Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Proponents present 'Ubuntu Act' initiative to expand protections for survivors of post-separation abuse

2723191 · March 20, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Proponents of proposed initiative measure 2025-26 No. 42, calling it the Ubuntu Act, told Colorado Legislative Council and Office of Legislative Legal Services staff on March 20 that the measure would expand protections, services and training for survivors of domestic and post-separation abuse, including tailored protection orders and culturally competent services.

Proponents of proposed initiative measure 2025-26 No. 42 — calling it the “Ubuntu Act” — told staff of the Colorado Legislative Council and the Office of Legislative Legal Services on March 20, 2025, that the measure would expand protections and services for survivors of domestic and post-separation abuse, strengthen training for judges, law enforcement and child welfare professionals, and create more permanent or “tailored” protection orders for survivors and children.

The hearing was a review-and-comment session required under Colorado law. Julianne Jensen, a staff member of the Colorado Legislative Council, opened the meeting by describing the purpose of the review and identifying the subject of the hearing: “we are here for proposed initiative measure 20 25 26 number 42 concerning protections regarding domestic abuse in tribal courts,” and then read the statutory preface for the proceeding.

The Office of Legislative Legal Services asked the proponents to supply the actual statutory text that would be added to the Colorado Revised Statutes, rather than a description of the proposal’s intent, and flagged constitutional single-subject requirements under Article V. Chelsea Princell, of the Office of Legislative Legal Services, told proponents that the initiative must include actionable statutory language and that the enacting clause and effective date provisions should follow constitutional requirements. Proponents indicated the default effective date tied to the…

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to keep reading

Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.

  • Unlimited articles
  • AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
  • Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
  • Follow topics and more locations
  • 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat
30-day money-back on paid plans