HB25-1250’s required materials for schools are now online. Teachers (and others) and filing ERPOs. Don’t consult the internet, get a soil test.

HB25-1250’s required materials for schools are now online

A bill passed into law in the regular legislative session this year required, quoting the bill’s fiscal note from the first link below “The bill requires the Office of Gun Violence Prevention in the Department of Public Health andEnvironment (CDPHE) to post or link to certain materials on its website for local educationproviders, including school districts, boards of cooperative services, district charter schools,institute charter schools, approved facility schools, and the Colorado School for the Deaf and theBlind.”

It also requires that, again quoting the fiscal note, “local education providers must distribute these materials to caregivers of elementary andsecondary school students at the start of each school year and also post the materials on theirwebsite.”

I had followed this bill because of concerns over what they would be forcing down the throats of students, such concerns motivated by things I’ve seen and written about on both the Office’s gun violence resources and their “Let’s Talk Guns” website.

I’ve been checking a couple, three times a week and emailing over to the media person at the Office of Gun Violence Prevention’s site to check in and the material just recently got posted to their site.

The second link below is the Office’s “landing page” and, for convenience, the third link is to the actual resource the Office produced to meet the requirements of HB25-1250.

A lot of it is pretty bland. That is, there’s not a whole lot that is objectionable here. Mostly it’s just statements of fact and/or reminders about current law.

I do take objection to the blurb about “perceived access to firearms” as that is based on a survey which has limited applicability to the real world (to see the objections in more detail, check out the fourth link below for an earlier newsletter on the survey).

In the interest of fairness, I think it’s also worth pointing out the first bullet point under the “Additional Resources” heading. The link next to “talking to your kids about gun safety” is actually a resource backed by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade group representing gun manufacturers.

I know, given the Office’s past work I was surprised too.

I have been trying to get information about how this law will play out in my local school district. Thus far, I haven’t heard.

If you are curious about your school district, the best thing to do would be to contact your local school superintendent and ask. If you find something concerning, take it to the school board.

If you hear something concerning from your local district, please also feel free to share here. If I hear of something changing in a concerning way at the state level, I will update too.

https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2025A/bills/fn/2025a_hb1250_f1.pdf

https://cdphe.colorado.gov/coloradob-gun-violence-prevention-resource-bank/gun-violence-prevention-for-parents-guardians-of-k

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q8D6vFhhbL0d5ikk1v4moRPsUxMq7IKI/view

https://coloradoaccountabilityproject.substack.com/p/academic-frippery-open-fields-doctrine?utm_source=publication-search

---

Teachers (and others) and filing ERPOs

In late July I wrote about the state’s newly-released curriculum to train health care workers about filing Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs, aka Red Flag Petitions). If you want or need that context, you’ll find the newsletter linked first below.

The same law, SB23-170, which enabled some who work in medicine to file ERPOs also enabled some working in education to file ERPOs. That bill is linked second below if you’d like the reference.

Noted gun control enthusiast AG Phil Weiser recently got around to releasing the training curriculum for those working in education--his curriculum advertised in a press release I linked to third below.

I registered and took the course for those in higher education** so that I could share some of the curriculum with you. The fourth link below is to a shared folder containing all of the relevant resources that could be downloaded from the course. There’s a lot there, too much for me to digest and share in its entirety, so if you find something worth sharing that I don’t point out, please add it to the comments or message me.

Some things stood out in taking the training, however.

The first is the image you see heading this post. This is the list of education workers that can now file an ERPO. I wish I could tell you who all fit in the “other campus staff” category, but they didn’t delve into that. This seems to almost indicate that the janitor could pull an ERPO on a student if they saw fit.

Screenshot 1 shows some statistics on the AG’s office tossed in on the efficacy of ERPO’s. (see also the “Related” content below). I looked, but could not find a reference for the studies anywhere in the training. I have a feeling that I know one of the references (it having appeared on the Office for Gun Violence Prevention’s site), but I’ll see if I can get more on those. If I do, I’ll update.

Screenshot 2 shows something repeatedly referenced in the training: one way or another, it was mentioned that for students not legally old enough to own firearms, an ERPO and/or the police could be used to enforce (I also heard reinforce) safe storage laws.

This left me with some questions. If someone draws an ERPO on a minor, said minor (anyone up to 21 in Colorado per current law actually) of course not allowed to own a gun, what then? Do they take the parents guns? Does that allow the police to come in and inspect your house to make sure the guns are locked away?

I could not find any definitive references. The best I could find was what you see in the fifth link below. I don’t know how reliable this source is, but it seems to say that only a conversation about safe storage is allowed; the police can’t inspect without a warrant and they can’t take an adult’s guns. Laws are different in different states, however, so I’ll see if I can get more here and update if I do.

I point you now specifically to the document labeled as “Navigating Common ERPO Challenges” in the shared folder linked below. Besides echoing the above about an ERPO filed on a minor child (see screenshot 3 attached), this document more than anything else I saw in the course gave me the strongest concern.

What you see in the screenshot is largely to blame for this feeling. It the savor of intrusion into a family’s home in order to get an ERPO. I fully understand the desire to prevent gun violence of any kind, but that desire ought to be balanced with respect for other rights. Tickling up to the line makes me wary.

This particular document also piqued my interest because it makes mention of another dynamic I have often seen from both the left leaning press and gun control proponents: what can/should be done if your police don’t cooperate with your desire to get an ERPO? Screenshot 4 shows the relevant bit of that document. It would not at all surprise me if this were included for those groups (though you will note the careful language at the top and avoidance of disagreement about the role of ERPOs vis a vis the Second Amendment).

One last thing before moving on. Stay with me in the “Navigating Common ERPO Challenges” document. Page 5 has tips on renewing an ERPO, including a link to the form you’d use to renew one. I won’t go into detail here because (see the seventh link below) it’s a topic I’ve already covered, but I think it’s worth a quick note here that, quoting my earlier newsletter, “If the person who sought the ERPO wants to renew it and the person against whom the order was issued doesn’t show up or contest the order, it can be renewed without a new hearing.”

Thus far, by what I’ve seen, ERPOs in Colorado have largely not been abused. Opening them up to more and more people makes it more and more likely that they will be. It remains to be seen whether this happens and to what degree just like it remains to be seen what Colorado Democrats do in the future re. gun control.

In the meantime, if you’re concerned about your rights and/or due process or if guns and gun control are an interest, take the time to read up on the materials in the shared folder.

Knowing the law is the first step toward protecting your rights.

**If anyone working in K-12 education wants to take that course and report out anything interesting they find, message me. I’d be interested to see.

https://open.substack.com/pub/coloradoaccountabilityproject/p/counterpoint-on-colorado-river-water?r=15ij6n&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false

https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb23-170


https://coag.gov/2025/training-to-help-educators-prevent-school-violence-and-student-suicide/?utm_campaign=COAGSproutSocialCampaign&utm_content=1759178338&utm_medium=social&utm_source=bluesky,facebook,instagram,linkedin,twitter

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/10yEYE_hPe65rSs-IN7V9_LgCbtXNIG-H?usp=sharing

https://onethingyoucando.org/frequently-asked-questions-erpo-minors/#:~:text=An%20ERPO%20will%20prohibit%20a%20minor%20from,when%20it%20is%20issued%20against%20an%20adult.

https://open.substack.com/pub/coloradoaccountabilityproject/p/some-questions-about-erpos-especially?r=15ij6n&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false

Related:

The RAND corporation did a series of meta-analyses on gun control policy studies. I have mentioned their work before.

While I do not say they’re definitive, while I do not say they’re even a good look at the topic, they do at least offer a resource: a sober look at current research not sullied by passing to you through the hands of gun control advocates.

Their page on ERPO’s is linked below if you’d like to give it a look. The overall conclusion RAND reached? Limited evidence that ERPOS prevent suicide, inconclusive or non-existent evidence they help/harm all the other aspects of guns in America on every other category RAND defined.

https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/extreme-risk-protection-orders.html

---

Don’t consult the internet, get a soil test

That time of the week again. It’s the last post til Sunday and thus it’s time for something fun, something not related to politics.

It was a rough year for strawberries. My plants looked sickly, they were showing signs of nutrient deficiencies, and they didn’t produce. I got a little worried mid-Spring and thought a couple new ones (to fill in some holes in the bed) might be in order, but even those struggled.

Depending on where you go on the internet, you can see all kinds of advice on planting. Some is decent. Some is the usual clickbait. If the issue your plant is having is specific and unique enough, the internet can be a handy resource.

The problem comes in when, as was the case with my strawberries, the issue is general and could be caused by numerous problems. The plants lack vigor, the leaves show veining and yellowing, and they don’t produce.

Would that they could just talk!

When you try to fix problems like these via the internet, the proffered solution is often one of “add this” or “add that”: it’s clear that your plant needs iron, it needs nitrogen, it needs grandpappy’s wonder tonic of tobacco juice and Epsom salts.

Tempting as those things are, and noting that sometimes adding too much of something can cause its own problems, the only real solution to a general plant problem starts with a soil test. You need to start down where the roots are and get a chemist’s-eye view of things down there.

Pictures 1, 2, and 3 are from my own soil test in the strawberry bed. Any good soil test will check for the usual plant nutrients and minerals as well as pH and other important factors. Knowing these things you can start to put together an idea of where to start working on the problem.

You can clearly see in the pictures what I have heard is a quite-common condition in garden soils. There are AMPLE (perhaps on the edge of too much?) nutrients and minerals in the soil. No, the yellowing isn’t a lack of nitrogen, phosphorous, or potassium. It’s not a lack of iron. These things are all there.

The problem, at least to this layman, is that the nutrients are not getting to the plant and I think that the first row points out why. The pH is too high for strawberries. If that number is too high, the plants are going to have issues in using what is already in the soil.

I did my soil test in June and when I got the results back, I made a plan to fix the problem. I had to wait til late, late Summer so as to not stress the plants because the solution was a pretty big bed renovation. I moved any and all strawberry plants to be closer to the emitters on the drip lines** and bought some soil acidifier (not aluminum sulfate--while it might be quicker, I didn’t want the possible issues aluminum can bring).

I added some soil acidifier as a top dressing (working it with my fingers into the first inch or so of soil) prior to moving and replanting. I’ll do a couple more doses in early Spring 2026 so as to spread it out some.

After this soil test, I can for sure say I won’t do my usual wake up top dressing of compost for the bed. There’s all kind of food for these plants just lying around waiting. I bet I could probably coast by a couple years before worrying actually.

We’ll see. It’s fingers crossed for a better year in 2026!

If you’re having issues with a plant, start with a soil test, and not the internet, unless you have something so specific that you zero in right on the problem and all the links Google offers show the same cause/fix.

It might cost money and time, but in the end it will save you money by not wasting fertilizer or supplements, or worse, making the soil toxic with a superabundance of them. Only a soil test can give you the specific information you need about your plants and your soil to help guide you to the actual solution.

That’s it for today. Enjoy the rest of your Friday and see you back at it Sunday!

**My strawberry bed “drifts” over time. Some plants fade as they age, I am always potting up or planting the runners they shoot out for the future. Point being, they were all originally right near water, but not so much after years. I think this may have also been part of the problem. We had a really warm dry Spring and the plants weren’t off to a good start.