May 6, 2026 · Education · 11,164 words · 18 speakers · 164 segments
Ms. Chapman, please call the roll.
Senator Bridges. I'm sorry you're here, but I'm also glad you're here. And I know why, and you're a mensch.
Kip. Here.
Helton R. Here, first time in education in eight years.
Mitch. Here.
Simpson. Present.
Excuse. Mr. Chair.
Here. We have a quorum, and we have our first bill sponsors here ready to go on 1345. I am going to make a quick announcement. I'm going to hear 1016 second, and then 1417, and then we'll have Senator Bridges discuss 139 at the end.
You want to do Senator?
Okay. Real quick. Senator Bill 139, Senator Bridges.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have had a lot of conversations with folks about this bill. I think fundamentally it would be transformative for education, for teachers, for housing in this state. However, with bills of this nature, still lots of questions that folks had, more stakeholding work that needs to be done. We are going to do that work. This bill will be back. Better luck next year. we look forward to that conversation and ask that the committee postpone indefinitely the Senate bill.
Do you need a motion?
I move to postpone indefinitely Senate bill 139.
That's a proper motion. And Ms. Chapman, will you call the poll, please?
Senator Bridges. Aye.
Kip. Yes.
Pelton. Aye. Rich. Aye.
Lincoln. Aye. Marchman. Excuse.
Mr. Chair. Aye. And that passes unanimously.
Thank you, committee. I'll see you next year. Thank you.
Thank you. We'll get that out of the way. Now we'll go to 1345. Who would like to start us off? Okay, now I'm going to use titles. Mr. President.
Just James. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Members of the public, Mr. Chair and committee members, I'd like to start by thanking you for the opportunity to discuss this bill today alongside my co-prime, the greatest minority leader of all time, Cleve Simpson. In the fall of 2024, the Colorado Commission on Higher Education convened the Higher Education Funding Formula Working Group. This group brought together representatives from every institution of higher education in the state, along with CCHE, CDHE, and members of the legislature. The group took a deep and thoughtful look at our current funding formula and asked a simple but paramount question, how can we better serve Colorado students and institutions? That work did not happen in isolation. CCHE launched a statewide survey to gather additional input with, met with institutional leaders during summer meetings and its annual retreat and partnered with the Colorado Trustee Network to host briefings and collect feedback. At the same time, CDHE staff worked closely with the Institutional Data Advisory Group to ensure that any proposed changes were grounded in consistency and best practices. The result of this extensive effort was consensus around 12 recommendations. House Bill 1345 is a product of that consensus. This bill makes important updates to the funding formula. It improves naming conventions and structures so policymakers have greater flexibility and clarity when using the formula It ensures that data is sourced and calculated using best practices especially in light of changes at the federal level so that our metrics remain reliable and results driven But beyond these technical improvements this bill makes meaningful changes that better reflect the realities of Colorado's students. Today, 55% of students in Colorado attend part-time, yet our current formula does not include them in outcome measures. This bill changes that by creating a more inclusive retention metric that accounts for both part-time and full-time students. We also know that student pathways are not always linear. Nearly 45% of Colorado students transfer at least once, but the current formula does not recognize many of those transfers as successful outcomes. House Bill 1345 expands that definition to include qualifying transfers from four-year institutions, ensuring that student mobility is recognized and not overlooked. It is important to note that there is no general fund appropriation associated with this bill. I know that bums all of you. We're proud to have the support of organizations such as Weld County, Colorado Succeeds, Reddy Colorado, Western Colorado University, University of Northern Colorado, Colorado Community College System, and that list continues to grow. Community members and other organizations are here to provide testimony, and we thank you for your support.
Mr. Minority Leader.
Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. Not often I present in Education Committee, but happy to join the greatest president of the Senate of all time.
Come on.
And this important bill. Look, I did get put on the higher education funding formula working group, but like at the very last meeting of the group, so I was behind the eight ball trying to catch up, but I know the institutions in my district, Adams State, Fort Lewis, and the Valley Campus of Trinidad State, all were supportive of how this ended up, And would appreciate your support for the bill today. Thank you.
Do we have questions for our bill sponsors? I know, Senator Pelton, you must have just so many being your first time at Ed.
Okay.
All right. Anyone else have questions? All right. We will go to our testimony phase. We just have two people. We have Dr. Tricia Johnson and Jen Walmer.
Come on up. Come on down.
Our sponsors can stay there. That's the only two we have. Dr. Johnson, if you'd like to go first.
Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. My name is Dr. Trisha Johnson. I am the Deputy Executive Director and Chief Operating Officer for the Department of Higher Education. I'm testifying today in support of House Bill 261345. In my role at the department, I had the opportunity to engage in the development of and to observe the intentional process that led to the submission of this new funding formula concept for higher ed in the state. The funding formula development process was a true collaboration within the higher education ecosystem, one that invited and ensured voice for stakeholders. In fall 2024, in partnership with leadership of the Colorado Commission on Higher Ed, department staff introduced the funding formula review process in a public commission meeting. The commission and the department took institutional feedback to heart and worked in concert to develop a working group model that would elicit feedback from stakeholders, leadership from institutions of higher education, members of the legislature, thank you, President Coleman, and subject matter representatives who served to provide technical expertise. We engaged the services of a third-party facilitator who balanced feedback of stakeholder participants and offered offline support and dialogue throughout the process I am proud to have worked closely with the Commission Chair Jennifer Walmer who advanced a process that was thoughtful intentional iterative and transparent As a result of Chair Walmer's efforts, each meeting built on the meeting prior, taking the thoughts, concerns, and ideas from members of the working group to make the concepts for the model better and more representative of the needs of Colorado students and the unique needs of the institutions in our state, including important attention for nontraditional students. Having spent the vast majority of my career teaching and leading in community and technical colleges, this focus matters to me. It reflects the students I served day in and day out over my 20 years in higher education institutions. On behalf of the Department of Higher Education, I ask that you vote yes on this bill. Thank you for your time.
Thank you. I appreciate your testimony. Ms. Walmart, go ahead. You have three minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee, for the opportunity to testify. My name is Jen Walmer, and I'm here in my capacity as the Chair of the Colorado Commission on Higher Education in support of House Bill 1345. You've already heard some about the process, but I just want to take it back a step and say that the review process was really grounded in the values of CCHE, specifically recognizing our commitment to embrace lifelong learning and recognition of all pathways. and our recognition and celebration of the strengths and unique characteristics of our many institutions. We also sought to ensure that our recommendations were grounded in the legislative declaration and goals of the formula outlined in statute by policymakers, paying particular attention to the call for the formula to be transparent and understandable and that metrics be consistent, predictable, and focused on improved performance. Recommendations from the report that led to the legislation before you today are based on broad agreement of the working group and fall into those three broad categories outlined to you by the sponsors. Changes in the structure and naming conventions of the formula ensure that the formula remains transparent and understandable and maintains the flexibility and stability of the current formula design. I am most inspired personally by the changes before you today that recognize the unique characteristics of our ecosystem. recognizing the innovative partnerships between many of our institutions and the creation of bridge and partnership programs, and the graduation cohort calculation, and the modifications to metrics that recognize our higher education students are not always on a traditional first-time, full-time, four-year path. By including part-time students in the retention metric, and including all qualified transfers in our metrics to ensure we more accurately reflect the journey that so many of our students take in the higher ed system. I urge a yes vote, and I'm happy to answer any questions about the policy or any of the changes to the formula design. Thank you very much.
Do we have questions for Senator Marchman?
Not so much a question, just more a comment. I just want to say thank you. You guys really did thread the needle on this. there were so many concerns when people are talking about funding formulas without growing the pool. And it didn't become Hunger Games, and I appreciate that a lot. I was very concerned originally for rural schools, and that's all worked out. So thank you for your work. I got to watch being on the commission how it went, and it was laborious. And so thank you for your work. and yeah, I'm excited about this. Wouldn't you agree? Any other comments And I would agree I want to say there are nothing but good things about how the work has been done Thank you so much for being open being transparent And it does take time to make major changes And I appreciate the time that it was taken and the work that was done. Appreciate you.
Thank you very much. We don't see any other questions. Is there anyone left in the room who would like to testify who has not signed up? Seeing no one, the testimony phase is closed. Do we have amendments? Senator Minority Leader. Senator Minority Leader. Go ahead.
I got it right, though. You know. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We do have one amendment that I think has been distributed to the committee.
Yes, we do have an amendment. Senator Marchman. Wait, no, Senator. Mr. Minority Leader is on the committee today. Go ahead.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Amendment L-001 to House Bill 1345.
Please, would you like to go over your amendment?
No, I'll have to let the President do that because I just saw it.
Mr. President.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. This amendment is a technical amendment that directs the commission to implement the will of the legislature as approved in 1410 to distribute financial aid to public institutions only for the 26-27 budget year.
Okie doke. Any questions about the amendment? Seeing none, any objections to the amendment? Seeing none, L-001 has passed. Any other amendments? No, Mr. Chair. None. Any from the committee? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Final comments? Mr. President.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Members of the committee, I want to express my sincere gratitude to everyone who contributed to this effort. Thank you again to my co-prime sponsors, Speaker McCluskey, Representative Hamrick, Minority Leader Simpson, as well as the members of the Higher Education Funding Formula Working Group, our institutions of higher education, the Colorado Commission on Higher Education, the Colorado Department of Higher Education, and the American Federation of Teachers. this bill reflects a truly collaborative process. This bill addresses how we account for innovative programs like bridge and partnership programs. These programs allow students to complete degrees not offered at their home institution by transferring while remaining connected to their original campus. And the bill ensures that graduation metrics properly reflect these pathways and do not unintentionally penalize institutions. 1345 is the result of a careful analysis, broad stakeholder engagement, and genuine consensus, And it brings our funding formula in line with the reality of today's students and strengthens our ability to support both institutions and outcomes across Colorado. We talk a lot, and rightfully so, about pre-K through 12 education, but I always say what happens after that. And our children go into the workforce. But in addition to that, they should have an opportunity to be able to go to college and continue here in Colorado. At Colorado Paradox, where we have a robust higher education system, but are our children going to those institutions. And so just thank you all for the work, and I'll pass it over to my co-prime.
Mr. Minority Leader.
Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee. No real closing comments. With your permission, I think I'll just move the bill.
Go right ahead.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As the former chair of the Board of Trustees at Adams State University, it's my honor to move House Bill 1345 as amended to the committee of the whole with a favorable recommendation.
That's a proper motion. Ms. Chapman, will you take the roll, please? The poll. Senator Bridges.
Aye.
Kip.
Yes.
Pelton.
Yeah.
Yeah. Rich. Aye.
Simpson.
Aye. Marchman. Aye. Mr. Chair. Aye. That passes unanimously. Mr. Minorderly, did you have any recommendations? Recommend we place 1345 on the consent calendar. Any objection to being on the consent calendar? Seeing none, be on the consent calendar. Thank you, committee. Next, we have House Bill 1016 with Senators Frizzell and Immobile. Who would like to start us off? Sarah Frizzell.
I will. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, committee members. It's a little weird being here with you, but not really with you. It's a little awkward. But anyway, thank you so much for taking time to listen to House Bill 1016 today. This is all about open educational resources, sometimes known as OER. And open educational resources are high-quality learning materials that are public domain or under shared licenses that allow free use, adaptation, and redistribution. You know, so I'm just on a personal note. When I was going through college, through university at CU, paying for textbooks was incredibly painful, even back in the dark ages when I was attending CU. It never failed that I had a professor who had written the textbook, and that one was always twice as much as the other textbooks. So I think that this is an amazing program because it really puts into reach these materials that are really incredibly important. So anyway, that was my digress. Due to the public domain or shared licensing, these open educational resources are remixable, customizable, allowing Colorado instructors to create materials that are unique to their courses and also relevant to their region. So this is really cool because there are zero textbook cost programs. that use these open educational resources, and they create pathways to students to earn credits, course credits, without actually having to pay for textbooks. And again, I just think that this is a really important thing because I don't think being able to afford textbooks should be a barrier to getting a great education. So in 2017, the General Assembly created the OER, or that Open Educational Resources Council, and commissioned a report on how these initiatives can serve higher education. And in 2018, we built on that report to create a grant program, which at that time invested $500,000 initially, and then that amount grew to $1 million in 2019 and 2020. But based on the growing demand for more open educational resources and administrative support, the legislature voted to continue the program in 2021 expanding on that good work to give the Department of Higher Education one FTE funding for a repository and conference and a grant program for five years that is set to end this November, which is why we are here before you with House Bill 1016, because this grant program is up for renewal, And this bill extends the grant program. And so with that, I'm going to turn this over to my good co-prime.
Senator Immobile.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to my co-prime for letting me jump on this bill with her. It had originally been a bill of our colleague who has since left for greener pastures, so to speak. I guess my textbook story is I was very fortunate when I went to CU. My father paid my tuition, and he paid for my books. He had five kids to get through school. We all went to public. Well, we didn't all. Most of us went to public school in Colorado. and so at the end of the year you could sell your textbook back and then I got to keep that money which was really helpful which was actually really helpful for like going out and celebrating that the semester was over so but it was an incredibly expensive add-on I mean when I was at CU our tuition was hundreds of dollars not thousands of dollars but the textbook part was a huge lift and this I know that the one of the staff people from the Joint Budget Committee had a huge hand in creating this policy in 2017 and worked really hard on this and this is a winner. This has shown that it is very helpful for students. It saves them a lot of money, $59.7 million in the first six years, and it doesn't cost the state as much as we saved these students. And we hear all the time about how our students are struggling to find, to get food, to have health care, to find housing. We have students who are living in their cars. And this is a thing that we can do that really helps them, helps them to focus on their studies and helps them to get a degree. And that's, of course, the other thing that we know about higher ed is that if you don't finish in four years, or if you don't finish at all and you take on debt, you're in a way worse situation. And this is just one expense, and it is a significant expense that we can help spare these kids by passing this bill. And I will address the elephant in the room because I have talked to some of you, and I know there's some concern about the fiscal note on the bill. And I will say that, first of all, you do have to look at the most recent fiscal note because it has gone down considerably. And, you know, we wanted from the beginning to keep this program going, but we weren't sure if we could afford it. And as this budget worked its way through the process and as this bill got introduced a while back And at the end of the day we decided that this was well a worthy thing for us to at least get in front of you because the impacts on these students is important. And so I ask for a yes vote on the bill.
Thank you. Do we have questions for the bill sponsors at this time? Senator Kipp.
Yeah, thank you very much for bringing the bill. I love this program. This is a great program. This is a program that we voted to begin my first year in the legislature because I know the governor, this was like his agenda thing. And it's a great program, and I do find myself incredibly frustrated and would be very, very grateful if it didn't have a $522,000 fiscal note, if perhaps you could switch to gifts, grants, and donations. It looks like you have until November to figure this out, a different funding source. I don't know. Could SIPA do something like this? The State Internet Portal Authority, they do technology stuff that's outside of the budget. I am incredibly frustrated because I know it's a really good program. I know it's a good return on investment, but I also know how hard you guys have worked on the budget committee. I know how hard every member of the legislature has worked to get their fiscal notes to zero. And so voting for something with a $522,000 fiscal note just seems incredibly irresponsible. So if you have any thoughts, I mean, cutting it down to the bare bones, taking it beyond the $522,000. The Colorado Department of Higher Education met with me in November, and I'm like, yes, this is only a million dollars. I'm like, and there is no money. And they're like, yeah, but it's only a million dollars, and there's a great return. And I'm like, but there is no money. And so I find it very challenging to get there on this bill. And so, I mean, if you guys change my mind today, I just don't know how I can legitimately vote for something. And I'm used to, like, voting for stuff and assuming that it's going to be sorted out in the Appropriations Committee in the context. But I'm already told that the Joint Budget Committee has all the votes it needs to get it passed, which means that, frankly, we are the deciding committee here. and that's why I am so incredibly frustrated because oh I'm sorry, I'm sorry the appropriations committee, I apologize I didn't mean to say that but I do find myself incredibly challenged because I think this is a great program I think it has a great return on investment yet what are all the other things that we didn't find fund this year and what are... I don't know. I'm just incredibly frustrated by this because it seems like we're being put in a terrible position. Perhaps we could scale it back to a bare bone so it's not 522,000, and I'll be quiet. I think that might be the question. Is there an opportunity to do that? Does everybody have any answer or comments
from the bill sponsors? Senator Mabale.
Well, I'll just say over in the House they did obviously, you know, take a look at that. There is one FTE who I understand is doing an amazing job of administering this program and if we don pass something she will lose her job If all we fund is the FTE then we won have money or enough money to actually do the grants And so that was where they came out on the fiscal note. and I don't know what number we would have to hit to satisfy people's, you know, maybe somebody could give me an idea of what the number is, but again, without the FTE we can't administer the program. If we pay for the person, then we also need money to actually have grants to give out.
Any other questions? Senator Marchman. Thank you.
And I, too, share the concerns of my colleague as well as you guys, that this is a really important program. I, too, met. I had the very same conversation in Loveland with the higher ed department in November about this priority bill. So it came through the budget process. Did it make it through? That's how all the bills that we bring are. And so the reason I keep asking, is this a set aside? Because it's listed. It's transparent. I know that SB 149 is a set aside. I know 1425 is a set aside. But I didn't have 1016 on my radar as a set aside. And so that's the part that I'm struggling with. because I too read the memo from the JVC staff, who's absolutely amazing. This is a fantastic program. I'm simply wondering why if it's a priority and why if it was not taken up by the long bill where that was in the first fiscal note, why did we move forward this way? And I'll say the repository is $20,000 and the conference is $50,000. So part of what I'd like to understand is what is it that the grant program is providing that colleges are not able to do on their own? You know, I know we've got phenomenal employees who execute the work that we've asked them to do. But when we don't have money to implement 504 plans and I'm literally banking on a bill that I can't stop getting thousands of emails opposed to to get that money just to get it through appropriations, it's a challenge to have this here, especially with someone who is one of those important votes on appropriations. So I'm just saying that it's a challenge. This is a challenging bill for me as well.
Okay. We're going to go to Mr. Minori and I'll come back to you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So only having about the last 45 minutes to prepare for this, I had some similar thoughts about how we're going to pay for this, but my mind is spinning. And again, having the opportunity to work on a board of trustees at a campus that takes advantage of this there's true value in it and my wheels are spinning i'm going to be supportive of today to try to help you find how do you close this I'll call it a gap. I have some thoughts, but I'm not ready to share them yet. But recognize the value of the program and think, surely there's places. And I know you could do this for any number of bills that come forward, but I'm going to be supportive today and try to help find a solution to this.
Senator Kipp.
Thanks. I mean, in terms of, yeah, you get rid of one thing, But, I mean, for instance, somebody pointed out to me that if we get rid of this program, we're getting rid of the repository, which I assume is like all of those books that have been created so far. I mean, that's a $20,000, $500 item. I would not want to lose what we have already done, right? And I don't want somebody who's doing a fantastic job to lose their job either. I just think that there are ways in which this could be scaled or alternatively funded to make a difference. So do you – I don't know. If this bill moves forward, would you be supportive of trying to find a path that scaled it better?
Sarah Brazil.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Senator Kipp. We do have some witnesses here to speak that I would love to hear them answer these questions.
Thank you. And that was going to be my next point. There are some witnesses here to help me, especially with some understanding of how this program works. So let's go to our witness testimony. I'm going to call up Carl Einhaus, Nicholas Swales, Emily Reagan, and Stella Knowles. Everyone is in, one person in person and the other three remote. And since we have Mr. Einhaus ready, why don't we start with you? Go ahead and find that mute button. It's on. Interesting. All right. There you go. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members.
My name is Carl Einhaus, and I'm the Chief Student Success and Academic Affairs Officer for the Colorado Department of Higher Education. And it's my pleasure to express the department's support for House Bill 26-10-16, which continues our Open Educational Resources Program, also known as OER. This bill is a five-year continuation of the Popular and Productive Grant Program. OER benefits all students. Students do not need to navigate financial aid or scholarship applications to benefit. To date, the state invested just over $5 million and has saved students nearly $60 million. This is 11 times return on investment. OER are high-quality teaching and learning resources that reside in the public domain or have been released under an intellectual property license that allows for free use. OER includes a variety of teaching and learning materials like textbooks, quiz banks, software, applications, and more. While scholarships are typically one-to-one cost, OER are one-to-many and can impact students from across all of our state colleges and universities. It is an impactful, cost-effective, and fiscally prudent state investment. The OER program provides the following, grant funding for faculty to be trained on and to learn and convert their courses to OER a state conference funding for a CDHE staff member and an online OER repository for the state Our OER our exceptional OER director recently hosted a statewide event to plan a future zero textbook cost or ZTC nursing programs, sharing and leveraging resources between institutions to make it so. By passing House Bill 1016, this is the kind of work that we'll continue to do. And by the way, over half of Colorado public IHEs are working on ZTC programs. We have 29 under development that need continued funding and guidance. While we can't control all of higher education costs, we can reduce textbook costs and increase the affordability of credential completion in Colorado with OER. Saying yes to this bill will convert hundreds of courses to OER, save Colorado students an estimated $1.2 million annually that will compound, and increase our nearly 50 ZTC programs that cost Colorado. Thank you for your yes vote.
Thank you, and if you just stick around, I know I have some questions, and maybe some others do too. Next, I'm going to bring up remotely here Nicholas Wales. If you would unmute yourself, state your name, who you represent. You have three minutes.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
One moment. We have a hard time hearing you. Okay. If you can move closer to your microphone and turn it up if you have that ability.
Yeah.
Can you hear me now? No. We're trying to turn it up on our end as far as we can go.
Go ahead and test it.
Can you hear me now? That's better. And I guess we'll go with that.
Try to speak as loud as you can.
I'll speak like I'm in class. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.
I am Nicholas Swales. I am the Dean of Academic Affairs and Online Learning and Vice Chair of the OER Council at CDHE, and I have served voluntarily there for four years.
I am here representing Colorado Northwestern Community College in support of 1016. Over five years, OER grant funding has enabled TCC to transition from zero OER courses to two complete Z degrees and four additional degrees running this fall. This transformation has delivered measurable results. One example, our Biology 1111, our Gen Biology course, saw nearly a 20% increase in student success rates after the simple move to OER. Across all 90 of our courses, we have anywhere between a 5% increase in success to 28% of increase. These funds at CNCC enable faculty to develop materials to tailor to our students, which is not possible with copyrighted for-profit materials from Chicago or New York City Publishing House. As an example, our faculty have created 12 laboratory manuals that represent the diverse experiences of our students and our environment in Northwest Colorado. We serve rural communities across two campuses that are 90 miles apart. Rangeley, our home campus does not have a grocery store. So our students experience extreme isolation. OER provides immediate access on day one and students no longer have to wait weeks for their textbooks to arrive from Amazon or even to our bookstore This has proven to increase our student satisfaction retention and graduation rates Over 56 of our students have told us these materials have made a positive impact on their studies. Over 70% consider these materials to be better than those costing hundreds of dollars. The financial impact at CNCC is simple. It saves students 20 to 25 percent of their annual cost by not having to buy textbooks, which is important to color students who continue to struggle to meet the financial demands of attaining a certificate or a degree in higher ed. To date, grant funds have saved a half million dollars, which is a 200 percent return on investment which is money back into our community in Rio Blanco County or Rockett County and if we continue this funding and support CNCC will pursue our Z degree in nursing and pilot a program with our concurrent education partners helping to ensure we are successful in meeting Colorado's big three and workforce demands I urge you support and I'm happy to answer any questions of the
committee thank you if you just hold on and put yourself on mute we'll see if we questions after everyone has testified next i'm going to bring up emily reagan is that correct go ahead and unmute yourself state your name who you represent and you have three minutes
hello good afternoon chair members of the committee i'm emily reagan i'm a professor in the department of chemistry and biochemistry at metropolitan state university of denver and i'm here today to urge you to support house bill 1016. it's not often that we get to advocate for a bill that will have a direct impact on the student's ability to afford a higher education degree but today we have just that i had the privilege of serving on the inaugural state we are council in 2017 and i served through 2022 at msu denver i established our oer task force in the fall of 2018 and have served as principal investigator on oer grants since year one of the the state program. This program is about college affordability and saving students money. As Colorado's statutory open access university, we are extremely affordability focused. The OER program has offered us another avenue to make sure all Coloradans can access higher education. We now have complete degree tracks that a student can complete without purchasing a textbook or online homework systems. This bill is also about student success. We collected data from 57 of our faculty members who taught the same classes before adopting OER and after adopting OER. We found that students earned higher grades and had fewer withdrawals from the course after OER was adopted. Student feedback reinforces these findings and surveys 89% of our students report that having no cost for materials is a significant benefit to them. One student told us OER gave them quote the ability to take more courses worry-free. Other students described how no-cost materials allowed them to keep pace with classmates. Today, OER at MSU Denver impacts about 24,000 student seats annually. OER is a mature faculty-supported initiative at our institution thanks to the state's continued investment, which has resulted in $8.8 million in student savings, so we've had a 14 times return on investment at our institution. While we've made huge strides across the state creating and offering OER resources, there is still more work to do. With your help, we can continue to increase student success at MSU Denver and for universities across the state of Colorado House Bill 26 ensures this proven high program continues and I urge you to support it Thank you.
Thank you. If you just hold on, we have one more. I have Stella Knowles. If you go ahead and unmute yourself, state your name and who you represent, you have three minutes.
Good evening, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. My name is Stella Knowles, a Community College of Aurora student and a member of Young Inventable Student Voice Coalition, the only statewide higher ed policy coalition led by students. And I'm here to encourage you all to pass HB 261016. Last fall, I was ecstatic to find the audio version of my American Government textbook for free, knowing it would help me ace the course. I learn best when I can combine audio and visuals, but most textbook platforms don't offer both. So every semester in the past, I face the choice that shouldn't exist. Buy the used copy I can afford or the accessible format my accommodations actually require. As a low-income student, I pick whichever is cheapest. And sometimes that meant I'm behind financially and academically before the semester even started. This is the reality for many students across Colorado. We aren't just paying for books. we are paying for the right to fully participate in our own education. It's high time we treat textbook affordability as the academic necessity and wraparound support that it is. Open educational resources have provided free, high-quality course materials for me and many others since 2018. According to the Colorado Department of Higher Education 2025, as it was said, the OER grant program has saved students over $59.7 million in textbook costs. Letting this program expire would reintroduce unnecessary financial barriers for students across the state. Sustaining it ensures that more students can access the materials they need on day one of class without delay or hardship. At its core, this bill is about fairness and access. Students should not have to choose between paying for basic necessities and paying for the materials required to succeed in school. I urge you to support HB 261016. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Thank you. And do we have questions from anyone? I do have a question. I'm going to start with Mr. Einhaus of how the program works.
Initially, I thought that this was buying books, but then hearing more information here today, it's about professors developing basically their own materials and wondering how much of this is used every year. Give me a sense of how this works, how we start off. Because if Northwestern Community College is doing something where they're doing their own lab manuals, I assume they got one grant maybe to help develop that, but do they need any more money for that? Mr. Einhaus.
Thank you very much for that question, Shel Kolker. And, yes, I can answer that question, but I wonder if I could allow one of the people that spoke, especially Dr. Reagan, if she could answer that question because she can provide a direct example.
Thank you.
I had started with you.
Okay. I appreciate that. So, Dr. Reagan, can you help us out here?
Sure. So I have a colleague, Andy Kerr, who received a grant to adapt OER for introduction to nutrition. It's a high enrollment course, and she was the course coordinator. She used an existing resource in the tool that's called LibreText, but she was able to take what was there, update it, and make a customized version for MSU Denver. We leave a $3,000 grant in the summer of 2020, and that resource is still being used across all sections of Introduction to Nutrition. She is spending her sabbatical this spring to further update the book to keep it current, but that did not require any additional funding from the state. We just made a small initial investment that has led to hundreds of thousands of dollars of savings for students in that course. So quite often there's a small upfront investment. Faculty adopt or adapt or create OER and then start using them, and then those cost savings will accrue every semester going forward.
So what does the repository look like then? Do they keep that for everyone to use, or is it just Metro State, Dr. Reagan?
That's right. Anyone across the country can use it.
And so we are uploading that digitally, paying for those costs, I'm assuming. You know, that's an interesting question.
For this specific project that I was referencing, she used a different repository that's called LibreText. We have a subscription to OER Commons, which is a really excellent site, and we like having all of the OER created in the state of Colorado together in one site, but people can choose to share their OER in other places as well.
Okay, so that's somewhere in the cloud, essentially.
Thank you.
And then, Mr. Swales, if you could tell me a little bit also your experience with OER. So do these students get to keep these materials when they walk away?
Absolutely. So in our case, all students are notified when they register for classes that this is a VTC course. And they are told that all of their course materials via the bookstore, so we're in compliance with state and federal law, that their materials are published in their learning management system as either a direct link to where they exist on the repository, a publisher called OpenStack. They're provided with a PDF that they could download or an EPUB. They're giving this format in many ways to which are digitally accessible, which, again, is helping us meet other state requirements for that. And they have those resources in perpetuity. It's not like a textbook rental program. It's not like any of the other low-cost programs the state has seen because those are time-limited. This is permanent.
Thank you. Any other questions besides me? Senator Kip?
Yeah, and I'm not sure who is best to answer this question, but on the repository, so from what was just said, it sounds like are there other states that have similar programs programs that are contributing to more of like a national repository, right? I mean, obviously it seems like if that's the case, we'd want to maybe be doing our share, but can you tell me how that works? Who could tackle that? Anyone?
I'm happy to share. Go ahead, Mr. Soils.
States like California has an OER program, New York, Minnesota. Many states have that, and they are they run by grant programs they are direct funding say through cooney or the suny system they do have access to the oer commons which is an international repository um suny has their own repository the georgia program has their own repository but any of these repositories are open to anyone so it creates a collaborative space that a part of the quote open and open educational research Does that help Senator Kipp Yes but so there is a line item in here for the repository
So what happens to the repository if this bill doesn't move forward? I mean, I think that would be a really important thing to know. Anyone have an answer for that?
Is that our subscription, I think, is our line item? and that is that information still there in the cloud. Mr. Swales, it looked like you were going to say something.
Correct. So that line item that you see, a portion of that is for our repository. That is a subscription fee to maintain that repository. I am not exactly sure when they would go if we do not pay for the repository, but it is simply a cost of only $2,500 a year. The other part that you see there is we have a statewide license to Pressbooks, which is an open ed publishing platform that in itself is a repository as well. And any institution of higher ed in Colorado can ask to have their materials submitted to Pressbooks and they are published there and sent globally as well.
Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions? All right, thank you to our witnesses.
Yeah, I do have a little more. And maybe, I don't know, Mr. Reinhardt, if you'd be the right person, but, I mean, you know, with this year's budget, I mean, the $522,000 out of the general fund, I mean, it's just a lot. Would there be a way to pare down this program to more essentials for a year or maybe have the person who was doing it take on some fundraising opportunities to try and fund? I mean, is there some other way to do this? And, I mean, I don't want this program to go away, but I also know the budget realities we're facing, and I guess I'm very just frustrated by the entire situation because I see the value.
Mr. Einhaus. Chair Kolker, thank you very much for that question. Senator Kipp, and we very much understand the situation that we're in as a state and the difficult decisions that you have right now. This is something that we feel very passionately about to continue because of the return on investment that it provides and how it compounds over the years. We can work with our legislative liaison to provide a little bit more specifics in terms of alternatives, in terms of how to continue this program with less funding, but we'll definitely want to discuss that internally and get that information to you as soon as
possible. Well hopefully sooner and later. Any other questions? Seeing none again, thank you for being here. I appreciate it. Is there anyone in the room who signed up to testify who has not had a chance or hasn't been called? Seeing no one, the testimony phase is closed. to our bill sponsors in our amendment phase. Senator Mobley, do we have any amendments?
No, we don't have any amendments today. But we did get some various phone-a-friends while we were listening to the witness testimony, and we are going to work on an amendment to reduce the appropriation. I think just back of the napkin they were suggesting they might be able to get it down to and still have it do the thing that I think we all want it to do And we will work on that for appropriations if we are able to pass it through this committee today.
Thank you. So no amendments, and do we have any amendments from the committee? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Comments, closing comments from our bill sponsors. Senator Frizzell.
Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And again, committee, thank you so much for your thoughtful questions. I want to really thank the witnesses that took time to talk about how important this program is to them and to the students that they serve. This bill has a wide variety of sponsors or supporters, not surprisingly community colleges, universities, all over the state of Colorado. This is a really good thing. The downside to, I guess, having your textbook through the open educational resources is you can't sell them back at the end of semester like my good co-prime and I did. A lot. But that said, and all jokes aside, this is an incredibly important thing for our students and their success. So regardless of where they are in the state of Colorado, and I would ask for your aye vote.
Thank you. Thank you. Senator Mobley.
I would just echo the comments from my co-prime and say it would really be too bad if this program were to die. And it would be very difficult to get it back up and running again because a lot will have been lost in the time, in the year that we don't have it. And so I certainly understand everyone's angst about the budget, believe me. I have been living it for six months or more and, you know, wouldn't have agreed to try to get some funding for this if I didn't believe that it was something that's really important. And so, as I said, we will continue to work on it. We can bring an amendment to appropriations. We just need a little bit of time to figure out exactly what that might look like and to get an amendment drafted and a fiscal analysis of the amendment and all of that. So I would hope for your yes vote today.
Thank you. Comments from the committee? Closing comments.
Senator Kipp. Thank you. I really appreciate your willingness to work on this because I don't want this program to go away, and I would like to be able to vote for it today. So, yeah, given that you have a commitment to continue to work on it, I will just say that I do think that, and I don't want to just, like, be, you know, saying no, no, no, no, but $275,000 when, you know, we can't get a $20,000 bill through committees is hard or through the process. So I hope that you are able to get it down further, but I really do appreciate that you're bringing this today.
Thank you. Anybody else? Mr. Chair.
Senator Pelton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know it been said many times in this building especially during the budget process we have a priority problem in this state We spend millions hundreds of millions of dollars on things some of us think are wasteful I think this bill, this program shows fruit. I've got several community colleges in my district that this helps. With that, I will be a yes today and support your bill.
Thank you. Anyone else? I do have some closing comments. Just from what I see, what I think, and since I sit on the Appropriations Committee and I could be the deciding vote, things I would like to see, and I appreciate you looking at cutting the cost on this. You know, in years like this, when we're struggling for money and many of us have seen our own bills, struggle because of not getting the funding bills that we prioritize. I mean, it's trying to get those priorities, right? How do you prioritize? Do you prioritize CCAP? Do you prioritize disabled kids over kids getting textbooks? Do you, you know, it's sharks seeing blood in the water. I wrote this down as a little note. That's what we're seeing. Oh, there's money. How can we get that money, right? It's also a program that has been around that wouldn't have come to us if it wasn't expiring, because it would have been in the long bill, because you don't need a unanimous vote. You had an inappropriate, or excuse me, in JBC, you had a 4-2 vote, so that it wasn't a JBC bill. But you still could appropriate it, but unfortunately you have to run a bill, because it's an expiring policy. It's an expiring law. So that answered a bunch of questions for me when I found that out, why we are seeing a fiscal note this year. In many of our sunset bills, we don't see a fiscal note this year. It's been appropriated at $1.1 million, now at $500,000. Because we're struggling and we're afraid at the end of session trying to all get what we need to get out of the priorities that we all have. And all of us share a lot of these priorities. I would love to see some of this done. I look at conferences and training. I'm at $50,000 because that's something that could be held off for a year. Personal services is the person that's running the program. The grant program is $338,000. Can we reduce that grant program? You know, I think this is a great idea, and I think as a former teacher trying to write my own textbook, it would drive me, I would need that grant. I would need that grant to put this together because I need that time. I need to figure this out, what kind of support I might need. I actually worked in a book depository the summer after I graduated from college, a company called William C. Brown, part of Kendall Publishing in Dubuque, Iowa. I worked third shift packing books. And one of my side jobs doing that during the day was taking a previous edition, literally cutting and pasting it to the new edition, things that they wanted to save. This is before we had computers. So they are very expensive. I remember doing this and thinking, who's going to keep this book? But, Be able to design one for your own class, I think, is so much more impactful. I still have a few of my old textbooks. I have the Civil War textbook that I had, you know, some for my major. But I absolutely understand that. I just, we're in such a tight position. I really want to see us, before we pass this out, see what those numbers look like. So I'll be an eye for this committee. but I would like to work with you a little bit. Thank you. Any other comments?
Senator Bridges. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Sorry to speak after you, but real quick, just because you inspired me for this comment. The reason I'm a yes, and the reason I was a no initially on this and that I just didn't like this program initially is that I've worked as associate VP in an institution of higher education. I've seen this from the inside. My wife is actually right now making the final edit on what will soon be published by Cambridge University Press. Her first book, her dissertation, turned into book form, which will change the world, I think, at least the world of Calvin Studies. And I had real concerns about, first of all, academic freedom on this. And then second of all, that these professors were writing books just for their class. And that's not a benefit that I think the state should be funding. What I have discovered and what I have learned, and I think what the testimony today verified, is that these are resources that are used broadly, that one professor may write it, but it's not simply used in that person's class. It is used across the institution and more and more across the entire state. And so I really appreciate that we are finding ways to reduce one of the major costs that students still have. Even students who come in with a lot of other financial support often end up having to buy those books. So I am a yes today, and I fully support the program. I also have looked askance a little bit about the fiscal note, but I am supportive of this bill in its current form and appreciate the work you're doing. Thank you.
Senator Marchman, would you make a motion?
Yes, I move House Bill 1016 to the Appropriations Committee.
That's a proper motion. Ms. Chapman, you take the poll. Senator Bridges.
Kip.
Yes, for today anyways.
Pelton.
Yes, I like it in the current form.
Rich.
Aye.
Simpson. Aye. Marchman. Aye. Mr. Chair. Aye. That passes, I think unanimously, yes, with some reservations. So thank you very much. We'll see you in appropriations. Next, we'll bring up House Bill 1417 with our own Senator Rich. Do you need a co-sponsor? I mean, Senator Roberts need to be here? Senator Roberts, he's your co-sponsor. Then we'll take it, Senatorial 5. Thank you Thank you. We'll have Senator Rich lead the way on.
Senator Rich? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Is that working? To your left. That one. See if that works. All right. Thank you. There you go. Thank you for staying, and I've got this bill, House Bill 26, 14, 17, ensuring equal access to testing for people with disabilities. This was a bill that was first heard in the House and seemed to get through the House fairly quickly in committee and off the floor. And what this bill does is that it strengthens Colorado's anti-discrimination protections by ensuring that all testing entities provide meaningful accommodations for people with disabilities. It expands the definition of testing entity to include any person, business, or government agency offering exams or courses tied to education, licensing, or certification. Clarifies the requirement that exams to be offered in a physically and functionally accessible manner. and it clarifies the requirement that alternative accessible arrangements when standard testing conditions are not accessible. It matters because barriers still exist. People with disabilities routinely face obstacles when trying to access or access professional licensing exams and certification programs. And without accommodations, opportunity is denied. Testing barriers can prevent qualified individuals from entering the workforce, advancing in careers, and equal access is a civil right. Colorado law already requires accommodations, but gaps in definitions and enforcement leave too many people behind. And with that, if you have any questions, I will do my best.
Thank you. Any questions? seeing none, we can go to testimony because I know I'll have questions for the people testifying that might answer. I don't want to put you on the spot. We'll call up Jack Johnson and Dr. Michael Neal who is remote. Mr. Johnson, since you're here, go ahead. You know the drill.
Maybe a different microphone No it the middle Yes There we go Okay End of session, you know, we'll get things figured out.
Too much use, Mr. Johnson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I'll keep it quick. My name is Jack Johnson. I'm an attorney at Disability Law Colorado here testifying in support of House Bill 1417. I'll just lay some brief foundation about why we need this bill. and why it's so beneficial to our community and our businesses. So two years ago, this body passed, I think unanimously in both chambers, a bill that requires entities to allow individuals who need accommodations on high-stakes standardized licensing tests to get those accommodations in an equitable manner. And we did so, you did so almost unanimously, because it is very beneficial to Colorado businesses when we as a state invest a lot of time and effort to educate these individuals. We take them through K-12 education and then often through higher education, providing them subsidized resources through our taxpayers to get them ready to enter our workforce. After all of that time and all of that investment, oftentimes the last thing at the end of the road is a standardized test, which is often administered by an organization that is not the state. What happens when individuals with disabilities don't get appropriate accommodations to those standardized tests for their license, for their profession, or other type of professional certification, they are no longer able to practice in the state of Colorado, which means all of that investment that includes graduating with degrees and going through a public education system could be wasted. And so businesses in Colorado also have this barrier. If the licensing authority doesn't provide these individuals with accommodations, those individuals aren't able to enter the workforce, and businesses who invest time and effort in training and certifying these individuals lose that opportunity. And so we passed this bill. You passed this bill a couple of years ago, and what happened is there was a court ruling this last December, which exempted certain testing entities, which are private testing entities, not state testing entities, from this law. What that means is that, in this case, while our state medical board requires everyone to go get a professional test, a licensure test to be done, the medical boards, the entity that actually administers those tests is a private company, the National Board of Medical Examiners. The National Board of Medical Examiners was not allowing an individual who was taking her medical licensing exams, who had passed all of medical school and all of the rest of her higher education with exceptional degree, who had letters of recommendation from all kinds of medical professionals. The denial of the accommodation prevented her from being a doctor. And what the court ruled is that because our definition is not clear the way the federal definition is clear on what entities are covered, these private entities who are non-state actors, even though they're administering the test on behalf of the state of Colorado, are exempt. The federal definition, the court said, is and does capture these individuals. And so what House Bill 1417 does is it more or less aligns Colorado's law with the federal definition of Title 42, so there's no longer any confusion for those individuals who are taking that test. I'm happy to answer any questions, and thank you for your time.
Thank you And we have Dr Neal remotely Dr Neal if you unmute yourself you have three minutes Ah yes Yes There we go Thank you Mr Chair
My name is Michael Neal. I am an individual with a disability in a wheelchair who does require things like time and a computer to take tests and was lucky purely academic thing from undergraduate and other testing. I've gone to hospital as I thought I might, and they're not very different reasons. Might very well run into the same problem where facing a health professionalized board certification and things like health preparation and other specific disability issues. So I can easily . And the other piece of it is that when you can't get access to these particular issues via a public testing authority, you know, folks that have money might be able to skirt the system involved. Getting this back is oriented, but I must admit that I was a and before the . As of J2, we testified on it back in 24. And now Mr. Sinclair, I fully understand and fully know why we need to get out again. on our court challenges and stuff. But for the great of what I did with my career path and my schooling path could have gotten high. And you're not always going to find something that you're people in the college and university University who will be minimal because you've got to contact as a legal settlement. So I'm asking for an answer on 14th and 18th. So let me keep that as a general for two years ago. Thank you.
Do we have questions for these witnesses?
Just a quick question, Mr. Johnson, on this. Because we've put so much emphasis into some of the trades, and I don't know what their certifications are like, what it looks like, you know, paper, pen. Are they, I mean, is this bill going to be able to offer the, make sure that we get the accommodations like someone who has ADHD, who would typically be on a 504 plan? Would this bill take that into account, Mr. Johnson? Thank you, Mr. Chair, for the question. The answer is yes. You know, what often happens to these individuals is kind of two things. They're on a 504 plan, they go to college, they continue that 504 plan through their higher education, and then they get to this high-stakes exam and they get denied, and so they're used to accommodations throughout the entire process, and now they're being told no. The other answer is sometimes individuals, especially when they face an extremely high rigor of difficulty, like law school or medical school, a disability which did not prohibit them through their undergraduate or K-12 education now rears its head, and this high degree of challenge often then requires them to receive a new accommodation that they never have before. And so they go on a 504 plan late, like in law school, and because it's late, these testing entities then deny that accommodation. And this would prohibit them from doing that and give those individuals some level of accountability at the state court, most of whom are looking for injunctive relief, which is why this state law is so important because it really hard to go to a federal court and get injunctive relief And so if we not in line with the federal definition their remedies are shut off whereas if our state courts are allowed to do that they can quickly get an injunction get the accommodation take their medical exams, and become a doctor.
Senator Kipp.
Thank you. So thank you, Mr. Johnson. So just to be clear, even if it's an entity that's based outside of the state, so long as they are dealing with students in the state or people who are trying to get their licensure within the state that we're good. Mr. Johnson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Senator. Yes, with this new definition, at least the court that ruled in this case distinguished between the federal and the state law and said that the federal law does allow that and the state law doesn't. So by aligning that, we feel very confident that we will now have remedies for these outside entities when they're testing it here in the state of Colorado.
Thank you. Any other questions? All right. Thank you very much. The testimony was appreciated Do we have anyone else who would like to testify Seeing no one else the testimony phase is closed To the amendment phase Senator Rich No amendments Mr Chairman Does the committee have any amendments? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Closing comments, Senator Rich.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I just want to, I don't want to go through everything I already said, but the impact of this bill, it will expand access to jobs and careers. It supports workforce participation for people with disabilities. It promotes fairness in education and licensing. And it aligns Colorado with modern accessibility expectations. No one should be denied the opportunity because a test wasn't accessible. And with that, I ask for an aye vote. Thank you very much.
Do we have any final statements from the committee? Seeing none. I think we got one two three four You here Yeah we good All right If you would like to move your bill please Senator Rich Thank you Mr Chair I move House Bill 1417 to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation That's a proper motion. Ms. Chapman, will you take the poll, please? Senator Bridges.
Excuse.
Kip. Yes.
Pelton. Aye.
Rich. Aye.
Simpson. Aye.
Marchman. Aye.
Mr. Chair. Aye. That passes unanimously. Do you want to recommend Senator Rich?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ask if there's no objection to go to the consent calendar.
Is there objection? Seeing none, you're off to the consent calendar. Congratulations all by yourself.
Thank you.
And that concludes our business here in Senate Education Committee today. We are adjourned. Thank you.