Community Corrections Budget Request & Data Information
Summary
HB1423 requires the Colorado Department of Public Safety to include a dedicated community corrections budget request in its annual budget submission to the Joint Budget Committee. The bill defines key terms used in community corrections budgeting, including “distribution of offender populations,” “program availability,” and “projected need,” and ties those definitions to offender population projections, eligibility for referral, expected acceptances, and anticipated changes in program capacity.
The bill also specifies the information that must accompany the budget request. That includes projected need for the next fiscal year, the factors driving that need, how the requested appropriation relates to projected need, planned changes in per diem reimbursement rates, and a detailed projected allocation by judicial district and placement type. The required allocation breakdown covers standard residential beds, nonresidential slots, specialized beds, fixed payments, board funding, and other appropriations, including amounts supported by the General Fund and other sources such as the Correctional Treatment Cash Fund. Beginning in January 2027, the department must also present information at its annual SMART Act hearing about any gaps between offender distribution, program availability, and projected need.
Impact
The bill amends Colorado Revised Statutes governing community corrections to create a more formal budgeting and reporting framework for the Division of Criminal Justice within the Department of Public Safety. It does not change eligibility rules for community corrections placements, but it does require the department to submit a more detailed annual budget request and ongoing performance information, which may affect how appropriations are justified, reviewed, and allocated across judicial districts and program types. The measure increases legislative oversight of community corrections funding and may improve transparency around bed capacity, reimbursement rates, and unmet need.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have been broadly supported and noncontroversial. It passed the House Appropriations Committee unanimously, cleared House third reading with no dissent, and then passed Senate Appropriations and Senate third reading unanimously as well. The recommendation for placement on the consent calendar in the Senate further suggests the measure was viewed as routine or administrative rather than politically divisive.
Contention
No major opposition is reflected in the available record. The main policy issue embedded in the bill is how to measure and report “projected need” versus actual program availability and offender distribution, and how those figures should inform funding levels and per diem reimbursement rates. Any potential concern would likely come from budget administrators or community corrections providers about the added reporting burden or how the new data requirements could influence future appropriations, but no explicit objections are shown in the transcripts or votes.