Policy Committee supports initiating legislation on traffic cameras, background checks

CML's Policy Committee met Oct. 17 to review proposals for CML-initiated legislation. Members voted to recommend CML’s support for the following six proposals, which were approved by the CML Executive Board on Oct. 24.

• Placement of Sex Offenders in Mental Health Transitional Living Facilities: This proposal would require the Colorado Department of Human Services to continue its current policy of refraining from placing registered sex offenders in Mental Health Transitional Living Facilities (authorized by HB22-1303) within 1,000 feet of a school.
• Lodging and Vacancy Taxes: There are three separate, but related proposals concerning to lodging and vacancy taxes — 1) Authorize municipalities to refer short term rental taxes to voters, with revenues dedicated to workforce housing; 2) Authorize municipalities to refer residential vacancy tax questions to voters; and 3) Authorize municipalities to adopt real estate transfer fees, with revenue dedicated to local affordable housing and workforce housing.
• Municipal Exemption from Massage Facility Background Check Requirements: This proposal would amend HB24-1371 (More Uniform Local Massage Facility Requirements) by exempting municipalities from the law's requirement that local governments adopt a local process for conducting background checks for massage facility owners and employees.
• Expand Municipal Use of AVIS: This proposal would allow municipalities to use automated vehicle identification systems (AVIS) on interstates within their jurisdiction and collect revenue generated from its use. 
• Regulation of Noise: CML staff proposed an amendment to the Noise Abatement Act in response to the recent decision of the Colorado Supreme Court in Hobbs v. City of Salida. The proposal would clarify the exception to remove the limit on the use of government property (including by a permittee or lessor); retain the exception for any cultural, entertainment, athletic, or patriotic event on nonprofit property; and specifically allow for local permitting of similar events on private property that can exceed the limits of the Act.