Memorializing former Senator Lewis H. Entz.
Senate Joint Memorial 26-002 is a commemorative resolution honoring the life and public service of former Colorado Representative and Senator Lewis H. Entz, who died on December 10, 2025, at age 94. The memorial recounts his upbringing in Monte Vista, his service as a Marine in the Korean War, his work as a farmer and aviator, and his family life. It also highlights his long career in local and state government, including service as an Alamosa County Commissioner, eight terms in the Colorado House, and later service in the Colorado Senate.
The memorial emphasizes Senator Entz’s legislative focus on agriculture, water, natural resources, local government, energy, veterans’ affairs, and military affairs. It notes his leadership roles on key committees, his work on water legislation, and his role in creating the Colorado Division of Aeronautics. The resolution concludes by expressing the General Assembly’s condolences and directing that copies be sent to members of his family.
This memorial does not change state law, create new programs, or appropriate funds; it is a ceremonial legislative action. Its practical effect is to formally recognize Senator Entz’s contributions to Colorado and to preserve the General Assembly’s record of his service. The only direct action required is the transmission of copies of the memorial to named family members.
The sentiment surrounding the memorial is strongly positive and respectful. The bill text itself is written as a tribute, and the sponsorship list suggests broad bipartisan support. The discussion context provided does not include committee debate or recorded opposition, and there are no votes indicating controversy, which is consistent with a routine honorary memorial honoring a widely respected former legislator.
There is little to no apparent contention over this measure. Because it is a memorial rather than substantive legislation, the main focus is recognition of Senator Entz’s career and legacy, not policy disagreement. Any differences in emphasis would likely be limited to which aspects of his service are highlighted—especially water policy, agriculture, veterans’ issues, and local government—but no opposing viewpoints are reflected in the available record.