2026 Primary Election: Candidates for State Legislature

We as a state, should guarantee that our data systems are secure and accessible only as metadata to help guide state policies that help Coloradans. We must prevent all sharing of information with federal entities, especially individual identifying information. We can use our authority to strengthen security, to protect data, and to have meaningful enforcement of state law.

Colorado needs to strengthen data security requirements for state agencies to protect LGBTQ+ and at-risk community members through expanded use of enhanced encryption and decentralized data storage, implementation of rigid protocols to reduce collection of Personal Identifiable Information (PII) to that absolutely required for service delivery, and implement and enforce contractual provisions requiring vendors to follow at a minimum the same data protection and breach notification standards as the state.

I would work to enact legislation prohibiting voluntary sharing of sensitive data regarding sexual orientation, gender identity, reproductive healthcare, or immigration status by state agencies with federal agencies and other third-parties; as well as expanding the Colorado Privacy Act (CPA) to fully include state agencies and institutions of higher education, and strictly enforcing C.R.S. § 6-1-713, which requires public and private entities to develop a policy for the destruction or proper disposal of paper documents containing personally identifiable information. I would also support banning the use of state-collected data for automated decision-making or profiling related to "sensitive data" (e.g., sexuality, health, citizenship) as defined in the CPA.

To protect sensitive personal data that could be used to target or harm at-risk communities, specifically LGBTQ+ individuals, Colorado should ensure that current privacy laws include, or are expanded to include, information about sexual orientation and gender identity with stiff penalties for entities that knowingly share prohibited information. This should take place in tandem with enhanced confidentiality policies, including data encryption, limited access, and auditing of who is accessing this information.

Colorado should also require that these entities put clear consent protocols in place so that individuals have control over which aspects of this data are shared and with whom; and safeguards, including education and support, should be provided to adolescents and families to prevent unintended, harmful disclosures.

As a legislator, I would look into best practices and strong legislation introduced and passed in other places and, most importantly, listen to and work with affected stakeholders, subject matter experts, and colleagues to draft and support legislation that strengthens privacy protections and oversight, while also considering the fiscal impact of these mandates. I would center the needs of my constituents, and be open to feedback and legislative priorities that will help to ensure that members of Colorado’s at-risk communities are protected.

To answer the first part of the question, I would work with the Attorney General to use existing privacy laws that are already in pace to sue and investigate in any wrongdoing. I would also use my legislative authority to attack future conflicts that may arise such AI systems and health, as well work with orgs and individuals in the community to see their concerns around private protection

Colorado laws already aim to protect personal data held by state agencies, but there are some ways that the practices could be strengthened. One way could be to mandate that when state agencies are implementing new processes or adopting new technology that collect or handle private information, they have completed a privacy impact assessment to ensure that personal data will be protected. Formal assessments are a best practice that do not appear to presently be required.

As a software engineer and Councilmember, I view data privacy as a matter of structural security and human rights. We must build a "digital fortress" to ensure state agencies cannot be weaponized against LGBTQ+ Coloradans or at-risk communities.

To achieve this,

We should apply HIPAA-level protections to all Personal At-risk Information (PAI) held by state agencies. This ensures that identity documents and social service records are treated with the same strict "minimum necessary" rules as medical files.

The best way to protect data is not to collect it. I will mandate a statewide audit to eliminate unnecessary collection of gender identity or immigration status on state forms.

I will sponsor legislation prohibiting state agencies from fulfilling "bulk data" requests from federal authorities without a specific Colorado judicial warrant, creating a legal firewall against identity-based targeting.

I will advocate for an independent Privacy Oversight Board and a private right of action, allowing individuals to sue if their sensitive data is unlawfully shared.

My father’s union values taught me to stand against overreach. In the State House, I will ensure our laws are "coded" to protect people, not profile them.

Colorado must treat personal data as something that can either protect people or put them at risk. I would require agencies to collect only the data they truly need, secure it with strong encryption and tight access controls, and strictly limit when it can be shared. I support legislation like SB 26-070 to restrict the use and expansion of FLOCK license plate reader systems and prevent mass surveillance that can be used to track vulnerable communities. Sensitive information should never be handed over in ways that could be used to target LGBTQ+ people or other at risk groups.

The legislature should codify firm limits on data sharing, create a private right of action for misuse, require transparency when agencies receive federal data requests, and mandate regular independent security audits. Oversight must include the Attorney General and legislative review to ensure no state collected data is weaponized against LGBTQ+ people or other vulnerable Coloradans.

Privacy is always important, and all the more so in the setting of a persecutory federal regime. I'm cautious about a universal simple approach to a highly varied set of data situations, but by and large, we should ensure that this data is only used for public good, and I would consider requiring that this information not be shared with law enforcement or any federal agency without a subpoena.

We should regulate and enforce data collectors to prioritize privacy and not sell data for a profit. Colorado must enshrine 4th amendment protections at the state level and reject the SCOTUS backed third party doctrine that allows law enforcement to circumvent warrants and buy personal data from corporate entities, and the consequences for breaking this law should be steep.

All Coloradans deserve to access health care, education, and public services without fear that their personal information could be weaponized by any administration or outside actor. LQBTQ+ communities are routinely targeted in this Administration, and data breaches put people at risk.

Sensitive personal data—especially information related to sexual orientation, gender identity, HIV status, reproductive and behavioral health, immigration status, and participation in public programs— must be protected as high-risk data held in trust. As a data-scientist, I think about confidentiality and anonymity, especially for special and protected populations. In the legislature I would:

- Practice data minimization: collect only what is necessary, limit how long it’s retained, and prohibit use for unrelated purposes.

- Implement strong safeguards that include encryption, multi-factor authentication, role-based access controls, and audits with real consequences for misuse.

- Limit Cross-agency data sharing by default and require formal privacy agreements.

- Limit disclosures to only those that are legally required, and subject to heightened review.

- Engage impacted community in policy development.

We can and should reduce what we collect, harden how it’s stored, tightly limit who can access it, and put real oversight in place so it can’t be weaponized by any administration or outside actor.

One of the immediate things I think of is retention cycles. I currently work at Charles Schwab for my day job, and our servers only hold information for a 2-year retention cycle due to security and compliance concerns. If the state can implement relative procedures, it can lower the pool of data that can be at risk.

Ironically, some of the most vulnerable databases are government databases. They're often outdated and convoluted, and actually easier to break into. The state can direct more funding and pass legislation to increase database security funding and raise standards. Our most vulnerable' information should also not be stored in some of our most vulnerable systems.

By strengthening any existing laws, and closing any loopholes.

The federal overreach is particularly worrisome and requires additional backbone. Frankly, a lot of the standing up to the federal government will have to come out of the Attorney General's office.

Any occasion or action that targets any community to harm them should be prosecuted under existing law. Any weaknesses or loopholes in those laws we need to look at tightening.

It is important to absolutely build on CPA (Colorado Privacy Act); to make it stronger, we would use explicit prohibition on government access without a warrant and a mandatory data minimization that require entities to retain only the minimum personal information on everyone.

In the current political climate, sensitive data isn't just administrative, it’s a target list for federal overreach. I refuse to let our state’s records be weaponized against the LGBTQ+ family and friends I’ve spent my life championing.

I will use legislative authority to build a digital firewall, legally prohibiting state agencies from sharing personal identifiers with federal entities intent on targeting our residents. I will mandate radical data minimization, ensuring the state only collects what is essential and purges records the moment they are no longer needed. I will establish an independent privacy oversight committee to conduct unannounced audits of data agreements, closing loopholes that let private contractors exploit our digital lives.

We aren't just protecting databases; we are protecting people. Colorado must be a sanctuary where you can live your truth without fear of government surveillance.

Protecting sensitive personal data is a civil rights issue. Colorado collects deeply personal information related to health care, education, identity documents, and social services. That data must never be used to target or harm LGBTQ+ people or other at-risk communities.

First, I would work to close gaps in the Colorado Privacy Act by extending similar protections to state agencies. Government-held data should follow strict data-minimization rules, require clear consent where appropriate, and prohibit disclosure to outside entities—including federal agencies—without a warrant or clear legal mandate.

Second, we should ban the purchase or sharing of sensitive personal data with third-party brokers and require transparency reports when agencies receive requests for information.

Third, I would strengthen oversight by empowering the Colorado Attorney General's Office or establishing an independent privacy watchdog to audit state systems and investigate misuse.

Finally, we must explicitly treat sexual orientation, gender identity, and health information as highly sensitive data under state law, with heightened protections and penalties for violations.

Colorado can and should lead in protecting privacy, dignity, and safety for every community.

No sensitive information should be shared with the current federal administration or any other state without a proper judicial subpoena or warrant. I would also support legislation that would set up a department within the AG's office that would review any subpoena or warrants, and they would be required to challenge any such order that is intended to put our people at risk.

As a State Representative for House District 33, I believe that we should protect this data from any federal overreach. I would be a proponent of any legislation to restrict state level agencies and organizations with turning over any private or personal data to the federal administration or out of state entities. Vulnerable communities such as Transgender people privacy and information should be safeguarded.

I one hundred percent of the time support nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people in all aspects of living in Colorado. I am concerned about the ability to access gender affirming care and the pressure that the federal government is putting on our hospitals and clinics who has historically offered this care and are pulling back due to threats of losing funding. We may have to find ways to support these hospitals and clinics, even while in a dire budgetary situation, to keep access to this life saving care available to Colorado kids and adults. I am also concerned about the continual attacks on the trans community, especially kids, in sports and schools. I feel that there may be things we can do to strengthen protections for kids. We also have to make sure that AI systems are not algorithmically making decisions and discriminating against LGBTQ+ people in accessing housing, jobs, education and healthcare.

Absolutely! Although Colorado law already provides non-discrimination protections for LGBTQ+ individuals across employment, housing, public accommodations, education, and healthcare under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA), and recent legislation has expanded protections by banning discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity, as well as mandating gender-affirming care coverage in insurance, more needs to be done.

I will support legislation that addresses the barriers created by religious exemptions that allow health-care providers to refuse LGBTQ+ patients care and business owners to deny services. I will also support expanded recognition of non-binary and gender non-conforming individuals to ensure they are equally protected, and ensure equity in access to resources in rural areas, especially for transgender people who live in conservative areas of House District 13.

Yes, I support maintaining and strengthening Colorado’s nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, and healthcare.

A couple key areas where there are gaps in current state law that require urgent legislative action include (1) the specific exemption under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act for employees of religious organizations that are not supported by public funds; (2) exemptions under the Colorado Fair Housing Act for owner-occupied units, non-brokered single family homes, and owner renting rooms; (3) ensuring that social service providers and homeless shelters appropriately serve LGBTQ+ people by providing them shelter and resources based on their gender identity (e.g, housing for transgender or non-binary people in gendered spaces with which they may not identify).

The enforcement of Colorado’s nondiscrimination laws can also be strengthened through legislative action that requires that affected entities, at a minimum, adopt policies that address mandatory, ongoing training for employers, educators, healthcare providers, and housing and other entities serving the public regarding LGBTQ+ inclusion and anti-discrimination policies.

Yes, I support maintaining and strengthening Colorado's nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ individuals in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, and healthcare. I do think privacy protection laws in the scope of the LGBTQ+ community could be strengthened. As well looking at current case law such as 303 Creative and other cases to see where laws can be strengthened.

Yes, I support maintaining the protections provided by the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act that prevent discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender discrimination. While the state law is clear, the actual experiences of individual Coloradans isn’t always perfect and enforcement often relies on the victims’ ability to report. As some federal policies shift or become unclear under the current administration, it is necessary for Colorado to clearly define and codify nondiscrimination policies and equitable access into state law so that educators and healthcare providers, especially, will not be at risk of prosecution for providing services and giving care to LGBTQ+ Coloradans.

I absolutely support maintaining and strengthening Colorado’s nondiscrimination protections. As a Councilmember and software engineer, I believe our state’s legal "code" must guarantee that no one is excluded because of who they are or whom they love.

While Colorado has made great strides with laws like the Kelly Loving Act, being "legal on paper" isn't the same as being "protected in practice." We must address these urgent gaps:

We must treat Personal At-risk Information (PAI) with HIPAA-level urgency. I will fight for legislation that prevents state-collected data from being weaponized by federal or out-of-state entities to target LGBTQ+ individuals seeking care.

Nondiscrimination laws are toothless without a robust Civil Rights Division. I will advocate for increased funding to clear case backlogs and provide real remedies for victims of discrimination.

As a software engineer, I am uniquely concerned about how AI Algorithms can "silently" discriminate in hiring, housing, and lending based on proxy data for LGBTQ+ identity.

I will champion policies that ensure schools remain safe, affirming spaces where a student’s privacy and identity are respected by default.

I am ready to partner with the RMEQ to ensure Colorado remains a leader in equality and dignity for every resident.

Yes. I strongly support maintaining and strengthening Colorado’s nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, and healthcare under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act. Colorado’s protections are among the broadest in the nation, and we must keep them that way.

However, enforcement is a serious gap. A recent 5280 investigation found that from fiscal 2016-17 to 2024-25 the Colorado Civil Rights Division issued “probable cause” findings in only about 2.7% of nearly 9,600 workplace discrimination cases, far below rates in other states, suggesting that many meritorious complaints never receive meaningful investigation or resolution. This low rate can discourage people from pursuing claims and leave discrimination unaddressed. (link posted at end)

Addressing this is one way to improve enforcement, clarifying standards for probable cause and strengthen investigative capacity so that the Division can better identify credible claims of discrimination and provide real remedies. Increasing funding for the Civil Rights Division, expanding trained investigators, and requiring clearer reporting on outcomes will help ensure nondiscrimination laws are not just on the books but effective in practice.

I 100% support these nondiscrimination protections. I would welcome guidance from content experts on what gaps currently exist.

Yes, I do. Namely, we need to continue to provide protections for extremely vulnerable queer youth, who often must find safe adults in places like school, and ensure that they and the teachers/faculty they have put their trust in are protected from retaliation. Bills like the current SB 018 (Legal Protections for the Dignity of Minors) are great examples of ensuring queer minors have rights and recourse when their parents do not have their best interests in mind and don't respect their identity. I also commend SB013 in expanding cohabitation rights and reduces grounds to charge criminal offense based on 'bigamy'. This bill is a great win for many, but particularly for the poly community.

Yes — I absolutely support maintaining and strengthening Colorado’s nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, and health care. Colorado has made important progress, but protections only matter if they’re clear, enforced, and felt in people’s daily lives.

We need to make sure the Colorado Civil Rights Division has the resources to investigate complaints quickly and fairly. Delays and red tape discourage people from speaking up. In health care, protections should be explicit and comprehensive, including clear safeguards against discrimination and protection for access to gender-affirming care.

Housing is another urgent area. LGBTQ+ youth and transgender Coloradans face disproportionately high rates of housing instability, and we must ensure shelters and transitional housing programs are inclusive and affirming.

As a former Jeffco School Board Director, belonging and safety for kids has been central to my work. I’ve seen firsthand how much it matters when students feel safe, respected, and supported at school. LGBTQ+ students deserve clear policies that protect them from discrimination and bullying and ensure they can participate fully in school life.

Colorado should continue leading with laws that are strong, enforceable, and centered on dignity and safety for every community member.

Absolutely. I think SB26-018 which was just introduced that has the parental custody provision added into it is great- It fosters parental accountability. When it comes to enforcement, it always comes down to access. I see this personally with our immigrant community that cannot fight bad business owners or bosses because they're undocumented. This kind of inaccessibility is reflected throughout our other marginalized communities such as those who are differently abled and neurodivergent, as well as our LGBTQ+ community members. The state can work with agencies across the state to ensure ease of access and use for complaints and introduce legislation that foster more anonymity for reporters in order to pursue more safety when blowing a whistle.

I'm going to be blunt - I'm woefully undereducated on this topic.

Yes, I support maintaining our current nondiscrimination protections.

It's the gaps in law where I would turn to y'all to be brought up to speed. So to speak.

I like that used the urgent. Urgency is always missing in legislative bodies, isn't it? It is, of course, by design. Still, it's aggravating.

I keep talking about "go along to get along" Democrats. Some, perhaps many, "have" to be that way, as their district might be +/- 5 D. Commerce City is +/- 22. I can stand and scream and walk planks and my community will have my back. I've been knocking doors. Every day Dems, they want some damn action.

They have a sense of urgency.

My entire campaign and myself believe the freedom and equality in every single person and fairness when it comes to employment, housing, education, healthcare, and other accommodations and to fight and maintain these non-discrimination laws. Both state and federal law are broad, and our job would be to narrow it down to make it more specific and just for everyone, so discrimination, hate or violence is not permitted anywhere in schools, workplaces, etc.

As a firefighter, I never ask someone who they love before saving them from a fire. My support for equal rights in housing, jobs, and healthcare comes from that same belief. Everyone deserves to be safe and treated with respect.

We have made strides through recent legislation, like the Kelly Loving Act. I will use my legislative authority to strengthen the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act by raising non-economic damage caps, ensuring that justice for victims of discrimination is not a luxury reserved for the wealthy. Furthermore, we must address the material reality that LGBTQ+ Coloradans, particularly youth and people of color, face disproportionate housing insecurity. I will champion universal housing vouchers and dedicated funding for safe shelters.

Finally, we must stop insurance companies from using excuses to deny healthcare to trans people. A right is not real if you cannot access it. I am running to make sure that safety and dignity are a reality for every person in our community.

Yes. I strongly support maintaining and strengthening Colorado’s nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, and healthcare.

Colorado’s existing anti-discrimination framework under the Colorado Anti‑Discrimination Act prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression in key areas like employment, housing, and public accommodations.

Despite this progress, gaps remain. We need stronger enforcement mechanisms so that victims of discrimination can access justice and damages without excessive delay. We also must ensure that protections are clearly applied in educational institutions and health care settings and that individuals know how to file complaints with the state Civil Rights Division. Expanding public awareness and ensuring local governments can act where needed helps close enforcement gaps.

Finally, as attacks on LGBTQ+ rights increase nationally, Colorado must stay vigilant by protecting gender-affirming care, supporting inclusive school policies, and ensuring housing access for LGBTQ+ Coloradans. I would champion legislation that closes loopholes, increases remedies for discrimination, and strengthens enforcement so all Colorado residents can live and work free from bias or fear.

Absolutely yes! Too often, we allow religious organizations, that receive state or local funding, to circumvent nondiscrimination protections. The laws must be strengthened to ensure that any entity that receives funding as well as any entity of public accommodation must not be allowed to discriminate against any person for any reason. Religious organization should also not be allowed to discriminate in hiring decisions, unless that position is 100% religious in nature. I would argue that shouldn't be allowed either, but federal law does currently allow for that. If a position is not actively engaging in proselytizing, then nondiscrimination should apply.

I affirm and pledge to maintain and continue to protect Colorado's LGBTQ+ community from any form of discrimination. I believe the current legislative issue would be the Protecting the Freedom to Mary Act and to continue to support people seeking gender affirming healthcare. Hospitals and clinics should continue to allow and permit transgender youth seeking healthcare.

I touched on this above though being on the Health and Human Services committee for the past 5 years, time and time again I have seen bills come forward that seek to strip basic human rights and protections from people in our state. I defend Coloradans by vehemently speaking out and voting no on these hurtful policies. Elections matter and it is critical that we maintain a majority of people who will strongly and without hesitation defend trans peoples rights to life saving health care. People need to understand that gender affirming care IS literally life saving health care.

To defend Colorado’s laws protecting gender-affirming care, I would seek to apply the provisions of SB23-188. This law forbids Colorado state agencies from aiding in out-of-state prosecutions, honoring subpoenas, or executing warrants against patients or providers engaged in legal, Colorado-based care.

I would call on the Attorney General and support their efforts to challenge federal attacks on the state’s right to regulate medicine and protect sensitive medical records from inclusion in national monitoring, enforce HB25-1309 requiring insurance coverage for necessary care, including hormone therapy, surgery and mental health services, defend professional licensing of providers, and preserve Colorado’s status as a "refuge" state for people seeking gender-affirming care.

I would also work to enact, maintain and strengthen policies that provide access to gender-affirming care in state-regulated environments like foster care and juvenile detention centers.

I would defend access to evidence-based gender-affirming care by focusing on strengthening privacy protections. For providers and patients of legally protected healthcare, this would include working with stakeholders and colleagues to introduce state legislation that would strengthen SB 25-129, for example, extending prescription label privacy to gender-affirming therapies including specific hormone therapies and blockers.

Further, as described in my answer to the first question on this application, I would work with stakeholders and colleagues to strengthen data privacy through legislative action, including the requirement for enhanced confidentiality policies for organizations handling related sensitive information, addressing data encryption, limited access, and auditing who is accessing the information.

I would defend these protections by codifying laws into Colorado statute to ensure that if you are in our state, you will always be protected. As well work with friendly surrounding states to make uniform laws such as we have for the rights to seek an abortion here in our state or if you come from out of state. In terms of funding, I would like to make a mechanism to have money from lawsuits go to a fund to help the LGBTQ+ community Ogs do what they see fit to help their regions.

I believe that medical decisions should be made by patients and competent medical professionals. State laws should support and protect individuals and providers in making medical decisions based on evidence-based research. If the state is going to regulate and/or provide funding for medical care in Colorado, such regulations and funding should support evidence-based treatment equitably, whether it be pediatric, orthopedic, cardiac, geriatric, or gender-affirming care.

Defending gender-affirming care requires a strategy that combines legislative firewalls with technical data security. I will ensure Colorado remains a sanctuary for evidence-based medicine through three key actions:

I will sponsor legislation to ensure that out-of-state subpoenas, civil judgments, or investigations related to gender-affirming care are legally unenforceable in Colorado courts. We must protect patients, families, and providers from external legal overreach.

Federal pressure often targets data. I will fight to treat data strictness across all state agencies, prohibiting the sharing of healthcare identifiers with federal entities without a specific Colorado warrant.

I will work to diversify state healthcare revenue to ensure that vital services are not compromised if a federal administration attempts to "pull the purse strings" to force compliance with discriminatory policies.

In the State House, I will lead with a "security by design" approach to ensure medical decisions stay between a patient and their doctor and never a politician.

I will fight to defend and protect Colorado law protects access to evidence based gender affirming care. That means opposing any attempt to restrict care through state legislation, insurance regulation, Medicaid policy, professional licensing rules, or budget decisions. Lawmakers should not override established medical standards or interfere in decisions made by patients, families, and qualified providers based on ideology.

If elected, I would support the Attorney General in aggressively defending Colorado’s protections in court and resisting federal overreach that attempts to undermine state authority. I also support strengthening shield laws so Colorado providers and families are protected from out of state investigations or civil actions related to lawful care provided here.

This is both a civil rights and healthcare access issue. Gender affirming care is supported by major medical organizations and recognized as medically necessary for many patients. Colorado must remain a state where evidence based medicine guides policy, and where transgender people can access care safely, legally, and without political interference.

I deeply believe that the locus of decision-making belongs with patients, families, and their medical team. And I have more than enough exposure to trans adults and youth to understand the stakes, and the risk of harm from restricting access to health care. As a physician, I am well-positioned to advocate with my legislative colleagues and other actors about the true facts around this care, and the importance of protecting the autonomy of patients.

Trans rights are human rights, and when we attack trans rights, we attack all rights. The reality is that cis people benefit from gender-affirming care, too, and we all suffer when we do not defend the most vulnerable. I think it's important to be able to humanize these issues to folks who aren't part of the queer community (or don't have a lot of exposure to it) and to recognize that most people believe that their neighbors should have access to life saving healthcare. I would stay focused on the humanism of the issue and not get distracted by virtue signaling politics that attempts to create a boogey man out of every day people who just want to live a free and healthy life. There can be no compromise on this.

Colorado law recognizes that decisions about gender-affirming care belong to patients, families, and qualified medical providers. I support keeping those protections in place.

If elected, I would work to ensure access cannot be limited through changes to state law, regulations, or funding decisions. That includes making sure our statutes are clear, consistent with established medical standards, and strong enough to withstand legal challenges. I would also support protecting providers and patients from unnecessary interference so they can focus on care, not uncertainty.

If federal pressure or court challenges arise, Colorado should respond thoughtfully and firmly, working with the Attorney General to defend existing law and ensure that our policies reflect evidence-based medicine.

For all families, this is very personal. It’s about their child and their well-being. What they need most is stability. Young people and adults who rely on this care deserve steady support and clear rules — not sudden changes that create fear or uncertainty.

My focus would be on maintaining a health care system where decisions are guided by medical expertise, patient well-being, and respect for families — and where people can access care safely and without fear.

Colorado is in a particular place- It's easy to say that we can ensure funding will stay there, but in a world of TABOR, nothing is guaranteed. These conversations must always start with repealing TABOR.

Colorado must also become self-sufficient, as of right now despite our budget hole, Colorado isn't a donor state, nor "welfare" state for lack of a better term. It's almost flat, which is a good start. Colorado can bolster its finances to ensure our programs have enough funding without federal subsidization. The two pieces of force the Trump administration is using to pressure states is funding and military. If Colorado balances its budget to fall flat every year, it will dissipate the leverage the federal government has on us. An incredible idea I also heard from Representative Titone is that if Colorado builds relationships with other states, they can band together and refuse federal taxes leaving the state. That money can then be used to insulate the state.

State leg and regulation, again, I'm woefully undereducated.

Funding, now here's where the rubber meets the road. This is what the Colorado leg can most effectively do.

It seems like every year is a budget crisis down there. (I live just north of Denver and I have a "map bias" of "looking down" on those south of me and "looking up" to those north of me. For example, if you live in Loveland, I'd be happy to drive up and see you.)

This year's budget crisis, holy hell.

For 20 years, they've been telling government agencies to "do more with less." That can only go so far, even with AI. (Let's not get started on AI!)

It's sad that sometimes laws are passed and then ignored. This then requires court enforcement, which seems unnecessary and stupid. But often, it must be done.

This sounds like a case by case question. My office will be open to all, especially communities under attack like the LGTBQ+ community. I stand with you.

It would be something for all of us to defend. One way would be to get the youth and education system involved to codify non-discrimination guidance in schools, create clear state enforcement independent of federal vagaries. Also, to include healthcare, insurance coverage, and local ordinance support.

Gender-affirming care is life-saving healthcare, and I will defend it with the same urgency I bring to an emergency call. My friends and family in the trans community deserve to live without fear that their medical needs will be used as a political weapon.

To protect these rights, I will uphold Colorado’s status as a sanctuary state. I will support legislation that blocks state agencies from cooperating with out-of-state investigations or federal pressure to restrict care. We must ensure that our state "Shield Laws" remain unbreakable and that no Colorado resources are used to harm our residents.

In the legislature, I will vote against any attempt to strip funding from clinics or change regulations to make care harder to access. Healthcare decisions belong to patients and their doctors, not politicians. I will treat any attack on this care as a direct threat to public safety.

A close family member of mine just had GA care in a western state so this is near and dear to me. Colorado has taken important steps to protect access to evidence-based gender-affirming care, and I fully support defending those protections. Under laws like the Reproductive Health Equity Act and recent shield protections, Colorado recognizes that decisions about medical care belong to patients, families, and qualified providers—not those in perceived power.

If elected, I would oppose any state legislation that restricts or defunds medically necessary gender-affirming care. I would work to ensure that Medicaid coverage and state-regulated insurance plans continue to include this care, and that no regulatory body can quietly undermine access through rulemaking.

To defend against federal pressure or court challenges, we must make our statutory language clear, grounded in equal protection principles, and aligned with Colorado’s constitutional commitments to privacy and nondiscrimination. I would support funding for the Colorado Attorney General's Office to vigorously defend these laws in court.

Finally, I would work with medical professionals and civil rights organizations to ensure policies reflect the strongest available medical evidence. Protecting gender-affirming care is about protecting health, safety, and the fundamental dignity of every Coloradan.

Colorado needs to enact state-level single-payer health care system or partner with other, blue western states to enact a regional system. One key point of any system is that science-based care, including gender-affirming cars must be covered in its entirety. In the interim, such care must be fully funded by the state, even federal dollars are pulled for the care. The AG's office also must be funded sufficiently to fight federal overreach and take whatever action is needed to ensure that care for our people is preserved.

I would continue to support and use SB23-188 to protect providers and patients from federal overreach and seek to bring back hospitals and public health providers to come back to the table to assist and provide gender affirming healthcare.

I would proudly and openly stand up to support gender affirming care in protests, speeches, and rallies. Trans rights are human rights.

We must continue to speak up for the institution and importance of PUBLIC schools and how every student must be supported in a way that allows them to thrive. Fighting for school funding matters, fighting to make sure public school funding does not slip into private school funding. Keeping the DEI conversation going, because it is important. State law, funding and oversight protections should reflect our values in this area.

I know from lived experience that ensuring safe, inclusive schools is essential for the well-being of students. Legislation should require implementation and enforcement of comprehensive anti-bullying and non-discrimination policies, mandatory staff training on diversity and compliance with its tenants, provision of mental health support, and creation of affirming environments for all students.

State strategies for accomplishing these requirements would include provision of resources and funding for development of inclusive and culturally appropriate curricula, establishing and supporting Gay-Straight Student Alliances, providing access to counseling and mental health services (especially in rural areas), and fostering a school culture that values diversity, ensuring every student feels a sense of belonging. Oversight of these efforts should include collection of data that would allow monitoring of the school environment and accountability measures to prevent discrimination and harassment.

To ensure that public schools are inclusive and safe for all students, I would work with education advocates and colleagues to take a multi-pronged approach. Some possibilities include requiring school districts to have policies that address restorative practices; reallocating or increasing financial incentives and resources for educators that commit to employment with a district where the demographic of their educators do not match that of their students; and modifying the Colorado School Finance Act to increase categorical funding for students with higher needs or including a factor to address recommendations from the State’s educational adequacy study. Some of this increased funding to schools could be directed to required professional development for all educators, administrators, and support staff that addresses student safety, belonging, and well-being.

State law, funding, and oversight all play significant roles; with rule-making by the State Board of Education, Colorado Department of Education initiatives and programs, and local school district policies having a large impact through interpretation, implementation, and oversight of state law. Funding plays the most important role, as the ability for schools to function as a strong community hub that can adequately support student needs requires maintaining or increasing funding for public schools.

I personally believe we should encourage Ag's office to look into nondiscrimination laws were there are complaint in regard to school districts. I also believe we should update SB21-217 with a prevision to keep a database if ICE or any federal officials that break our state laws that we have already created to protect our most marginalized.

I am a mom of four. Two of my children have graduated from Colorado public schools and two are currently attending. I also have two transgender nieces in another state. Making sure schools are safe and inclusive is important to me as a mother and aunt foremost, and that will influence how I prioritize this as a legislator. CADA requires schools to not discriminate and should be providing a blueprint by which administrators and teachers can be acting to protect students. I don’t think funding should be pulled from a school due to the behavior of site administrators and teachers, but there should be a path of accountability that runs through school boards and district administrators that lets them know that failure to address–and possibly remove–problem personnel can affect state funding. Local boards and superintendents need to have local control, but nondiscrimination is not a local decision. State law must be followed to receive state support.

As a kid from a marginalized background, I know that a "right" doesn't exist if you don't feel safe enough to claim it. We should design systems that are structurally designed to protect them. In the State House, I will lead with three priorities:

I will codify strict data privacy firewalls, ensuring a student’s immigration and/or gender-affirming care records are shielded from federal or out-of-state entities without a Colorado-specific warrant.

Inclusivity requires people, not just posters. I will advocate for permanent, per-pupil funding for bilingual counselors and LGBTQ-affirming mental health staff. We must treat social-emotional safety as a core infrastructure requirement, not a "one-off" grant.

We must close the "compliance gap" between state law and classroom reality. I support creating a statewide, uniform bias-incident reporting system and an independent oversight body to audit districts on inclusivity benchmarks.

By treating belonging as a core requirement, we ensure that every student, regardless of their identity or background is free to learn and lead.

Safe schools require clear state standards and funding. I support strong anti bullying protections, inclusive curriculum standards, mental health funding, and enforcement of nondiscrimination laws. The legislature should ensure districts comply with protections for LGBTQ+ students, students of color, immigrants, students with disabilities, and others facing hostility. Funding should prioritize counselors, social workers, and training for educators. Oversight must ensure that no district undermines student safety through discriminatory policies. Belonging is foundational to academic success.

If a child doesn't feel safe and welcome, it becomes very difficult to learn. This means that ensuring cultural safety for all students is core to the mission of our schools, not extraneous. schools that are unable or unwilling to ensure a safe environment are derelict in their duty, and need to change.

I believe in legislation that actually works, not just sends a message, so I need to learn more about the effective levers available to ensure that schools fulfill this obligation.

Firstly, ICE needs to get out of our schools, full stop, and we must have methods in place to push back on them and hold them accountable when they push too far. Beyond that, as I noted above, it's extremely important to protect teachers and staff that are safe adults for young queer kids to confide in, especially when their guardians are not supportive or aware of their identity. Colorado law must have protections in place for teachers and staff to protect children and shield the faculty members from bigots who will attempt to claim violations of parental rights. We must also ensure we include queer education in our sex education. Finally, we must keep religion entirely out of public school system. It has no place in education and it has long been used to attack the queer community under the false pretense of religious freedom.

Schools are the hubs of our communities, where students should feel safe and welcoming for every child, without exceptions. Every student — LGBTQ+ students, students of color, immigrant students, students with disabilities — deserves to walk into school knowing they belong. Safety is non-negotiable and the State plays a role through funding for student supports and quick and fair reviews of civil rights violation and bullying complaints.

As a former Jeffco School Board Director, one of my first votes was to adopt “Safety and Belonging” as one of our district’s core Ends. This ensures that this directive was codified in policy, adding certainty that implementation is a requirement with penalties, and not merely a philosophy.

At the State House, that same conviction will guide me. Laws should clearly protect students from bullying and discrimination. Schools need adequate funding for counselors, mental health support, and staff training so adults know how to support students when challenges come up. And when families raise concerns, there should be clear, fair processes to address them.

Our schools play an important role in offering support to families and we have a responsibility to protect that space and make sure it stays welcoming for everyone.

There needs to be a system for fostering educational justice- because having a right is different than having access to that right. We need to ensure that schools are fully funded and equipped with teachers knowledgeable enough to be sensitive to all students of all kinds in order to create a welcoming community for all.

A specific policy that I'm running on is flipping structures to give schools with the least number of resources relative to the property values and taxes of the given area in order to support them in the way they need to be. Our rights are enshrined, yes, but the way we create belonging and safety is by creating access to those rights.

This question, keeping public schools inclusive and safe for all students, is so vital. Public education is vital to the working class folks I'm seeking the honor of representing.

The key word you used was "all." I stand with every community you mentioned, because all are under attack.

I'd like to be further informed about the religious and political hostility.

State law must be strong, protecting all our children in our public schools.

The funding must be there, Colorado has never properly financed its schools in my 30 years living here.

And oversight is key, isn't it?

I am open to suggestions for strengthening all these key elements.

First, we would clear statewide standards in law (not just guidance) and make state statue explicitly require protection in public schools of harassment and discrimination on religion, political beliefs, sexual orientation, etc. We would also define "safety" broadly and realistically and notice that sometimes violence is not physical but can be verbal.

As the parent of a fifteen-year-old at Denver School of the Arts, I see the joy that comes from an environment where diversity is the norm. My child’s school is welcoming and inclusive, but I know that not every student in Colorado has that same experience.

I will use state law to protect inclusive books and curriculum, so every child sees themselves in their education. Funding must be shifted away from punishment and toward mental health support and social workers.

Oversight is critical to ensuring schools comply with anti-discrimination laws, especially regarding names and pronouns, because how we choose to identify ourselves should be respected. We must hold districts accountable if they fail to prevent harassment. I am running to ensure the belonging my child feels at DSA is not an exception, but the standard for every public school. Every student deserves to feel safe as they learn and grow into their truest selves.

As a former public school teacher, and nonprofit leader in immigration, our roles in the classroom are CRUCIAL for our kids' survival. I know schools are more than classrooms, they’re communities. Every student deserves to feel safe, seen, and valued, no matter their identity.

Colorado already prohibits discrimination in schools under the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, but we must ensure those protections are consistently enforced. That means fully funding school-based mental health supports, restorative discipline practices, and culturally responsive training so educators can support LGBTQ+ students, students of color, immigrants, students with disabilities, and students facing religious or political hostility.

State law should set clear expectations for inclusive policies—such as anti-bullying protections, affirming name and pronoun policies, and protections for students’ privacy—while allowing districts flexibility in implementation. Funding must follow those priorities. We cannot demand inclusive environments without investing in counselors, special education services, language access, and professional development.

Oversight also matters. The state should require transparent reporting on bullying and discrimination complaints and ensure families understand how to seek support through the Civil Rights Division.

Safe, inclusive schools aren’t political, they’re foundational to student success. When students feel like they belong, they thrive.

The state must ensure that no school district in Colorado is allowed to discriminate in any way against any student. Schools must be a safe space for all students. State funding and law must be clear that all schools that receive state funding must adhere to the strictest confidentiality and anti-bullying standards to ensure that is the reality, not just the rule. That includes schools that receive state funding for universal preschool as well. The state department of education must be empowered to enforce these rules, including the ability to take over the governance of habitual offenders in the most extreme circumstances.

I would continue to codify the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA). We need to continue to bring state protections in the event that the federal government continues to use its Department of Education to withdraw funding and harass public schools that have shown liberal or progressive communities.

Since I come from the world of evidence-based medicine, it is easy for me to be in this lane and do my best to educate others and to push back on their hateful and misguided rhetoric when I hear it. It is not difficult to resist any pressure on this issue. As a mom of a trans kid, I don't have any trouble standing up to bullies in this topic area.

This would require a multi-pronged strategic approach utilizing robust data collection, advocacy, community engagement, and legal action when necessary to withstand ideological and political attacks. I would seek to use the clinical standards and research-based position statements of well-established organizations, such as the American Medical Association (AMA), American Psychological Association (APA), and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), as well as leverage data, research, partnerships and coalitions, to demonstrate how protective state laws, regulations and funding decisions support positive outcomes for LGBTQ+ individuals, such as suicide reduction, mental health improvements, and economic benefits.

I would also call on the Attorney General to challenge discriminatory treatment based on First Amendment arguments that deny equal protection to LGBTQ+ people, including those that allow businesses to deny services to same-sex couples based on religious beliefs.

I would anchor state laws, regulations, and funding decisions (hereafter referred to as “inclusive policies”) affecting LGBTQ+ people in evidence-based medical and social science by addressing vital information around health and economic impacts for LGBTQ+ individuals and communities at large. Overall, I would look to data that supports the premise that inclusive policies enhance public health, improve economic stability, and reduce societal costs.

I would continue to learn from LGBTQ+ allies and organizations, evidence-based medical and social science journals and articles, and other resources to ensure that I can provide specific data that supports and defends these decisions, especially when facing ideological or political pressures. I would also seek out information that is specific to Colorado, and also addresses different demographics and regions.

In addition to building a strong understanding of evidence-based medical and social science that supports inclusive policies, I would seek to understand information and communication gaps, and the lived experience and ideological backgrounds of those who are opposed to inclusive policies in order to understand how to best approach their concerns in a way supports the LGBTQ+ community and their community.

I would work with orgs like yours and medical professionals that have worked in this spaced to pe as informed as possible when presenting to other members. Also, I would allow members to work with me to find common ground but will not let them pressure me ideologically or politically to not protect the LGBTQ+ community in the decisions that affect their lives.

I would seek out research from trusted organizations and stakeholders rather than simply listening to opinions. While I recognize that this can be a charged and polarizing issue for some, I believe that championing science is the best way to approach decisions that might be difficult for some to understand from a purely ideological view.

I would anchor state laws, regulations, and funding decisions affecting LGBTQ+ people in a clear principle: policy must follow evidence and constitutional rights, not ideology.

In practice, that means writing laws with explicit findings grounded in peer-reviewed medical and social-science research and aligning standards with established clinical guidance. Health and education policies should be informed by independent experts, not political pressure, with agencies required to document the evidence behind their decisions.

I would protect clinical decision-making and patient privacy, keeping politicians out of exam rooms and safeguarding personal data from misuse or targeting. Funding decisions should prioritize programs with demonstrated outcomes, such as improved mental health, school safety, and housing stability and include accountability measures that track what actually works while protecting privacy.

When misinformation spreads, the state has a responsibility to respond quickly with clear, accurate public information and training so schools, providers, and local governments implement policy consistently.

When ideological pressure arises, my response is straightforward: if someone wants to change policy, they need credible evidence that it improves health and safety. Protecting LGBTQ+ people means governing with facts, medical expertise, and a firm commitment to dignity, safety, and equal freedom for everyone.

State law should be grounded in peer reviewed medical and social science, not ideology. I would require that regulations affecting healthcare and education rely on recognized professional standards and documented research. Legislative committees should consult subject matter experts and require fiscal and evidence based impact analyses before adopting policies affecting LGBTQ+ people. When facing political pressure, I will stand with data, medical consensus, and the lived experiences of impacted communities.

I am very well grounded in the current evidence base of medical care for LGBTQ+ people, as a queer person myself and a family physician. I have extensive professional experience in taking this scientific foundation and translating it into intelligible and actionable information for whatever audience is in front of me. I understand how attempts to restrict and delegitimize our medical care are part of a broader thrust toward dehumanization, and I know to interpret political pressure and anti-LGBTQ messaging in light of that larger picture.

We must stand strong with the science and against the hate. We cannot compromise on human rights because it is very much life or death for many folks who need this care. The best way to anchor the legislation is to be steadfast in the fact that these are basic human rights and cannot be negotiable. I am willing to leverage any and all tactics to fight against pressures from within and without the legislation.

When the state is making decisions that affect LGBTQ+ people, those decisions should be grounded in credible medical research, sound public health data, and established social science, and not in politics or religion. And we must respect lived experiences and ensure that science is interpreted in context.

That means listening to physicians, mental health professionals, researchers, educators, and the people directly impacted. If we’re proposing a change to law or regulation, we should be able to clearly explain what evidence supports it and what outcomes we expect. Established medical standards of care should guide health-related policy, and patient autonomy and privacy must always be respected.

We must also provide adequate funding for programs that are proven to improve well-being — including mental health services, suicide prevention, violence prevention, and inclusive school supports. We should evaluate outcomes and adjust policies based on what’s working, not on shifting political narratives.

Coloradans deserve thoughtful, evidence-based policymaking that prioritizes safety, fairness, and real-world results. And implementation should strengthen the systems of care necessary to provide quality care, data protections, and social support for protected populations.

I would refer to experts and people of those communities and identities. I do not have a lived experience of being an LGBTQ+ person, I do not understand what they go through, I don't understand their biology, I don't understand their sociology. What I do understand is that they are people deserving to live their best lives and understanding that science, sociology, and psychology trumps their ideology every time is what will be important when having these conversations and making these decisions. It's imperative that we trust people living the lives we aim to improve and do our best to support them, not suppress them and tell them they're something they're not.

Thank you for referencing evidence-based medical and social science. This is the key to defending decisions. Science and data.

This will be a key area where I will turn to Rocky Mountain Equality. I hope you will continuously feed me the science and the data regarding these important issues.

"ideological or political pressure"

In a previous question, I spoke about "go along to get along" and how here, in this district, the Democrat here can and should lean out there as far "to the left" as our communities need us to. I am prepared to take heat. I am prepared to get threats on my life. It's gut check time. I'm all in.

I love the word "anchor." The anchor on federal funding has been lifted. The seas are stormy.

I never thought about how to anchor legislation. It just feels like the next legislature or the next Administration can undo what the last did. I am open to ideas on how to chisel some of these protections into stone.

We would definitely try to make evidence standard directly into statute like codify "evidence-based" as a legal requirement. We can also build a strong legislative record and make findings as legal armor and not "fluff".

I know, as a first responder, that politics has no place in a medical emergency, and it has no place in our healthcare laws. I will ensure Colorado’s policies are anchored in science by codifying the consensus of major medical associations into our state statutes. When we treat gender-affirming care as essential healthcare, we stop politicians from treating it like a debate.

I will fight to protect state funding for LGBTQ+ services by building legal firewalls that prevent political interference. This means setting clear, science-based criteria for how we spend our money to ensure it reaches the people who need it most.

If political pressure threatens our doctors or schools, I will stand with them to protect their work. We must keep the focus on dignity and community health.

As a scientist, we let the evidence lead the way with strong advocacy. When laws or funding decisions affect LGBTQ+ people, especially around health care, education, or youth services, they must be anchored in credible, peer-reviewed medical and social science.

In the legislature, I would prioritize testimony from licensed medical professionals, researchers, and major medical associations when drafting or evaluating bills. Colorado has a strong framework for civil rights and health access, and we should continue aligning our policies with evidence-based standards of care and best practices in public health.

I would also support fiscal and program evaluations that measure outcomes—student well-being, mental health access, housing stability—so funding decisions are tied to what actually works. When ideological pressure arises, transparency and data are our strongest tools. Public hearings, expert panels, and clear legislative findings grounded in research help ensure laws can withstand political and legal challenges.

Colorado has long valued individual freedom and dignity. Upholding that tradition means making decisions based on science, constitutional protections, and real-world outcomes, not rhetoric. Evidence-based policymaking protects both vulnerable communities and the integrity of our democratic process.

Ideological bias has no place in state law. Religion and religious beliefs have no place in public policy, Period. I grew up in a fundamentalist cult, where witnessed firsthand, the harm that those organizations prey upon their victims. I also saw how they were able to circumvent anti-discrimination laws to harm children and ignore mandatory reporting. All laws and regulations must be based in sound, scientific evidence. Where a lot of policy is nuance, there are areas that are not nuanced. Denying individuals the right to exist as their true selves is one of those areas. For example, they ban on conversion therapy for minors must be upheld and enforced at all costs. In addition, no organization, religious or otherwise, should be allowed to shield abusers from mandatory reporting.

As a current State House Representative it is my duty as a policy and lawmaker to listen to science and evidence based research and facts. I plan to remain committed in supporting progressive and liberal policies that benefit and support all LGBTQ+ communities.

"Religious exemptions" is to me a guise for being able to hide hate behind a veil. I don't buy it. They can keep testing us on this and I will keep fighting back. Again, this is why elections matter and how critically important it is to make sure that the people we elect are willing to go to bat for the LGBTQ+ community. Even Democrats who may hesitate in this area should be held accountable. The LGBTQ+ community is a small percentage of the population and to be targeted like they are is unacceptable and should be to any compassionate human.

Freedom of religion is enshrined in the U.S. and Colorado constitutions, however that freedom does not allow for discrimination in the provision of taxpayer-funded services. Responding to claims for religious exemptions that seek to limit LGBTQ+ access to state-funded medical services, programs, or protections involves addressing the direct conflict between anti-discrimination laws and the freedom of religion. Fortunately, courts have found that non-discrimination requirements for state funding are neutral and generally applicable. As a result, organizations accepting such funding cannot refuse services based on legally protected characteristics of those served, such as sexual orientation and gender identity. I would call on the Attorney General to enforce the law in this regard.

When faced with a claim for religious exemption to seek to limit LGBTQ+ people’s access to state funded services, programs, or protections, my response would be that I believe in the fundamental right for people to be treated equally, regardless of the presence of protected characteristics (including sex, sexual preference, gender identity, or gender expression) and public funds cannot be used to support discrimination.

Free exercise of religion does not include the right to discriminate against others; and Colorado’s antidiscrimination laws and strong LGBTQ+ protections highlight the importance of equal access for ALL to state-funded services, programs, and protections. If a religious organization discriminates against LGBQT+ people in any form, they should not be able to accept public funding. This discrimination would lead to unequal access by LGBTQ+ people to essential services, and is unjust.

Legal precedent supports this. In a 2025 ruling, a judge determined that the Colorado Universal Preschool Program’s non-discrimination rules, which include protections for sexual orientation and gender identity, do not violate religious freedom. This ruling ensures that our tax dollars are not being used to support discrimination against the LGBTQ+ community.

I do think while there are religious exemption laws I think we should look into that, as I believe that those claims are violating nondiscrimination laws although they are a religion they are offering a service, and if state funds are used for side service by a religious group making this claim. it is in the states interest to look at if that is something as a court of law agrees with and the legislature should join that weather as the challenger or in an amicus brief.

The US Constitution provides religions some protections when it comes to the power of the government, and upholding this right is important to me. However, I do not believe that there should be exemptions granted that open ways for individuals to be discriminated against. The government relies on public institutions to provide many services to residents. If an organization is going to receive state funds for services, those services should be equally available to all Colorado residents.

I strongly support religious freedom and I also believe it cannot be used to deny others their civil rights. In Colorado, equal protection under the law is not optional.

When services are state-funded or state-administered, the state has a responsibility to ensure equal and equitable access for everyone, including LGBTQ+ people. Religious belief should never be used to justify denying healthcare, housing, education, or other public services paid for by taxpayers.

My approach is guided by three principles. First, public dollars come with public obligations. Any organization that accepts state funding must comply with nondiscrimination laws.

Second, I would draw a clear line between private religious practice and public service delivery. Individuals are free to hold and express their beliefs, but government programs must serve the public fairly and without bias.

Third, I would require narrow, evidence-based review of exemption claims and reject broad carve-outs that undermine access to care or weaken civil rights protections.

The bottom line is simple: religious freedom protects the right to believe, not the right to exclude or harm others. Protecting LGBTQ+ Coloradans means defending dignity, safety, and equal access to services for all.

Religious freedom is protected, but it cannot be used to deny others equal access to state funded services. I would oppose broad religious exemptions that undermine civil rights protections in healthcare, housing, or public services. Where the state provides funding, programs must comply with nondiscrimination law. Colorado should ensure any exemptions are narrowly tailored and do not permit discrimination against LGBTQ+ people.

One person/entity's right to religious freedom does not supersede the civil rights of other people, full stop.

Religion has no place in our government, full stop. Government regulations should not be guided by religion, and government services and programs are from a violation of an individual's religious freedom. Separation of church and state is very clear, and religion has no place in science and healthcare

We’ve seen in Colorado how these issues play out in real time. While serving as a Jeffco School Board Director, our district faced a lawsuit over overnight field trip accommodations for transgender students. The case became part of a broader national effort to challenge inclusive policies by framing them as conflicts over religion or parental rights.

What I saw firsthand is how quickly complex student safety issues can be pulled into larger political fights. Our responsibility as a district was to follow state nondiscrimination law, protect student privacy, and make sure every child felt safe and respected. This is not about ideology or religious beliefs, rather it’s about making sure schools serve all students in a safe and welcoming environment.

When it comes to religious exemption claims tied to state-funded services, I believe the same principle applies: public institutions and publicly funded programs must follow civil rights law and serve people equally. Individuals have the right to their beliefs. We cannot create carve-outs that allow discrimination against LGBTQ+ people.

Colorado has worked hard to build strong protections. We cannot allow those protections to be weakened under the banner of religious exemption. Equality under the law must remain the standard.

When I was a kid I grew up hearing that Colorado was called "The Hate State", because it historically has been an immensely difficult state to exist in for LGBTQ+ folks. I would ardently fight a law that would be making it more difficult to folks in our communities to simply exist, in any way shape, or form. Religious texts, often as the constitution, are interpreted. People interpreting the Bible to justify bigotry and discrimination will not be tolerated.

I would respond respectfully but forcefully that access to state-funded services, programs, or protections are there for all. No exceptions.

Some science and data would help back me up, but I can wing it in a pinch.

One point we should get across is that everyone has the right to hold any religious belief nut are not free to impose those beliefs on others. So, we will codify limits on religious exemption in state-funded contexts.

I believe that public service means serving the entire public. When organizations accept state funding to provide a service, they must follow our non-discrimination laws. No Coloradan should be denied access to a taxpayer-funded program because of their identity or their family.

We have seen ongoing efforts to use religious exemptions to bypass these protections. I agree with our courts that when an entity takes public money, it must play by the same rules as everyone else. This is not a matter of religious hostility. It is a matter of fairness and equal access to the services we all pay for.

While I respect religious freedom, I respect the freedom from religion even more. It cannot be used to discriminate against the LGBTQ+ community in the public square. I will oppose any legislation or regulation that seeks to create special rules for those who wish to limit the rights of my friends and family within the LGBTQ+ community.

We left our church in 2000 after working there for many years because they wouldn't let our child be a leader in the church if they were LGBTQ+, so we take this personally. Our civil rights framework, including the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act, makes clear that when an entity accepts public funding or operates in the public sphere, it must serve the public without discrimination. I would oppose sweeping religious exemptions that allow taxpayer-funded programs, contractors, or providers to deny services to LGBTQ+ people.

Religious liberty protects personal belief and worship. It does not grant a license to withhold healthcare, housing assistance, education, or other essential services from someone because of who they are. Courts have consistently recognized that the state has a compelling interest in preventing discrimination, especially when public dollars are involved.

If elected, I would work to ensure any language does not undermine access to care or services, and includes clear safeguards so no one is turned away from state-funded programs. Colorado can respect faith traditions while upholding dignity, fairness, and equal treatment for every resident.

Religious exemptions should be not allowed in any access to state-funded services, programs, or protections. As I mentioned above, religious belief has not place in the setting of public policy. No organization, including religious-based health care facilities should be allowed to deny care, including, but not limited to, reproductive health care and gender-affirming care. If they receive state funding, they must be required to treat every person equally.

I would continue to expand and codify the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act (CADA). My efforts and hope is to work with organizations such as One Colorado and ACLU Colorado to protect any religious exemptions that would affect state services that would discriminate LGBTQ+ people.

I am in direct communication with your organization as much as possible. As well as individuals in my community and with ONE Colorado. This is a policy area near and dear to my heart and soul as I shared above about my own kid, and is one of the primary reasons I ran for office in the first place. I am here for you because you have been there for my kid and others in our state and I thank you!

As a life-long member of the LGBTQ+ community I know that meaningfully engaging such community members requires establishing consistent, transparent, and intersectional communications. If elected, I would implement strategies to ensure legislative priorities, votes, and oversight responsibilities are informed by the lived experiences of LGBTQ+ constituents in House District 13. I would draw on the expertise of organizations such as the LGBTQ Democratic Caucus, One Colorado, Stonewall Democrats of Colorado, and community-based Pride groups to inform my legislative efforts, and solicit their input on proposed legislation, including feedback on the impact of such legislation on the LGBTQ+ community.

I would host regular listening sessions in known safe locations and virtually to remove barriers to engagement and seek to hear directly from LGBTQ+ constituents about issues they are encountering, especially related to housing, healthcare and safety. I would then collaborate with them in exploring solutions that are rooting in community needs.

I would also use my role to challenge anti-LGBTQ+ legislation publicly and advocate for expansion of proactive protections in housing, employment, and public accommodations. Using these strategies, would ensure that LGBTQ+ voices are not just heard, but are an essential part of my legislative agenda.

If elected, I would establish advisory committees from members within and outside of my district to help inform my legislative priorities, votes, and oversight responsibilities. These advisory committees could include local community members and leaders from organizations that are active advocates, people of all ages with lived experience that may or may not be politically active, subject-matter experts, and others, including LGBTQ+ community members.

I would actively seek out viewpoints that can help me understand issues, challenges, and potential solutions by going to where my constituents are and through electronic meetings (as my district is very large and geographically diverse) or in-person meetings at the Capitol, and ensuring that my team is communicating with the public to keep them informed about what’s going on during the legislative session, important bills, and opportunities to be involved in the process. I would also actively seek feedback on how I do better as a legislator to inform professional and personal improvements.

I would ensure that I am available, accessible, and transparent with my constituents throughout the year. In addition to the intentional outreach shared above, I’d participate in in-person and virtual office hours, town halls, visits to organizations, community events, and meetings.

I would meaningfully engage LGBTQ+ communities and communities-based orgs is by hosting town halls at their establishments, as well making sure you and others are the first I talk to when it comes to my vote, weather in support or opposition. I also would talk with the caucus most affected by legislation being presented before the body

I already have a great record of engaging with community-based organizations through volunteer work and showing up at community events, and that is something I hope that my schedule will continue to allow if I am elected. As a legislator, I would hold regular town hall events and sponsor visits to the Capitol by constituents. To engage specific communities, such as LGBTQ+ constituents, I would use a variety of means, including gathering information from constituents who engage with my office and reaching out via organizations such as Rocky Mountain Equality.

If elected, I would engage LGBTQ+ communities as partners in governance, not as an afterthought.

I would establish regular, structured engagement with LGBTQ+ community members and community-based organizations through listening sessions, roundtables, and ongoing advisory relationships. These conversations would include youth, seniors, families, rural residents, and people at the intersections of race, faith, disability, and immigration status.

Before key votes—especially on healthcare, education, housing, public safety, and civil rights—I would seek input early, share draft legislation, and ask direct questions about real-world impacts. Transparency about constraints and tradeoffs is essential to building trust.

In my oversight role, I would elevate community expertise by inviting organizations to testify, identify implementation gaps, and help evaluate whether laws and programs are working as intended.

I would also ensure engagement is accessible and sustained, with virtual options, clear follow-up, and accountability for how feedback shaped decisions. Engagement should not be symbolic or limited to moments of crisis or Pride Month.

My guiding principle is simple: the people most affected by policy should help shape it. Meaningful engagement leads to better laws, smarter use of public funds, and stronger protections for dignity, safety, and opportunity for all Coloradans.

If elected, I will maintain regular meetings with LGBTQ+ community leaders, youth advocates, healthcare providers, and civil rights organizations in Boulder/Weld County and statewide. I will host listening sessions, partner with local nonprofits, and ensure impacted communities help shape legislation before votes are cast. Engagement must be ongoing, not symbolic. Representation means accountability and collaboration. Thank you for this opportunity!

I am queer, and I live, work, and play amongst LGBTQ+ communities, so I remain deeply connected to our lived realities. I plan to work closely with our community organizations on assessing policy, and my door is always open to advocates who would like to collaborate on new legislation.

Honestly I wouldn't have to change much! I am a lesbian and my wife and I are pretty connected to the community. That being said, I always love anything that makes my life even gayer.

Partnering with community is the core of my approach to everything. I believe people are the experts of their own experiences. The people who are living with the impact of our laws every day should have a real voice in shaping them.

I hold sacred the concept of “nothing about us without us”. This is how government should work. I don’t want to be making decisions about LGBTQ+ Coloradans without sitting down, listening, and understanding their experiences, needs, and ideas.

And I cannot emphasize enough the necessity that engagement has to be authentic. That means we cannot simply make decisions in advance and use feedback to confirm the process. The whole point is to let what we hear shape the solution. Sometimes that means slowing down, reworking language, or even changing direction based on how many viewpoints come together.

That requires building trust, listening and, showing through action that you can be a safe partner in the work. I am proud of my public record and the relationships I have built. I plan to bring the practice of being a trusted pattern and ally to the Capitol.

We will do that by building proxy relationships. It takes a certain level of hubris to waltz into a community that you don't identify with and market yourself, which is often viewed as opportunistic and shallow- That's the last thing I would ever want. We would engage those community members by building relationships with the front-facers from those communities and working with them to build relationships with the rest of it.

I'm Indigenous, I would not feel comfortable with a white woman barging into my community to brag about themselves. I would imagine that LGBTQ+ communities would be just as uncomfortable if I, a cisgender man. were to enter the room and expect engagement and support.

The same way I try to meaningfully engage all the allies who stand on "my side" politically. I'd love to stand with you publicly at the Capitol. That's easy. I'll march with you. Make every effort to attend your annual gala. I love those events. I bet yours are over the top! No pressure :)

I work at UPS from 3am-9am 5 or 6 days a week. On Fridays, we sometimes go to Ted'z Bar after work. (It's 5 o'clock somewhere.) Inevitably, the LGBTQ+ group gathers at their own table. I love to spend some time sitting there sharing a drink with them. They are creative. They are understanding and empathetic. They are strong. They are funny. They play board games I've never heard of. I hate calling them "them" because it implies some us vs them. They are my friends and colleagues.

Sometimes, they tell me stories that break my heart.

Is there an LGBTQ Commerce City group? It has been my experience that Commerce City is woefully unorganized compared to other cities. If someone "dared" to start one, I would join and attend.

First, let them know that they are not alone. As a Hispanic and with immigrant parents, we know what it feels like to get discriminated, what it is to feel left out. We need to build that connection and hope with everyone. We all have a different background, but we all share the same future, and it is a future that we need to fight for together.

I am lucky to have many close friends and family members in the LGBTQ+ community, and their lives are part of my own.

I also know that being a true ally requires humility. I know what I don’t know. I will never pretend to have all the answers, but I will always show up to listen. I will rely on the community to continue educating me and to share their specific needs.

If elected, you will be the co-authors of my work. I will host regular meetings and stay in constant contact with community leaders and families to ensure my votes reflect your lived reality. My door will always be open. I am committed to staying close to this community and learning from you every single day. I am running to make sure the belonging my child feels at school is the standard for every person in our state.

I would first ask my own LGBTQ+ family members and constituents and show up where I'm needed the most. I would also hold regular community roundtables in HD33 and partner with local and statewide LGBTQ+ organizations to hear directly from residents about barriers they’re facing in health care, housing, schools, and public safety.

I would build ongoing relationships with groups like Broomfield PRIDE, One Colorado, and The Center on Colfax, as well as youth groups, affirming faith communities, and small business owners. Engagement cannot be performative or limited to Pride Month, but it must be continuous and built on trust.

As a former teacher, I believe in creating structured feedback loops. That means advisory meetings before major votes, surveys to gather input, and transparent updates explaining how community feedback shaped my positions. I would also ensure my office is accessible, culturally competent, and responsive when constituents need help navigating state agencies.

Legislating well requires lived experience alongside policy expertise. By staying in close partnership with LGBTQ+ Coloradans, I can ensure my votes and oversight responsibilities reflect real needs, not assumptions.

I will engage with all constituencies in my district regularly. That includes regular town hall meetings. By myself, with other state legislative partners. Meeting regularly with the City Councils within my district. In addition, I will maintain social media presence where residents can interact with me. I will also hold regular office hours. During my time serving on Broomfield City Council, I held weekly office hours, monthly coffees and quarterly town halls with the residents in my ward. I was also available on demand to meet with any resident at their convenience.

As a current State Representative I've made a clear policy on supporting and advocating for transgender youth in my community. I already and will continue to pledge my policy to be proactive in defending and protecting our LBGTQ+ community and making a Colorado a place for everyone regardless of your race, creed, gender, or sexual orientation.