Connect with us

Colorado

Colorado lawmakers will go after parents | BRAUCHLER

Published

on

Colorado lawmakers will go after parents | BRAUCHLER







Advertisement

George Brauchler



Shortly after the Michigan parents of a juvenile school shooter were sentenced to prison last month for their roles in the arming of their son and his subsequent murder of four sudents and shooting of seven others, Gazette Executive Editor Vince Bzdek explored whether parents should be criminally responsible for their kid’s criminal conduct — especially mass shootings.

The prosecution in Michigan is factually unique and unlikely to be replicable in Colorado absent our legislature’s change to our laws — and that is what is coming for us. Next session. Be aware.

To be clear: The Crumbley parents engaged in inexplicable behavior and unjustifiable lapses in judgment. I believe they would have been prosecuted here, but it would have been more complicated. The Crumbley parents were more easily prosecuted under Michigan laws we do not have here — yet. Colorado does not have an Involuntary Manslaughter charge, like Michigan’s, that contains provisions specific to firearms, the failure to perform a legal duty and “gross negligence.”

Stay up to speed: Sign up for daily opinion in your inbox Monday-Friday

Advertisement

Colorado’s homicide statutes decrease in severity from first- to second-degree murder to manslaughter to criminally negligent homicide. Our manslaughter charge is based on recklessness, which is similar — but not an exact match — for Michigan’s “gross negligence.”

The significant difference between our laws lies in Michigan’s ability to prosecute someone for failure to perform a legal duty. Michigan allows prosecution of a person who “willfully neglected or refused to perform (a legal) duty and (his / her) failure to perform it was grossly negligent to human life.” That fits the Crumbleys. As the elected district attorney told the jury during trial, the parents were “not on trial for what (their) son did,” but “for what (they) did and for what (they) didn’t do.”

This is the change we should expect next year’s legislature to enact, because it simultaneously attacks two things the progressives in power dislike: guns and parents.

Gov. Jared Polis and Democrats in the legislature have continued a relentless march toward making gun ownership by the law-abiding either completely illegal, or so risky many will choose not to exercise their constitutional right to bear arms. At the same time, they have done nothing to discourage or punish criminals with guns.

The legislature made it a crime for law-abiding Coloradans not to lock up their firearms in their houses and cars. Yet, this year’s Democrats refused to increase the penalties for criminals who break into cars to steal those same guns. Lawful gun owners who have never misused their firearms are on the verge of having to carry attorney-enriching liability insurance for exercising their Second Amendment rights, while those who have committed felonies — including drug dealing and car theft — can now possess guns under Colorado law (thank you, Attorney General Phil Weiser). Local governments are entrusted to whittle away gun rights by limiting what firearms can be possessed, but they cannot be trusted to decide who and under what conditions a concealed-carry permit is to be issued.

Advertisement

While extremists like Hamas-celebrant Tim Hernandez and Israel-hating Elisabeth Epps work to pass laws blaming and punishing everyone except the evil-doer who pulled the trigger killing someone, Coloradans should know legal theories predicated on parental failure to intervene to prevent “gun violence”  would have been irrelevant in every mass shooting case I have handled.

Columbine: The parents immediately lawyered up and provided no statement to law enforcement. The weapons obtained by the evil killers were obtained either illegally (the TEC DC-9), and the wrongdoers went to prison, or legally (the long rifles), by the girlfriend of one of the murderers. Nobody knew what they intended to do. One shooter hid the homemade pipe bombs, magazines, web gear and rifle in his locked bedroom. An appropriately nosey parent would have discovered it — my mom (an appropriately nosey mom) would have discovered it.

Aurora Theater: Everything was purchased legally, including the four firearms, thousands of rounds of ammo, body armor, the building blocks for the apartment bombs and the “road stars” for puncturing police tires as the killer envisioned them chasing him. He spread the purchases around using different methods of payment to avoid detection.

Arapahoe High School: the 18-year-old killer murdered innocent Clair Davis with a legally purchased shotgun.

Mountain Vista High School: Two 16-year-old girls planned a Columbine-style mass shooting that was averted by a nosey parent and DCSO text-a-tip. The would-be killers made efforts to obtain a handgun illegally, but had thus far failed.

Advertisement

STEM School: the 16- and 18-year-old murderers of hero Kendrick Castillo five years ago broke into a parent’s safe with an axe and crowbar to steal four weapons and ammunition.

The issue of parental responsibility for the conduct of children is real and parents like the Crumbleys are rightly held accountable under the law. However, the current discussions and inevitable exploration by our liberal lawmakers of ways to make it easier to criminally prosecute and incarcerate parents is a double-edged sword. It takes little imagination to envision a prosecutor using such a law to target parents of gang members (or is it “gang-involved individuals”?) or bullies or recalcitrant youth or even juveniles who have previously offended.

The Crumbleys are an outlier best addressed under our current laws. But take heed, Colorado parents and gun-owners — unless November’s elections change things under the Gold Dome — expect the legislature to make it easier to prosecute you for the misdeeds of your kids, especially if they involve the use of a firearm.

George Brauchler is the former district attorney for the 18th Judicial District and is a candidate for district attorney in the newly created 23rd Judicial District. He has served as an Owens Early Criminal Justice Fellow at the Common Sense Institute. Follow him on Twitter(X): @GeorgeBrauchler.



Source link

Advertisement

Colorado

Colorado lawmakers duel over data centers: Grant millions in tax breaks or regulate them without incentives?

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.”

Advertisement

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.

An overflow crowd watches through the windows during a community meeting at Geotech Environmental to discuss concerns about a new data center under construction in the Elyria-Swansea neighborhood in Denver on Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2026. (Photo by AAron Ontiveroz/The Denver Post)

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Tyler Manke skateboards at Elyria Park near a new data center being built by CoreSite in the Elyria-Swansea neighborhood of Denver on Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2026. (Photo by AAron Ontiveroz/The Denver Post)
Tyler Manke skateboards at Elyria Park near a new data center being built by CoreSite in the Elyria-Swansea neighborhood of Denver on Tuesday, Feb. 24, 2026. (Photo by AAron Ontiveroz/The Denver Post)

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.

Advertisement

“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.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Colorado

Colorado family pushes for change after rare disease clinical trial abruptly ends

Published

on

Colorado family pushes for change after rare disease clinical trial abruptly ends


This week marks Rare Disease Week, a time when families across the country are sharing their struggles with access to treatments and clinical trials, and their hopes for change, with lawmakers and federal health officials. A Colorado family is now adding its voice to the chorus after a clinical trial their son relied on suddenly ended.



Source link

Continue Reading

Colorado

Evacuation warning issued for area near wildfire in southwest Boulder

Published

on

Evacuation warning issued for area near wildfire in southwest Boulder


Authorities have issued an evacuation warning for homes near a wildfire that broke out in southwest Boulder on Saturday afternoon.

Advertisement

Mountain View Fire Rescue


Just before 1 p.m., Boulder Fire Rescue said a wildfire sparked in the southwest part of Boulder’s Chautauqua neighborhood. The Bluebell Fire is currently estimated to be approximately five acres in size, and more than 50 firefighters are working to bring it under control. Mountain View Fire Rescue is assisting Boulder firefighters with the operation.

Around 1:30, emergency officials issued an evacuation warning to the residents in the area of Chatauqua Cottages. Residents in the area should be prepared in case they need to evacuate suddenly.

chatauqua-cottages-evac-warning.jpg

Chatauqua evcuation warning area

Boulder Fire Rescue

Advertisement


Officials have ordered the DFPC Multi-Mission Aircraft (MMA) and Type 1 helicopter to assist in firefighting efforts. Boulder Fire Rescue said the fire has a moderate rate of spread and no containment update is available at this time.

Red Flag warnings remain in place for much of the Front Range as windy and dry conditions persist.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending