Summary#

“Transportation Network Company Consumer Protection” amends Colorado law governing transportation network companies (TNCs), adds a new consumer-protection section, and changes related worker-protection and penalty rules. Its stated goal is to support clear, consistent safety standards and a safer, reliable, accessible transportation system.

• TNCs must check drivers’ criminal histories every six months. Large-scale TNCs—those with at least 20,000 rides a month—must pay for the checks and share results with the driver.
• TNCs must create and provide safety policies, including rules to prevent account sharing and renting, address assault and crimes against drivers, and limit rides for unaccompanied youth. Drivers must be allowed to refuse someone they believe is not authorized to use the account, without being penalized for that refusal.
• TNCs must provide regular safety training to drivers and riders. The Public Utilities Commission must set training rules by June 1, 2028.
• The law sets rules for audio and video recording, incident reporting, data retention, and driver deactivation reviews. Some requirements differ by company size, and specified school- and government-focused services may be exempt if they meet conditions.
• The Commission may fine a TNC up to $1,500 per violation. The law also makes certain contract waivers invalid, requires consent before collecting biometric data, and requires TNCs to follow Colorado privacy law.

What it means for you#

• Drivers: TNCs must give drivers copies of safety policies in the language they use on the platform. If a driver is permanently deactivated after certain allegations, the policy must include meaningful human review. Drivers can challenge a deactivation and have it reconsidered internally. The bill does not guarantee that a driver will be reinstated.
• Riders: TNCs must provide safety training and maintain policies on safety and food or drinks. Large-scale TNCs cannot charge you more solely because you opt in to recording a ride. The Commission will set recording rules, including how riders can opt in and how recordings are handled.
• Drivers and riders: A TNC must get your consent before collecting biometric data, such as a face scan or voiceprint used to identify you. A complaint filer may opt in to receive updates about a driver’s deactivation challenge.
• TNCs: They must report safety incidents each year and report certain injury crashes to the Commission within 30 days. TNCs must also respond within 72 hours to specified subpoenas or search warrants for complaint-related information.
• Some school- and government-focused TNCs: Several requirements do not apply if a company meets the law’s service or revenue test and has at least 90% of its drivers complying with specified Commission rules. The exemption does not cover every requirement in the law.

Money#

No total cost estimate is available in the supplied material.

• TNCs must pay for the six-month criminal history checks if they are large-scale; the law does not state who pays for those checks at smaller companies.
• TNCs will have costs for policies, training, reporting, and recording systems. The Commission must decide whether and when drivers are reimbursed for recording technology.
• The Commission may impose fines of up to $1,500 per violation. The bill does not estimate fine revenue or public costs for rulemaking and enforcement.

What is unclear#

• The existing laws being amended were not supplied, so the exact change from current law could not be verified.
• The Commission must set many details by rule, including recording, training, data access, retention, and the timelines for companies to comply.
• The bill does not set a full process or timeline for deciding whether an allegation is substantiated or for completing a deactivation review.
• The law defines a small- or large-scale TNC by monthly rides, but the supplied text does not explain how rides are counted when a company’s volume changes.
• The bill’s criminal-history list includes indecent exposure and public indecency under language about felony offenses; the supplied text does not clearly resolve whether those offenses must be felonies to disqualify a driver.

Case for#

• The bill appears intended to address reported safety concerns by setting duties for checks, training, safety policies, and incident reporting.
• Sharing deactivation information between TNCs and requiring human review could help prevent a driver removed for serious conduct from simply moving to another platform, while allowing a driver to challenge a permanent removal.
• Public incident reports and Commission review could make safety trends easier to identify.
• Consent and rules for recordings and biometric data could give riders and drivers more control over sensitive information.

Case against#

• The bill leaves important safeguards to future Commission rules, so the practical protections and costs are not yet clear.
• Recording rides and retaining incident-related material could create privacy and data-security risks; the law does not itself settle all questions about access, storage, and deletion.
• Frequent background checks, training, reporting, and recording systems could impose significant costs, especially where reimbursement is undecided.
• A complaint triggers a deactivation review, but the bill does not fully explain how to balance prompt safety action with fair treatment of a driver facing an unproven allegation.