2026 Primary Election: Candidates for State Legislature

Colorado must treat sensitive personal data as a safety issue. State agencies should not be allowed to share sensitive data with the federal government or outside entities unless required by a valid court order. We should also require data minimization, purpose limitation, limited retention, audit trails, and regular legislative oversight of interagency or federal data requests.

This has already been a priority in my work. As chair of the Joint Technology Committee, I led the Office of Information Technology oversight hearings and reviewed in depth where state IT systems have failed. That work led me to author and pass SB26-185, which strengthens Colorado’s state IT security infrastructure.

I also requested a late bill to prevent Colorado’s DMV from sharing data with the federal Selective Service System for undocumented license holders and to prohibit the federal government from using Colorado’s self-attested gender identity field as a proxy for draft registration eligibility. Although that bill was denied by Senate leadership, the issue remains urgent.

In 2027, my priority bill will be a broader digital privacy framework to protect all Coloradans, especially LGBTQ+ people and other communities at risk of being targeted through data exposure.

Colorado should act fiercely to protect personal data and refuse to provide this data to the federal government when it is demanded. Though this can be complex, given the amount of collaboration traditional of the federal and state agencies, we have seen through previous restrictions that it is possible. I would support legislation that prevents data transfers to the federal government from state agencies and that strengthen privacy protections around this data. As one example of how this can work, in HB1113 - this year's elections legislation I helped lead - we restricted the sharing of voters' data with the federal government who were demanding it to create federal voter rolls. Similar efforts can and should be undertaken to protect immigrant communities (as we saw in SB25-276 and SB21-131), LGBTQ people, and others vulnerable to attacks from the federal administration.

Colorado should not be sharing most data we collect with any other entity. In recent years, we’ve seen the danger and damage from sharing data related to our immigrant community. Despite the protections that already exists, the governor has shared immigration data with the federal government. I am vehemently opposed to sharing any information that could be used to target individuals or communities. I support stricter regulations on data collection, retention, and sharing to protect the healthcare decisions, privacy, and safety of all people, especially patients seeking reproductive and gender-affirming care. I will support legislation to keep Coloradans’ data in safe and private.

We need to ensure firewalls between our state data and federal data, particularly to hostile agencies such as ICE or unfortunately, apparently DHS. We should work with the Attorney Generals office to ensure this separation stays intact and the Governors office to know it won't be threatened or undercut. We also need to be proactive in not passing legislation that degrades these protections, such as parental notification or consent laws, our voter/election data and how AI is being regulated. We should also be aware of how this tech is being used in schools and what data is coming from that, so that private corporations which could share this data don't have access to our kids or the clearance to share it. I would run and support bills that allow parents to opt out of their kids engaging with AI tools in schools, as we know people often share personal data with these bots and kids aren't able to consent properly. We also need to protect our data from other states like Texas, which could track women coming her for abortion care to prosecute them.

I am so glad this is an issue that RMEQ is focused on. As the Chief Policy Officer for Connect for Health, a private entity that collected personal data including health and tax information, I know what goes into a robust data security infrastructure. I have completed data privacy and systems security coursework specifically because I believe legislators need to understand the technology they are regulating.

Given how data is being weaponized against marginalized groups including our LGBTQ+ community, I would support legislation limiting the types of data necessary to collect, increasing data safeguards for state agencies including data destruction and to prohibit sharing sensitive data with federal agencies without a valid court order.

Colorado’s legislature should treat data privacy as a public safety issue, not a technical one.

As a legislator, I strongly support LGBTQ+ equality and protecting the privacy, dignity, and civil rights of all Coloradans. Last year, I passed legislation requiring stronger protections for personal data collected through the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), because people should be able to access essential services without fear their information will be misused or exposed.

Colorado should continue strengthening privacy protections by limiting unnecessary data collection, restricting data sharing absent a court order or clear legal requirement, and requiring strong cybersecurity standards for agencies handling sensitive records. I also support stronger safeguards around healthcare and identity document information, particularly for transgender individuals seeking gender marker changes or gender-affirming care.

There must be meaningful accountability when sensitive data is improperly accessed, disclosed, or weaponized against vulnerable communities. As a legislator, I will continue supporting policies that protect privacy, civil liberties, and the right of every person to live safely and authentically in Colorado.

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.

Much like we prohibit local law enforcement from working with ICE, I support efforts to prevent state agencies from disclosing sensitive personal information to the federal administration. When they go to the doctor or seek help from a state agency folks need to know they can rely on those interactions to keep them safe. In 2025, legislation I passed eliminated the reporting of testosterone from Colorado's Prescription Drug Monitoring Program, ensuring that trans and non-binary folks wont be tracked simply because they use hormone replacement therapy (n.b. estrogen was already excluded from the program).

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.

The right to privacy and due process is paramount to freedom in America, and LGBTQ+ Coloradans deserve to live their own lives free of oppression by the state or targeted attacks of violence or discrimination. In order to protect this freedom, we need to limit data collection to only what is truly necessary. I would support legislation that prohibits the purchase of private data by law enforcement and state agencies. I would also like to see us give individuals more control over what information is collected and shared, with the option to opt out wherever possible.

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.

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.

Colorado has a responsibility to protect the personal information residents are required to share in order to access health care, education, housing, and public services. No one should fear that seeking medical care, updating an ID, enrolling in school, or applying for assistance could put them or their family at risk, especially LGBTQ+ people, immigrants, and other vulnerable communities who are increasingly being targeted.

I would strengthen data minimization policies. State agencies should only collect the information that is absolutely necessary to provide a service, and they should not retain that data longer than required. The less information we collect and store, the less there is to misuse or weaponize.

We need stronger legal barriers to prevent improper data sharing.

Legislative oversight must be real and ongoing. Agencies should be accountable, and residents should have clear rights to know what information is being held about them and how it is being used.

A privacy policy should not be written in a vacuum. Stakeholders ned to be at the table.

As a legislator, I should not just to react after harm occurs, but pass legislation to prevent it. Protecting privacy is protecting freedom, dignity, and safety.

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 strongly believe that all personal data collected by health care providers, educational providers, social service, etc. must be strongly safeguarded and especially protected from access by the Federal government. I am not an IT expert, so I cannot answer the best way to do this. I can give some examples from when I was associated with CU. As best as the university system office and each of the campus offices can do to protect data collected, there still have been breaches. When I was an employee, we received an email alerting us that our social security numbers had been compromised. CU suggested that we open accounts with the three major credit rating bureaus freeze access to opening new credit card accounts. Recently, Canvass, a popular software used in teaching was compromised. The university quickly stopped using Canvas and alerted the CU community of what happened. This is an outside vendor, which CU has no control over. These examples illustrate that even with the strongest firewalls, data breaches happen. The state and other organizations that collect data need to update security frequently, alert people when a breach happens and provide help to ameliorate the breach.

The state could work towards preventing gender affirming care information from being visible on patient portals and preventing medicare & medicaid from limiting services based on procedure code and diagnosis.

I would support any efforts to maintain privacy based on HIPPA protected information.

In particular, I am concerned with the increased utilization of surveillance technology at the local and state levels. This includes the usage and data privacy concerns around Flock cameras and other cameras/technologies that capture data that could put Coloradans at risk. We simply cannot trust privately-owned companies to safeguard data that could be used to prosecute or otherwise harm LGBTQ+ Coloradans. Likewise, we cannot assume altruistic intentions for companies that answer to shareholders. The same is true for personal data held by the state. Ensuring that sensitive data remains shielded from a federal administration that seeks to harm LGBTQ+ Coloradans is a priority, and it must come with both safeguards and accountability for those who transgress state law.

Data privacy continues to be a state wide issue, I have worked on legislation like SB25-0276, that expands data privacy not only to the state but also to municipalities and counties. I also support the proposal to make sure that Flock camera information is not accessed without a warrant. Also as we continue to work on strengthening safety nets we also must make sure our private information is not sold, shared or used to sell us good and services at a higher price.

Yes. No Coloradan should lose a job, be denied housing, be turned away from care, or be excluded from public life because of who they are. I am proud to have helped build on Colorado’s nondiscrimination protections, including my work to codify Title IX protections in K-12 schools during my first session and my work this year on SB26-125, Student Civil Rights, which reflects my commitment to enforceable rights in Colorado schools.

Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act is strong, but rights only matter if people can enforce them. One of the most urgent gaps is underfunded enforcement. The Colorado Civil Rights Division needs the resources to investigate complaints quickly, because months-long timelines are not workable for families facing discrimination at work, at school, in housing, or while seeking care.

We also need to write stronger health care nondiscrimination protections into state law so LGBTQ+ Coloradans are not dependent on the priorities of any federal administration. This year’s School Finance Act closed loopholes that allowed public school dollars to flow to programs that could discriminate against employees and students. We should continue that work by closing any remaining loopholes that allow landlords, employers, schools, or providers to discriminate against Coloradans.

Yes, I strongly support maintaining and strengthening Colorado’s nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people in these various areas. Every Coloradan deserves the freedom to live, work, learn, and access government services without fear of discrimination or exclusion. We know the devastating, negative impacts when that is not the case.

Colorado has made important progress to this end. Going forward, we should strengthen CADA enforcement mechanisms so that civil rights protections are meaningful not just on paper, but in practice. Too many people facing discrimination encounter lengthy complaint processes, limited access to legal support, and inconsistent outcomes. The state should prioritize in faster investigations and stronger accountability for repeat violators.

I also support reinforcing protections for transgender and nonbinary Coloradans, particularly in healthcare and schools, as we see attacks on gender affirming care and trans youth in sports. These too are critical accommodations, sometimes through public intuitions, to which we must ensure fair access.

Colorado should continue leading with the principle that equality under the law is nonnegotiable. Whether through strengthening CADA or other anti-discrimination statutes, protecting LGBTQ+ people from discrimination is fundamental to building safe, healthy, and thriving communities for each of us.

Yes. I support strict regulations on data collection, retention, and sharing to protect patients seeking abortion and gender-affirming care from digital surveillance. I support limiting the use of automated license plate readers, location tracking, and data that period tracking apps can store or share, that could be weaponized to criminalize healthcare decisions. I support clinic safety legislation to protect patients and providers from harassment, ensuring everyone can access care without intimidation.

I support ensuring equitable voting access by opposing any voter suppression efforts aimed at making our democratic processes less accessible to women and LGBTQ+ Coloradans. I support upholding the separation of church and state in our laws to protect women and LGBTQ+ individuals from religious exemptions that permit discrimination in healthcare, public services, and the workplace. I support strengthening enforcement of anti-discrimination laws to guarantee that the rights and absolute dignity of every person in Colorado are unconditionally protected. I support strengthening policies to close the gender pay gap and pay inequality.

Yes I support this. I think the most urgent thing to do will be to defeat the two ballot measures currently being pushed forward and to then file legislation next year to establish further protections against conversion therapy and protections for trans kids in schools.

Yes, fully. LGBTQ people deserve the same protections in every part of life, and I will fight to maintain and strengthen Colorado's nondiscrimination laws in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, and healthcare.

The most urgent gaps are in enforcement. Rights on paper mean nothing if people do not know how to use them or cannot afford to pursue them. I would support strengthening our Civil Rights Division and streamlining complaint processes because I have seen what happens when protections exist without enforcement. Finally, we have a gap in protections for LGBTQ+ staff and teachers in our schools, to be protected against parents. As someone who experienced discrimination from parents when I was a teacher, I know this is an area lacking regulation.

I will show up for our communities most at risk, and work with LGBTQ+ advocates who have the on-the-ground knowledge I need to get the details right.

Yes. I strongly support maintaining and strengthening Colorado’s nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people in employment, housing, public accommodations, education, and healthcare. Every person deserves to live safely and authentically without fear of discrimination.

While Colorado has made important progress, there are still areas that require additional legislative attention. One issue I have worked on directly is protections against discrimination based on pronoun usage and gender identity in the workplace. I previously worked on legislation that would have required employers to respect an employee’s pronouns and created a cause of action for discrimination related to repeated intentional misuse. That bill ultimately did not move forward because additional stakeholder work was needed, but I continue to believe these conversations are important and necessary.

I also believe Colorado should continue strengthening enforcement of existing civil rights laws, protecting LGBTQ+ youth in schools and foster care settings, safeguarding healthcare access, and ensuring sensitive personal data cannot be weaponized against vulnerable communities.

As a legislator, I will continue supporting policies that center dignity, safety, equal opportunity, and civil rights for all Coloradans.

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.

Yes. Colorado has significant and important nondiscrimination protections in law and regulation for LGBTQ people and those should be protected. However, I am certain that gaps exist and that our enforcement of these protections can be improved. In 2023, I passed legislation to make sure that hospitals had to disclose whether they performed certain Reproductive health care and gender affirming care procedure, so that folks across Colorado would know where they can receive the health care they need before they go to their local hospital and get turned away. I look forward to working with the LGBTQ+ community to identify how we can strengthen our laws and improve enforcement so that everyone can live as their true authentic selves at work and at home.

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’ve carried and co-sponsored bills to protect equal access to public restrooms, prevent the intentional deadnaming of transgender youth in public schools, refer marriage equality to the ballot, and protect transgender patients in Colorado from outside prosecution from oppressive states, and I plan to continue this work once I am back in office. Some of the areas that I believe need further work are expanding access to gender-affirming care, adequately staffing and funding the Colorado Civil Rights Division, and further protecting LGBTQ+ students from discrimination.

Additionally, I believe that while we have some strong anti-discrimination laws in Colorado, too often we fall short when it comes to enforcing those laws. Individuals who are discriminated against in schools, housing, or employment often don’t have the information they need about how to seek redress, may not be able to afford legal services, or they receive assistance but it’s too little and too late. We need better funding for civil rights enforcement as well as better public resources and education so Coloradans know their rights.

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 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.

I support maintaining and strengthening Colorado’s nondiscrimination protections for LGBTQ+ people in every part of life.

We have made progress, but legal protections are only meaningful if they are enforceable and accessible. We must continue closing the gap between what is written in statute and what people experience in real life.

One urgent area is healthcare access. LGBTQ+ Coloradans, especially transgender individuals, continue to face discrimination in obtaining medically necessary care, insurance coverage, and respectful treatment. We need stronger protections to ensure that providers and insurers cannot deny care based on gender identity or sexual orientation, and we must defend access to gender-affirming care from political attacks.

We should strengthen tenant protections and ensure landlords are held accountable when discrimination occurs.

In education, students deserve safe learning environments free from bullying, harassment, and bad policies. We should support inclusive school policies, protect students’ privacy, and ensure schools have accountability when discrimination happens.

Too many people do not report discrimination. When reported we should ensure timely investigations and meaningful consequences for violations.

We must remain vigilant as national political attacks increase. State law should be strong enough that the federal government cannot undermine the dignity, safety, and rights of LGBTQ+ Coloradans.

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’m a staunch ally of the LGBTQ+ community, and I will stand up to any discrimination against them in employment, housing, public accommodations, education and healthcare. The legislature has consistently strengthened antidiscrimination legislation for the LGBTQ+ community. I am unaware of gaps in state law or enforcement, but I would be open to learning about legislation that RMEQ would like to see introduced next session. Obviously, we are losing a strong champion of these rights with Rep Titone terming out. However, we have several strong champions that have brought forward legislation, such as Reps McCormick and Brown. I will always back any legislative efforts to strengthen nondiscrimination.

Yes, I support maintaining and strengthening protections. With the recent Supreme Court Decision regarding our conversion therapy ban, we need to re-address this. Additionally, LGBTQ+ individuals are uninsured at a higher rate and potentially have a pre-disposition for acute and chronic conditions than cisgender individuals. We need to work to address these disparities and ensure that insurance coverage doesn't exclude care for these individuals' unique needs.

Yes. My work in the legislature has focused on the issue of affordable housing, and I fully recognize the equity gap that exists for LGBTQ+ Coloradans in finding housing that is affordable and safe. This includes lower-than-average homeownership rates for LGBTQ+ Coloradans as compared with their peers, a lack of options for affirming and supportive retirement housing and long-term care facilities, as well as higher percentages of housing instability overall. While connected to larger issues such as employment opportunities, the ability to save, etc., the data points to the continued need to ensure housing is open and accessible to all people while focusing on closing equity gaps for LGBTQ+ Coloradans. In light of the Trump Administration's actions, this must include strengthening state-level anti-discrimination laws wherever possible.

Yes, we must continue to update nondiscrimination protections, specially when we see the Federal government targeting our LGBTQ+ and immigrant communities. We continue fighting for gender affirming care, access to abortion and reproductive rights as well as kids being able to be called by their chosen name in school.

I would continue to defend Colorado’s protections for evidence-based gender-affirming care through our laws and our budget. A state budget is a moral document. It shows what the legislature and executive branch truly value, and we cannot allow budget decisions to become a way to restrict gender-affirming care.

This year, I worked on SB26-125 to ensure students and families with 504s in K-12 schools have an avenue to seek accommodations when those accommodations are not provided. The debate over the relatively small amount of funding needed to enforce this bill showed how easily rights can become theoretical if we are not willing to fund enforcement.

Just this month, the Colorado Supreme Court found that Children’s Hospital violated CADA when it suspended gender-affirming care for transgender youth while continuing the same treatments for cisgender youth. Federal coercion does not excuse CADA violations, and I would support codifying that into state law.

I was proud to support Colorado’s 2023 shield law and would fight any attempt to weaken it. Colorado has become a safe place for many families with transgender children, and state law must continue to protect their ability to access safe, lawful, evidence-based care.

I was proud to support HB25-1309, protecting access to gender affirming care during my first legislative session. Though before my time, I am also supportive of our shield laws that ensure patients and providers from out-of-state have protections to legally provide gender-affirming care.

While we know the federal courts have persistently attacked these types of protections, Colorado courts have been a glimmer of hope for ensuring continued access. I support Medicaid coverage of gender-affirming services and - as possible in the limited budget - specific set-asides for these services, further codification of the right to access them for adults and youth (if needed), and robust oversight of state agencies to ensure coverage, access, and protections for those seeking gender-affirming services.

At the state level, I will be a fierce protector of the right to gender-affirming care. As a mom, I believe my kids should have the right, and the protections, to grow up to be whoever they are.

I support expanding protections for LGBTQ+ individuals, including proactive shield laws to protect gender-affirming care and closing any legal loopholes that allow federal prosecution or out-of-state investigations into healthcare decisions made in Colorado. I support ensuring that gender-affirming care and other self-determining medical decisions remain completely free from legislative interference. I support defending the civil rights, safety, and dignity of LGBTQ youth, including strengthening anti-harassment and anti-discrimination laws, and civil actions for conversion therapy survivors. I support strict enforcement and accountability for employers, landlords, public servants, and other actors who violate anti-discrimination laws or deny LGBTQ+ Coloradans their fundamental civil rights.

I believe in accessible gender affirming care and acknowledge that our hospitals are under threat due to providing this care. I think as a state, we need to continue to support the providers who are standing behind their patients and ensuring that we don't rollback any state funding to their programs, and if possible to expand that funding so they are able to help the patients other facilities are not helping due to the threats.

Protect the providers still doing this, try to get those providers (like PPRM) more resources to fill the gap, do our best to support the facilities that want to provide it and impose limitations and regulations on facilities that pretend to be healthcare providers, but who are picking and choosing which people to provide services to based on political/religious ideology.

Gender-affirming care is healthcare. It is evidence-based, it is life-saving, and it is not a bargaining chip. I will fight for our families to have access to this care as a champion, not just a supporter.

I would oppose any attempt to restrict care through state legislation, regulatory changes, or funding decisions. I have wholeheartedly endorsed the campaign Families not Politics, to oppose ballot initiatives 109, and 110, which are direct attacks on trans youth and their families.

I also speak from community, not just policy. My partner and I have been leaders in women's rugby for years. I have organized against transphobic parents on my child's soccer team. I am a fierce trans ally because I have walked alongside trans community members in real life, and I will govern like it.

Colorado has taken important steps to protect access to evidence-based gender-affirming care, and I strongly support continuing those protections. I was proud to pass SB29, legislation protecting doctors and healthcare practitioners who provide gender-affirming care from out-of-state attempts to investigate or prosecute them for providing lawful healthcare in Colorado.

I believe healthcare decisions should remain between patients, families, and medical professionals, not politicians. As attacks on LGBTQ+ rights increase nationally, Colorado must continue standing firmly in support of bodily autonomy, privacy, and access to medically necessary care.

As a legislator, I would oppose efforts to restrict gender-affirming care through state legislation, funding decisions, or administrative barriers. I would also support strengthening legal protections for patients, providers, and families seeking care in Colorado, while ensuring strong data privacy protections so sensitive medical information cannot be misused.

I also believe Colorado should continue working closely with healthcare providers, civil rights organizations, and impacted communities to ensure our laws remain responsive to evolving legal challenges and federal pressure. Colorado should continue to be a state where LGBTQ+ individuals can live safely, access healthcare with dignity, and receive evidence-based medical care free from political interference.

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.

In 2025, I passed legislation to require insurers to cover gender affirming care, codifying our agency rules to ensure that the federal government could not take this life saving health care away. Doctors, patients and families should be making health care decisions, not politicians and not insurance companies. I will continue to oppose efforts to roll protections for gender affirming care back and work to protect our state's shield laws which protect doctors and other health care providers from political attacks from other states and the federal government. I will continue to work with the Attorney General's office to support their efforts fight court challenges to these protections.

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.

Gender-affirming care is health care, full stop. And while I’m glad we have passed shield laws to protect patients and providers, as well as passed legislation to require health benefit plans to include gender-affirming care, there’s a lot more we need to do to defend these protections. We need to pass robust legislation aimed at protecting patient privacy and strengthening existing protections so that federal pressure and court challenges can’t undo the progress we’ve already made. We also need real accountability, oversight, and transparency so that insurers and providers aren’t erecting barriers that make accessing care impossible. I was glad to see the recent Colorado Supreme Court decision requiring Children’s Hospital Colorado to provide gender-affirming services – this shows the role our state can play in making sure everyone can access the care they need.

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.

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.

I support protecting access to gender-affirming care and will work to defend those protections against any attempt to undermine them.

Medical decisions belong between patients, families, and their healthcare providers, not politicians. Gender-affirming care is evidence-based, medically necessary care, and for many people it is lifesaving.

As a legislator, I will oppose any bill that seeks to restrict access to gender-affirming care, deny insurance coverage, limit provider protections, or create barriers through licensing or administrative rules.

I would also support strengthening legal protections for providers, patients, and families so they are shielded from politically motivated investigations or out-of-state attempts to interfere with lawful care provided in Colorado. We have taken steps in this direction, and we should continue.

We need to protect public funding where appropriate. We must ensure that state programs and insurance systems do not quietly create inequities by excluding medically necessary care for transgender Coloradans.

Federal actions are threatening these rights, Colorado must be prepared to use every legal tool available, including litigation when necessary, to defend our laws and our residents.

People deserve the freedom to access medically appropriate care without government interference or political attacks. I will always stand for protecting that right.

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.

This session we tried to push back on the Federal ban on gender affirming care by our hospitals, but this has been an uphill battle because of the threat of losing Federal funding for those hospitals that provide gender-affirming care. Fortunately, four families sued Children’s Hospital, and the Colorado Supreme Court recently ordered the trial court to issue a preliminary injunction directing Children’s Hospital Colorado to once again provide health care for transgender youth. I will be watching anxiously to learn of the lower court’s decision. With our tight budget this past session and a tight budget next session, the state’s general fund cannot backfill funding that hospitals may lose from the Federal government if they pull funding because of this treatment.

We could codify these protection into the Colorado constitution, continue to fight against sharing this information with the federal government, work to quickly make new legislation that responds to the attacks of the federal government to maintain a safe state of Colorado.

I have long fought to protect gender affirming care in our state, including supporting vital legislative efforts such as HB25-1309. I will also be working to beat Initiatives 109 and 110 at the ballot box as these measures are regressive, dangerous, and out of line with the values of our state. This year I was proud to support HB26-1322 which is a vital measure to protect against the dangers of conversion therapy. I believe all of these bills play together to create an environment where Coloradans have access to the services they need without fear of intimidation or threats. I will continue to ensure equity in access to healthcare that recognizes gender affirming care as the life-saving care it truly is.

We must continue to push back against federal pressure, as well as pushing our state providers to do better, as well as mandating insurance companies to cover gender affirming care. I am also working to help get the Graduated Income Tax question to the ballot, so we can fund healthcare and education.

Every student should be able to walk into school knowing they are safe, respected, and able to learn. I would strengthen student civil rights protections, fund enforcement, and use state oversight when districts fail to protect students. A student’s safety should not depend on their zip code, local politics, or whether their district chooses to do the right thing.

State law must clearly protect students from harassment, discrimination, retaliation, and exclusion. It should require districts to have real response plans, respect students’ identities, provide disability accommodations, and ensure public dollars are not used to support programs that discriminate. Funding matters because rights are only meaningful if students and families can access remedies, which means we need to fund the Colorado Civil Rights Division.

This has been a priority throughout my time in the legislature. In my first session, I ran SB23-296, which codified Title IX protections, lowered the bar for harassment by removing the “severe or pervasive” requirement, and required every district to have a response plan. I sponsored HB24-1039 to ensure students are called by their chosen names, ran SB26-125 to strengthen protections for students with disabilities, and worked to limit book banning.

I agree our schools' climates are essential to ensuring students feel safe, respected, and supported, which ultimately impacts their long term success. Students deserve safety regardless of their identity, background, disability, or religion. Colorado’s schools should be places where all students can learn free from bullying, discrimination, or fear.

State law plays an essential role in establishing clear, enforceable protections for students, including protections against discrimination based on protected classes. We must ensure schools have strong anti-bullying policies, inclusive nondiscrimination standards that are enforced by administrations, and fair disciplinary practices that do not disproportionately harm marginalized students.

Funding is equally important. Schools need resources for mental health support, counselors, special education services, language access programs, and staff training on inclusion, de-escalation, and cultural competency. Safe and supportive schools require investment. Too frequently in Colorado that investment is determined by zip code, so the state legislature must ensure better access for all students.

The state should also ensure transparency, accountability, and consistent enforcement of civil rights protections while partnering with educators, families, and local communities to address concerns constructively.

In 2022, as the former Executive Director of the Colorado Democratic Latino Caucus, I helped launch and lead the 1192 Coalition, bringing together the Latino, Black, and LGBTQ Caucuses as well as community advocates to ensure compliance with HB19-1192, fighting back against Republican attempts to disregard the commission’s recommendations and aimed to remove critical histories of marginalized communities in the state education standards in history and civil government. This coalition was successful in ensuring the SBoE moved forward with the commission’s recommendations.

Public schools must, by law, be inclusive and I'll support legislation to ensure they continue to be, just as I have fought for inclusive and representative education in the past.

I also oppose public dollars going to private or quasi-private institutions that could potentially discriminate and support a legal requirement that any school (public, charter, private, etc) that receives a single dollar of public money be inclusive and not discriminatory towards the LGBTQ+ community, immigrants, students with disabilities, etc. As a parent of school-aged kids, I will fight to ensure our schools are inclusive - I want to make sure my kids are educated in a system that supports diversity and encourages students to be who they are.

In my previous work helping to establish clear and inclusive standards for comprehensive sex ed in Colorado, I learned a lot about how public schools operate. I hold very firmly to the idea that public schools should serve their public, meaning they should be safe and inclusive spaces for every member of a community. Schools that do not meet that requirement or could not pass an audit of their processes, should not receive state funding, period. I know this is not a particularly nuanced or possibly popular position, but the fact of the matter is that the state gets to make funding decisions. I find it abhorrent that we would continue funding entities which allow for bullying or hostility towards students.

The most urgent school safety issue right now is not infrastructure. It is fear. Immigrant families are keeping kids home. LGBTQ students are told they don’t belong. Teachers are afraid to do their jobs. I am part of a parent organizing effort that trains families to show up as allies for immigrant families and teachers at my daughter’s school. And while we are doing what he can to organize locally, as a legislator, I can bring that to the state level.

I would follow the lead of the two Latine DPS school board members who have endorsed me: DJ Torres and Xochitl Gaytan, both of whom are experts on racial inequity in education. This includes joining their work to ban ICE on school property. And to fund a curriculum that reflects the full diversity of our communities, oppose outing policies, and school-based mental health supports. Schools should be places every child feels they belong. That requires policy, funding, and leadership that says it clearly.

As a legislator, I believe every child deserves to feel safe, respected, and supported at school regardless of their sexual orientation, gender identity, race, immigration status, disability, religion, or background. Public schools should be places where students can learn without fear of bullying, discrimination, or political attacks.

State law plays an important role in setting clear protections and expectations. I support maintaining and strengthening Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws, ensuring schools have inclusive policies, and protecting access to mental health support, affirming environments, and culturally competent education. Schools must also have clear procedures to address harassment and bullying quickly and effectively.

Funding matters as well. We must ensure schools have adequate counselors, social workers, language access services, special education resources, and training for educators so they can support diverse student populations. I also support investments in restorative practices and trauma-informed approaches that help students feel connected and safe.

Oversight is equally important. The state should ensure that civil rights protections are being enforced consistently across districts and that families have meaningful avenues to report discrimination or exclusionary treatment.

I will continue working to ensure Colorado schools remain welcoming, inclusive, and safe for every student.

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.

Regardless of whether they live in Boulder or Baca County, every student has the right to be safe and supported as their true authentic self. We should not use local control as an excuse to condone discrimination and harassment of LGBTQ kids. State policy and funding should support these goals. While we have put some protections in place for kids to make sure their school districts and teachers and not engaging in harassment or discrimination, we should examine how we can tie state funding to these requirements so that school districts need to meet certain basic, nondiscrimination requirements in order to receive state funding.

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.

Our schools need to be places of learning, but learning becomes all but impossible when students are facing discrimination or an unsafe environment due to their identity. I proudly prime sponsored HB24-1039 in 2024, prohibiting deliberate deadnaming of kids in Colorado public schools and requiring local districts to adopt a policy on chosen names compliance. Not every district is going about this exactly as we’d like, and we continue to need local advocacy and activism, but I’m confident in the statutory language we chose and its durability. This type of legislation means very little in practice if it is not being enforced, and we’ll need meaningful accountability when schools fail to meet their obligations.

And finally, many Colorado schools simply don’t have the resources they need to be inclusive and safe places for all students. Disability accommodation, school counselors, nondiscrimination training for educators, and multilingual classes are all critical for students’ wellbeing and inclusivity. They also routinely fall by the wayside when our schools are underfunded, as they currently are. I’ll be advocating for a yes vote on the school funding measures that will be on the ballot with me this November.

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.

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.

Public schools should be safe, welcoming places where every student can learn, grow, and feel they belong. That means protecting all the groups mentioned above from discrimination, bullying, and exclusion.

State law must provide clear protections and strong accountability. I support strengthening anti-discrimination policies so every school district has consistent standards for student safety, privacy, and equal access to opportunities. Students should not lose protections based on where they live.

Funding is also essential. Schools need resources for counselors, mental health support, inclusive curriculum, staff training, and programs that address bullying and harassment before they escalate. Supporting educators with professional development helps ensure schools are places of respect and understanding.

Oversight matters because protections are only meaningful if they are enforced. The state should ensure complaints are handled fairly, families have accessible reporting options, and districts are held accountable when they fail to protect students.

Every child deserves the chance to succeed without fear. Our responsibility is to make sure schools reflect that promise with fairness, dignity, and opportunity for all.

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.

Colorado schools must provide a safe and inclusive environment for all students in the school community. When I was on the Board of Education of BVSD, I was very proud that we included LGBTQ students in our anti-discrimination policy. When each segment of the student population is specifically included in antidiscrimination policies it shows that LGBTQ students, along with all our other students, are valued. The state of Colorado is one of eight states that have local control of its school districts, meaning policies are set by the local school boards, not by the state. The state Board of Education and the Colorado Department of Education oversee school districts. I am not certain how the state Legislature can guarantee and inclusive and safe environment for all students. That being said, if a parent or student reached out to me about feeling unsafe, I would certainly find the right avenue to help the student to feel safe.

All schools receiving school funds, must comply with state law and title 9 protections. We could work to hold school districts more accountable to ensuring schools are responding quickly to situations, offering training, etc.

Public education must stay public. I believe that is the first step to ensuring that our education system is inclusive of all identities and beliefs. As a former public school teacher in a Title I school, I have seen firsthand how critical quality public education is and how our public schools must remain safe for all students. In addition to fully funding our public schools, we must remain united against the privatization of education in the United States and ensure that all students, regardless of background, have access to the same educational opportunities. This means empowering teachers with the resources and curriculum they need to teach an honest (and sometimes uncomfortable) account of different lived experiences in our country, while supporting students in embracing all of who they are.

I passed a law that made sure that kids could wear any clothes they chose for graduation, including indigenous regalia, their heritage pride like a mexican/american stole, and are able to also wear pride flag stoles or religious attire, in other states like Florida we saw attacks on trying to mandate that kids couldn't wear clothes that were gender affirming.

I would anchor laws, regulations, and funding decisions in evidence, medical expertise, and the lived realities of the people affected. Science is both foundational and dynamic. As an engineer, I rely on the scientific method to problem solve: looking at cause and effect, analyzing trends, reviewing sources, and adjusting when the evidence requires it.

That is how I approach policy. I oppose efforts to override medical knowledge or social science with ideological definitions in health care, education, or social services. When decisions affect LGBTQ+ Coloradans, especially transgender people, the state should rely on credible medical standards, peer-reviewed research, data from agencies and providers, and testimony from impacted communities.

I often say “data is my love language,” and I mean it. I would rather see trends, data, and implementation plans than slogans or political talking points. Policy must be based in fact, not ideology.

When bills or amendments misrepresent scientific consensus, I call that out in committee and on the floor. I would continue using that same approach to defend evidence-based care, inclusive schools, and funding decisions that reflect what actually keeps LGBTQ+ Coloradans safe, healthy, and supported.

By doing so. The science on everything from the benefits of familial & social acceptance, to positive outcomes of gender-affirming care, to the negative impacts of conversion therapy, and countless other issues impacting the LGBTQ+ community could not be clearer. We must legislate from this place of science that centers the voices of those impacted, and no other.

The pressures you mentioned aren't my politics or my ideologies, nor do they reflect those of my community. I am very proud of that and will continued to lead from that place.

Religious beliefs should not be used to deny other people equal access to services, healthcare, housing, education, or legal protections, particularly those utilizing tax payer dollars.

When organizations or providers accept public funding or serve the public, they have a responsibility to follow Colorado’s nondiscrimination laws and treat all people fairly, including LGBTQ+ Coloradans. Allowing broad religious exemptions that permit discrimination undermines civil rights protections and creates real harm for people seeking essential services and care. Religious exemptions have been used to discriminatory ends in the past just as we are seeing them used now. I don't want to repeat this shameful history.

Colorado should continue protecting equal protection under the law by ensuring that personal beliefs do not become a basis for denying someone healthcare, safety, dignity, or participation in public life. We can respect religious diversity while still maintaining clear standards that prevent discrimination.

Every Coloradan deserves to know they will be treated with fairness and respect, regardless of who they are or whom they love.

I support ensuring our Attorney General’s office has the resources they need to fight the federal government’s attacks on LGBTQ+ Coloradans, and work to ensure the legislature can create bills to blunt attempts to discriminate by ballot measure, for which there are many. I support legislation such as HB26-1322, which establishes the ability for conversion therapy survivors to bring civil actions. As with any ideological or political pressure, I align my work and will legislate in partnership with the leaders and communities directly impacted by the decisions at hand.

If an entity receives public money, they should not be able to claim exemptions from laws that allow them to discriminate. If a healthcare facility or others do not comply with anti-discrimination laws and provide gender affirming care, abortion services, etc due to their ideological views, they should not receive public funds. I support legislation and regulations that strengthen compliance mechanisms and expand access to services, not restrict or erode access.

As an abortion rights advocate I have long since not been influenced by ideological or political forces that push anything anti-science. So I'll be honest I don't know what else we could anchor our state laws and policies in other than science and medical based evidence.

All requests for religious exemptions on anything are a non-starter for me. Religious institutions should be entirely privately funded and still subject to state regulation particularly if they are medical or service providers, period.

I pursued an MBA in health sector management specifically to understand how healthcare systems work and how to use financial and clinical data to advocate effectively. I build my own models. I read the research. When ideological pressure conflicts with evidence, I will bring the evidence and explain why publicly.

And for what it’s worth, I would support requiring state health agencies to ground their policies in peer-reviewed medical consensus, and I would oppose any attempt to classify evidence-based gender-affirming care as experimental or elective for purposes of coverage or funding decisions. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Medical Association, and decades of research are not a political opinion.

Religious freedom is a real and important right. It does not include the right to use public funding to discriminate against LGBTQ people.

State-funded services, programs, and protections exist to serve all Coloradans. When an entity accepts public dollars, it accepts the obligation to serve the public without discrimination. I would oppose any religious exemption claim that seeks to use state funding as cover for denying LGBTQ people access to services they are entitled to, including access to faith-based childcare.

I grew up a Catholic missionary and as an adult, I joined Dignity, an LGBTQ-affirming Catholic community. My faith and my commitment to LGBTQ equality are not in conflict. I say this because I want to be clear that this is not an anti-religion position. It is a position about the appropriate limits of religious exemptions in publicly funded contexts. The state should not be a vehicle for one group's religious beliefs to override another community's civil rights.

As a legislator, I believe laws and public policy should be grounded in evidence, expertise, and the lived realities of the people affected not political rhetoric or misinformation. Decisions impacting LGBTQ+ people, particularly around healthcare, education, and civil rights, should be informed by established medical standards, peer-reviewed research, and the guidance of licensed professional organizations.

In Colorado, I have supported policies rooted in evidence-based care, including passing SB29, which protects providers who offer gender-affirming healthcare from out-of-state attempts to punish or criminalize that care. Major medical organizations recognize gender-affirming care as evidence-based and medically necessary for many patients, and policymakers should respect the expertise of healthcare professionals rather than substitute political ideology for medical judgment.

I also believe legislative processes should include meaningful engagement with doctors, mental health professionals, educators, researchers, civil rights advocates, parents, and impacted communities. Good policymaking requires listening to experts and understanding the real-world consequences laws have on people’s safety, health, and dignity.

When political pressure conflicts with established science or civil rights protections, I will continue to support policies that prioritize evidence, public health, individual freedom, and equal protection under the law.

I strongly support religious freedom, but I do not believe religion should be used as a basis to deny people equal access to public services, healthcare, housing, education, or protections under the law. When organizations or entities receive public funding or participate in state programs, they have a responsibility to serve the public fairly and without discrimination.

Colorado has worked hard to build strong civil rights protections for LGBTQ+ people, and I believe those protections must be upheld consistently. Claims for religious exemptions should not become a loophole that allows discrimination or the denial of medically necessary care, particularly for vulnerable communities who already face barriers to services and support.

As a legislator, I believe we must carefully balance constitutional protections for religious exercise with the state’s compelling interest in preventing discrimination and ensuring equal access to services. Courts have long recognized that religious freedom is a fundamental right, but it does not give individuals or institutions blanket authority to harm others or deny equal treatment in publicly funded spaces.

I would continue supporting policies that protect LGBTQ+ Coloradans from discrimination while ensuring state agencies, contractors, healthcare systems, and publicly funded programs operate in compliance with Colorado civil rights laws.

"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.

As a former scientific researcher, I believe that policy making should be grounded in evidence. As a policy maker, I believe we should use the consensus from the medical community as the basis for our decision making, whether we are discussing gender affirming care, conversion "therapy," or vaccines. As a prime sponsor of SB26-032 we specifically decoupled our states vaccine recommendations from the pseudo science that is taking over vaccine policy at the federal level and made sure Colorado could rely upon the evidence based policy recommendations of major medical associations like the American Academy of Pediatrics. I passed HB25-1309 to codify gender affirming care into Colorado Insurance law because gender affirming care is evidence based and saves lives.

While the U.S. Supreme Court may disagree, I do not believe that we should allow folks who receive state funding to provide services to Coloradans to discriminate against people based on religious or any other reasons. Supporting the free exercise of religion and the first amendment does not mean that state services need to fund organizations who would seek to exclude, discriminate against or harass LGBTQ people. State funding should be used to foster inclusion and state services should be available to everyone, regardless of who they love or what their gender is.

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.

Public policy should be rooted in evidence and built through deliberation and consensus. There is no role for religious dogma or bigotry, and separation of church and state is critical in preserving our multi-cultural, pluralist democracy. We do this by consulting with affected communities and those with the relevant scientific and legal expertise in the legislative process. Discrimination against LGBTQ+ kids leads to worse mental health outcomes and higher incidences of suicide, whereas gender-affirming care and the presence of supportive adults are protective factors. Far-right attempts to manufacture controversies about what sports kids are allowed to play only serve to distract from this reality.

People and institutions have the right to their beliefs, but their beliefs do not entitle them to discriminate against others. This is doubly true regarding institutions that are publicly funded and provide a public service.

I oppose any religious exemption claims that allow publicly funded programs to discriminate against LGTBQ+ individuals, whether that’s in health care, housing, education, or any other sector. I would also support stronger enforcement mechanisms as well as a clear, accessible complaint process so individuals know where to turn if their rights are being violated under the guise of religious liberty.

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.

Laws and public policy should be grounded in facts, research, and expert guidance, not fear, politics, or ideology. When decisions affect LGBTQ+ people, especially in healthcare, education, and public safety, we have a responsibility to rely on evidence-based medical standards and established social science.

That means listening to physicians, mental health professionals, educators, and researchers who work directly with impacted communities, as well as the people whose lives are affected by these policies. Gender-affirming care, for example, is supported by major medical organizations because it improves health outcomes and saves lives. Legislators should not substitute political rhetoric for medical expertise.

I would oppose efforts to restrict care, education, or civil rights based on misinformation or moral panic. Instead, I would support legislation that requires agencies and public programs to use recognized professional standards and transparent data when shaping policy and funding decisions.

Oversight also matters. We should require regular review of state programs to ensure they are meeting outcomes and serving communities fairly, while protecting privacy and civil rights.

Religious freedom is a fundamental right, but it should never be used as a license to discriminate or deny someone equal access to public services, healthcare, housing, or education. When services are funded by taxpayers and intended to serve the public, every person deserves fair treatment and equal protection under the law.

I respect sincerely held religious beliefs, but personal beliefs cannot override another person’s civil rights or block access to essential care. LGBTQ+ Coloradans should not be turned away from healthcare providers, shelters, adoption services, or public programs because of who they are.

As a legislator, I would oppose overly broad religious exemptions that create loopholes in nondiscrimination laws or allow state-funded entities to deny services. We must ensure that public dollars are not used to support discrimination.

Colorado should continue strengthening clear legal standards so religious liberty and civil rights are balanced appropriately with the understanding that government has a duty to protect equal access for all residents.

Our laws should reflect fairness, dignity, and respect. No one should have to choose between receiving basic services and being treated with humanity.

Good policy should improve lives, not score political points. My role is to protect people, not ideology.

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.

As an academic with a thirty-year at CU, I always try to anchor my work with data. We are fortunately that the state Legislature is firmly in Democratic hands, and we law makers nearly always anchor our legislation in evidence-based medical and social science theory (one law Democratic law maker is the exception). I will never cave to ideological or political pressure when it comes to these matters.

Colorado is always a testing ground to erode both LGBTQ+ rights and abortion rights at the ballot box. Fortunately, we have always successfully shot down these attempts, and this election will test us again. There are two initiatives aimed at the LGBTQ+ community: Initiative 109 – male and female participation in school sports, and Initiative 110 – prohibit certain surgeries on minors. Our caucus has been apprised of these initiatives through a presentation by One Colorado, who I assume is leading the charge against these. I plan to focus of my upcoming newsletters on these initiatives, as well as other initiatives that will have a negative impact on our state. I plan to title the newsletter, Decline to Sign, and explain each initiative and ask my constituents to not sign the petitions currently being circulated.

I stand firmly in the idea that health information stays between the patient and the doctor and ensuring privacy at all times.

This is why I am seeking the endorsement of organizations like this one, with the goal of utilizing your knowledge and expertise when I question the evidence presented.

I believe in the separation of church and state. I would respond by not supporting such exemptions.

First, Rocky Mountain Equality and other advocacy organizations have been, and will remain, critical to our efforts to ensure that we're making decisions as a legislature based on science, not speculation. In my community, our values are clear: Fort Collins is a place for all people to thrive, including our LGBTQ+ neighbors and friends. I have not experienced political pressure to vote otherwise; it would go against what I believe and what my community expects. That being said, the data around these issues is clear and compelling (using housing as an example, where nearly 1/3 of transgender people have reported being unhoused at some point in their life), and the action we take as a state must match the medical and social science data we have. Furthermore, we must trust the lived experiences of the LGBTQ+ community in making decisions around statute and funding of services in our state.

I'm a former clergy member in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. I pastored a congregation of house churches that primarily provided outreach, affirmation, and support to LGBTQ+ individuals and families here in Northern Colorado. I'd start by saying that if your religion is defined by determining winners and losers, you're doing it wrong. I also believe that the laws of our state should apply to all organizations, and that limiting access to protections, services, or programs, using religion as an excuse, is just blatant discrimination. People deserve access to the same resources regardless of their identity or orientation. Period.

Some of the tactics we have used have been adding federal protections to our state statues in case they are repealed, we also continue to sue the trump administration and we have had wins and loses, this is the time for the state to protect our communities and it's so frustrating that we are also dealing with major budget deficits, the rich and corporations must pay their fair share so we can properly fund services and safety net programs so we don't leave anyone behind.

I wouldn't support exemptions.

Meaningful engagement starts with relationships before legislation is drafted or votes are taken. LGBTQ+ people are part of every community in my district, and they deserve to be heard directly, not treated as an abstract constituency.

I have deep relationships in Larimer County with organizations and leaders who have been working on LGBTQ+ equality, education, and community safety for a decade or longer. I rely on conversations with advocates, school district leaders, LGBTQ+-friendly businesses, and community members to understand what people are experiencing and how state policy can better respond.

I also attend Pride events in my district whenever I can. Pride is joyful, but it is also one of the places where people speak most honestly about what is working, what is not, and where they still feel unsafe or unsupported. Some of the most direct and unfiltered conversations I have had about policy have happened at community Pride celebrations.

At the Capitol, I would continue engaging LGBTQ+ advocacy organizations, lobbyists, providers, educators, students, and families before making decisions that affect their lives.

I collaborated with LGTBQ+ groups to bring SB26-18 this year which protects youth name change records and - in its original form - would have ensured family courts could consider parental recognition of protected classes when making determinations. I was grateful to RME for their support of this bill, as well as - in the end - One Colorado's and Bread & Roses'. This collaboration taught me the benefits of patience and continued conversations in policy efforts, as better policy was made through the work of bringing each of us along.

I will continue to prioritize consistent, direct engagement with LGBTQ+ individuals, advocates, and community-based organizations like RME to ensure their experiences and concerns inform my legislative work. I also think it is important to show up in community, including at our local Pride fests and drag events.

I always operate on the basis of building relationships and trust with people and communities. I would appreciate the opportunity to meet with LGBTQ+ leaders and communities both in my district and in Colorado prior to taking office and continuously throughout my tenure to ensure I understand priorities and pressing issues on an ongoing basis.

In leading up to specific legislative sessions, conversations about legislation need to begin in the summer and fall, long before session begins. While important stakeholdering does happen during the session, it’s too busy of a time to be starting conversations then. My goal is to meet with organizations and leaders before the session starts, so that when things need to move quickly during session everyone with an interest in legislation is already familiar and can engage meaningfully.

As a proud queer woman I would start with engaging my friends and personal networks in conversations about their lives and needs to help generate needed ideas, and I would meet with statewide and local organizations that serve these communities as primary stakeholders in any of this work. I would hold town halls in queer friendly spaces (currently my campaign has exclusively used queer friendly spaces for our events) and to meet with queer leaders and parents of LGBTQ kids. I would also work with local education associations and school districts to figure out how to best protect our queer students and to get their take as stakeholders as well.

I am queer, and community engagement is not something I will do from a distance. I will continue regular conversations with One Colorado, participate in the Stonewall Democrats, Victory Institute (I am a Victory Fund endorsed candidate), and community organizations with the on-the-ground expertise I need to legislate well. I have regular relationships with their leaders now and will maintain them as a legislator.

To me, that looks like calling someone before a vote, not after. Especially on tricky health care bills where anti-LGBTQ+ provisions can slide in under the radar. It means following the lead of people with lived expertise by stakeholdering during the off season, not just inviting testimony at a committee. It means showing up at community events, pride celebrations, and memorial services when there is no vote pending, because that’s how we build community. I have been active in LGBTQ+ for years (including in rugby), so I’m not starting from scratch.

As the incumbent, I have been proud to strongly support LGBTQ+ community members and to work alongside advocates, healthcare providers, educators, and civil rights organizations to advance equality and protect fundamental rights in Colorado.

I believe meaningful engagement starts with building authentic relationships and maintaining open communication with LGBTQ+ individuals and community-based organizations throughout the year, not only during legislative session. In my work at the legislature, I regularly meet with stakeholders, advocacy groups, and impacted communities to help inform my legislative priorities, votes, and oversight responsibilities.

I have supported and passed legislation protecting LGBTQ+ Coloradans, including SB29, which protects providers offering gender-affirming care from out-of-state attempts to criminalize or punish that care. I have also worked on broader issues involving privacy protections, healthcare access, anti-discrimination efforts, and educational opportunity.

As an elected official, I believe it is important that impacted communities have a seat at the table early in the policymaking process. I remain committed to listening, collaborating, and ensuring LGBTQ+ Coloradans are treated with dignity, fairness, and respect under Colorado law.

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!

I sincerely value the relationships I have with community organizations like RMEQ. I have been proud to pass legislation that has been supported and spearheaded by RMEQ in the past (e.g. accurate gender markers on death certificates and gender affirming care in insurance requirements) and I will continue to listen to the LGBTQ+ community about what is needed to make sure everyone is protected and has the health care they need and deserve. I will continue to reach out to RMEQ to listen to their legislative priorities and would love to continue to partner with RMEQ to promote equity for the LGBTQ+ community.

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.

Equity and inclusion are central to why I first ran for office. I’m a working-class LGBTQ+ person who has faced mental and physical health struggles, and I didn’t see many people with my life experiences in elected office. During my first term, I made it a priority to listen to impacted communities when crafting policy, and I plan to do the same when reelected. I already have a strong working relationship with local LGBTQ+ community-based organizations like Prism Community Collective, and I will continue to build and maintain those relationships in office.

While it can be tempting to think Colorado has turned a corner and bigotry is a thing of the past, it was within my lifetime that Colorado was known as “the hate state” because of the discriminatory nature of our constitution. The massacre at Club Q here in HD-16 strikes incredibly close to home. We will see further efforts to erode our rights on the ballot this year, including Proposed Initiatives #109 and #110. That history, and the threats we still face, are why meaningful engagement can’t be symbolic or occasional.

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.

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.

If elected, meaningful engagement starts with listening, not just during campaign season, but consistently throughout my time in office. LGBTQ+ Coloradans deserve representation that is informed by their lived experiences, not assumptions.

I would maintain regular communication with LGBTQ+ community members, advocacy organizations, healthcare providers, educators, and youth leaders to understand the real impact of proposed legislation and state policies. That means attending community meetings, hosting accessible town halls, meeting with local organizations, and making sure people know my office is open and responsive.

I also believe engagement must include those whose voices are often overlooked—rural residents, transgender individuals, LGBTQ+ youth, seniors, and people navigating multiple barriers such as disability, housing insecurity, or immigration challenges.

Legislative priorities should be shaped by the people most affected. Before voting on bills involving healthcare, education, housing, or civil rights, I would seek direct input from impacted communities and policy experts to ensure decisions are informed, practical, and protective.

Representation is not just about speaking for people—it is about creating space for people to be heard and making sure that voice leads to action, accountability, and stronger policy outcomes.

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.

I am well-known by the leadership and lobbyists at RMEQ and One Colorado (Nadine served on the search committee I chaired for hiring the CU president), and they know that they can always reach out to me about an issue, a bill that I might be able to sponsor, etc. I attend the wonderful annual Garden Party sponsored by RMEQ and am friends with many in the LGBTQ+ community. I think everyone knows I will always have an open door and will welcome any input they want to provide for me.

I was the Mayor of Loveland for 8 years, and in that time I have a history of showing up and engaging with the LGBTQ+ communities locally, attending, volunteering and speaking at local events, also listening and responding to the community members needs, etc. I would continue this effort, but also engage further with organizations like this one to gain additional knowledge of how best I can support.

I continue to have a strong relationship with LGBTQ+ organizations and businesses here in Northern Colorado. This is, in part, due to my background as Lutheran clergy, but also as a part of our continued engagement on these issues at the state and local level. I don't know what I don't know - so engagement and advocacy from the community here in Fort Collins remains critical as we continue to fight for a state where all people are affirmed and welcomed for who they are.

I am the first queer Latina elected in the Western slope and I will continue to support and advocate for our communities as well as continue building coalitions and pushing orgs to get out of their silos.