By Brittany Morris Saunders and Loren Furman

Last year, following the Special Legislative Session, we wrote in Colorado Politics that delaying Colorado’s AI Act was not a setback. It was an opportunity.

We asked state leaders to pause, bring more voices to the table and take the time to get this right. That is exactly what happened.

For more than two years, stakeholders across Colorado have been grappling with how to approach AI policy. For the past five months, the structured process we called for has brought that work into focus.

Through the Governor’s AI Policy Working Group, consumer advocates, labor leaders, technology developers, employers, health care providers, education leaders, and business and tech associations like ours have spent hundreds, if not thousands, of hours working through one of the most complex policy challenges of our time.

The group was tasked with a clear but challenging goal: develop a policy framework that protects consumers while allowing Colorado’s culture of innovation to thrive. That meant balancing strong safeguards with clear, workable rules and ensuring the state remains competitive.

The result is a revised framework that reflects the group’s painstaking work and a clear path forward. The framework received unanimous support, with members voting to support it either as written or with targeted changes, as we did.

That progress did not happen on its own. It was made possible by a structured, facilitated process led by Berrick Abramson, who brought stakeholders together, ensured every voice was heard, and helped navigate difficult tradeoffs. In a conversation this complex, that kind of facilitation was essential.

This outcome represents a meaningful shift from Senate Bill 205, the Colorado AI Act.

While well intentioned, SB 205 needed greater clarity in key areas. It applied broad requirements without clearly distinguishing between those who build and those who use AI systems, and risked sweeping in low-risk applications that do not affect people’s access to essential services.

The revised framework takes a fundamentally different approach.

It more clearly distinguishes between developers and deployers, aligning responsibility with how these systems are built and used. It focuses on consequential decisions where the stakes are highest, rather than regulating low-risk uses.

It also delivers practical consumer protections. People will know when AI is used in consequential decisions, receive understandable explanations when outcomes are adverse and have the ability to request human review.

And it creates a more workable enforcement structure, with oversight led by the Attorney General and a clear rulemaking path to address issues. Strong protections and clear rules should go hand in hand.

Just as important as the policy itself is how it came together.

Consumer and labor advocates pushed to ensure protections are effective and strong. Employers and deployers brought forward how AI is used in practice. Developers contributed both technical expertise and real-world insight into how these systems are built, deployed and improved. Business and technology associations like ours represented the voice of economic drivers across Colorado, from the smallest entrepreneurs to large employers. The facilitator helped bring those perspectives together into a framework that can actually work.

This kind of progress requires bringing people together and working through difficult issues with discipline and transparency. That is exactly what this process delivered.

The result is not perfect. As drafting moves forward, continued collaboration will be important to ensure the framework works in practice. But it reflects meaningful progress and a more balanced, practical approach.

Brittany Morris Saunders is president and chief executive of the Colorado Technology Association. Loren Furman is president and chief executive of the Colorado Chamber of Commerce.