Gov. Jared Polis noted an “unfortunate trend of legislative proposals that ultimately impede access to official records” when he signed House Bill 25-1041, which makes name, image and likeness contracts between public universities and student athletes confidential.
It could have been worse. While open-government losses far outnumbered wins in the 2024 session of the Colorado General Assembly, the death of a burdensome Colorado Open Records Act bill in the closing days helped make the final tally a little less one-sided.
The title is set for a proposed Colorado initiative to repeal newly enacted legislation that narrows the definition of “public business” in the Colorado Open Meetings Law as it applies to the General Assembly and lets lawmakers communicate by email and text message without it being a “meeting” under the statute.
State lawmakers sent a bill to Gov. Jared Polis that narrows the definition of “public business’ in the Colorado Open Meetings Law as it applies to the legislature and lets members of the General Assembly communicate by email and text message without it being a “meeting” under the law.
A committee of state senators endorsed major changes to the way the open meetings law affects the Colorado General Assembly, approving a bill that narrows the definition of “public business” and lets lawmakers communicate by email and text message without it being a “meeting” under the law.
Several key rulings in 2023 showed why courts matter so much for enforcing and interpreting Colorado’s open government laws.
The directive is the first in the nation to expressly prohibit legislators from using so-called “ephemeral messaging” apps when discussing public business.
Colorado should enact legislation like a 2021 Michigan statute that outlaws the use of disappearing messaging apps in state government, but the language should be broadened to affect all state and local officials, a law student’s report prepared for the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition recommends.
If it’s becoming commonplace for state and local officials to communicate using disappearing or encrypted messages, what does that mean for government’s obligations under the state’s transparency laws?
