For the last two years Senator Cathy Kipp, a Democrat from Fort Collins (along with her stalwart Republican companion, Representative Matt Soper from Mesa County) has run bills seeking to change the Colorado Open Records Act, commonly known as CORA. This is the law that spells out how anyone, including ordinary citizens, can get access to public records from their government, from local up to state.
The newest version, Senate Bill 25-077, isn’t quite as bad as its predecessor, but still stinks enough as is to flunk the smell test.
The 2024 effort was God-awful. It would have let records custodians label someone requesting records as “vexatious,” barring them from making records requests for 30 days. It would have excessively extended deadlines for custodians to answer requests.
Further, if a requester had multiple records requests that all fell within 14 days of each other, they could all be counted as a single ask. This seems an innocuous change until you realize that the free hour’s worth of the records custodian’s time you get on a CORA request would then apply to all of your requests over 14 days, potentially adding a huge cost to what are already outsized fees for records.
Perhaps one of the most aggravating aspects of this bill was that it would have let state government divide up Coloradans into the haves and have-nots, as there were different rules for “media” and ordinary citizens baked into the bill.
The 2024 version, despite amendments to make it more palatable, died in the legislature. I don’t think it was mourned by many.
New version still stinks
The 2025 version of the bill shows some promise at actual CORA reform, but all the flavoring and bright color the sponsors mixed in cannot kill the horrible medicinal taste hiding underneath. The bad parts from 2024 linger here.
Like before, though perhaps differing in number of days, the 2025 bill would extend the deadline for CORA requests, giving the records custodians extra time. The normal deadline now is 3 working days, it would go to 5. The deadline if “extenuating circumstances” exist is now 7 working days, it would go to 10. If the records custodian is not scheduled to work in the normal response window, that would now count as an extenuating circumstance and allow extra time.
The 2025 version brings back lumping multiple requests that fall in 14 days’ time into a single request with that same grand total of 1 hour’s free time.
And, as in 2024, this bill makes two sets of rules. One is for the people the government deems “media,” while the other is for everyday people. That lengthened response time? That’s not for the media. That’s for you!
Senator Kipp claims to be running these bills in a effort to prevent CORA abuse. A worthy idea, that ignores the reality that some bad behavior will always be with us. Attempts to legislate it away carry the potential for unintended (and sometimes intended) harm, especially to those who like myself often make CORA request, but are not credentialed journalists.
I have made mistakes or needed to refine CORA requests in the light of new details. This has meant multiple requests, sometimes in a 14 day window. I don’t do it to abuse anyone, it’s just reality. Absent the grace of one free hour per request, I and others might face costs high enough to deter getting the information we want. That, or lengthy 14 day pauses that might raise the price of participation enough to deter requests. Regular citizens don’t do CORA requests for a living, they do them around their living. Whether intended or not, rules like these have harm ordinary requesters that don’t happen to work as journalists.
Additionally, I’ve had records custodians play right on the boundary of doing something against the rules. If we allow more discretion on their part–such as who is news media, who isn’t, when they are scheduled or when they are off–surely there will be some custodians who take advantage. As an ordinary citizen, I might not have the time or financial resources to fight, nor the clout of a large public platform to embarrass the government that does it.
Add to this the repugnance of the idea that on top of all of this, the government privileges others to operate under special rules I can’t. Where is the fairness and even dealing here?
Some good ideas
To be fair, the 2025 bill is not as bad as it’s predecessor. In fact, there are some provisions in it that I support. It requires better disclosure of the CORA rules and policies for different government departments, it requires custodians to offer a breakdown of costs for record retrieval (possibly allowing one of those refinements I mentioned earlier), and it even allows people to pay for records by credit card in certain cases. A step in the right direction, all.
If these were the only things in the bill, I’d be first in line to support it. They aren’t, however, and if the only choice we have is an all-or-nothing one, I think the bad in this bill outweighs the good.
That said, if the sponsors were to prune away the bad spots, I’m on board.
Cory Gaines is a regular contributor to Complete Colorado. He lives in Sterling on Colorado’s Eastern Plains and also writes at the Colorado Accountability Project substack.
