Senate committee advances bill to require regular review of state rules after broad testimony

The Senate Finance Committee on April 4 advanced Senate Bill 137, a bipartisan measure requiring regular, outcome‑focused reviews of state agency rules, after hearing several hours of testimony from business groups, local governments, labor and environmental advocates.

Sponsors President Coleman and Minority Leader Simpson framed SB 137 as a pragmatic effort to reduce unnecessary administrative burden while preserving public protections and transparency. "It bolsters regulatory review across the board and will improve how state government functions," the sponsor said, noting the bill sets a floor for agencies to review rules at least every five years.

Supporters — including the Colorado Chamber of Commerce, Denver Metro Chamber and a broad coalition of business and health‑care associations — told the committee that regulatory complexity has real costs for employers and that a predictable review timeline would improve competitiveness. Patty Salazar, executive director of the Department of Regulatory Agencies, described the proposal as building on existing Smart Act and sunset processes to increase transparency and legislative oversight.

Opponents and amend proponents — including the Colorado AFL‑CIO, Colorado Municipal League, Earthjustice and GreenLatinos — raised concerns that language in the introduced bill (notably a provision identified in testimony as section 1m) could be interpreted to prioritize industry costs over public‑health, environmental and local government protections. Megan Kemp of Earthjustice said the bill "encompasses a very wide and discretionary use of the term burdensome while adopting a very limited scope of what is considered a public benefit." Bev Stables of the Colorado Municipal League urged changes to ensure agencies acknowledge compliance with the Administrative Procedures Act.

In response to those concerns, sponsors offered and the committee adopted two technical amendments (L001 and L002). Sponsors said the amendments remove or clarify problematic language, preserve agencies’ existing sunset review schedules, and ensure the bill does not apply to collective‑bargaining agreements. After amendment, the committee voted to send the bill to the Appropriations Committee with a favorable recommendation.

Committee members pressed witnesses on how to ensure rulemaking reflects legislative intent and asked whether the bill would prompt rollbacks of protections. Business representatives and agency staff said the bill is intended to add a periodic accountability check rather than undo substantive protections.

The committee action advances SB 137 to appropriations; further changes could be offered on second reading.