House Committee on Local Government (02/19/2014)

Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Date:	02/19/2014	ATTENDANCE

Time:	01:34 PM to 05:19 PM	Dore	*
		Exum	X
Place:	HCR 0107	Garcia	X
		Gardner	X
This Meeting was called to order by		Landgraf	X
	Representative Fields	Lebsock	X
		Navarro	X
This Report was prepared by		Rankin	X
	Damion Pechota	Rosenthal	X
		Vigil	X
		Wright	X
		Singer	X
		Fields	X
		X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call

Bills Addressed:		Action Taken:
HB14-1223 HB14-1193 HB14-1184		Amended, Referred to the Committee of the Whole Amended, Referred to the Committee of the Whole Amended, Referred to the Committee of the Whole

01:35 PM -- HB14-1223

Representative Coram, sponsor, presented House Bill 1223 concerning the reclassification of Dolores County for the purpose of statutory provisions fixing the salaries of county officers. The bill reclassifies Dolores County as a Category V county only if the annual salaries of county officers as set forth in current law are not increased by more than 7.5 percent through legislation enacted during the 2014 legislative session. Current law establishes the salary for county officer positions of commissioner, sheriff, treasurer, assessor, clerk and recorder, coroner, and surveyor. For purposes of setting the salary for these positions, counties are categorized into one of six classifications; Dolores County is currently categorized as a Category VI county.

Representative Corum discussed the need for category reclassification and the support of Dolores County organizations. He answered questions from the committee regarding the cost to Dolores County to pay higher salaries.

01:37 PM -- Eric Bergman, Colorado Counties Inc., spoke in favor of the bill. He distributed a document to the committee (Attachment A) and discussed the specific salary increases for officials if Dolores County was reclassified as a Category V county. He answered questions from the committee regarding other counties that have made a category change.

14HseLocal0219AttachA.pdf

Mr. Bergman discussed the increase of workload for commissioners and officials in Dolores County due to changes in the local economy. Representative Gardner discussed the role of judicial districts in relation to assessed valuation. Mr. Bergman answered questions from the committee regarding population size and the current procedures for Dolores County Commissioner meetings. He answered questions regarding the bill's fiscal note and the process of public involvement for determining pay levels for elected officials.

Representative Coram presented and distributed amendment L.001 (Attachment B).

14HseLocal0219AttachB.pdf


BILL:	HB14-1223
TIME:	01:46:06 PM
MOVED:	Singer
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.001 (Attachment B). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Wright
		VOTE
	Dore
	Exum
	Garcia
	Gardner
	Landgraf
	Lebsock
	Navarro
	Rankin
	Rosenthal
	Vigil
	Wright
	Singer
	Fields

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection

Representative Singer presented and summarized amendment L.002 (Attachment C). Representative Vigil discussed the importance of allowing Mineral County to change categories in addition to Dolores County.

14HseLocal0219AttachC.pdf

Representative Coram answered questions from the committee regarding the number of counties changing from category VI to category V.

The committee discussed amendment L.002. Representative Fields determined that amendment L.002 does not fit under the bill's title and ruled the amendment out of order.


BILL:	HB14-1223
TIME:	01:56:30 PM
MOVED:	Singer
MOTION:	Refer House Bill 14-1223, as amended, to the Committee of the Whole. The motion passed on a vote of 13-0.
SECONDED:	Rosenthal
		VOTE
	Dore	Yes
	Exum	Yes
	Garcia	Yes
	Gardner	Yes
	Landgraf	Yes
	Lebsock	Yes
	Navarro	Yes
	Rankin	Yes
	Rosenthal	Yes
	Vigil	Yes
	Wright	Yes
	Singer	Yes
	Fields	Yes

FINAL YES: 13 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

01:57 PM -- HB14-1193

Representative Salazar, sponsor, presented House Bill 14-1193 concerning requirements governing the imposition of a fee for the research and retrieval of public records under the "Colorado Open Records Act". The bill requires that hourly fees for research and retrieval of records under the Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) do not exceed three times the state minimum wage. In addition, charges must be nominal to the time the custodian spends responding to the volume of requests. A custodian may only charge a fee for research and retrieval of records if the custodian's policies concerning research and retrieval of document are posted on the custodian's website or otherwise published. Representative Salazar answered questions from the committee regarding varying fees levels determined by local governments.

Representative Fields presented and distributed amendment L.001 (Attachment D) and amendment L.002 (Attachment E).

14HseLocal0219AttachD.pdf

14HseLocal0219AttachE.pdf

Representative Vigil expressed concerns on the impact to counties in his district. Representative Salazar discussed the importance of standardizing the process and fee structure for CORA requests across the state. He answered questions from the committee regarding CORA request workload requirements. Representative Gadner discussed the provisions of the bill in relation to current case law.

02:17 PM

The committee continued to ask questions regarding the potential financial impact to counties.

The committee discussed the function of CORA and the accessibility of documents. Representative Salazar said that the bill is a compromise between stakeholders in regards to CORA.

02:27 PM -- Dianna Orf, representing the Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado, spoke in opposition to the bill. She discussed the financial impact to rural communities. Ms. Orf answered questions from the committee regarding the types of CORA requests and the process for a citizen to obtain documents. She discussed the population ranges in the different Colorado counties and the need of smaller counties to hire outside staff to support the provisions of the bill.

02:35 PM -- Geoff Wilson, representing the Colorado Municipal League (CML), spoke in opposition to the bill. He said that the taxpayers will be burdened by the provisions of the bill to makeup the loss caused by lower fees. Mr. Wilson answered questions from the committee regarding public access to information from the public. He discussed the differences between citizen and out of state organization CORA requests.

Representative Lebsock discussed the importance of CORA to provide government transparency. Mr. Wilson said that the provisions of the bill do not provide transparency, but rather allocate costs for complying with CORA.

02:48 PM

Mr. Wilson answered questions from the committee regarding provisions of the bill in relation to case law and discussed the fee structure of CORA requests.

02:54 PM -- Evan Goulding, representing the Special District Association, spoke in opposition to the bill. He discussed the importance of government transparency and the CORA request process for special districts. Mr. Goulding discussed the impact of the bill on small districts and the difficulty for custodians to properly budget the needs of CORA requests. He spoke in favor of amendment L.001 and amendment L.002. He answered questions from the committee regarding onerous requests and the burden that they create on district staff.

03:05 PM -- Jeremy Hueth, representing the University of Colorado, spoke in opposition to the bill and spoke in support of amendment L.001 and amendment L.002. Mr. Hueth discussed the CORA request process and the costs for employees to comply with the law.

03:12 PM -- Alex Loyd, representing the University of Colorado, spoke in opposition of the bill. He described the types of CORA request processed through the University of Colorado and the associated costs.

Mr. Hueth answered questions from the committee regarding the use of work study students and hired staff to comply with CORA.

Representative Salazar discussed the process of CORA requests at CU Boulder. Mr. Hueth answered questions from the committee regarding the importance of negotiating with the requestor to limit work time and costs.

03:16 PM -- Jon Caldara, representing the Independence Institute, spoke in favor of the bill. He said that the lack of standards for providing government documents limits government transparency. Mr. Calderra answered questions from the committee regarding the varying size and ability of Colorado counties to manage CORA requests. He discussed the importance of creating standardized policies for CORA requests and the role of technology to ease services.

03:25 PM -- Pat Ratliff, representing Colorado Counties, Inc., spoke in opposition to the bill. She discussed the impact to smaller counties. Ms. Ratliff discussed issues related to standardizing costs for CORA requests. She spoke in favor of amendment L.001 and amendment L.002. Ms. Ratliff answered questions from the committee regarding the rate of fees related to CORA requests.

03:32 PM -- Christine Stretesky, representing Arapahoe County, spoke in opposition to the bill. She said that Arapahoe County supports the accessibility of public records. She discussed nominal charges and current fees related to CORA documents.

03:39 PM -- Donnah Moody, representing the Colorado Assessors Association, was neutral on the bill. She said that the Colorado Assessors Association had issues with the current bill and said that the bill is a cost assignment issue.

03:41 PM -- Denise Maes, representing the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), spoke in favor of the bill. She discussed the ACLU in relation to CORA requests and that research fees vary by jurisdiction. Ms. Maes said that providing consistency for CORA requests is important for public accessibility. She discussed the role of technology in processing requests.

03:44 PM -- Chad Marturano, representing the Department of Higher Education, spoke in opposition of the bill. He discussed the differences between nominal and actual charges defined in the bill.

03:45 PM -- Eliza Schultz, representing the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, spoke in opposition of the bill. She discussed the types of CORA requests and the role of the Attorney Generals Office in reviewing the requests.

03:48 PM -- Christine Watson, representing the League of Women Voters of Colorado, spoke in favor of the bill. She discussed the importance of government transparency and explained how the high costs limit access to open records.

03:50 PM -- Luis Toro, representing Colorado Ethics Watch, spoke in favor of the bill and distributed a handout to the committee (Attachment F). Mr. Turo said that CORA request fees do not depend on the size of the jurisdiction. He discussed the importance of providing standards to avoid litigation. Mr. Toro discussed the compromises in the bill in relation to current case laws. He said that he opposes amendment L.001 and amendment L.002. Mr. Toro answered questions regarding nominal and actual charges.

14HseLocal0219AttachF.pdf

Representative Salazar discussed the differences between nominal and actual charges in relation to CORA requests.

04:00 PM -- Elena Nunez, representing Colorado Common Cause, spoke in favor of the bill. She said that the bill benefits Colorado by establishing consistent statewide policy for CORA requests.

04:03 PM -- Greg Romberg, representing the Colorado Press Association and the Colorado Broadcasters Association, spoke in favor of the bill. He discussed the compromise between governmental agencies and requesters to establish fee standards for the bill. Mr. Romberg said that maintaining access to public records is a fundamental responsibility of the government. He discussed the role of nominal charges and spoke in opposition to amendment L.002.

04:14 PM

Mr. Romberg continued to testify regarding CORA request fees related to other states open record policies.

04:17 PM

The committee recessed.

04:21 PM

The committee came back from recess.

Representative Fields discussed amendment L.001.


BILL:	HB14-1193
TIME:	04:22:10 PM
MOVED:	Fields
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.001 (Attachment D). The motion passed on a vote of 10-2.
SECONDED:	Singer
		VOTE
	Dore	Yes
	Exum	No
	Garcia	Yes
	Gardner	Yes
	Landgraf	Yes
	Lebsock	No
	Navarro	Excused
	Rankin	Yes
	Rosenthal	Yes
	Vigil	Yes
	Wright	Yes
	Singer	Yes
	Fields	Yes

YES: 10 NO: 2 EXC: 1 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

Amendment L.002 (Attachment E) was moved by Representative Fields, but died due to a lack of a second.

Representative Salazar provided closing comments on the bill. The committee members discussed their positions on the bill.


BILL:	HB14-1193
TIME:	04:31:20 PM
MOVED:	Gardner
MOTION:	Refer House Bill 14-1193, as amended, to the Committee of the Whole. The motion passed on a vote of 9-4.
SECONDED:	Lebsock
		VOTE
	Dore	No
	Exum	Yes
	Garcia	Yes
	Gardner	Yes
	Landgraf	No
	Lebsock	Yes
	Navarro	Yes
	Rankin	No
	Rosenthal	Yes
	Vigil	No
	Wright	Yes
	Singer	Yes
	Fields	Yes

FINAL YES: 9 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

04:33 PM -- HB14-1184

Representative Vigil, sponsor, presented House Bill 1184 concerning conservancy districts. The bill makes changes to the board of directors of the Pueblo Conservancy District. Specifically, the bill establishes district residency requirements for board membership, increases the number of directors from three to seven, and requirements for sub-districts within the larger conservancy district. Representative Vigil presented and discussed amendment L.004 (Attachment G) and amendment L.005 (Attachment H).

14HseLocal0219AttachG.pdf

14HseLocal0219AttachH.pdf

04:38 PM -- Buffie McFadyen, Pueblo County Commissioner, spoke in favor of the bill. She discussed the history of the Pueblo Conservancy District. Commissioner McFadyen discussed amendment L.004 and amendment L.005 in relation to fees and representation in the conservancy district.

04:40 PM -- Rick Kidd, Pueblo Conservancy District, spoke in opposition of the bill. He discussed the history of the conservancy district and the function of the district board. He discussed the process of determining flood plain assessments and maintenance funds related to direct and indirect costs. He discussed concerns related to changing the requirements and membership of the board.

04:49 PM

Mr. Kidd continued to discuss the Pueblo conservancy district and the current issues related to the board.

Representative Vigil discussed the provision to require nine board members.

04:55 PM -- Sean McCarthy, representing himself, spoke in favor of the bill. He discussed the function of the conservancy district in relation to small business owners and local residence. Mr. McCarthy discussed the resources presented to the conservancy district and the potential service provided by a nine member board.

05:01 PM

The committee recessed.

05:12 PM

The committee came back from recess.

Representative Vigil answered questions from the committee regarding amendment L.004.

Ms. McFadyen was called back to the table and answered questions from the committee regarding L.004.


BILL:	HB14-1184
TIME:	05:12:47 PM
MOVED:	Vigil
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.005 (Attachment H) as an amendment to L.004. The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Singer
		VOTE
	Dore
	Exum
	Garcia
	Gardner
	Landgraf
	Lebsock
	Navarro
	Rankin
	Rosenthal
	Vigil
	Wright
	Singer
	Fields

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:	HB14-1184
TIME:	05:12:32 PM
MOVED:	Vigil
MOTION:	Adopt amendment L.004 (Attachment G), as amended. The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:	Singer
		VOTE
	Dore
	Exum
	Garcia
	Gardner
	Landgraf
	Lebsock
	Navarro
	Rankin
	Rosenthal
	Vigil
	Wright
	Singer
	Fields

YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:	HB14-1184
TIME:	05:17:57 PM
MOVED:	Vigil
MOTION:	Refer House Bill 14-1184, as amended, to the Committee of the Whole. The motion passed on a vote of 13-0.
SECONDED:	Singer
		VOTE
	Dore	Yes
	Exum	Yes
	Garcia	Yes
	Gardner	Yes
	Landgraf	Yes
	Lebsock	Yes
	Navarro	Yes
	Rankin	Yes
	Rosenthal	Yes
	Vigil	Yes
	Wright	Yes
	Singer	Yes
	Fields	Yes

FINAL YES: 13 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

02:23 PM

The committee adjourned.