A bill seeking to stop Colorado law enforcement from encrypting, and therefore hiding, all of their emergency radio communications met its demise Thursday but sparked a debate about the public’s right to know — pitting journalists against police agencies as it went down.

Even as members of the House State, Veterans, and Military Affairs Committee rejected the measure brought by state Rep. Kevin Van Winkle, a Highlands Ranch Republican, they raised concern about the issue and urged him to bring it back at a later date.

“I think you’re on to something,” said Rep. Jovan Melton, a committee member and Democrat from Aurora.

The legislation, House Bill 1061, sought to keep Colorado’s police agencies from encrypting all of their radio channels — as several departments across the state, from Aurora to Fort Collins have done — and would have made it a crime to monitor dispatch traffic while in the commission of a crime.It also would have allowed law enforcement to switch on encryption for their communications during investigations or tactical responses, such as SWAT activities.

But police agencies were united in their opposition to the bill during Thursday’s committee hearing, saying it threatened to put officers and the public at risk.

“We think that this is an unnecessary bill that presents a threat to public safety,” said Kevin Klein, director of the Colorado Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management. “… We think it is restrictive.”

Klein pointed to Twitter posts made during the 2015 Planned Parenthood shooting in Colorado Springs where users discussed police tactics and positions from the law enforcement scanner as an example of why the communications need to be hidden at times.

“What we don’t want (officers) to do is be fumbling with their radio any more than they have to,” Chief Dave Hayes, of the Louisville Police Department, said of the prospect of officers switching between encrypted and non-encrypted channels. “…It does have an impact on an already taxed communication center.”

In a counter-argument, the Colorado Press Association and Colorado Broadcasters Association framed access to emergency communications as something that promotes public safety. They also contended that allowing blanket encryption turns police agencies gatekeepers of that information.

Nicole Vap, director of investigative journalism at Denver television news station 9News, talked about responding the 2012 Aurora theater shooting after hearing about it on the police scanner. In July 2016, Aurora’s public safety channels were encrypted on the basis of employee safety concerns.

“I was at the Aurora theater shooting within a half-hour,” she testified. “We would have been delayed in sharing the most important moment in Aurora’s history. I don’t think anyone wants that to happen.”

Van Winkle, who called the growing number of police agencies completely encrypting their radio channels a “troubling trend.”

“In reality, I don’t think it will change very much,” Van Winkle said, adding that the last thing he wanted to do was put officers at risk. “… The time is right to ensure transparency for the public, especially for law enforcement. … Encrypt what is necessary. Do not encrypt what is not.”

The bill died in a 6-3 vote, with Republican Reps. Dave Williams, of Colorado Springs, Tim Leonard, of Evergreen, and Steve Humphrey, of Severance, in support.

Democratic committee members who voted down the measure said they were concerned with the bill’s loopholes and language, though they were mostly in agreement that the topic is worth keeping tabs on.

Van Winkle said he might introduce similar, more refined legislation at a later date.