There’s a new law that’s going into effect in Colorado that isn’t generating a lot of headlines, but you may be seeing more like this one in the future. Governor Jared Polis (D) recently signed the Pet Animal Ownership in Housing Act, HB23-1068. It’s not all that often that I get to say nice things about a Democratic Governor, but this bill is at least trying to do something positive, though it may generate a few new issues of its own. What the new law does is changes how landlords and insurance companies along with some other public officials deal with tenants and homeowners when it comes to pet ownership. One example is that insurers will no longer be able to deny either homeowner’s insurance or fire insurance based solely on the breed of a dog residing there. Some of the other changes are similarly designed to make life a little easier for pet owners and provide better care for animals. (Denver Gazette)

Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed HB23-1068 into law on June 8, changing how insurers. law enforcement, and landlords are allowed to treat pet owners in the Centennial State.

Per the rules laid out in the bill, insurers are now prohibited from denying homeowner’s insurance or a dwelling fire insurance policy based solely on the breed of a dog at a residence. Insurers are also now unable to inquire about the breed of a pet dog, though they can ask if a specific animal has been deemed dangerous.

Another change that comes with the passage of the bill is that officers executing a writ of restitution, also known as an eviction, must give pets to tenants if they are present at the time the writ is executed.

It’s not hard to read between the lines and see where some of these provisions are coming from. Preventing insurers from asking about the specific breed of dog in the house is certainly an effort to reduce the stigma attached to some breeds, particularly pit bulls. But if a dog has a history of attacking anyone, that will need to be disclosed regardless of the breed or the insurance may be nullified.

Evicted tenants will have to have their pets given to them by the evicting officials. If they are not present, the pet must be taken to a proper shelter and an effort must be made to inform them of where their pet is.

As an animal lover and lifetime shelter volunteer, I obviously like seeing rules like this put in place. But at the same time, it’s certainly possible that some issues may arise. That probably won’t be the case so much with homeowners, but it could cause problems for renters. If landlords see the new rules as being too onerous, they may be more inclined to simply make their properties unavailable to pet owners. For example, the law limits the amount of an extra security deposit that landlords can charge for tenants with pets to $300. It also imposes limits on how much extra “pet rent” can be charged per month.

If the state makes it less profitable for landlords to rent to pet owners, again, they will be less likely to rent to pet owners. So this law may wind up having unintended negative consequences for pet owners. But it will hopefully expand awareness that these are real issues that pet owners face, and many states make little if any effort to address them. At least Colorado is trying.