May 11, 2026 · Appropriations · 2,686 words · 5 speakers · 87 segments
. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you Thank you. Thank you. House appropriations will come to order. Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representatives Basenecker. Here. Bottoms. Here. Gilchrist. Here. Joseph.
Where did she go?
Excused, I guess.
She was just here.
Richardson. Here. Taggart. Here. Tatone. Here. Velasco. Here. Zokai. Excused.
Madam Vice Chair. Here.
Mr. Chair. Here. All right, folks, let's start with Senate Bill 23. Welcome to our bill sponsors. Do we have any questions for our bill sponsors? Seeing none, there are a number of amendments in our packet. Madam Vice Chair, I will let you move and explain and all that.
Okay.
And Rep Lukens is here for explanation as well. And I know it appears that there are a lot of L and J amendments, And yes, in fact, we are going to ask for the L and then the J. I'm told this is typically how J amendments work with the School Finance Act, so that it's just clear each appropriation as it relates to each individual item.
So first I'll move L021.
Second. Seconded by Representative Titone.
Are there any objections to L021? Seeing none, L021 has passed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move J004 to Senate Bill 23.
Seconded by Representative Titone.
Are there any objections to J004? Seeing none, J004 has passed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L023 to Senate Bill 23.
Seconded by Representative Titone.
Are there any objections to L023? Seeing none, L023 has passed
Madam Bysher Thank you, Mr. Chair The next one is L027 which is a new smoothing mechanism which will eventually replace the averaging process and this will help to ensure that no district falls 3% below prior year per pupil count. So I move L027.
Second. Seconded by Representative Titone.
Are there any objections to L027? Seeing none, L027 has passed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Next, I move L028 to Senate Bill 23.
Second. Seconded by Representative Titone.
Are there objections to L028? Seeing none, L028 is passed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. To implement L028, I move J005 to Senate Bill 23.
Are there objections to J005? Seeing none, J005 is passed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Since we did L028 and J005, we can now do L30. So I move L30 to Senate Bill 23.
Seconded by Representative Chitone.
Are there objections to L030? Seeing none, L030 is passed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. To effectuate that, I move J006 to Senate Bill 32.
Seconded by Representative Chitone.
Are there objections to J006? Seeing none, J006 has passed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And the last piece we are going to work through here is L31, and this is adjusting the cost of living factor in this year's School Finance Act. The late-breaking problem necessitated this to support some of our lower-income, higher-risk districts. So I move L031.
Thank you.
Seconded by Representative Titone.
Is there objection to L031? Seeing none L031 has passed Madam Vice Chair Thank you Mr Chair I move J to Senate Bill 32 Thank you Seconded by Representative Satone Are there objections to J Seeing none, J-007 is passed. Okay. That's it for now. Great job. Are there any additional amendments? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Are there additional, or sorry, Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Senate Bill 23 is amended to the Committee of the Whole.
Seconded by Representative Satone.
Do we have any final discussion? Seeing none, Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Oh, I'm sorry, Rep. Zokai has joined us. Rep. Zokai has joined us. Representatives Basinecker.
Yes. Bottom. No. Wilchrist. Yes. Joseph Excused Richardson. Yes. Taggart. Yes. Tatone. Yes. Velasco. Yes. Zocay. Yes.
Madam Vice Chair. Yes.
Mr. Chair. Yes. That bill passes 9 to 1 with one excused. Thank you for funding our schools. All right, on to Senate Bill 80. Committee members, do we have questions for our bill sponsor? All right, seeing none, there are no amendments in our packet. Do we have any amendments? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Let's see, Madam Vice Chair or someone else? Sorry, go ahead.
I can move it. I might have one more thing to say.
That's fine. Go ahead, Madam Vice Chair.
I move Senate Bill 80 to the Committee of the Whole.
Second.
Is there a second?
Second.
Seconded by Representative Gilchrist. Discussion, Representative Lukens.
Mr. Chair, my sincerest apologies, but I was wondering if we can wait for Rep. Joseph to come back.
Oh, yes, we can. We'll call her.
Thank you.
Yeah, make sure she gets here quickly. she was here the committee will stand in a brief recess do you want to have some discussion while we wait for her the committee will We'll come back to order. While we're waiting for Rep. Joseph, I think there may be some committee members who may want to make some comments. Is there further discussion about Senate Bill 80?
Madam Vice Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I can appreciate the desires of the bill sponsors to address what you are aiming to address through the policies and the societal challenges you're trying to address through this bill. But I am very challenged to, and I can't think of a time that I have, voted for a bill that is being, for an ongoing program to be supported solely by gifts, grants, and donations. And in this respect, for a sizable amount of money, we're talking about a million dollars here, state staff contingent on that. And for grant programs that I think we actually have a number of these programs throughout state government. There's the Tony Gramps program that we run about $10 million through, I think. We have the post-secondary workforce readiness programs that we are now working through and consolidating. I see some themes of this actually running through the new proposal for a transformational Department of Higher Education incorporating programs within the Department of Labor. I think there are just things running through state government that are doing all of this already. And what I couldn't understand from lobbyists who spoke with me about this program is why, you know, they said to me they never had any, they don't have any intention of asking for state funds to support this program. And my question is, then why do we need a state grant program if it's just philanthropy who's planning to give money? Then why is it that we would create another state grant program for grants that we already, I think, actually have throughout state government? and why wouldn't philanthropy just invest in the places that have already been identified to do said work? This is technically wrap up,
but I will allow the sponsor to, since you did not give an opening or a closing comment, I will go ahead and give a comment if you'd like.
Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Madam Vice Chair, for the great question. There is significant philanthropic interest in this program being a statewide program. I believe that there is a vested interest in a program being through the state because it demonstrates that there is a statewide interest in a successful program like this. I also believe that a program like this leads to more transparency and stability and accountability by being through the state. And in addition to that, I think that part of the reason that I'm on this bill as a rural legislator is because having a, you know, just a nonprofit based in, say, Denver is wonderful and fantastic. But the idea of this program is that it could benefit all corners of the state. I think that nonprofits based in certain areas, of course, can support across the state as well, but usually support the community that they're in. And the idea of this program is that we look at the already existing wonderful community-based programs that exist, and we ensure one of the requirements of the program is that there is collaboration with the community and that the grant recipient has demonstrated that there is collaboration within the community. So I understand that there is hesitancies around this being created through the state, but this type of program we have seen be wildly successful in the state of Maryland. And I think that there is a large amount of groups that have a vested interest in seeing this successful in the state of Colorado as well. And having the state, specifically the Department of Human Services, oversee that.
Additional comments? Representative Zocaya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, sponsors. I struggled with this bill a bit because I do support the goals here, but I am pretty concerned with the structure we're setting up here of having out-of-state money from a private investor group solely funding state functions. And I think that if those outside groups, from my understanding outside of Colorado, want to support these programs, as Madam Vice Chair mentioned, there are grants that could use their support and they can give to these organizations directly. And I would rather see them do that than set up a state grant where they're the only funder. So for those reasons, I'm respectfully a no today.
Additional comments? Representative Taggart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm somewhat on the fence on this because of the fact that I'm, as you know, I'm a co-prime on 1317, which is an effort along with the Speaker to consolidate all our programs into one area. And we have developed a working group to do that with higher education. and I realize higher education and jobs, and I know this touches on this, but it also is early on. But even having said that, a program now going through human services as compared to education just doesn make a great deal of sense to me So I have some real questions Are there additional comments Representative Joseph Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to thank the sponsors for bringing this bill forward. This is an extremely important bill, especially for those who work in early childhood or in early child care. And I understand our current fiscal situation and what the bill is attempting to do. And because of that I will be a yes today, and I just wanted to put that on the record. Thank you for running this bill, because if you were not running it, I would have probably want to run it myself. Thank you.
Thank you, Representative Joseph. Sponsors. Representative English has not had a chance to comment yet.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to say that this is money that the state doesn't have, and this bill will access money that doesn't cost the state, and it will bring in new foundation money and it will help with all the programs who are doing the work. And the state also tells the philanthropic community the state believes in the work. And so to Representative Zolkai's point, the goal is to work with Colorado philanthropic people. and it's not an education bill. It's to support the wraparound services and CDHS has supported programs like this before. So we think this bill makes sense and we would ask for your yes vote. Thank you.
Thank you, Representative English. Are there additional comments?
Aye.
Representative Gilchrist.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We heard this bill in education had extensive discussion about the program and its impact. And I am a yes today, although I understand the gifts, grants, and donations funding a program that's state-run is unique, given the importance of the program and the holistic nature of it and the fact that there is that source of funding, and given our current fiscal situation, I feel like this is a needed and welcomed opportunity to invest in these programs and invest in programs that are holistic, like I said, holistic in nature and have been successful in other states. So with that, I will be a yes today.
Thank you, Representative Gilchrist. Are there further comments? All right. I will say that I think I shared with many of my colleagues at the beginning of the year that when you're using gifts, grants, and donations, in order for me to feel comfortable with the bill, I needed to know that there was a specific offer of a specific amount of money from a specific organization to fund it, and it would need to be in the exact amount to implement the program. I also indicated that ongoing programs should not be funded by gifts, grants, and donations because the government is not a nonprofit, and we should not worry about the stability of our programs based on the whims of private donations. For those reasons, since this bill appears to violate both of those principles that I laid out at the very beginning of the year, I will be a no, despite the fact that I really believe in the work that you all are trying to do. I recognize this is a unique opportunity. I also recognize that there are protections in place to make sure that this doesn't become a general fund obligation in the future. But of course, we write the laws and could change those obligations. And so I'm concerned about that this sets a very bad precedent for the way that we run state government. And so in appropriations, at least this morning, I will be a no, I will reconsider my vote potentially for the floor. All right, with that, Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representatives Basenacker.
Yes. Bottoms. No. I don't know. No. Gilchrist. Yes. Joseph. Yes. Richardson. Yes. Taggart. No. Tatone. Yes. Velasco. Respectfully, no. Zokai. No.
Adam Vice Chair. No.
Mr. Chair. No. That fails five to six. Thanks, guys. I will entertain a motion to postpone Senate Bill 80 indefinitely by using reverse roll call.
Madam Vice Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to postpone indefinitely Senate Bill 80 by means of reverse roll call.
Second.
Seconded, are there objections to using reverse roll call? Seeing none, Senate Bill 80 is postponed indefinitely. Okay. Moving on to Senate Bill 125. Representative Bacon and Representative Phillips. All right. Do we have any questions for our bill sponsors? All right. Seeing none, there are no amendments in our packet. Do you all have any amendments? All right. Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair, would you like to move the bill?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Senate Bill 125 to the Committee of the Whole.
Second. All right. Seconded by Representative Velasco. Is there a discussion or comments from the sponsors? Go ahead, Representative Bacon.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to be available for any questions. Wanted to draw your attention to the amendments we made in judiciary in regards to the repeal date and the triggers by CDE, as well as the conversations we've had with CDE on their ability to perhaps work with other agencies, restructure, or draw down on federal funds. So we just wanted to be sure that folks saw that amendment to be clearer on the expectations of what would need to happen in the next two years.
Thank you, Representative Bacon. Are there further comments on Senate Bill 80? 125. Oh, jeez, I'm still on the last bill. Are there further comments on Senate Bill 125? All right, seeing none, Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representative Spasenecker.
Yes. Bottoms. No. Gilchrist. Yes. Joseph. Yes. Richardson. No. Taggart. Yes. Titone.
Yes.
Velasco. Yes. Zocay.
Madam Vice Chair. Yes.
Mr. Chair. Yes, that bill passes nine to two. Thank you. All right, you're onto the committee of the whole. Committee members, thanks for your work today. Stay tuned for future meetings. I'm not sure when or if we will meet again. So the house appropriations is adjourned.
Thank you. Thank you.