After a nail-biter at the Capitol, Colorado lawmakers on Thursday pushed through a bill that would force outside employers to hold lawmakers' jobs while the legislature is in session, then shipped it to the governor's desk. The proposal, approved 33-31 in the House on April 2, after a 23-11 Senate vote on March 16, says employers must grant unpaid leave to members of the General Assembly during regular or special sessions. Backers say the change could open the doors for teachers, firefighters, and other working-class residents to serve. At the same time, critics argue serving under the gold dome is supposed to mean personal sacrifice.
What SB26-087 Would Do
According to the Colorado General Assembly, SB26-087 would create a specific right to legislative leave and job protection for "qualified members" of the General Assembly who have outside jobs. Those lawmakers could step away from their regular work for the length of the session, and their employers would be prohibited from firing them for requesting or taking that leave. When the session ends, employers must return them to the same job or an equivalent role. Sponsors listed on the bill include Sens. Katie Wallace and Byron Pelton and Reps. Kenny Nguyen and Mandy Lindsay, who say the structure is designed to make it more realistic for working people to consider running for office.
Votes and the Debate
The fireworks really started when lawmakers dug into what public service should look like in practice. The House ultimately squeezed out a 33-31 vote, with opponents arguing that serving in the legislature is inherently a sacrifice and supporters countering that current salaries and schedules effectively sideline people who do not have high-paying, flexible careers. "We must remember that this job is a public service," Rep. Ava Flanell said in opposition, as supporters warned that the chamber should better mirror the economic realities facing everyday Coloradans, as reported by the Denver Gazette. The Gazette reported that in the House, all Republicans and nine Democrats voted against the measure, and in the Senate, every Republican except Byron Pelton opposed it.
Exemptions, Timing and Job Protections
The Legislative Council's fiscal note explains that only lawmakers who meet certain economic and management thresholds can claim the new protections, according to the Fiscal Note. To qualify, a member cannot directly manage more than 20 people and must have an annual individual or household income at or below 120% of the area median income for their county. Employers that are required to remain nonpartisan are carved out of the requirement altogether. The bill text sets a delayed start date: qualified members could begin taking legislative leave on January 1, 2027, while those serving four-year terms when the law first takes effect would not be eligible until January 1, 2029. The measure largely leaves decisions about health insurance continuation, paid leave and similar benefits to employers; the leave can be unpaid, partially paid or paid, and the law does not require benefits to accrue while the lawmaker is away.
How Colorado Compares And What Employers Should Watch
As the Denver Gazette noted, Colorado would not be breaking entirely new ground. States including Maine, Minnesota, Oregon and Nevada already require employers to offer similar unpaid legislative leave. Labor and employment attorneys say this bill would add yet another category of protected leave for Colorado employers to track; a Husch Blackwell analysis hosted on JDSupra highlights the income and management caps, along with the January 2027 go-live date, as key details for human resources departments to watch. For voters keeping an eye on representation at the Capitol, the debate lands squarely in a longer-running conversation about whether Colorado's citizen legislature is still accessible to working families.
The bill now heads to Gov. Jared Polis for his consideration. If he signs it, one structural barrier that has kept some working Coloradans from seeking office would shrink, at least on paper. In the meantime, lawmakers, employers and their lawyers are already sifting through the fine print on notice rules, temporary coverage plans and what this shift might mean for who can realistically afford to trade a day job for a seat in the General Assembly.
.jpg){kind=link}