HB 25-1031: Law Enforcement Whistleblower Protection - Colorado

Revised (04/11/2025) → PA2 (04/10/2025) · 3 edits

MINOR

The bill was amended to add specific remedies for employees who face retaliation for whistleblowing in law enforcement. The changes require courts to order reinstatement with seniority status, back pay with interest, and compensatory damages for emotional distress and other losses.

Scope change

The scope of available relief for whistleblowers was expanded to explicitly include reinstatement, back pay, and emotional distress damages.

REQUIREMENT

Added specific remedies including reinstatement with seniority status for retaliated employees.

Added requirement for back pay with interest as part of relief.

Added compensatory damages for emotional pain, suffering, and inconvenience.

Rerevised (04/14/2025) → Revised (04/11/2025) · 2 edits

MINOR

The bill text was updated to reflect its current legislative status, changing from 'Rerevised' to 'Revised' and updating the amendment adoption language. A new section was added establishing a private right of action for employees whose protected activities contributed to adverse employment actions, allowing them to seek remedies after exhausting internal administrative procedures.

Scope change

The bill now explicitly grants employees a private right of action against employers who violate the law, expanding the enforcement mechanism available to workers.

TECHNICAL

Header updated from 'Rerevised' to 'Revised' with updated language indicating amendments were adopted on second reading in the Second House.

ENFORCEMENT

New section added creating a private right of action for employees whose protected activity was a contributing factor in an employer's adverse action, allowing them to seek necessary relief after exhausting internal administrative procedures.

PA1 (03/27/2025) → Rerevised (04/14/2025) · 4 edits

MODERATE

This version of the bill adds multiple new co-sponsors to both the House and Senate, updates the bill's revision status to reflect all adopted amendments, and includes new reading dates and committee assignments. The substantive policy content regarding whistleblower protections for law enforcement appears unchanged in this diff, with the main differences being procedural updates to the bill's legislative history and sponsorship roster.

TECHNICAL

Added 19 new House co-sponsors (Barron, Bird, Boesenecker, Bradley, Brooks, Brown, Caldwell, Camacho, Duran, English, Espenoza, Froelich, Garcia, Gonzalez R., Hamrick, Jackson, Johnson, Joseph, Keltie, Lieder, Lindsay, Lindstedt, Lukens, Mabrey, Marshall, McCluskie, McCormick, Paschal, Ricks, Rutinel, Sirota, Smith, Stewart K., Story, Titone, Weinberg, Willford, Winter T., Woog, Zokaie) and 17 new Senate co-sponsors (Ball, Bridges, Coleman, Cutter, Exum, Gonzales J., Hinrichsen, Jodeh, Kipp, Kolker, Michaelson Jenet, Mullica, Snyder, Wallace, Weissman, Winter F.)

Updated bill status from 'PREAMENDED' to 'REREVISED' to indicate all amendments have been adopted in the Second House

Added Senate 3rd Reading Unamended date of April 14, 2025 and House Amended 2nd Reading date of March 27, 2025

Updated bill summary availability date from unspecified to March 31, 2025 for House 3rd Reading Unamended version

Final Act (05/01/2025) → PA1 (03/27/2025) · 3 edits

MINOR

This bill was reorganized and reformatted from a final act version to a pre-amended draft version. The substantive policy content regarding whistleblower protections for peace officers remains unchanged, but the document structure was updated to reflect committee amendments and legislative session information.

Scope change

The bill's scope and applicability remain unchanged; it continues to protect peace officers from retaliation when they report violations of law or policy in good faith.

TECHNICAL

The document was reformatted from a final signed version to a pre-amended draft version, adding session information and committee amendment indicators.

Removed the final act signature notice indicating the bill had been prepared for Governor's signature.

Added committee sponsorship information and bill summary notes indicating this is an unofficial version with pending amendments.

Signed Act (06/03/2025) → Final Act (05/01/2025) · 3 edits

MINOR

This bill was finalized and prepared for signature, with the main substantive change being the removal of a provision that allowed law enforcement agencies to seek a stay of whistleblower lawsuits during ongoing criminal investigations or critical incident responses. The bill prohibits retaliation against peace officers who report violations of law or policy, provides private rights of action for affected employees, and establishes internal administrative procedures that must be completed within 180 days.

Scope change

The bill's scope remains focused on protecting peace officer whistleblowers from retaliation, with no change to the core protections or applicability criteria.

TIMELINE

Removed the provision allowing law enforcement agencies to request a stay of private right of action lawsuits when criminal proceedings or critical incident investigations are ongoing

TECHNICAL

Changed document formatting from draft bill language to final act language, including adding signature notes and correcting section numbering

Corrected subsection numbering from (I) and (II) to (1) and (2) for consistency with standard legal formatting

Reengrossed (03/31/2025) → Signed Act (06/03/2025) · 7 edits · Jun 3, 2025

MODERATE

The bill was amended to add new sponsors to the Senate and House rosters, expand the list of prohibited retaliatory actions against peace officers, clarify exemptions for departmental procedures, and establish specific timelines for internal investigations and private lawsuits. These changes strengthen protections for whistleblowers by ensuring internal complaints are handled within 180 days and allowing employees to sue if agencies fail to comply.

Scope change

The bill's scope was expanded to include additional peace officer sponsors and clarified that departmental administrative procedures do not violate whistleblower protections.

ELIGIBILITY

Added new sponsors to both the House and Senate lists, including representatives like McCluskie, Carter, Phillips, Valdez, Woodrow and senators like Ball, Bridges, Cutter, Exum, Gonzales J., Hinrichsen, Jodeh, Kipp, Kolker, Michaelson Jenet, Mullica, Snyder, Wallace, Weissman, Winter F., and Coleman.

REQUIREMENT

Expanded the list of prohibited retaliatory actions to include 'otherwise discriminate against a peace officer in terms, conditions, or privileges of employment' and added protections for disclosures made in good faith.

Added a requirement that law enforcement agencies must complete internal administrative procedures within 180 days after a report or disclosure, or employees may file a private lawsuit.

TIMELINE

Added a two-year statute of limitations for bringing whistleblower retaliation actions and clarified that the limitations period is tolled until internal administrative processes are complete.

ENFORCEMENT

Added provisions allowing employees to request reinstatement or attorney fees after a judgment is entered in their favor, with entitlement to a hearing before the court's determination.

SCOPE

Clarified that departmental administrative procedures such as suspension during an investigation or objective procedures for distributing assignments do not violate whistleblower protections.

EXEMPTIONS

Added exemptions for employees who disclose information they know to be false, disclose with disregard for truth, or fail to fully comply with internal reporting procedures.

Engrossed (03/27/2025) → Reengrossed (03/31/2025) · 4 edits · Apr 14, 2025

MODERATE

The bill was reengrossed to include additional co-sponsors and updated the version date to reflect amendments adopted during the House of Introduction. Substantive text changes appear to remove specific subsections regarding damages and affirmative defenses, though the full context of these deletions is limited in the provided excerpt.

Scope change

The bill's scope remains focused on creating a civil cause of action for peace officers, but the specific text regarding available damages and affirmative defenses has been altered.

TECHNICAL

Additional co-sponsors were added to the House sponsorship list, expanding the coalition of legislators supporting the bill.

The document header was updated from 'ENGROSSED' to 'REENGROSSED' and the date was changed to March 31, 2025, indicating the bill has been amended and re-submitted.

REQUIREMENT

Specific text detailing compensatory damages for nonpecuniary losses and the process for requesting reinstatement or attorney fees was removed from the visible excerpt.

ENFORCEMENT

Text defining an affirmative defense for employers was removed from the visible excerpt, which may alter the legal protections available to employers in disputes with peace officers.

Introduced (01/08/2025) → Engrossed (03/27/2025) · 5 edits · Apr 14, 2025

MODERATE

The bill was amended to add Senate sponsors and clarify whistleblower protections for peace officers. Key changes include reorganizing the damages section to allow for full relief including back pay with interest, and adding a requirement that employees exhaust internal administrative procedures before filing a lawsuit. The amendments also restructure how protected activities are defined and how retaliation claims are handled.

Scope change

The bill now applies to peace officers who report violations in good faith, with clarified protections against retaliation and discrimination based on their disclosures.

ENFORCEMENT

Added Senate sponsors Roberts and Pelton B. to the bill's sponsorship section.

Added a new provision allowing employees to request a hearing on reinstatement or attorney fees before the court makes a final determination.

REQUIREMENT

Reorganized the damages section to require employees to exhaust internal administrative procedures before seeking legal action.

Changed back pay accrual rules to allow for interest and specify that back pay is calculated based on the employee's seniority status they would have had but for the violation.

DEFINITION

Rephrased the definition of protected activity to clarify that reporting violations in good faith is protected, even if the report is a contributing factor in adverse employment actions.

Law Enforcement Whistleblower Protection

What changed between versions

How they voted

Actions timeline

Sponsors