May 7, 2026 · Appropriations · 8,812 words · 17 speakers · 349 segments
. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Thank you. Thank you.
It's in the first packet, supposedly.
House appropriations will come to order.
Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representative Basenecker. Here.
Bottoms. Excuse.
Joseph. Here.
Martinez. Here.
Here.
Richardson.
Taggart.
Tatone. Velasco.
Here. Zokai.
Here. Madam Vice Chair.
Here. Mr. Chair.
Here. All right, folks. We will be, for those of you following along at home, I will be laying over, I'm going to lay over 1250 until a future date. I'm also going to move House Bill 1433 to second on the list after 154. Let's go ahead and get started with 154.
Madam Speaker and Mr. Minority Leader.
Committee members, do we have any questions for our witnesses? Sorry, witnesses, our bill sponsors. Sorry about that. Seeing none, there are no amendments in our packet. Are there any amendments that you have sponsors?
No, Mr. Chair.
Committee members, seeing no amendments, the amendment phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Senate Bill 154 to the Committee of the Whole.
Second.
Seconded by Representative Velasco. Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representative Spasenecker.
Yes.
Bottoms excused.
Joseph. Yes.
Martinez. Yes.
Richardson. Yes.
Taggart. Yes.
Tatone. Yes.
Velasco. Yes.
Zokai. Yes.
Madam Vice Chair. Yes.
Mr. Chair. Yes. that passes 10 to 0 with one excused all right moving on to 1433 we are the committee of reference
for this bill uh sponsors would you like to describe your bill please uh madam speaker thank you mr chair good morning members i love an early approach meeting nothing is better um We are here today with House Bill 1433, a small modification to our behavioral health services, behavioral health program for our Colorado firefighters across the state, a fund that has been very valuable to ensuring that we are providing the support and services to firefighters who are so often challenged by dealing with very difficult and frightening experiences. We have more than 13,000 firefighters, 6,000 professionals, 7,000 volunteer. And this program launched in February of 2023 enrolls over 250 fire agencies to ensure that firefighters have access to behavioral and mental health services This bill simply ensures that the trust can accept gifts grants and donations We hope that we are able to secure some federal funding for the program as the funds are not meeting the demands from our firefighting community. With that, I would ask for your support and a yes vote.
Representative Velasco, you're good? Great. All right, questions for our bill sponsors? Seeing none, let's move on to the witnesses. We have two witnesses signed up. I'll call Megan Wagner and Ken Watkins, please. They can join us at the dais. All right, Ms. Wagner, please go ahead. You'll have two minutes, please introduce yourself.
Good morning, Chair Brown, Vice Chair Sirota, members of the Appropriations Committee. My name is Megan Wagner, and I'm testifying on behalf of the Special District Association and our 2,800 members. STA would like to thank Speaker McCluskey and represent Velasco for sponsoring House Bill 1433. Colorado is a leader in creating the Behavioral, Cancer, and Cardiac Trust for Firefighters. These trusts allow firefighters quick access to health care services without having to fight health insurance or the workers' comp system. That is the benefit and why the legislature has invested heavily in the creation of these trusts. This legislation will allow for gifts, grants, and donations, which was unfortunately not created in the or was not authorized in the enacting statute for the behavioral trust program. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
Thank you, Ms. Wagner. All right, let's go online. Is that Mr. Watkins there? Why don't you go ahead and introduce yourself? You have two minutes.
Thank you, Chairman Brown, members of the House Appropriations Committee. My name is Ken Watkins, and I'm the Executive Director of the Colorado State Fire Chiefs and retired Grand Junction Fire Chief. I'm here to ask for your support of House Bill 26-14-33. Our organization, the Colorado State Fire Chiefs, represents the leadership and members of our over 300 fire departments across Colorado, serving urban, suburban, rural, and communities across our state through career, combination, and volunteers. Together, these departments employ our staff through volunteers the 13,000 firefighters who work to protect our citizens, visitors, infrastructure, and economy. The Colorado Firefighter Health Benefits Trust was created to help our firefighters and agencies manage both human and financial impact of cardiac and cancer conditions related to their service. Senate Bill 22002 expanded the trust to include behavioral health and provided state funding to support firefighters facing mental health concerns. Effective November 1st, 2025, this state funding ended, which immediately reduced behavioral health trust benefits due to the budget limitations. We certainly understand the fiscal difficulties facing the state budget, but this sudden loss of funding was a blow to firefighters and agencies statewide. Since November, we, along with our partners from the Colorado Special District Association and the Colorado Professional Firefighters, have been committed to finding a funding solution for firefighters battling mental health issues. The bill provides additional path for funding by allowing grants, gifts, and donations, as you've heard, to keep the Trust Behavioral Health Program running as we search for a more lasting solution. I also want to thank the bill's sponsors, Senator McCluskey, Representative Velasco, Senator Cutter, and Senator Roberts for their dedication to supporting first responders. These sponsors recognize the financial pressures that many fire districts and fire departments across Colorado are experiencing and have continued to support our efforts Please join them in addressing firefighter behavioral health needs through your yes vote of House Bill 26 Thank you and I welcome any of the questions you may have
Thank you, Mr. Watkins. Appreciate that. Committee members, we have questions for these witnesses. All right, seeing none, we thank you for your testimony today. Bill sponsors, come on back up. We do not have any amendments in our packet. Would you like, do you have any amendments with you? Okay, seeing none, committee members, do we have any questions or amendments? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move, oh, we are on the moving of the bill, yes?
Yes.
Okay. I move House Bill 1433 to the Committee of the Whole.
Second.
Oh, I'm sorry, Representative Blasco. I should have allowed you to move the bill. That's my bad, so apologies for that. I also want to recognize that Rep Bottoms is here.
Yeah, I was going to say, Rep Taggart says I need some coffee.
That's usually what happens this time of day. Are there any follow-up or closing comments from sponsors?
Mr. Chair, thank you. Members, thank you. Just appreciate the support of our firefighting community.
Any other closing comments? All right, seeing none, Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representative Space Necker.
Yes.
Bottoms.
Yes.
Joseph.
Yes.
Martinez.
Yes.
Richardson.
Yes.
Haggard.
Yes.
Tatone.
Yes.
Velasco.
Yes.
Zokai.
Yes.
Madam Vice Chair.
Yes.
Mr. Chair.
Yes. That passes unanimously. Congratulations. You're on to the committee.
Thank you, committee.
All right. Moving on to 1063. Representative Bradfield and Representative Bryden. Good morning. Committee members, do we have any questions for our bill sponsors? All right, seeing none, bill sponsors, we have an L amendment in our packet. Would you like us to move L004?
Yes, please.
Okay, Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, I move L004 to House Bill 1063. Seconded by Representative Satone.
Are there any questions about L004? Are there any objections? Seeing none, L004 has passed. Bill sponsors, do you have any other amendments?
No, we do not.
Committee members? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. move House Bill 1063 is amended to the committee of the whole.
Second. Seconded by Representative Belasco.
Closing comments? Seeing none, Ms. Polk, please call the roll.
Representatives Basinecker? Yes. Bottoms? No. Joseph? Yes. Martinez? Yes. Richardson? Yes. Taggart? Yes. Tatone? Yes. Belasco? Yes. Zokai? Yes. Madam Vice Chair?
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Yes, that passes 10 to 1. All right, congratulations. On to 1138. We'll bring up our sponsors, Representative Woog, and, okay. Committee members do we have questions for our bill sponsors Madam Vice Chair Thank you Mr Chair I will just say I am troubled by this sort of the amendment that is presented in our packet here L12
is switching this new program, I guess, over to the Department of Public Safety. and what I'm told has happened is magically the department has identified $350,000 that was set to revert at the end of the year because it was no longer needed for whatever grant program was set to expire at the end of the fiscal year. And in a year where we spent months going through programs across our state departments to have a situation where we now have magically found another $350,000, I feel quite frustrated and I just, I am troubled and I wonder if this is really a decision that, you know, the General Assembly would have made to say, we have cut all of these other grant programs across state government, including in this department. And yet now this amendment serves to actually continue. We're not just starting a retail theft prevention grant program, but we are continuing the Safer Streets program that was set to expire. rolling forward this full $350,000. And there is also an odd date by which the program is repealed. And it's November 1st, which is just partially in to a next fiscal year. And I wonder about the need or purpose of that. And I think, you know, my frustration is in the context also of a department that also has apparently received federal funding, FEMA funding, that they weren't sure if they were going to get, but they have gotten some that we had appropriated general fund for, and our analyst has yet to know what the actual total dollar amount is. So I guess maybe, Representative Wood, could you tell me how this particular amendment came about and why the shift from the Department of Law to the Department of Public Safety, and why shouldn't we just, if the General Assembly thinks this is such a worthy investment, not just invest the general fund in the Department of Law as originally intended?
Representative Wood.
Thank you, Representative. I don't know that I have a lot of details because, as you know, sometimes we work on bills and as things move along and our Senate co-primes work on things too, things change. What I do know is it is federal dollars and it can't go to another program. I mean, I don't know that I can change your vote or make you feel better. But yeah, I think just with negotiations, we found that this was the best way to do it. And again, being federal dollars, we felt this was the strongest way to get this to happen. And we certainly feel very strongly that this is a very important topic and retail theft has been a huge, huge, issue in the state so um i don't know if i can alleviate your concerns but i appreciate it
uh representative taggart thank you mr chair and representative wu this is not aimed at you whatsoever but as i think we all recall there was a request and an amendment, or a couple of different amendments, having to do with auto theft, the CAFTA program. And I know I sent a text through one of the lobbyists to say, are there any dollars at all in the department that could help fund this? And the answer was absolutely not. And then I see this. So I'm equally as frustrated, and I don't want to take it out on you, but I'm equally as frustrated that departments need to be honest with us because these dollars didn't exist, these dollars couldn't support auto theft, and now these dollars can support retail theft. it leaves a bad taste in your mouth. And again, I stress this is not aimed at you folks whatsoever.
Thank you, Representative Taggart.
I will also say that I think it is frustrating as another, as a fellow JBC member, that departments seem to find magical pots of money when things matter to them. this is one of those situations where the department has magically found another pot of money. I also think that what the vice chair raises about a program that was scheduled to repeal is certainly valid. What I would like to see is that the difference between the three-year funding, or I think the program, what is it? this is an amendment that goes through 2029 or something like that. The difference between the cost of that and the remainder of the fund would be reverted to the general fund. And I hope you would work with me on that maybe in the for seconds.
Representative
Espinosa. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And yes, we would happily work with you. I just want to set a little bit of difference in terms of where the money was found and how this process worked, because I think it's important to understand. Originally, when we were looking at this program, we had set it in, we have an amendment today to go forward, we had set it in the Attorney General's office, because my understanding was the Attorney General's office had a task force already working on retail theft. However, the aim and goal of their task force, apparently, was not such that they were willing to take on this without putting a larger fiscal note on it, despite my lots of efforts to try to reduce that fiscal note to be able to get us through appropriations. As a result of that, that's how DPS then came to us as sponsors and said, we too are working in the retail theft space. We've just started a program that we can absorb the cost of this, which is what our amendment today goes to. So there was a transfer in this process from the Attorney General's office to the Department of Public Safety. Originally when we were looking at the Department of Public Safety we were again looking at grants and donations but we understood that there was an issue with some of the gifts grants and donations not even being sufficient at this point There were some concerns raised as we were going through that process with some members of the Appropriation Committee, and so when we went to the Department of Public Safety, they said, we do have dollars that we can put towards this program because of the priority that was there. There was some understanding at the beginning when we were first looking at this in the AG's office, that there were other dollars that might have been available. We tracked those down to determine that they were not available and they had already been swept by the JBC as appropriately they should have been. And we're happy to continue to work with this. I would just say the reason this is so important and that we've been pursuing this process so diligently is that we're talking about a loss of $78 million a year in sales tax to the state. We believe that if we can establish this task force, we can take aim at some of the prosecutions that have not been able to be made because of the multi-jurisdictional nature of some of the thefts that are happening. Specifically, we've also heard in the Judiciary Committee over the last couple of years, bills with regard to trying to attack the problem of gift card thefts where people are going into stores, taking them off the racks, repurposing them, and then putting them back on a rack in a multi-jurisdictional way. Those prosecutions are very difficult. Because we couldn't find easy ways to deal with that problem, the retail council came to us and said, we need a solution. There did not seem to be one, our path to just increasing criminal penalties, at least not in our judiciary at this time. And so that's the reason this task force was established, or why we're attempting to establish this task force. We're modeling it after the program with auto theft, which did reduce the auto thefts in the state, because we believe that that's an approach that might be able to actually get a handle on some of the thefts that are happening. So just wanted to give that background in terms of why this is such a priority and the efforts that we've taken to date and why we've now moved to this. And again, when we were meeting with the AG's office and the Department of Public Safety, one of my concerns was not duplicating any programs, and so we clarified that the AG's office is an ordered program. It is not a statutory program. and so there's no certainty that it would continue in the next administration. And secondarily, the Department of Public Safety has stood up a program to start to address the retail theft. So it did make more sense to move the funding to the Department of Public Safety and it was at that point that Director Lund indicated that he had funding that he would also allocate to this program because of the priority within Department of Public Safety. So I just wanted to set that table or framework for you all to let you know the progress that we've been working on and why this bill is coming to you at this date. It's because we've been working diligently to make sure that we can address this serious problem that does exist. And we've been trying to track down the dollars if they were existing. In the alternative, we would have gone for gifts, grants, and donations. and we actually in our amendment still allow for that so that the reversion that you're talking about could be possible if some of these funds are supplemented by the gifts, grants, and donations as well. And then I'm sure we would be happy to work with you to revert any additional money so that it is more clear that that would be the process of what would happen.
Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. you may or may not know the answer to this, but if there are an additional $350,000 identified that would have reverted, which is what I think I'm reading here, at the end of the fiscal year, but you are extending a broader program you not just creating a new grant program but you are extending a program that was set to expire at the end of the fiscal year and your original fiscal note only shows the need for what some over the course of the life of your program. What is set to happen to the other, like, $200,000? Is it that then the the Department of Public Safety is going to continue granting that money out through the Safer Streets program, or is it planned to be utilized? I don't know what's happening with that money, and I just have extreme frustration with the department about this discovery and situation at this late date. And I also wonder if you can tell me, is there something magical that's to happen during this partial fiscal year where the program is set to expire on November 1st of
2029 instead of at the end of the prior fiscal year? Well, I would just note that the money was set to revert in 2027, not in the end of this fiscal year. July 1. Oh, okay. I just got notice
of July 27. I think part of the issue is these are federal dollars, and so there was a question in terms of its usage, and that's why Director Lund indicated that he would be able to use it
for this program. That was all I knew.
Okay.
Thank you very much, Representative.
It seems like that the cost of your program is about $42,137 a year, roughly. By my on-the-diais rough math that the JBC analysts will correct later, it seems like there's about $223,000 left in the $350,000. So I think that for second reading, changing your appropriation so that $223,000 still reverts at the time that is appropriate would be appropriate.
But go ahead, Representative Espinosa.
Thank you. I think part of the reason that number was there, though, was because it was based on the original FTE assignment of the Attorney General's office. So I would just like to verify whether there was additional costs for the actual implementation of the program. Because my understanding is that portion of the fiscal note was being absorbed by the Department of Public Safety now. So I just would want clarification, but definitely would work to ensure that we're reverting a substantial amount of the money. But I don't want to commit that that's the exact dollar amount until I can confer with the department as to what they actually thought the program was necessary. but I believe we can definitely reduce the cost and a substantial amount as would have been intended.
Are there additional questions for our sponsors?
Representative Taggart. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, this is not aimed at you two folks, but I know the department is here as well. I'd like a full accounting on this, the safer streets. the state of the funds and what precisely is left over, because I don't like to be told that there is no money, and then this emerges. And I hope they're hearing me loud and clear that I'm furious about that.
Representative Espinosa.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We do have an amendment that we would need to bring to get this to the department.
Bill sponsors I wonder if you might be willing to lay this over one more day so that we can work out these issues I hate to put you in that position but it seems like there have been some significant conversations happening on the dais here today and it might be worthy that we work some of this out so that Representative Taggart can get his questions answered and we can figure out what the right reversion is.
that would be fine we're happy to continue to work on this thank you for your time
thank you bill sponsors House Bill 1138 will be laid over until tomorrow alright let's move on to 1286 Representative Leader and Representative Richardson. Do we have any questions for our bill sponsors? All right, seeing none, I understand that we have a couple of amendments in our packet. Would you like us to move L011?
Yes.
Yes, okay.
Madam Vice Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L011 to House Bill 1286. Second.
Seconded by Representative Velasco.
Are there any amendments? Sorry, are there any questions about L011? Any objections to L011? Seeing none, L011 has passed. Oh, I'm sorry. Representative Richardson.
I'm just on autopilot, you know.
Totally understandable. Representative, so then we have two different amendments. I think I would recommend that we adopt the J amendment if that's agreeable to the sponsors. All right, Representative Richardson.
All right, I move the J amendment to House Bill 26-1286.
Okay, J-001.
Yes, thank you.
Great.
Second.
Seconded by Madam Vice Chair.
Are there any questions about J-001? Any objections? J-001 is passed. All right. Seeing no further amendments, are there, Madam Vice Chair, sorry, the amendment phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair. Oh, I'm sorry. Representative Richardson.
I will.
Absolutely.
I move House Bill 1286 as amended to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation.
Second.
Seconded by Madam Vice Chair.
Are there any comments or questions? Sorry, not questions. Are there any wrap-up comments? Somebody get the chair a coffee. I am starting to lose it. Sorry. Yeah, go ahead.
Representative Zocca. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was hearing that this was no longer a referred measure. Is that not the case? Or is that something that's coming forward later?
It is. Sorry, not to get in the way, but L011 makes sure that it removes the referred measure portion. So we've adopted that. We did both. Are there any additional comments?
Representative Baisnecker. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your work on the bill. I want to just be clear that my support of this year's bill is the same as my support of last year's bill, and my yes vote for this year's bill should be interpreted as such. And I think it's important to note the differences that you have made, but I want to be clear that having supported last year's bill, my yes vote is a support for that same policy.
Okay. Thank you very much. We'll see no further discussion. Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representative Space Necker.
Yes.
Bottoms.
Yes.
Joseph.
Yes.
Martinez.
Yes.
Richardson.
Yes.
Taggart.
Yes.
Sorry, Tatone.
Yes.
Velasco.
Yes.
Zokai. Yes. Madam Vice Chair. Yes. Mr. Chair. Yes. That passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Moving on to 1325. Mr. Minority Leader.
and representative for a she's here no not here okay mr. minority leader do we have any questions for our bill sponsor all right seeing none mr. minority leader I understand we have an amendment in our packet that would makes this bill conditional on the receipt of gifts grants and donations is that correct
That's correct, sir.
And you would like us to move that amendment?
Yes, sir.
Okay. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move L008 to House Bill 1325. Second.
Seconded by Representative Titone.
Are there any questions about L008? Are there any objections? Seeing none, L008 is passed. There is no J. It's just, okay, great. All right. Are there any additional amendments? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed.
Madam Vice Chair. Thank you. We don't need the G2. No. I move House Bill 1325 as amended to the Committee of the Whole.
Second.
Seconded by Representative Taggart.
Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representative Spacenecker.
Yes.
Bottoms.
No.
Joseph. Pass.
Martinez. Yes.
Richardson. Yes.
Taggart. Yes.
Tatone. Yes.
Velasco. Yes.
Zokai. Yes. Joseph. Yes.
Madam Vice Chair. Yes.
Mr. Chair. Yes. That passes 10 to 1. Congratulations. Let's move on to 1422. All right, bill sponsor, welcome.
Thank you, Representative Clifford.
Do we have any questions for our bill sponsor? Seeing none, Representative Clifford, I want to thank you for your work on this bill. We have L003 in our packet which makes the legislative portion subject to available appropriations would you like us to move that amendment Yes Thank you sir Madam Vice Chair Thank you Mr Chair I move L003 to House Bill 1422
Seconded by Representative Tone.
Are there questions about L003? Are there objections to L003? Seeing none, L003 has passed. There are no other amendments. Committee members, seeing none, amendment phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 1422 as amended to the Committee of the Whole.
Second.
Seconded by Representative Velasco. Are there any additional comments? All right, seeing none, Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representative Spasnecker. Yes. Bottoms. No. Joseph. No. Martinez. Yes. Richardson. No. Taggart. Yes. Tatone. Yes, for today. Velasco. Yes. Zokai. Yes, for today. Madam Vice Chair. Yes. Mr. Chair. Yes.
That passes 8 to 3. Thank you, Committee. Thank you. All right, moving on to 1429. We are the Committee of Reference for this particular bill. Madam Vice Chair, would you like to describe your bill?
Our bill. Our bill. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. So this is a really, I think, exciting bill for the committee to consider. We have a county system of managing and distributing our public benefits to the people of Colorado. But what we have experienced is a safety net that has become under increasing strain due to both just the costs of administering such a system through, you know, 64 different counties, as well as federal policy changes that have occurred that are going to put increasing pressure both through budget cuts and broader administrative and fiscal challenges across the country. multiple programs. So the state, upon passage of H.R. 1, started working diligently to try and come up with a way to better protect the state against these changes coming federally, and to also try and address this broader problem of flat or reduced federal funding for some of these block grants for county administered programs that are remaining flat, but the cost to administer them continue to grow, and we continue to see pressure on increases to county admin staff. And so the state put forward a budget request to deal with this. I think the counties came back and were quite challenged by what was put forward by the state, but then what ensued was a really incredible process one that I'm not sure I have quite seen take place starting from such an angry place to now this really incredibly collaborative posture where we have this bill that is being supported by both our state and by the counties that are serving our constituents and also advocates working on behalf of our constituents who utilize these programs And so this bill coming forward has been the result of a months-long, very dedicated process to coming up with a way to better streamline and standardize the way in which we deliver our safety net programs in the state, both by setting up an immediate set of processes for the state and counties to commit to work to get our error rates down in these programs, and then putting together a process for a transition program, a transition plan that will then be delivered to the General Assembly in January to set up these 12 cohorts, up to 12 cohorts, that will ultimately be responsible for benefit delivery. But really what we are attempting to do is to set more standardization across these programs and ensure that the dollars that we are spending on safety net programs are actually able to be put toward the services and benefits that our constituents rely on and less so on the administrative end. And so I just want to say thank you so, so much to everyone who has worked so hard to bring this forward. It was something that the Joint Budget Committee understood was a process underway. And so we did not approve the budget requests that the state departments had put forward, but rather made a placeholder for those requests for this bill that you see before you today. And we'll have folks from each of those entities here to testify. If you have, you know, questions for them, I'm sure they'd be glad to answer. But I'm happy to take anyone's questions as well. Committee members?
Representative Bottoms.
So if I'm reading this right, we're going to spend almost $100 million and 45 full-time employees to find fraud. No.
Thank you, Representative Bottoms.
No. We are spending total funds from this, the fiscal note, that is impact on the first part of your document here document here indicates that there is a $228,000 total fund impact. Sorry, you want to correct that?
Madam Vice Chair, go ahead.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This bill is requiring 9.8 FTE in the next fiscal year. So those are the additional folks necessary at the state level. to implement this new shared work model for fraud and member integrity services that will be set up across and then additional folks in our departments to help implement this work and to put the transition work in place. There will be a couple other people who will be the cohort liaisons that will be needed going forward. but in the first year, this will require $2.96 million in general fund, not $100 million.
Thank you. Representative Bottoms.
So I understand that's this year. $2.6 is only from general fund. I've got $5 million from federal funds, $1.3 million from cash. So it says total expenditures, $10 million. FTEs, $9.8 million. But that's just for this year. We've got three more years that add up to almost $100 million and 45 FTEs. I'm reading it straight from the page. Am I wrong about that?
Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would just say that you are looking at SNAP. You are looking at Medicaid, TANF, CCAP. We're talking billions of dollars expended through these services. So this is really a fraction of what we are expending statewide on all of these services and benefits that are going out the door that have significant federal funds connected to them and rules that we are going to have to implement, particularly due to the passage of H.R. 1. And what we continue to see, so in addition to those penalties that H.R. 1 is going to place on the state if our error rates aren't drastically reduced in SNAP and in Medicaid, if we don't reduce those error rates, we're going to be on the hook for massive sums of money that this $10 million will pale in comparison to. And I will also say, layered on top of that, is the fact that we continue to see year after year challenges coming from the counties saying that they cannot meet the requirements of the job with the dollars that they have to administer these programs. And so this bill is an attempt to actually try to streamline services and to ensure that we basically are stopping the bleed on the dollars that we are having to plow into administrative work instead of delivering benefits.
Additional questions, Representative Adams?
Yeah, just one last question. So the answer was yes? No?
No. I think what the – I would reiterate what the vice chair said, which is that this investment, this reorganization, if you will, of some of the ways that we administer these benefits is being driven by changes at the federal level that hold potentially 100 – I don't know how many tens of, certainly tens of millions, if not more than $100 million of fines over our heads for not having an adequate system that has an error rate that the feds can agree with. And so this is directly driven by the threat of the federal administration cracking down on Colorado and us having to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties. And so we need to make this investment now so that we don't have to pay much bigger fines later. Additional questions? Seeing none. We will move on to witness testimony. I have a number of people signed up. Okay. We will bring up Kelly Flanagan from CCI. from CCI. We'll bring up Minna Castillo from DHS. And we'll bring up Sarah Barnes. We can also bring up anyone else who is in favor of this bill at this time. All right. All right. Let's go ahead and start with online with Miss Flanagan. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. I'm Kelly Flanagan, the executive director of Colorado counties, very proud to represent all 64 of Colorado counties. I'd like to take a minute to focus on the process that brought us here, because it's the reason this proposal is aligned and really implementable at the county level. We approach this work with a shared understanding that our current safety net system is under strain and maintaining status quo is simply not an option. What you see before you today is the product of months of intensive collaboration and negotiation with state agencies, county commissioners, human services directors, and advocates all coming to the same table. The commissioners and the directors, the people that will be responsible for on-the-ground implementation, were deeply engaged through the whole process. Together, we spent countless hours working through details, negotiating line by line, even word by word in some cases, and making difficult decisions and compromise along the way. As you've heard, the system and that collaboration was grounded in shared values, high-quality services to Coloradans statewide, consistency across our system, accountability, and responsible stewardship of resources. These values are reflected in what you have before you today. We ensured representation across urban, rural, resort, and frontier counties so the proposal will reflect the true on-the-ground realities facing Coloradans. Because of that process and because the people responsible for implementation helped to shape the policy, we believe it's workable and durable. And more importantly, we believe the collaboration and the trust that we built through this effort is the necessary infrastructure that will deliver us successful implementation. We believe this improves outcomes for clients we serve while containing costs and strengthening coordination. In my mind, we ask whether legislation moves us forward, and from where I sit, this does. It creates scaffolding necessary to better serve our friends and neighbors while sharing resources, improving consistency, and containing costs. I'm very proud of the work that we did and respectfully ask for your yes vote on 1429.
Happy to answer any questions Thank you Ms Lennekin We appreciate your testimony Let move on to Ms Castillo Ms Castillo you have two minutes please
Thank you, Chair Brown, Vice Chair Sirota, and members of the committee. My name is Mina Castillo. I'm the Deputy Executive Director of Community Partnerships at the Department of Human Services, and I'm pleased to be with you today presenting on behalf of three departments, Healthcare Policy and Financing, Human Services, and Early Childhood, in our collective support of House Bill 26, 1429. Our current public benefit system is fragmented with inconsistent service delivery, limited coordination, and rising administrative complexity and not enough fiscal or workforce resources to deliver effective services with measurable outcomes. With these increasing administrative pressures from federal policy changes, fiscal uncertainty, and already strained budgets, as well as the deepening needs of members of our community, we can no longer afford to keep doing our work the way we do it now. We are at the threshold of an opportunity coming together to consolidate, to leverage economies of scale, and standardize our client-centered service delivery in order to consistently, accurately, and timely serve members of our communities. Through extensive and genuinely collaborative efforts that Executive Director Flanagan discussed, we have designed a bill to both right now fix urgent problems that we have as well as fundamentally redesign our safety net system in the long term. Key features of this bill include short-term actions that will be accomplished in the next year such as centralized statewide case integrity services, combined and aligned performance-based contracts, standardization of our corrective action, and public reporting of performance data. Longer term we create a path to redesign how public benefits are delivered in Colorado. This will be achieved through a third-party facilitator for fiscal modeling and coordination of an implementation working group that engages clients, counties, eligibility workforce, and advocates. This work will provide the roadmap for aligned governance, fiscal strategy, and workforce planning for this new county cohort delivery model. We are energized by the long-term vision of a safety net that works for those that is intended to catch, and we urge you to vote yes.
Thank you, Ms. Castillo. All right, moving on to Ms. Barnes. Ms. Barnes, you have two minutes. Please introduce yourself.
Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. My name is Sarah Barnes, and I am the Vice President of Policy at the Colorado Children's Campaign, a nonpartisan policy organization committed to making Colorado the best place to be a kid and raise a kid. Our focus is on the whole child, which is why we support House Bill 1429. At its core, this bill ensures Colorado children and families can reliably access basic supports like health care, food, and child care. These programs are lifelines, and when they work, families stay stable. When they don't, kids feel the impact immediately. As you've heard this morning, federal instability is creating fiscal and administrative strain, and our system's current lack of standardization makes it harder for families to access the help they're eligible for. This bill responds to this moment with a balanced approach. You've heard about the immediate fixes in the bill that will stabilize the safety net and ensure families have more reliable access to support. And you've heard about the bill's structured path to a long-term redesign that will make the system easier for families to navigate and better at delivering results. Just as important as what is in this bill is how it was developed. You've heard about the intensely collaborative process, and I want to underscore how unusual that is. Often these groups come to this building with different perspectives and competing priorities. That is the nature of this work. but in this case there was a shared recognition that doing nothing was not an option so instead of working against each other we worked together what you have in front of you is a shared solution It reflects the experience of frontline workers the realities counties face the expertise of state agencies, and the voices of advocates. And because of that, this bill is not only strong policy, it is implementable. House Bill 1429 is about making sure a parent can get childcare so they can go to work, a child can see a doctor, and a family does not fall through the cracks because of administrative barriers. This bill stabilizes what we have today, and it builds what we need for tomorrow. And the campaign respectfully asks for your support. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Barnes. I will note for the record that we have Josh Montoya from the Department of Healthcare Policy and Financing signed up for questions only. Lisa Castiglia from the Department of Early Childhood for questions only. and Danielle Greer from the Department of Early Childhood as well for questions only. Are there questions for these witnesses or are folks who have signed up for questions only? All right, seeing none. Thank you very much, witnesses, for your testimony today. Are there any additional folks in the room or online who wish to testify on 1429? Oh, we have one more. Oh, yes. Mr. Hinga, welcome. Thank you. Mr. Hinga, you all have two minutes. Great, thank you.
Good morning, Mr. Chair and Madam Vice Chair and members of the committee. My name is Sean Hinga, and I am the Deputy Director for AFSCME Colorado. AFSCME represents human service workers throughout the state, and I'm here before you today to advocate for an amendment to House Bill 1429. The reorganization of human services in Colorado is a significant policy proposal. More than a quarter of the state's population receives some sort of county-administered government assistance, including services like Medicaid and SNAP benefits and grants for foster children. Our members are the dedicated employees in the county human service departments across across the state who handle the eligibility screening, administration, and ongoing monitoring of the benefits so that so many Coloradans rely on these. They make our counties run and our subject matter experts and process experts. They're the ones that we will implement the new technology and processes outlined in this bill. So they need to have a seat at the table so that their perspective is included. This will help give the future program best chance of success. The current draft of the bill needs to make it more clear that frontline workers voices will be included in this process. We have worked with the sponsors, the governor's office, the county officials, and other stakeholders on an amendment we expect to be offered. We urge you to pass this amendment to help ensure that the folks that make our counties work can continue to do so in a way that best serves all Coloradans and we are grateful for the collaboration on this policy. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on this important bill and I'm available for questions.
Thank you very much, Mr. Henga. Do we have any questions for our last witness? All right, seeing none, thank you very much for being here. All right, seeing no one else in person or online who wishes to testify, the amendment phase, or sorry, the witness phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair, it seems like you have an amendment
for us Yes Mr Chair I happy to move it and then explain it if that works That sounds great Okay I move L001 to House Bill 1429 Seconded by Representative Titone Madam Vice Chair would you like to explain your amendment Yes. I know that it is lengthy, but it is really very cleanup oriented. So we are reordering some legislative declarations and replacing some legislative declarations in sections one and six. There are just clarifying and cleanup amendments on the centralized member integrity service section two. throughout the bill. There are changes to add references to the Children's Child Health Plan Plus section of the statute because that needed to be explicitly stated and can't just be captured by the Medicaid references. We're updating some definitions, updating dates and making slight adjustments to when things should become implementable. And we are clarifying some data reporting metrics. We have included the specific language about frontline workers that Mr. Hinga referenced to ensure that they are named stakeholders for engagement. and the membership of the work group is specified and the appointment process and structure is further clarified and laid out and as well what roles are required for advisory subgroups. We are also allowing for a minority report as part of the transition plan and multiple suggestions or paths forward are possible through the report provided from the work group and just some other technical and conforming amendments.
Questions about L-001? Seeing none, objections to L-001. Seeing none, the amendment is passed. All right. Madam Vice Chair, would you like to move J001?
Yes. I move J001 to House Bill 1429 and thank Mr. Dermody for his terrific work.
Second by Representative Titone, I think, that time. Are there any objections to J001? Seeing none, J001 is passed. All right. Are there any additional amendments? No, Mr. Chair. Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move House Bill 1429 as amended to the Committee of the Whole, and I also just want to extend my gratitude not only to everyone who has engaged so deeply on this bill, but also to Ms. Princell who drafted it and Mr. Carpenter who wrote the really extensive fiscal note and Mr. Dermody who worked through this canary and J amendment. Just much gratitude to everyone. I know it's been a huge lift. As usual, kudos to our staff. We've done a fantastic job. So thank you all who have worked on it.
Additional comments? Representative Richardson.
yeah thank you Mr. Chair as a former county commissioner and somebody Since three large counties and four fairly small ones, this is long overdue, very long overdue. We've allowed our local governments to kind of struggle with bad tools for a long time until problems have gotten to where they are. I wish I'd have taken kind of the threat of having to share and SNAP benefits and other things from the federal government to move us along. but this needs to be done.
So thank you. Thank you, Representative Richardson. Additional comments? All right, seeing none. Oh, I'm sorry, Representative Azenegger.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be very brief and just say, like so many of us, we met with our county prior to session starting. There was concern about where the proposal was at at that time. And I just want to give a lot of kudos to everyone who worked on this because I think the inclusive and stakeholder process that you all have engaged in to be able to get the bill to this point has really led us to a policy that folks are feeling very good about, and I think will solve a key need in our community. So I would echo your gratitude to staff, but also just the multitude of stakeholders who worked on this policy to get it in such a good place. So thank you.
Thank you, Representative Buesnicker. All right, seeing no further comments, Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Second.
We didn't have a second? Oh. Would someone second the motion that the vice chair made?
Seconded by Representative Taggart.
Ms. Pope, now please call the roll.
Representative Spasenecker. Yes. Bottoms.
No.
Joseph.
Yes.
Martinez.
Yes.
Richardson.
Yes.
Taggart.
Yes.
Tutone.
Yes.
Velasco.
Yes.
Zocay.
Yes.
Madam Vice Chair.
Yes, Mr. Chair.
Yes, that passes 10 to 1. On to the floor. All right on to Senate Bill 131 Representative Woodrow and Woog Committee members, do we have any questions for our bill sponsors? Seeing none, we have a J amendment in our packet. Bill sponsor, would you like us to move that? Representative Woog, sorry.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. what's the amendment number again please?
J2.
I move J2 to
the Appropriations Committee. Yeah you can't move it but would you like us to move it?
I thought you asked me to.
Madam Vice Chair. Thank you Mr. Chair I move J002 to Senate Bill 131.
Seconded by Representative Batesnecker
are there objections to J002? Seeing none J002 has passed. All right. I see no other amendments. Are there any amendments? No? Committee members? Seeing no amendments, the amendment phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Senate Bill 131 as amended to the Committee of the Whole.
Seconded by Representative Basinecker.
Ms. Polk, please call the roll.
Representatives Basinecker.
Yes.
Bottoms.
Yes.
Joseph.
Yes.
Martinez.
Yes.
Richardson.
Yes.
Taggart. Yes.
Tatone. Yes. Velasco.
Yes. Zocay. Yes.
Madam Vice Chair. Yes.
Mr. Chair. Yes. That passes
unanimously.
All right. Congratulations.
You're on to, let's
see, 151.
Representative Winter and
Representative Martinez. 157. 157. Right? Yeah. Okay. Okay. Do we have any questions for our Are bill sponsors? Seeing none, we already have an appropriation of this bill. Are there any amendments? Seeing no other amendments amendment phase is closed Representative Martinez Thank you Mr Chair I move Senate Bill 157 to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation
Second.
Seconded by Representative Taggart.
Seeing no further questions, or sorry, no further comments, Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representative Spasenecker.
Yes.
Bottoms.
Yes.
Joseph.
Yes.
Martinez.
Yes.
Richardson.
Yes.
Taggart.
Yes.
Detone.
Yes.
Velasco.
Yes.
Zocay.
Yes.
Madam Vice Chair.
Yes.
Mr. Chair.
Yes. That passes unanimously. Okay. On to 165. Are there any, oh, I'm sorry. This is Representative McCormick and Representative Soper's bill. They are in ethics currently. and so they've asked us to just proceed with this bill without them. Do we have any questions about the bill? We will do our best to, okay. There are no amendments in our packet. Does the committee have any amendments? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Madam Vice Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Senate Bill 165 to the Committee of the Whole.
Seconded by Representative Basinecker.
Are there any additional comments? Seeing none, Ms. Pope, please call the roll.
Representative Spasenecker.
Yes.
Bottoms.
No.
Joseph.
Yes.
Martinez.
Yes.
Richardson.
Yes.
Taggart.
Yes.
Totone.
Yes.
Velasco.
Yes.
Zocay.
Yes.
Madam Vice Chair.
Yes.
Mr. Chair.
Yes. That passes 10 to 1. All right. Final bill. So Senate Bill 172. Representative Basenacker and Paschal, do we have any questions for our bill sponsors Seeing none are there any amendments bill sponsors No amendments Seeing no amendments the amendment phase is closed
Madam Vice Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move Senate Bill 172 to the committee of the hall.
Seconded by Representative Titone.
Oh, I'm sorry. Oh, shoot. I did that. I didn't even look up. I did that. Okay. Ms. Pope.
Go ahead and call the roll. Representative Basenecker.
Yes.
Bottoms.
Oh, my bad.
Joseph.
Yes.
Martinez.
Yes.
Richardson.
No.
Taggart.
Yes.
Tatone.
Yes.
Velasco.
Yes.
Zokai.
Madam Vice Chair.
Yes.
Mr. Chair.
Yes.
That passes nine to two. All right, committee. That concludes our work for today. Thank you, committee. We will meet again tomorrow. Sorry, we will meet again tomorrow. House Appropriations is adjourned. For now. Until tomorrow.
Thank you. Thank you.