Is HB26-1111 a smart ag solution or another TABOR workaround?

By Cory Gaines | Commentary, Colorado Accountability Project

HB26-1111: a beneficial enterprise?

At my last check, HB26-1111 (linked below) is awaiting either 30-day passage or the Governor’s signature.

This is another enterprise-creation bill. It creates an enterprise which charges a fee on pesticide producers and applicators. The fee will, among other things, be used to create a program where pesticide applicators can dispose of leftover pesticide.

Per a conversation I had with my State Senator Byron Pelton, as things stand now, prior to this bill, pesticide applicators must pay a disposal company to take leftover chemical, and that price is growing more and more each year.

The enterprise created in that bill steps in with a government-run business to take over the safe disposal of chemical. A couple of non-contiguous quotes from the bill’s fiscal note flesh this out:

“Starting November 1, 2026, the enterprise must impose a fee on pesticide applicators of no more than $50 per eligible product disposed through the program, annually adjusted for inflation. In addition, the enterprise must impose a fee on businesses that register pesticide products for sale and distribution in the state.”

“The program must offer commercial and private pesticide applicators with disposal services, including a means for safe disposal, education on proper and safe practices, and statewide events. Further, the enterprise must provide businesses that register pesticide products with decreased disposal costs and decreased liability for consequences associated with improper disposal.”

The idea here is a bargain (with some extra politics mixed in which I will take up shortly): the government-run enterprise would charge people — either directly or indirectly with pass-through costs — but that charge will result in net savings. You might pay $50 for that tank of pesticide, but you won’t have to pay hundreds to dispose of it later.

Whether this is what will happen, whether this bill creates worse unintended consequences later, remains to be seen. I can see arguments made for having the enterprise; it’s not a completely unheard of idea. When I repainted my car, I had a few partial containers of chemical left (clear coat, color, solvents, etc.). I thought getting rid of them would be horribly expensive, but it was actually free. I just popped into a local auto parts store, handed them over, and walked out. It was free because of a fee I didn’t notice on the receipt when I bought it. I paid a fee upfront to get rid of the chemical for free later. You do too when you buy paint. I believe this is also true with tires.

The reason to post this bill was because it provides entree into a discussion on rigidity.

I think an absolute no-compromises attitude is not always the best one to adopt. Looking at this bill, seeing an enterprise, and saying an automatic “no” might make you end up missing an opportunity — an opportunity to save money or ease a burden.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m still not a fan of enterprises. In general, I am opposed, but I think the lesson for me here is to evaluate them more carefully. Perhaps the lesson for lawmakers is to not abuse them (as they have done since the Colorado State Supreme Court ruling that said enterprises are a crafty end-run around TABOR limits) so as to create a reflexive “no.” Perhaps a short sunset process would be handy too. Three years and an evaluation. If it doesn’t make life easier and cheaper, can it.

One last thing to touch on, the politics I alluded to earlier. I’ll recopy part of the quote from the fiscal note here for convenience: “Further, the enterprise must provide businesses that register pesticide products with decreased disposal costs and decreased liability for consequences associated with improper disposal.”

While talking about this bill with Senator Pelton, he told me the pesticide producers and some other ag groups were behind this bill.

I can’t speak for the ag groups’ support, but I bet you my lunch that the bit above is why producers wanted this bill.

Who doesn’t love a good decrease in liability?

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/HB26-1111

https://ag.colorado.gov/home/about-us/ag-commission

READ THE FULL COMMENTARY AT COLORADO ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.