A ‘county average’ for pretzels: Colorado’s next price-control creep

By Rep. Ken DeGraaf | Guest Commentary, Rocky Mountain Voice

HB26-1012
“A PERSON IS PRESUMED TO BE ENGAGED IN AN UNFAIR OR DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICE IF THE PERSON CHARGES A CAPTIVE CONSUMER A PRICE FOR AN ANCILLARY GOOD OR SERVICE THAT IS MORE THAN THE AVERAGE PRICE OFFERED FOR A COMPARABLE GOOD OR SERVICE SOLD IN THE COUNTY IN WHICH THE CAPTIVE CONSUMER PURCHASES THE ANCILLARY GOOD OR SERVICE”

Welcome to bill #12 of over 700 to be considered and passed into law in 120 days of session.

The Democrats keep piling on regulations that jack up costs for everyone, then act like the fix is squeezing vendors harder—instead of slashing the taxes, fees, and mandates they’ve created.

They could drop sales taxes on basics, cut absurd airport fees, or repeal rules that inflate prices across the board. But no—they keep layering on bad policy with worse, like HB26-1012, marketed as boosting affordability and protecting consumers. 

Truth is, it’s classic government overreach: spawning burrocracy (governance by jackassery), threatening higher prices, and scaring off vendors from fairs, concerts, and events that make Colorado fun—things that stave off that day “after labor has become not only a means of life but life’s prime want.” 

Despite the massively regulatory nature of tracking pre-crisis community-averages, it is telling of the Governor’s priorities that neither has a fiscal note.

HB26-1012 builds directly on HB25-1010 (no surprise–same sponsors), hawked as a shield against “price gouging” during emergencies. The pitch was protecting families from greedy corporations, but it really gave the governor broad authority to clamp down whenever markets get bumpy or disasters strike. 

In practice, that stifles supply response. Why would a retailer reroute trucks full of water or fuel to a crisis zone if they can’t cover the rush costs? Prices guide resources to where they’re needed; artificial caps disrupt that and prolong shortages.

Neither bill sets exact prices—they just outlaw what you can’t charge if it’s labeled “too high” or over some arbitrary line. 

HB25-1010 flagged +10% hikes as suspect in crises; HB26-1012 now links venue prices to an undefined “county average” for similar items. 

When every deviation needs justification against a community standard, the next step is obvious: legislation spelling out an official “suggested” benchmark sellers must defend. That’s price control dressed up as fairness—slow, regulatory creep.

The mechanism in HB26-1012 is simple but dangerous: exceed the elusive “county average” and your price is presumed illegal, but refutable in court at the risk of treble-damages. 

Figuring out that average for a drink, pretzel, or parking spot demands forced reporting from thousands of sellers or patchy, unreliable data. 

Both paths lead to expanded government machinery—data systems, audits, disputes. Small operators take the hardest hit, drowning in paperwork and uncertainty—“give me the man, I’ll give you the crime.”

Count on this new layer of oversight arriving as a TABOR-proof “enterprise” that charges fees for its supposedly vital work to fund its self-imposed vital work.

That’s the Democrat playbook: grow control, then launch fee-based enterprises that sidestep TABOR caps and voter oversight–they will not be happy until you have nothing. 

These quasi-state entities, exempt from revenue limits, collect fees that function like hidden taxes. Legislators keep them just small enough to avoid referendums, quietly expanding government footprint without accountability—death by 1000 cuts.

HB26-1012 enforcement will demand fresh hires to analyze data, field complaints, define equivalents, compute averages, and adjudicate challenges; all with no fiscal note. 

Funding? Not general taxes (which trigger TABOR)—but vendor permits, venue add-ons, ticket surcharges, or a brand-new “consumer fairness enterprise” fee. Intrusion sold as public benefit, paid through backdoor charges that burden businesses and buyers alike. 

Zero openness, zero public vote—just relentless bureaucratic expansion.

The reach goes far beyond major airports and pro venues. Extending “captive audience” protections to big events pulls in county fairs, rodeos, festivals, and local halls—exactly where small, seasonal vendors try to turn a small profit despite steep overhead: site fees, pop-up infrastructure, security, storage limits, unpredictable crowds. 

Benchmarking their prices against a hazy “county average” is nonsense; the bill leaves “related items,” “similar offerings,” “rival sellers,” and average methodology completely undefined. That guarantees uneven enforcement—businesses left to guess, then fight to survive.

Bottom line: these are optional buys. A beer at a show or burger at the rodeo is discretionary—nothing like the genuine hardship of rent, power bills, groceries, daycare, or fuel. 

Meddling in entertainment pricing does zero for daily survival struggles.

Free markets use prices to balance supply and demand. 

Picture a fair elephant ear—big fried dough, sugar-dusted. It might sting at $6–$12 (far above any diner waffle; no standard “community” price exists for these high-cost, short-run treats). But that price stops people from grabbing armloads and tossing half. It allocates scarce supply to folks who want it most.

Imagine a regulator capping it at fifty cents for “fairness.” Lines would surge, early buyers hoard, waste piles up, and the stand empties instantly. Late arrivals walk away empty-handed, resources squandered, vendor bleeds money. 

Come next season? The vendor skips the event—or jacks prices elsewhere to stay afloat. Choices shrink, lines grow, waste rises—the market’s natural rationing evaporates.

It all seems to loop back to Governor Polis’s flagship HB26-1001 (the HOME Act), which pushes “affordable” housing by mandating fast-tracking dense projects on public and nonprofit land—overriding local zoning and community input starting 2027. 

Promoted as streamlining supply, it’s really top-down imposition of concentrated low-income developments destined to become islanded ghettos, eroding community self-governance. 

Layer after layer of Democrat taxes and rules (codes, energy standards, compliance burdens) inflate living costs statewide, forcing these heavy-handed “good intentions” that drag everyone toward an equitably totalitarian “minimum living wage”—from each according to ability, to each according to need; all centrally decreed.

The twist? HB26-1012 will probably increase costs. Compliance headaches, lawsuits, and uncertainty flow straight into higher base prices, fewer specials, slimmer menus, or vendors bailing entirely. Reduced competition and options—the textbook recipe for inflation.

If affordability were the real goal, this would have landed in Business Affairs & Labor for serious talk about jobs and small enterprises. Instead, it went to judiciary because the free market has become a crime. 

Make no mistake, 1012 is about growing state power, not easing family burdens.

Democrats fueled the affordability mess with over-regulation and heavy taxes. Their answer? Tighter reins, suspicion of profits, more market meddling. 

Yet markets thrive when people freely choose—pay up or pass. That’s genuine pricing power, not officials inventing averages and penalizing winners.

Real relief means removing government’s foot from Colorado producers’ necks and letting markets function. 

Democrats find that intolerable—so dismantling bad laws demands replacing bad lawmakers. It starts with 2000 liberty-minded patriots winning their precincts.

Rep. Ken DeGraaf represents House District 22 in northeast Colorado Springs and has served in the Colorado House since 2023. He’s a 27-year U.S. Air Force veteran and pilot, a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy and holds a master’s in structural dynamics from Columbia University.

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in commentary pieces are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the management of the Rocky Mountain Voice, but even so we support the constitutional right of the author to express those opinions.