HB 1008 would expand Colorado’s jail-based behavioral health services program by directing the Behavioral Health Administration (BHA) to provide funding to jails for “complementary behavioral health services” for people in custody. The bill defines these services broadly to include options such as motivational enhancement therapy, meditation, and auricular acudetox, and it requires the services to complement a person’s primary course of treatment for a behavioral health disorder.
Under the bill, jails receiving funds must use the money to train staff to deliver the approved services and to provide those services at no cost to incarcerated people. The BHA must approve the specific complementary services a jail plans to offer before the jail may spend the money. The bill also requires the General Assembly to appropriate up to an additional $50,000 each fiscal year beginning in FY 2025-26 for this purpose, subject to available appropriations.
Impact
The bill would amend Colorado Revised Statutes section 27-60-106 to add a new funding purpose within the jail-based behavioral health services program and to create a new subsection governing complementary behavioral health services. It would not create a new standalone program, but would expand the existing program’s scope, impose new duties on the BHA to fund and approve services, and require jails to train staff and provide the services without charging incarcerated individuals. The measure would also create an ongoing annual appropriation obligation of up to $50,000, affecting state budgeting and jail program administration.
Sentiment
The available vote history suggests the bill received mixed but favorable committee support: House Judiciary voted 6-5 to refer the bill to Appropriations, indicating a narrow majority in support but meaningful opposition. No transcript excerpts were provided, so the broader discussion record is limited, but the committee vote implies the bill was viewed as a policy proposal with some support for expanding behavioral health options in jails and some concern about the approach, cost, or program design.
Contention
The main points of contention likely center on whether the state should fund complementary or alternative behavioral health services in jails, which specific services should qualify, and whether those services are evidence-based and appropriate for correctional settings. The bill’s inclusion of examples such as meditation and auricular acudetox may draw scrutiny from those who question efficacy or prioritize more traditional treatment models. There may also be debate over the fiscal impact, the requirement that the BHA approve services before funds are spent, and whether jails should be responsible for delivering these services at no cost to incarcerated people.