Almost a year after Colorado lawmakers frustrated transparency advocates by exempting themselves from parts of the open meetings law, a coalition of residents seeking more access to government records and meetings says it’s drafting a potential ballot initiative to strengthen “the public’s right to know.”
The group is calling itself “Team Transparency,” and it’s been meeting monthly in Denver to talk through proposals to send to voters in 2026.
It’s also uniting and attracting groups that have found themselves at opposite ends of political issues in the past.
Jon Caldara of the libertarian-leaning Independence Institute said he’s working to strengthen the transparency laws with other groups he’s had many disagreements with, including the League of Women Voters.
“We all want to be able to watch government as it does its work. We want to see what they are doing,” Caldara said last week. “Government should be more and more open. It surprised me to find out that Colorado is only one of two states that don't live stream their committee meetings.”
Caldara said the group is finalizing a first draft of a constitutional amendment.
The details of the transparency ballot question are still being worked out. But Jeff Roberts of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition said there are lots of ideas.
They range from tightening the open meetings rules for public officials to capping research fees for public records. The cost of obtaining those records recently jumped to $41.37 per hour.
“And it's been very difficult to get legislators interested in reforming the way those fees are calculated,” Roberts said at the Capitol last month. “It has been very difficult to get legislators interested in actually improving access.”
The group considering a ballot measure to improve public access is also motivated by recent actions lawmakers have taken.
Last year, the Democratic-led legislature exempted itself from some open meetings rules by passing Senate Bill 157 .
That bill ultimately allows lawmakers to have more conversations in private.
The bill narrowed the definition of public business, lets lawmakers discuss bills and other public business electronically without the communications constituting a public meeting, and meet one - on - one with fewer restrictions.
The legislature passed the bill at the start of Sunshine Week, an annual nationwide event to celebrate open government and the public’s right to know.
Roberts said Democratic lawmakers used the loosened transparency rules last fall to block the public from some of their caucus meetings about a special session on property taxes.
“There were caucus meetings that everyone, the public and journalists for many decades, have been open to to them, and they were actually closed to journalists, some of them,” Roberts said. “And so that was something that was sort of new and a little startling.”
Roberts said pursuing a constitutional amendment next year to strengthen public access would ensure that lawmakers could not pass a bill to undo it.
Beth Hendrix, the executive director of the League of Women Voters of Colorado, said her group was “distressed” when lawmakers passed their open meeting exemptions.
“We are concerned that some legislators are prioritizing efficiency over transparency, and the voters should always be first,” she said. “These people are our employees, ‘our’ being the voters.”
Many residents also aren’t happy with lawmakers doing more business in private. At a hearing the legislature was required to hold on the impact of their new transparency rules, residents and transparency advocates gave them an earful and asked for a repeal.
Lawmakers are defending their relaxed transparency rules, saying the old ones stifled candid conversations between them.
House Speaker Julie McCluskie, D-Dillon, said late last year Democrats were also posting public announcements of their caucus meetings and minutes.
Transparency bills debated
As transparency advocates consider a 2026 ballot measure to strengthen the state’s sunshine laws, there are multiple bills on the topic being debated this month at the statehouse.
House Bill 1242 would lower the cost of obtaining public records and repeal lawmakers’ open meetings exemptions.
“It does breed distrust when you don't know what your elected officials are are saying and doing behind closed doors,” Rep. Lori Garcia Sander, R-Eaton, said of her bill. “On the other side they’re probably thinking ‘well, we’ve got to negotiate.’ Well those negotiations can happen in public.”
But the outlook for Sander’s bill is questionable. As of late last week, it did not have a Democratic sponsor ahead of it s first hearing scheduled for Thursday.
Meanwhile, a different bill that transparency advocates say would make it more difficult for some to get public records is advancing.
Senate Bill 77 would give governments a few extra days to respond to the requests. Cathy Kipp, D-Fort Collins, is the sponsor.
“They’re just drowning in (open records) requests and this just provides that little bit of relief,” she said of her bill.
Kipp’s bill passed the Senate and is now up for debate in the House. For Roberts at the Freedom of Information Coalition, it s passage would be another setback, and another potential reason for the ballot measure.
“There are already enough obstacles for records requesters, fees being the No. 1 obstacle,” he said. “And so why are we creating more obstacles?”
Proponents of a ballot question would need to gather thousands of signatures by next spring.
Copyright 2025 KUNC
