Senate Finance [Mar 10, 2026]

Finance, we are starting in an unusually funky mode this afternoon, thanks to Mr. President. So we appreciate you being here and making us more cool. We always appreciate that. We are going to start today off with a couple of confirmations, and then we'll be going on to hear 26118, 261003, and 261146. But we're going to start out with the Financial Services Board. Oh, I'm sorry, we have to take roll. Thank you, Mr. Rudevich. Well, please have a seat, you guys. But Mr. DeBush, will you please take the roll?

Here. Excused. Here. Excused. Present. Excused. Here.

Good afternoon, Chair. Thank you. My name is Mark Valente. I'm the Commissioner for the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agency's Division of Financial Services. We're the primary regulator for Colorado State Chartered Credit Unions and Savings and Loans Associations. And as you said, I'd like to introduce the newest member of our Division of Financial Services Board of Directors. He's also CEO of Guadalupe Parish Credit Union down in Antonido, Colorado. I'd like to welcome Mr. Robert Chavez.

And please let the record reflect that Senator Gonzalez is here. Thank you, and I appreciate the time today. I'm very interested in serving because I feel that my expertise in the credit union industry would serve me very well. I've been in the industry over 30 years, the last 15 years as an executive, and I'm committed to the members of my credit union and also of all members of the state. And where I come from, it's a very small community, and that's one of the functions of credit unions is to serve underserved areas in our state. And so I'm really excited about being able to offer my expertise to this committee, and I feel like I'm very well qualified to do that.

Thank you, Madam Chair. No question. Just thank you for making the long trip up here. It's like San Luis Valley Day at the Capitol today. So thank you.

Thank you. I move to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation, the appointment of Robert Chavez to the Financial Services Board. Thank you.

Aye. Aye.

Congratulations and Vice Chair Marchman I would recommend the consent calendar Is there any objection to this nomination going to the consent calendar Seeing none I am going to expect that your nomination will fly through the Senate because you are now on the consent calendar. Thank you so much for making the trip and hanging out with us today for a little bit.

Next up, we have a confirmation hearing for the State Board of Equalization, and I know we have Mr. Erfmeyer here to introduce Ty Coleman. Well, any relation, Mr. President?

And Mr. Erfmeyer.

And Mayor Coleman, please tell us about why you're willing to step up and do this.

Thank you so much. As a former member of the Board of Equalization when I was in the House, I really appreciate you stepping up. It is an important role. So, members, do we have any questions for Mayor Coleman? Senator Simpson, I mean, excuse me, Minority Leader Simpson. I got it right the first two times. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Excellent.

So I glad that you came all the way up here and thank you for your service on the State Board of Equalization Thank you Further comment Okay Senator Frizzell Thank you Madam Chair I move to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation

Thank you very much. That is the proper motion. Ms. Rudovich, will you please take the roll?

Enthusiastically, aye. Aye. More enthusiastically, aye. E. Snyder's excused march. Most enthusiastically, aye. Yes.

Excellent. Thank you. Is there any objection to the consent calendar? Okay. Well, your nomination also should fly through the committee, and thank you, Frizzell, for making that nomination. as the really most qualified person in the Senate to do that. So thank you very much. We really appreciate it. And thank you for making the trip again. And I just want to reiterate, we are always available on Zoom, too, should the drive prove to be something that you don't want to do. But we really appreciate you making the trip, and congratulations.

I wish you much success.

Thank you. Okay, that brings us to Senate Bill 26-118. with President Coleman and Minority Leader Simpson. We got the brass up here today, so we'll try and behave ourselves while they present their bill. Okay, who would like to go first? President Coleman.

Thank you. Minority Leader Simpson.

Thank you. Members, do you have questions for our sponsors? I do have one, and let me know if it's more appropriate for another witness, but since Senator Snyder is presenting his bill in another committee, I will ask it, because I know he asked that when I had a conversation with him yesterday. So if the estate, is this the 60-day timeline start after the estate is closed? I mean, after that, because sometimes it can take a long time to resolve an estate after somebody dies. So do you know that, or should I, would you like to defer to your witnesses? President Coleman.

Okay, excellent. Well, thank you, and let us bring up our, oh, Senator Coleman, I mean President Coleman.

You're the chair, Madam Pro-Tum.

Murphy Nonprofit Association, John Kraus, University of Denver, Allison Morgan, the Colorado Bankers Association, and Teresa Garcia from Colorado Public Radio. Would that be all right? That would be perfect. Thank you. And do we have one more? Okay. Great. Oh, do we need another chair? Okay. No, sorry. I thought you were coming up as well. So if you don't mind, let's go from our left to your right. Everybody's going to have... Oh, if you have a preferred order, I'll let you do that. I usually go from my left to my right, but if you guys have a preferred order, we'll just go with that. So please introduce yourself, and you have up to three minutes. When the little yellow light goes on, that means you have 30 seconds left, so please wrap up by the time it turns red. Thank you. Sir. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, and please let the record reflect that Senator Molica is here. And who would like to go next? Okay, please introduce yourself, and you have three minutes.

My name is Teresa Garcia. I work as the plan giving officer at Colorado Public Radio and sit on the board of the Colorado plan giving roundtable. Each year, CPR receives between 15 and 25 new legacy gifts, likely because of beneficial tax reasons and more donor education, an increasing number of these gifts are coming via beneficiary designations. At the end of November 2024, one of our donors passed away. We were named the beneficiary on two of her accounts with different custodians. The total of both accounts was over $2 million. With custodian A, there was no expectation or requirement to open a new account. We simply filled out an entity acceptance form, sent in some corroborating documentation, and received that payment at the beginning of February 2025. This is really the exception that proves the rule. For Custodian B, we had to open a new business account, fill out multiple forms, and then spend months following up for the initial payment, which we didn't receive until May 13, 2025. And then even though we originally asked for the entirety of the account to be sent, a small amount remained under management for the next eight months until we could coordinate internally to zero out and close the account. Unfortunately, because of one unresolved outstanding stock position, we've been unable to fully close the account and still have a random empty account with this custodian because of their process. Many smaller nonprofits aren't fortunate enough to have a full-time plan giving person or someone whose job it is to administer these gifts. The staff hours this particular gift required were enormous, and it's fortunate, though never a guarantee to have a gift so large. We have another beneficiary designation gift right now for $8,000 that has required multiple hours of executive staff time, confusing forms, and a medallion signature guarantee to open an account with a different custodian in order to receive these funds. If we didn't have to do this, our team would be able to dedicate our time to activities supporting the mission of the organization, better aligning with the attention of the donor and their philanthropic goals in the first place. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm Allison Morgan with the Colorado Bankers Association. Colorado Bankers is in strong support of Senate Bill 118. We have participated in the stakeholder process from day one. I can honestly say there wasn't a lot that I knew about legacy giving at the beginning of this process and probably, unfortunately, know too much about the legacy-giving process as the bill was introduced. And it was, as President Coleman and Minority Leader Simpson said, it was a very robust stakeholder process. And if I never have to have another 5 o'clock Friday call, it would be too soon. But it was a good meeting, and there were a lot of people at the table. And as we had to work through concerns, we worked through those concerns, and we worked through processes. And what you have before you is a bill that works. It meets the needs of financial institutions, the timelines of financial institutions, and recognizes the need of every once in a while there may be a hiccup that says something in federal law says oops we might need something slightly longer than 60 days and we recognize that but that the norm is 60 days And the bankers strongly feel that this is legislation that can be complied with, meet the needs of what the donor has requested, what the nonprofits are seeking, and as you see throughout the bill, the concerns of the creditors and the credit agencies if the estate has issues later on in fulfilling those ends of the needs, and there's balance throughout the legislation. So we support this legislation in its present form.

Thank you. Yeah, thanks for the opportunity to address that. So what we are requesting is that 60 days from the date the financial institution has received the affidavit and all the required information from the nonprofit that is necessary to make the distribution. So it should happen a lot sooner than that, but we're giving them 60 days. once they have everything they need to basically produce the check and send it to us. One of the great things about beneficiary designations is it is not subject to probate. And so the purpose of a will or a trust or other estate planning documents are basically to govern any assets that don't already have a beneficiary designation or have not been titled to be received by someone. In the case of these accounts that have beneficiary designations, those can be liquidated within weeks of a donor's passing because they don't involve the estate or probate process at all.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to come up as you have virtually Jessica Ziedman with Jewish Family Services. You should also have Ashley Leder, Jamie Major, and also who was not signed up but can sign up is Naomi Amahov from Denver Foundation. yeah thank you and I think I have all those people here and if anybody else wants to testify on this bill this is actually your opportunity to come forward because we do have two free seats

chair and members of the committee my name is Ashley leader and I have served I've served in the nonprofit sector in Colorado for over 20 years. I serve on the Colorado Plan Giving Roundtable as a board member as well. I am here to represent the small to medium-sized nonprofits in our community today. I serve as the Director of Philanthropy for the Cat Care Society, which is a small cat shelter located in Lakewood operating since 1981. Small yet mighty. Our annual revenue is over $3.4 million, and of that 66% comes from bequests, including IRA gifts and transfer on death accounts. These gifts obviously are critical to our operations. They are not optional. Yet the process for receiving these gifts is a major undertaking. Our staff is small. It's just me. And so I can tell you that I have spent hundreds of hours completing these phone calls, these applications, these processes that are being required by these financial custodians. In one case, we were named a beneficiary of a $70,000 IRA gift. Despite our responding promptly and following all the instructions of the financial institution, the funds did not arrive for over a year. Now, $70,000 may not seem like much to some, but to us, that represents over 3% of our annual revenue budget of over $3 million. So, to small nonprofits like ours, facing challenges like opening mandatory accounts, giving personal information, months and months of paperwork and phone calls, it is all to receive funds that are already legally owed to the charity. These hoops offer no compliance benefit, they delay donor gifts, and they create unnecessary risk for the individuals, the staff that are required to provide this information. This bill solves this problem by creating a clear process and timeline for transferring these funds that will be directly given to charitable beneficiaries. For small charities like the Cat Care Society, this is mission critical. And I don't know about you, but opening 10-plus new accounts in a year and then having to close them is something that is an administrative burden that is unnecessary to a charity or a nonprofit. And in some cases, we've been told that we are not allowed to close the account for more than a year. They must hold it open for three years or more until we can close it. So keeping track of all of that is also administratively way too cumbersome. Please put the dollars of your donors to work immediately in our community, and thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Kipp and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of Senate Bill 118. My name is Naomi Amaha, and I am the Director of Policy and Government Affairs for the Denver Foundation. We are a community foundation that's existed for 100 years and worked to connect and collaborate with community members to address current and future challenges. In our work as a funder of nonprofits of all sizes and a steward of donors' charitable gifts, we here have, and at times ourselves, experienced challenges when accepting various types of gifts. We see this bill as an opportunity to establish a baseline process for transferring legacy gifts between a financial institution and a charitable beneficiary. This will help nonprofits secure the dollars they need to do their work in community. My organization is really fortunate. We have a comprehensive financial department that can dedicate time to do the follow-ups, address additional requests from information. But we recognize that these administrative versions, as you've just heard and have heard in the previous panel, are quite significant. and they can either take away an individual attention from mission critical work or add to the additional work that they already have We feel that this bill addresses the challenges faced by the nonprofit and philanthropic sector again, by reducing administrative burdens, limiting delays in transferring gifted funds, and reducing the personal risk faced by nonprofit officers by sharing personal information. We believe that uniformity can bring a sense of certainty to nonprofits that's really important right now, especially as organizations are going through financial challenges and should be looking at different ways to bring in revenue for their ability to do their mission critical work. We also want to thank the proponents and the stakeholders for their deep work to understand the nuances in this process and for developing a framework that's workable for all parties involved in the transaction. At a time of increased cybersecurity risks, we appreciate any standardization of practices that can reduce the sharing of sensitive information. In closing, legacy gifts are for many and hopefully for MAR will become a key part of their fundraising streams, and we hope that this process and this bill will help to ensure that they can focus on delivering essential services and meeting community needs and not having to go through administrative processes. Thank you, and respectfully wish for you to vote yes.

Yes, hello. Thank you, Chair and members of the committee. My name is Jamie Mauger. I am the Executive Director of the Office of Gift Planning at the University of Colorado and on the Executive Board for the Colorado Plan Giving Roundtable. The University of Colorado supports this proposal because of the real challenges our organization faces when trying to receive legacy gifts intended to support the university. In my role at CU, my team works to both support donors as they make gifts through their estate plan and after their life to help with the estate administration. The CU Foundation manages all of our philanthropic gifts on behalf of the university, and we work closely with them when administering these estate gifts. Planned gifts are those that someone makes as part of their estate plan when they pass away, and often include retirement accounts such as IRA designations made to the CU Foundation to support students, faculty, research, patient support, and programs across the university. These gifts reflect donors' deeply held values and their desire to make a lasting impact. IRA beneficiary designations are often encouraged as a first tool for donors to use in their estate planning because of the tax efficiency that they provide to donors and their heirs. Unfortunately, the current process for transferring these funds from financial institutions to charitable beneficiaries is inconsistent and often unnecessarily burdensome. As you've already heard today, the CU Foundation has also shared that in order to receive funds, executive team members and sometimes board members are required to open accounts at their holding financial institution. It often requires them to provide sensitive personal information simply so the foundation can receive a charitable gift. The beneficiary of the funds is the nonprofit entity, not the individual. The lack of clear timelines for transferring these can also lead to significant delays. Earlier this year, the CU Foundation experienced a situation where it took more than six months to receive a $200,000 IRA distribution from an institution. Despite multiple conversations with the estate and financial institution representatives, delays kept happening with no explanation as to why. In the meantime, the remainder of the estate could not be distributed until CU's portion was paid out, delaying the entire process for many nonprofits. When a donor includes a nonprofit organization as a beneficiary of their estate their intent is for that organization to receive the funds as fast as possible to start the impact immediately These delays mean the funds are not available to provide scholarship medical research or other important support This legislation would help solve these issues by establishing a clear process and timeline for institutions to transfer legacy gifts to charitable beneficiaries. It would allow nonprofits to receive funds through direct payment or transfer to their institution of choice without opening these accounts or sharing personal information. Please vote yes on Senate Bill 118 and help increase efficiency in charitable giving. For organizations like CU, these gifts can immediately support students and the university. Thank you.

Hello, committee. Thank you for allowing us to present on this bill today.

Well, we close with quite a story. Thank you so much. Members, do we have questions for this panel? Okay, well, I think you've clearly made your case. So thank you so much. And with that, we've already had the last call for witnesses. We will bring our sponsors back up for the amendment phase. It does look like you have an amendment. Who would like to tell us about it?

Excellent. Thank you so much. Members, do we have any questions about this amendment? or comments? Okay, seeing none, it's been moved.

Oh, I guess no. Seeing none, is there any objection to L001? Seeing none. L001 is adopted. Any further amendments, sponsors? No.

Members, any further amendments on our side? No. Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. Who would like to close first?

Oh, Mr. President. Good bill vote yes.

Senator Kolker. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just asked a few comments because this is what I do for a living, and I've experienced a lot of what the witnesses have said in delays, in frustrations of getting money out to beneficiaries. And all I've ever heard is, well, the FINRA says we have to do this. And, you know, all I've been saying is, I've taken a lot of time discussing with some of the people who have testified today to get clarity on what we're trying to do. I mean, the purpose here is for this money that has been donated to a beneficiary. And in this case, it's not an individual. It's charity. I have the same problems with individuals. The person has to set up an account. What I've heard from the charities is, you know, we would like it electronically fund transfer to their bank. And under the AML law, which is the anti-money laundering law, that bank has already verified that they're not laundering money. So I don't see a reason why this bill can't go forward. I don't see why they cannot implement what you're asking them to do. Even opening, they shouldn't even have to open an account in that institution. If they have a bank, it should go to the bank. The one loophole here is sending a check to a charity. And that's where they have to verify that this is not some sort of organization that's doing money laundering. The question and the concern that I have here is, are we overstepping our bounds on federal government regulations through FINRA? No one has been able to tell me. Okay? What's disappointing is no opposition, the people that are opposing this bill, did not come forward and testify and tell me. And come here and say, this is the FINRA statute. talking to the people who had testified who are trying to look up that statute. No one can find it. So until we get that information and I really wish Dora was here to give their interpretation, and I would suggest that they come forward and do their interpretation. This bill goes forward to the House. I just, it's all smoke and mirrors, and I appreciate you bringing this. I've had these frustrations for 20 years. I'd like to see these cleaned up. I'd like to see it cleaned up with individuals, too. But right now, we're just dealing with charities. so long explanation of why I'm supporting this bill but it is I think needed and there's just no idea of it's unconscionable why some of these companies keep the money when it's obvious that it's gone to the beneficiaries I appreciate this bill. Thank you

Thank you, Madam Chair. I move Senate Bill 118 as amended to the Committee of the Whole with a favorable recommendation.

And Minority Leader Simpson. Thank you, Madam Chair. I would suggest we send this to the consent calendar. Thank you.

Senator Gonzalez. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just as it relates to the last policy, I went and before we get into this next bill, I just want to say that I went to the Secretary of State's website to check who had registered what position in relation to the policy. and there were a number of organizations and entities that were signed up in an amend position and not but no formal opposition to the policy but I do really think that the point stands and I really appreciate Madam Chair and Senator Colker raising the concern because I do think that that matters deeply And so I just want to clarify that, because it's one thing to raise concerns and then not come and testify. and I wish that we would have more of that engagement if there are actual policy disagreements or what have you. But I just wanted to just make that note for the record.

So that they can be addressed later.

It looks like Senator Marchman, please. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Committee, for hearing this bill. As you can see, this is House Bill 26-1003. It came from the House, clearly, with a lot of good support. What this does is it modernizes the CLIMR program. The Colorado Office of Economic Development and Trade administers the CLIMR. It provides affordable working capital loans to small businesses across Colorado by partnering with lenders, CDFIs, credit unions, and nonprofit lenders. They underwrite and deploy loans to support business stability, growth, and job retention. Since its creation, the Clymer Loan Program has delivered measurable statewide results. 273 small businesses funded across 33 counties. More than 2,150 existing jobs were supported, helping employers keep workers on payroll. 283 new jobs were created, showing climbers not just a stabilization tool, but a tool for growth, and statewide availability with intentional reach in underserved and distressed communities, including rural areas and businesses that have historically faced barriers to traditional financing. This came about as a part of the COVID situation and we are now going to modernize it. So I'm just really appreciative to be a part of this bill and I want to thank my co-prime for including me on it. Thank you.

Do we have questions for our bill sponsors?

Senator Marchman. You're right. It's not much. I mean, it's something. It's $120,000 is generally what we're giving. So that's generally what the – and the loan life is usually one to ten years.

Senator Mark, oh, Senator Kolker. That's microloans. The $5 million is going to go to microloans. They're a lot smaller, and we can have the department answer that.

Okay. Minority Leader Simpson, did you have a question?

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. And members of the committee, it's great to see you all. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I am State Treasurer Dave Young, and I'm here today in support of House Bill 26-1003. Treasury worked with the General Assembly in 2020 to create the CLIMR program at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that's when Colorado's small businesses were facing immediate and unprecedented economic disruption. The Department of the Treasury played a central role in standing up climber quickly to respond to those urgent needs, ensuring that capital could reach businesses at accessible interest rates when they needed it the most to survive. What began as an emergency response has since grown into an evergreen program that continues to serve small businesses across Colorado. Even as the program transitioned to the Office of Economic Development and International Trade, I have remained involved as the chair of the Climber Oversight Board. In that role, I work with lenders, economic development partners, and state agencies to ensure the program remains fiscally sound responsive and aligned to the real needs of small businesses House Bill 26 makes thoughtful updates to reflect how the economy has changed in the past few years During its quarterly meeting on Friday, January 30th, the Clymer Oversight Board reviewed the legislation. While the Board did not take a position on the bill, Board members generally view the bill as an improvement because it broadens the scope of the program and makes it more accessible. Lowering the private match requirement and increasing flexibility in deployment will help ensure climber capital is used efficiently and reaches more businesses faster. Board members expressed a desire to more fully understand how changes to the contribution ratios of private capital to state funds from the four-to-one requirement currently in the statutes to a permissive ratio as low as one-to-one might affect the amount of the state's first lost capital. This is a conversation I'm having with the staff at Oedit currently, and we'll always be happy to have conversations with the bill's sponsors as this bill moves forward today. I also support the transfer of funds to the Colorado Startup Loan Program, which plays a vital role, a valuable role, in serving entrepreneurs who often lack access to early-stage traditional financing. At the same time, I want to acknowledge an important concern that I have about the long-term sustainability of the program. While I'm supportive of this transfer, it is occurring alongside broader efforts to draw down Climber resources for use in filling the state's budget gaps. Climber remains a critical tool for small businesses, supporting jobs, local economies, and long-term resiliencies. If the reductions to Climber are necessary to balance the budget, I strongly hope that there is a clear plan to restore that funding in the future. Colorado's businesses continue to rely on this program, and access to affordable capital remains essential to their success. I remain fully committed to the Clymer Small Business Loan Program and to the small businesses that depend on it, and I appreciate the committee's consideration on this bill. I want to thank Senator Kulkler particularly for reaching out to me in advance of the introductions. So I thank you for your time. I'm happy to answer your questions as they come up. Thanks so much.

I will be happy to. Thank you, Madam Chair. And, committee, my name is Sam Taylor. Okay.

What's that?

Oh, thank you. I thought I was already signed up. I apologize for that. You're fine. As I said, my name is Sam Taylor. I serve as a climber senior program manager at the Office of International Trade and Economic Development. I've staffed the climber program since 2022 and has seen its distribution in over half the counties in the state. The climber program was created by the legislature in 2020, as you heard, in response to the pandemic. And it was funded originally by one time sale of premium insurance tax credits. While support is needed at all stages of business lifespan, the Climber program was created to provide capital to existing businesses who are struggling for economic reasons outside of their control. Originally, that was the pandemic, and now Colorado companies are facing challenges as they adapt to changing federal trade policy, slow growth, and economic growth. and uncertainty in many aspects of the geopolitical environment. With the input from the lenders, the Oversight Board, and Colorado Housing and Finance Authority as the program administrator, the CLIMR program has evolved over the years to be able to provide the support of our small business community needs. Through CLIMR's Oversight Board, I apologize, The program has been largely flexible in responding to business needs ranging from loan size, term length, and creating a more comprehensive access to capital continuum by moving it from the Treasury to Oedit. The changes in this bill allow for better small business and lender support and the economic challenges being faced today. It makes two main changes. The first is that it does lower the private leverage from a 4-to-1 to as low as 1-to-1. This requirement, as it's been mentioned by the sponsor, matches the state's funding with private funding of four to one. It's been successfully matched in the past, but it is a slow and cumbersome process when you have to work with multiple banks, funders, all with different financial goals. This bill does adjust the leverage ratio so tranches or pools of capital can be formed more quickly as lenders have more demand from small business. With this change, we have the flexibility to raise the funds at a one-to-one or even two-to-one, three-to-one, or maintain it as a four-to-one as the oversight board sees fit. It will allow us to raise funds quicker, allow more CDFIs and nonprofit lenders to participate. It will also let us work with foundations to provide a tranche funding specific to a demographic, such as rural areas, if we fall below our benchmarks that are set by the oversight board. The second major change is the reallocation of $5 million from the Climber to the Startup Loan Fund, which provides not only loans to small businesses, but technical support as well. Thank you for considering the changes to a successful program to help it serve Colorado even better. Available questions.

Good afternoon, members of the committee. My name is Marie Peters, and I'm the fund director at B-Side Capital and B-Side Fund, a Colorado-based nonprofit lender and community development financial institution, otherwise known as the CDFI. And I've worked in the Colorado economic development space for 17 years. B-Side provides responsible financing to underserved Colorado entrepreneurs, specializing in low-income communities by offering loans with flexible credit and collateral requirements that help businesses overcome traditional lending barriers, especially those with limited resources and opportunities. B-Side is a participating lender in both the Climber and the Colorado Startup Loan Fund. Since we began direct lending back in 2011, we've deployed over $27.5 million in capital, supporting over 400 businesses to help create or sustain 2,100 jobs across Colorado. Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of House Bill 26-1003. Small businesses are the backbone of Colorado's economy, but access to capital remains one of the greatest barriers facing entrepreneurs, particularly those who are early stage, rural, or operating in communities that have been historically under-resourced. Programs like the Clymer Loan Fund and the Colorado Startup Loan Fund have been a powerful tool to help mission lenders like B reach these businesses In addition Climber and Colorado Startup Loan Fund allow community lenders to provide smaller more flexible loans, often with more patient underwriting and fewer collateral requirements. In addition, these state programs offer a lower cost, fixed interest rate pricing compared to other lending programs that we administer, which gives Colorado-based businesses a meaningful cost advantage and a greater stability as they grow. The bill continues to fulfill the program's purpose of assisting small businesses by deploying remaining funds through the existing lending network to help economic challenges entrepreneurs face today, such as rising costs, tighter credit markets and supply chain disruptions. Continuing to deploy these funds is critical for maintaining Colorado's small business ecosystem. HB 1003 provides a practical and necessary fix that will make it significantly easier for state partners and program managers to raise the required private match, assemble tranches, and deploy capital quickly to Colorado businesses. It also supports startup capital being transferred to the Carter Startup Loan Fund, which helps mission-based lenders finance entrepreneurs who are just getting their businesses off the ground. These early-stage businesses often face large capital gaps, and strengthening this program will ensure that Carter remains a place where innovation and entrepreneurship can thrive. Again, on behalf of B-Side and the entrepreneurs, I respectfully request that you support this bill and I am happy to answer any questions you may have. Sorry to go over. You're fine. Thank you

committee. I'm Jonathan Singer, Senior Director of Policy Programs with the Boulder Chamber of Commerce. And when I heard the term climber loan, I thought it was during school kid pickup. And so I've got a playground in my background and I couldn't think of a more perfect metaphor actually. The start of the state, including Boulder and Boulder County, is proceeding. And the reason is the economic environment. But programs like the Climber Program have provided that solid foundation to be able to weather these storms more aptly. And the modernization is just one more step in the right direction to ensure that our policies keep up with the times. I'm not going to belabor the points here to say, other than to say that we support this bill, the amendments that were done in the House, and look forward to the committee. Thank you very much. Please hold for questions.

Oh, Senator Snyder. Chair, I thank you everybody for being here. Usually I like to verbally spar with our esteemed treasurer, but since we have the administrator of the Climber Fund here, so Mr. Taylor, Under the 4 to 1, it seems to me we had a hard cap of $50 million estate money, hoping to raise $200 million in private investment.

Mr. Taylor.

Okay.

Thank you. And I know that these are longer-term loans, I think, than I'm thinking. But I'm just wondering, since we are targeting a community of folks that generally cannot access traditional sources of capital, do we have any numbers on default or anything like that as far as the loan repayment?

We do, actually. Thank you for asking. The two different tranches were very different because we came forward with the legislation. So I can go on tranche one, which was a five-year maximum loan length and low interest rate. And currently we do have, if you count late and already sent to collection, about a 12% loss rate in that.

Do we have further questions for this panel? Oh, Senator Mullica.

Treasury Young.

Treasury Young, would you care to comment?

Oh, Senator Mullica.

Senator Gonzalez.

Okay, and Senator Kolker.

Mr. Taylor.

Follow-up. Thank you. Just a follow-up on the revolving amount of loans. Are we getting interest back? are we getting the premiums back to maintain at this current $39 million funding level or $35 million funding level?

Thank you. Right now, Chafa, who is on the phone, the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority, they are the administrator of the fund, and they have been directed that as the loans are paid back from the downstream lenders, the first payments go to the contributors that do that. Now, the first tranche doesn't close for just about another year, so it hasn't fully been repaid back. So any interest that the lenders pay goes to actually paying the contributors and paying that capital first. We should see if the losses stay where they are. We should see money revolve sometime early next year. It's not sure exactly how much because we do have an incentive payment for them to make good loans where they get a portion of the remaining money.

Just a last question on either Mr. Boyce or Mr. Taylor is the economic benefit, the return on investment. I mean, do we have any studies, any numbers yet from these loans going out, what it's done for economic benefit?

We do have a few, and maybe Mr. Boyce will add to that. But so far, the program has helped maintain 2,286 jobs, and according to self-reporting by the borrowers, they have created 360 jobs based on the loans they've received.

No. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, I would just comment to Sam and his numbers. I mean, we track the number of loans that are going out to minority women veteran-owned businesses, as well as the number of jobs. So, I really don't have anything additional to add to that. So, thank you.

Senator Marchman. Yeah, I just wanted to take everything out of the unclaimed property tax fund.

There's no amendment. No amendments. You want a conceptual amendment?

Okay. No amendments. Do you have any other amendments?

You know, that would be a good bill to be able to donate our money to the unclaimed property tax fund. Any other comments or any other amendments from the committee? Seeing none, the amendment phase is closed. who would like to close first senator colker thank you madam chair and committee as you've heard you

Senator Marchman. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I too urge an aye vote. There are $34 million left in this fund. We're going to take five to go support rural small businesses and other small businesses in the startup loan and then $29 for this with the lower bar, so hopefully the money will actually get to where it needs to go. So I appreciate you guys listening, and I appreciate the witnesses who came, and I urge your aye vote today.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the bill's sponsors. Having been around for the inception of the CLIMR program, it was good to get an update to see how it's really working. I think it's been a very effective program. It was a creative way to finance it to begin with, with the tax credits. And I'm particularly proud that my county, El Paso County, has received and distributed $4,375,000 and has helped 37 businesses in El Paso County. It befuddles me a little bit that we're behind Puebla, but that's okay. But I think this is a good update, a good modification to the program to keep it viable, and I'll be happy to be voting yes today.

I move House Bill 261146 to the Committee on Appropriations. 1,003. I'm on the wrong bill. I moved ahead already, 1,003. House Bill 261003 I already moved to my next bill to the Committee on Appropriations.

Senator White.

Madam Chair Yes Senator Colker It appropriations Oh it appropriations yeah sadly okay Thank you We will now be moving on to SB 261146 with Senators Kolker and Kipp

Thank you. All right. We have House Bill 1146.

Senator Kipp.

Committee, do we have any questions for the sponsors? We only have two witnesses signed up, so we will go ahead and move on to the witness. If you guys want to stay there, you can. Your two witnesses are Michael Stepat and Amy Gearhart. If you guys could step up. They don't bite on Tuesdays. And we'll start with you. You've got three minutes. Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the committee.

Great. And you may begin.

Go closer.

That bites.

Thank you. And thank you, Ms. Gearhart. Does anyone have any questions? Senator Snyder.

Senator Snyder.

Great. Thank you.

Great. Does anyone else have any questions? Seeing none, thank you for your testimony today. Oh, I do want to tour, Ms. Gearheart.

Sponsors, do we have any amendments? No, we do not. Okay. Committee, do we have any amendments?

Great. Any other comments? Seeing none, Ms. Rudabush, will you please? I'm sorry, we've got to move the bill. My bad. It's going to the cow.

Proper motion.

Aye. Aye. Yes. Aye. Aye. Yes. Aye. Sponsors, Senator Kolker. I recommend the consent calendar.