Draft rules implementing a new Colorado consumer privacy law have been revised to address news organizations’ concerns about how the law could affect journalism activities.
Like last year, court rulings dominate CFOIC’s 2022 list of transparency highs and lows, with perhaps the most closely watched decision coming nearly three weeks after a shooter killed five people and wounded more than a dozen others at an LGBTQ nightclub in Colorado Springs on Nov. 19.
The Colorado Supreme Court declined to review issues in a Court of Appeals opinion that could impact the First Amendment rights of lawyers to make statements about public-interest litigation.
News organizations in Colorado are urging state Attorney General Phil Weiser to exempt journalism activities in draft rules implementing a 2021 consumer privacy law.
The published ruling clarifies Colorado’s 2019 anti-SLAPP law, which protects news organizations and Coloradans in general from meritless lawsuits that target free expression.
But a year after House Bill 21-1250 was signed into law, reporters still can’t tune into Denver and Aurora police radio transmissions like they did before both agencies blocked public access — Denver in 2019 and Aurora three years earlier. Although each department has a written policy on radio access, neither has reached an agreement with any Denver metro news organizations.
The philanthropic Colorado Media Project is starting a fund to help Colorado journalists pay for public records that enhance reporting on social, economic, racial and other inequities.
For those concerned about access to government records in Colorado, the 2022 legislative session was notable for what didn’t happen — the introduction of a bill addressing frustrating issues such as expensive fees, email retention and slow responses by law enforcement agencies.
A committee of state lawmakers endorsed a tax credit for small businesses that spend money to advertise in Colorado news outlets.
The Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition and other organizations are asking the state’s highest court to review an appellate court ruling that, if allowed to stand, will impact the First Amendment rights of lawyers to make statements about public-interest litigation.