Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Employer Health Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Adams County staff flags legal risks as it backs large‑employer health‑fee bill with amendments
Summary
County staff recommended a support position on HB1327, a proposal to assess fees on large employers whose employees rely on state/federal health programs, while warning of likely legal challenges and noting the attorney general will not provide an opinion in hearings.
Adams County staff told commissioners on April 1 that they would support House Bill 1327, a proposal to assess a fee on large employers (those with roughly 500 or more employees) whose workers rely on state or federally funded healthcare programs. Staff said the bill was amended to add employer data‑tracking requirements, enterprise‑board authority to fund on‑site wellness centers and a mechanism allowing the board to adjust the fee year to year.
"It will go into an enterprise fund and then the board of that enterprise fund will in theory put that back into Medicaid funding for the state," a staff presenter said, describing the bill's intended flow of funds and noting that the board could also direct money into employer wellness centers.
Staff cautioned commissioners that HB1327 faces a difficult legal path. They cited prior efforts in other states, where similar measures were reported in the presentation as having been overturned or blocked in part on federal‑law grounds (the transcript references precedent involving "Orisa"). Staff also said the Colorado attorney general's office will not be providing a legal opinion for hearings on the floor, a development staff called significant for the bill's prospects.
County staff said some progressive fiscal organizations that might normally support such a measure had shifted to opposition, and that the bill had passed out of its initial committee on a party‑line vote and was heading to appropriations. Staff therefore recommended support with awareness that the bill may be vulnerable to litigation or other challenges.
The presentation included several implementation details added by amendments: enterprise‑board discretion to finance on‑site health facilities for employers, a requirement that employers report year‑over‑year data to track hiring and hours, and a fee‑adjustment mechanism so the board could reduce the fee if revenues grew rapidly.
Commissioners discussed values and practical risks. One commissioner said from a values perspective the bill "is a great idea," while others urged caution given the likely legal tests ahead. There was no formal public vote at the study session; staff asked commissioners whether to take a support position and commissioners present indicated support.
Next steps: staff will continue to monitor legislative progress and report back if the bill or its legal posture changes.
