Stakeholders Push for AI Update as Colorado Governor Mulls Special Session

Polis, who publicly backed a federal moratorium on state enforcement of AI laws, has said AI will be part of the conversation if the legislature returns for a special session. He has expressed interest in delaying the law’s implementation date.

Polis called special sessions in 2020, 2023 and 2024. Tech groups are pushing hard for a special session this fall. Special sessions typically last three to four days.

Introduced by Senate Majority Leader Robert Rodriguez (D), the Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act (SB-205) is scheduled to take effect in February 2026. SB-318, Rodriguez’s legislative proposal to update CAIA, which failed earlier this month, would have extended the law’s enforcement date to January 2027, when his term ends.

Offices for Polis and Rodriguez didn’t comment.

Kjersten Forseth, who lobbied on behalf of Colorado AFL-CIO in AI negotiations, said some are anticipating a special session focused on the impact of federal budget cuts, with AI getting pulled into the conversation. AFL-CIO is operating as if a special session “might happen in late September, early October and if it doesn’t, then we get a little extra time” to work through issues before the 2026 session begins in January, she said. “We’re kind of getting used to these special sessions, unfortunately.”

Consumer Reports has advocated for lawmakers to strengthen the law, clarify consumer rights and remove enforcement loopholes before it goes into effect. CR didn’t take an official stance on SB-318, but the organization views the “vast majority” of proposed changes as industry-driven, said Policy Analyst Grace Gedye, who helped negotiate on behalf of consumer interests. “We’re happy to negotiate, and we would love to reach a compromise that everyone can live with, and if that happens during a special session, we’re ok with that,” she said. CR doesn’t want to see the law’s effective date delayed further because it’s not fair to Colorado consumers, who deserve transparency into AI-driven, life-changing decisions, she said.

The Colorado Technology Association and the Colorado Bankers Association have actively lobbied in AI legislative discussions. CTA “remains focused” on extending the law’s implementation date at least through 2027 and is supportive of Congress’ proposed 10-year moratorium on state AI enforcement (see 2505270049), CEO Brittany Morris Saunders said in a statement: Colorado’s AI law puts “jobs and economic growth at risk, and that’s why similar bills have been rejected or vetoed in other states. Without critical changes, SB-205 will have a tremendous impact on Colorado’s tech industry, an industry that's vitally important to our state's economy -- contributing over $100 billion to Colorado’s economy each year and accounting for 10 percent of our state’s total employment.”

Colorado Bankers Association CEO Jenifer Waller said SB-205 is a “massive bill” and adjustments will “ensure the policy works in a real-world application.” CBA believes the law “needs to be adjusted to ensure there is not discrimination, but also not harm consumers by discouraging use of AI or AI innovations.”

SB-318 proposed several key changes to the Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act:

• Eliminate the requirement for AI developers and deployers to use “reasonable care to protect consumers from any known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination.”
• Eliminate the requirement for developers and deployers to notify the attorney general “of any known or reasonably foreseeable risks of algorithmic discrimination arising from the intended uses of the high-risk artificial intelligence system.”
• Exempt deployers from special requirements if they use AI systems “solely relating to the recruitment, sourcing, or hiring of external candidates for employment, meets specified disclosure requirements, and does not employ more than specified limits on the number of full-time equivalent employees.”
• Raise the threshold for when consumers can contest AI decisions, requiring that AI be the “principal basis” for a decision, rather than a "substantial factor.”