Brandon Leuallen, The Business Times

About 50 Western Colorado business leaders traveled to Denver in late February as part of the Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce’s annual Legislative Days at the Capitol, a two-day trip designed to connect local employers with state lawmakers and policy leaders.

Participants traveled across the mountains to attend meetings and discussions focused on state-policy issues affecting businesses across Mesa County and the Western Slope.

Candace Carnahan, president and chief executive officer of the Grand Junction Area Chamber of Commerce, said the trip is organized each year to ensure business voices from Western Colorado are heard in state-policy discussions.

“The goal is to make sure we are creating an opportunity for Western Slope business voices to be heard in the Capitol,” Carnahan said.

The chamber schedules the trip during the legislative session, which began Jan. 16 this year and runs for 120 days, usually ending in mid-May. The visit typically occurs during the early part of the session while many bills are still being introduced and debated.

Participants included business leaders from across the Grand Valley as well as members of the Mesa County Leadership program, which allows emerging community leaders to see how state government operates and how policy decisions affect employers and local economies.

While the Grand Junction Chamber organized the trip, representatives from other regional chambers also attended, including the Palisade Chamber of Commerce and the Fruita Area Chamber of Commerce.

Bills the chamber is watching

Carnahan said the chamber is closely monitoring several pieces of legislation this session that could affect Colorado businesses, including proposals related to labor policy, workplace regulations and consumer pricing.

One bill the chamber is watching closely involves potential changes to Colorado’s collective-bargaining laws. 

The proposal is similar to legislation introduced last year that would remove the second vote currently required in many workplaces during the unionization process.

Under existing Colorado law, employees first vote on whether they want union representation. A second election is required before a union can negotiate an agreement requiring workers in the bargaining unit to pay union dues or fees. Carnahan said eliminating that second vote could affect Colorado’s competitiveness and could require some employees to pay union dues even if they do not support union representation.

“We’re still being really watchful on the collective bargaining bill,” she said.

Another proposal the chamber is monitoring involves workplace protections related to extreme temperatures. The revised bill would require employers to develop action plans addressing temperature conditions in the workplace, and it directs the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment to establish specific temperature thresholds.

Carnahan said business groups have raised concerns about how such requirements could be applied in industries that rely on outdoor work.

“There are a lot of questions around compliance and administrative burden,” she said, noting sectors such as agriculture and construction often face changing weather conditions.

Carnahan also pointed to a proposal addressing what lawmakers described as “captive consumer” pricing. The bill attempted to regulate pricing in situations where consumers have limited purchasing options, such as at stadiums or entertainment venues.

Carnahan said the chamber opposed the proposal, arguing it could allow government involvement in private pricing, and the consumers at entertainment venues are attending events and making purchases at them voluntarily.

The chamber opposed the proposal and worked with other business groups to submit a letter opposing the legislation. The bill ultimately failed in committee earlier this session.

In addition to those proposals, the chamber tracks other legislation through its online tracker, including current proposals involving workplace-safety regulations, economic-development incentives, data centers, protections for agricultural products and measures that could allow local governments to tax vacant residential properties.

Policy discussions with agencies and business groups

During the trip, participants met with lawmakers, policy organizations and state agencies to discuss issues ranging from workforce development and regulatory impacts to state budgeting and economic competitiveness.

One panel discussion featured representatives from several state departments responsible for implementing legislation passed by the General Assembly, including the Department of Regulatory Agencies, Department of Local Affairs and Department of Labor and Employment. The conversation focused on how legislation passed at the Capitol translates into regulations, agency rules and administrative requirements that businesses must follow.

Carnahan said the panel also discussed how agencies manage budget pressures while implementing new laws.

“Many of them mentioned they currently work off cash funds that are created from fees generated by the services that they provide,” Carnahan said. “But when more legislation passes that they are required to implement, that stretches capacity and budget, which means those funds often grow through increased fees.”

Those fees, she said, ultimately affect businesses across the state.

Participants also met with the Colorado Chamber of Commerce and the Common Sense Institute to discuss the state’s economic competitiveness and budget outlook. Carnahan said Colorado currently ranks as the sixth-most-regulated state and 38th in the nation for cost of doing business.

“There is a lot of pressure being put on Colorado to hold on to the businesses that we have here,” she said.