HB1138 creates a new statewide Retail Theft Prevention Advisory Board and a Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program within the Division of Criminal Justice in the Department of Public Safety. The bill is aimed at organized, felony-level retail theft and gift card fraud, which the legislature describes as threats to public safety, retailers, supply chains, and tax revenues. It defines key terms, including “felony-level retail theft,” and sets up a board made up of state officials, local law enforcement, prosecutors, public defense, local government, and nonvoting retail representatives to guide the program.
The advisory board is responsible for setting grant deadlines and criteria, reviewing applications, collecting and analyzing data, and developing policy recommendations with state, local, and federal partners. Grant funds may be used for investigations and prosecutions, technology and data-sharing tools, training and technical assistance, and prevention and deterrence initiatives. The bill also allows the Attorney General to accept gifts, grants, and donations to support the program and permits an intergovernmental agreement between the division and the Attorney General’s office to coordinate efforts with the Colorado Retail Theft Task Force.
The bill requires annual reporting beginning in January 2028 through the division’s SMART Act hearing, including grant recipients, grant amounts, performance metrics, and criminal case information such as the number of organized retail theft cases and their outcomes. The retail theft section is repealed November 1, 2029, and the bill also extends the repeal date of the existing Crime Prevention Through Safer Streets grant program to November 1, 2029. It appropriates and repurposes funds so the new retail theft grant program can be supported from money already set aside for the safer streets program, with some unexpended funds reverting to the general fund in 2027.
The overall sentiment in the recorded votes appears generally supportive, with the bill advancing through both chambers by comfortable margins, though not unanimously. The House Judiciary and House Appropriations committees both approved it, and the bill passed third reading in the House 46-14 and in the Senate 31-3. That pattern suggests broad agreement that organized retail theft warrants a coordinated state response, while still reflecting some reservations about the approach, funding, or structure.
The main points of contention likely center on whether a new grant-and-board structure is the best way to address retail theft, how the money is being allocated from existing public safety grant funding, and the inclusion of multiple stakeholders with differing perspectives, including law enforcement, prosecutors, public defenders, and retailers. The bill’s focus on organized felony-level theft and gift card fraud, rather than broader retail crime, also suggests a policy choice that may have drawn debate over scope and priorities.
The bill adds a new section to Colorado law creating the Retail Theft Prevention Advisory Board and Retail Theft Prevention Grant Program in the Division of Criminal Justice, and it amends the existing Crime Prevention Through Safer Streets grant statute to fund and align with the new program. It authorizes grants to eligible law enforcement, prosecutorial, tribal, and task force entities for investigation, prosecution, technology, training, and prevention efforts related to organized felony-level retail theft and gift card fraud, while also establishing reporting requirements and a sunset date for the new program.
The bill appears to have had generally favorable support in the legislature, moving through committee and floor votes with clear majorities in both chambers. The vote margins indicate bipartisan acceptance of the need to address organized retail theft, though the presence of some no votes suggests not all members agreed on the policy design, funding mechanism, or scope.
Likely areas of disagreement include the use of existing grant money to finance the new program, the creation of another advisory board and grant structure, and whether the bill sufficiently targets organized felony-level theft rather than broader retail crime. The inclusion of both enforcement-oriented members and nonvoting retail representatives suggests an effort to balance perspectives, but also reflects the competing interests involved: law enforcement and prosecutors seeking stronger tools, retailers seeking protection, and others potentially concerned about oversight, duplication, or resource allocation.