Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Family Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee postpones baby‑changing station bill after industry and parent testimony
Summary
House Bill 26‑1130, which would require diaper‑changing stations in many public restrooms while exempting small businesses and government buildings, drew supportive parent testimony and opposition from apartment associations; the committee ultimately postponed the bill indefinitely after a failed motion to move it to the Committee on the Whole.
Sponsors introduced House Bill 26‑1130 as a constituent‑driven measure to ensure caregivers have sanitary, safe baby‑changing options in public venues such as restaurants, retail stores and theaters. Sponsors emphasized exemptions for small businesses (fewer than 25 employees or less than $3.5 million in annual revenue), age‑restricted venues, and government buildings, and said units can often be installed at modest cost.
Several parents described uncomfortable and unsanitary experiences changing infants in public and urged the committee to act. "This legislation ensures that all Colorado caregivers have the dignity of a sanitary space," a sponsor said. A parent and sponsor also urged that changing stations be provided in both men's and women's restrooms.
Representatives of the apartment industry — Stacia Foreman of the Apartment Association of Metro Denver and Andrew Hamrick of the Colorado Apartment Association — registered concerns in an amended or opposed position. They argued the bill's definition of 'restroom accessible to the public' could capture common‑area restrooms in multifamily properties (leasing offices, clubhouses, pool restrooms) where residents already have private bathrooms and demand for a changing station is limited. The witnesses said retrofit costs and space constraints in older buildings could be onerous and suggested limiting the requirement to new construction or exempting multifamily housing.
Committee members asked multiple questions about exemptions, how the definition applies to apartment clubhouses and leasing offices, and whether the policy amounts to a building‑code change. The drafter from the Office of Legislative Legal Services clarified that 'restroom accessible to the public' would include indoor restrooms open to customers or public visitors but would not require individual living units to have changing stations.
After extended questioning and debate, a motion to send HB 26‑1130 to the Committee on the Whole failed on roll call. The vice chair then moved to postpone the bill indefinitely; with no objection the committee agreed and HB 26‑1130 was postponed indefinitely.
