Other Issues

Colorado's Budget

Colorado has always had a small government.  And in the past year we’ve made it even leaner.  We’ve cut to the bone and balanced the budget.  We’ve already made significant cuts to balance the $2 billion ’09-‘10 budget shortfall.  But we’re not done.  Now we’re cutting even more, to help fill a $1 billion shortfall and to keep our budget balanced in FY 10-11.  We’ve cut in such a way that will allow us to focus most on what matters to people.  This long bill requires us to continue making tough choices and tough cuts.  We are being fiscally responsible this year to plan for more tough times to come in FY ‘11-‘12.  Like Colorado’s responsible families and businesses, we continue to practice fiscal prudence.

While the latest quarterly economic forecast has shown that the economy has started a slow recovery, the legislature still needs to make decisions about how to ensure the FY 10-11 budget is balanced given the $1 billion shortfall.  These decisions have been difficult, but like families across Colorado we have made the necessary cuts to ensure we balanced our budget.  The following is a summary of some of the major decisions to balance the budget:

 

$260 million reduction to K-12 Education - Our state spends 43% of our General Fund in support of K-12 education.  We have worked to protect this important funding during the recession, but given the magnitude and duration of the recession, we had to make the difficult decision to reduce the K-12 funding by 6%.  A similar dollar cut would mean a cut of almost 50% to Higher Education, or Human Services, or Corrections.  As a son of two educators, and someone who benefited greatly from public education, this has been the most difficult vote I have made in my 3 years in the legislature.

$140 million from Tax Exemptions and Credits - The legislature has eliminated or suspended several tax exemptions and credits that will result in increased revenue of roughly $140 million.  We took a very targeted approach and selected only a few of the over $2 billion in exemptions and credits offered by our state.  This revenue will help prevent further cuts to our K-12 budget.  For example, it will help us save the roughly $100 million we spend on Pre-School and Kindergarten. 
 

$93 million from the Senior Property Tax Exemption - The legislature will continue the suspension for at least one more year of the property tax exemptions seniors receive.  However, we will continue funding for programs that help needy seniors, such as the Area Agency's of Aging, which helps people with programs such as Meals on Wheels.

 

$62 million cut from Higher Education - Currently, our state funds higher education at 49th out of the 50 states, and this will mean roughly a 9% reduction in funding.  Higher Education always takes a significant portion of the reductions because it is one of the only large areas in the budget that does not have constitutional, or federal law protections.

 

$37 million reduction in State Payroll - The legislature has reduced the take home pay of all state employees by 2.5% by reducing the state contribution to their retirement.  This will result in a reduction of each state employee's, including legislators, take home pay.

 

$20 million savings in Corrections - Thanks to the leadership of Governor Ritter, and the legislature, we have seen a reduction in our prison population for the first time in anyone's memory.  This has happened through investments in recidivism programs and getting smarter with how we deal with offenders, without reducing public safety.

 

$20 million cut to provider rates - The state will save funds by reducing the rate we pay providers of Medicaid and Human Services by an additional 1%.  This reduction will result in a 5.5% provider cut to most providers over the two year budget cycle.

 

These have been difficult decisions, but are necessary to deal with the over $1 billion shortfall our state faces next year.  We will continue to balance the budget, while keeping our eyes on helping to create jobs, and building a strong economy for both the short and long term.

 

Payday Lending Reform

 

Addressing payday lending is one of the most important issues the Colorado General Assembly will debate this legislative session.  I wholeheartedly support payday lending reform because it is important to require financial institutions to have consumer protections.  During hours of committee testimony, we heard numerous witnesses describe interest rates as high 521%, business practices that encourage more debt, and rollover loans that create a cycle of debt.  We also heard witnesses talk about the need for short term loans from payday lending facilities to repair a damaged automobile or pay rent during a difficult economic time.  There is a need for payday lending facilities - there just also needs to be more consumer protections in place.  The 2010 legislation accomplishes this goal.  Recently, the payday lending bill was amended to allow up to 45% interest rates and a $10 fee per $100 loan. 

Rafting on Colorado's Rivers - HB 1188

I serve on the State House Judiciary Committee, which debated this bill on February 4th.     I voted for this bill and I would like to respectfully explain why.  While there was spirited discussion about 100 years of water law from both sides of the issue, I voted for the bill because it is vitally important to both protect private property owners’ rights and provide reasonable of right of way on navigable rivers so that the rafters can operate their business.

It is interesting to note that every state in the Western United states defines navigable rivers as public rights of way – even conservative states like Wyoming. They have defined navigable rivers to include reasonable public use because they know their economy depends on it.

Additionally, under Colorado Constitution Article XVI, section 5, the water of every natural stream “not heretofore appropriated” is hereby declared to be the property of the public and dedicated to the use of the people of the state.  Currently, Colorado does not have a definition or standard for what is navigable.  This legislation helps define that.

We also know under that Colorado Revised Statue 18-9-107 (1) (a), it is a misdemeanor to obstruct a water way or any other place used for passage of persons, vehicles or conveyances when the public or a substantial group of the public has access.

Finally, HB 1188 contains strong trespassing language to protect the private property owner (for example, ensuring that private property owners can place barbed wire on their property to contain cattle), and the legislation provides reasonable portage guidelines.

The best analogy that was used in the debate was mineral rights vs. surface rights.  Both parties should have reasonable expectations to access their rights.  This analogy proves apt when discussing property owner rights vs. rafter rights.  HB 1188 strikes a sensible compromise and that is why I support this bill.

The Colorado Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act - HB 1365

This bill is an excellent example of numerous groups working together to develop bipartisan legislation that will lead the nation in cutting air pollution, creating jobs, and increasing the use of cleaner, lower-carbon energy sources.  HB 1365, the Colorado Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act, will require Xcel to sharply reduce pollutants by retiring, retrofitting, or repowering Front Range coal-fired power plants by the end of 2017 and replacing them with facilities fueled by clean-burning natural gas and other lower or non-emitting energy sources. However, the bill does not mandate any fuel source when considering the replacement or repowering of the retired power plants.

The bill is good for Colorado`s economy as the natural gas industry is one of the state`s leading creators of jobs and state and local tax revenues, supporting 137,000 Colorado jobs and $18.3 billion in annual contribution to the economy. Specifically, this bill could create at least 400 new natural gas industry jobs, and an additional $24 million in estimated Ad Valorem, Severance, and Conservation Taxes annually from natural gas production.

The legislation is a proactive and constructive alternative to federally mandated emission compliance programs that will otherwise occur. This bill will allow Xcel Energy to plan for how it meets not only the new U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandates, but also upcoming mandates for ozone, mercury, and carbon dioxide in one single, comprehensive analysis that will minimize costs and maximize emissions reductions. The result will be meaningful air-quality improvements from reductions in emissions of pollutants from older, higher-emitting generation sources.

Furthermore, the costs of not enacting this legislation are too high, and the status quo is not an option. We have an opportunity to craft a uniquely Colorado solution to our air pollution, regional haze and nitrogen oxide problem. If we don't do this now, the EPA will force a mandate on all of us next year, and that could cost everyone, from electric ratepayers to manufacturing companies to everyone who drives a car.

The Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act is a winner for jobs and the economy. This legislation is a net job creator. It will create new jobs in the natural gas, utility and industry sectors. The CEO of Anadarko says he sees hundreds of new jobs coming from this proposal alone, and if other states follow Colorado's lead, the potential for job growth and economic opportunities is unlimited.

The Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act is also a winner for ratepayers. (1) It would cost a utility company – and their ratepayers -- about $1.4B to build a new coal plant vs. $500M to $600M for a comparable new gas plant. (2) It would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to install new equipment on old coal plants to bring them into compliance with the U.S. Clean Air Act. What a waste, especially when we can convert those plants to cleaner-burning energy sources like homegrown Colorado natural gas. (3) By stabilizing the price of natural gas with long-term contracts, gas is clearly the winner for ratepayers.

The Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act is also a winner for public health, especially for the millions of people along the Front Range, including those living in low-income neighborhoods. By eliminating coal-generated emissions from metro area power plants and transitioning to cleaner- burning sources like natural gas, we will save millions -- even tens of millions -- in costs associated with infant mortality, bronchitis, asthma and other health impacts.

The Colorado Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act will demonstrate Colorado`s leadership in responsible environmental stewardship integrated with prudent development of its abundant energy resources including clean-burning natural gas while creating good paying jobs.

PERA

Over 400,000 state, school and local government employees count on the Colorado Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) for their retirement benefits and livelihood.  I am working hard to make sure that PERA stays healthy and continues providing for Coloradans now and into the future. We are confronting one of the worst one year losses – approximately $12 billion dollars in 2008 – which reduced PERA’s resources from $41 billion dollars to $29 billion dollars. If you start this discussion with the premise that we cannot invest our way out of this horrific financial year, sacrifices have to be made to restore financial solvency to PERA.

That’s why we requested the PERA’s Board of Trustees to provide the General Assembly with legislative recommendations to ensure the health and longevity of the fund.  We have received those recommendations and are working with a coalition of groups representing past, present and future PERA employees to develop strong legislation that protects the fund while also ensuring all PERA beneficiaries get a fair deal. 

The legislation contains the following provisions:

    * Continue to increase the Amoritization Equalization Disbursement (AED) at a rate of 0.4% per year, beginning in 2013 for a total increase of up to 2% beyond the current rate schedule.  The total amount of the AED in 2017 would equal 5%.

    * Continue to increase the Supplemental Amortization Equalization Disbursement (SAED) at a rate of 0.5% per year, beginning in 2014 for a total increase of up to 2% beyond the current rate schedule.  The total amount of the SAED in 2017 would equal 5%.

    * Reduce the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) to an amount equal to the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners & Clerical Workers (CPI-W) with a 2% cap for all retirees, members and inactive members.

    * Maintain the 3-year Highest Average Salary (HAS) with a base year, including an 8% increase cap.

    * Shorten the requirement for members with a retirement date effective on January 1, 2011 or later to receive benefits for a 12 months period before being eligible to receive a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA).  Additionally, members retiring with a reduced service retirement must meet the minimum age requirement of 60 or meet applicable age and service requirements in order to be eligible for a COLA.

    * Continue the current statute providing that everyone hired prior to January 1, 2007, will, upon his or her retirement, receive a payment of retirement benefits retroactive to the date on which he or she first reached age and service eligibility for retirement.

    * Modify the age and service credit requirement for full service retirement for existing members who do not have five years of service credit as of January 1, 2011 to Rule of 85 with a minimum retirement age of 55 with 30 years of service credits.  For new hires on or after January 1, 2011 full service retirement requirements will be the Rule of 88 with a minimum age of 58.  For new hires on or after January 1, 2017 full service retirement requirements will be the Rule of 90 with a minimum age of 60. 

    * Mandate an automatic decrease in AED and SAED contributions to a division’s trust fund when the division’s year-end funded status is 103% and if the division’s funded status falls below 90%, the contributions will increase.

    * Adjust the COLA cap based upon the year-end funded status of the plan.  When the total fund reaches a status of 103%, the COLA cap will increase by a designated amount, and subsequently, if the funded status falls below 90%, the COLA cap will decrease by a designated amount.

    * Add 30 days to the current 110-day limit for working after retirement in a calendar year without penalty for up to 10 retirees per employer in the School and DPS Divisions & Higher Education employers in the State Division.

Medical Marijuana

Medical marijuana is a subject that has gained a lot of news coverage over the past few months. The interest has stemmed from the fact that medical marijuana has been largely unregulated by our state although Colorado’s Constitution was amended by millions of Colorado voters in the year 2000. When medical marijuana use was approved by voters in as Amendment 20, specifics on how medical marijuana should be regulated as an industry were left unanswered. This has created some confusion because there are no set guidelines for medical marijuana facilities to follow.

One of my goals for this session is to help pass legislation that will regulate the medical marijuana industry, place strict guidelines about the operation of dispensaries and how patients and caregivers can operate. We must establish and define how these facilities will operate while providing safe, community access to qualified individuals as deemed medically appropriate by their health care professionals.   It is also important to ensure that we maintain dignity for cancer patients, veterans suffering from PTSD, individuals with seizures, glaucoma, and HIV/AIDS so that they can obtain medical marijuana in a safe and humane manner.

Some of the guidelines that are in HB 1284 and SB 109 include:

·         Establish statewide, uniform application and licensing for dispensaries and growers.

·         Establish a Board within DORA (Dept. of Regulatory Affairs) to serve as a licensing authority for clinics and growers.  The Board should be comprised of experts from the medical marijuana field including patients, caregivers, medical professionals, and others.

·         Establish a uniform sales tax statewide of 2.9% and a standard retail sales tax at city/county level with no special excise tax for medical marijuana.

·         Allow incorporated caregiver entities to be recognized as a caregiver, including protection for employees of these organizations

·         Define difference between personal/small grower and commercial grower. Provide the caregivers with ID cards.

·         Utilize existing health and safety enforcement, food quality & labeling requirements for MMJ edibles.

·         Allow local municipalities to regulate zoning issues, but not ban dispensaries

·         Establish a 24 hour call line for law enforcement personnel

·         Prohibit employers from firing an employee on the sole basis of off-work, off-site medical marijuana use

·         Provide Colorado universities the authority to research medical marijuana

Affordable Housing Legislation - HB 1017

In 1980, the Colorado State Legislature imposed a statewide ban on rent control ordinances.  Before and after passage of the rent control ban, local governments across the state negotiated with developers over questions like how much parking to provide, how dense the development could be, what schooling provision would be made, whether the streets would have to be widened, and, in some cases, whether the new development would include any affordable units.

These negotiations have always been part and parcel of a land use approval application for a new development.  But twenty years later, in 2000, the situation changed.  The Colorado Supreme Court surprisingly declared that the 1981 rent control ban prohibited not only rent controls on existing buildings, but also invalidated land use approval agreements to provide some affordable housing in new developments.  This created uncertainty, which has persisted for a decade, over whether such agreements regarding new developments are enforceable.  It has also allowed out-of-state speculators to buy buildings in Colorado, which have been subject to these long-standing agreements, to have them overturned by the courts, and to watch the value of their buildings skyrocket.  It has forced developers and local governments to abruptly change the subject as soon as a concession in return for some affordable housing is suggested.  It has made it difficult for cities like Aspen to provide any workforce housing in new developments, or to protect the workforce housing they already have.  And it has made it extremely complex, if not impossible, for a battered women’s shelter, or a foundation for the relief of homelessness, to help fund a development, secure in the knowledge that the purpose of the funding will not be legally undermined.

This year, House Bill 1017, brought clarity back to the law.  It will take us back to the 80s and the booming 90s, when, even though rent control ordinances were banned, developers and local governments could nevertheless negotiate agreements that new developments would include an affordable housing component.  My bill does not affect existing buildings, cannot be used to coerce anyone into providing affordable housing, and leaves intact the rent control ban. 

Opponents of the bill worry that local governments might overreach if the bill becomes law.  But there’s no danger of that.  They didn’t overreach in the two decades between the passage of the rent control ban and the Supreme Court decision which threw new-build affordable housing agreements into doubt.  Developments boomed.  Affordable housing was often included.  Profits continued.  Everybody won.

Also, it is unconstitutional for governments to make unreasonable demands during permit negotiations.  The law does not permit it.  And finally, the market restrains government; if they demand too much, developers, who have a keen eye for the bottom line, will walk away and refuse to develop.  No local government wants that.  The bill is a time-tested way to clear a legal bottleneck that has choked off the development of new affordable housing and threatened to let speculators destroy the affordable units we have already built.

Work Share Program - SB28

To help employers maintain employees at their jobs, I cosponsored SB 28, a work share program.  It's an innovative program that allows businesses to share cuts among all their employees, rather than laying people off.  The program is completely voluntary.  The unemployment benefits that would have gone to the laid off workers instead get spread proportionally to all workers who had their hours cut.  It's optional for an employer to participate and it saves the unemployment trust fund money. 

Summary of Legislation

Senate Bill 28 allows for the creation of a voluntary work-share program, which would provide prorated unemployment benefits to workers whose hours are reduced in lieu of layoffs. The bill requires employers to submit a written work-share plan to the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment Division of Employment and Training for approval.(1) The plan must apply to at least 10 percent of the employees in an affected unit, and their work hours must be reduced at least 10 percent but no more than 40 percent. Employers must maintain employee benefits, such as health insurance, during the period in which the employee participates in the work-share program. Unemployment benefits paid under the work-share program are deducted from the total maximum allowable regular unemployment benefits in a benefit year.

Background

As of December 2009, Colorado's unemployment rate was 7.5 percent.(2) Total claims for unemployment benefits are at a historic high.(3) In the third quarter of 2009, 58,540 initial claims were filed in Colorado.(4)

Unemployment benefits are paid from the Unemployment Insurance (UI) Trust Fund, which is funded by a tax paid by employers. Employer tax rates are experience-rated; employers with a stable workforce and for whom less benefits are paid have lower tax rates. There is also a solvency surcharge that goes into effect when the UI Trust Fund has been depleted. The surcharge has been in effect since 2003 and is likely to remain in effect until 2012.(5) Colorado's UI Trust Fund is projected to have a negative balance of $93 million in fiscal year 2009-2010 and of $150 million in 2010-2011.(6) When the balance is below zero, the state is required to borrow money from the federal UI Trust Fund.

Work-share programs, also referred to as short-time compensation, allow employers to reduce hours across the workforce rather than lay off employees. Workers then receive partial unemployment insurance benefits to offset the lost hours of work. For example, an employer might reduce the work hours of a division by 20 percent, from five days to four days, rather than lay off 20 percent of the workforce. Workers with reduced work hours could then receive unemployment benefits to cover a portion of their wages from the "lost" fifth day of work.

Research and Evidence of Effectiveness

Work-share programs are a tool companies can use to weather short-term business declines. The first program was introduced in California in 1978. Currently, 18 states have work-sharing programs.(7)

Work-share program beneficiaries are a small component of the overall unemployment insurance program. Nationally, short-time compensation has not constituted more than 1% of unemployment benefits paid annually.(8)

Such programs are more frequently used during periods of recession. Nationally, the number of work-share program beneficiaries peaked at 111,202 in 2001.(9) During the current recession, states with such programs have reported significant increases in work-share programs. Between 2007 and 2008, New York reported a 60 percent increase and Rhode Island reported a 119 percent increase in the number of companies using work share programs.(10) Also during this time frame, some states have seen significant increases in initial claims under work-share programs; claims rose 171 percent in Arizona and 78 percent in California, for example.(11) While historically used in the manufacturing sector, work-share programs are now being implemented in a broader range of industries, such as the construction and retail industries.(12)

According to the fiscal note on SB 10-028, this policy is estimated to save the Unemployment Insurance Trust Fund between $12,104 and $2,160,688 in FY 2010-11 and FY 2011-12.(13)

Estimate of Impact and Benefits

Work-sharing programs can benefit both employers and employees. Such programs are also likely to have positive macroeconomic effects for the state of Colorado.  Employers can retain highly skilled workers during economic downturns, thereby reducing recruitment and training costs once the economy recovers. Employers also benefit by sustaining employee morale and productivity, as compared to layoffs,(14) and by preserving the diversity of the workforce.(15) The impact on the employer's experience rating is likely to be the same under the work-share program as under the current system. Senate Bill 28 requires the employer to certify that work hours would be reduced at the same rate even if the employer was not participating in a work-share program. In other words, the employer must certify that there would have been an equivalent reduction in hours through layoffs.

Instead of imposing substantial hardships on the few employees who are laid off, work-share programs spread more moderate impacts across a broader pool of employees. Employees would continue to receive their existing health and retirement benefits under the work share program.

Finally, such programs can have benefits on the state level by keeping more people employed. Unemployment leads to reductions in consumer spending and consequently, lower state revenues.(16) Because employees would retain their health benefits, there is less need to turn to state services for support. Moreover, state employment services may see a savings in job assistance program expenditures.(17) According to the fiscal note, aside from costs to reprogram computers, the division can administer the program with existing staff.(18).  See NBC Nightly news' story about this program nationally: 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/33920188#33920188
 
Economic Stimulus Act (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) – Energy efficiency and Renewable Energy Opportunities

The Governor’s Energy Office will receive money in three areas: weatherization, state energy program and energy and efficiency and conservation block grants.

The weatherization program provides energy-efficiency retrofits to residential buildings occupied by an income-qualified owner or tenant. The annual income must be equal to or less than $21,660 for one, $44,100 for a family of four to qualify.

The State Energy program provides funds to GEO to reduce fossil fuel use and save or create jobs in Colorado. These funds will be invested in four categories: access to services, access to capitol, access to information, and shovel ready projects. Applications will be accepted from government agencies, colleges and universities, private businesses and non-profits.

The Energy efficiency and Conservation Block Grant program involves funding to be distributed to Colorado cities and counties and to the Governor’s Energy Office for distribution to cities and counties that do not receive a direct allocation.

Please contact the Governor’s energy office for more information:

www.colorado.gov/energy/  or for general information on the ARRA: www.colorado.gov/recovery

Education Stimulus Funds

The State of Colorado is going to apply for “Race to the Top” money for improvements in education. The Lt. Governor’s office is overseeing the research and preparation for our application. We will be competing with the other states but the general consensus is that we have a good shot at the money because we are already involved in some innovative education efforts. The Lt. Governor is setting up task forces in 4 areas:

Quality Teachers
Data and Assessment Systems
Low Performing Schools
Benchmark Standards and Assessments Statewide.

The task forces are open to anyone; she is encouraging individuals to send in your name, which task force you are interested in joining, and contact information to be notified about the first meeting. Please email Tyler.Lyons@state.co.us and let him know which group interests you. This is a great way to be involved.

Homeowners and businesses in Colorado will have more help in coping with the upfront costs of renewable energy and efficiency projects, thanks to a new law.

Colorado Governor Bill Ritter signed a bill last week that should allow more people in the state to obtain financing for clean energy projects.

Senate Bill 100 was sponsored by Senator Gail Schwartz and Representative Joe Miklosi.

The bill strengthens a measure adopted in 2008, which allowed local districts to offer financing for energy improvements.

Under the latest measure, local districts will be able to team up to offer energy financing programs.

Senate Bill 100 effectively allowed district financing programs to cross county borders, clearing the way for counties to work together – particularly where they might be too small to operate financing programs alone.

“Powerful”

Gov. Ritter said the bill was a “powerful tool” to help people reduce energy bills and promote local clean energy companies, as well as helping Colorado reach its energy targets.

He said: “Without the changes proposed in SB 100, it will be extremely difficult for Colorado’s smaller counties to offer this financing tool, denying their home and business owners access to the benefits this tool provides.”

Pitkin County Commissioner Rachel Richards said the bill would be a “big step” for rural counties in taking clean energy “out of newspaper headlines and putting it to work in local neighborhoods”.

Commissioner Richards said of the bill: “It helps empower county governments to empower our citizens to lower their energy consumption and their energy bills – all while helping to put their own neighbors, in the hard-hit construction trades, back to work.”

Renewable Energy Bonds

Separately last week, Colorado’s Senate approved another bill from Senator Schwartz, which will allow the state to qualify for Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds to fund energy improvement projects.

The Bill made a slight change to state procedures to allow use of the Bonds, which would provide federal funds via the Recovery Act for local governments across Colorado.

The bonds can be used to fund energy conservation projects, with the federal government picking up 70% or more of the interest.

“As Colorado continues to expand our renewable energy sector, we must address the evolving needs of consumers and local communities,” said Sen. Schwartz. “Voters in Colorado continue to approve programs to finance affordable energy improvements to their homes.”

Colorado law boosts local financing rules for clean energy by James Cartledge

Homeowners and businesses in Colorado will have more help in coping with the upfront costs of renewable energy and efficiency projects, thanks to a new law.

Colorado Governor Bill Ritter signed a bill last week that should allow more people in the state to obtain financing for clean energy projects.  Senate Bill 100 was sponsored by Senator Gail Schwartz and Representative Joe Miklosi.

The bill strengthens a measure adopted in 2008, which allowed local districts to offer financing for energy improvements.  Under the latest measure, local districts will be able to team up to offer energy financing programs.  Senate Bill 100 effectively allowed district financing programs to cross county borders, clearing the way for counties to work together – particularly where they might be too small to operate financing programs alone.

“Powerful”.  Gov. Ritter said the bill was a “powerful tool” to help people reduce energy bills and promote local clean energy companies, as well as helping Colorado reach its energy targets.

He said: “Without the changes proposed in SB 100, it will be extremely difficult for Colorado’s smaller counties to offer this financing tool, denying their home and business owners access to the benefits this tool provides.”  Pitkin County Commissioner Rachel Richards said the bill would be a “big step” for rural counties in taking clean energy “out of newspaper headlines and putting it to work in local neighborhoods”.  Commissioner Richards said of the bill: “It helps empower county governments to empower our citizens to lower their energy consumption and their energy bills – all while helping to put their own neighbors, in the hard-hit construction trades, back to work.”

Economic Stimulus Bonds

Separately last week, Colorado’s Senate approved another bill from Senator Schwartz, which will allow the state to qualify for Qualified Energy Conservation Bonds to fund energy improvement projects.  The Bill made a slight change to state procedures to allow use of the Bonds, which would provide federal funds via the Recovery Act for local governments across Colorado.  The bonds can be used to fund energy conservation projects, with the federal government picking up 70% or more of the interest.

“As Colorado continues to expand our renewable energy sector, we must address the evolving needs of consumers and local communities,” said Sen. Schwartz. “Voters in Colorado continue to approve programs to finance affordable energy improvements to their homes.”