy people, which were her bread-and-butter as host of the public access show “I’m OK, You’re Not” in the 1990s. Back then, an average show might feature a man who was convinced his toddler was a space alien, or a dominatrix and her submissive husband.
“The problem with that concept is that you can run out of crazy people in a very short amount of time,” Bader said.

Maybe funny, maybe angry
But by improvising her own interesting situations — based on, but not bound by actual cases — Bader hopes to develop a show with a unique spin on the “People’s Court” motif. The lay judge is still tinkering with what will work, and is interested in doing a show about a man who sues his friends for allegedly stealing his wallet while they bailed him out of jail.
There’s another idea about a couple who broke off their engagement only to be sued by the wedding hall for backing out of their contract.
“We could really make that into fun show — maybe a funny show, maybe an angry show — but the premise of the broken engagement could override the basic issues to the point that the lawsuit becomes secondary to the fact that these people hate each others guts now.”
Bader says she doesn’t yet have firm commitment from any station to actually air the show, but is shopping around for syndication (she’s in touch with some contacts in the business about that).
And should I want to play the role of a jilted fiancé, Bader said, it’s all mine.

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

ACLU_DNC
Source: ACLU

20090820_ACLU
Source: ACLU

By Peter Rossi
LAW WEEK COLORADO
Editor’s Note: Statewide trial reporter Peter Rossi rounds up today’s court news.

Eight plaintiffs, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, filed a lawsuit against the city of Denver alleging the Denver police acted unlawfully when they arrested more than 100 people during last year’s Democratic National Convention.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/08/20/Denver-sued-over-Dem-convention-arrests/UPI-36821250822230/

Gerbaz Not Guilty Of Arson
Larry Gerbaz Friday was found not guilty of arson in connection with the County Road 100 wildfire started in April 2008. Gerbaz still faces two civil lawsuits from an injured fisherman and from homeowners who had property damage.
http://www.aspentimes.com/article/20090821/NEWS/908219984/1006/NONE&parentprofile=1058

Third Week Underway In Thompson Trial
The third week of trial starts this week in the Aaron Thompson child abuse trial. After two weeks, it’s still unclear what could have happened to Thompson’s daughter, Aarone.
http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=121702&catid=339

Odell To Be Sworn In As District Judge
Devin R. Odell will be sworn in as a Larimer District Judge next Monday, with his first day on the bench Sept. 1. Judge Stephen Schapanski will swear Odell in.
http://www.coloradoan.com/article/20090824/LOVELAND01/90824001

First Candidate Appears In Veterans Court
Army Spc. Yoofi Minta appeared in veterans trauma court in El Paso County Friday as the first candidate to be a part of the program that emphasizes treatment of offenders. Minta was charged with possession of a controlled substance and a traffic violation.
http://www.gazette.com/articles/minta-60612-combat-courtroom.html

Woman Suing Cops Arrested
Rifle woman Danielle Marie Trujillo, wrongfully arrested in connection with an alleged drug ring in 2008, was arrested last week for assaulting a family member. Trujillo has a civil federal lawsuit pending against the drug task force for false imprisonment and slander.
http://www.postindependent.com/article/20090821/VALLEYNEWS/908209973/1083&ParentProfile=1074

Another Nurse Arrested For Stealing Pain Med
Another nurse, Cheri Jo Bechdolt, last week was arrested for stealing syringes containing the pain medication Dilaudid. Bechdolt is a nurse at Denver Health and is scheduled to be in court Aug. 31.
http://www.denverpost.com/headlines/ci_13181342

Have a trial you want to tell us about? Do you have questions about our future trial coverage? Send your queries to Peter Rossi at prossi@circuitmedia.com.

DENVER DAILY NEWS
The Senate Thursday voted 68-31 to confirm Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court in a vote that was largely on party lines with Democratic support and Republican resistance.
Several Colorado Democrats expressed their pleasure at the confirmation.

Udall’s response
U.S. Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., expressed his pleasure that Sotomayor was confirmed.
“Over the last few months, the nation has gotten to know Judge Sotomayor, and she is an example for all of us,” Udall said. “She is the daughter of Puerto Rican parents, who moved to New York City at a time when racial and ethnic prejudice was widespread. She learned from her parents’ good example, worked hard, achieved amazing things, and rose to the top of her field.
“Sonia Sotomayor’s story is compelling, but it is her record that matters most. She navigated rigorous Senate confirmation hearings with grace, took tough questions and gave clear and forthcoming answers. Her poise through hours of questioning is a testament to her strength of character. And my study of her record convinces me that she is a judge who follows the Constitution and the law, and that she is exceptionally qualified to serve.
“Twenty-eight years after my father, former Arizona Congressman Morris Udall, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee on behalf of fellow Arizonan, Sandra Day O’Connor — the first woman to serve as a United States Supreme Court Justice — I was honored to cast my first Supreme Court confirmation vote for Sonia Sotomayor and make history again.
“As a first-year Senator, this is a moment I will remember for the rest of my life. I have full faith that Judge Sotomayor will be an excellent, unbiased justice, and I want to welcome her to the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Bennet’s response
U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, D-Colo., echoed Udall’s remarks.
“Judge Sotomayor has the intellect, professional background and judicial temperament necessary to serve as an associate justice of the Supreme Court,” said Bennet. “Her confirmation [Thursday] is a compelling reminder that, in this nation, anything is possible.”

Salazar’s response
Interior Secretary Ken Salazar released this statement Thursday: “[Thursday], our nation took a giant leap on the path of progress by confirming Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court of the United States. Judge Sotomayor’s qualifications, experience and sound judgment make her an excellent choice for the bench. She will be a fair, tough and impartial champion for the law.
“I am also proud that Judge Sotomayor, as the first Latina to reach the highest court of the land, will be an inspiration to young people of all backgrounds that with hard work, dedication to service and compassion for others, there are no limits to what a person can achieve in our great country.”

Waak’s response
Colorado Democratic Party Chair Pat Waak issued the following statement: “[Thursday’s] confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor is a historic event for the U.S. Supreme Court and for the American people. Our nation’s highest court will gain a sharp mind and a highly experienced justice to its bench. Her dedication to the court and commitment to the Constitution have been proven throughout her expansive legal career as a judge, a litigator and a prosecutor. With more judicial experience than any justice on the court in the last 70 years, she couldn’t be more prepared to rise to the monumental task of serving our country as a Supreme Court Justice.
“On this day we would also like to pause and appreciate the life of Judge Sotomayor as a remarkable citizen. Her achievements and hard work are humbling proof that the American Dream is alive and achievable. Judge Sotomayor will be the first Latina and only the third female to serve on the Supreme Court, making her a strong role model and an inspiration to millions of Latino and female Americans. Today is a great day for the American people, and I congratulate Judge Sotomayor and wish her the best of luck as she embarks on this important journey.”
Sotomayor will be sworn in on Saturday.

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

State Bill Colorado and its sister service, Law Week Colorado, deliver lots of great news via e-mail and Twitter!

E-mail
It’s free to receive State Bill Colorado’s daily e-mail rundown on legislative news. Just submit your e-mail address below.

Twitter
Sign up for your favorite Circuit Media Twitter feed here.

* StateBill: All the best Colorado legislative news and more from the #1 legislative news service. (This also is the feed you see when you sign into the site as a premium user.)
* StateBill_Slow: The best Colorado legislative news, but a little bit less of it. The stuff you have to have.
* StateBill_Video: Our special Colorado video feed.
* SB_Pursuits: Our Colorado entertainment news feed.
* SB_Commentary: Our high-minded thoughts ’bout things in the state that’s “above all.”
* SB_WeekendTalk: Colorado’s political talk shows come to you via Colorado’s best legislative news source, State Bill Colorado!
——————————
* LawWeek: All the best legal news from Colorado’s best legal news source.
* LW_Appellate: News coming from the state Supreme Court and the Colorado Court of Appeals.
* LawWeek_Trials: The best Colorado trial coverage from our reporters and other reporters statewide.
* LW_Judgeships: Everything you need to know about opportunities on Colorado’s bench.
* LW_LawBiz: This feed is for people who are interested in the business and practice of law in Colorado.
* LW_Trouble: Our feed of Colorado legal disciplinary actions. Check it just to make sure you’re not on it.
* LawWeek_Video: The best legal news in full motion.

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

By Alan Gottlieb, EDUCATION NEWS COLORADO
In a field as complex and simultaneously fast- and slow-moving as education, it’s easy to lose perspective. Each next “big” thing takes on monumental importance, only to be tossed aside and forgotten as soon as the next “big” thing comes along.
So it’s nice to get away once in a while, cleanse your mind and regain some perspective. Backpacking for a few days just now in the Flattops Wilderness certainly helped restore my perspective. Especially during those long minutes Monday night when, huddled in my exposed tent on the tundra at 11,600 feet, I listened to – and felt – a massive midnight thunderstorm rumble in. With each blinding flash of lightning I counted, one-one thousand, two-one thousand, waiting for the thunder, my agnostic soul teetering ever closer to fervent prayer.
I survived, shaken and sleep-deprived, but unscathed. And on this Wednesday morning my mind newly focused, I offer these thoughts and questions.

* Race to the Top, the Obama administration’s $4.3 billion education innovation competition, may turn out to be a genuine “big” thing. Certainly the money involved is big. U.S. and Colorado officials are making all the right noises. But one has to worry that any creative, groundbreaking initiative that passes through both federal and state bureaucracies (100-member work groups? What can they possibly accomplish other than rubber-stamping?) has high potential for producing a bland mash instead of a piquant piece de resistance. Colorado’s challenge will be to produce a plan so tightly conceived that its implementation cannot be compromised. The best way to measure this is by watching who fights against various elements of the plan, covertly if not overtly.
* Evaluating teachers at least in part based on how much growth students attain in their classes is so fundamental to improving education that it is hard to fathom people and organizations objecting to it. Of course “the devil is in the details,” but unless you believe that all testing is irredeemably flawed, how can test results not be an essential component? Especially when what you’re measuring is growth, not absolute scores?
* In education, everything else really is secondary to teacher quality. The major challenge is figuring out how to make education a true profession, in which practitioners have a significant degree of autonomy and a sense of efficacy. I’d wager that only a small percentage of highly capable people who leave teaching do so because of the children.
* Our state is adept at creating commissions, study groups and blue ribbon panels to ponder all manner of education issues. How often do these myriad bodies produce something surprising? How often is the outcome preordained?
* It will be refreshing when CSAP scores are released next week to see the focus on student growth, not “status.” But let’s not forget that status matters too. Measuring growth is a major leap forward in our state’s education data, and the sophistication of our data analysis. At the end of the day, however, growth doesn’t matter much if those doing the growing can’t hit certain absolute benchmarks. It’s a real accomplishment to move a student from reading at a third grade level in ninth grade to a ninth grade level in twelfth grade. But it’s not enough.
I’m sure that by next week I will have lost perspective again. But it feels good to see things clearly, if only for a few fleeting moments.
The author edits Education News Colorado.

Distributed by Colorado Capitol Reporters

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