Colorado Bill Would Require State Agency Lobbyists to Register and Disclose Like Everyone Else — Governor Calls It ‘Absurd’
Why It Matters
A growing transparency debate in Colorado has put the executive branch on a collision course with a bipartisan bloc of state lawmakers. At issue is whether legislative liaisons — government employees whose primary job is to influence legislation on behalf of state agencies and the governor’s office — should be required to follow the same public disclosure rules that govern every other lobbyist operating at the State Capitol.
The outcome could reshape how much insight Colorado taxpayers have into the executive branch’s behind-the-scenes efforts to shape state law using public resources.
What Happened
A bipartisan group of Colorado lawmakers is advancing Senate Bill 147, legislation that would require state agency legislative liaisons to register their positions on bills with the Secretary of State’s Office — the same requirement that applies to all other lobbyists in Colorado.
Currently, private lobbyists must publicly register a stance on any legislation they seek to influence. Legislative liaisons working for state agencies or the governor’s office perform the same function but are exempt from those disclosure requirements, meaning their positions on bills are not made publicly available.
The bill passed the Senate on a 30 to 4 vote and cleared the House State, Civic, Military, & Veterans Affairs Committee unanimously on Monday. Gov. Jared Polis has pushed back forcefully against the proposal.
“Staff members in the governor’s office are not registered lobbyists, and it would be absurd to have them treated the same way,” said Eric Maruyama, a spokesperson for the governor. “This is a clear attempt to limit the Governor’s Office’s ability to meaningfully participate in the legislative process, and to curb the governor’s decision-making authority.”
By the Numbers
30–4: The margin by which Senate Bill 147 passed the Colorado Senate.
Unanimous: The House State, Civic, Military, & Veterans Affairs Committee vote to advance the bill to the full chamber.
1 office, outsized influence: Sponsors say the governor’s first-floor Capitol office has wielded disproportionate sway over the legislative process in recent years, often withholding positions on bills until the last minute.
0 current disclosure requirements: Under existing rules, legislative liaisons for state agencies face no obligation to publicly register their stance on legislation they are actively working to influence.
Supporters and Opponents
Bill sponsors from both parties framed the legislation as a straightforward government transparency measure. Rep. Meg Froelich, an Englewood Democrat and a primary sponsor, cited what she called an “unprecedented level of involvement” from the executive branch in the legislative process in recent years.
“This is a chance to turn the page and to bring in new people who are going to abide by a more transparent set of rules,” Froelich said in committee.
Rep. Dusty Johnson, a Republican from Fort Morgan and co-sponsor, argued the bill is necessary to preserve the constitutional separation of powers. “In our state, we very much see what the first floor wants often is what the first floor gets,” Johnson said, referring to the governor’s office. “So we’re asking for that transparency just to make sure we have an even playing field on the separation of branches.”
The private lobbying industry and organized labor both testified in support. Lacey Hayes, executive director of the Colorado Lobbyist Association, argued there is “no functional difference” between legislative liaisons and registered lobbyists. “Lobbying activity by any person or entity should be reported, especially when public dollars are being spent in an effort to amend, support, oppose, or even monitor a bill,” Hayes said.
The Polis administration countered that forcing governor’s office staff into the lobbyist registration framework would impair its ability to participate meaningfully in the democratic process — a position that drew sharp skepticism from the bill’s sponsors.
Zoom Out
The debate in Colorado reflects a broader national tension between legislative and executive branches over transparency and influence at state capitols. As Colorado lawmakers also recently abandoned an effort to limit police use of surveillance camera data, the legislature appears to be navigating multiple fronts on government accountability simultaneously. Lawmakers in other states have similarly moved in recent years to tighten disclosure rules around government-employed advocates who function as de facto lobbyists without formal registration.
With the state already managing significant fiscal and environmental pressures — including elevated wildfire risk forecast for this summer — the question of how the executive and legislative branches coordinate on policy carries real consequences for Coloradans.
What’s Next
Senate Bill 147 now moves to the full Colorado House for a floor vote. If it passes, it would head to Gov. Polis, who, given his administration’s strong public opposition, could veto the measure. Whether the bill’s bipartisan support is sufficient to sustain an override remains to be seen. Lawmakers and lobbyist groups are expected to continue pressing for passage before the current legislative session concludes.