Colorado
Colorado Democrats spar over legislation as party seeks direction in Trump era
In late February, the second-ranking Democrat in the Colorado House sat before a group of her colleagues and prepared to do something she had rarely done: voluntarily kill one of her own bills.
House Bill 1020 would have put initial regulations on earned-wage services — companies that let employees access part of their paychecks early in exchange for a fee. Majority Leader Monica Duran and her co-sponsor, Denver Democratic Rep. Sean Camacho, had pitched the measure as a way to put guardrails on a financial product vital for lower-income people in a financial bind.
But Democratic critics alleged it was an attempt by financial companies, who were backing it, to draft their own regulations, and those legislators argued that the service was just a different kind of payday loan. After the bill passed its first committee, progressive Democratic lawmakers worked with a liberal think-tank, the Bell Policy Center, to draft amendments that would have imposed tighter regulations on the services.
Duran and Camacho — who denied the services were a loan — were open to the changes. But Duran said that as she reviewed the amendments, she felt the bill had slipped away from the one she’d introduced. The industry groups supporting the bill balked, and one formally filed to oppose it.
So when the bill came up for a vote, Duran and Camacho voluntarily — and acrimoniously — killed it.
House Bill 1020 was not the first business-friendly bill to be decried as anti-worker, and it hasn’t been the last to be scuttled by other Democratic lawmakers. Another — to help struggling restaurants by clipping tipped workers’ minimum wage — has been delayed until later this month because of that opposition. A third — a draft proposal to audit recent environmental, labor and health care regulations — is undergoing a full rewrite amid backlash from both Democratic lawmakers and the union and environmental groups allied with them. Its sponsors say the idea may be tabled altogether.
It’s not unusual for House Democrats — whose 43 members span the left-of-center spectrum — to disagree on policy, even to the point of semi-public conflict. Nor are the contested bills unique or particularly startling. Lawmakers of both parties often run legislation in coordination with businesses or trade groups, and this year’s bills, sponsors contend, set out to address real problems: a sagging restaurant industry, a popular but unregulated financial service, and debates over the state’s regulatory framework.
“Doing the right thing matters. How we show up to this building matters,” Duran told colleagues on the House’s Finance Committee before asking that they vote to table it. She defended the legislation as pro-worker: “This bill was for working people, to support working people, and as a fierce advocate for working families, I know firsthand how supportive this bill would have been. It is frustrating when misinformation is spread saying this bill is anti-worker.”
But the debate swirling around the direction of the Democratic Party and the chaotic uncertainty springing from the Trump administration have elevated opposition from more liberal members of the party. While some lawmakers have worked to legislate this year like any other, others have sought to close ranks and defend what they see as Democratic priorities in a tumultuous political environment, both for the party and the country.
That tone was set, in part, two weeks after the election, when Democratic lawmakers gathered in the Capitol to unveil pro-labor reforms. Near the end of their news conference, one of the bill’s sponsors called out, “Which side are you on, Democratic Party?”
“We are facing a reckoning of what type of party we want to be,” said Rep. Yara Zokaie, a Fort Collins freshman who opposed both the tipped-wage measure and Duran’s paycheck bill. “I also think that everybody wants to represent their own districts to the best of their ability. I ran on standing up for workers.”
Trying to help struggling restaurants
The debate around all three bills has been heated. During testimony Monday night, Denver City Councilwoman Shontel Lewis said that it was “appalling” that Democrats were proposing to cut the tipped minimum wage while “the federal government is in chaos.”
Rep. Alex Valdez, a Denver Democrat backing the tipped wage bill, said the rhetoric surrounding it has been “vile,” referring to crude flyers depicting another lawmaker and negative reviews left for restaurants whose owners had testified in support of the bill.
The measure — which now faces a critical and potentially fatal vote in mid-March — is intended to help struggling restaurants reeling from high costs. As written now, it would lower the specific minimum wage paid to workers who also received tips in Denver and elsewhere that exceed the state minimum.
Another sign of the tricky political dynamics: It’s backed by Denver Mayor Mike Johnston but opposed by Lewis and other City Council members, as well as lawmakers from both parties who disparage it as a pay cut and a violation of cities’ ability to set their own wage laws.
Valdez said lawmakers’ desire to respond to actions and posturing from the Trump administration had further strained an already difficult debate, which he said fundamentally turned on helping restaurants stay afloat.
“I think that’s where we see an exacerbation by the Trump administration. It’s just, ‘What can I do?’ But that isn’t always the best way to do things,” he said. “I think at least with the tipped wage (bill) — this is the culmination of a five-year process. We didn’t catch this overnight. It’s five years of conversation, and we’re still having it.”
But for other lawmakers, debate in the legislature is a statement on the uncertainty from Washington, D.C., and internal arguments over how the Democratic Party reacts to its November losses.
“I do think we are trying to figure ourselves out in this moment. Are we a party for working people or not?” said Rep. Javier Mabrey, a Denver Democrat and among the more left-wing legislators.
Even though he and labor unions are pushing a contentious effort to reform the state’s labor law, Mabrey said he felt that “labor groups, progressive advocacy groups, consumer rights’ groups are playing defense this year in a way that they did not have to play defense in my first two years.”
“It is not a DOGE bill”
The audit proposal — to have the state auditor review 10 years’ worth of environmental, labor and health regulations — fits into that feeling of defensiveness because it’s backed by business groups, legislative leadership and Gov. Jared Polis. When details of the audit bill were revealed last month, several Democrats responded with a profane, three-word response.
That reaction — further fueled by fears of deregulation at a federal level — has helped put the brakes on the proposal. Speaker Julie McCluskie, a Dillon Democrat sponsoring it, said Wednesday that the idea was about promoting good governance. But it’s now being reworked fundamentally, and it may not come at all this year, she said.
Some Democratic lawmakers had taken to calling the proposal the “DOGE bill,” referring to billionaire Trump adviser Elon Musk’s so-called “Department of Government Efficiency,” which has set about dismantling a succession of federal agencies in recent weeks.
“To be frank, we had not had enough of an initial conversation before we released the draft,” McCluskie said. “In large part because of what’s happening with the Trump administration … I think people are drawing a parallel there that is not the same. I would push back. We are trying to just, again, focus on good governance.”
“It is not a DOGE bill,” she added, emphatically.
McCluskie argued that the party can find a path forward that helps both workers and businesses. While Colorado Democrats largely held serve in November, the party’s national losses were “a moment for all of us to recognize that a lot of folks are unhappy,” the speaker said.
“I would lift up that we also have to think about the entire … ecosystem: businesses, workers, consumers, right?” she said. “You have to think about that globally, and I have always believed you can be pro-business and pro-worker at the same time.”
Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.
Colorado
How the Colorado Rockies Are Actually Building Its Opening Day Roster
The Colorado Rockies are seeking the right balance and experimenting under their first full-year manager, Warren Schaeffer.
It’s a different Rockies roster compared to last season. There are new faces on the active roster for the start of the 2026 season. Having a team with youth and a mix of veterans can be a successful formula for the Rockies.
Knowing how the elevation affects things in Colorado, the Rockies will see which pitcher can thrive playing in Coors Field. Anything can happen this season.
The Rockies Must Have A Roster That Can Stay Durable
A Rotation of Veterans
Rockies president of baseball operations Paul DePodesta added several arms over 34, including Michael Lorenzen, Jose Quintana, and Tomoyuki Sugano.
The fifth starter will be a competitive battle. The Rockies have options in who will win that fifth and final spot. Here is the prediction of the Rockies’ starting rotation:
- Kyle Freeland
- Michael Lorenzen
- Ryan Feltner
- Jose Quintana
- Chase Dollander
Ryan Feltner has battled injuries. The 29-year-old suffered back spasms and shoulder injuries, preventing him from performing in 2025. He’s determined to have a breakout season.
He had a lot of momentum in his final 15 starts of the 2024 season. Feltner posted a 2.75 ERA and finished with a career-high 162 1/3 innings. Feltner has been building his weight-room capacity and getting himself ready for the new season. Hopefully, he can stay healthy and produce.
Flexibility on the Infield
The Rockies’ acquisition of Willi Castro was a smart move. We know the Rockies’ future at shortstop is Ezequel Tovar. However, the Rockies organization is being cautious. They want to make sure they have an extra body on hand in case something goes south. Castro is a former All-Star and a versatile defender.
Eduoard Julien is known for playing second base, but he can also play first base if the Rockies need him there. It all depends on many situations and circumstances. Julien is one of the players on the Rockies roster who must prove his worth.
In terms of first base, TJ Rumfield is a front-office option to serve that position. He has the size, length, and youth to play the position. Rumfield is having an impressive start to the spring so far.
Current Roster and Opening Day Prediction Lineup
Ezequiel Tovar, SS
Tyler Freeman, 2B
Mickey Moniak, DH
Hunter Goodman, C
Kyle Karros, 3B
Jordan Beck, RF
Brenton Doyle, CF
Jake McCarthy, LF
TJ Rumfield, 1B
The lineup can change overnight, and especially in the next few weeks. If, for some reason, Freeman can’t okay second base to start the season, then Castro is the leading man to take the spot.
Colorado
Colorado quarterback Dominiq Ponder dies in single-car crash at age 23, police say
BOULDER, Colo. (AP) – Colorado quarterback Dominiq Ponder died early Sunday morning in a single-car crash, police said. He was 23.
Ponder was driving a 2023 Tesla when he lost control on a curve and hit a guardrail, according to the Colorado State Patrol. The car struck an electrical line pole and rolled down an embankment.
Ponder was pronounced dead at the scene in Boulder County. Police said a preliminary investigation “shows that speed is suspected as a factor.”
Ponder played in two games for the Buffaloes last season, going 0-for-1 passing and carrying the ball twice for a loss of 4 yards. The 6-foot-5 sophomore from Opa Locka, Florida, began his collegiate career at Bethune-Cookman before transferring.
The Buffs were slated to begin spring practice on Monday.
“God please comfort the Ponder family, friends & Loved ones,” Colorado coach Deion Sanders posted on X. “Dom was one of my favorites! He was Loved, Respected & a Born Leader. Let’s pray for all that knew him & had the opportunity to be in his presence. Lord you’re receiving a good 1.”
Colorado offensive coordinator Brennan Marion reposted Sanders’ statement and called Ponder a joy to be around and coach.
“Getting that call from his dad today didn’t feel real,” Marion posted. “Love you Dom! God cover his family & our team, especially our qb room!”
Colorado athletic director Fernando Lovo said Ponder “epitomized the values of passion, enthusiasm, leadership, toughness, and intelligence that were revered by his teammates and coaches alike.” The athletic department said it would make counseling resources available to players and staff.
Fellow Colorado quarterback Colton Allen also paid tribute to Ponder on Instagram.
“Dom, you were a blessing to so many people,” Allen wrote. “You had a presence about you that just made everything better. You brought so much joy to me and everyone around you. I’m grateful for every lift, every practice, every rep, every conversation we got to share. I’ll carry those with me for the rest of my life.”
The Big 12 Conference extended its condolences in a post on X.
___
Get poll alerts and updates on the AP Top 25 throughout the season. Sign up here. AP college football: apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-college-football-poll and apnews.com/hub/college-football
Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Colorado
Colorado lawmakers duel over data centers: Grant millions in tax breaks or regulate them without incentives?
Colorado lawmakers are deciding this year between two disparate approaches on data centers — one that aims to lure them to the Centennial State with millions of dollars in tax incentives and another that would implement some of the strictest statewide regulations in the country on the booming tech industry.
Either of the two competing bills would create the state’s first regulations specific to data centers. Sponsors of both bills say they hope to minimize environmental impacts from the power and water demands of the centers, while also ensuring that the cost of new infrastructure they need doesn’t wind up on residents’ electric bills.
Both bills are sponsored by Democrats but differ widely in what they’d do.
The bill supported by the data center industry — House Bill 1030 — would incentivize companies to comply with regulations in exchange for large tax breaks. The legislation would not regulate data centers whose owners forgo a tax break.
The other bill — Senate Bill 102 — would offer no incentives, instead imposing regulations on all large data center development across the state. It is supported by environmental and community groups.
“We want to make sure that as data centers come here, they come on our terms,” said Megan Kemp, the Colorado policy representative for Earthjustice’s Rocky Mountain office.
The bills have landed as debate over the future of data center regulation intensifies across the state. Data centers house the computer servers that function as the main infrastructure for the digital world. They crunch financial data, store patients’ health information, process online shopping, register sports betting and — increasingly — make possible the heavy data demands of artificial intelligence.
Several companies have begun construction on large data centers across the Front Range in recent years. A 160-megawatt hyperscale facility is under development in Aurora and could consume as much power as 176,000 homes once completed.
The construction of a 60-megawatt data center campus in north Denver has angered those who live by the site and prompted Denver city leaders last week to call for a moratorium on new data center development while they craft regulations for the industry. Larimer County and Logan County have enacted similar moratoriums.
Hundreds gathered Tuesday night at a community meeting about the northern Denver campus owned by CoreSite. Frustration in the crowd — which filled overflow rooms and the front lawn of the building that hosted the meeting — erupted as residents of the neighborhoods surrounding the center expressed concerns about how it would impact their air quality, power and water supplies.
Attendees said they did not know the data center was being built until they saw construction underway.
CoreSite leaders had planned to attend the meeting. But they pulled out of participating the day before because of safety concerns, company spokeswoman Megan Ruszkowski wrote in an email. She did not elaborate on the concerns. A Denver police spokesman said the department did not have any record of a police report filed by CoreSite in the days prior to the meeting.
CoreSite’s absence left officials from the city and utilities to answer the crowd’s questions and field their frustrations. City leaders told attendees that they had no say in whether the data center could be built because there are no city regulations specific to the industry.
“Data centers are proliferating quickly and we don’t know all the impacts,” said Danica Lee, the city’s director of public health investigations. “That’s why we need this moratorium.”
Promises of future regulation meant little to the residents of Elyria-Swansea, where the data center is scheduled to go online this summer. More than an hour into the meeting, a man took the microphone. He noted that so much of the conversation had focused on technicalities — but the information provided had not answered a question on many residents’ minds.
“How do we stop it now?” he asked, to a loud round of applause from the room.
Transformative opportunity?
Some in the state Capitol think more data centers would be beneficial for Colorado.
Supporters of the tax incentive bill in the legislature said luring the industry to Colorado would create high-paying jobs, help pay for electrical grid modernizations and strengthen local tax bases.
“This could be transformative for the state,” said Rep. Alex Valdez, a Denver Democrat who is one of HB-1030’s sponsors.
In exchange for complying with rules, data center companies would be exempted from sales and use taxes for 20 years for purchases related to the data center, like the expensive servers they must replace every few years. After two decades, the companies could apply for an extension to the exemption.
To earn the tax break, data center companies would have to meet requirements that include:
- Breaking ground on the data center within two years.
- Investing at least $250 million into the data center within five years.
- Creating full-time jobs with above-average wages, though the legislation doesn’t specify how many jobs would be required.
- Using a closed-loop water cooling system that minimizes water loss, or a cooling system that does not use water.
- Working to make sure the data center “will not cause unreasonable cost impacts to other utility ratepayers.”
- Consulting with the Colorado Department of Natural Resources about wildlife and water impacts.
While the bill would exempt data centers from sales tax on some purchases, they would still be on the hook for all other taxes, Valdez said, and would bring both temporary and permanent jobs. The bill does not specify how many permanent jobs must be created to qualify for the tax break.
Dozens of other states have enacted tax incentive programs for data centers. Such incentives are a key factor that companies weigh when deciding where to build, said Dan Diorio, the vice president of state policy for the Data Center Coalition, an industry group.
“Colorado is not competitive right now,” he said.
Figuring out the projected impact of the bill on the state’s finances gets complicated.
The legislature’s nonpartisan analysts estimated that the state would miss out on $92.5 million in sales tax revenue in the first three years, assuming a total of 17 data centers would qualify for the tax breaks in that time period.
But Valdez said that is revenue that the state otherwise wouldn’t see if the data centers weren’t built here. And the companies would still pay all other state and local taxes, he said.
“We see it as unrealized revenue, rather than a tax cut,” he said.
Some of that lost tax revenue would be offset by an increase in income taxes paid by low-income families, according to the bill’s fiscal note.
That’s because the projected decrease in sales tax revenue in the first year of the program would decrease the amount of money available for the state to provide its recently enacted Family Affordability Tax Credit. State law ties the amount available for the family tax credit to state revenue growth and whether the state collects money above a revenue cap set by the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights. TABOR requires money above that level to be returned to taxpayers.
If the state doesn’t have excess revenue, it can’t fund that tax credit.
In the next fiscal year, which begins in July, data center companies would avoid paying $29 million in sales taxes, which would trigger a change in the family tax credit. Low-income families would be made to pay a total of $106 million more, the fiscal note estimates.
Bill sponsors are planning to address the fallout for the tax credit in forthcoming amendments, Valdez said.
“We’re not out to trigger any negative impacts to low-income families,” he said.

Baseline guardrails
Forgoing tax dollars during a state budget crisis is a hard sell to Rep. Kyle Brown, a Louisville Democrat sponsoring the regulatory bill. He and other supporters of SB-102 aren’t convinced tax incentives are necessary to bring data centers to the state.
Major construction projects are already underway, he said. In Denver, CoreSite chose not to pursue $9 million in tax breaks from the city but continued construction on its facility regardless.
“The point of our policy is (putting) reasonable, baseline guardrails on this development so it can be smart,” Brown said.
Brown last session co-sponsored a failed bill with Valdez that offered tax incentives to data centers. Since then, however, he’s seen other states that offer tax incentives express buyers’ remorse, he said.
Brown pointed to concerns in Virginia about rising electricity costs due to data center demand and a proposal by the governor of Illinois to suspend the state’s tax credit so that the impacts of the data center boom it sparked could be studied.
His bill this session — co-sponsored by Sen. Cathy Kipp, a Fort Collins Democrat — requires that data centers over 30 megawatts:
- Draw as much power as possible from newly sourced renewable energy by 2031.
- Pay for any additions or changes to the grid needed to serve the data center.
- Adhere to local rules about water efficiency.
- Limit the use of backup generators that consume fossil fuels; if such generators are necessary, they must be a certain type that limits emissions.
- Conduct an analysis of the data center’s impacts on local neighborhoods, engage in community outreach and sign a legally binding good-neighbor agreement if the community is disproportionately affected by pollution.
Owners of data centers would also need to report metrics annually to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. They would cover the center’s annual electricity consumption, how much of that power came from renewable sources, the total number of hours backup generators were used and annual water use.
Utilities, too, would face additional requirements.
The legislation would ban utilities from offering discounted rates to large data centers. It also would prohibit them from supplying electricity to a data center if doing so would affect the utility’s ability to provide power to its other customers — or its ability to meet state emissions reduction goals.
Environmental groups supporting the bill say the state needs regulations to make sure the increased electrical demand generated by data centers doesn’t expand the state’s use of fossil fuels or slow the retirement of fossil fuel-powered plants.
If not done thoughtfully, the groups said, the increased electrical load could imperil the state’s climate goals.
“What we need to avoid is a race to attract data centers that turns into a race to the bottom,” said Alana Miller, the Colorado policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council’s climate and energy program.
If the legislature enacts SB-102, it would implement the strictest data center regulations in the country and would ward off future data center development, Diorio said. He sees many of the rules as unattainable.
“It would make it nearly impossible to develop a data center in the state of Colorado,” he said.
Conversations between the sponsors of the two bills are underway, Valdez and Brown said. Both expressed hope that a consensus could be found between the two pieces of legislation.
Neither bill had been scheduled for a committee hearing.
Stay up-to-date with Colorado Politics by signing up for our weekly newsletter, The Spot.
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts5 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO5 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
News1 week agoWorld reacts as US top court limits Trump’s tariff powers