tod williams winter woodward center story would you please lead us in the pledge of allegiance thank you mister president colleagues would you please rise and join me in the pledge of allegiance i pledge allegiance and senator joint resolution zero seven will be laid over until tuesday april th introduction of bills renauld story concerning dental services for bringing women covered under the children's basic health plan and in connection with making an appropriation bills seeing none the motion is the passage of all the bills listed on third reading consent calendar are there any no votes on any of the bills on the third reading consent calendar donovan marino patterson a vote of thirty five is zero knows your apps and zero excuse house built ten sixty nine is past co sponsors sarah crowder senators donovan taped is there further discussion sarah gardner thank you miss chase if you're listening i told you it would come to a third reading vote and we would be remiss if we did not think the office of legislative legal services for what has lot of you weren't able to be in the chamber yesterday when we were working on this bill on second amendment so on second reading pardon me the bill is if you will notice and look at the most recent version has been changed quite significantly  on the coop formation in this state to allow and empower individuals to form groups in order to negotiate directly with hospitals we also amended it working with  my colleague to make sure that we clarified the role of the commissioner and these coops going forward as well as we changed the safety clause to a petition clause so wanted to flag those important changes for the room now that we're all gathered back together but but beyond that let me go back further than just yesterday health care has been something that i did not expect to work on it was it was an issue that was not a natural fit for me i thought i was going to come down here and pound my fist against the front range taking westslope water be a voice for small scale agriculture talk about what it meant to be an educator but then my district said no you need to work on health care and so i walked in the building and started to try to work on health care it wasn't an issue that i had been exposed to except for when i went to visit my doctor about insurance that was the breadth and depth of my experience so for over for over five years now we've been coming up to the mic and in committees  please help us lower the cost of health care for the individual market and the high country and five years ago that conversation was my district as the highest price district not only in this state but in the entire country and year after year different solutions were person at different ideas were eliminated we came at it from this angle we came at it from this angle and often those bills met their fate in committee  the problem only got worse as we battled and presented a new idea with a new angle from a different approach and so i cannot tell you how thrilled i am to have a bill on thirds in front of this body and ask you to support it today because as we saw those bills not make it to the governor's desk to sign the problem only got worse it did go stagnant it didn't stay status quo to only got worse and what we it creeped out of the boundaries of senate district five in the high country and now is touching every single one of our districts i am sure you've heard that people that the same stories that i've been hearing for years you've probably heard over the past couple years so i sincerely asked for your support of this one solution that we have in front of you that will have the power to take our vote and our support of policy and turn that into the ability of  event individuals across the state to join in a shared voice and go to their local health care provider and say you must address the cost we are pain we are speaking as one voice because we've been powered by our general assembly to do so so i respectfully ask for your aye vote on senate bill four on third reading and final passage and i would also like to move senate bill four on third reading and final passage smallwood thank you mister president good morning members i just wanted to to briefly give my thoughts on on this bill again if you weren't around for second reading to make sure that you know obviously you can vote however you want on this bill i'm voting yes this is a bill that's changed significantly since before the senate health committees it's no longer a bill about creating a pilot program in a very small area benefitting very few people it's no longer a bill permitting the division of insurance to form and administer coops it's now a bill that in my opinion tries to modernize the rules around these health care cooperatives as well as according to testimony from the county commissioners in those areas gets the state government out of the way in allowing the formation of these coops so again i'm going to be an aye vote appreciate all the work that the sponsors and the stakeholders have done in making this a very good bill so with that i'll be  senators hill cook crowder woodward story crowder foot bridges winter filled janelle lee williams gardner moreno patterson marble woodward gutierrez concerning the creation of the senator danielson thank you madam chair i move senate bill eighty five and the judiciary committee report to the report thank you madam chair thank you colleagues for your time and attention today we come to you with senate bill more easy to implement so a broad range of business community representatives came to us with their ideas higher education etc and some of them were great ideas that made the bil better strengthen the measure and and so we did we amended the bill i think eight times in favor of a number of pretty reasonable accommodations to make it a bill that could be implemented by businesses all across the late all out week with stakeholders and also members on the committee thank you for your feedback and i think that the amendments make it a stronger bill and i ask for your support is there any further discussion on the report seeing none the motion before the body is the adoption of the judiciary committee report all those in favor say aye aye those opposed no the eyes have it and the report is adopted to the bill senator daniels little daughter isabelle running around the chamber and those of you who serve with me in the house saw quite a lot of her she'll be too soon and she's got a lifetime of opportunity before her but if colorado does nothing to address gender pay disparities then at the rate the gender wage gap is currently closing isabel will be a woman in her s by the time she makes what a man earns for doing the exact same job that is unacceptable i've been dedicated to the fight for equal pay for a long time now but each day as isabel grows i become more inspired to keep up this fight for her and for all of colorado's daughters that's why i'm sponsoring senate bill eighty five with senator patterson and once again fighting to secure equal pay for equal work in colorado the facts of the gender pay gap are astonishing white women in our state make eighty six cents for every dollar men earn for the same exact work according to the women's foundation of colorado the numbers are far worse for black women who make just sixty three cents on the dollar and for latinas who earn only fifty three point eight cents for every dollar a white man makes for the same exact job inequality and pay due to gender they jeopardize the financial securities that colorado families deserve while forty cents might not seem like a lot at first these numbers add up  exponentially over the course of a woman's lifetime the average male will take home over half a million dollars more than the average woman according to the national committee on pay equity this is a substantial amount of money that could go towards college tuition medical costs retirement maybe buying a home providing necessary childcare for your little ones and so much more and with more and more women ever be than ever before serving as the sole or co breadwinners in dollars not only is it the right thing to do but we would literally add billions into the colorado economy the good news is that we have this new opportunity to close the gender wage gap senate bill eighty five would prohibit employers from asking prospective employees for their past wage rates and from relying on a prior wage rate to determine salary it will also protect hard working women throughout the state by preventing employer retaliation ensuring that women are not tied to their previous salaries can help break the cycle of wage discrimination the bill requires employers to announce advancement opportunities and job openings to all employees as well as disclose the pay range for these openings so instead of handpicked insiders being selected for jobs the women get to decide whether or not they're qualified to apply i'm proud to sponsor this common sense legislation with senator patterson to end gender based wage discrimination in colorado isabel and all colorado daughters deserve a future in which hard work experience education not their gender determine their earnings it is time we deliver that future and give every colorado worker equal pay for equal work i urge an aye vote on senate bill eighty five the equal pay for equal work act senator peterson you madam chair and members before i talk about this bill just want to thank senator danielson for your leadership you have been fighting this fight for years now really happy to be on this bow with you i also want to thank senator winter has been a part of  pieces of this bill over the last few years and senator donovan while we can only have two sponsors this is really a team effort and we couldn't be here without you as well this bill is incredibly important because it changes the conversation from the begin instead of actually asking us what our salary history is and how much how little we can get paid for our future potential job we are asked our salary requirement that's what this bill will change it will also ensure that the salary ranges are posted and opportunities for promotion are publicly posted as well so what this means is that women will have leverage that they haven't previously had in colorado and then for the small percentage of bad actors there are remedies in place of this bill where you can actually file suit and hold them accountable but for most businesses they actually don't realize that they have a system in place that perpetuates inequity and that's why i think it's the other pieces of this bill that are so important because it really changes the conversation and ensure that we have the opportunity to advocate for ourselves in ways that we haven't before as a millennial this bill is important to me when i think about my lifetime earnings on average will be one million dollars less if we just go along with the status quo if we do nothing in my lifetime and for other millennial women we will earn one million dollars less it's not because we don't have the education the experience the work ethic or these specific positions it's because we are paid less from the very beginning and that follows us throughout our careers so if we do nothing i will also be seventy five years old before women are actually paid the same as men and i think that we can all agree that that is unacceptable for future generations we can actually have a systemic change in colorado to ensure that women have that same opportunity as senator danielson mentioned this will bring nine point two billion dollars a year back into colorado's wanna me just for women getting paid with their male colleagues do so it will also ensure that women are self sufficient in fifty percent percent less of women working in poverty so this is an incredibly important bill i believe that we will be able to look back in ten years and point to what we were all able to do together in this chamber to make a difference for women and colorado families and i ask for your support is there any further discussion senator woodward thank you madam chair colleagues i completely agree that equal pay for equal work is a laudable goal it's how i practice my life and my business what i think the problem is is the way this bill has it's the teeth in this bill actually provides more full employment for attorneys instead of putting money in the hands of women and workers so so let me tell you a personal story first before i introduce a couple of amendments that i think will help this first of all in my business for the last ten years i have always paid women more women earn twenty seven percent more in my company and they've always held the top leadership jobs one of the pieces that this bill is going to backfire is that it in fact gives men the teeth than to step in and say hey employer you are you are paying women more for doing the same work and that comes down to i pick and i think most employers pick whoever will do the job the best and that's who we want to pay well and who we want to reward so i'm a complete supporter of this but i think we're going about it a little bit wrong one of the pieces that i think goes about it wrong is that it puts it takes away the role of the state currently the director of the department of labor and employment the labor department here in colorado takes all complaints ways those and and comes up with a fair result and if either party doesn't like the result then it goes for beyond that through an appeals process  there is an amendment on the desk will the clerk please read em m and l zero three chair what what this amendment does is it basically strikes section five and returns it back to the original language which says the director of the colorado department of labor unemployment has the right to make these decisions so so first madam chair let me move amendment l zero three six thank you now to the amendment and again what this amendment does is it returns the authority to make these decisions back to the governor's appointment he will do a great job i had a chance to meet with him and i think he is a fighter for worker rights and it puts it back in his in his hands so that we don't danielson thank you madam chair i am thank you to my colleague for bringing forward this idea but this actually gets at a major major piece of the bill which we've created a way for women to hold their employers accountable for the first time ever and that if they feel so compelled they can take it an employer to court and recoup some of the damages that have been lost over the years this eliminates the private right of action in the bill and i ask for a no vote on amendment l zero three six is the any other discussion yes senator gardner thank you madam chair well members this is an excellent amendment it is excellent because it restores the decision concerning litigation to the director of the department of labor and employment and what the bill does now without the amendment is it creates a private cause of action now over the years and i think you know that i make my living as a attorney some say a simple country lawyer  i don't make my living as a legislator and this is one of those those situations where i come down here and and i have to tell you the lawyer me  i want my friends over here to understand the lawyer me he thinks this is a really bad amendment however the person who represents small businesses in my district and the citizens of my district thinks this is an excellent opinion this is an excellent amendment creating more and more private causes of action creates more litigation it makes it much more difficult for small employers it creates more employment for lawyers if you're for more employment for lawyers you're one of us know on this but if you were for small business you're going to want one of the yes on l zero three six because it restores balance to the system and some modicum of protection for our small businesses in colorado i asked for an either senator danielson thank you madam chair i just want to add some context for those of you who didn't listen to the committee hearing here the department of labor has never seen one case through the existing set up that would go back to its form if we pass this amendment would put it back to the status quo that is right now it's an absolutely ineffective tool for women who have been wronged who have been discriminated against in the workplace and that is why we are giving them a new tool to hold their employers accountable like i said this is an ineffective tool it has never been utilized and again for the folks who came to committee to testify in favor of this measure can tell you time and time again that they need an actual quality tool to hold their employers accountable and that is why you must vote no on this amendment thank you senator petersen inc you madam chair and this brings us back to the status quo like i talked about before i will be seventy five years old before women are paid the same for doing the same job if we do nothing so this is a unfriendly amendment because the small percentage of businesses that are bad actors  there will be some accountability in place for women but the most important piece is that we change the conversation from the beginning to ensure that we actually have the opportunity to advocate for ourselves and then if our employee have our have bad intentions there's actually a mechanism for accountability so i ask for your no vote on l zero three six because the status quo is not working fact perhaps a man who has a complaint about the wage that you were given and saying it's unfair the only thing that you can do is now go to district court and file a complaint currently under current process you can simply make a phone call to the department of labor and initiate a process it's so much easier for women today to start a process and and my amendment would restore that make it easier for women to make a complaint senator danielson thank you madam chair again for the folks who weren't listening to the committee hearing we did highlight and amend the bill in order to very clearly highlight that a woman still has the opportunity to go through the colorado civil rights division and wage a complaint that in no way is any woman required to go to court that you can still wage a claim it's just going to be through the cc rd and that you can even take the evidence that they find and demonstrate and take that to court if you wish but no there is in no way fewer options for women in this bill we've expanded the ability that women have to hold their employers accountable if they so choose so we have literally spelled it out in the bill that a woman is not required to go to court if she wants to hold her employers accountable she may still wage a claim it will still be investigated it's just adding this opportunity for a woman for the first time ever in colorado to take her employers to court if she has been discriminated against in the workplace if you pass this amendment you will strip that ability of the woman to hold her employers accountable like i said we amended the bill to very clearly say that a woman still has the opportunity to go to the colorado civil rights division and in his no way in no way is forced to go to court senator gardner thank you well i i appreciate the explanation from the senator from wheatridge and i disagree with it in this sense yes a woman always has and had before the right to go the colorado civil rights division a complex process a lengthy process currently the law would allow complained to the director of the colorado department of labor and employment and have a very straightforward administrative proceeding if that was not resolved ccr d would allow you to go to court as well but this locks out the ability to go to the director of the colorado department of labor employment makes it more complex my my yardstick on this as i've already given it to you is that if the if the lawyer me says that's probably really good for all of us lawyers then the legislature may says that's not in the interest of my constituents because it creates more litigation it does not resolve problems at their lowest possible level in the easiest fashion possible this is an excellent amendment i ask for an aye vote on  seeing no further discussion the motion before the body is the adoption of senate bill eighty five all those in favor senator lee thank you i apologize madam chair i wanted the  body to know that the colorado chamber is now neutral on this bill what we heard this bill in the judiciary committee in january they felt that there was a lot of work to do from all sides prior to the hearing and i want to commend the sponsor and the chamber for getting together when the business community came up to talk about this bill they all indicated that they were supportive of the concept of equal pay for equal work as you know in this chamber the devil is in the details they had challenges with some of the details in the bill so we worked with these groups and individual businesses for days there was a lot of collaboration and partnership and we came up with a series of amendments i believe they were like nine amendments that went on the bill in the judiciary committee bills dealing with the period of back pay that could be allowed for a claim  requirements regarding job posting were added establishing that an employer is not subject to liquidated damages if they act in good faith allowing some reasonable business exceptions to comparable pay for comparable work based upon geography training education and experience clarifying that workers have the option to seek a claim in the civil rights division and changing the effective date to postpone it for until two thousand and twenty one for businesses to adjust and to come into compliance so based on these efforts i'm authorized to say that the colorado chamber of commerce and other businesses believe that the bill is a significant step forward and they are neutral on the bill they are no longer opposing the bill based on the amendments that were put on it thank you senator danielson thank you madam chair and thank you to my colleague for mentioning that it actually reminded me of a commitment that i made along the way some of the mints that we made were like i said it's just a broad range of businesses that are looking forward to implementing this measure and one concern came from higher ed we did amend the bill to accommodate some of their concerns i think their concerns went a little farther than we were able to move the language however i'd like to just say to the record that we believe that the piece about basically what we've done is written in a lot of different scenarios for why women and men should be paid differently if you out perform someone if your job is based on sales performance if you have an accelerated degree if you are published if you work more hours if you've worked more years whatever seniority you may achieve there are legitimate reasons that men and women should be paid different and we've basically done what we can to say all things being equal if a woman is being discriminated in the workplace and can prove it here we go we believe that the exception that we made for education and experience would cover the the concerns of academia and higher ed when it comes to their specific seniority concerns like being published or an accelerated degree and so to that end i just wanted to make mention there and thank them for their cooperation senator crowd people that are putting the amendments in to get together on this booth this moment may very well be a workable bill you know but what i would like to see is there anything in here that says if if an individual brings suit against a business and if that suit is found to issue that we ought to look at and address you know i'm not sure how what the you know how many people are involved in this but there's if there's any involvement at all it should be corrected but i think that this may you know maybe something instead of this side versus this side i think maybe there is a way to come together and i would ask the sponsors to to look at these amendments that the put on and to make sure that this is more equitable for everyone involved senator marbles thank you madam chair i'd like to address this bill and why i am a no vote and why i voted the way i did yesterday i didn't go into this but i have a research paper from tanya tarr who herself is a minority woman and did an excellent job of explaining why we have a recent study by the institute for women's policy research  how it gained its information and why it was done methodically so that she has an incredible insight in n i am a total fan of tanya tarde and she says it's important to remember that statistics have no bearing on an individual's probability of success much of the historical or statistical analysis from the institute of women's policy research miss profound changes that have happened for working women in the last six years attempting to boil down the experience of millions of people and dozens of industries in those industries we're looking from construction we're looking at oil and gas field workers to the people who work in tech that's a big difference in industry differences and this is across  multiple decades into a few numbers so tight try and boil these down it's actually very problematic because so much context and meaning is lost it also misses more nuanced in contradictory dynamics that exist in smaller pockets of women in the workforce women and men of varying industry are all lumped together in their problematic a problematic piece of the iwp our analysis is it doesn't properly weigh the massive changes that have happened for women and their earning potential in the last six years with a significant advantage or advancement by black and hispanic women this is incredible advancement it should be applauded by women and we have done so much to be proud of in and sixty three there were only thirty eight percent of women enrolled in higher education consider that the women who started college in two thousand and twelve have only been in the workforce full time for two years at a maximum which would be in no way a measurement or a measurable impact on the institute for women's policy research findings i think it's particularly interesting that it's true for women seeking to enter the higher paying tech industry whether in tech or other professional service industries payscale found in a recent study that the controlled gender pay gap was two cents two cents the control gender pay gap is when women and men at a similar job compare salaries which is specific to job description and industry but many of these advances in pay  recent may not have registered with the eye wpr analysis i'd like you all to take some time and go over th tania tarr is very very remarkable in a way to pick apart the problems of us and our numbers and statistics and yes we can make number anything but i think her way of going about looking at our pay scales is remarkable and that is why i am a no vote senator petters thank you madam chair and to some of the points that were just made women are actually attaining degrees at a higher rate than men and it it clearly points to even how how much more important this bill is because we are getting higher levels of education and we are still being paid differently and at a far less rate than men so thank you for highlighting that and to say that you know we're not it accurately reflecting where we are with the pay gap it would be wonderful to see that we are actually closing that pay gap quicker than we are projected but we know when we look at our state data it points at every level to support the evidence that we have brought forward in the bill that we're bringing forward as a solution women are paid significantly less for doing the same job period and if it's true that we were being paid and we were have a very small gap then there should be nothing to fear with this bill because  ensures an evil level playing fields for women to advocate for themselves and the private right of action we would never actually have to go file suit so we know that this bill is necessary the status from the start of my presentation what i said was in reference to the women's foundation of colorado's years long studies that are a result of decades of work on the women's foundation of colorado specific to the state there are well trusted  and well respected c nonprofit organization and the numbers that i gave are across the board low wage earners ceos everybody in between what they've done is taken account for every single comparable problem apart from a woman's gender and whether or not she's a member of another protected class and so the actual facts are that when compared to men across the state white women earn at the top at the top along with asian women white women earn eighty six cents for every dollar to the men to men for the same work the same work so we're not talking about job descriptions we're not talking about rates of college education we're not talking about college attendance we're talking about the same jobs all across the state and yet because a person happens to be female she'll well she will earn eighty cents eighty six cents to the dollar for every dollar a men a man earns for the same exact work and it only goes downhill from there if you happen to be glbtq if you happen to be disabled or if you happen to be a woman of color and we alluded to that earlier by saying for the same exact jobs day in day out week in week out year long latino women still only earn fifty four cents to the dollar that a white man earns for the same exact work now is the time to stop that cycle of discrimination and this is the tool that you've got in front of you to use so thank you aye vote on the bill senator fields thank you madam chair and i want to thank the bill sponsors for bringing us senate bill one senate bill eighty five as i read the bill it is very progressive it's very timely it's very thoughtful and it's the time is right for us to be doing this right now and i don't want us to get lost in translation as it relates to some of the statistics that you've been seeing and hearing the fact is that women are underpaid and if you go to the us department of labor they will show you occupations after occupation you can be an accountant you can be a physician you can be a doctor you can be a lawyer and time and time again it will show you the average of pay for that woman an average pay for a man and you will see that women earn less but let's talk about the reality of what's going on here in the state of colorado because what we're seeing in the state of colorado is more women are head of the household more women are just working minimum wages wages and they're not able to make ends meet i have a s says nine out of ten single mothers of color with young children have income that's inadequate to cover the expenses that they need we all know these expenses that we have living in the state of colorado is difficult we need to address the wage gap in the state of colorado and what this do this bill does it gives the opportunity to create transparency as relates to income giving an opportunity for women to take much more ownership to negotiate their wages this bill is designed to shrink the wage gap and to create a state where there's equity in pay for all employees men and women so this is about doing the right thing and i do urge a yes vote on senate bill eighty five senator cort thank you thank you madam chair members how many of you remember reading not too long ago about the lawsuit from the d u law professors the female d u law professors many of you read that article and followed that case these are sophisticated educated women the d u law professors that are female who brought and won a pay discrimination case against the university of denver would we expect to see that if women were not being paid in  equally that wouldn't have happened but even in a place as sophisticated as the university of denver and the law school there women were discriminated against and had to bring a lawsuit to get the equal pay they deserved and folks some of those women are my constituents and i'm very proud of them for pointing out the inequity that they had to live with for many many years this is the right thing to do for everyone not just women but men too so they recognized that their co workers are being treated respectfully and fairly i urge a yes vote senator c well that's my point the previous speaker made there was a lawsuit so my question is why do we need to change a system if it's working like it is and why can't i wait well don't laugh but why can't we make this a more equitable for everybody why is there a division because of this bill and that's that's all i'm saying are we protecting businesses in case of bad lawsuit so is this something we can work out and make it a  cd le this amendment removed the requirement that women must hire an attorney and file an expensive complicated lawsuit in district court vote yes on this amendment so that women can take action against bad actor employers is there further discussion good discussion on it during the committee of the whole what this amendment does is restores the current system that doesn't create a new cause of action the need to hire a lawyer litigation that is  necessary to vindicate the rights of employees it's full employment for lawyers not employers it's important that we not create more and more causes of action so that really the employees are caught in the middle in order to get what they are entitled to and rather than getting the director of cdl e act for them and to have their hearing now they have to go to court or they have to go to cc rd and go through a very long process this committee of the whole amendment will ensure they don't have to do that it is employee friendly i asked for an either is there for the discussion see none the question before the body is the adoption of amendment zero zero one to the committee the whole report are there any no votes senators danielson rodriguez majority leader winter court williams foot fields pettersen leigh donovan moreno with a vote of sixty knives nineteen no votes zero apps and zero excuse that amendment is lost the question before the body is the adoption that committee the whole report are there any no votes thank you mister president members there were as we know this there was a robust debate here in the senate this bill went through several committees was amended every step of the way and then the same occurred over in the house and the bill went through several committees had a very robust debate on the floor as well and there were i believe fourteen amendments made to the house and i think it is in the best  economies for us to accept these amendments call it a job well done and make sure that we can move forward with some certainty and ensure that there are some basic health and safety protections for all folks around the state of colorado and i'm happy to speak more to the amendments as we get into the discussion is there further discussion sara hill thank you mister president  now colleagues just want to confirm we had a long discussion i think about a lot of aspects of this bill we know there was some significant disagreements over this bill but all along it's been said this was not intended to be a ban this wasn't going to be ab and this is about safety and not about ab and we talked about that here at the microphone senate and it seems that in some ways these amendments were intended to address that i wonder if the sponsors mister president will be willing to address whether or not this alleviates some of the concern that senate bill one hundred and eighty one actually permitted bans on development of our oil and gas resources is there further discussion  stop the industry overnight the amendments i would say did not change the fact that that was never true to begin with this i have heard from the  industry that they would like us to concur with the house amendments i don't think they would be asking us to do that if they thought this would truly end the industry overnight and create a statewide ban or even local bands  that is not what the bill did as introduced that is not what the bill does now as amended i believe there are there were some some additions in the house that provided some safeguards to make people feel more comfortable that in fact that's not what the bill does or what it could do but i still hold pretty staunch salute to the fact that it never did that in the first place and therefore there's very little we could have done to ensure that it didn't occur cause it wouldn't have occurred in the first place in the introduced bill this bill does again if you remember back to our debate does allow in the interim before the health and safety rulemaking is officially adopted it does provide the ability to do additional research into permits that potentially provide a health and safety risk to a community or to people that is still in there we clarified the intention of that my understanding is that the industry doesn't think it's a moratorium or a ban even though that was in some of the talking points and we also clarified that the role of the local government at the local level is to have reasonable regulations when it comes to siting of oil and gas facilities it does not give them lincoln authority to do things like a ban or a long term moratorium that is effectively abandoned the bill never did that however i do think some of the amendments clarified that the intention wasn't that in the first place and the bill cannot be used for those types of purposes is there further discussion seeing none the motion before the bodies that the senate concur with house amendments to senate bill one hundred and eighty one are there any no votes quote necessary and reasonable standard language that we added in the senate there have been several requests to further define it but unfortunately that's proved to be difficult i will say though that it's the sponsors intent to have that phrase interpreted together in the context of the bill as a whole which is one a clear desire to prioritize health and safety when it comes to oil and gas operations permitting and supervision without consideration of profitability from the state regulatory authority of the c and to an ability for local governments do the same and be more protective than the state if they choose necessary and reasonable is not intended to mean regulatory authorities can only make a land use decision or enact a regulation once all other options are exhausted instead it is meant to be a guardrail against a regulatory or a land use decision without reasonable justification state and local governments should not be able to impose requirements limitations or decisions that defy explanation however they should be entitled to deference and allowed to use the precautionary principle to determine if a regulation or land use decision is necessary and reasonable each localities application of necessary and reasonable may be different depending on its circumstances and should how much went into this bill about how much input there was before it was introduced but especially once it was out there and went through the process i printed off that's quite a few amendments and some of them are technical in nature some of them are clarifying some unintended potential consequences of the original language many of them were at the request of industry in fact i think some of the most major concerns that industry had in in many ways were addressed in one way or another and to say that this did not receive a robust debate and ha time throughout the process for full debate and input i think would be incorrect i i don't know how many amendments were offered in total but the last one that was adopted so they were probably more after this is l one  i don't know if i've ever seen an l one hundred and eighty before that's a lot of offered amendments a lot of work went into this bill it is not a perfect bill it is not perfect for communities that want additional tools that is not perfect for environmental advocates it is not perfect for families that feel threatened and it's not perfect for the industry but i do think it represents sitting down of various diverse stakeholders to figure out what is the best path forward not can we solve every problem in one bill but how can we move forward in a way that provides some certainty for communities for local governments for families for industry alike and i think that's what this bill does i want to speak to one amendment in particular particular that was adopted in the house and that is an amendment that professionalized the colorado oil and gas conservation commission this is something that the industry was asking for all along the way we frankly i was always kind of agnostic to whether the the commission itself should be a professional body that has paid employees my feeling when we were debating this senate was that maybe we should not do all of this all at once we should figure out how these rules get implemented figure out what the commission is going to actually need to be successful in this new world and decide in a year or two what those one when adopted and when signed into law will start the process of professionalizing the colorado oil and gas conservation commission i don't think any of us know truly what that will look like to look like the puc and operate like the puc some would say god i hope not some would say that sounds great but that is a major concession a major compromise that was made with the industry was to to say yes let's do this if we are if we are trying to be honest about what we are trying to accomplish including certainty let's do this because the industry wants it we think it overall can be a good thing to professionalize the commission and make sure that they are on a regular basis meeting that they're meeting efficiently and that they have a professional way of conduct of the value the cases that they evaluate and so i i support that i think it's important that we move forward with this bill as is there will be tweaks in the future i'm sure but i think those will be making some changes around the edges rather than wholesale changes to the overall framework like we are doing in this bill i do hope that there is a recognition out there in the community and all of the communities around the state that have been paying attention to this bill that the things that the industry were asking for especially professionalizing the commission are in this bill they're about measures filed out there from what i hear that would professionalize the commission that has been taken care of and i hope folks will realize that the best thing we can do moving forward now is to see this through to go through the rulemaking process to be engaged and allow this to be successful and see what changes maybe need to happen in the future but that the objectives of those ballade measures that are filed out they're a huge part of the objective of professionalizing the commission will be adopted  codified in law under this bill and so i see that those are unnecessary and only provide more uncertainty for the industry and for families moving forward and that is exactly what we do not need but with that mister president i think we have had a long scott woodward gardner smallwood ta majority leader and the minority leader and i ask to be excused on monday mister president so if you're feeling a little stressed you can relax refresh and renew with the colorado coalition of massage therapists are here this week today from eight thirty this morning till two  in on the first floor colorado state capitol first floor and so complimentary chair massage so take advantage of that and ease up thank you mister president i do have an announcement the senate health and human services meet will meet upon adjournment and we will be meeting in twenty five minutes from now other announcements mister minority leader thank you mister president members you probably know by now i i love history and one of the significant events in the history of our nation occurred on monday april  and sixty five when general ulysses s grant and his army entered the fallen capital of richmond virginia six days later on april ix generally would surrender to general grant in those four years of bloody conflict in our nation would come to an end just ask that you keep our history in your thoughts this amazing month of april and just an honor and privilege to work with all  thank you mister president i would like to request a moment of personal privilege granted thank you mister president members yesterday i was notified that a very dear friend and community activist and advocate for criminal justice i would call her a foot soldier got her wings yesterday she's in heaven right now and her name is tammy garnet williams for anyone who has served down here and who has participated in any of our judiciary committees have probably most likely met her i consider her a friend i consider her a champion and she's worthy of our time and attention she never was shy about coming down here to share her thoughts and opinions as it related to criminal justice reform issues she was active in our community she was active in her church she played a role with the n double a cp in the urban league if there's anything social that's going on in the community as it as it dealt with dealing with the most vulnerable people in our community she was there she told her personal story and then she also told the story of the community that she loved to support i consider her a friend of the state capitol because you could always count on her as her role as a citizen to share inland voice she was attending  metro state college she was working on getting her degree she had great promise she had a great future and she's no longer with us and so i would like to request a moment of silence mister president but i'm not quite sure who else might want to share their experience with miss some tammy garnett williams generally thank you mister president i'd like to add my thanks to the words spoken by the senator from aurora for recognizing tammy garrett williams i've got to know her out in the world as was mentioned she was part of the n double a c p an organization i've been a member of for many years but what was really significant about her was that she showed up she was at events she was at rally she was at judiciary committee hearings she articulated her own message of her own life so she brought the life experience of a person who understood the criminal justice system from the inside out her experience and her testimony has informed some of the legislation passed by mister president tammy actually lived in my district for a while and she came down to this body and sat on the bench over there several times including twice this session and it was a real shock the context in which she came down the last time was to talk about women's issues she was at the women's lobby breakfast in the morning and she told me how excited she was to be down here and to be on the floor and to have an opportunity to chat with me as her representative and this body about an issue that she cared very deeply about and the thing that touched me the most is we were there at breakfast i was picking up my coffee and she said a little prayer for me it was extremely touching we're going to miss her is there further discussion seeing none as requested the senate will observe a moment of silence  the senate chimes will be wrong thank you sir thank you