Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Eminent Domain topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rep. Richardson’s bill would curb investor‑owned utilities’ early use of eminent domain; committee postpones it
Summary
Representative Richardson introduced HB 12‑78 to require investor‑owned, PUC‑regulated utilities to obtain route‑specific local approvals (or successful PUC/court appeal) before filing condemnation. After hours of testimony from utilities, state agencies and dozens of landowners and local officials, the committee ultimately postponed the bill indefinitely.
Representative Colin Richardson introduced House Bill 12‑78 as a narrowly framed sequencing reform to limit when investor‑owned utilities can initiate compulsory condemnation for high‑voltage transmission projects. "This bill makes condemnation the final step to acquire necessary land, not the opening move," Richardson told the committee, stressing the measure applies only to PUC‑regulated investor‑owned utilities and not to municipal utilities or cooperatives.
The sponsor said the bill would preserve PUC oversight and judicial review while protecting property owners from what witnesses described as premature court filings. Richardson cited recent district court rulings and said knowing a final, approved route is important for courts to evaluate whether a taking is a valid public use.
State and utility witnesses opposed the bill. Will Toor, Executive Director of the Colorado Energy Office, said the bill "would make transmission slower and less likely to be constructed," arguing that the current balance — local land‑use review with a PUC appeal backstop — is important for weighing local and statewide needs. Holly Velasquez Horvath, Regional Vice President for State Affairs and Community Relations at Xcel Energy, told the committee Xcel generally seeks voluntary agreements and said the bill could lengthen timelines and make critical upgrades harder to complete.
Landowners and local officials offered hours of testimony in support. County commissioners and dozens of property owners from Albert County, El Paso and Conejos described condemnation or immediate‑possession filings they said were filed before local hearings or route approvals. Landowner Don Gray said the process forced some residents to spend life savings on legal costs. Albert County officials described offers and tactics they said undermined local review and negotiation.
The committee adopted four sponsor amendments clarifying that a successful PUC or judicial overturn of a local denial counts as an approval (L001), that voluntary negotiations may proceed at any time (L002), that utilities should commit to early and meaningful engagement with disproportionately impacted communities (L003), and that a confusing expedited‑process provision be struck (L004).
After extended debate about property rights, statewide electrification needs and the potential cost and schedule impacts on transmission projects, the committee first declined to advance the bill as amended. A subsequent motion to postpone HB 12‑78 indefinitely passed on a reverse roll call. The committee recorded its votes at the end of the hearing; the clerk announced the motion had passed and the item was removed from active consideration for this session.
Next steps: HB 12‑78 was postponed indefinitely by the committee. Proponents said the testimony shows a need to revisit statutory sequencing; opponents said the current system, including PUC authority, balances local and statewide needs.
