The party’s chairwoman, Hannah Goodman, sent the slurs Friday after a commenter privately messaged the party’s Facebook account to criticize what he saw as its “asinine” postings. After an initial exchange that included the commenter sarcastically highlighting the party’s lack of electoral success, Goodman — replying through the party’s official account — defended her party’s achievements and repeatedly referred to the commenter using an anti-gay slur.

She also repeatedly referred to him using a slur for people with intellectual disabilities.

Goodman continued using the slurs after the commenter said he planned to take the messages to the media. The party confirmed in a statement Saturday that Goodman, a congressional candidate last year, sent the messages. In a subsequent email exchange in which the commenter asked party leadership for an apology, Goodman told the commenter that she had authored the messages through the party’s Facebook account.

“There is no such thing as bad press,” Goodman wrote in the Facebook exchange, according to copies of the messages provided to The Post by the party. “Also, I’m the chair of the party. So … no (expletive) given.”

The commenter, who is gay and requested anonymity to share the exchange out of a fear of harassment, said he had never spoken with Goodman or the party previously.

He said Goodman’s initial responses were fine, given the “sassy” nature of his initial message to the party. But he said he was taken aback by how “grossly homophobic” her subsequent responses were since he was just “some rando who tried to get smart with them.”

Goodman did not return a message seeking comment Friday. On Saturday, the party’s executive director, James Wiley, sent The Post a seven-page statement that defended the party’s political relevance, touted the success of a recent social media posting on the party’s Facebook page, and further criticized the commenter.

Wiley referred to a meme produced by Goodman as an “artistic work product” that, Wiley wrote, had prompted the initial criticism from the commenter.

“These judgements were rendered entirely at (the commenter’s) own suggestion without any prompting on the part of the party or its representatives,” Wiley wrote.

Wiley confirmed that Goodman wrote the messages and said he stood by them. He concluded the statement by calling the commenter another slur and quoting a character from the animated show “South Park.”

The party, which was founded in Colorado more than 50 years ago, has long been a minor player in the state’s elections. It has the third-most party affiliations among Colorado voters. Both Goodman and Wiley have run unsuccessfully for Congress.

But the party played a more substantive role in last year’s contests — by not participating in them.

In 2023, the party’s leadership reached an agreement with the Colorado Republican Party to keep Libertarian candidates out of some races, so long as the Republican candidates in those contests signed a pledge to align with Libertarian values. That was thought to improve the Republican candidates’ chances of winning, including in the tight 8th Congressional District race later won by now-U.S. Rep. Gabe Evans.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

The Colorado Senate unanimously approved a resolution approving its installation Monday. The House also unanimously approved it last week. Installation is planned to begin in 2026.

The statue, by sculptor Gerald Anthony Shippen, will depict the Cheyenne and Arapaho chiefs Black Kettle and Left Hand, as well as a Native American woman with a child. It will be placed on a pedestal on the western steps, where a statue of a Union soldier once stood.

“We end our healing run there, on the steps, and we just look in,” said Otto Braided Hair, a Northern Cheyenne descendant of the massacre and tribal representative.

He referred to the annual 200-mile trek, the Sand Creek Massacre Spiritual Healing Run organized by the Northern and Southern Cheyenne and Arapaho tribes, that goes from the massacre site near Eads to downtown Denver.

“We’re outsiders,” Braided Hair continued. “And today, we are inside. Today, the Cheyenne, Arapaho nations recognize, acknowledge both the unanimous support of the House and Senate. I’m just beside myself. I wish all my relatives and descendants and runners were out here.”

That statue recalls the brutal, unprovoked attack by U.S. Cavalry on a village of Cheyenne and Arapaho people, who had gathered under a United States flag and a white flag of peace, in 1864. The cavalry would kill more than 200 people, mostly women, children and the elderly, and go on to parade mutilated body parts through downtown Denver, according to the resolution.

The bipartisan resolution was sponsored by Sens. Kyle Mullica and Rod Pelton and Reps. Tammy Story and Ty Winter.

“Our hope is this resolution and memorial will be a turning point. A moment when Colorado says we are not afraid to confront our past because we believe in a more just and honest future,” said Mullica, a Thornton Democrat. “To the Cheyenne and Arapaho nations, we see you. We honor you. And we walk forward — not ahead of you, but with you.”

The statue replaces a separate memorial of a Union soldier that previously stood on the pedestal. That statue was toppled during the racial justice protests of 2020. It honored Coloradans who served in the Union Army during the Civil War — but also memorialized the Sand Creek massacre and Col. John M. Chivington, who perpetrated it.

That statue has been on loan to History Colorado since its toppling. It will eventually go to the Department of Military and Veteran Affairs.

Money for the Sand Creek Massacre memorial has been raised in part through the One Earth Future Foundation. The final fundraising push will begin next month through the Sand Creek Massacre Foundation. People who wish to donate may do so at sandcreekmassacrefoundation.org.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

In a video announcement, Lopez spoke about putting “people over politics” while hitting on Republican red-meat issues like “government overreach,” cutting taxes and regulations, and referencing conservative concerns about public education.

“People over politics means cutting through the government red tape, making life more affordable and putting families first,” he said in the video. “This movement is about listening, not dividing.”

Lopez is the highest-profile Republican to join the 2026 gubernatorial field seeking to succeed term-limited Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat who has served since 2019. Lopez is set to compete in the GOP primary next year against at least two state lawmakers, Rep. Scott Bottoms and Sen. Mark Baisley, as well as Teller County Sheriff Jason Mikesell.

Last week, Democratic U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet unveiled his long-anticipated campaign for governor, catapulting himself to the front of small Democratic field previously dominated by Attorney General Phil Weiser.

In June, Lopez won a special election to represent the Eastern Plains’ 4th Congressional District for roughly six months after former U.S. Rep. Ken Buck stepped down early. Lopez didn’t pursue a full term, and the seat was later won by U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert, who switched from the 3rd Congressional District.

Lopez’s stint in Congress was the second shortest of any Coloradan, behind William E. Burney’s two-month stretch in the early 1940s. Lopez previously told The Denver Post that it was an “honor and a pleasure” to have worked in Congress, even if he felt like an exchange student.

Earlier, Lopez served as the mayor of Parker. He ran for governor in 2018 and 2022, losing in the primary race each time. In 2016, he briefly ran for a U.S. Senate seat. A former director for the Small Business Administration, Lopez reached a settlement with the Trump administration’s Department of Justice in 2020 to resolve allegations that he’d violated conflict-of-interest policies.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

That means a continuous flurry of floor votes in both chambers as sine die approaches in early May. In the House this week, representatives will debate House Bill 1321, which would dedicate $4 million to the governor’s office to defend against “adverse” action from the Trump administration, including possible criminal investigations, as we reported last week. That will likely be a tense debate: The House’s top Republican, Minority Leader Rose Pugliese, foreshadowed her concerns with the bill in brief comments on other legislation last week.

The House will also debate bills seeking to implement policies around book bans in schools; to allow small cars common in Japan — called “kei vehicles” — onto (most) Colorado roads; and to institute an easier licensing system for food trucks. House Bill 1174, which would cap certain hospital reimbursements, is also up for a first House vote this week.

Also calendared for a first full vote in the House: Senate Bill 5, the pro-union bill backed by Democrats and opposed by businesses and Gov. Jared Polis. The measure has been floating while lawmakers and labor leaders seek to find a deal that would see the bill signed into law while advocates pull down a union-backed ballot measure proposal that, if it wins voter approval, would represent a more significant win for workers and a bigger threat to the state’s businesses.

Across the Capitol, the full Senate is still waiting to debate House Bill 1169, the so-called YIGBY — or “Yes in God’s Backyard” — bill allowing housing to be built on religious and educational properties. The measure’s been rolled over repeatedly in recent weeks, apparently at the request of its sponsors, according to the Senate’s majority leader.

The Senate is set to give final approval to a bipartisan bill that seeks to prevent landlords from charging fees to the families of tenants who’ve died. The Senate was initially set to vote this week on Senate Bill 201, which would require people to verify their ages before looking at pornographic websites. But the chamber’s leaders then summarily moved to table the bill late Monday morning, killing it entirely.

Senate Bill 276, which would expand existing state law to further limit federal immigration authorities’ ability to work in the state, is also scheduled for a floor vote this week.

Here is what else is scheduled this week:

Reproductive health bills

On Monday, the Senate’s Judiciary Committee will discuss Senate Bill 130, which generally would require hospital departments — including labor and delivery caregivers — to provide emergency treatment to patients who need it. It effectively places existing federal protections into state law, with an emphasis on abortion care. The bill has undergone some changes, and supporters are holding a news conference Monday afternoon to rally support for it.

Then, on Tuesday, the House’s Appropriations Committee will vote on House Bill 1259. The bill is partially focused on enhancing protections for in vitro fertilization in state law. But it would also roll back and alter some regulations related to sperm and egg donors that were passed nearly three years ago. That’s made it controversial, and it’s been held up amid negotiations and opposition.

More committee votes

Elsewhere Monday afternoon, the House’s State, Civic, Military and Veteran Affairs Committee will debate two election bills. One — the Colorado Voting Rights Act — would enshrine federal voting protections in state law amid fears of federal intervention. Right after that, the committee is set to vote on House Bill 1327, which would make some changes to the ballot measure process, including a requirement that voters be told how much revenue would be generated by tax increases.

The Senate’s Judiciary Committee on Monday will debate House Bill 1282, which would eliminate credit card “swipe fees” charged to businesses on taxes or tips paid by customers. It’s a bipartisan bill, but it’s vehemently opposed by credit card companies, some business groups and airlines.

The Senate’s Appropriations Committee will vote on a Regional Transportation District reform bill on Tuesday morning — a late start for a toned-down version of last year’s contentious reform attempt, which prompted a fight.

A legislative HR department?

Legislative leadership will discuss the establishment of a human resources department in the Capitol on Tuesday afternoon. That’s long been a desire of legislative aides, and it would likely involve the expansion of the legislature’s existing — and small — Office of Workplace Expectation.

Legislative leaders previously signaled support for establishing a larger HR office, though they also said last month that they wanted to do so slowly to keep costs down.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

Colorado lawmakers have succeeded in putting a cork in part of the state’s liquor laws after a skeptical Gov. Jared Polis signed a new measure blocking the state from issuing a certain type of license to grocery and drugstores.

Senate Bill 33, which passed the legislature with sizable bipartisan support, blocks the state from issuing any more liquor licenses to drugstores, which typically means grocery stores that also have pharmacies. Supporters had argued that the law would help support independent liquor stores as grocery stores — which can now sell wine and beer — move increasingly into alcohol sales.

The new law, signed by Polis on Thursday, means more grocery stores can’t expand into selling hard liquor.

Read more

Colorado budget cuts — including hit for roads, loss of health workers — cause heartburn as lawmakers close gap

The Colorado state budget is moving closer to finalization, but lawmakers have continued grappling over $1.2 billion in proposed cuts — with trims to a community health reimbursement program and to transportation funding among those drawing attention.

Proposed funding cuts for community health workers led to amendments and pleas from lawmakers looking to boost a workforce that one senator called a “lynchpin” for his rural district. Meanwhile, the proposed delay of tens of millions of dollars in highway funding has outside organizations worried about road conditions in coming years.

In both cases, critics warned that the proposed cuts and delays would cause more harm than savings. But the fiscal math doesn’t lie, budget writers counter — no matter how painful it makes the decisions.

Read more

Gov. Jared Polis signs sweeping gun law that adds requirements to buy certain semiautomatic weapons

Gov. Jared Polis signed a sweeping gun-control measure into law Thursday, the culmination of years of effort by advocates and progressive Democrats to limit the sale of high-powered semiautomatic weapons in Colorado.

Starting next summer, Coloradans will have to pass a background check and a training course before they can purchase a swath of semiautomatic firearms that include most of the guns known colloquially as assault weapons. Senate Bill 3 also prohibits the sale of bump stocks and rapid-fire trigger activators, which are firearm components that can increase a gun’s rate of fire.

The bill’s sponsors said it was intended to prevent future mass shootings and enforce the state’s existing prohibition on high-capacity magazines.

“We have been able to add to the safety of each and every Coloradan, especially when it comes to gun violence,” said Sen. Tom Sullivan.

Read more

Colorado lawmakers want to add body cameras to youth detention staff

Colorado lawmakers want to add body-worn cameras to staff working in the state’s juvenile detention centers and have backed off a request to substantially increase the number of beds available to house youth awaiting trial.

Legislators this week made drastic overhauls to House Bill 1146 to now include a pilot program in one youth detention facility and in one commitment facility that requires every staff member who is responsible for the direct supervision of youth to wear a body camera while interacting with them.

The program would be implemented from January 2026 through December 2028. The Colorado Department of Human Services would then recommend whether to continue and expand the program, or eliminate it.

The lawmakers’ request comes just weeks after a Denver Post investigation found widespread allegations of excessive force by staff in the state’s 14 juvenile detention facilities.

Read more

Colorado launches new “last resort” homeowners insurance policy

Colorado launched the state’s new, last-resort homeowners insurance program — known as the FAIR Plan — on Thursday even as this summer’s weather conditions could be ripe for severe hailstorms and wildfires.

Homeowners who can show they’ve been declined coverage by at least three commercial insurance companies can apply to purchase a FAIR Plan policy that would provide up to $750,000 toward the cost of replacing their home. Applicants will have the option to add coverage for wind and hail damage as well as theft and vandalism.

“This product is not intended to compete with the admitted market,” said Kelly Campbell, the FAIR Plan’s executive director. “It’s not intended to be the same as a basic homeowners policy.”

Read more

Polis threatens to veto bill addressing sentencing disparities between Colorado’s state and municipal courts

Gov. Jared Polis has threatened to veto a bill that would mandate Colorado’s municipal courts conform to state sentencing guidelines, the bill sponsors said.

House Bill 1147 would limit city courts from administering sentences that go beyond state limits for the same crimes. Legislative reforms in 2021 significantly reduced maximum penalties for a host of low-level, nonviolent crimes in Colorado’s state courts. But municipal courts, which operate individually and are not part of the state judicial system, were not included in the statute.

As a result, defendants in Colorado’s municipal courts can face much longer sentences than those in state court for the same petty offenses, The Denver Post previously found.

Read more

Colorado officials ready legal defense fund against Trump cuts and potential investigations

Colorado legislators are fast-tracking the creation of a $4 million fund to help Gov. Jared Polis’ office defend against actions by the Trump administration — including potential criminal investigations — as policymakers grapple with frozen funding and uncertainty from the federal government.

Using state money set aside to match federal dollars, House Bill 1321 would establish a fund to hire staff or contractors to defend against threats to federal funding that’s due to the state. The money could also be spent on reimbursing the Colorado Attorney General’s Office, should its attorneys have to defend state leaders and employees against legal and criminal proceedings filed against them. That would include potential inquiries from Congress.

Should the $4 million prove insufficient, the bill would also allow Polis’ office to accept gifts, grants and donations to add to the fund — meaning that the state could essentially use crowdfunding to defend itself and its funding streams from the Trump administration.

Read more

Colorado Democrats’ bid to launch TABOR lawsuit clears first committee

Democrats’ latest attempt to uproot a state constitutional amendment that severely limits officials’ spending authority narrowly passed its first committee vote Monday night.

House Joint Resolution 1023 would commit the Colorado General Assembly to suing the state over whether the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR, passes federal constitutional muster. Voters passed TABOR as an amendment to the state constitution in 1992. Among other provisions, it restricts lawmakers from raising taxes without seeking voter approval and limits how much the state budget can grow annually.

This resolution, if it passes the full legislature, would result in a legal challenge based on whether TABOR’s restrictions are allowed under the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that all states have a republican form of representative government. TABOR, the resolution argues, restricts the state to a direct democracy when it comes to matters of spending.

Read more

Colorado lawmakers back new election requirements for officials appointed to vacant seats

Colorado lawmakers on Monday backed a pair of bills to reform the much-maligned process that helped seat nearly a quarter of the legislature, while rejecting a competing proposal that would’ve required changing the state constitution.

The two favored bills, which cleared an initial House committee, are essentially a package aimed at changing the vacancy-filling process: House Bill 1315 would allow lawmakers appointed via a vacancy committee to serve no more than a full session in the Capitol before standing for an election, while House Bill 1319 would enact similar election parameters for vacancy-appointed commissioners in large counties.

Both bills are bipartisan, and they passed the House’s State, Civic, Military and Veteran Affairs Committee in succession.

Read more

Tenants facing eviction could get jury trial under bill before Colorado legislature

In October, amid a record-breaking wave of eviction filings, the Colorado Supreme Court handed down a seismic decision: Tenants facing eviction have a right to contest their displacement in front of a jury.

The opinion — sparked by a lawsuit from a tenant challenging allegations from her landlord — marked a shift, at least for the relatively small number of cases that would qualify under its parameters. Eviction proceedings are often dispatched in rapid succession, with relatively few tenants defended by lawyers and county judges typically denying requests for jury trials.

Then, in December, the court reversed itself. In a move that one housing lawyer said he’d never seen before, the court voluntarily withdrew the opinion because of its new understanding of an underlying fact in the case — how the tenant had been served her eviction notice.

The court then demurred on the deeper question about tenants’ access to jury trials. That question, the justices wrote, should actually be addressed by the legislature.

Read more

Budget week part 2: A flurry of election reforms and more this week in the Colorado legislature

It’s Budget Crunch: Part II in the state Capitol this week, as the state budget and several dozen spending measures hit the House.

The proposed budget for the 2025-26 fiscal year, which starts in July, cleared the state Senate in perfunctory fashion last week. Now it begins what will likely be a more tense journey through the House. That means there will be few committee meetings on this side of the Capitol as House members spend most of the week debating the budget — known as the “long bill” — and its cluster of 60-some related measures, known as “orbitals.”

The long bill is, well, long, and the orbitals revolve around it. The legislature is a clever place.

If all goes to plan, the budget will be on the House floor Wednesday, Thursday and — if need be — Friday for a parade of amendment proposals from Democrats and Republicans alike. It’ll then likely go to a conference committee of House and Senate legislators to resolve amendments made in each chamber before going to Gov. Jared Polis for passage into law.

Read more

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

Re: “Lower Arkansas Valley: Clash over water,” April 6 news story

While visiting a local business the other day in Rocky Ford, I noticed the headline in the local paper about another attempted water grab in the Lower Arkansas Valley by Colorado Springs. I am a fifth-generation farmer, and we have agricultural interests in Kansas and Colorado, including in the valley.

For anyone unaware of the consequences of these water grabs, it would be timely to take a drive through Ordway, Las Animas, or other locations in the valley. There you can see the impact of the greed of cities and developers.

The reality is that the cities and the developers operate on the assumption that there is a God-given right to develop. Last Sunday, there were also articles about the massive growth around DIA and the need to widen Peña Boulevard to handle the higher volumes of traffic. Really? The fact is that we are dealing with finite resources, and there are limits to growth.

I am fully aware of the water savings technology that is in use in agriculture, and there are multiple ways in which that technology can and should be used in urban settings. But when we have unaccountable bureaucrats who have no incentive to conserve, the result is bound to be bad.

Until there are some honest conversations and leadership at all levels of government in Colorado about the limits to growth that are tied to finite water resources, the conversations about saving the Colorado River and other water sources are just for show.

Ben Palen, Denver

I’m pretty sure they teach the basics of supply and demand in business 101. But just in case the people in charge of these decisions skipped that class, let’s review. There’s no question the Front Range needs water to continue to develop. That’s the demand side.

The problem is the search for new water sources in areas that don’t have water to spare. We don’t need to duplicate the actions of Los Angeles that turned the Owens Valley into a desert, with the same outcome for the Arkansas River Valley in Colorado. How about a different approach? Look to obtain new sources of water from areas that have a surplus of water.

The Missouri River and Mississippi River basins flood with regularity almost every year. This would be the supply side of the equation. Why not run a pipeline to the Front Range? It seems feasible that they could run a pipeline that would parallel existing oil pipelines. They could also utilize solar, wind and backup generators to run the pumps.

The immediate argument is that we can’t; it’s too expensive. Yes, it is expensive, but can’t never got anything done. Los Angeles proved that water runs uphill to money, and the money is there. It’s there in the form of insurance settlements to pay for all the damage the flooding does every year to that region. It would require reallocating how the money gets spent. It would require a functioning federal government. It would require political willpower. The issue isn’t the short supply of water; it’s the short supply of imagination.

Mike L. Keith, Gunnison

Commuter rail is Front Range issue to solve

Re: “Still waiting: Endless barriers prevent start of construction on train from Pueblo to Fort Collins,” April 6 commentary

Please name the fast-growing cities in the United States that do not have traffic problems. They are everywhere.

Predictability in transit times is important for economic efficiency. Given the unpredictable nature of metropolitan road traffic, there is a significant opportunity to improve economic efficiency through improved transit.

NIMBYs, however, don’t want to share the burden. Nor do environmentalists. Further, there is no consensus on the ideal solution. Is it light rail, subway, more highway lanes, blimps or a partridge in a pear tree?

Most importantly, there is no money — not local, not federal. The federal government’s debt level must be reduced. It cannot borrow funds to solve traffic frustration.

What is the solution? Colorado residents must pay for the improvements in transit. If Coloradans are frustrated by the lack of a solution, I suggest they buy a mirror.

Every people has the government it deserves.

Michael Canon, Denver

I wholeheartedly agree with the content of Sofia Joucovsky’s commentary. Sadly, our country now lags behind both European and Asian countries in passenger rail infrastructure. Dispersed population centers like those that exist on the Front Range could easily upgrade the system in a simple, linear way.

Peter Ewing, Pueblo

Looking for better ways to get to the airport

Re: “For $15 million, look at all Peña Blvd alternatives,” April 6 editorial

I hope the Peak Consulting Study finds a way to understand who’s using the road and why, which will probably include understanding where the person is traveling to and from. I live near 13th Avenue and Holly Street. The A Line is not close. I’d have to drive there or hire a driver, then still pay the $10 ticket and wait for the train.

I like the idea that drivers could go to E-470, but if most people are coming from the west of the airport, why would they go east? No matter how much traffic I’ve seen on Google Maps when I’m leaving the airport, it has not once told me to take E-470.

The article mentioned the expansion of lanes by the airport, which has always puzzled me. I’ve only been here for six years, so maybe before that, the last mile before the airport had bad traffic? All of that roadwork planning missed the mark on how fast the area was growing residentially. It feels like everyone is scratching their head as to why there are more people on the road.

I lived for years in New York City, and I loved its public transportation options, but that’s not feasible for Denver at this point. We need to think about more futuristic options, like self-driving vehicles with a dedicated lane, because asking me to take a train, then a bus, then walk doesn’t seem like the future.

Lauren Jenkins, Denver

Denver City Council doesn’t need to spend $15 million on a study; rather, look at what the Washington D.C. metro area did in the 1980s. As the area around the Dulles International Airport grew, the Dulles Airport Access Highway became clogged not as much with airport traffic as with travelers going to homes, shops, and restaurants between the Beltway (Interstate 495) and the airport. Does this sound familiar? It should, because that is what is happening between Interstate 70 and DIA. This is due to all of the development around the airport. I would venture to say much of the traffic on Peña Boulevard never even goes to the airport.

The solution for Dulles and the surrounding area was simple: Build local access roads to serve travelers who did not have business at the airport and restrict the Airport Access Highway to airport business traffic only. Having traveled in and out of the area since the late ’70s, I can tell you that this has worked and continues to work for the airport and surrounding area.

There seems to be plenty of land around Peña Boulevard. Building traffic lanes for local businesses and housing in the area and keeping non-airport off of Peña makes sense.

Calvin T. Switzer II, Castle Rock

I offer a far less expensive and disruptive alternative not mentioned in the article. Recently, I read a second cell phone lot was being considered. For the new cell phone lot, why not have a continuous loop of shuttle buses?

Departing passengers could be dropped off at the lot, transported to the terminal, and the same bus could bring arriving passengers back to the lot to be picked up. This would not only reduce traffic on Peña Boulevard but also reduce traffic congestion at the airport. RTD could run the service, charge a fee of maybe $2.00 per trip and maybe show a profit.

Attention City Council: I offer this alternative and will accept far less than $15 million.

Steve Nash, Centennial

Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

Senate Bill 33, which passed the legislature with sizable bipartisan support, blocks the state from issuing any more liquor licenses to drugstores, which typically means grocery stores that also have pharmacies. Supporters had argued that the law would help support independent liquor stores as grocery stores — which can now sell wine and beer — move increasingly into alcohol sales.

The new law, signed by Polis on Thursday, means more grocery stores can’t expand into selling hard liquor.

“Independent liquor stores are important small businesses in communities across the state, especially in small towns, and they are the lifeline for Colorado’s craft breweries and distilleries,” Sen. Dylan Roberts, a Frisco Democrat who co-sponsored the bill, said in a statement Friday. “Without this law, we’d see more local job layoffs and more closures of these stories across the state because they’d be turfed out by big box stores.”

The bill was also backed by Sen. Judy Amabile and Reps. Naquetta Ricks and Ron Weinberg.

Colorado has 36 active drugstore liquor licenses, according to a nonpartisan legislative analysis. The law is expected to prevent about two dozen more licenses from being issued in the next two years.

The law does not impact grocery or drugstores that already have those licenses; they’ll still be able to renew them. Lawmakers had pursued similar limitations in previous years, and Roberts said SB-33 was a compromise compared to those attempts, which would’ve removed existing licenses.

In signing the bill, Polis bucked retail and grocery store industry groups that had asked him to veto it. In a signing statement, Polis wrote that he was concerned the bill would move the state’s “liquor laws backward, not forward.”

But the legislative support for the bill was so overwhelming, he continued, that it forced his hand away from the veto pen. Eighty-four of the legislature’s 100 lawmakers voted in support of the bill.

Opponents criticized the bills’ passage into law and floated the possibility of a ballot measure to reverse the new policy, which goes into effect immediately.

“On behalf of hundreds of businesses and thousands of employees in Colorado, we are disappointed that the governor has signed this protectionist measure into law when the current system balances consumer choice, business sustainability, and safety,” Ray Rivera, the executive director of Coloradans for Consumer Choice, said in a statement. “Senate Bill 33 disrupts this balance, contradicts the will of voters, and does nothing to improve public safety.”

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

Proposed funding cuts for community health workers led to amendments and pleas from lawmakers looking to boost a workforce that one senator called a “lynchpin” for his rural district. Meanwhile, the proposed delay of tens of millions of dollars in highway funding has outside organizations worried about road conditions in coming years.

In both cases, critics warned that the proposed cuts and delays would cause more harm than savings. But the fiscal math doesn’t lie, budget writers counter — no matter how painful it makes the decisions.

Members of the Joint Budget Committee, which wrote the state’s spending document for the 2025-26 fiscal year, faced the deep budget hole this year because of the constitutional spending limit set by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights. The cap resulted in cuts big and small across the government as lawmakers sought — successfully — to protect funding for education and Medicaid.

“It is heartbreaking,” said Rep. Shannon Bird, a Westminster Democrat on the budget committee. “When you’re cutting $1.2 billion out of the budget, it’s impossible to fund all the things we would like to fund as a Joint Budget Committee. … This breaks our heart as well. It’s not a decision we would make in a different fiscal situation.”

The House passed the budget 44-21 on Thursday. It would authorize about $44 billion in total spending and $16.7 billion in general fund spending for the next fiscal year, which begins July 1. The Senate passed the budget in early April.

Now, the Joint Budget Committee will need to reconcile the two versions before the budget goes to Gov. Jared Polis for approval.

The budget isn’t all cuts, however. Budget writers also tout another $150 million for education and a 1.6% boost to how much most medical providers would be reimbursed under Medicaid — both areas of early worry when lawmakers faced such a massive shortfall.

And not all proposed cuts have gotten as much heat, including a $1 million cut to bullying prevention in the Education Department, caused by sagging marijuana revenue; a $4.2 million reduction for peer services in the Health Care Policy and Financing Department; and $4 million in total cuts to the Behavioral Health Administration. A troubled Medicaid transportation program was slashed by more than $13 million, and jail-based competency programs took a $2.3 million hit.

In one of the several dozen budget orbital bills, so called because of their close relation to the budget bill itself, lawmakers also formally killed an eating disorder prevention program launched amid an increase in diagnoses and concern about treatment centers. That program had been pared back even before it was passed two years ago — also for budget reasons — and lawmakers this week swept away what remained.

“They have a really difficult, almost impossible, job to do,” said Zach Zaslow, the vice president of community health and advocacy for Children’s Hospital Colorado. “There are a lot of worthy causes out there.”

Fight over community health workers

But he’s among those concerned by a proposal to cut Medicaid reimbursement for community health workers, which has drawn particular consternation.

The measure, an orbital bill, would kill a program established by a 2023 law, though it hasn’t taken full effect yet. The program would cost an estimated $2.8 million, though its elimination would also lead to the loss of more than $8 million in federal matching funds.

Community health workers help people connect with and navigate complicated health care systems. Advocates said the use of the workers leads to immediate and long-term savings by helping patients get care before they wind up in costly emergency rooms.

This program would have bolstered existing networks throughout the state. But, budget writers argued, it wasn’t going to launch until July 1. They saw it as a place to save money without harming existing services, even as they lauded its intent.

“This cut was not one that was easy to make,” Bird said.

Earlier in the budget process, the Senate amended the bill that would defund the program to halve the cut, to $1.4 million. That change did not make it into the House version.

The chambers still need to reconcile the two versions of the bill — one with some funding, one without any — before the budget goes to Polis. It’s an open question whether the funding survives and, if it does, where the money might come from.

Patti Valverde, the director of the Colorado School of Public Health’s programs at the University of Northern Colorado, said community health workers are a “bridge” between their communities and health care, with decades of research backing up their efficacy.

They proved vital during the COVID-19 pandemic to helping people who didn’t trust the public health departments or speak English as their first language, she said. She also warned that cuts would disproportionately affect rural areas.

“It really would be a huge loss and we would be going backwards” without the program, Valverde said. “And we would lose (community health care workers) because without reimbursements, we’ll lose grant funds … we just won’t see return on investment with the ways this workforce can really reduce costs.”

Valverde said she’s been working to implement the Medicaid reimbursement program for two years. Hundreds of workers have been trained already under the expectation that Medicaid will soon start helping to pay their wages, she said.

Zaslow, from Children’s Hospital Colorado, said it’s one of the rare programs where not only does it pay off down the road, but it would pay off in health care savings the year it’s implemented.

In the Senate, a bipartisan group of lawmakers pushed the funding through, over the objections from the budget committee members. Sen. Kyle Mullica, a Thornton Democrat who pushed to soften the cut, said the state sees more than $2 in return for every $1 spent on the program. Sen. Marc Catlin, a Montrose Republican, called community health workers a “lynchpin” in his community.

But the state needs to find cuts somewhere when it’s facing a $1 billion hole this year and projecting similar cuts next year, Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, a Brighton Republican on the budget committee, said.

“While I appreciate this, and understand the need, this program has not started,” Kirkmeyer said. “It doesn’t start until July 1. And starting on July 1, next (fiscal) year — probably even before next year — we’ll have to start deciding what cuts we’re going to make.”

Slow-rolling transportation funding

A separate budget move has been roiling other elected leaders, though it doesn’t seem to be gaining traction among lawmakers: slow-rolling some transportation funding to save $70 million this upcoming budget year and $56.5 million next year. The proposed changes would boost planned funding in the early 2030s, however.

While budget writers finalized the spending proposal last month, a coalition of rural county commissioners and business groups signed a public letter asking to keep transportation funding in place. The state already has a massive backlog of roadwork that needs to be done, they said, and delays in funding will only slow the state’s response to the need for highway maintenance, construction and safety improvements.

A lack of funding is “jeopardizing the safety of our citizens and impeding our state’s economic progress and competitiveness,” they warned.

During debate, the budget-writing lawmakers countered that the proposal wasn’t a cut, just a delay. Transportation projects don’t materialize based on yearly budgets, but based on long-term funding windows, said Kirkmeyer, who spent two decades on a transportation advisory committee.

She said the committee worked with the Colorado Department of Transportation to ensure there would be no “hiccup in funding transportation projects.”

“This is one of those items that I think all of us would prefer not to have to do to balance the budget,” said state Rep. Rick Taggart, a Grand Junction Republican on the budget committee. “There’s no question about it.”

Bad road conditions, whether due to snow or the potholes it causes, are a consistent concern throughout the state. A recent study by the Common Sense Institute, a think tank focused on the economy and free enterprise, found that new transportation fees passed in recent years have largely gone to multimodal projects, such as mass transit, and environmental mitigation, while money for base infrastructure hasn’t kept up.

“CDOT resources do not meet demand,” the study found. “Over the long term, the resources available simply are insufficient to operate, maintain, and expand the state’s highway system to maintain appropriate service levels.”

Ben Stein, a former chief financial officer for CDOT and author of the CSI study, warned that delaying repairs can result in more urgent, costlier repairs down the road. Today’s postponed repaving project can easily become tomorrow’s road reconstruction problem, for example.

“The legislature says it’s in a bind today … so they’re going to put it on a back end in 2032 or 2033,” Stein said. “Who’s to say the legislature in 2032 or 2033 won’t say they’re also in a bind, so they’re going to push that money off another 10 years?”

But he, like everyone else wary of the cuts who spoke for this story, also struck a conciliatory tone. The size of the budget gap backed lawmakers into a corner, giving them the unenviable task of cutting their way out.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

Starting next summer, Coloradans will have to pass a background check and a training course before they can purchase a swath of semiautomatic firearms that include most of the guns known colloquially as assault weapons. Senate Bill 3 also prohibits the sale of bump stocks and rapid-fire trigger activators, which are firearm components that can increase a gun’s rate of fire.

The bill’s sponsors said it was intended to prevent future mass shootings and enforce the state’s existing prohibition on high-capacity magazines.

“We have been able to add to the safety of each and every Coloradan, especially when it comes to gun violence,” said Sen. Tom Sullivan, a Centennial Democrat who co-sponsored the bill with Sen. Julie Gonzales and Reps. Meg Froelich and Andy Boesenecker.

SB-3, which passed the legislature late last month, becomes the most sweeping gun-control measure passed by legislative Democrats in Colorado, and its passage into law was cheered Thursday by national gun-control groups Moms Demand Action and Everytown for Gun Safety.

Though the law doesn’t impose a complete ban on assault weapons or any type of firearm, it follows in the footsteps of previous attempts in the Capitol to fully prohibit the sale or purchase of those guns. A group of activists, including local students who’d repeatedly come to the state Capitol calling for tighter regulations, attended the bill signing in the governor’s office Thursday.

Before the bill was signed, Froelich referred to those students as the “lockdown generation” that has lived their “whole school lives in the shadow of gun violence.”

“Today’s victory is because of the countless students that showed up day after day to testify in support of this life-saving bill,” Grant Cramer, a gun violence survivor and the co-president of Denver East High School’s Students Demand Action chapter, said in a statement. “We refused to take no for an answer and now we’ve strengthened our gun safety laws in Colorado. This is proof that our voices hold power to create change, no matter how big or small.”

Ian Escalante, the executive director of the group Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, called the bill’s passage into law “one of the most disgraceful things that’s ever been done in the state.” After the bill had drawn national attention from gun-rights advocates in recent weeks, the National Rifle Association quickly put out a blistering statement criticizing Polis’ decision to sign it.

Escalante said his group was considering legal options to challenge the bill — though they likely won’t be able to pursue litigation until the bill goes into effect next year. He also said he planned to pursue “electoral accountability” in 2026, referring to challenging Democrats in competitive districts.

“We’re not going to let this law stand,” he said outside the governor’s office, “whether it’s through litigation or whether we kick these bastards out and we replace them with people who will repeal it.”

Law doesn’t apply to common handguns

The new law goes into effect Aug. 1, 2026. It applies primarily to gas-operated semiautomatic firearms that accept detachable magazines, a definition that includes the AR-15 rifle and many guns like it. It would require people pass background checks from their county sheriff. Should they clear that, they would need to take either a four- or 12-hour training course, depending on whether they’ve passed a hunter safety class.

Polis said Thursday that he wanted to keep the cost of background checks and training to below $200 per person and that he wanted additional carveouts for people who’d previously been trained with the weapons.

The law does not prohibit the possession of the weapons. It does not apply to most common handguns or shotguns, and lawmakers included a list of other firearms that are exempt from the limitations. The law also would not require anyone to turn in their firearms.

Gun shops can also continue selling firearms covered under the law, even to people who haven’t passed background checks, so long as the weapons have been altered to have a fixed magazine — meaning that they cannot be reloaded as rapidly.

All of the legislature’s 34 Republican lawmakers — along with several Democrats — voted against the bill. Conservatives labeled it an infringement on the Second Amendment and argued it would do little to stop gun violence.

Opponents delivered thousands of petitions to Democrats and to Polis’ office requesting that the proposal be rejected, and some also left flyers at the homes of Democratic lawmakers.

A skeptic of previous proposals to ban firearms at the state level, Sullivan embraced SB-3 as a means to enforce the 2013 magazine ban passed after the 2012 Aurora movie theater shooting, in which Sullivan’s son, Alex, was killed. Other advocates and supporters said the bill seeks to prevent the mass shootings that have become a common feature of American life.

The new law’s limitations would apply to the guns used in the Aurora attack as well as to the weapons used at Columbine High School in 1999, at the Boulder King Soopers in 2021, and in a shooting spree in Lakewood and Denver in late 2021.

Polis sought changes to bill

As initially drafted, the bill would’ve broadly banned the sale or purchase of any gas-operated gun that accepted detachable magazines — which simultaneously would’ve escalated the magazine ban and enacted a de facto ban on most existing assault weapons.

But Polis balked, and his staff sought to insert a loophole into the measure allowing for sales to continue under certain circumstances.

In a late-night deal, Sullivan and Gonzales eventually acquiesced to the governor’s request. They added in the training and background check requirements after a needed supporter — embattled then-Sen. Sonya Jaquez Lewis — was absent ahead of a key vote.

In a statement accompanying the bill signing, Polis focused largely on the changes inserted into the bill to allow the firearms to still be sold to people who complete SB-3’s training and background check requirements.

“This bill ensures that our Second Amendment rights are protected and that Coloradans can continue to purchase the gun of their choice for sport, hunting, self defense, or home defense,” he wrote.

With SB-3, Colorado joins a growing list of states that have either instituted a permitting scheme — meaning requirements that people receive some sort of approval before they can purchase certain weapons — or an outright ban on semiautomatic rifles.

The law will almost certainly be challenged in court, though legal scholars and supporters have argued it stands on solid constitutional footing.

Legislative Democrats have enacted a growing list of firearms regulations, largely in the past few years as the party’s legislative majorities have grown. Sullivan said 40 gun-violence prevention bills have been introduced in recent years, nearly half of which have passed.

Those new laws include a mandatory waiting period and age limit for purchasing firearms, new gun-storage rules and additional gun shop licensing requirements. Lawmakers have also further limited where firearms can be carried and have expanded the legal avenues for a court to temporarily confiscate a person’s weapons.

After signing SB-3 on Thursday, Polis then signed another Sullivan-backed bill intended to help bring federal funding to the state to respond to mass shootings.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.

Legislators this week made drastic overhauls to House Bill 1146 to now include a pilot program in one youth detention facility and in one commitment facility that requires every staff member who is responsible for the direct supervision of youth to wear a body camera while interacting with them.

The program would be implemented from January 2026 through December 2028. The Colorado Department of Human Services would then recommend whether to continue and expand the program, or eliminate it.

The lawmakers’ request comes just weeks after a Denver Post investigation found widespread allegations of excessive force by staff in the state’s 14 juvenile detention facilities. A year’s worth of internal incident reports reviewed by The Post showed teens suffered broken bones, sustained concussions and overdosed on drugs in these secure centers.

Colorado’s child protection ombudsman, tasked with investigating child safety concerns, has been calling since last year for the state to add body-worn cameras to staff in juvenile detention. Currently, facilities are equipped with video but no audio, making it impossible for investigators to determine whether verbal altercations contributed to excessive force or restraint incidents.

“We were thrilled when we saw this amendment,” Stephanie Villafuerte, the ombudsman, said in an interview Wednesday. “This will increase juvenile and staff safety.”

The revised bill also reversed course on adding substantially more beds to Colorado’s maximum capacity for detained youth awaiting trial.

The state’s district attorneys originally requested to hold 324 youth in pre-trial detention at any one time, up from the current cap of 215. The legislation’s original language ultimately asked for 254 beds in the first year, followed in subsequent years by a formula to determine the maximum bed count, based on the average daily population.

Prosecutors argue the state doesn’t have enough beds to house violent youth offenders awaiting trial, citing increased violent crime among youth. As a result, they say, authorities are forced to release teens who might otherwise be deemed a danger to the public to free up spots for someone else.

The amendment introduced and passed by the House Health and Human Services Committee on Tuesday would instead create 39 emergency beds that wouldn’t count towards the total bed cap. Authorities could use these beds if they run out of space from their normal allotment.

Juvenile justice advocates hailed the revised legislation.

“The dramatic pivot from a bill that would have locked up more kids every year without regard for the dangerous and deteriorating conditions in our youth jails to the amended bill that passed out of committee today is a step in the right direction,” said Dana Walters Flores, Colorado campaign coordinator for the National Center for Youth Law.

The bill now heads to the House Appropriations Committee.

Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.