Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transit Worker Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate hearing on transit‑worker assault bill draws operator testimony and legal concerns; committee lays measure over
Summary
Sponsors and transit workers urged passage of House Bill 12‑90 to create a transit‑worker assault charge and make RTD safety officers eligible for certain training funds. The Office of the State Public Defender warned the proposed criminal language largely duplicates existing statutes; the committee laid the bill over for further work.
Senators and witnesses differed sharply over the best way to address rising assaults on transit workers during a lengthy Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on House Bill 12‑90.
Sponsor Senator Mullica described the bill as a targeted measure to protect transit operators and to create a new charge for assault on a transit worker, classed as a class 1 misdemeanor aligned with existing third‑degree assault penalties. Mullica also said the bill contains permissive language allowing the Regional Transportation District (RTD) to receive certain Proposition 130 funds in some circumstances and would authorize RTD safety officers as potential recipients of training and support funding.
A large group of transit employees and advocates testified in support. Light‑rail operator Jason Buckley, commuter‑rail engineer Kurt Hartnett, operator Stacy McConnell and others described repeated threats and assaults — including being spat on, chased, struck, and threatened with knives — and urged legal and enforcement changes. Michael Davies, government relations officer for RTD, said RTD logged 496 incidents meeting the Federal Transit Administration definition of assault on a transit worker in 2024 and asked the committee to approve the bill. “This bill takes a thoughtful approach…by balancing current penalties for assaulting an individual while clarifying that conduct such as spitting or throwing hazardous materials on a transit worker are included,” Davies said.
Opposition testimony came primarily from the Office of the State Public Defender. James Karbach told the committee the conduct the bill targets — spitting or throwing bodily fluids, causing bodily injury — already is criminalized in Colorado under harassment and third‑degree assault statutes and in other transit‑specific provisions. Karbach said the bill would add overlapping class 1 misdemeanor provisions, which could create confusion without raising penalties or improving enforcement. “Everything this proposes to do is actually covered by other statutes,” Karbach said, adding the new language may increase litigation over whether prosecutions must prove a more specific set of elements for transit workers.
Committee members probed the statutory drafting and enforcement issues. Senator Weissman and other members asked whether the proposed subsection would make prosecutions harder because it adds a status‑based element (the person being a transit worker) while keeping the same penalty as the general assault provisions. Witnesses and committee members discussed an existing Title 32 provision (cited in testimony as a statute protecting transit employees) and whether the new language would cause prosecutorial or equal‑protection issues if identical facts can be charged under different statutes with different elements.
RTD representatives described enforcement challenges across jurisdictions and varying police response times; RTD said it has expanded its post‑certified police force from roughly 20 officers to about 100 and aims for 150, but RTD officers do not have full arrest authority inside the City and County of Denver except in limited areas such as Denver Union Station. Amtrak conductors and Smart Transportation Division representatives also testified about assaults on passenger‑rail staff and supported including passenger rail in the bill’s definitions.
After lengthy testimony and detailed legal questioning, the committee laid the bill over for further work. Sponsors and committee members asked for additional drafting and more data about incident reporting, enforcement outcomes and jurisdictional response times before returning the measure for action.
Why it matters: Transit operators said assaults and threats are frequent enough to affect retention and service reliability. Lawyers warned that creating another, overlapping misdemeanor at the same penalty level may not improve enforcement and could have unintended legal consequences. The committee left the testimony record open and asked sponsors and stakeholders to resolve drafting and enforcement questions.
Next steps: The bill was laid over for further amendment and committee consideration; the testimony record remains open.
