Colorado Senate 2026 Legislative Day 063

Mr. President.

Yes, thank you. Members and chamber, will everybody please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Journal of March 16, 2026 be approved as corrected by the Secretary. You've heard the motion. All those in favor say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. That motion is adopted. Mr. Schaffler, please add Senator Pelton R to the roll. Senate Services. Correctly printed Senate Bill 140 and 141. Correctly engrossed Senate Bill 66 and 126. Senate Joint Resolution 17. Correctly re Senate Bill 87 88 118 and 120 Correctly revised House Bill 1017 1042 and 1103 correctly re House Bill 1146 correctly enrolled Senate Joint Resolution 1 Committee reports. Committee on Education, after consideration on the merits, the committee recommends the following. House Bill 1136, be referred to the Committee of the Whole with favorable recommendation. Mr. President, the Committee on Education has had under consideration the head of hearing on the following appointments and recommends that the appointments be placed on the consent calendar and confirm. member of the college and best board of directors for a term expiring july 31st 2029 david hughes of denver colorado appointed mr president the committee on education has had a consideration had a hearing on the following appointments recommends that the appointments be confirmed members of the board of governors of the colorado state university system effective january 1st 2026 for terms expiring december 31st 2029 elizabeth markey of fort collins colorado reappointed lewis martin of rush colorado reappointed kenzo kawanabi of denver colorado reappointed committee on education after consideration on the merits committee recommends the following senate bill 68 be amended as follows and as so amended be referred to the committee on appropriations with favorable recommendation committee on judiciary after consideration on the merits committee recommends the following house bill 1009 be referred favorably to the committee on appropriations mr president the committee on judiciary has had a consideration ahead of hearing on the following appointments and recommends that the appointments be placed on the consent calendar and confirmed member of the juvenile parole board tiffany pelham webb of Denver, Colorado to serve as a public member reappointed. Committee on Judiciary after consideration on the merits committee recommends following House Bill 1185 be referred to the committee of the whole with favorable recommendation and with a recommendation that it be placed on the consent calendar. Message from the House. Mr. President, the House is adopted and transmits herewith House Joint Resolution 1023 as printed in House Journal March 16, 2026. The House is passed on third reading and transmitted to the reviser of statutes. House Bill 1187, House Bill 1280, House Bill 1297, and House Bill 1303. House is passed on third reading and transmitted to the Revisor of Statutes, House Bill 1019, House Bill 1268, House Bill 1139, House Bill 1053, House Bill 1208, House Bill 1194, House Bill 1116, House Bill 1262, House Bill 1203, House Bill 1207, Senate Bill 11 and Senate Bill 32, amended as printed in House Journal March 13, 2026. Message from the Revisor. We hear with transmit without comment House Bill 1187, 1280, 1297, and 1303. Without comment as amended House Bill 1019, 1053, 1116, 1139, 1194, 1203, 1207, 1208, 1262, and 1268. Without comment as amended Senate Bill 11 and 32. Moments of personal privilege. Mr. Majority Leader.

The motion is to proceed out of order for moments of personal privilege. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, no. The ayes have it. We'll proceed out of order for moments of personal privilege. Mr. Schoffler, please add Senator Lindstedt to the roll. Senator Carson and Senator Ball.

Granted.

Senator Ball. Thank you, Mr. President. may I ask for a moment of personal privilege?

Thank you, Mr. President. And I'd like to thank the good Senator from Highlands Ranch for reading this tribute to our wonderful guest today with me. The Colorado Senate extends a hearty congratulation and commendation and proudly recognizes the All Veterans Honor Guard, established in Colorado in 1994 by veteran volunteers, understanding that only those who have served in the U.S. Armed Forces provide such sacred military funeral honors, recognizing it is the veteran who preserves the American heritage of freedom. Four dedicated teams, Aurora, Castle Rock, Fort Logan, and Littleton, continue this solemn mission without compensation, relying solely on donations to serve Colorado's veterans and their families. Growing from 78 honors in 1993 to 1,354 services, with fewer than 80 volunteers in 2021, and now having rendered final military honors to over 26,100 Colorado veterans and retirees through December 2025, demonstrating unwavering dedication to those who sacrificed to preserve American freedoms. The Senate honors the All Veterans Honor Guard for their selfless service and extends deepest gratitude for ensuring every veteran's final journey is met with the dignity they have earned. This resolution was requested by a senator from Denver and myself, and it's signed by the Honorable James Rashad Coleman, Senior President of the Colorado Senate. And I want to just conclude. We do have a nice plaque we're going to present to them with the tribute, and I also want to have each of them stand and be recognized when I call them. So from post one, we have Wanda Heath, and we have Diane Shea, Richard Claggett, Kathleen Crowe, Betty Jantz, David Rosendenz, and then we also have Kathy Kraske, but she was not able to make it today. From post 1187, we have Dale Erickson and Tina Cosley. And post 103, we have Harry Giglio and Ken Olson. Post 1992, Morris Smith, Bill Knox, and Randy Schuette. And then from post 1976, we have Dan Howell. And we just want to recognize, you know, I've been to a lot of military funerals, and having an official presence there to recognize what that service member has sacrificed in our country's thanks to that sacrifice is something that is incredibly meaningful to the families of our service members and something that is very valuable to our state So thank you very much

Thank you, Mr. President. And I wanted to, and I don't know that any of you have been there. I know the Senator from Denver talked about having gone to many. But when my father was laid to rest at Fort Sam Houston, for whatever reason, my mother didn't want to inconvenience anybody. And she didn't want people to be there. So when my father passed, she wouldn't allow my kids to come to go to San Antonio to be there and see my dad. My daughter, Megan, had already missed two funerals for her other grandparents, and she was very adamant. And we brought her along, but Alex didn't get to go. and so of course it was very small and as we were in the cars and we were coming in um to Fort Sam um like that and I vividly can remember turning the corner and all of a sudden gentlemen like like this stood up and saluted as we came in. And then when the process went, the 21 gun salute went off. And I mean, it's so appropriate that we're having this tribute on St. Patrick's Day. I assume you did that for my dad. But thank you so much. And even though the families don't get an opportunity to come over and thank you. Please know that each and every one of us do. Never forget that vision of seeing you all rise like that. So thank you so much for bringing this forward.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, today, in addition to the green...

Oh, Mr. President, may I have a moment of personal privilege, please?

U.S. President. So, yeah, members, today on a green day, we recognize the American Red Cross and honor the extraordinary service of the American Red Cross and the many volunteers who support its mission across Colorado and throughout our nation. For more than a century, the Red Cross has been there when communities face their most difficult moments, responding to disasters, supporting military families, teaching life-saving skills, and ensuring hospitals have the blood supply they need for care for parent patients. Here in Colorado, Red Cross volunteers regularly step forward during wildfires, floods, and home fires, providing shelter, comfort, and assistance to families in crisis. Their work reflects the compassion and service that define our communities. The Red Cross also plays a vital role in supporting our nations, providing emergency communication between service members and their families, offering support to veterans and military caregivers, and ensuring that those who serve our country know they are not alone. In addition, millions of Americans have learned life-saving skills through Red Cross first aid and CPR training. These programs equip ordinary people with the knowledge and confidence to respond in emergencies and save lives in their homes, workplaces, and communities. The Red Cross also depends on the generosity of blood donors. Every two seconds, someone in the United States needs blood, and those donations save the lives of trauma patients, cancer patients, and many others receiving medical care. In that spirit, I invite all my colleagues and all members of the Capitol community to participate in the Capitol blood drive today until 3 p.m. in the State Services Building. Donating blood takes less than an hour. It's one of the simplest ways we can help save lives. Today, we thank the American Red Cross for its continued dedication to service and humanitarian work, and we encourage everyone who is able to support their mission by volunteering their blood or donating and volunteering. Thank you, Mr. President.

Majority Leader Rodriguez. Thank you, Mr. President. I move the Senate proceed out of order for consideration of memorials.

Senator Snyder. Thank you, Mr. President. I move for the adoption of SJM 003 and request that it be read at length.

Senator Snyder. Thank you, Mr. President. Although I did not know Senator Marianne Thibodeau personally, I recently learned several impressive details about her life and career that I wanted to share with you. Senator Thibodeau dedicated a significant portion of her life to public service, 19 years in this building with the Colorado General Assembly where she represented the people of Colorado Springs in El Paso County with remarkable diligence and integrity her legislative service began in the Colorado House of Representatives in 1982 she was later elected to the Colorado Senate in 1988 where she served until 2001 throughout her tenure in public office she was widely recognized for a thoughtful approach to policymaking and deep unwavering commitment to the communities that she represented. Beyond her distinguished legislative work, Mary Ann was deeply devoted to her family. She married her husband Donald E. Thibodeau in 1954. Together they raised six children while building a life grounded in faith and service. Her legacy continues through her many contributions to the state of Colorado and the lasting example of civic responsibility she set for future generations.

We have to add a member to the roll, so just I move to rescind the motion. I move to rescind the motion.

Thank you, Mr. President. I renew my motion for the adoption of SJM 003 and request a roll call vote.

Aye.

Aye.

Carson.

Senator Carson.

Kip. Aye. Senator Kip.

Rich.

Senator Rich, aye.

Senator Snyder. Thank you, Mr. President. I request the current roll call be added as co-sponsors.

Senator Snyder.

Mr. Majority Leader. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that Senate Resolution 005 lay over until Friday, March 20, 2026.

Mr. Majority Leader. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that House Joint Resolution 1023 lay over until Wednesday, March 18, 2026.

Mr. Majority Leader. Thank you, Mr. President. I move for the passage of all the bills and third reading of Bill's final passage consent calendar, which are House Bill 1042 and Senate Bill 126.

Mr. Majority Leader. Thank you, Mr. President. I move to lay over House Bill 1038 until Friday, March the 20th.

Thank you, Mr. President. I move to lay over Senate Bill 66 until Wednesday, March the 18th.

Senator Weissman. Thank you, Mr. President. I move for the adoption of House Bill 1017 on third reading and final passage and urge a yes vote.

concerning amending specific legal processes for certain vulnerable populations. Senator Cutter. Thank you Mr President I move House Bill 26 on third reading and final passage Seeing or further discussion the motion is the passage of House Bill 1103 Are there any no votes

Majority Leader Rodriguez. Thank you, Mr. President. Pursuant to Senate Rule 21C, I move the Senate grant leave to the Joint Budget Committee to meet while the Senate is in session.

Yeah, who is that? That's Senator Cuffin. Yeah, I'm filing a complaint on you. Senator Mullica. Thank you, Mr. President. I move the Senate resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole for consideration of general order, second reading of Bill's consent calendar.

Relax the coat rule. We will come to order in this room. The coat rule is not relaxed. I do apologize for everyone watching on TV. I would suggest you put on some sunglasses. Yes, we will come to order. Thank you. The coat rule is relaxed. Will the clerk please read the titles of all the bills on the general order of second reading of bills consent calendar? House Bill 1142 by Representatives Daggart and Baisnicker and Senators Roberts and Ball concerning child advocacy centers in cases of child maltreatment. Senate Bill 60 by Senators Pelton, R. and Doherty concerning information about youth athlete mental health training and in connection therewith requiring mental health training for youth sports coaches and requiring the coaches to notify parents of possible mental health risks associated with concussions. Senate Bill 35 by Senator Roberts concerning an increase of traffic violation penalties. House Bill 1031 by Rep. Soper and Martinez and Senators Roberts and Catlin concerning protection for certain agricultural products grown in Colorado. Senate Bill 105 by Senators Hendrickson and Rep. Martinez and Morrow concerning county executive officers and in connection therewith requiring coroners, clerks and recorders and assessors to disclose their financial interests in regulated businesses, requiring coroners to disclose an aggregate number of remains, referrals to death care service providers, and create an extraordinary removal mechanism for county executive officers.

Is there any discussion on any of the committee reports? Seeing none, the motion before the body is the adoption of the committee reports. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no. The ayes have the committee reports are adopted Is there any discussion on any of the bills on the consent calendar Seeing none the motion before the body is the adoption of all the bills on the general order second reading of bills consent calendar All those in favor say aye Aye All those opposed no The ayes have it. The bills are adopted.

The motion is for the committee to rise and report. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no. The ayes have it. The committee will rise and report. Senator Mollica. Thank you, Mr. President. The committee has had a number of bills under consideration, will the clerk please read the report March 17, 2026 Mr. President, you committee the whole begs leave to report as had in consideration the following attached bills being the second reading thereof makes the following recommendations thereon Senate Bill 60 as amended, Senate Bill 35 as amended, Senate Bill 105 as amended passed on second reading and ordered engrossed and placed in the calendar for third reading and final passage House Bill 1142, House Bill 1031 passed on second reading and ordered revised and placed in the calendar for third reading and final passage Thank you Mr. President, I move the report The motion is the adoption committee to hold report Are there any no votes? with a vote of 34 I 0 0 0 absent when excused committee the whole report is adopted. Senate Bill 60 is amended. Senate Bill 35 is amended. 105 is amended. Passed second reading order of gross place and counter for third reading and final passage. House Bill 1142 and House Bill 1031 passed on second reading order of revised place and counter for third reading and final passage. General order second reading of bills. Senator Mullica. Thank you Mr. President. I move the Senate resolve itself into the committee of the whole for the consideration of general order second reading of bills. You've heard the motion. All those in favor say aye. Opposed no. The ayes have it. The Senate will resolve itself. To committee the hall of consideration, general order of second bill, Senator Mullica will take the chair. The committee will come to order. The coat rule is relaxed. Majority Leader Rodriguez.

The motion before the body is to proceed out of order and take up Senate Bill 62. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, no. The ayes have it. We will be taking up Senate Bill 62. Will the clerk please read the title to Senate Bill 62? Senate Bill 62 by Senators Cutter and Kipp and Representative Velasco concerning certain rodent control products in the state. Senator Cutter. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Senate Bill 62 and the Ag and Natural Resources Report. To the Agricultural and Natural Resources Committee Report. Thank you, Mr. Chair. In the committee, we did a lot. We worked extensively on this bill and ended up doing pretty much a strike below to considerably narrow the bill to its current form of only restricting some second use. Go ahead.

for Senate generation anticoagulants rodenticides Is there any further discussion on the committee report Senator Oh Senator Yeah on the bill We on the committee report Is there any further discussion on the committee report Senator Hendrickson Thank you, Chair Leprechaun. I... Yeah, we... I'm sorry, we can't have that. Mr. Minority Leader, I was kind on you to be on my side. I just want to thank the sponsors for the work on this. This was a significant concession, but I really believe that what we have is the rodenticide that is being extremely misused and is problematic for our communities. We heard some compelling testimony from veterinarians, and I really just want to express my gratitude because what I have, I think, protects our farmers, protects our landlords, protects the ability to deploy rodenticides in a manner that can attack the rodent problem that we have in Colorado, while still ensuring that these most harmful products are not getting into our pets not getting into our ecosystem not creating problems I just want to express the gratitude for the work on that any further discussion on the committee report seeing none the motion before the body is the adoption of the agricultural committee report all those in favor say aye all those opposed no the eyes have it and the committee report is adopted to the bill Senator Cutter Thank you, Mr. Chair. So these, I just want to set the stage a little bit. These are some of the most toxic products available to consumers, rodenticides. Anticoagulants cause internal bleeding and bioaccumulate in wildlife. They can cause seizures, paralysis, organ failure, respiratory distress, and death. Nationally, more than 24,000 rodenticide exposures were reported over the last several years, with approximately 70% of them involving children under 6. In Colorado alone, 306 exposures were reporting during that period, including 198 involving children under 5. These baits are often placed at ground level and may resemble food, increasing the risk of accidental digestion. They're a significant source of pet poisonings in Colorado, more than 2,100 reported cases over the last few years. Pets are most often exposed by eating this bait directly, and they also move through the food chain because carnivores such as owls, hawks, foxes, bobcats, and mountain lions are routinely exposed. So for these and many reasons, we believe that it's really important that we protect our children, our pets, our wildlife, and our environment for some of these really highly toxic and deadly rodenticides. Senator Kipp.

Thank you. So any further discussion on Senate Bill 62 Senator Pelton. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to thank the sponsors for talking about this bill and the dangers of this stuff. Because I have to tell you, in agriculture, we've used it a lot. We use it a lot to make sure that we are not spreading disease, that we are controlling the mice population. If you've ever seen what one mouse can do to a load of feed, because one mouse becomes 28 mice very quickly, what it does to a load of feed, you would say we need to do something about controlling the mice population. That is definitely what this is. Agriculture is very responsible when we use this stuff. We truly are. I have to tell you I said I've got a lot of this stuff all over my shop to make sure and it's all enclosed and little I call them mouse houses to make sure that it doesn't get out to make sure that we're not contaminating or my dogs can't get to it or my kids can't get to it or any of that stuff so we we're very responsible when it comes with this stuff but you want to make sure that you're you're not spreading the disease of the mice to your animals because that can happen. It's a really, really terrible deal when you see what mice can do to your livestock, to your feed, to basically they can tear up stuff very quickly. So one of the things that I wanted to do is I wanted to run an amendment that we talk about delaying this program a little bit. So I have an amendment, Mr. Chair. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read Amendment L-16? Amendment L-16, amend the agriculture. Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L-16 to Senate Bill 62. That's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment L-16. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This amendment would postpone the implementation of the bill until July 1, 2031. This amendment provides farmers and agriculture businesses with time to adjust to significant regulatory changes. something that we're not usually doing in this building to make sure we can do that. Agriculture producers should have adequate time to evaluate alternative pest control strategies and adapt their operations accordingly. By extending the implementation timeline, this amendment ensures that Colorado farmers are not forced to rapidly overhaul pest management practices that are critical to protecting crops and farm infrastructure. We want to make sure that we have plenty of time to implement this policy. I think just delaying for five years gives us that ample opportunity, and we're able to make sure that our folks aren't going to have any more increased costs. I mean, we're talking about a possible increased cost to our folks. We're already dealing with higher input costs when it comes to fuel, when it comes to fertilizer. Thank you, fertilizer. We dealing with a lot of things that are hurting agriculture and we want to make sure that we able to continue working in our trade in our industry, to make sure that we're not hurting it with any kind of undued, oh, what do you want to call it, unfunded mandate. So that's what I'm asking for. So I ask for an I on L-16. Any further discussion on amendment L-16? Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I rise in support of L-16. It never hurts to be prepared for these changes. This is going to be kind of a big one for agriculture and for apartment dwellers, homeowners. I think delaying this will give everybody a chance to really dig in, understand the rules, understand what products they will not be able to get without a restricted use permit. So I rise in full support of L-16. Senator Cutter. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are a no vote on L-16. There are multiple options, so many options for ridding yourselves of rodents and small pests. We left many, many toxins are still available and other kinds of traps. And so this just limits the use of one particularly egregious category. It does not even prohibit. So for that, we urge a no vote on that. There's plenty of options. Senator Catlin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm here in support of this amendment for a couple of different reasons. In rural Colorado, we may have a struggle in finding a professional applicator that can take care of this product because of the distance that some of these folks live from population areas. And I'm not positive that towns like Cheyenne Wells, for example, might have a pesticide applicator that's a professional that would qualify under this bill. So giving us a little more time to figure that out, I think, would be good for agriculture. It would probably be good for all of us. But the point I'm trying to make is that we pass bills in this building that we don't think about the people that are going to be implementing it on the ground. If you take something away, make sure that we have an opportunity to use what the state is now requiring. And there are places on the eastern plains and on the western slope that are a long ways away from the urban center so that they can hire a professional applicator of this product. So I'd ask for a yes vote. Any further discussion on the adoption of Amendment L-16? Seeing none, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment L-16. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, no. No. The no's have it and amendment L-16 is lost. To the bill, Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So we want to make sure that we're not putting an undue burden on folks that are going to have to implement this policy. So one of the things that we talked about when I talked about just up here is how much something costs and the input costs are all going up. So we want to make sure that we're preventing that from happening. So I have another amendment here. There is an amendment at the desk Will the clerk please read amendment L18 Amendment L18 Senator Belton Thank you Mr Chair I move L to Senate Bill 62 That a proper motion Tell us about Amendment L Senator Belton Thank you, Mr. Chair. This amendment would require that any permit issued by the Commissioner of Agriculture for the sale or use of these rodenticides may not cost more than $1. This amendment prevents the creation of a new fee-based regulatory system. When new permitting requirements are introduced, they can easily become another mechanism for generating revenue. We've seen that in a lot of areas through escalating fees and administrative charges for agriculture producers. We are already facing rising costs across the board. Even small regulatory fees can add up over time. By capping the cost of any required permit to $1, this amendment ensures that the permitting process remains purely administrative rather than becoming another financial burden on Colorado agriculture communities. So basically this amendment just prevents any kind of permitting that is done through this bill to be just with $1 and not to have an excessive fee. So I ask for an aye vote on ELP 18. Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Green Jacket. Mr. Chair, Senator Pelton. Mr. Chair, I'm sorry. Lost my mind. I rise in full support of this amendment. It is burdensome for our agricultural producers that don't have the restricted use permit to go get one. They're already facing so many costs and stuff that this could be the one that pushes them over the edge. And for the homeowners, apartment owners, they're going to have to go get a restricted use unless they want to hire a professional to come in and do this to administer these products in their dwellings where they live. So I think this is a very appropriate amendment to just charge a dollar. Otherwise, it's an unfunded mandate again, and this building is good at doing that. So with that, I urge an aye vote on this amendment. Any further discussion on Amendment L-18?

Is there any further discussion on Amendment L18? Seeing none, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment L-18. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, no. No. The no's have it. Amendment L-18 is lost. To the bill, Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We heard this bill in committee. It really changed a lot. It narrowed up a lot. At the end of the day, it's still not a good bill. And with that, Mr. Chair. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read Amendment L-13? Amendment L Senator Pelton Thank you Mr Chair I move Amendment L That a proper motion Senator Pelton tell us about Amendment L Thank you Mr Chair I move Amendment L That a proper motion Senator Pelton tell us about Amendment L What this amendment does is it exempts Colorado farms that earn less than $500,000 a year from this bill. The amendment protects the smaller farmers, the smaller agricultural producers that may not have a restricted use permit. Family farms and smaller agricultural producers often operate on thin margins. Most of them have to have second incomes. And they rely on practical, affordable pest control methods to protect crops, feed supplies, and farm infrastructure along with their equipment. This equipment nowadays is very electronic, a lot of wires, harnesses that are damaged whenever rodents are crawling all around them. And with that, I think this is an appropriate amendment. It helps the guys that struggle. And I would urge support for L013. Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think what I used in committee was, and what we heard from our farmers that were there, our producers, was, for instance, when I go and work on a pump, a well pump or a sprinkler, any of that stuff, you will see where the mice have got in and built nests in there. And they just tear up the inside of that motor, the inside of that well pump. And then if the irrigation pump goes down, that becomes a huge increased cost on those folks. So what we're asking for this amendment is just to make sure anybody that is less than $5,000, they are exempted from this. And I appreciate this amendment because, again, we're trying not to put undue pressure on agriculture. So I rise in support of this amendment. Senator Cutter. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We urge a no vote on this amendment. First of all, we appreciate all the work that our very important, lovely farmers do for us to feed Colorado and the nation. But we also left, again, left multiple options for farmers in this bill. And in fact, heard some testimony about just such an incident as the good senator was discussing about nesting and things, getting into equipment. And for that reason specifically, we left in the very cruel and awful glue traps, which was a big give. And it was a difficult give because they're incredibly cruel and torturous for the animals. But we understand that's what really helps when, you know, poisons may not help in those situations all the time. And so those are very useful. So again, lots of proven options that are no more costly and probably less costly than the ones that we've restricted use to. So we ask for a no vote. Senator Catlin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm here to support this amendment for a couple of different reasons. one of the things that I'd like to have people understand is that the $500,000 gross sales farm is not a big farm. That could be a small family farm with one or two people, a man and a wife, a man and a son, trying to operate something that gets more and more complex every day. The permits, the licenses, the awareness, the things that these agricultural producers need to pay attention to, continues to grow. Amen. In retail business, I'm not sure that it continues to grow that much with permits and awarenesses of these kind of things where you have to have a license or you have to hire a professional. But any time that these small operations have more expense or more restriction, we are getting closer to making Colorado one of the places that are very, very attractive to corporate farms. If you can't make it, all you can do is sell. So I'd ask for a yes vote. Are there any further discussion on Amendment L13? Seeing none, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment L13. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no. The no's have it. Amendment L13 is lost. To the bill. Seeing no further discussion, Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm sorry I wasn't paying attention. I was having conversations about this bill because there still needs to be more discussion about it. And with that, I'm going to offer up another amendment. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read Amendment L-17? Amendment L-17. Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. There's someone down here in the well kind of distracting me, kind of adding to my state of mind. We are to the amendment. I have been informed that I have the ability to fine in this position, and so if we have any more outbursts like that, I'm going to have to fine Senator Pelton. So please, to the amendment, I think there needs to be a motion as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment L017. That's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment L17. Thank you, Mr. Chair. What my amendment does is this bill is requiring anyone that wants to use second-generation anticoagulants to get a restricted use permit. You have to go through the test. I go through it every three years. And so instead of doing it every three years, this would extend it to 15 years. The rodents don't change. The chemistry doesn't change. That education stays with you. I've done enough. I just go in every three years and take it. I don't have to study. So I think this is a very appropriate amendment because I have to drive 40 miles to take the test. Some people have to drive 100 miles because it's only given at select county extension offices. It's not at every county extension office. You have to go to the one that gives the test. And so it becomes, you know, a burden to go, basically lose a whole day by the time you drive there, take the test and drive back home. So I urge full support of 017. Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think having your license must last 15 years, I think that that makes sense, especially when we're talking about having to drive and having to figure out ways to get this policy where we can qualify to use these items. 15 years is really not that long, especially for some of us that have been in agriculture for a long time So I would just ask that we continue down this path of making sure that we not putting undue pressure undue burdens on the agriculture industry, and let's just make sure that we are able to continue the way we are doing business now and that our license doesn't expire for 15 years. So I ask for an aye vote on L-17.

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment L-17. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no. The noes have it. Amendment L-17 is lost. To the bill. Senator Catlin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think there's a couple of other things that we may try to make this bill somewhat better, and I have an amendment. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read Amendment L-15? Amendment L-15, Amendment Agriculture. This amendment. Senator Catlin, do you want to move the amendment for me? I move Amendment 015 to Senate Bill 026. That's a proper motion. Senator Catlin, tell us about Amendment L-15. Thank you, sir. This amendment would exempt Colorado farms with fewer than 50 employees from the bill's requirement. What we're trying to do is to put fewer regulatory burdens from falling on smaller ag employers. Small ag is where we are in Colorado right now. We are not a corporate farm community. We're still family farms, smaller farms. Many of these farms operate with small teams of workers who are responsible for managing a wide range of tasks, including pest control. Requiring these operations to navigate new restrictions on widely used rodenticides would create compliance challenges that larger ag operations are better equipped to manage. By creating this employee-based exemption, this amendment ensures that smaller ag producers and employers are not disproportionately affected by the bill's restrictions. I would ask you for a yes vote on Amendment L-15. Senator Catlin, real quick, before you leave, can you just make a motion on Amendment L-15 to Senate Bill 62? If you just want to remake that motion for me.

You're fine.

Perfect. Thank you, Senator Catlin. Senator Pelton.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. For all of the reasons that I listed previously, we urge a no vote on this amendment, but do thank you all for your creativity. Seeing no further discussion.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So after multiple committee amendments that have been substantially altering this legislation, beginning July 1st of 2027, the bill now makes second generation anticoagulants a restricted use pesticide and requires the colorado department of agriculture to adopt rules that restrict the distribution and use of these projects or products in addition the bill makes the distribution distribution or use of second generation anticoagulants a deceptive trade practice and subject to penalties under the colorado consumer protection act according to a 2022 study, the EPA Rodenticide Task Force regulators concluded that chemical rodenticides are the fastest and most reliable way to quickly knock down an infestation and other methods of rodent control. These rodent controls are likely to be effective in the face of a substantial infestation. Unsurprisingly, given the widespread effectiveness of these products, many consumers have already pushed back against regulating rodenticides and glue traps for the use of, for the uses such as farming and ranching. And according to the 2023 study by the United States Department of Agriculture, over 95% of respondents who reported using rodenticides predicted negative impacts from one or more. So as only viable solution of widespread rodent infestation, it is inevitable that similar consumer sentiment will arise if rodenticides and traps are prohibited for personal uses in Colorado. I think I just wanted to read that aspect of it because even the EPA has said that this is the most effective way to control the infestations. Effective way. Now, there is nobody in agriculture that wants to see this stuff get out and harm the very land and the very environment that we live off of. Nobody wants that. But there is a significant issue when it comes to mice population, especially where I live. Every year when we get and it's going to happen in a couple weeks here we're going to get our 4-H goats and then in my feed barn where I have my feed every year I got to get in there and I got to set traps and I've got to set rodenticide to make sure that I am not that we are controlling the population because they are going to get in the feed. I have them in great big steel cans We open up the bags we put it in put the lid on and inevitably when they open up that lid there a mouse in there And you don know how they get in there but they do So that why we set these traps That why we do the rodenticide to make sure that those mice aren first of all eating that feed And then wherever a mouse goes, it leaves feces behind. It goes. Wherever it goes, it goes. So, I mean, we want to make sure that we're protecting the very food that we produce. the very corned beef and cabbage and potatoes, Mr. Chair, that we produce in this great state to make sure that we're not hurting the very food supply that we're trying to protect and we feed the world with. It's a big deal. So I ask for a no vote on Senate Bill 62.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. At the end of the day, this bill will not affect my operation because I've got one of these. But I'm here to fight for the homeowners, the apartment dwellers, the farmers that don't have one of these that have to go get one now. Some of them have to drive a long ways to get it. They have to study, and if they've been out of school a while, it's hard to study sometimes. They know how to use the product. They've been using the product. They try as hard as they can to keep it from moving off target. Going and getting that class won't change that part of it. So at the end of the day, I think this bill is not needed. It's burdensome for some producers, some homeowners. And with that, I urge no vote on 062.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well, as you can tell from the amendments that I've tried to run and that I've spoken on, I don't think this is the bill that we needed for this year's agricultural scorecard. It seems to me that we are always told that we're in the process of damaging or destroying the environment that we all love here in the state of Colorado. On this bill, we were told that it damages predators and raptors and all of the other things that all of us are in favor of. But there were no studies. There were no numbers. There was no really any identification of how many this might be causing. But the point I'm trying to make is just to change rules because we can change rules doesn't make sense to me in a period of time where there are other things we could be talking about. This is not a good bill for agriculture. I would ask you for a no vote.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just briefly want to say that for apartment owners and homeowners and people that there's concern expressed, this is not applied to them. There's all kinds of other ways. They most likely don't use these products anyway. So we did think all that through and hope you can support us on this bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move the Senate proceed out of order to take up Senate Bill 98.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Oh, I move. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Senate Bill 26098.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sorry, I spoke too soon. Colleagues, Senate Bill 98 is, in a lot of ways, a simple bill, but it is not an easy bill. It's a simple bill in that this is a bill really about local control and the fact that our local governments are in the best place to make decisions around noise in their communities. For a very long time since the early 1970s, Colorado has allowed local governments to grant permits to private events to go above and beyond the state's noise ordinance, which has a really low threshold, about 50 decibels. It's far more than 50 decibels in this room right now. That changed with the Colorado Supreme Court decision that happened in September, and all this bill does is restores the law to what longstanding practice has been for decades in this state. That's why the bill is simple. It's not an easy bill because I do want to recognize there are communities, one community in particular, who has been harmed by a concert developer who opened the Ford Amphitheater in North Colorado Springs in the middle of a residential neighborhood. And we heard from this community during committee. I have deep, deep sympathies with them. Ultimately, this bill is not about that situation. It's not about any individual case. It's about who should make the determination for these types of disputes. And so that is where we believe that local government is in the best place to do that. I hope that the democratic process in Colorado Springs is able to resolve that issue. And I urge a yes vote on this bill today. Senator Liston. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, yes,

Thank you, Senator Lisson. Any further discussion on Senate Bill 98? Senator Zamora Wilson.

There is an amendment at the desk. will the clerk please read Amendment L7. Amendment L7, amendment printed bill paid. Senator Zemora Wilson.

That's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment L7.

Any further discussion on Amendment L-7? Senator Ball.

Any further discussion on Amendment 07? Senator Baisley.

Senator Zamora-Welson. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate the comments from my colleague from Woodland Park. Yeah, we love our First Amendment rights, but if you are broadcasting, it is regulated. And as I mentioned before, my constituents have come in with recordings on their phone. You can clearly hear the F-bombs being dropped, and it's not just one here or there. Sometimes you have artists that that's how they're communicating, and you have the children right there. And even you could hear this in their basement. So it doesn't even have to be in their backyard. So I urge a yes vote on L-007.

Senator Zamora Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right, I have another amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L-001 to SB-98. That is a proper motion. Tell us about amendment L-1, Senator Zemmoura-Wilson. All right. So, again, concerns from my constituents as far as preventing, this is to prevent for-profit venues from exploiting the non-profit exemption as a loophole, and this aligns with the Hobbs v. Salida reasoning, where exemptions are justified only where public accountability or nonprofit purpose exists. And this prevents the shell nonprofit structures that allow commercial operators to bypass statewide protections. And so this eliminates the potential pass-through nonprofit abuse. It preserves legitimate nonprofit events and forces commercial venues to comply with statewide standards. And so this closes a loophole, nothing more, and nonprofits should benefit nonprofits and not be misused by for-profit entities to avoid accountability. So I urge a yes vote on L-001.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you again to the good Senator from North Colorado Springs for bringing this amendment. Colleagues, I urge a no vote on L-001, but would love to continue to talk about maybe some of the pieces of the policy. We have not seen this amendment before and don't have time to dig into it and sort of play out what the impacts would be, but we would encourage more conversations to happen, certainly when this gets to the House, and appreciate the amendment being brought today. We would urge a no vote at this time.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So again, constituents' concerns as far as the local control stops at the city boundaries and neighbors outside, we're trying to just make sure that they're still protected. So I have another amendment.

Thank you, colleagues. And, you know, I know I don't rise in opposition to this kind of thing very often, but I really do rise in strong opposition to this bill today. So noise pollution is a real thing, and that's why we have state standards. as with so many other things, the state can set the floor, and this is allowing local governments to go well above and beyond that. And, you know, my alternative suggestion to my good colleagues who are bringing this bill with, you know, very good intentions is perhaps if they had also brought standards that would limit the volume of noise that is acceptable to blast out of large events. I know in my own community in Fort Collins, we're having a similar issue. And it's not the city in this case, it's the university. However, I really do believe that when people are telling me that they hearing the loudest sound they have ever heard in their homes from an event that is a quarter of a mile a half a mile a mile away This is a problem I am really not interested in doing something that would potentially allow my community to seek redress in this because frankly, I'm not a lawyer, okay, but I've looked into the court decision that pertains to this bill, and I've looked into this bill, and I am very concerned that if we adopt this bill, it is going to legitimize the use of the CSU Stadium for the private events which are keeping my community awake and blasting this noise into their homes at all hours. I am really not interested in legitimizing that. I would offer an alternative approach. I'm not offering an amendment today, but I would strongly suggest that if this bill does not move forward, that an alternative approach would be a better solution. Because my eardrums are important to me. I assume you want to continue hearing well into the future. And when there are no limits, even for these large commercial events, It is a problem for me and for my constituents, and I assume for you and your constituents. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm so excited to be here. It's St. Patrick's Day, and I'm hoping to have a little bit of luck of the Irish with these amendments. All right. All right. So I appreciate the comments from my colleague from Fort Collins about protecting our hearing after flying in jets and aircraft. I have this ring in my ear, and so, yes, I appreciate protecting our hearing. All right, so again, looking at where local control stops at the city boundaries and we have neighbors that we want to still protect, I have another amendment.

Senator Samara Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L002 to Senate Bill 98. It's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment L2, Senator Zamora-Wilson. All right. So this amendment prevents externalization of harm, preserves statewide protections where impacts cross borders. And as far as the anticipated practical effects, this protects nearby communities, their outside jurisdictions, and limits exporting noise pollution. And so local control should not mean harming your neighbors. Local control should only apply locally and not go beyond a local government's area of accountability. I urge a yes vote on L-002.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, I appreciate where the good Senator from El Paso County is coming from. She was just giving these amendments like an hour or so ago, and we're just seeing these amendments just now. So with that in mind I can appreciate where she and the people who are opposed to this but we respectfully ask for a no vote on Amendment L to Senate Bill 98 And I want to remind all of the members that affected parties have remedy under what's commonly known as Rule 106, which is very common. It's already in law. And basically what Rule 106 does, it allows people and the courts to review whether a local government has exceeded its legal authority, misapplied or ignored its own ordinances, abused its discretion, and acted arbitrarily or without evidentiary support. So under Rule 106, they already have this ability to file a complaint with the local government, whether it's the city council or the board of county commissioners. So with that in mind, members, I would respectfully ask for a no vote on Amendment L-002. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right, so permits should not erase fundamental rights, so I do have another amendment.

Senator Samoa Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L003 to Senate Bill 98. That's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment L3, Senator Samoa Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, like I said, my constituents are concerned. Currently, right now, there is a law that's in place that's supposed to protect them. Unfortunately, there's been permits upon permits where it allows the noise level to exceed what these citizens were told would never max, never go past. So here we, in this amendment, a permit cannot take away a resident's right to sue over harmful noise. This balances the bill's local flexibility by reinforcing that permits don't immunize against common law nuisance claims. So the private right of action is a core enforcement mechanism of the statute, and this retains a clear enforcement mechanism for neighbors if permitted noise becomes a nuisance while still preserving local authority. And this balances the bill's local flexibility by reinforcing that permits don't immunize against common law nuisance claims. So as far as practical effects of this, it maintains accountability even where local governments fail and deters abusive permitting. And so, again, permits should not erase fundamental rights. This protects Coloradans' ability to defend their homes. and without this amendment, Senate Bill 98 effectively removes citizens' protections. I urge a yes vote on L-003.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This was my biggest, I heard this in the local government and housing committee and ultimately was a no on this bill but this was my biggest issue because what this bill will do is takes away a citizen right to petition their government for redress Something that in both the Colorado Constitution and the U Constitution So if this bill passes as is, that will be extinguished. There is a current active lawsuit, Bailey v. Notes, down in El Paso County District Court. That case will be dismissed if this passes. This is the last and only option that these folks have. They've gone to their local government. They attended all the hearings. Local governments, I hate to say it, but they can't resist that siren song of new economic development, a new shiny object, an amphitheater in this case. But don't take away folks, their last resort, to try and get some redress. So I think this amendment would go a long way to making this a better bill, and I'm 100% in support of it and urge an aye vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, once again, under Senate Bill 98, we're not trying to take away anybody's rights. And I'll just go back, like I said just a few minutes ago. the citizens, whether under this bill or any other, have always had the right to bring their legal claims under Rule 106. And Colorado appellate courts have repeatedly held that local residents and others can sue under Rule 106 when they are affected by nearby land uses that affect their own use and enjoyment. I can give you a couple of cases, specifically aesthetic interests, Range View LLC versus City of Aurora, Friends of Black Forest Regional Park versus the Board of County Commissioners. Members, we are not trying to take away anybody's right for a right of private action. So with that in mind, I would respectfully ask for a no vote on Amendment L-003. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, I was a yes vote in this in committee and am planning to be a yes vote here today on second reading. But this area seems to be an area of agreement on both the support and the opposition to Senate Bill 98. So, and even counsel for, in support of the bill, advised me that a private right of action does not go away with Senate Bill 98. So this would simply clarify that. So I think it makes sense to support this amendment to make that clarification on which everyone seems to be agreeing. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Aye.

No.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. All right. I mentioned it's st. Patrick's Day happy st. Patrick's Day all right so permits should actually control noise not just allow it so I have another amendment there is an amendment at the desk will the clerk please

Amendment L-4. Senator Zemmour Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L-004 to Senate Bill 98.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, as I mentioned, permits should actually control noise, not just allow it. And so what this amendment does is it prevents paper permits with no enforcement teeth. that aligns with best practices and ensures permits don't function as unlimited exemptions. As far as the practical events, this will help improve compliance during events, will have faster response to any violations, and reduce chronic nuisance exposure. So if we allow permits, they must be enforceable. This ensures responsible operation, not unchecked noise, and if the local government is to control the noise, they must actually control the noise. I urge a yes vote on L-004.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, members, you know, I actually agree with Senator Zamora Wilson that there should be guidelines, but this amendment is not the way to do it. But currently, when a permit is issued, we learned this in the testimony the other day when we heard the bill, already the event sponsors, they already do these things. It is common practice that these events just don't arise out of nowhere. They are planned months and sometimes a year in advance or more that when an event is, is they sit down with the operator, the venue owner, and they set up the guidelines. Speaking of, I can just speak for the city of Colorado Springs, they do this, whether it's the Ford Amphitheater or down at Memorial Park or at some of the other venues. And right now, if I heard correctly, is that the Ford Amphitheater, some of their events have still not been approved yet by the local authorities, which is the city council and others. So I understand where the good senator from Colorado Springs or El Paso County is coming from. We already do this. This amendment is not needed, so I would respectfully ask for a no vote on Amendment L-004. Thank you.

Aye.

No.

We got it. Yeah.

And as the good senator sponsor from El Paso County, El Caldero Springs described, this has been a one size fits all for the entire state and needs to allow all of the very diverse communities that have the bluegrass festivals and Red Rocks amphitheater and so on to allow them all to control all the variables for entertainment for themselves locally Case in point the Colorado Municipal League is in support of this So that 271 I believe it is members that are all asking for that kind of local control over the entertainment venues. So it makes sense on a statewide basis. Now we did, as was coming up in conversation here, It did come up that there's one venue, the Ford Amphitheater in Colorado Springs, that was retrofitted into that neighborhood that is causing most of the conversation and the concerns. And these are folks where they did not have all of the noise, the music, and so on, not only to themselves within the city, but even miles beyond, so within the county. but three, four miles away that they're hearing this. So that issue specifically needs to be addressed independent of this bill, in my opinion. The bill ought to go forward. We ought to vote it into law or vote for the bill for the governor to decide whether it goes into law. And I would just encourage the folks locally in El Paso County to get together between the city and the county. and come up with an MOU, come up with agreements where they can address this one specific issue that has become a problem for their citizens within the city, within the county. But other than that, we ought to take the broader view and move forward, and so I urge a yes vote on 98. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, I appreciate the comments from the good Senator from Woodland Park and especially the good senator from Colorado Springs, who was doing her best to represent her constituents. And quite frankly, I heard her constituents that afternoon, as did my colleague Senator Ball, and I totally empathize with them. They probably have been inadvertently dealt a bad hand in the sense that the noise levels are exceedingly loud. And I can fully appreciate where they're coming from, which is all the more reason, which is the intent of Senate Bill 98, rather than somebody up in, like I said, Denver or wherever around the state. these grievances, and they are legitimate, these grievances can and should be addressed by the local government. In this case, the City of Colorado Springs City Council and or the county commissioners. Something that was brought up, and I think the good senator from Woodland Park was alluding to it, is there's nothing to prevent. In fact, I would encourage on a local basis the City of Colorado Springs City Council and the county commissioners to get together and have a memorandum of understanding, as it's called, to get together to work out some of these things so that the residents can have a peaceful life. but quite frankly the ordinance that is that is being the law that's being referred to was passed in 1971 the noise abatement act and that deals with the highest level is 55 decibels well 55 decibels right now is louder than what we hear a lot of times in this chamber So that law probably needs to be updated but taking away local control is not the way to do it And so with that, members, I appreciate your time and attention and respectfully ask for an aye vote on Senate Bill 98. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to lay over the balance of the calendar until Wednesday, March 18th.

Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move the committee rise and report.

Aye.

Thank you. Thank you. I'm glad you had that amendment as Amara Wilson.

Senator Mullica. Thank you, Mr. President. The committee has met and had a number of bills under consideration. Will the clerk please read the report? March 17, 2026, Mr. President, the committee that holds begs leave to report has had under consideration the following attached bills being the second reading thereof and makes following recommendations thereon. Senator Bill 62, as amended. Senator Bill 98, passed on second reading and ordered engrossed and placed in the calendar for third reading and final passage. Senator Bill 40, Senate Bill 112, Senate Bill 134, laid over until March 18, 2026 and retained their place in the calendar. Senator Mullica. Thank you, Mr. President. I move for the adoption of the report.

With a vote of 34 ayes, 0, no, 0, absent, one excuse,

Senate Bill 62 is the minute, 98, passed on second reading order in gross place, and counted for third reading in the final passage. Senate Bill 40, Senate Bill 112, Senate Bill 134, later over until 3-18-2026,

Joseph Kennedy Costello of Arvada, Colorado, to serve as a representative of the 7th Congressional District, occasioned by the resignation of Susan Lontine of Denver, Colorado, appointed for terms expiring July 1, 2029, Amanda Jelinski of Golden, Colorado, to serve as a representative of the 7th Congressional District, appointed. Kasana Littler of Morrison, Colorado, to serve as a representative of the 7th Congressional District, occasioned by the resignation of Sarah Porter of Salada, Colorado, appointed. William Kennard of Boulder, Colorado, to serve as a representative of the 2nd Congressional District, reappointed. Members of the Water Quality Control Commission, effective February 16, 2026, for terms expiring February 15, 2029. Charles Garcia of Denver, Colorado, appointed. Nicole Ponsolet-Johnson of Livermore, Colorado, reappointed. Christine Johnston of Littleton, Colorado, reappointed. Member of the State Housing Board, effective February 1, 2026, for term expiring January 31, 2030. James Martinez of Thornton, Colorado to serve as a Democrat and resident of the 8th Congressional District reappointed. Members of the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority Board of Directors effective July 2nd, 2025 for terms expiring July 1st, 2029. Beth Klein of Denver, Colorado to serve as a member with experience in mortgage banking appointed. Pat Myers of Denver, Colorado to serve as an individual experienced in real estate transactions appointed. Sylvia Ann Wirba of Boulder, Colorado to serve as a member representing the public reappointed.

Any discussion? Seeing an emotion as the confirmation of the appointments on the consent calendar, are there any no votes on the consent calendar?

Signing of bills.

Announcements.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Very good. Further announcements.

Thank you, brother.

Seeing none, Mr. Majority Leader.

Do further motion.

Opposed, no.