[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:03] Senate National Resources Committee for Wednesday, May 27, will come to order.
[0:12] Even though I thought we had our act together in announced a change of order at the well earlier, we're going to have to be flexible on our bill order, as we have sponsors kind of scattered throughout the building and with different obligations.
[0:27] but we will go ahead and start with a number of
[0:36] of confirmations, and let me catch up with myself on the calendar.
[0:41] It is worth describing for the record that unique circumstances that we were on.
[0:46] We have agreed that we are doing confirmations without having the members here
[0:53] due to health and safety concerns.
[0:57] All of these, all of the people that were up for confirmation have been shared with committees
[1:04] as a committee has had an opportunity to reach out to members of the head concerns or questions.
[1:09] But with that, Mr. Vice-Chirst, Senator Rodriguez, would you care to walk us through some motions?
[1:19] Oh, that was good. I was waiting for attendance. Senator Sonnenberg, is that with you? How about we do some roll call?
[1:28] Sanitors, Coral.
[1:31] He's excused.
[1:32] Sanibur?
[1:34] He's excused.
[1:37] Sorry.
[1:39] Here.
[1:41] Half here.
[1:44] With that, now shall we do some motions on confirmation.
[1:48] Senator Rodriguez.
[1:49] Thank you, Madam Chair.
[1:50] I move to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation.
[1:53] the appointment of Mike J. Zimmerman to the coal-mined board of examiners for the favorable recommendation?
[2:00] It is a proper motion, Mr. Becker. Please take a roll.
[2:07] I'm excuse.
[2:09] I.
[2:10] Sorry.
[2:12] Are you good?
[2:12] Aye.
[2:14] Aye.
[2:15] That passes 40-01 excused in the objection to the consent calendar.
[2:21] Seeing a lot of them to the consent calendar, Senator Rodriguez.
[2:24] Thank you, Madam Chair. I move to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation, the re-appointment of Lauren Duncan to the Mindland Reclamation Board.
[2:32] It is a proper motion. Mr. Becker, please take the roll.
[2:37] Senator, or I'm excused?
[2:40] Aye.
[2:41] Sorry?
[2:42] Yes.
[2:44] Aye.
[2:45] Aye.
[2:46] That passes 40-0 with one excuse in the objection to the consent calendar.
[2:52] We'll put them on the consent calendar. Senator Rodriguez, please.
[2:55] Thank you, Madam Chair. I move to the full Senate with a federal recommendation.
[2:59] The appointments of Brian Koppam, Jeffrey Mandrich, and Miguel Badagon to the Colorado State Fair Authority Board of Directors.
[3:07] That is a proper motion, Mr. Becker. Please take the roll.
[3:10] Senator Square, I'm excuse.
[3:12] It's on a book.
[3:14] Story?
[3:15] Yes.
[3:16] Hi.
[3:19] Hi.
[3:20] That passes for to zero with one excuse any objection to the consent calendar.
[3:26] See none like that.
[3:28] Senator Rodriguez, please.
[3:30] Thank you, Madam Chair.
[3:31] I move to the full Senate with a federal recommendation.
[3:34] The re-appointment of Michael Gooseff and the appointments of John
[3:37] Ott and Charles Weber to the water quality control commission.
[3:40] That is a proper motion, Mr. Baker, please take it off.
[3:44] Senator, you're just going to excuse Senator.
[3:47] Sorry?
[3:48] Yes.
[3:49] What do you have?
[3:52] Aye.
[3:52] That is for zero with one excuse any objection to the consent calendar.
[4:01] All right.
[4:01] Well, we rushed through those.
[4:03] Thank you, team.
[4:05] And for any of the folks listening,
[4:08] And we certainly appreciate your commitment to serve the state of Colorado.
[4:13] We would have loved to have had time to chat with you all in person, but in exceptional
[4:17] circumstances we will thank you for your service over the air waves instead of in person.
[4:25] So thanks for your ongoing or perhaps your first service to the state on one of these boards.
[4:31] These commissions are really the unsung heroes of a lot of the work that the state does.
[4:38] With that, we can move on to our bills, we do have six bills to consider and let's just hop around, I suppose.
[4:52] Senator Sonnenberg, are you okay with starting on 1072 since you are president accounted for?
[5:00] I did ask Senator Bridges if he was okay with us proceeding without him and he said that that was fine.
[5:08] Sorry, I'm catching you a little bit off guard. It's payback for you not telling me I forgot to do roll.
[5:18] Thank you, Madam Chair, and if that's the only payback, life is good, so thank you.
[5:24] Madam Chair, this was an interim water committee bill, as you probably remember.
[5:29] One of those good ones that we thought was appropriate that needed pursuit, given the current status of things,
[5:37] where we have to cut and need to prioritize water funding as well.
[5:43] I would ask that we and move that we postpone indefinitely,
[5:48] and I do not remember the bill number.
[5:50] 1072.
[5:51] 1072.
[5:53] Thank you, Senator Sonnaburg, for that motion to postpone
[5:58] in definitely 1072.
[5:59] Is there anyone who wishes to testify on 1072?
[6:02] to see non-will closed testimony.
[6:07] I am assuming that there are no amendments.
[6:10] Seeing no amendments, we'll go ahead and close the testimony
[6:13] at the amendment phases.
[6:15] So we do have a proper motion to postpone
[6:19] a definitely 1072 at the sponsors request.
[6:23] Mr. Becker, will you please take the roll.
[6:25] There's more of an excuse, Senator.
[6:27] Sorry?
[6:28] Yes.
[6:29] Right where do you go?
[6:30] Hi.
[6:31] I'm John.
[6:31] I'm John.
[6:32] I'm Francis Request.
[6:34] That bill will be postponed and definitely on a 4 to 0 with one excused.
[6:40] Moving on, then let
[6:46] me see if we maybe we need to do a little bit more of a forceful request
[6:50] for Senator Corm.
[6:52] We have one of those sponsors here.
[6:56] Yeah, do you, Senator, a story would you like to go ahead and present House Bill 1191?
[7:03] I certainly will. I forgot that soon. It's on here.
[7:08] So just now. Oh, and Senator Story. Thank you for joining us on Ag today.
[7:13] Thank you for having me happy to be here.
[7:16] So yes, this outdoor recreation industry office bill was to
[7:22] codify and office that it already exists and just codify and
[7:28] statute, and it has been operational, and we decided that this was a bill that could wait until later in order to optimize our time here with focus on more critical bills.
[7:43] And so I wish to also lay this bill over until some other time, let's say August 20th.
[7:54] So I moved that we lay over Houseville 1191 to August 20th.
[8:01] That is a proper motion.
[8:02] Thank you, Senator.
[8:03] Story.
[8:04] Is there anyone here to testify on Houseville 1191?
[8:09] Seeing no one here to testify will close the testimony.
[8:13] Faith.
[8:13] Are there any amendments that people would like to offer on Houseville 1191?
[8:18] Seeing no amendments will close the amendment.
[8:21] phase. We have a motion on the floor. Mr. Becker, please take the role in that amendment
[8:26] is to lay over House full 1191 to August 20. Senator Sporov, excuse on the board.
[8:34] Aye. Sorry. Yes.
[8:37] Aye.
[8:38] It sponsors request aye. That motion passes on a 401 excuse. I guess that then leaves only me to move
[8:47] forward and as we await for Senator Finnberg to be able to join us to present his two bills.
[8:56] It does the committee have any objection if I just sit here to present the bills and move on.
[9:02] So let me, why don't we start with Senate Bill 121. Senator Rodriguez, would you like to take the
[9:10] chair while I do my couple bills? Yes, sure. I guess I don't know if I have a choice but I will do it.
[9:17] You say, no, we can ask you.
[9:20] That's true.
[9:21] Yes, thank you.
[9:23] Senate Bill 121, would you like to talk about your bill, Senator Donovan?
[9:28] Thank you.
[9:31] So if the committee will permit me a little bit of time on 121, not extensive,
[9:38] but so Senate
[9:39] Bill 121 was a bill that was getting quite extensive attention, I would say, at least certainly
[9:46] my part of the world on the Western slope. Before we temporarily adjourned and it also brought together
[9:56] and this is what I would like to express a month.
[10:00] A lot of pretty incredible and difficult conversations.
[10:08] In the waning weeks of my six years in this building, I would say the policy that this work eventually produced is some of the policy that I'm most proud of that I've ever written and pulled together.
[10:23] I would really like to express gratitude to the draft or Mr. Morris on this.
[10:32] We all know his talents and they certainly shown on this bill of bringing together a complicated
[10:42] issues in elegant and clear language.
[10:46] And so with the committee's permission, I will be quite transparent about what I would like
[10:51] do and would ask for your support. There is a strike below, multi-page strike below that was
[10:56] emailed to your yesterday six pages. I'm hoping that the committee will consider adopting
[11:01] that strike below so that it's on the public record and then after that I will ask for this
[11:07] bill to get laid over. The reason that I would like the strike below to be adopted and on the public
[11:12] record is because I think it has a lot of thoughtful ideas in it and we have the potential of
[11:21] Wolves being, we have two situations.
[11:24] We have the potential of a ballot measure this fall passing that would begin the
[11:31] wheels turning on Wolves' reintroduction.
[11:34] We also know that we have a pack of Wolves that have entered on their own in Northern Colorado.
[11:41] And so we have Wolves in the state.
[11:44] Both of those scenarios, we don't currently have any answers on the books of how to approach
[11:50] them arriving on their own forelegs or them arriving via helping them on their own forelegs.
[11:58] And so I would hope that the work of a diverse and quite honestly a post stakeholder group would be able to be publicly available as we consider the future of wolves in the state.
[12:15] So with that, Mr. Chair,
[12:20] if it's okay with you, I guess I would go ahead and move L001 to Senate Bill 121 and ask for it's the professional courtesy of it being adopted.
[12:33] Thank you, Senator Donovan. Is there any objections to the members of Senator Sonberg?
[12:40] Thank you, Mr. Sharon, I really don't know how to handle this, not to respect to the chairman
[12:50] and what she is trying to do.
[12:52] I appreciate what she's trying to do.
[12:57] I absolutely can't be on record to support the policy and that amendment.
[13:07] If you would like to have a conversation offline, I'm willing to do that, but I'm going
[13:14] to have to be in no outer respect, I understand where I'm at, I'm at the end of the
[13:21] end.
[13:21] Okay.
[13:22] Then I do object to the amendment.
[13:25] Okay.
[13:26] There's a motion on the floor to object the amendment.
[13:29] Mr. we take the roll.
[13:31] Senator's corps makes huge son of Berg.
[13:33] Story. Yes. Donovan. Yes. Oh. Yes. I don't know.
[13:41] Mr. Chair. Yes. That motion passes with the vote of three to one. Any other discussion
[13:49] on your bill? Senator Donovan?
[13:54] That portion is closed. Any discussion? Anybody would
[13:58] like to testify on this bill? Okay. Well, that portion is closed too. Let's move to the
[14:04] motion, do you would like to make a motion on your bill?
[14:06] Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.
[14:09] I moved to postpone and definitely Senate Bill 121,
[14:15] which I assume is the motion Senator Sonnenberg will vote for.
[14:19] There is a proper motion.
[14:21] Please take the roll.
[14:23] Senator's core, I'm excuse the sonnenberg.
[14:26] Aye.
[14:28] Yes.
[14:29] Honour.
[14:30] Ow.
[14:31] No, aye.
[14:33] I'm sorry that I am Mr. Chair.
[14:35] Hi, that motion passes the bill is laid over until August 1, 2020.
[14:41] Thank you for the presentation, and I give it back to the chair.
[14:46] Thank you.
[14:47] I think you have to walk me through one more because we need to do Senate Bill 201.
[14:52] Okay.
[14:54] Okay, we'll move to Senate Bill 201.
[14:55] Would you like to introduce your bill, Senator Donovan?
[14:58] Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[15:01] The classic species conservation trust fund bill is in front of us today. I do have an amendment for
[15:13] it. Mr. Chair, so I'll give the committee a heads up on that. If you haven't received it, I do have paper copies if that is something.
[15:22] you feel comfortable having but the species conservation trust fund bill is a bill that we
[15:32] annually do. I'm sure many of you are familiar with that this is not. This is just a bill that
[15:38] we do that largely gives this spending authority. It gives us a chance to review it and give a double
[15:46] check on if this, the priorities in this field rate and then it gives the authority for the
[15:52] Department of Natural Resources in consultation with other divisions to spend money on various projects.
[16:08] Senate, the amendment to this bill under obvious under these circumstances adjust the funding
[16:16] that's currently mentioned in the bill. So I would move Senate Bill 201 to appropriations
[16:23] and as well as move amendment L001.
[16:28] Thank you. Is there any questions for the sponsor?
[16:32] Okay. Thank you. Is there any, we don't have anybody signed up for testimony? Is there anybody
[16:36] in the audience elected testify? All right. And that step will move on to the amendment
[16:41] phase. Is there any discussion about the amendment? Seeing none, Mr.
[16:49] We've made take the roll. On adoption of the amendment, there's there's one.
[16:56] Senators. Quaram. Oh, is there any objection? Okay. Let's see that amendment,
[17:02] there's zero one is adopted. To the bill, was there a motion?
[17:12] Oh, we'll just go off
[17:13] to appropriations as amended? Is there any objections to that? Do we need to take roll?
[17:20] Okay. It could be your mind, Terry.
[17:26] I know. Motion, motion on the table is through
[17:29] a first Senate bill. 201 has amended to the Committee on Appropriations and that there's
[17:34] This is Laura McSkees and her son-in-brake.
[17:37] It's our story.
[17:38] Yes.
[17:40] Donovan?
[17:41] All right.
[17:42] Mr. Chair.
[17:43] Aye.
[17:44] With the four votes and one excuse, that is a proper movement.
[17:48] This bill will be going to appropriations.
[17:51] I give the gavel back to the chair.
[17:55] And thank you.
[17:56] Thank you, Senator Rodriguez.
[17:59] We know our missing a sponsor.
[18:02] Oh, but we gained a member.
[18:08] Well, let me text our missing sponsor, and I'm not very good at multitasking right now apologies.
[18:23] But let me take this time while we are waiting for Senator Frenberg to join us.
[18:31] And thank you Senator Marble for being here.
[18:35] I do think this is our last ag meeting of this, which kind of dawn on me this morning with a bit of abruptness.
[18:48] So I would like to take some time on the record to thank Mr. Becker.
[18:56] I think we are a very lucky committee to have a staff member as talented dedicated and knowledgeable as Mr. Becker.
[19:04] He has saved my height many times.
[19:07] I assume that statement is true for other members on the committee and not only has he always diligently helping me with Ag,
[19:17] but he's one of the go-to people in this building for any questions concerns or problems that I'm having.
[19:22] In fact, even just yesterday, he fixed a transportation issue that we had before I was even
[19:28] able to get back to my office.
[19:31] So the people of Colorado are incredibly lucky to have individuals like Mr. Becker working
[19:36] behind the scenes.
[19:37] They're truly the unsung heroes of the things that we are able to do.
[19:42] Our names get to be in the headlines, our bills, fill the newspapers, but we would not be
[19:46] able to do any of that without Mr. Becker.
[19:48] So, thank you, sir, for your continued service and everything you do, Senator Corrum.
[19:54] Well, thank you.
[19:54] I was going to say if he was a little younger, that started out like a eulogy, so.
[19:58] Hi.
[19:59] I guess.
[20:00] In the crisis of time, we're in it could be anyway. Anyway, thank you.
[20:06] Any other comments?
[20:10] I'd like to thank them for my first year in helping me now get through this committee with
[20:15] flying through carried on events, all amendments, all in one statement and rushing through their
[20:20] patience.
[20:23] And
[20:26] I also just would add an appreciation for this committee.
[20:30] this building can be contentious, frustrating,
[20:36] soul crushing on some days, but I have found
[20:39] this committee willingness to laugh at ourselves, work together on behalf of a group of citizens
[20:50] in Colorado that are, I would say, underrepresented, and so I think this committee bears an
[21:01] and I'm very proud to be a member of it, and I'm very proud of the work that the
[21:06] senators that serve on this committee have done. Even when we disagree, I know that everyone's
[21:12] heart is in the right place, and I think that's the most, the most that anyone can ask
[21:17] of a public servant, and I think you guys all serve your communities very noble. So, since
[21:22] appreciation for all of you and the service that you've had since the communities of Ag and
[21:28] rural Colorado for the past two years.
[21:32] With that someone can get Senator Sunberg some tissue,
[21:35] you guys can't see it, but he's crying. He's literally sobbing right now because of my remarkable
[21:39] words and we will bring Senator Finberg and Senator Marble up to present 197. Madam Chair.
[21:50] Oh, Senator Zumber, please.
[21:52] Why are you bringing those up?
[21:54] For some reason, in my box,
[21:56] I cannot find the amendment to the
[21:58] Species Conservation Bill.
[22:13] For with Senator Fendberg or Senator
[22:14] Remember, whoever like to talk and
[22:18] introduce 197, just for the record,
[22:22] we did receive some written testimony on this bill.
[22:27] And so that will be included as part of the official record.
[22:30] And we also have people to testify on this bill, so we will afford them that opportunity as well.
[22:36] But Senators, however, would like to start, please go ahead.
[22:41] Thank you, Madam Chair.
[22:43] I'll be brief.
[22:45] This is obviously a bill that was in the in the works and in the pipeline before we adjourned in March.
[22:53] Many bills are not a priority at this moment, given the circumstances, but this one I think
[23:00] was clear that it still needs to happen, while we can get it done.
[23:05] And that's because the federal government has finally learned a thing or two from the
[23:12] good people of Colorado and has started taking action when it comes to agricultural and industrial
[23:20] hemp and we want to make sure that we are in line with them. So that in the interim, we don't
[23:28] inadvertently no longer have a legal hemp program, but we need to make sure we are aligned with
[23:33] federal law so that we can continue to do what we do from the regulators perspective, but also
[23:38] from the producers and other folks in the chain continue to do what they do and run their businesses.
[23:47] There is an amendment that I think is from the Department that we'll discuss in a moment,
[23:54] and I will say there had been a lot of other conversations about potentially adding some
[23:58] other things to this bill, and I just want to say in the front end, I have not had the time
[24:04] to totally digest what all those conversations are.
[24:07] But I think folks are going to inform us of those in apologies in advance for not returning
[24:13] some people's voicemails and having some of those conversations that I'd normally would have,
[24:18] but obviously things have been a little crazy. But if the core of it, this bill really is
[24:23] just to make sure that Colorado is aligned with federal law and we don't inadvertently have
[24:29] an illegal hemp program running, come October, before we come back to the legislature in January.
[24:37] Senator Marble, anything you'd like to add?
[24:42] Thank you, Madam Chair.
[24:45] I just want to thank my co-prime sponsor for always being there on these bills.
[24:53] Please be an absolutely fantastic to work with.
[24:56] And if you recall, we passed a resolution.
[25:00] Earlier this year regarding the farmers and a lot of their grievances with the USDA and their definitions of certain things that they came through.
[25:14] And this bill is actually going a bit further with that resolution in trying to help the farmers and save what is left of the hemp industry and try to rebuild from here.
[25:28] The farmers deserve our support, they deserve our ear and the ability to know that we are doing everything in our power to make it available to them and easier for them to plant this season.
[25:47] So thanks to Senator Finberg or Majority Leader Finberg and for always being there for the things that are so important because these hemp bills for me have been very rewarding and very informative and I am very passionate for the farmers and very passionate about the hemp industry
[26:13] it has really taken some hits and bumps along the way because it has, it's a new thing and
[26:24] been declassified and with that still we have knee-jerk reaction from around the world to
[26:30] exactly what do we do with hemp? Well this bill is a good start. So I want to thank you Madam Chair
[26:38] and committee members and majority leader for always being a great partner on hand.
[26:47] Thank you very much Senator Marble. Are there any questions or comments from the committee
[26:53] before we move on to witness?
[26:58] All right, with that, we will go ahead and move on to hearing for
[27:02] witnesses. Senators, I will ask you to leave the desk. We have two witnesses signed up.
[27:10] If you're comfortable coming up both at once, we would ask you to join us if you want to come up one at one that's fine as well.
[27:18] But Ms. Thompson and Mr. Heiser is that correct?
[27:23] Yes, thank you.
[27:24] Wonderful. Thank you for coming in today.
[27:28] Ms. Thompson, if you would like to go ahead and shoot for somewhere between, oh, yes.
[27:36] That very subtle indication.
[27:37] to go first if you can fall between the two and three minute mark would be
[27:43] excellence but we'd love to hear your thoughts on 1997 please.
[27:47] Thank you very much Madam Chair and members of the committee.
[27:50] The sponsors I'm here I submitted written testimony in my capacity as
[27:56] Executive Director and Chief Legal Strategies for live well.
[27:59] I'm here in another capacity today. My name is Dean Heiser. I'm the chairman of the
[28:08] also the longest acting during the Association of Colorado.
[28:13] We had a relatively extensive legislative agenda,
[28:15] as a two-most of you did this year as well.
[28:18] And we have foregone that entire agenda,
[28:20] and I wouldn't be here unless what we were testifying about
[28:23] was really important to our membership and to myself as well.
[28:27] We fully support the chance process.
[28:29] We fully support the Legalization Hemp.
[28:33] We're here to support a possible amendment of the bill
[28:36] to address what our membership believes are serious deficiencies that place the public health at risk.
[28:42] There is no provision in Colorado law at present that provides for testing of industrial hemp products that are intended for human consumption on par with testing and labeling that is applied to marijuana products.
[28:59] In my written testimony, and I believe in some written testimony that you received from the open label project project,
[29:06] which is I would say they are a nonprofit third party, no skin in the game.
[29:13] Group that tested approximately 400 hemp products that are on the market and on the shelves today.
[29:21] It's scary to say that a substantial percentage of the hemp products that are on the shelf today have as much lead in them
[29:27] more than Flint Michigan's water supply, and so we are here to support an amendment that
[29:34] would align testing of hemp products with the comprehensive testing supervised by the
[29:43] CDPHE and the MED that applies to marijuana products. We believe it's fundamental for the
[29:56] support the mechanisms that were first voted last year.
[30:00] In the marijuana sense bill that started trying to align hemp and marijuana testing by requiring that all testing are all marijuana that are all hemp that is sold in marijuana stores has to be tested to the level of marijuana products.
[30:17] We believe that for purposes of this committee, we should take that to the next level and make sure that what people are putting in their bodies are tested to the level of what marijuana is tested.
[30:28] And without I will take any questions that you might have.
[30:34] Any questions for this witness?
[30:36] Senator, please.
[30:39] And I'm not sure if now's the proper time to ask about the amendment,
[30:43] or if you'd rather have Kristen test five first,
[30:46] and then maybe either one of them could answer whatever you're.
[30:52] You want to jump in as something and then we can loop it back to.
[30:55] Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair.
[30:58] Go ahead, I will also be speaking to the amendment.
[31:02] Hi, my name is Kristen Thompson.
[31:04] I'm here representing the Green Solution, which is a cannabis company.
[31:08] I want to lower your cannabis companies here in Colorado.
[31:12] You did receive written testimony from our one of the owners, so I'm not going to repeat
[31:18] that.
[31:19] I'm really going to sort of talk to history and the CBD products.
[31:24] So, one of really important pieces of background and why this bill is that under the federal policy, the Farm Bill, there was no distinction made between hemp, the agricultural commodity and hemp products.
[31:43] They're looped into one definition because Colorado has a very long history with hemp legalization long eight years.
[31:54] We have developed a different definition of hemp product to make that distinction.
[32:02] We want to make sure that those two things remain distinct in the law as Senate Bill
[32:09] 197 moves forward.
[32:12] That's why we really are pursuing the amendment on this bill that they get to move forward
[32:16] at the same time when we're talking about federal alignment.
[32:21] So, obviously, we are not, we've got a long history with hemp products here in Colorado.
[32:27] We're not talking about our farmers and our locally grown hemp products.
[32:34] We are talking about products coming from China, not born from our farmers or product manufacturers.
[32:42] A lot of those products you will see in the Clean Label Project tested hot for THC, as well as metals, microbials, etc.
[32:53] A lot of these products being to notoriety through helping children with seizures and other conditions.
[33:00] Years ago, actually, they were developed and regulated through the marijuana system,
[33:06] Even though the levels of THC were miniscule, that got separated a couple years ago, it is
[33:14] because of this history that the Green Solution and really the marijuana industry is a whole
[33:19] support that had been industry and the use of CBD is of a supplement, including allowing
[33:28] That's all your decision, but helping subsidize the hemp regulatory program through the use of marijuana money to over $10 million at this point.
[33:42] That includes the champ process that was said you've heard today set up in Senate Bill 220 last year, which was literally titled almost the same.
[33:54] alignment with the federal hemp policy, as well as Senate Bill 240, again from last year that
[34:00] really addressed this hemp products issue.
[34:04] We feel that, again, if we're going beyond that process right now, that it is important
[34:10] that we include the hemp products part of that.
[34:14] The health of CBD consumers is no more important than the health of the marijuana consumers.
[34:19] Because these products can be sold to anyone, meaning CBD can be sold to anyone, including
[34:26] consumers under the age of 21.
[34:29] So we do feel that the time is now and that public health should be protected.
[34:34] Thank you.
[34:39] Thank you.
[34:39] Senator Sonnenberg, back to you.
[34:42] Well, thank you, Madam Chair, and I guess maybe it covered both of you talked about the
[34:49] visions that are in that amendment,
[34:54] and why we need, or why you believe we need that is there's something.
[35:00] I guess I'm anxious when the sponsors come back up to have that conversation with them as well.
[35:12] Is it necessary for your industry? Or are you just looking out for the general public through this that they meet the same standards that you do?
[35:28] Please, whoever would like to answer that. Maybe just identify yourself for the record.
[35:31] I'm not sure if thank you, but what's that?
[35:35] Dean Heiser from the Maryland Industry Group.
[35:38] So it's more a matter of alignment.
[35:41] So it is a little bit about our industry.
[35:43] It's largely about public safety.
[35:45] So we are obligated as licensees under the marijuana code
[35:50] to have all of the hemp products that we sell in our facilities
[35:55] to be tested consistent with marijuana.
[35:57] And so what's been set up inadvertently, I believe in legislation today, is that
[36:05] hemp products that are sold in Colorado, subject to farm bill legislation and allegedly
[36:11] after the irregularation have very, very little mandatory testing that's intended to protect
[36:18] public health while at the same time, and those same products, if we bring them into our
[36:23] have to be tested at the same level as the marijuana products that we sell in our stores.
[36:30] So there is a business issue there trying to make sure that this stays aligned,
[36:35] because let's be honest, they are effectively the same plant,
[36:39] being sold for, especially on the medical side, effectively the same purposes.
[36:45] And so that's one reason, but the primary reason that I'm here
[36:49] that Megas concerned about this is, because of the clean label study that you have in your
[36:53] testimony, a lot of the products that are being sold in Colorado right now that are
[36:58] unregulated are dangerous. They're dangerous to children, they're dangerous to the public,
[37:02] and that has two concerns, one that general overall public health and safety protection concern
[37:08] that we're all here trying to address. But almost as importantly, those products in the
[37:18] that are CBD products are intermingled.
[37:22] And so any hemp products that poison a child
[37:24] or become articles of abuse for children
[37:27] because they're hemp products that are hot with THC
[37:29] and being sold at Walgreens,
[37:31] those will back across the entire industry
[37:33] of hemp and marijuana.
[37:36] If I could follow up, again, it's Kristen Thompson
[37:40] with the Green Solution.
[37:42] I do want to say, the marijuana industry definitely supports
[37:47] the hemp industry. In fact, we use a lot of hemp supplements now that we're allowed to. We
[37:54] were not allowed to for a long time, but use a lot of Colorado grown hemp in a number of our
[38:02] products to add flavor to increase the CBD content, etc.
[38:09] In what Dean is referring to is
[38:13] Starting this summer, we are also finally allowed to sell pure CBD products in our stores
[38:20] without THC. It used to be a requirement that everything sold in our stores had to contain THC.
[38:26] So we're allowed to work with farmers, work with CBD product manufacturers to sell pure CBD in our stores.
[38:35] We're excited about that.
[38:38] However, those products go through very rigorous testing.
[38:45] So it might be the same labeled product that you will see in a marijuana store that goes
[38:51] through all of this testing and is deemed safe by CDPHE as well as the marijuana enforcement
[38:58] division.
[38:59] That's not what we're asking for here.
[39:00] We're talking about CBD, or CDPHB regulation, and that those two labels might contain very
[39:12] different products.
[39:14] So yes, we want to make sure that they are the same, whether or not you get it at the
[39:20] green solution or at Walgreens.
[39:22] We want to make sure we have a robust hemp industry here because they are critical to the
[39:28] success of the marijuana industry as well, especially now that we are allowed to use products
[39:37] creator or extracts from hemp in our own products once they are deemed safe.
[39:44] Thank you.
[39:46] Senator Korm.
[39:46] Thank you.
[39:48] Senator Sonberg, let me address this a little bit to you from experience, because I
[39:54] product to a company that I and my oil has to meet 48 qualifications.
[40:00] Or they will purchase it. There's others out there that will take it no matter what. And frankly, it's got stuff in it that you wouldn't want an animal feed.
[40:12] So I think this is important that we do get the labeling down and get it down correctly, because I think there are some things. I liken this to the days of prohibition.
[40:27] You know, they were people out there that were making moonshine that was extremely quality stuff.
[40:33] There were people out there that were making products that would kill you.
[40:37] And, fortunately, the consumer, when it says on the bottle, it's CBD, you don't know the contents.
[40:43] So, for the sake of the interest industry, I think we need clarification as to what you're buying.
[40:51] Any other questions for these witnesses? What we have them?
[40:55] Thank you.
[40:57] Thank you.
[40:58] Thank you.
[41:00] Thank you.
[41:03] Is there anyone else who'd like to testify on this bill?
[41:10] Mr. Waters.
[41:11] Thank you.
[41:14] Madam Chair, members of the committee senators, Fendberg and Marble.
[41:17] My name is Benjamin Waters, and I represent the Hemp Agricultural Advancement Guild here in Colorado.
[41:22] I was not intending on testifying.
[41:25] I just received a copy of this amendment yesterday.
[41:27] I was intending on working on this issue in the interim with the marijuana industry.
[41:31] There are distinct differences between the hemp industry and the marijuana industry.
[41:38] I personally believe from experience that having worked in the marijuana industry,
[41:41] that a lot of the testing regimen that goes around marijuana, does go a bit too far,
[41:45] and that needs to be looked at and be right-sized.
[41:48] Our folks feel that this amendment, during a pandemic legislative session,
[41:55] is not right for prime time.
[41:57] We would rather have an interim conversation using an already existing process that exists within
[42:02] the Department of Ag called Champ, which put together the bill that you see before you today.
[42:07] I have already committed to senators Fenberg and Marble.
[42:10] I have committed to the folks who testified and several of the folks in the audience to
[42:14] this conversation in the interim, and despite that they decided to move forward with this amendment.
[42:19] Our industry opposes this, made of farmers, manufacturers, and processors.
[42:24] We do want to have a conversation about this in the interim because all of our companies adhere to robust food safety standards as regulated by the Department of Public Health and Environment.
[42:36] And we look forward to working on policy like this moving forward. We just do not like this particular amendment and we do not think it's ready for prime time.
[42:44] Happy to answer any questions folks may have.
[42:46] Thank you, Mr. Waters. Any questions for this witness?
[42:50] The very rare testimony for Mr. Waters.
[42:52] Thank you.
[42:57] Anyone else who would like to testify on this bill that didn't get a chance to sign up?
[43:03] All right, we will close the testimony phase.
[43:05] Senators, if you would like to join us, it seems was appropriate to kind of address
[43:13] move into the amendment phase since it seems like we are alluding to some, and I believe there's
[43:17] some others out there, so if you guys would like to, where would you like to start on that?
[43:22] Why don't I send her Findberg?
[43:23] How would you like to proceed with amendments?
[43:25] Thank you, Madam Chair.
[43:27] So, I think you'll have the amendments in the box
[43:34] or driver or something.
[43:35] I couldn't address it.
[43:36] I couldn't.
[43:37] The Senator's song, Barbara.
[43:38] Madam Chair, I don't have it in my box either.
[43:41] I don't know if anybody else is.
[43:43] I can get in the amendments in my box after we're passing them.
[43:47] And I don't know if that's an issue or what the deal is, but I'm not sure
[43:50] anybody has had the opportunity to look at the amendments other than myself.
[43:55] So maybe I'll just, men chair, if it's all right, maybe I'll just summarize what I think is
[44:00] going on with the amendments and then I think that'll be able to get you paper copies or
[44:06] get them into the box.
[44:07] But L01 and L002, I think our technical amendments from the department and then I think
[44:18] L005 is the amendment that that folks were referring to from the marijuana industry.
[44:28] The L001 and 2, I think are purely technical and happy to discuss it more, but they're
[44:35] from DOR and Ag, I believe, but L005 is the one regarding testing.
[44:43] And I will say, I've seen some of the research and some of the testing that has come out
[44:51] from the studies that are referenced, I think it's incredibly concerning.
[44:55] There's no question, I mean, the hemp industry, the CBD industry is clear.
[45:00] Really grown really fast, and there are some good players in the industry, and then there are probably some players that are trying to make a quick buck, and I think we're all aware of that in other industries as well.
[45:14] And so yes, I think we need to address this. I think we need to do more testing to make sure that the product people are buying for them, for the kids, for their health, is what they think it is, just like people expect in almost any other product that they put into their body.
[45:31] I do, and I'll be the first to say like next session, well I guess if the good people of Senate District 18 send me here next session, I will be the first one to pull a title to do a bill exclusively about this issue and set up a stakeholder process work on it to make sure we do it right.
[45:53] I do wonder, though, if, and I know there's an frustration from the industry that this has been discussed loosely, and it's just never totally materialized.
[46:03] And that's where, and I think that's valid frustration.
[46:07] The way L005 is written, I don't know that these rules would actually even get into place before we were able to pass a bill in January anyways.
[46:16] It says, within an implementation time frame established by the department, and the department is opposing this amendment.
[46:22] So I'm guessing they're not going to get on it right away.
[46:26] And I think, which one?
[46:28] Elzer 0.05.
[46:30] And so I think timeline was, these regulations are probably not going to be
[46:34] put into place and executed before we actually come back next session.
[46:40] And so I think the folks have my word.
[46:44] I mean, everybody that's testified for against this.
[46:47] consider friends and people that I work with on marijuana and hemp issues regularly. I am
[46:55] absolutely committed to making sure something happens and there's a testing protocol that
[47:00] protects people in Colorado. I do question that this is the right way to do it and if this
[47:05] would actually result in that testing regimen going into place any faster or more efficiently than
[47:11] would just simply pass the bill next year?
[47:14] Thank you, Senator Marble.
[47:17] I'm going to suggest if you're
[47:20] amenable of this, that we just take a very
[47:23] true Senator L5, because I think that we are now talking about
[47:27] amendments that we haven't had some eyeballs on,
[47:29] and maybe that's a Senator L2.
[47:31] Senator Corm, did you have them?
[47:34] No.
[47:35] Senator Marble, are you okay with that?
[47:36] I know you want to, or would you like to add comments?
[47:38] And then I just talking about amendments that we have
[47:40] Yeah, so I think we'd like to look at a real quick.
[47:44] Well, thank you, Madam Chair.
[47:46] My comment basically the same.
[47:47] Elzeras are one and two are technical pretty much put from CDA.
[47:52] We got those from Jordan Beesley.
[47:55] I have not seen 003, 005.
[48:00] I have not seen, but I have heard about it.
[48:04] And just want to make a couple of comments.
[48:06] Hampton and marijuana are separate industries and we have to be sure that we keep them separate.
[48:14] One of the things about testing an MED, MED is not precise.
[48:18] MED cannot come within the lines of consistency needed for Hampton to determine THC content.
[48:30] There are some available testing people out there companies that do a pretty good job, but they are not everywhere.
[48:43] The industry, the hemp industry is coming into its own, and I hear it time and time and time again.
[48:53] That hemp does not want to co-mingle with MED or marijuana in how it's grown, how it's regulated or who tested.
[49:05] And I agree that MED is not precise in its testing for THC, and we need to definitely keep these two industries separate for the farmers and their testing.
[49:21] and not have any D interfere or come in in any way because the farmers are not growing
[49:29] marijuana. The farmers are growing hemp and this started way back and I've had this
[49:37] conversation with hemp farmers for quite a few years now and this came when we took the
[49:44] definition of hemp out of the state constitution I got that in and it was at the request of the farmers and they said we are not marijuana
[50:00] Farmers, we're hemp farmers, and I said, I know, I know that and they go, then why don't you say that, and so I did, and I took that definition and we passed it through the legislature at God on the ballot and the people agreed to.
[50:19] We have to keep these two industries separate and they should not co-mingle or interfere with each other because the farmers are adamant.
[50:29] They are egg, they are ham, and MED should not have a place in their industry, and ham
[50:37] will come in on its own and develop its testing, which is better.
[50:42] Some of it already is, it's just that there's not enough of it, but they are doing a fine job,
[50:47] and I would say let's just keep trucking along, doing what we're doing, and let this fledgling
[50:53] industry come and develop on its own.
[50:59] That's what the farmers want.
[51:01] So I am 100% with the farmers.
[51:03] I get where marijuana is, but this is hemp.
[51:06] And we're making a very big distinction,
[51:08] and we did that when we took the definition of hemp
[51:12] out of the Constitution and out of it.
[51:17] So the people spoke, the farmers of spoke,
[51:20] We've spoken. I would just say in no on LZO-05 because the testing is developing and
[51:28] they're getting it done. And I agree, we shouldn't be shipping stuff in from China. We really shouldn't.
[51:35] And maybe we should just help those. That wouldn't break my heart at all. So, thank you,
[51:41] Madam Chair, and committee members. I appreciate it. Thank you, Senator Marvel.
[51:50] Senator
[51:51] Just to be transferring, the challenge is that the electronic method that we're supposed
[51:58] to use is called box.
[52:00] The amendments can't be available there until they are moved or made public because
[52:04] our staff has to treat them as confidential until we kind of get permission, so may a little
[52:11] bit of a hurdle there, but we do all have now one, two, and five.
[52:17] Just for this sake of overcoming technicalities, is there three or four out there?
[52:22] Yes, Senator Sonnenberg, sorry, Senator Quorum, I've now trumped you and I realize that, Senator Sonnenberg.
[52:26] Thank you, Madam Chair, would you please staff please release L-003?
[52:33] That's mine.
[52:34] Okay, so we're going to try our best to make three available.
[52:39] Is there a four that we should be aware of?
[52:43] Obviously.
[52:44] There's a four there, but maybe it's not going to be something that comes up today.
[52:48] Okay, so right now we have under consideration, but no motions yet on 1, 2, 3, and 5,
[52:56] Senator Corrum back to you while we figure out what we're doing with 3.
[53:00] Well, thank you, Madam Chair, and Senator Marvel, I totally agree with you that we need
[53:05] this separation. I also agree that we need testing. But the problem here is with the testing,
[53:12] there's no consistency to the test because you don't really know what you have to
[53:17] you have a finished product.
[53:20] So I'm a little uncomfortable with any amendments today.
[53:25] I would rather that maybe discuss them but to put amendments out today, I'm not real
[53:32] comfortable with till we've had time to review them.
[53:37] We can send her a son and bird, please.
[53:41] Senator Rodrigues, do you have your hand up?
[53:42] I just scratching my head.
[53:44] Well, we're calling on you anyways.
[53:46] Thank you, Senator.
[53:46] Senator, son and bird.
[53:47] So come up with something to send.
[53:48] Amendment three.
[53:50] Senator, son and bird.
[53:51] Thank you, madam.
[53:52] Sure.
[53:53] And I'm not sure how three and five interact.
[53:58] So here's.
[54:00] I'm in the camp quite honestly that we probably out of wait and continue to have you guys have these
[54:05] conversations with those stakeholders, obviously led in products is probably not a good thing
[54:13] and we probably shouldn't wait if we need to add that in there.
[54:20] With that said, on L001, we are going a different route with civil fines, putting it back
[54:30] into account rather than in a general fund, are we creating an incentive to find these industries
[54:39] rather financial incentive, you know, we don't allow the state patrol to do it, when they
[54:46] write tickets, that goes into the general fund, explain to me why we need one to go into
[54:53] back into the hamperage station.
[54:56] Fun.
[55:00] I don't know if I know all the context, but my understanding is that the industry supports this, because they actually want to have a funded enforcement mechanism to make sure that the program is successful.
[55:19] So, does it create an incentive?
[55:24] I don't think so, but I haven't heard that concern from the hemp industry.
[55:30] But I think it's appropriate.
[55:32] I mean, it's not something I'm, you know, going to die in the hill for.
[55:36] But this was something that industry minor saying is okay with and the department thought it was more appropriate.
[55:43] So,
[55:46] Senator Marvel, would you like to come in on this, Senator Son of the question on L-001?
[55:50] Thank you, Madam Chair and Senator Son of the, there is a fund that had been set up previously regarding hemp.
[56:03] And the money collected by that was to go back into the industry for research.
[56:08] And specifically to help build up that.
[56:11] Now I am, it's been, I may be two years since I've had this discussion and I just want
[56:18] to say I am not 100% sure that the industrial hemp registration program is that program,
[56:28] that actually takes this money and then through grants gives it to organizations to do funding
[56:36] for for the research in hemp just for hemp not for marijuana but also it was something
[56:45] very important and it seemed wise and a lot of the if this is that program the farmers
[56:52] were very in tune with lighting that money go there keeping it there and gaining access
[57:00] and funding more research for hemp industry.
[57:09] Okay, how would we like to proceed on this?
[57:17] Committee, do you feel like you've had enough time
[57:20] to review the amendments?
[57:24] I see one shaking head.
[57:25] Would people like to take a break to review the amendments
[57:28] or would we just like to move forward
[57:30] with the, for that we have, I will note that this does, this bill does go to appropriations.
[57:41] So this is not a final committee hearing before the four thoughts, Senator Rodriguez.
[57:48] I'd like to take a Senator or a five to have a discussion on this.
[57:53] Let's go ahead and do that, not to pressure anyone but to pressure everyone.
[57:58] And we do have to be out of this room at one 30, so that I'm confident we can accomplish
[58:02] that.
[58:02] We will stand in a Senatorial 5.
[58:05] We're not going.
[59:52] We are back from our Senatorial 5 in getting a little bit of a handle on the amendments.
[59:58] At this time.
[1:00:00] I don't think the committee will offer any amendments. We do have another committee and a little bit more time before this still gets the floor to work through some of these details. So, without objection from the committee and without further to the sponsors of any further comment, otherwise I'll go ahead and close the amendment face.
[1:00:21] Madam Chair, I just say I'd work committed to working with anyone and everyone before this gets to the floor to figure out these amendments and make sure we're doing the right thing.
[1:00:30] But yeah, I think for sake of time, let's get into a approach.
[1:00:32] You know, we can buy ourselves at least a few days for the floor.
[1:00:37] My name's sorry.
[1:00:38] Finance.
[1:00:39] The more the mayor.
[1:00:40] The more the mayor.
[1:00:41] All right.
[1:00:43] All right.
[1:00:43] Well, we will close the amendment face then.
[1:00:46] closing comments from the sponsors before we entertain a motion to move this bill on to finance
[1:00:54] Thank you for that Senator Rodriguez. Do you have a motion for us?
[1:00:58] Thank you madam chair. I move Senate bill 2197 to the finance committee
[1:01:04] With a favorable vote
[1:01:08] Mr. Record. That's a proper motion. Please take the roll. I hate to send anybody to finance, but I
[1:01:17] Yes
[1:01:21] That goes on the consent calendar and finance.
[1:01:23] That goes on the consent calendar and finance.
[1:01:25] Thank you guys.
[1:01:26] Don't make sure it never gets on them.
[1:01:28] Didn't get on the consent.
[1:01:30] And we look forward to hearing where we land by the floor on these amendments.
[1:01:35] So thank you for being willing to continue these conversations.
[1:01:39] Okay Senator Finnberg, our final bill of Senate Agriculture for this session is yours.
[1:01:44] it is Senate Bill 189.
[1:01:49] Please tell us about your bill and we will go from there. If you want
[1:01:55] to tell us about our bill. Thank you, Madam Chair. Senator Sunberg requested to be at
[1:02:00] as a co-prime to this next bill.
[1:02:04] It's going to the floor.
[1:02:08] Madam Chair, this is a conversation that I think can continue into the future and I look
[1:02:16] forward to working with the Good Senator from Sterling on that issue by I asked that the
[1:02:22] committee postponed this bill indefinitely and will bring it back up later.
[1:02:30] Senator Sonnenberg, for a soap box die-tribe and a motion?
[1:02:33] just a simple motion that by golly if you're going to give me an option to make a motion
[1:02:38] I moved the postponing definitely said about 189 that is a proper motion and this is
[1:02:45] why I love ag oh yes we do have a motion on floor I assume no amendments because the
[1:02:53] amendment faces anyone want to testify that did not is there anyone here to testify
[1:02:57] on this bill and we did not receive any written testimony for this bill either that I'm
[1:03:02] So, we do have a proper motion on the floor Mr. Becker. Please take the roll,
[1:03:08] save her this moment committee as our last vote to have her.
[1:03:12] What a feel to kill for the last, baby.
[1:03:18] Pass.
[1:03:22] I, I, I, I, I.
[1:03:35] Yes.
[1:03:35] be postponed indefinitely at the sponsors request.
[1:03:43] Any further comment from the committee
[1:03:48] before we go dark. With that we are adjourned. Thank you.