Statewide Government Language Access Assessment
HB1153 directs Colorado to conduct a statewide language access assessment focused on the principal departments of state government. The bill finds that hundreds of thousands of Coloradans speak a language other than English and that language barriers can limit access to state services. It creates an interim language access working group, led through the Office of New Americans and the Department of Personnel, to help draft a statewide language access policy for gubernatorial review and eventual publication as a universal policy standard.
The assessment must evaluate how ready principal departments are to meet those standards and identify needs such as guidance, training, technical assistance, existing language-access plans and materials, contracts and funding, and which agencies have frequent contact with linguistically diverse residents. The bill also allows the state to hire one or more third-party entities, including entities outside Colorado, to conduct all or part of the assessment if they have relevant expertise. By December 31, 2026, the work group is to dissolve and transition into a smaller ongoing community of practice focused on implementation and best practices.
The bill adds a new section to Colorado law requiring a statewide language access assessment and report, and it ties the effort to the Department of Personnel, the Office of New Americans, and principal departments of state government. It also requires a public report with recommendations on improving service quality, reducing duplication and cost, addressing service gaps, evaluating technology such as artificial intelligence, and identifying infrastructure needed for sustained implementation. The bill requires public posting of the report, availability in multiple languages, and a summary in the department’s 2027 SMART Act hearing, while appropriating $100,000 from the general fund to the Department of Personnel for the Colorado Equity Office to implement the act.
The bill appears to have broad overall support, passing committee and floor votes in both chambers, including unanimous or near-unanimous votes at several stages and final passage in the House and Senate. The vote history suggests the measure was generally viewed as a practical administrative step to improve access to government services for multilingual residents. The presence of amendments in both chambers also indicates legislators were refining the bill rather than opposing its core purpose.
The main points of contention appear to have been procedural and fiscal rather than about the goal of language access itself. The House State, Civic, Military, & Veterans Affairs Committee and the House Appropriations Committee both saw split votes on referral, and the House and Senate floor votes were not unanimous, suggesting some lawmakers had reservations about cost, implementation burden, or the scope of the assessment. The bill’s inclusion of third-party contractors, possible out-of-state entities, and the use of artificial intelligence as a potential tool may also have raised questions about oversight, effectiveness, and administrative complexity.