Colorado Senate 2026 Legislative Day 092

Let's do this. The morning roll call is 35 present, zero absence, zero excuse. We have a quorum. Senator Wallace, would you please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance?

Approval of the journal. Senator Carson, Carson, Carson, Carson.

I apologize, Mr. President.

Yeah, well, this is a big day, folks, so we need to approve the journal. I move that the Senate journal of Tuesday, April 14, 2026 be approved as corrected by the secretary.

Aye.

No.

Correctly printed. Senate Joint Resolution 24, Senate Resolution 7, correctly re-revised. House Bill 1045, 1116, 1126, 1213, 1228, 1265, 1302, and 1305. Committee reports. Committee on Finance. After consideration on the merits, the committee recommends the following. Senate Bill 155 be amended as follows. No so amended be referred to the committee on appropriations with favorable recommendation. Senate Bill 49 be amended as follows. No so amended be referred to the committee on appropriations with favorable recommendation. Fantasy bill 116 be amended as follows and as so amended be referred to the committee on appropriations with favorable recommendation house bill 1188 you referred favorably to the committee on appropriations committee on business labor and technology after consideration. On the merits committee recommends the following House bill 1110 be amended as follows And as so . You refer to the committee the whole , recommendation and whether recommendation you be placed in the consent calendar Mr.. President the committee on business labor and technology has had your consideration had a hearing on the following appointments and recommends that the appointments be placed in the consent calendar and confirmed. Members of the state plumbing board, effective July 2nd 2025 for terms expiring July 1st 2029 Sarah Harkson of Thornton Colorado serve as a master plumber reappointed Matthew Gentrip of Loveland Colorado serves as an employee of a local government agency conducting plumbing inspections appointed. Tiffany Hansen of Littleton, Colorado, serves as a journeyman plumber appointed for a term expiring July 1st, 2026. Jared Serafian of Colorado Springs, Colorado, serves as a plumbing contractor engaged in the construction of residential or commercial buildings. Occasionally by the resignation of Charles Lee of Grand Junction, Colorado appointed. Mr. President, Committee on Business, Labor, and Technology has had any consideration ahead of hearing on the following appointments. It recommends that the appointments be placed in the consent calendar and confirm members of the State Electrical Board, effective July 1, 2025, for terms expiring July 1, 2028. Russell Strickler of Denver, Colorado, who serves as a public member appointed. Benjamin Larkin of Castle Rock, Colorado, who serves as an electrical contractor who has a master's license reappointed. Charissa Allen of Berthey, Colorado, who serves as a journeyman electrician who is not an electrical contractor, occasioned by the resignation of Monique Cisneros of Conifer, Colorado, appointed. Michael Caja of Wheatridge, Colorado, to serve as a general contractor. Occasioned by the resignation of Yvette Roman of Denver, Colorado, appointed. Mr. President, Committee on Business, Labor, and Technology has had our consideration and had our hearing on the following appointments. It recommends that the appointments be placed in the consent calendar and confirm. Members of the Workers' Compensation Cost Containment Board for terms expiring December 13, 2029. Robert Switzer of Centennial, Colorado, to serve as an executive with good risk management experience and insurance industry reappointed. Thomas Jensen of Gypsum, Colorado, to serve as an employer with good risk management experience with respect to their workers' compensation insurance reappointed. Susan Mishler of Littleton, Colorado, to serve as a representative of an employer with good risk management experience in the insurance industry appointed.

Thank you, Madam President. Colleagues, we have a rare occurrence today. We will be proceeding. The motion is to proceed out of order to take up moments of personal privilege.

Aye.

No.

Thank you very much, Madam President. I request a moment of personal privilege.

Very good. I would ask if the members of AKA could please stand on both sides of the chambers. Members, Alpha Kappa, you stop. Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Incorporated, an international service organization, was founded on the campus of Howard University in Washington, D.C. in 1908. It's the oldest Greek letter organization established by African-American college-educated women. Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Incorporated is comprised of more than 360,000 initiated members in graduate and undergraduate chapters located in 12 nations and territories, including the United States, Bahamas, Bermuda, Canada, United Arab Emirates, Germany, Japan, Liberia, Nigeria, South Korea, South Africa, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Led by International President Lamp, CEO Danette Anthony Reid of Dallas, Texas, Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority often is hailed as America's premier Greek letter organization for African American women. Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority's mission is to cultivate and encourage high scholastic and ethical standards to promote unity and friendship among college women, to study and help alleviate problems concerning girls and women, to improve their social stature, to maintain a progressive interest in college life, and to be of service to all mankind. Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority always has been at the forefront of social justice to promote fairness and equity. They stand in the gap to empower our communities and act in the best interest of all people through social advocacy and justice. They will equip communities with tools knowledge and support to activate their voices and mobilize self to empower communities to help themselves including by providing information about African American and other women of color currently serving in political leadership positions as well as how to create a pathway for women interested in politics. And not just these individuals, but those who are here today, we have members participating with their annual AKA Day at the Capitol. Ms. Anika Wilson-Sterling, Midwestern Regional Director of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. Ms. Kathy Nesbitt, Midwestern Region Cluster A Coordinator. Andriette Jordan-Fields, Colorado State Connection and Social Action Coordinator. Ms. Brittany Joy Westware, Regional Program Committee. Ms. Alicia Harvey, Midwestern Region Assistant Secretary. Ms. Shapira Lane, Midwestern Region Assistant Financial Secretary. Ms. Anita Westbury, Regional Protocol Committee Co-Chairman, and also members, we have a member of the Youth Leadership Institute, a.k.a. YLI. It's a youth-led and highly interactive leadership development program designed to empower and engage youth ages 11 through 13. They also provide educational services such as conducting programs, workshops, and field trips for middle school youth related to STEM, the environment, culture, and careers. They are sponsored by the Mu Omega Omega Chapter and Epsilon Nu Omega Chapter. We have 11 students from Robert F. Smith Steam Academy and those joined here today. Members, please join me in welcoming A.K.A. to the Capitol. And for no reason other than because I like to say it, the greatest fraternity of all time is Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity Incorporated.

uh mr majority leader thank you madam president i move that the senate proceed out of order for

house joint resolution 1027 by representatives Weinberg and Woodrow and Senators Weissman and Ball concerning remembrance of the Holocaust senator

read at length. Will the clerk please read it at length? Whereas genocide begins not with violence but with words and whereas prejudice, bigotry, bias, and racism have been the causes of conflict, war, and mass atrocities throughout human history and whereas observing an individual moment of silence for each Jewish victim of the holocaust would take over 11 years and whereas the English word holocaust derives from the Greek words meaning whole, holos, and burnt, kostos, and generally describes destruction on a mass scale. Holocaust, as a proper noun, specifically refers to the state sponsored persecution and mass murder of European Jews and others at the direction of the German Nazi government between 1933 and 1945. And whereas the Nazis, who came to power in Germany in January 1933, asserted that Germans were racially superior and that Jews and others were inferior and an alien threat to the so-called German racial community. And whereas the Nazis used anti-Semitism and as a political weapon to gain popular support blaming Jews for all of Germany's hardships, including the country defeat in World War I the economic depression and the threat of Bolshevik communism it made little difference that the Nazis accusations were blatantly contradictory and their so facts were fabricated And whereas between 1933 and 1945, Nazi Germany and its collaborators murdered 6 million Jews, two out of every three Jews who lived throughout Europe, 1.5 million of whom were children, as well as 5 million other civilians who were viewed as enemies or threats to Nazi ideology. And whereas we recall that in the aftermath of World War II, Israel, a close ally and friend of the United States, became a refuge for many survivors who endured the ravages of the Holocaust, and it has remained a sanctuary for Jews worldwide seeking safety ever since. And whereas we gratefully acknowledge the more than 28,000 non-Jews who, at great risk to themselves, saved Jews from extermination during the Holocaust and have been designated righteous among the nations by Yad Vashem, the World Holocaust Remembrance Center, and acknowledge the efforts of the United States and other allied forces who liberated Nazi concentration camps as World War II was ending. And whereas today we mourn the loss of those who were killed and consider the terrible experiences of those who suffered and lived through the Holocaust, we note that anti-Semitic acts are not a thing of the past. According to the Anti-Defamation League's annual audit of anti-Semitic incidents, anti-Jewish incidents surged to historic levels in 2024, with a total of 9,354 incidents of anti-Jewish harassment, vandalism, and assault reported across the United States. In Colorado, there were 279 reported anti-Jewish incidents in 2024, which is the highest level recorded in more than 45 years and a 42% increase since 2023. Colorado ranked ninth among states in 2024 for the most reported anti-Semitic incidents. Globally, there has also been an increase in anti-Semitic incidents. Many Jews feel more isolated and vulnerable as a result. And whereas today, while we remember the Holocaust, we focus our attention on the passing of Holocaust survivors who provided firsthand accounts of the terrors they endured, leaving their children and grandchildren as the last generations to know the stories of the Holocaust directly from those who lived through it. And whereas while we are fortunate that several organizations in Colorado are dedicated to retelling the stories of the Holocaust and other genocides, it is not enough. Far too many people, including most students, need more opportunities to learn about these atrocities so they are not repeated. To mitigate the issue, on July 8, 2020, Governor Polis signed into law House Bill 2013-36, requiring the satisfactory completion of a course that includes Holocaust and genocide studies as a condition of high school graduation in public schools. And whereas we recognize the tremendous investment and preparation that Colorado school districts, administrators, and foremost classroom educators are putting forth to implement and support House Bill 2013-36, as they ensure the phrase, we remember, will carry meaning and merit for generations of Colorado students. and whereas it is our responsibility to bear witness to the truth of the horrors of the holocaust its many lessons and to prevent hateful words from building up like the bricks that built auschwitz now therefore be it resolved by the house of representatives of the 75th general assembly of the state of colorado the senate concurring herein that we the members of the general assembly one remember the holocaust including survivors fred briner samuel weinberg and sylvia weinberg two promote anti-bias bullying prevention and holocaust and genocide education programs in school districts and universities to prevent anti-Semitic incidents that target Jewish students, including targeting based on their actual or perceived support of the state of Israel. And three, declare that the people of Colorado should understand the power of words, remember the great injustices of the past, and commit to preventing such atrocities in the future. Be it further resolved, the copies of this joint resolution be sent to the Jewish Community Relations Council of Jewish Colorado, the Mountain States Regional Office of the Anti-Defamation League, the Coalition Against Global Genocide, the Holocaust Awareness Institute University of Denver Center of Judaic Studies, the Interfaith Alliance of Colorado, the Mizell Museum, the Denver Parks and Recreation Department's Bobby Yara Park, the Mountain States Office of the Jewish National Fund, the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., the Colorado Holocaust Educators, and the University of Colorado Boulder Program in Jewish Studies.

Thanks, Mr. President. Mr. Schauffler, thank you for reading the resolution. Members, take a seat if you'd like. you know the senator from Denver and I were comparing notes last week in anticipation of presenting this resolution and kind of asked ourselves and each other you know how do you possibly speak to this subject how do you capture its totality and enormity how do you add to it well we'll try I think what I wanted to reflect on just very briefly this morning is really how deep the roots were how ancient the roots were of the atrocity that led to the systematic annihilation of six million people like us and six million others who were not favored by the regime, then in power and in command of that mechanism of death. But I think we know that the wheels of the so-called final solution didn't really start turning in 1941. I think we know that as Hitler was rising to power, he was talking very openly about what he thought about people of Jewish ancestry and what he was going to try to do. when I was a younger person, I visited the Holocaust Museum in D.C., and there are some shockingly brazen news clips, you know, that are preserved from German newspapers in that time, where Hitler was not remotely hiding the ball that was in the 30s, and you can go back to his writings in the 20s. I am a person of Jewish ancestry who doesn't date to Holocaust survivorship. Personally, my family came here earlier in the time of the pogroms, which roughly are dated from 1880 to maybe the 1920s. The Library of Congress estimates that three million Eastern European people of Jewish ancestry fled their home countries. Those are the ones who survived anyway, and came to our country seeking refuge and a fresh start. But the roots of the Holocaust really aren't even that recent either. Almost ten years ago now, I had the opportunity to travel to the south of Spain, which you could say historically the Jewish part of Spain. On the one hand, it was at certain points a time and a place of great safety and flourishing of Jewish folks. Maimonides, one of the great scholars, was born in Córdoba in the south of Spain in the 1100s. And at other points, that part of Spain was a site of immense terror and persecution in Sevilla, in Granada. In particular there was a horrific purge in 1391 in the south of Spain It is referred to in some Jewish histories as the massacres of 1551 That would be the year in the Jewish calendar. One history relates that at least as far back as 1378, certain figures with a high profile had begun to preach and spread anti-Jewish rhetoric in what we now call the south of Spain, and it went on and on and on and on, and the demonization and otherization went on until it finally exploded in June of 1391. And I printed out a map that I had made a picture of from a trip to a Jewish history museum in the south of Spain showing the exodus of Spanish or Sephardic Jews to London, to Hamburg, to Krakow, to Istanbul, to Beirut, to Jerusalem, that far from the south of Spain to flee the persecution. And we're only at 1391. We could go back farther. So as the resolution notes, we need to pay attention to language. we need to pay attention to the constructs of otherization, of demonization, of hate, that can build so slowly and gradually that maybe we don't notice them, because before there's a construct like Auschwitz, there are other constructs that make those physical constructs possible. You know, human beings, the seven billion of us on the earth, are capable of some truly wonderful things, self-sacrifice, generosity, acts of kindness, and we are capable of some true horrors and atrocities as well. And what happened in Europe in the 30s and 40s leading to the death of 12 million innocent folks. We're certainly among those, so we need to learn from it. That's what this resolution encourages us to do. So we're going to have a busy day here debating the budget, but in whatever way feels right to you based on your values, your ancestry. Please take a minute and reflect on this. Thanks.

Thank you, Mr. President. I struggled with what to say on this topic last year, and I struggled with what to say about it this year. and the good senator from Rohr and I had a conversation about it last week because what do you say about the Holocaust that hasn't already been said a hundred times? I've been learning about the Holocaust and it's been instilled in me since I was a kid that the Holocaust, it stands for the most unspeakable evil that mankind is capable of. And sometimes I think we even refer to it sort of in a cheap way without thinking too much about it because it's the worst thing that we could do and so things get compared to it. There's a law, sort of tongue-in-cheek, called Godwin's Law on the Internet, and it says that the longer the two people argue over something on the Internet, the probability that someone compares the other person to a Nazi or invokes Hitler is 100%. Because that's our yardstick for the most evil that mankind is capable of. so last week I just I started looking at a couple pictures I have a not a real connection in my family to the Holocaust but a tangential one which is that it barely missed my grandfather my grandfather came to this country from Poland when he was five in 1921 And I saw I looked at a picture of him and then I saw I looked up another picture which was a rally of the Nazi party in 1924. So three years after that point. And what struck me was that at the rally, at the rally for the Nazi party with Hitler on the stage, the crowd was going crazy. And I think that's what's so unsettling and important about the Holocaust, is that Hitler was popular. And there were people after the war in Germany who said they didn't really know what was going on. There was probably a spectrum. Either you really knew what was going on and you supported it avidly, or maybe you knew about it, you knew enough that you didn't stop it. But the truth is that there was a lot of energy behind this machine of hate. And what I think is important to remember is that we're not better than that now. This is something that mankind is capable of, which means it's something that we're capable of. And everybody would like to think that if they were alive back then, they would have resisted and harbored people in their basement or something like that. But that can't be true for all of us. And so, as the good senator from Aurora said, it's important that we are vigilant to put up a bulwark to prevent something like the Holocaust from happening again. But I would also ask that, just as important, is that we recognize that impulse in ourselves and that we confront it with compassion. Because I think there's power in strength and there can be power in hate. And sometimes we buy into that. But the answer isn't always that you have that same energy on the other side and you fight hate with hate. I think the real answer is that you approach it with compassion and there's more strength in compassion than there is in hate. And so I guess I'll conclude just by saying we should never forget the Holocaust, but I think we should also never forget why the lessons from the Holocaust are so important. And we should commit to taking time to exercise compassion in our world now so that we don't fall into this hate that we know has the potential for all of us to buy into. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. President. I ask that the roll call be listed as co-sponsors.

Senator Judah and I, we want to welcome the Sikh community of Colorado to the capital today Yesterday, April 14th, was the Sikh holiday of Vaisaki marks the day to celebrate when Sikhism was born as a collective faith. This morning we began with a Sikh prayer known as Ardas. Sikhs originate from the Punjab region in northern India and represent the fifth largest religion in the world. Currently there are more than 30 million Sikhs around the world who celebrate Vaisaki every year, and the Sikh community of Colorado is proud to help bring this wonderful cultural celebration to the people's capital. They hope this event will be a great educational opportunity for the Colorado community to better understand their religion.

Thank you, Mr. President. Members, as I said yesterday, today at 11 a.m., the C community arranged for a lunch for all members, staff, and the public in the Capitol in the West foyer. This is traditionally known as a linger, known as a community kitchen open to all, no matter what their faith, gender, age, or status is, is offered by every single gudwara in the world, including three temples in Colorado and Commerce City, Inglewood, and Colorado Springs. Colorado is home to tens of thousands of Sikh Americans pursuing diverse professions, making rich contributions to our social, cultural, and economic vibrancy of the United States, armed forces and significant contributions to agriculture, information technology, small businesses, the hotel industry, trucking industry, medicine, politics, technology, and many other industries. And we also want to highlight that Governor Polis will be signing a proclamation later today, recognizing April of Seek Awareness Appreciation Month around 1 to 1.30 on the first floor. And so we welcome everyone. And you get to have two lunches today. So maybe go get one for later and then one here in the chamber. It is incredibly good. And of course, we've all had it before. So please go enjoy and grab as many as you can. Thanks.

Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to make the announcement that 15 minutes upon adjournment will be meeting in the three fifty seven. for the Republican caucus to go over the amendments that we're going to be talking about today, later this afternoon.

I would ask for a moment of personal privilege, Mr. President.

Thank you, Mr. President. Today, members, is tax day. And we're going over the budget on tax day. So I do this every year. I always say before we do the budget, I just would like to remind everybody about the $47 billion in agriculture that pays taxes in this great state. And so let's remember that when we're spending the money to make sure that we're moving forward. So. I just want to say thank you for everybody and thank you for this great day. So thank you.

Senator Frizzell. Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to make the announcement that tomorrow morning at 8 a.m., the Committee on Legal Services will be meeting in HCR 107. We'll be discussing Senate Bill 2683, the Rule Review Bill, litigation update, and other business.

Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I will not be making the announcement about the nuclear lunch and learn today. I just want everybody to know I'm not making the announcement about the nuclear lunch and learn today. Thank you.

Colleagues, we will be recessing so the minority can have their amendment caucus. We will return upon the completion of that meeting. On that note, Mr. President, I move that the Senate recess until 10.30 a.m. today.

Aye. Opposed, no.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thank you.

Senate will come to order. Majority Leader Rodriguez.

A call of the Senate has been moved and properly sustained. Will the sergeants please close the doors, allow no senators to leave, and return those who are absent from the chambers? Will the clerk please call the roll?

Majority Leader Rodriguez. Thank you Madam President I move the call be raised The motion is to raise the call All those in favor say aye Aye Opposed no The ayes haven and the call is raised Majority Leader Rodriguez.

Thank you. The motion is that the Senate take up all of the bills that the majority leader listed on special orders consent at the hour of 1155 a.m. 54 a.m., my apologies. This requires a two-thirds vote. All those in favor say aye.

Those opposed, no.

The ayes have it, and the motion is adopted. The Senate will take up all the bills that the majority leader mentioned on special orders consent calendar at the hour of 1154 a.m. Second, special order, second reading of bills, consent calendar. Senator Mullica.

Thank you. You have heard the motion. All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed, no. I have it. The motion is adopted, and the Senate will resolve itself into the committee of the whole for the consideration of the special order of second reading of bill's consent calendar, and Senator Mullico will take the chair.

House Bill 1348 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Amabile and Bridges concerning the use of money from the Broadband Infrastructure Cash Fund. House Bill 1349 by Representatives Brown and Sirota and Senators Amabile and Kirkmeyer concerning modifications to prevention services programs within the Department of Early Childhood and in connection therewith making and reducing an appropriation. House Bill 1350 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators of Mable and Bridges concerning appropriations related to school food programs and in connection therewith making and reducing an appropriation. House Bill 1352 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators of Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning reducing the frequency of Colorado reading to ensure academic development act independent evaluations and in connection therewith reducing an appropriation House Bill 1354 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Amabile and Bridges concerning repealing a science teacher professional development program and in connection therewith reducing an appropriation House Bill 1355 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Amabile, concerning the appropriation for out-of-school time program, grant program, and in connection therewith, reducing an appropriation. House Bill 1356 by Representatives Brown, and Taggart, and Senators Ramaboli and Kirkmire concerning the repeal of the local accountability system. House Bill 1358 by Representatives Brown, and Taggart, and Senators Ramaboli and Kirkmire concerning reducing an appropriation for the Colorado Academic Accelerator Grant Program. House Bill 1361 by Representatives Brown, and Taggart, and Senators Bridges and Kirkmire concerning the repeal of the Pay for Success Contracts Program. House Bill 1362 by Representatives Syroda, and Taggart, and Senators Bridges and Kirkmire concerning the repeal of the decarbonization tax credit administration cash fund. House Bill 1364 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning the calculation of the consumer price index for the 2025 calendar year and in connection therewith making an appropriation. House Bill 1366 by Representatives Brown and Sirota and Senators Zimaboli and Kirkmeyer concerning enhancing state-directed payments for physician services rendered by medical professionals at Denver Health and Hospital Authority and in connection therewith making an appropriation. House Bill 1367 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning federal money payable as reimbursement of a public expenditure when the federal money exceeds 50% of the expenditure amount. House Bill 1368 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Zimabale and Bridges concerning eliminating a transfer from the Limited Gaming Fund to the Innovative Higher Education Research Fund. House Bill 1369 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Zimabale and Kirkmeyer concerning the repeal of a requirement to contract for use of an online platform by higher education institutions for public benefits. House Bill 1370 by Representatives Brown and Sirota and Senators Bridges and Kirkmire concerning the transfer of money from the limited gaming fund to other cash funds. House Bill 1371 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Zimabale and Bridges concerning adding repeal dates for certain higher education programs with limited purpose fee for service contracts. House Bill 1372 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Zimabale and Bridges concerning requirements for spending appropriations for the Auraria Higher Education Center. House Bill 1375 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Zimbabwele and Kirkmeyer concerning repealing the county administration of assistance programs funding model and in connection therewith reducing an appropriation. House Bill 1376 by Representatives Brown and Sirota and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning updating permissible uses of money in the excess federal title IV-E reimbursement cash fund. House Bill 1377 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Zimaboli and Kirkmeyer concerning clarification regarding the treatment of funds that are transferred from the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing through the Colorado Department of Human Services that passes through a regional accountability entity. House Bill 1379 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning a correction to the association for bond forfeiture money deposited in the Judicial Stabilization Cash Fund. House Bill 1381 by Rep. Brown and Sirota and Senators Zimabile and Bridges concerning eliminating the requirement that the Commission on Judicial Discipline Special Cash Fund begin each state fiscal year with a balance of at least $400,000. House Bill 1382 by Rep. Brown and Sirota and Senators Zimabile and Bridges concerning the support of Coloradans with disabilities and in connection therewith creating the Colorado Disability Funding Authority and making and reducing appropriations. House Bill 1383 by Representatives Brown and Sorota and Senators Maubile and Bridges concerning repealing the employment support and job retention services program and in connection therewith reducing inter-appropriation. House Bill 1384 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning the classification of school to work alliance program cost payments to the Department of Labor and Employment from the Department of Education. House Bill 1386 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning changing the funding mechanism for the Colorado National Guard tuition waiver program. House Bill 1387 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning the expenditure of money from the severance tax trust fund and in connection therewith allowing the state treasurer to transfer money from the severance tax perpetual base fund to the species conservation trust fund establishing an annual transfer from the severance tax operational fund to the general fund and reducing an appropriation House Bill 1388 by Representatives Serota and Taggart and Senators Zimaboli and Bridges concerning the repeal of the bond assistance program administered by the Department of Personnel and in connection therewith transferring the balance of the bond assistance program cash fund to the general fund House Bill 1389 by Representatives Brown and Serota and Senators Zimaboli and Kirkmeyer concerning eliminating the annual appropriation requirement for the comprehensive human sexuality education grant program and in connection therewith reducing an appropriation. House Bill 1390 by Representative Brown and Sirota and Senators Zimaboli and Kirkmeyer concerning the evaluation agent for the health disparities and community grant program. House Bill 1391 by Representatives Brown and Sirota and Senators Zimaboli and Kirkmeyer concerning clean drinking water in places where children are present and in connection therewith extending the school and child care clean drinking water fund through the 2028-29 state fiscal year, adding high schools to the scope of potential recipients of grants from the school and child care clean drinking water fund, prohibiting the Department of Public Health and Environment from issuing a license to a child care center unless the child care center is in compliance with laws concerning testing of drinking water and making an appropriation. House Bill 1392 by Representatives Therota and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning the transfer of money from the Public Safety Communications Revolving Fund to a Public Safety Communications Trust Fund to support the digital trunked radio system. House Bill 1393 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Zimoboli and Kirkmeyer concerning subjecting specified cash funds to a three-year maximum reserve limitation instead of the annual maximum reserve limitation and in connection therewith, subjecting the public school construction inspection cash fund and the health facility construction inspection cash fund to three-year limitation. House Bill 1394 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning the conversion of the motorcycle operator safety training fund to a cash fund subject to annual appropriation by the General Assembly and in connection therewith, making an appropriation. House Bill 1395 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Amabile and Bridges concerning the repeal of the Wildfire Resilient Homes Grant Program administered by the Department of Public Safety and in connection there with transferring the balance of the Wildfire Resilient Homes Grant Program Cash Fund to the General Fund. House Bill 1396 by Representatives Brown and Taggart and Senators of Mobley and Kirkmeyer concerning modifications to the Disaster Emergency Fund. House Bill 1398 by Representatives Brown and Sirota and Senators of Mobley and Kirkmeyer concerning the allocation of retail delivery fee revenue credited to the Multimodal Transportation and Mitigation Options Fund. House Bill 1400 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning adjustments to the Public Employees Retirement Association's allocation of money to trust funds. House Bill 1402 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Mobiley and Bridges concerning the transfer of money to the Capital Construction Fund. House Bill 1403 by Representatives Brown and Sirota and Senators Bridges and Kirkmeyer concerning prevention of the transfer of unexpended information, technology, annual depreciation, lease, and equivalent payments to the General Fund. House Bill 1406 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Mobiley and Kirkmeyer concerning the repeal of certain provisions regarding the funding of capital construction and in connection therewith reducing and appropriation. House Bill 1407 by Representative Brown and Taggart and Senators of Mobile and Kirkmeyer concerning state money that was used to refinance money received from federal coronavirus state fiscal recovery funding and connects in there with transferring unspent state money to the general fund extending a deadline for the use of state money and reducing an appropriation. House Bill 1408 by Representative Brown and Taggart and Senators of Mobile and Bridges concerning the establishment of processes for the determination of budget requests for the upcoming state fiscal year.

Yes. Thank you. Before I start reading all these bills, colleagues, I think they were still waiting for some of the meated burgers to come in, so just FYI, but want to recognize that the burgers that are not meat are still from the agriculture industry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move for the passage of all the bills of special orders consent reading and the one committee report on one bill, which is House Bill 1348, House Bill 1349, 1350, 1352, 1354, 1355, 1356, 1358, 1361, 1362, 1364, 1366, 1367, 1367, 1367. 1368, 1369, 1370, 1371, 1372, 1375, 1376, 1377, 1379, 1381, 1382, 1383, 1384, 1386, 1387, 1388, 1389, 1390, 1391, 1392, 1393, 1394, 1395, 1396, 1398, 1400 1402 1403 1406 and the appropriations report 1407 and 1408

welcome to the consent calendar on that motion mr. I move the committee rise and

The Senate will come to order. Senator Mullica.

April 15, 2026. Mr. President, Madam President, your committee, the whole begs leave the report. It has had a number of bills under consideration. The following attached bills being the second reading thereof. It makes the following recommendations thereon. House Bill 1348, House Bill 1349, House Bill 1350, House Bill 1352, House Bill 1354, House Bill 1355, House Bill 1356, House bill 1358, house bill 1361, house bill 1362, house bill 1364, house bill 1366, house bill 1367, house bill 1368, house bill 1369, house bill 1378, house bill 1371, house bill 1372, house bill 1375, house bill 1376, house bill 1377, house bill 1379, house bill 1381, house bill 1382, house bill 1383, house bill 1384, house bill 1386, house bill 1387, house bill 1388, house bill 1389, house bill 1390, house bill 1391, house bill 1392, House Bill 1393, House Bill 1394, House Bill 1395, House Bill 1396, House Bill 1398, House Bill 1314, House Bill 1400, House Bill 1402, House Bill 1403, House Bill 1406, as amended, House Bill 1407, House Bill 1408. Pass on second reading in order to revise and place on the calendar for third reading and final passage.

Thank you, Madam President. I move the report.

Okay. Your committee of the whole begs leave to report it has had under consideration the following attached bills. Okay. Being the second reading thereof and makes the following recommendations therein to HB 26 1348 HB 26 1349 HB 26 1350 HB HB 261350 HB 261352 HB 261354 HB 261355 HB 261356 HB 261358 HB 26-1361, HB 26-1362, HB 26-1364, HB 26-1366, HB 26-1367, HB 26-1368, HB 26-1369, HB 26-1370, HB26-1371, HB26-1372, HB26-1375, HB26-1376, HB26-1377, HB26-1379, HB26-1381, HB26-1382, HB26-1383, HB26-1384, HB26-1386, HB26-1387, HB26-1388, HB26-1389, HB 26-1390, HB 26-1391, HB 26-1392, HB 26-1393, HB 26-1394, HB 26-1395, HB 26-1396, HB 26-1398, HB 26-1400, HB 26-1402, HB 26-1403, HB 26-1406 as amended. HB 26-1407, HB 26-1408, passed on second reading in order revised and placed on the calendar for third reading and final passage.

Thank you, Madam President. I move that the Senate take up special order second reading of bills, which is House Bill 1351, House Bill 1353, House Bill 1357, House Bill 1359, House Bill 1360, House Bill 1363, House Bill 1373, 1374, 1380, 1385, 1397, 1399, 1401, 1404, 1405, 1411, 1412, 1413, 1409, 1378, and 1410 at the hour of 12.09 p.m.

All those opposed, no.

Thank you, Madam President. I move the Senate resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole for consideration of special order, second reading of bills.

All those opposed, no.

Okay, it's you and me on these first three. Okay. Do I have a list? Let me see. Just real quick. I don't know where my list is. I'm on the bills. I got it. Commedia will come to order. The coat rules were relaxed.

Be ready. Be prepared. Consider this your warning. Even if you do have amendments that have been approved, if you're not here to move them, guess those amendments didn't get on the bill. Thank you. If your amendments know that, yeah, you know what I'm talking about. Any further discussion on House Bill 1351? Seeing none, the motion before the body is a passage of House Bill 1351.

Aye.

The ayes have it, and House Bill 1351 is adopted. Will the clerk please read the title of House Bill 1353?

Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 1353.

Could be a vote yes.

All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed, no.

House Bill 1357 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators of Mobley and Bridges concerning phasing out the teacher recruitment, education, and preparation program and in connection therewith making and reducing and appropriation.

That is a proper motion.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So when we heard this in appropriations, we heard that there was lots of kids still in this program and that if we could find the money, we could keep the program going. We had a similar program like this out in eastern Colorado called T-PREP, and it is definitely helping to solve our teacher shortage throughout the whole eastern plains, and so that's what this is trying to do as well, and I'm positive that we do have an amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read Amendment L-6?

Sandra Marchman. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment L-006.

So there is a question underneath this debate that I do want to name directly. it's not really about TREP, that's what I call it, maybe it's TREP, but it's more about whether we believe teaching is a profession or whether we think anyone can walk off the street and do it. Because the argument that I have heard is these students would be better served at community college. Y'all, you can't be a teacher and go to community college. You need a bachelor's degree. So when we suggest that a community college would have been good enough for these students we say something that we can take back We say the preparations that our teachers invested in the degree they earned the educator prep program they completed the license they carry it didn really matter but it did. It matters every day in every classroom in Colorado. So this program was set up in SB 21-185. It passed this chamber with bipartisan support. The education shortage survey shows 14.5% of all statewide positions for teaching required hiring this year. So 7,792 unfilled teacher positions. The shortage has just gotten worse. These TREP students are on the path to filling them. There are 193 students enrolled right now in 30 districts across the state, including seven rurals. They are in years five and six of a pathway to a teaching license, not a community college credential, a teaching license. I've heard the credential completion rate cited as evidence that this program is failing. 4.5% sounds low. Well, it is kind of low, but do you know why? It's because the first cohort of kids in this program who could actually earn a bachelor's degree don't even graduate until next month, this spring, not last year, this May. Of the 221 students in the data set, 129 were still actively enrolled last May. They're not dropping out. They're mid-program. We can't judge a race by how far the runners have gotten at the halfway mark. I've also heard about the ascent comparison, and I want to be precise because this comparison fails. ASCENT and TREP were not the same program. ASCENT was an open-ended, extended high school with no required credential destination. A student could use it for any coursework their district supported. No connection to a specific profession, no licensure requirement, no ed prep requirement. TREP is the opposite. TREPs are on a state-defined teaching career pathway working toward a bachelor's degree, an approved educator prep program, and a teaching license. ASCENT had no destination. TREP has a profession. They are not the same program. This is not the same comparison. So what this amendment will do is it transfers existing cash from the Electrifying School Buses Fund into the State Ed Fund, which is the constitutionally appropriate home for teacher pipeline investment. It has a hard repeal of July 1, 2029. The best causal study of a program like TREP is the Teacher Academy of Maryland. They published in January of this year, after following 226,000 students for a decade, 45% were more likely to become teachers. So the researchers were clear the pipeline takes years to materialize. That lag is not a failure. It's a failure. how the pipeline works. We are in that lag right now. The first students who could earn a teaching license under this program graduate this May. So what this bill will do is, I'm sorry, what this amendment will do is extend the program so those who are in year five can complete their year six and graduate with their TREP program and a teaching license. This is for 193 students in 30 districts. There's no general fund, and there's a hard repeal. So I urge your support on Amendment L-006.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted real quick to point out that many students who start at community colleges end up at four-year schools, and it is for many students the more affordable way to attain that four-year degree to imply that somehow beginning at community colleges is a lesser path than simply enrolling in a four-year institution from the beginning. I think it does a disservice to our community colleges. I am obligated to ask for a no on this amendment as a member of the Budget Committee, but I will say that the pay for that has been found here seems reasonable. The promise that we are keeping to folks who have been assured that this program would be there for them through this amendment I think is one consistent with what we made last year. It is a good thing for the state to do to keep this commitment. However, given my position on the budget committee, I do ask for a no vote on the amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to commend my colleagues from Loveland and Sterling on offering this amendment. I fully support it. You know, we meet with a lot of folks here that lobby us on behalf of different interests out there. What I've been amazed about this program and this amendment is I've just been lobbied by everyday folks coming up here to the Capitol. It's really an example of citizens working to learn about the process. I met one of the young ladies who was in this program, and one of the side benefits is just learning how the legislative process works. They've been working on this amendment over in the House. They worked on it here in the Senate. You know, we have a teacher shortage in this state. We need to make sure we've got a good pipeline of high-quality teachers coming in. We have, when I was on the University of Colorado Board of Regents, you know, one of the things we were very concerned about was the growing cost of tuition. And you can particularly understand for folks trying to become teachers, whatever we can do to help them with that process. And I think this program was set up, you know, to get young people into the pipeline, get them prepared and educated for teaching in our state, help them with the affordability issue. I think what this amendment says, at least out of fairness, we ought to protect those young people that are already in the program. they've been in the program, at least continue it on for another year. As I understand it the offsets have been found and there a lot of support for continuing the program at least for a short period of time so that we don pull the rug out from under the students who have been in it So you know I got folks in my neighborhood that are working on this right there in Highlands Ranch and I think it's an important amendment to keep part of this program. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to come and speak to this question, this amendment, because I do think that it raises just an interesting vantage point into what structural violence in terms of budgeting looks like and feels like. And so this is a question that many, look, I sat in the appropriations committee. I listened to high school seniors and their family members and their grandparents. And I also appreciate where the Joint Budget Committee members came in making their decision looking at the utilization of this program and its return on investment in terms of the data that was initially put forward. And so I think what I, in response to some of the comments that I have heard from the proponents of this amendment and the proponents of this amendment, where I think where I just ask a question of that I don't think I heard in the debate and the appropriations committee is how many seniors who are currently impacted would be, I'm sorry, how many seniors in high school right now who participate in this program would be impacted if this amendment were to come to pass? Thank you very much.

All those in favor say aye

All those opposed, no

All those in favor say aye

All those opposed, no

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 26-1359. Ask for an aye vote.

Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 26-1360. I ask for an aye vote.

Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I actually have a technical amendment to... Oh, I'm sorry. I move House Bill... Wait, wait. Yep. I move House Bill 1363, and I would also like to move L0...

Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L003.

Senator Amabile. It's a technical amendment, just clarifying a little bit of the language.

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 26-1373. I ask for an aye vote.

Thank you. I move L1.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This bill makes really difficult cuts to our foster families, and what this amendment will do is ensure that these families have proper notification upon those cuts and that the lower subsidy rates don't go into effect on contracts that aren't up yet. So it gives people stability and proper notice so that they can prepare for what will be really difficult cuts. So I urge an aye vote. I think this will make it easier on our foster youth and give them some needed stability given the trying budget situation we're in.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We appreciate the amendment, understand it, and we're okay with it.

Aye.

All those in favor say aye. Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment L-7 to House Bill 1374.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this amendment does not impact the budget balancing. We negotiated this with a variety of stakeholders. The amendments provide for a standardized notice of non-certified kinship care. This notice will specify that funding is being discontinued, the date of discontinuation, and that the option to become certified providers if they are eligible. Families must also be notified no later than June 15 of 2026 since funding will cease on July 1 of 2026. We're also striking language to continue reporting on non-certified kinship care. Just because we're discontinuing funding doesn't mean that these families are disappearing. We still need information about how many non-certified kin are providing care to inform policy moving forward. We believe this is helpful and agreed upon. We ask for a yes vote.

Thank you. We appreciate the amendment. We're okay with it.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 26-1380. Ask for an aye vote.

So, members, as noted, Senate Appropriations always strips off any changes to the budget and the orbitals, and that's what the amendment here, what the committee report does. The introduced version of 1380 immediately repeals the Ombuds Program that was set up by statute in 2023. There was an amendment that passed all the way through the House that changed that to causing it to sunset in a year to basically buy some time. And so what Senator Probst did, and no judgment, that's what they do, is they took that off. By encouraging a no vote on the committee report, what we're saying is we should pass the House version, which simply would sunset the program in a year. I hope that's not confusing enough. Now, why? Rewind the tape. A couple years. Some of us were here. Some of us weren't. there was a lot of talk about the judicial branch of government in Colorado. There was a whole interim committee in 22 that led to constitutional amendment approved by the voters. I think it was about 73%. Part of that discussion was the creation of a statutory ombuds effort passed in the 23 session. It was to be overseen by an ombuds that would be appointed by a kind of board with different appointing authorities. There have been some slip-ups and some sort of missed connections for, frankly, reasons that... are still a little bit opaque to me, I will admit. But the reason that we're asking for this to not go totally away, the reason that we're asking for one more year, is because we think too much effort has gone into this in the past. We think the question of relations between different branches of government and such ongoing conversations as there might continue to be are too important. And we're just asking for a little bit of recognition of what members of both parties in this chamber have done in past years and may continue to do with the judicial branch over the interim. I will say in asking for a rejection of the committee report, there's no fiscal change. There's not anything appropriated for this cause in the budget. I will concede that's only fair and right based on what we know. So there's a line sitting there. We're not trying to give it any money. we're saying let's remember how we got here in the first place and let's not move past it too quickly. So I'm up here asking for a no vote on the committee report from Senate Appropriations.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to my colleagues on the Joint Budget Committee for their work. You know, it's not enough to pass a bill into law. you also have to do the work to ensure that that law is implemented. We did that work on a bipartisan basis over the course of two years to ensure that there was restored trust and accountability in the judicial branch of the state of Colorado. We even went forward and changed our constitution. And as part of that work, we also, the Judicial Discipline Interim Committee, sought fit to create this judicial ombuds office in order to try and change the culture. in order to give workers within the judicial branch the opportunity to raise concerns, what have you. And to hear that now, I can't remember actually if it's two years or three years later, the judicial branch just hasn't gotten around to doing it. Friends, what message does that send? if we allow the judicial branch to just not implement statute. I ask for a no vote on this committee report, but let me be really honest and candid for a second. I won't be around next year to run a bill to ensure that that thing that we thought we had asked them to do via statute three years ago would actually be implemented. One would think that once you pass a bill into law and that it is signed, that there would be the work done to ensure that it is implemented.

Actually, it's not just up to the judicial department. The second year I was on the Joint Budget Committee when this came in front of us. We were trying to figure out what was going on, what were we doing here, and we found out that appointments that were supposed to be made were not made, and it wasn't necessarily just on the judicial branch. So, again, this does have an impact to the budget. If you were to vote no on the committee report, it would be a $400,000 impact on the budget because that's what we would have to appropriate for this ombudsman. So it's been three years. We've given them a fair warning. We said go get this done, get it accomplished. They didn't do it after the first year. They didn't do it after the second year because we tried again last year. We're trying again this year. It just needs to go away. They're not fulfilling it. It doesn't mean that it was a bad law in the first place. It just means it's not happening, and it does have an impact on our budget. So please vote yes on the Appropriations Committee report. Thank you.

Aye.

No.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just briefly, I do believe that some role like this needs to exist in the judicial branch. I know this was the legislature's attempt to do something about it, to create this. My understanding is judicial branch understands they need this. They're looking at something internal. We need to be vigilant as they stand that up to make sure that it is accomplishing what it is that we know needs to be accomplished on this. But again, this office for three years has had no movement. Ask for an aye vote on the bill.

Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 1385.

Well, I'll just say what we did here was we looked at the money that is for mental health for both district attorneys and public defenders. The district attorneys had a whole bunch of money left over from previous years because they weren't using the program. So for one year we gave all the money to the public defenders who were using the program and the district attorneys can just spend down the money they already got and then we'll go back to regular order 50-50 split in subsequent years. I ask for a yes vote.

All those opposed, no.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 1397, the Appropriations Committee report.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment L-003 to 1397.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This amendment just preserves the... It eliminates the planned... Oh, excuse me. Wait a minute. This preserves the statewide behavioral health program for firefighters and their families, and the Cancer Trust Fund for peace officers into the future. We take the cut this year and just preserve that into the future so they can examine it in subsequent years and adjust it accordingly, and we ask for your support.

All those opposed, no.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 26-1399 and the Appropriations Committee Report.

Aye.

Thank you. We have an amendment.

Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a technical amendment. I ask for an aye vote on L005.

Aye.

Thank you. And yes. There is an amendment at the desk.

Thank you. I move L-004 to HB 1399.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Colleagues, I'm pleased to join with my colleague from Fort Collins on offering this amendment to House Bill 1399. So we recognize we're in a difficult budget situation. So this amendment says let keep the million cut we have here for right now in the multimodal options fund But for future years let keep looking at that see if we can find the funding for that in the years that go forward You know, this amendment passed the House. I think this is an important amendment for the localities. The Municipal League, Colorado Municipal League supports it. The Colorado Counties, Inc. supports it. There's a lot of federal matching dollars for these different transportation options that we're going to lose. And, you know, to me, one of my priorities is road safety. I think it's important to recognize that we keep funding in for the localities to keep making our roads safer, keep those improvements coming. That saves lives. I'm a big proponent of cars and highways. I think that's what most people use in this state. But I think we need to recognize that not everybody has that opportunity, that vehicle. You know, there's senior citizens that need other transportation options. There's disabled people that need those options. There's folks in the rural areas. A lot of rural communities get funding under this multimodal transportation program. And so, you know, what my colleague and I are simply saying here is let's take the cuts this year. We need to do that for the budget. but let's at least keep this program in place so we can see if we can keep these important projects for our localities moving forward. So I'd ask for your support.

Thank you, and I would like to thank my good colleague here for joining me on this amendment. Really, what this will do is this will eliminate the fund that is working in every single one of our districts throughout the state. If you want to see what's in your district, I have the report here that outlines all of the projects throughout the state that are being funded. And we get that we're in a tough budget situation, and maybe we will be next year. And if we are, fine, we can delay it again, or perhaps it will be totally eliminated at that point. But we would at least like the opportunity to just pause the funding for this year, not have any funding this year, and potentially at least have the option of bringing it back next year. because there's a lot of stuff in statute around this that would be revoked, and it would be a lot of work to get back in if all we end up having to do is pause it for a year. So we ask for your yes vote.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I ask you for a no vote on the amendment. Members, you know, I appreciate this, but here's the reality. This year in the budget, once again, for the third year in a row, we have over $500 million of one-time funds. We are going to be in the same situation that we are in right now. We're going to be in the same situation next year looking for everywhere we can cut. This is a program that's important. Multimodal is important. But first of all, the retail delivery fees, and I don't remember the dollar amount related to that, go into this fund. It's millions of dollars. They go into this fund. There are ARPA funds that went into this fund, into multimodal fund. There are lots of other federal funds, like the federal HUTF funds, dollars that go into this fund. I already said about the delivery fees. There are several transit dollars, federal dollars, that go into multimodal transportation projects. And then, members, there are 15 transportation planning regions, five of which are MPOs, that get direct money, the MPOs get direct money from the federal government to do programs such as multimodal transportation and mitigation options in their communities and in their regions. So they also have the opportunity to use their own local funds to their projects as well. So this doesn't end the program. It just ends us putting our general fund money into multimodal projects throughout the state of Colorado when there are already millions, and I mean millions of dollars, that go into multimodal transportation projects and transit projects throughout the state. That's all this does. I ask for a no vote on the amendment.

that my colleague just said, there are other dollars every year that go into this fund, millions of other dollars that go into this fund every year from fees, from places where it makes sense to be putting money into this fund. The general fund is not that place. This is not a place that we should be taking dollars from, especially given the challenges we have this year, into multimodal projects that receive funds from other places and that, frankly, are mostly local government construction, local government projects. Local governments don't have the same table restrictions that we do here at the state level. Almost every local government, almost every special district across the state has de-bruced. This is, they're in wildly different fiscal constraints than we are. We are in serious, structural, ongoing challenges. This is not a fund that is likely to come back in future years. to create the false hope that it will, to frankly put future JBCs in a position of having to come down here and argue this every year, I think is not a responsible way to treat our general fund dollars. I appreciate, though, that the sponsors of this amendment are not attempting to put additional funds this year into this program, but to have the promise that in future years we will, I think, is a misunderstanding of the structural deficit that we are in here in this state, and creating the false hope for local governments that they'll receive these dollars, I think is unfair to them. So I ask for a no vote on this amendment.

Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 26-1401 and ask for an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is where we are, though, right? 14-01. I didn't spend enough time digging in, but I'm curious what the total kind of draw on the unclaimed property trust fund is, including this amount, what the total accumulation we've acquired over history.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This one is one I care a lot about and I hope to have even more insight into in future years The legislature has taken an enormous amount of money from this fund There are folks who say, well, there's always money coming in. Once it's been there 10 years, who's going to come and claim that property, unclaimed property? Anyway, we have actually already taken more out of this fund than would be more than 10 years old. We are at about 2021 levels of takings already. Anything older than 2021 has been removed already from this fund. What this bill does is it says we're going to get rid of those future automatic transfers. We're going to get rid of the future automatic transfers that were put into place before 1-2-3 passed for housing funds. We're going to get rid of those future transfers where we take money away for adult dental care. Those are adult dental care in particular comes into the budget, counts as general fund, goes out as Tabor refunds. That is definitely not a great use of those unclaimed property dollars. What we do say in here is sort of what we're going to do is for the last time we're going to take $45 million out of the unclaimed property trust fund this year, year, but sort of in exchange for no more taking in the future, except for the bill that was run last year for FQHCs, which takes from the interest earned on the unclaimed property trust fund only.

Senator Bridges.

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of House Bill 1401. All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed, no. The ayes have it, and House Bill 1401 is adopted. Will the clerk please read the title of House Bill 1404? House Bill 1404 by Representatives Sirota and Taggart and Senators Amabile and Bridges concerning transferring money from the Tobacco Education Programs Fund to the Preschool Programs Cash Fund in connection therewith making and reducing an appropriation. Senator Amabile.

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of House Bill 1404. All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed, no. the ayes haven't House Bill 1404 is adopted. Will the clerk please read the title of House Bill 1405. House Bill 1405 by Representative Brown and Sirota and Senators of Mobley and Kirkmeyer concerning transfers of money from certain cash funds to the general fund. Senator Kirkmeyer. Thank you Mr. Chair I

appropriations report. Seeing no further discussion you have it's on the Appropriations Committee report Senator Pelton Thank you Mr Chair I move to reject the committee report We going to be in Senatorial 5

Senator Pelton.

That motion has been withdrawn.

Perfect. There is a motion to adopt the appropriations committee report, seeing no further discussion. That motion, all those in favor say aye.

All those opposed, no. The ayes have in the appropriation committee report is adopted. To the bill.

Senator Ball.

Will the clerk please read Amendment L-9. Amendment L-9, amend re-engross bill page 14. Senator Ball.

Senator Ball, I need a motion.

That is a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment L-9.

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment L9. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no. The ayes have Amendment L9 is adopted. To the bill, Senator Frizzell.

Senator Pelton, can you hand the amendment to the staff? Senatorial 5. We will come back to order. Senator Frizzell. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Senator Frizzell?

So I think if we're going to talk about the amendment, let's offer the amendment.

Perfect. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read Amendment L-8? Amendment L-8, amend re-engrossed bill page 10, line 15, strike 10 million, and substitute 17. Senator Frizzell.

You want to make the motion?

That's a proper motion. Now tell us about Amendment L-008.

Senator Wallace. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wanted to speak in favor of this amendment. I met with constituents of mine who are served through IDD programs. And it was a heartbreaking conversation, as I know our JBC members have been engaged in for the whole duration of the debate of this budget. I just want to say I met with one mother in particular who talked about having to explain to her child's doctors what her child's disability was because it is so complex and how she really is the person who can care for her child the best and how these caregiver hours are what is keeping their family afloat. So I thank the good senator for the amendment and will be in support.

Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I really appreciate the intent of this amendment. I have two family members. I have an uncle and a cousin who are both on DD waivers, So I know very personally the value of this. I know the challenges faced by these families because I happen to live it. This is a one-time funding source for an ongoing cost. We have done a lot of that in this budget. We have done a lot of sweeping one-time funds to cover ongoing costs. So in some ways, what's $7 million more of ongoing obligation that there's not a way to pay for next year? We may as well add it to the list. On the other hand, at some point, we have to recognize that 6% of the people in Medicaid account for 40% of the cost. And while we absolutely need to look at the other 94% of folks who are on Medicaid and ensure that we are getting the best bang for the buck there, 6% of people on Medicaid account for 40% of the costs. We have to be reigning in costs where we can. We have more generous payment for parents providing care for their kids with developmental disabilities, long-term disabilities, than just about any other state in the country. And we heard in testimony in the budget committee, one out of four of the people who came to say that they didn't want us to cut these services started with, I moved to Colorado to receive these benefits. I love, I love that we are able to help these families. But given the structural deficit that we have in the state, we just can't afford to be the place that folks from around the country move in order to receive these services because we just can't afford it. I, again, deeply appreciate where this amendment is coming from, but do ask for a no vote.

Aye.

No.

Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment L10.

So what this amendment does is it transfers just shy of from the Governor Mansion Activity Fund to the Colorado State Veterans Trust Fund This is a modest but meaningful shift from upkeep of the Governor Mansion to direct support of our veterans It reflects a commitment to honoring service members while exercising fiscal restraint, so I'd ask for a yes vote.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, again, appreciate where the senator is coming from. I disagree and ask for a no vote.

Aye.

No.

Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 1411.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members, this is maybe one of the more consequential orbitals, at least to some of us. So a couple of us here wanted to chat a little bit about what's going on. I guess just to set the issue up, I will acknowledge that our colleagues on the JBC have not found themselves in an enviable position at all this year. A big part of that is certainly increasing costs in health care, which is something I think we should all really, really dial in on when it comes to other policies outside of the budget. At any rate, 1411 deals with a health access program called Cover All Coloradans. Cuts were made all over health care. We grant that was necessary. Proportionally, bigger reductions were made here than overall. If you read the fiscal note of the introduced bill, negative $16 million on budget year, $31 million out year. we and advocates we've been working with and house colleagues have not even begun to try to restore all of that. We have tried to engage in a targeted way to invite all of us to back out a couple of the program changes that the JBC felt necessary to make. So that's the conversation that we're going to engage in here, starting with this amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L-11 to House Bill 1411.

Members, part of the conversation about Cover All Coloradans was the introduction of kind of a hard cap on those who could participate in the program. Understand this is something that the Budget Committee had to work out I not taking anything personal in terms of decisions made by our colleagues across the street There actually not a score or a fiscal cost on this particular amendment because the expectation in the analysis is that we're not really going to hit the cap anyway. So what we want to say here is, look, everybody has the right to health care, and we don't want to introduce a limit like this. You know, we've just talked on the very last bill about limitations on access to care. I think we should be mindful of those for everybody in our state, especially a lot of folks in districts like the one I'm here to serve, like the ones that my colleagues who may want to speak on these issues are here to serve. Frankly, like people who live in all 35 of our Senate districts, regardless of where in the state we live and represent or what party that we're in. So I'm urging a yes vote on L11. We'll see how this goes, and then we'll have some other conversation as well. Senator Benavides.

Members, this program, Cover All Colorado, when it passed, I wasn't here, but I did listen to a lot of the conversation about it. sitting at home because this is an important program. And in the county that I live in, where, and my district, in Senate District 21, it's roughly 50% Latino. The House district that I represented before that was one of two majority Latino districts. We have a high number of people without documentation that need these services. without these services, and we're just talking, giving you a lay of the land kind of thing. Without these services, people are really desperate. It doesn't mean they're not going to get sick. It means they're going to go to emergency rooms, which costs a lot more. And I understand the cap has a zero cost to it. But what it does, it tells people you only get it to this cap and to this many people. And let's just say we've finally met this cap because nobody really knows. But say you got services. You're a kid and you got services before and you were under the cap. And what happens then? The cap's reached and now you don't get any more services. This cap is detrimental to the access people need to these services. You know, it doesn't cost any money and it doesn't really do anything in there. I mean, I think fundamentally all of us believe that children need access to health care, and that's what this does, and we don't want to put barriers in front of them in gaining that access. And this is a budget bill. It's not a political statement. It's a budget bill. It's no dollars involved. Why put it in there when it may hurt individuals' access to this health care? So I urge a yes on this amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to rise in support of Amendment L11 to 1411. This is the second place where I'm going to talk about structural violence. Because... When I think about how do we navigate as a state the provision of care that is a consequence of failure to address a broken immigration system, both Democrats and Republicans have played games with people's lives for far too long. there's a reason that the dream act is old enough to get a beer and it still hasn't been passed it's because both sides have played games with people's lives that's structural violence cost savings that then seek to say, well, let's put caps on in order to limit access to a Medicaid-like program. doesn't mean that people won't end up needing care. They'll just be forced into emergency rooms. The least efficient and most expensive manner of accessing care. And structural violence. I am grateful that the program continues to exist. Grateful to the JBC for their work on this. But L11 just continues to streamline the process, ensures accessibility, ensures continuity of care for the children who have the fewest amount, the least amount of coverage options. Ask for an aye vote on 1411 L001.

Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think my concern about this amendment is that the reason why they're putting caps on this covering all the coloradoans is to make sure that we can still keep our infrastructure going with the medicaid dollars that are going to rural hospitals to keep them open the very place where we have a lot of these migrant workers there and i just want to make sure that when we start talking about structural violence there's also that aspect when it comes from the first floor who wants to cut the Medicaid so deep that it is hurting or possibly could hurt our rural hospitals because some of them have a 50 to 75 payer mix. I think this is a realistic thing to be aware of if we agree with this amendment. So I just want to make sure everybody knows that, that budget problems especially with Medicaid dollars that we get a drawdown from the federal government from We get no money from a drawdown from this There just money put in there that we have to be careful when we start talking about those areas in rural Colorado that could be hurt So I just want to make sure that I said that, and I'm going to say no to the amendment. And I appreciate it real quick, members.

by saying this was a very, very difficult bill. And the cap was something that got negotiated among us. And the reason why the cap matters is because the costs of this program have gone up exponentially. Way more people than we thought have enrolled. and we've made now a forecast that we think is more realistic and the cap only happens if we exceed the forecast. But it's really not right to say that it doesn't cost anything because if we do exceed the forecast and we don't have the cap, then we will have to pay. And so it isn't free. and unfortunately I would encourage a no vote on this amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to clarify because I'm the one who said this doesn't cost anything.

Senator Kirkmeyer.

Senator Kirkmeyer.

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment L-11. All those in favor say aye.

The no's have it, and Amendment L-11 is lost. Senator Weissman. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Members, as I indicated, there were a couple of details of the status that 1411 comes to us in that we need to talk about. Therefore, I do have another amendment. There is an amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please read Amendment L10?

Senator Weissman. Thank you. I move L10 to House Bill 1411. That's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment L10, Senator Weissman. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members, like we said, Cover All Coloradans is a comprehensive program, Medicaid-like, I think is very fair, although it's not Medicaid per se. There were changes made throughout the program. Again, we're acknowledging some changes were necessary. We're trying to be targeted in what we're inviting everybody to revisit here. Amendment L-10 concerns caps that were introduced not to overall participation in the program, but to dental benefits. available through the program. If we're lucky, maybe we don't think very much about our dental health, but consequences can get pretty bad pretty fast if you're not able to get the dental care that you need. Again, this is true regardless of your immigration status, all the way from pain to actually, it's sort of strange to think about, but you let dental health issues go unchecked for too long, they can actually start to affect the health of your heart. system. So what we're trying to say here is this is an important kind of care that people should be able to access. We want to take the monetary cap on benefit off that was introduced to this. Again, we understand the brutal discussions that our colleagues in the Joint Budget Committee had to participate in. The orbital bills and the long bill, like any other bills, are subject to amendment, as the senator from Unincorporated Adams County likes to remind us. There is a cost to this. That's what we're talking about here is moving dollars around in response to priorities. So I wanted to say a little bit about the pay for, if you will. What are we inviting the Senate to move dollars from? There is a line in HICPF, the Department of Health Care Policy and Finance, called General Professional Services and Special Projects. This is a nearly $57 million line. overall. It's used for a variety of purposes, including contracting out. There have been reversions. We believe from talking to staff, reversions have been on the order of $5 or $6 million in the past couple of years, a lesser number of millions of dollars before that. In the event that this amendment and the one to come, which is a smaller amount, are approved, there would still be 88% of the general fund dollars in that line. So we don't think that's radical. Budgets are about choices, what we're saying here. So let's make sure that people can have access to get the dental health care that they need and avoid worse consequences. We're asking for a yes vote on L10.

Senator Benavides.

Senator Gonzalez.

Senator Kirkmeyer. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I renew our encouragement to vote no on L-10. Look, this has not been an easy budget year, and I've been through a lot of budgets and had to make a lot of cuts, and it was excruciating.

Senator Gonzalez.

Senator Gonzalez.

Senator Weissman. Thanks, Mr. Chair. I wanted to respond just narrowly to the question posed. I think aptly, by the Senator from Brighton, well, what else are we inviting the Senate or the legislature to cut? When you put together an amendment to the long bill, it has to be balanced. I don't believe in writing amendments to unappropriated general fund, and I don't want to be part of a robbing Peter to pay Paul situation. So we've tried to avoid all of that here. And, yes, I think I'm quite well aware that difficult cuts have been made. I sit on the health committee. That's all we talk about in there. So we tried to really think hard about a line that maybe could bear a little bit of reduction. If you're looking at pages, it's page 126 is the number in the bottom left. It's in the HICPF part of the budget. The line is called General Professional Services and Special Projects, not provider rates. This line is not used for the core reimbursement of care providers, at least not to my understanding. This line is used for things like contracted services. Again, we have some evidence from nonpartisan staff that there have been reversions in the millions of dollars in recent years. Several years ago, a couple million dollars. More recent years, five or six million dollars in reversion. This is nearly a $57 million figure that we're looking at here in the subtotal. We're asking in the pair of amendments here, the next of which we'll talk about in just a moment, for about a 12% utilization of that, leaving 88%. We don't want to be part, I don't want to be part of working reductions in actual care to other folks. That's not what this amendment is proposing to do. I wanted to clarify. Senator Vita Vitas.

Senator Bridges.

Thank you. Further discussion? Yes. Senator Gonzalez.

Senator Burgess.

Thank you. Further discussions on Amendment L010? Seeing none, the question before is the adoption of Amendment L010. All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no.

And those have it, and Amendment L10 is lost. To the bill. Senator Wiseman.

Mr. Schoffer, please read the title to Amendment L012. Amendment L012.

Thank you for the discussion on Amendment 12. Yes, Senator Benavides.

Senator Cutter.

Sendora Gonzalez.

Thank you. Senator Bridges.

Thank you. Senator Mobley.

Thank you. Any further discussion on Amendment L-12? Seeing none, the question before us is the adoption of Amendment L-12. All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no.

The no's have it. The amendment is lost. To the bill. Seeing no further discussion, the question before us is the adoption of House Bill 12-11. All those in favor say aye.

14-11. I'm sorry. 14-11. All those in favor say aye. All opposed say no The ayes have it House Bill 1411 is adopted Mr Schoepfer please read the title to House Bill 1412

Thank you. Senator Bridges.

Okay. Any further discussion on the Committee report to House Bill?

Any further discussion on the committee report? Seeing none, the question before is the adoption of the committee report to House Bill 1214. All those in favor say aye. All opposed say no. The ayes have it. The committee report is adopted. To the bill. Senator Vazelle.

Ms. Schaffler, please reach the title to Amendment L-003. Amendment L-003.

Senator Giselle, please move the amendment. Oh, my goodness. I'm just not doing it right today.

All right, great. Thank you.

Senator Pelton B.

Further discussion? Yes, Senator Bridges.

And, members, let's stick to the facts and not impugn what we think the motives are of the department.

Well, I know, but we can't call people.

I understand that.

Let's stick to the facts.

Again, I will say that is not a proper term to use in the well. Who's up next? Okay any further discussion on Amendment L Seeing none the question before is the adoption of Amendment L All those in favor say aye Aye All opposed say no.

Amendment L-003 is adopted. To the bill, any further discussion on House Bill 1412? Seeing none, the question before is the adoption of House Bill 1412. All those in favor say aye. All opposed say no. The ayes have it. House Bill 1412 is adopted.

Senator Mobley.

Thank you. Any further discussion?

Seeing no further discussion, the question before us is the adoption of House Bill 1413. All those in favor say aye. All opposed say no. The ayes have it. House Bill 1413 is adopted. Is there an amendment there?

Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move for the passage of House Bill 1409. Seeing no further discussion, the question before us is... Okay. Senator 25. Thank you. Okay, we're back. Members, just a reminder, please be in the well for introduction of amendments or discussion on the bill. Yes, Senator Benavides.

Ms. Schopfer, please read the title to Amendment L-002. Amendment L-002.

I'd like to move L-002 to the amendment. What this amendment does, what this bill does, it makes some, It pulls some money from the marijuana tax cash fund. And one of the things that it pulls is an allocation that is divided up to local governments, to counties, to municipalities that sell marijuana. It a share that the state made a determination I don know when a time back that they would share this portion of marijuana tax cash funds with local governments You know it not a ton of money It million million And the local governments know that we have to make cuts in this budget, and they are not complaining about that. And this amendment does not change that. The $6.1 million this year is still taken out. It doesn't go to local governments. But what this bill does, it does that for all future allocations to local governments. So what this bill does, it only does the one year. So that means next year there would be an allocation to local governments. We may have a bad budget year. We may have a bad budget year the year after, the year after and the year after. But by keeping the allocation in there, it says to the JBC, take a look at this money. Do you need it or should it go to the local governments? And I think it's important that local governments get that. If they absolutely need it and they want to fight JBC taking the money, that's okay. You know, I've heard that we don't want to raise expectations with people, and I understand marijuana tax monies may be going down. I understand all that. But I also understand that this kind of allocation to local governments isn't easy to reinstate. It's not easy for local municipalities and county governments to come back to the marijuana tax cash run and say, we want you to reinstate this allocation to us. That's going to be hard to do, if not near impossible. All this bill says is don't take away that allocation. Look at it every year. And if you do need it for the budget, then fine. We will probably be okay with that from local governments. But, you know, I represent a lot of municipalities in a county that struggles to find money all the time. And they're willing to not push back on this this year. But for coming years, they should be able to receive that allocation. So I really, that's all this does. It just says, puts it back in the mix and lets them look at it every year. So I really encourage a yes vote on this amendment. Thank you.

Okay, sorry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just, I think this is a terrible amendment. I'll just say that because...

because this is the state's tax. This is money that the state gets. And in the past, we have shared this with the local governments. We have had no obligation to do that, but we have done it. And last year we cut it back, and this year we eliminated it. And I don't think it's fair to local governments that they won't be able to plan around the fact that they're not getting this money. And we've heard over and over again with this budget, well, you stopped funding a thing without telling us ahead of time. So we decided we're going to stop funding this thing, and now we going to tell you we not going to fund it going forward And that is what we did So they could plan around that Local governments can raise their local tax on marijuana We have nothing to do with that That is completely up to them. And $6 million in this budget is a lot of money. And the Marijuana Cash Tax Fund is on life support because marijuana sales are going down. And so that we have funded all kinds of things through the Marijuana Cash Tax Fund. And we're not going to be able to keep funding those things going forward. And so more and more things are going to have to get cut that are funded with that. And this just creates the illusion that somehow things are going to be better next year. And they're not going to be better next year. They're going to be worse. And so, you know, sure, the JBC can go back and fight with them some more. But I don't necessarily think that's good policy setting. I don't think that helps people do good planning. And so I would urge a no vote on this.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess I will say something. I respectfully disagree with this amendment, and I ask for a no vote. Members, we spend hours, and I mean hours, looking at the marijuana tax cash fund budget issue. And basically this budget has been, or this program has been rated over the years, and we have had to curtail it, and we're continuing to curtail it. And the good senator from Boulder is correct. This is sales tax money that comes into the state of Colorado.

Any further discussion on Amendment L-002? Seeing none, the question before is the adoption of Amendment L-002 to House Bill 1409. All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no.

The ayes have it. and amendment L002 is adopted. To the bill. Seeing no further discussion, the question before us is adoption of House Bill 1409. All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no. The ayes have it. House Bill 1409 is adopted. Let me get to my next page here. 1370, okay. Mr. Schopler, please read the title to House Bill 1378.

Senator Kirkmeyer.

Okay, that's a proper motion. Any? Any further discussion on the motion? Okay, the question before us is to reject the appropriations report. All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no. The ayes have it. The appropriations report is rejected. To the bill.

Thank you. Any further discussion? Seeing none, the question before us is the adoption of House Bill 1378. All those in favor say aye. All opposed say no. The ayes have it. House Bill 1378 is adopted. Mr. Shocklett, please read the title.

Sure. Senatorial 5. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay we ready to go with the long bill Mr. Shoffler, please read the title to House Bill 1410.

Thank you. Senator Bridges.

Okay. All right, any further discussion on the Appropriations Committee report? Seeing none, the question before is the adoption of the Appropriations Committee report. All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no. and the ayes have it, the appropriations committee report is adopted.

Thank you. And we are on, Mr. Schottler, please read the title to J131, otherwise Amendment 1. Okay. Senator Bridges.

Thank you. On we go. Mr. Schaffer, please reach the title to Amendment 1.

Senator Wiseman.

That's proper motion to the amendment.

I ask for a no vote. Thank you.

Aye.

No.

Senator R. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment 2.

Amendment 2.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Earlier on, oh, I move Amendment 02.

Thank you. Earlier on 1405, I ran an amendment to strip money away from the Office of the Governor's Mansion Activity Fund, and all that amendment did was just put it in the general fund. This is the part of what my ask was to take that money and put it into the Colorado State Veterans Trust Fund, which helps veterans across the state with various needs, housing, and et cetera. So with that, I urge an aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to withdraw Amendment 3.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move amendment number four.

Amendment number four, amend the appropriation of the report.

Colleagues, Amendment 4 is the second half to the amendment that we ran on House Bill 1405. So this takes the money that has now been put into the general fund and takes that money and allocates it towards Veterans Treatment Courts.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L5 to 1410.

Amendment 5.

No, I know.

I move this amendment because what it would seek to do is ensure that Denver Health would be able to access about $245,021 from General Fund in order to thereafter draw down a 65% federal match in order to ensure that people would not roll off of Medicaid. And so this would help keep people insured, and I ask for an aye vote.

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I move Amendment 6 to House Bill 1410.

Amendment 6. Amending the appropriations.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, I call this the – I move amendment. I thought I moved it already. Amendment 6 to House Bill 1410.

Yes, members, I call this the wow amendment. We're going to put women over wolves. And what this does is that we're going to move $2.1 million from the Natural Resources Fund to health care policy and financing for abstractics for women and children, especially in the rural areas. This is a great amendment. It still leaves money for wolves. There's plenty of money for wolves. and it does not, I emphasize, it does not affect the reimbursement for ranchers whose cattle may have been killed by wolves. I won't bore you with all the other details. It's a great amendment. The wow amendment, we're putting women over wolves. I ask for an aye vote. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Aye.

No.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment 7.

Amendment 7.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Colleagues, I want to thank the good Senator from Montrose for joining me on this amendment. He had one that was very similar coming next, and so we decided to combine efforts here. You might remember many of us were here in August last summer for a special session where a bill was passed by both chambers of the legislature and signed by the governor to say that in these tough budget times, we should not be using general funds to purchase and transport more wolves to the state of Colorado. because those wolves and the impacts of them have already cost state taxpayers far more than they thought it was going to cost when they voted on this in 2020. The blue book in 2020 said it was going to cost a year Now the costs far exceed million per year when you add the cost of new wolves mitigation efforts and compensation to livestock owners for their losses As I mentioned, the governor signed that bill into law in August after we passed it in the special session. And no new wolves actually came to Colorado for a variety of reasons in the last season. And so we are still obviously in very tough budget times. And we don't believe that in this time of cutting health care for sick children, money for transportation projects across the state, difficult times for education funding, that the general fund should be used for buying new wolves and transporting them to Colorado. And so this amendment seeks to remove $272,867 from the Department of Natural Resources. That's the cost that would be going to purchasing new wolves and bringing them here to Colorado. and putting that money back into the general fund so the JBC can have more flexibility in the cuts that they're having to make, return some taxpayer dollars to the general fund. It does not mean that we are defunding mitigation programs, compensation programs, and assistance to communities dealing with the wolves that are already here. And it also allows the administration, if they want to, to purchase new wolves using gifts, grants, or donations, or allowable cash fund sources. So the voters intent can still be honored, will still be honored. But we are saving Colorado taxpayers a little bit of money here on something that we know is costing us far more than we thought it was going to when it first got put into place. I think this is a good fiscally responsible amendment. Also one that is a something that our communities that we represent are asking for, but one that the whole state will benefit from in the money that we'll save. And I will remind you, the governor signed almost exactly this amendment into law in the form of the special session bill last summer that the Good Center for Montrose and I ran here through this chamber. So with that, I ask for your aye vote.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Members, I just wanted to come down and reiterate a couple of things. First off, we are not going to remove any of the dollars that we'll be using for mitigation or for reparations or for management. This goes directly to the people that are out there, the run cattle or the run sheep or the running livestock out in the mountains and in the higher country. This allows them to continue to practice the items that we've asked them to do, and they're trying their best. But it does stop us putting another bunch of troublesome animals back into the environment that they're still trying to manage. I think this is a fair opportunity for the state of Colorado to go ahead and meet the commitments that we made as voters and as a government. This is an opportunity for us to stand that up and say yes, we are. Please vote yes.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to flag that it looks to me like this is the same pot of money that the previous amendment took from. So we will need to do some budget jujitsu in conference to figure out what we're going to be doing here. And, of course, as a member of the budget committee, I do, of course, ask for a no vote on an amendment that seems to be saving us money in the general fund. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Seeing no further discussion, the question before us is adoption of Amendment No. 7. All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no. The ayes have it. Amendment 7 is adopted. Senator Catlin.

Thank you. Amendment number eight will be withdrawn. Senator Cutter.

Mr. Shofford, please reach the title to Amendment 9.

Senator Cutter.

Thank you Mr. Shuffler, please read Amendment 10. Amendment 10,

Amendment 10 does is it cuts all funding a little over a million from the

Thank you. Yes, Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I ask for a no vote. I think that this

Thank you. Seeing no further discussion, the question before us is adoption of Amendment 10. All those in favor say aye. All opposed say no. The no's have it. Amendment 10 is lost. Senator Pelton-R.

Thank you. Mr. Shuffler, please read Amendment 11.

Senator Pelton-R.

Thank you. Senator Bridges.

Thank you. Seeing no further discussion, the question before us is the adoption of Amendment 11. All those in favor say aye. All opposed say no. The no's have it. Amendment 11 is lost. Senator Henriksen.

Mr. Shatler, please read Amendment 12.

Senator Henriksen.

Thank you. Amendment 12 will be withdrawn. Senator Catlin.

Mr. Schoffer, please read Amendment 13.

Senator Catlin.

The phone call piece is something that we are required by law to cover as well, although, of course, someone could run a bill to reduce that. And on the last piece, the parole officers that would be removed by that could actually lead to more folks being in prison and then perhaps an even greater need for the Delta fence. Understand that the good senator is working on behalf of constituents and is in good faith attempting to make sure that we have the capacity that we need. Appreciate the amendment. However, do ask for a no vote. Thank you.

All opposed say no.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Pleased to join my colleague from Woodland Park on moving. I move Amendment 14.

Amendment 14, Amendment Reengross Bill, page 36, line 4.

Yes, I move Amendment 14.

You probably all agree with me that auto insurance rates in Colorado are out of control, so let's do something about it. This amendment would move $3 million back into the Colorado Auto Theft Prevention Authority. These funds go to the local law enforcement authorities. They use the funds to fight auto theft. 83% of local law enforcement agencies receive these funds, and the local law enforcement agencies annually contribute $4 million to partner in this program. It has a huge economic impact throughout the state. It's estimated that it saves us $250-plus million in auto property losses, so that's clearly going to have a big impact on auto insurance rates.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So folks, the JBC cut out the entire $8 million general fund allocation for our auto theft prevention program. The governor came back with a request for $5 million. That was turned down. We're asking for $3 million here to come out of the Department of Correction superintendent's subprogram for personal services, which I'm sure you all are very familiar with that line item. Near as I can tell, it's typically used when supplemental overspending and for discretionary funding. It currently has $14.6 million in that line item, so that's why we're asking for the $3 million. And you have to think about the great successes we've had with our auto theft prevention. Just a few years ago, we were by far number one in the nation. We've made great improvements, especially in Denver Metro. We're only the sixth worst for auto theft now. But we're really making progress. We can't unfund this program and not keep the program going forward. And I remind you that the people that are most hurt by auto thefts are some of our most vulnerable people. You know, somebody has money, gets a car stolen, they can rent a car, might have another car. For people of lesser means, this is their only transportation to get their kids to school, get to work, keep a job. So this is a really important bill, and I humbly ask for your aye vote.

Yes, I want to thank my colleague from Manitou Springs for those comments. I don know why I said Woodland Park Manitou Springs Thank you all We urge an aye vote Thank you Senator Bridges

Seeing no further discussion. The question before is the adoption of Amendment 14. All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no.

And those have it, Amendment 14 is lost. Senator Liston.

Thank you. Amendment 15 is withdrawn. Senator Liston.

Mr. Schoffler, please read Amendment 16.

Thank you, members.

No, thank you, Senator Liston. The question before us is the passage of Amendment J-89. All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed, no.

The no's have it. Amendment J-89 is lost. Will the clerk or actually Senator Bright.

Senator Bright, can you repeat yourself? Did you make a motion?

Okay, perfect. Thank you. Senator Bright. Continuing. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

The sponsor has withdrawn amendments 17, 18, and 19.

Will the clerk please read amendment 20? Amendment 20, amend the Engross Bill, page 87. Thank you.

Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This program brings together the parents of kids with disabilities, which of course does include folks in rural Colorado. I think it's an incredibly valuable program. Ask for a no vote on the bill. Sorry, on the amendment.

All those opposed, no.

The no's have it, and Amendment 20 is lost.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment 21. It's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment 21, Senator Exum.

Amendment 21 is going to reduce the administration of governor's office in the residential line item and restore $400,000 general fund for Tony Gramps' youth services program. And the reason for it is that last year we ran a bill to include, to increase access to the Tony Gramps' Fund for small and grassroots nonprofit organizations. And I'm fearful that this cut in a real tough budget year, and we understand that, may impact the possible grants or funding for those smaller organizations. We ask for an aye vote, and I'll pass it over to my co-prime.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I'm honored to join my colleague here on Tony Gramsis to retain the funds completely and not have any cuts to it. The cut was small, $400,000 that would be replaced. This is a program that was named under a former legislator, and it is one of the few programs in the state that we fund that helps, keeps kids out of trouble. You know, it gives them something to do after school, on weekends. There's tons of community-based organizations that get funding from this. This has been around for more than 20 years, and it's done well. They evaluate their programs. They evaluate how those monies are spent, and it is a great program. and we need to continue it. We don't need to have people worried about whether they're going to get the funds. It's my understanding, and I think our colleague will talk about that, they've already made awards for this year, and those organizations are counting on those funds to help with their programs on kids. So I encourage an aye vote on this amendment Thank you Senator Bridges Thank you Mr Chair I ask for a no vote on this amendment

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment L21. All those in favor say aye.

Ayes have it. Amendment 21 is adopted. Will the clerk please read Amendment 22? Amendment 22.

Senator Pelton.

Senator Kirkmeyer I love this amendment the office of saving people money is actually going to save people money I just want to point that out Senator Bridges thank you thank you moving on

Seeing no further discussion, the question before us, the adoption of Amendment 22. All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no.

The no's have it. Amendment 22 is lost. Senator Pelton B.

Ms. Schoffler, please read Amendment 23.

Senator Pelton B.

discussion the question before is the adoption of amendment 23 all those in favor say aye all opposed say no the nose having amendment 23 is lost senator rizelle thank you mr chair microphones all weird

Thank you.

Further discussion. Senator Bridges.

Seeing no further discussion, the question before us is the adoption of Amendment 24. All those in favor say aye.

The no's have it. Amendment 24 is lost. Senator Pelton R. Senator Pelton R.

Thank you, Mr. Shuffler. Please read Amendment 25.

Senator Peltner.

Thank you. Senator Bridges.

Thank you. Seeing no further discussion, question before us is adoption of Amendment 25. All those in favor say aye. All opposed say no. The noes have it. Amendment 25 is lost. Senator Rich.

Amendment 26, amendoring gross bill.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Oedit has taken a pretty significant hit both last year and this

the adoption of amendment 26. All those in favor say aye. All opposed say no.

Chair, sorry, it went out of order. For the record, I move. Amendment number 27, J118.

Thank you. Members, this picks up on the subject of the evidence backlog at CBI that we spoke about glancingly in the posture of supplementals earlier this year and that we spoke about a lot and necessarily so last year.

All those in favor say aye.

All opposed say no.

The ayes have it. Amendment 27 is adopted. Senator Rich.

Amendment 28 is withdrawn. Senator Verzell.

Mr. Choffler, please read Amendment 29.

Senator Verzell.

families rely on a small number of caregivers who have to sometimes travel long distances especially in the rural areas of the state just to provide services a strict cap may make it completely impossible for families to staff medically necessary care even when the workers are available And the other thing that I talked about when I asked for you to vote in favor of moving $7.1 million out of that cash fund was the DD waiver backlog, that waiting list that we hear about, which is now seven years long. The numbers that I have are, as of September 2025, there were about 8,850 individuals enrolled overall, and there is an average seven-year wait list for another 2,750 adults who need enrollment as soon as they can get it. There are so many people waiting, and this is, again, these are people who need attention 24-7. So, members, this amendment simply puts in writing what we talked about earlier. Talked about what to do with that $7.1 million out of the cash fund, and I'd be very grateful for your iVote. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to say from the perspective of having been in the room voting for these cuts over the last six months yeah, this amendment, more than a lot of the others, really gets it. It's some of the hardest decisions that we had to make this year. I, you know, I say that these are the kinds of votes that keep me up at night, and they literally do. There were tears, I think, from every member at some point during this last JVC process, and this is one that really got all of us. So I understand where the senator is coming from. Similar remarks to her amendment on the transfer bill where she freed these dollars up. This is the hard one. I do, as a member of the JBC, ask for a no vote.

Aye.

Amendment 30. Senator Pelton.

That's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment 30.

30. seeing no further discussion the motion before the body is the adoption of amendment 30 all those in favor say aye all those opposed no the no's having amendment 30 is lost will the clerk please

a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment 31. Okay, so what this amendment does is it eliminates the Office of Gun Violence Prevention and transfers the three million that is in that to reduce the wait list for IDD services. There's a lot of people that need these services that have been waiting for a long time and I think we need to adopt this amendment to the budget. So yes for

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again here with the Senator from Manitou Springs. And due to the indulgence of the Joint Budget Committee, we are moving an amendment. There is an amendment at the desk.

I move Amendment 14A.

This is just a technical slight change to what we offered earlier which is to move million back into the auto theft assistance fund

Aye.

No.

Amendment 32. amend re-engross bill page 137 line 15 and I amend

Absolutely. Members I don't

way to go i ask for your i vote saying no further discussion the motion for the body is the adoption of Amendment L-32. All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed, no.

The no's have Amendment L-32, or Amendment 32 is lost. Will the clerk please read Amendment 33?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to withdraw Amendment 33.

Amendment 34. Amendment 34, amend re-engrows bill page 141, line 5.

That's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment 34.

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment 34. All those in favor say aye.

All those opposed, no.

And the no's have it. Amendment 34 is lost. Will the clerk please read Amendment 35?

Senator Zemora Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I move Amendment 35 to House Bill 1410.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this amendment cuts funding for abortion in the HICPEF and returns $5.8 million to the general fund. And I understand this is a contentious topic, but though abortion is in our Constitution, taxpayer dollars should not be used to fund those services, just like I have a constitutional right to bear arms, but it's not up to the taxpayers to fund that right. This amendment reflects a commitment to protecting life and respecting diverse views of our taxpayers and returning these funds to the general fund to support broader budget stability and core state priorities. I urge an aye vote on Amendment 35. Thank you.

Seeing no further discussion, the motion for the body is the adoption of Amendment 35. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no. And no's have it, and Amendment 35 is lost. Senator Catlin. Or actually, will the clerk please read Amendment 36?

Senator Catlin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to move Amendment 36 to 1410. House Bill 1410.

Thank you, sir. Thirty-six adds $1.5 million to the general fund to the 988 hotline in the Department of Human Services and adds a footnote specifying that funding be used to increase call recipients and make the following reductions. It reduces the diaper distributions program in the Department of Human Services by $500,000. Reduces diversion and justice-involved behavioral health services by $500,000. And reduces the appropriation to the emergency stockpile rotation cash fund in the Department of Public Safety by $500,000. Members, the reason I'm doing this, I'm sure that you're aware that we're in a drought. And we in a tough tough time for agriculture in rural Colorado What I would like to do is to stand this up so that the people that are out there suffering from those instances they had no control over if they need some sort of help, that we're there ready to give it, that we're prepared. We've seen this coming. We've got 988 up, but what we need to be able to do is to prepare for what is probably coming. People losing a five or six generation farm to something they had no control over is sometimes more than most people can take. And believe me, the people that live out there on those ranches and on those farms are not the kind of people that would drive to town, park it on Main Street and walk through the door of a facility that says mental health on the glass door. They won't do it. But they might, and they do, call on the phone and say, I need somebody. I need some help. They're starting to understand that asking for help is not a weakness. It's a strength. Colorado Farm Bureau is out advertising the fact that we have these numbers out in amongst the people that are trying to coax a living up out of the ground. There are days that coaxing that living up out of the ground is something more than you and I would really want to talk about, particularly with what's at risk. So this is an opportunity for us in the Senate to stand up an opportunity to help the people that are helping the state of Colorado. I would ask for a yes vote.

Senator Catlin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would ask that we don't wait until we've seen a dozen or more funerals. We need to be aware of this, and I really want you to think about it. I hope the state is prepared to respond quickly.

Aye.

No.

Amendment 37.

That's a proper motion to House Bill Amendment 37. Senator Snyder.

Senator Weissman. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Yeah, members, Restorative Justice is a rich and interesting part of our overall criminal legal system, and what we're doing in this amendment is not really changing the structure of any of that. But to the point of the cash fund, some concern has arisen from parts of the restorative justice practitioner community about what are the decision-making processes concerning the funds that flow from that surcharge that the Senator from Manitou just alluded to. 37 is simply a legislative intent footnote. It doesn't move any dollars from or to anywhere else. We are urging the continued attention to the input of the RJ Council, which is a statutorily created council. The site is in the text of the note. These are folks who are tapped, you know, pursuant to the usual kind of appointment process to give their perspective. We just want it to be heard in the decisions that are made over in the judicial branch. That's the point of 37. We urge your support.

Aye.

Amendment 38.

So, okay.

Thank you, Mr. Minority Leader. Amendment 38 has been withdrawn. Will the clerk please read Amendment 39?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment 39.

Thank you. I spoke just a couple of minutes ago about the amount of redundancy that we have in various programs, and I brought Amendment 39 because I feel that this is another one. Two years ago, when I was still in the House, we passed a bill creating the Colorado Disability Opportunity Office. And there are a lot of reasons that the funding for it is there, funded primarily by the sale of license plates, as I recall. And what this amendment does is it eliminates the ADA coordinator in DPA DPA for the purpose of balancing this budget So basically it does away with what I would consider to be a redundant position that should already be included in the Colorado Disability Opportunity Office But again, I voted yes on creating that Opportunity Office. I think that it made a lot of sense. and again I think we need to really work on finding those redundancies that we have in state government and figuring out how we can be more efficient so I ask for your aye vote

Amendment 40, Amendment Re-Engross Bill, page 385.

That's a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment 40, Senator Rich.

Seeing no, Senator Bridges.

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment 40. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no.

So haven't an Amendment 40 is lost. Will the clerk please read Amendment 41?

Senator Wallace. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Senator Wallace, tell us about Amendment 41. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The amendment would cap reimbursement rates for hospital care. and affiliated health care facilities from the state health employment plan at no more than 165% of Medicare rates for the same services. Savings would be credited back to the general funds and would yield a little under $42 million, and rural and critical access hospitals are exempt from this reimbursement cap. Members, I'm going to withdraw this amendment in just a moment. I just wanted to start the conversation for us around hospitals and hospital pay. this is 40 nearly 42 million dollars that could be reallocated to services that we are cutting, including our state's pre-K program, our community health center funding, and general funds for Medicaid reimbursement rates across the board. And so I just want to point out that these are some overpayings that we are doing. And with that, Mr. Chair, I withdraw the amendment.

Amendment 42. Amendment 42. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment 42.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this amendment does a wonderful thing.

Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I love... Sorry, sorry. I loathe this amendment. It does eliminate all of CDPHE. I will say, as far as an expression of values go in this budget, this is a very clear one. I'm sure there are all sorts of things we could dig up that CDPHE does that are very important for your district and especially and particularly for Colorado's agricultural community. I don't feel the need to dig those up and point out exactly where it is that your constituents would disagree with you on this, but I understand in principle where you're coming from. I appreciate it. Ask for a no vote.

Senator Pelton. It would be wonderful just to keep in the local government hands. So that's all I'm asking for.

Aye.

No.

Amendment 43. Senator Samora Wilson.

That is a proper motion. Senator Zamora Wilson, tell us about Amendment 43.

3. Thank you. Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment 43. All those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no. The no's have it. Amendment 43 is lost. Will the clerk please read Amendment 44?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment 44 to House Bill 1410.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this amendment cuts $500,000 from the Preventing Identity-Based Violence Grant Program and returns it to the General Fund. State government should focus on core public safety functions rather than expanding grant programs, consolidating resources into existing law enforcement and public safety efforts, improves accountability and effectiveness. So returning these funds to the general fund supports responsible budgeting and helps address higher priority needs. I urge an aye vote on amendment 44.

Amendment 45.

That is a proper motion. Tell us about Amendment 45, Senator Zemar Wilson.

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment 45. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed, no. No. The no's have it. Amendment 45 is lost. Will the clerk please read Amendment 46A?

Senator Pelton. I move 46A.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And if I could have a little leeway, I have a couple articles up here I'd like to talk about.

Yeah. All right.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So what this amendment does is the Department of Transportation, Construction, Maintenance, and Operation, it adds a footnote. And what it says is that in the General Assembly's intent, it is the General Assembly's intent that the Department of Transportation not allocate any funds to the Front Range Passional Rail District until Colorado rural pavement conditions is ranked at or above 45 in the nation according to the Reason Foundation The reason why I bring this up is I have a news release here from CDOT that talks about the 10-year plan and the 25% investment in rule paving to continue in CDOT's updated plan. And it talks about how, thanks to Senate Bill 21-260, that there was going to be a lot of, I'm sorry, the unprecedented levels of rural road investment will continue to remake the road network that connects smaller communities across Colorado better. That's what it says. And it talks, and this is September 1st, 2022, the epic amount of funding. The first four years of the 10-year plan allocated approximately $382 million to rural pavement conditions and have made improvements to roads in 55 counties. September 1st, 2022, CDOT will maintain this focus throughout the decade and with a total of $940 million going towards rural roads over the life of the plan. That's what it talks about. So fast forward to March of 2025. This is the Reason Foundation.

Yes, we are sticking to it because it even talks about the Reason Foundation in the bottom of the...

Right, right. I understand. We're talking about the funding for the roads, yes.

We are. We're right back there. So basically what the Reason Foundation has found is that the safety conditions of the roads in urban areas is at 45, is ranked 45. And all I'm asking with this amendment is that rural roads are at 47th in the nation. So all I'm asking is for us to be equal before we spend any money to the passenger rail system, any money at all. So before any money is allocated from whatever source that it may come from, none of that money can get allocated until rural Colorado has the same conditions of their roads as urban Colorado. That's all we're asking with this amendment is that that is what it's telling us is that rural Colorado is treated equally as urban Colorado is when it comes to the condition of our roads. That's what this amendment is doing because right now it's not. We're not equal with anything and we have a 47 billion dollar industry that relies on this transportation infrastructure. So what we're asking is if you'd like to get your food to please maintain our roads before you spend any money on any of this brand new train to nowhere. That's what we're asking. So I ask for an aye vote on 46A. Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to know, is it

in either case um i i believe that coco as it now called the colorado connector wow hmm did they pull on that Cocoa I believe it will be connecting more than just the Front Range It will be helping folks get into some of our mountain communities I think the first piece of Front Range Rail the first piece that will go into effect is actually the train up to Craig is I believe a piece of what it is that this funding goes to

Seeing no further discussion, the motion before the body is the adoption of Amendment 46A. All those in favor say aye. Aye.

And the no's have it. Amendment 46A is lost. Will the clerk please read Amendment 47?

Senator Belton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment 47.

All this does, all this bill, or all this amendment does is just return CDPHE to the same amount they were in their budget before COVID. That's all it does. That's all we do. We just cut it back. so so um so we take that 69 million dollars that in that was increased 69.4 million dollars that was increased goes right back to the general fund and look we fixed part of the budget problem just part a little part but anyway there you go you get 69 million dollars so anyway that's what it does i ask for an aye vote on cdphe senator bridges thank you mr chair again the consistency

I am looking for a bingo for anyone who has inspecting cheese on your bingo card during the budget debate. That is a first in my time here. But I do see no further discussion on Amendment 47, so the motion before us is the adoption of Amendment 47. All those in favor say aye. Aye.

Yep, the no's have it. Amendment 47 is lost. Will the clerk please read Amendment 49?

Senator Zamora Wilson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. move Amendment 49 to House Bill 1410.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this is all about equity. So this amendment reduces statewide FTE counts by 3% across all departments. This is a manageable cut. It's a fair, modest, across-the-board reduction. It encourages agencies to prioritize core functions and improve efficiency. State government staffing has grown rapidly in recent years, and this brings headcount back towards sustainable levels. I mean, we're facing a serious crisis. It's a self-inflicted structural crisis. While private sector struggles with stagnation, government employment has grown at one of the fastest rates in the country, adding thousands of public jobs while private employment has stalled or declined. Between February of 2024 and 2025, Colorado lost 14,700 private sector jobs, while the public sector, the government jobs, expanded by over 15,000. People, this is unsustainable. This expansion of state bureaucracy has helped fuel our budget shortfall, and it's expanded to nearly $1.5 billion for the 26-27 fiscal year. So we need to tighten our belt. Instead, we've been looking at tapping our reserves, reducing our safety net, and asking taxpayers to do more. and this is why I'm calling for these necessary cuts to state employment to restore balance to our budget and our economy. Now I understand when we talk about cutting jobs, we're talking about people, we're talking about our neighbors, our friends, and our community members and so I want to be very clear, this is not an attack on individuals but on the bloated system that is taking more than its fair share of Colorado's talent. And we know that the private sector is desperate for talented, hardworking people. In Colorado, we have a persistent labor shortage. So our communities are looking for this talent. We call that in economics creative destruction. So this approach shares responsibility evenly across departments rather than targeting single programs. It promotes long-term fiscal discipline without eliminating essential services. And so I urge an aye vote on Amendment 49. Thank you.

Aye. All those opposed, no. No.

Amendment 50.

Amendment 50 is withdrawn. Wow. The motion before the body is the adoption of House Bill 1410. Seeing no further discussion, all those in favor say aye. All those opposed, no. The ayes have an amendment, or House Bill 1410 is adopted. We will be in a senator no no no I sorry Madam Assistant Majority Leader Thank you Mr Chair I move to rise and report The motion before the body is to rise and report. All those in favor say aye.

The ayes have it, and we will rise and report. No, no, we're going to announce that. Okay, okay. Now we're going to a senatorial five? Now senatorial five. Yeah. Yeah. Now we will be in a senatorial five. It's just like take your time, rising and reporting. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. President, the committee has met and had a number of bills under consideration. Will the clerk please read the report?

Danielson and Judah. Senator Mullica. Thank you Mr. President. I move for the adoption of the report. The motion is the adoption of the committee of the whole report and there is an amendment of the desk. Mr. Schaffler please read S002 to House Bill 1410. Amendment S002. Senator Liston moved to amend the report of the

Thank you Mr President Mr President I move Amendment S to House Bill 1410 To the amendment Thank you Mr President Mr President I move the Amendment S to House Bill 1410 To the amendment Very good Members this was an amendment to take from the inmate pay line And I know everybody was busy and so forth. And please understand, I'm not against the inmates. Under the current budget, their pay is going to increase by 12.3%. It's going to go from $5.1 million to $5.7 million. And all I'm suggesting, for the benefit of the ultimate benefit of the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, which the money will flow through them down to the National Cybersecurity Center, is instead of getting a 12.3% pay raise, is that it will just be cut by 5.2%. So that that $300,000 for your edification, let me give you some idea, once again, for those who were not here, of what the National Cybersecurity Center does. It's very significant for all of us here in Colorado, every one of us in our communities. It's an institution that was founded by the legislature some 10 years ago. It's been active in the Denver Public Schools, the fire districts, specifically the South Metro District, Fire District, Lake County, Park County, all of our communities. They've had cybersecurity training for all 50 legislators in all 50 states. They've awarded scholarships, well over a million dollars in scholarships for students to come and learn about cybersecurity. This is something that's going to affect all of our lives. It does currently. I won't belabor it except just to say that the old adage, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. We have an opportunity here to give a jump start to young students and adults that are not familiar with cybersecurity, how to protect public and private institutions, saving us tens of millions of dollars. So for a mere, just transferring a mere $300,000, which is only 5.2% of the entire budget, I would respectfully ask for an aye vote on Amendment S-002 to House Bill 1410. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you, Mr. President. And I understand the value that cybersecurity education provides here in the state. This is a booming industry. There are tons of people going into it. To use Colorado taxpayer dollars to support it at this point does not seem like the best use of those dollars when there are so many people already going into this high-skill, high-wage, in-demand industry. I'd say moreover, the pay for in this amendment is from inmate pay. Inmates make almost nothing per hour. I don't have DOC on the hotline, so the best research I could get in the last few minutes is that it anywhere between 33 cents to an hour This is unfathomably low It is not the place that we should be cutting funding from for this program. For both of those reasons, I ask for a no vote on this amendment.

Further discussion? Senior further discussion. The motion is the adoption of S-002 to House Bill 1410. Are there any no votes? Senators, Mr. Majority Leader, Amabile, Cutter, Marchman, Wallace, Kip, Wallace again. Gonzalez, Doherty, Kirkmeyer, Benavidez, and now Weissman. That's correct. Senator from Greenwood Village, I do always call the ladies first. Senator Bridges. Henrickson. Is that Senator Daniels? That's Senator Colker. Ah, Lindstadt. Sullivan. Ball. Exum. Roberts. Mullica. Please add the president. With a vote of 12 eyes, 21 no, 0 absent, 2 excused, S002 to 1410 is lost. There is an amendment to the desk. Mr. Schaffer, please read S-003 to House Bill 1410.

To the amendment.

Further discussion on S003.

further discussion sooner further discussion the motion is the adoption of S003 to House Bill 1410 Are there any? No votes. Senators. Mr. Majority Leader. Kirkmeyer. Yeah. Kirkmeyer. And Mr. Majority Leader already. Cutter. Amabile. Kip. Benavidez. Gonzalez. Wallace. Marchman. Doherty. Roberts, Snyder, Exum, Bridges, Colker, Weissman, Lindstedt, Sullivan, Ball, Henrickson, don't see any other hands up. Mullica, please add the president. I appreciate you, sir. With a vote of 11 ayes, 22 noes, 0 absent, 2 excused. S-O-3 is lost. Further discussion, seeing that in the motion is the adoption of the committee of the whole report. Are there any no votes? with a vote of

with a vote of 32 eyes, 1 no, 0 absent, 2 excuse, the whole report is adopted. House Bill 1351, 1353, 1357 is amended, 1359, 1360, 1363 is amended, 1373 is amended, 1374 is amended, 1380 is amended, 1385, 1397 is amended, 1399 is amended, 1401, 1404, 1405 is amended, 1411 is amended, 1412 is amended, 1413, 1409 is amended, 1378, 1410 is amended, passed, second, we need to revise, place, counter for third, we need to end. Final passage.

You heard the motion. All those in favor say aye. Opposed, no. The ayes having the Senate will adjourn until 9 a.m. on Thursday, April 16, 2026. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. . Thank you. .