Concerning modifications to the standards of the wildfire resiliency code board.
Summary
House Bill 26-1334 would revise the statutory duties and timelines of Colorado’s Wildfire Resiliency Code Board. The bill requires the board to review the wildfire resiliency codes and standards no later than July 1, 2026, and then at least every three years thereafter, or more often if the board chooses. It also expands the board’s petition process so that not only local governing bodies, but also any person impacted by the codes and standards, may seek a modification to the code.
The bill further extends the deadline for local governments in the wildland-urban interface to adopt a code meeting or exceeding the state minimum standards from April 1, 2026 to April 1, 2027. In addition, it requires the Department of Public Safety to provide annual reporting beginning in January 2027 as part of its SMART Act hearing presentation, covering implementation progress, local government challenges, and cost impacts to property owners, including insurance premium increases.
Impact
The bill would amend Colorado statutes governing the Wildfire Resiliency Code Board, specifically provisions in sections 24-33.5-1236 and 24-33.5-1237, by changing review timing, broadening the modification petition process, and delaying the local adoption deadline by one year. It would also add a new annual reporting requirement for the Department of Public Safety tied to legislative oversight. The practical effect is to give local governments more time to adopt wildfire-resiliency codes, while creating additional transparency and accountability around implementation and economic impacts on property owners, builders, and insurers.
Sentiment
The bill appears to be framed as a refinement of an existing wildfire mitigation policy rather than a wholesale change in direction. Its legislative declaration emphasizes transparency, public engagement, and support for local governments, suggesting a generally constructive and oversight-oriented posture. However, the bill was ultimately postponed indefinitely in the House Transportation, Housing & Local Government Committee, indicating that it did not advance and that there may have been unresolved concerns about timing, implementation, or policy design.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely the one-year extension of the local code adoption deadline and the expanded reporting on costs, including insurance premium increases. Supporters appear to favor the delay as a way to give local governments and the code board more time to complete technically sound, locally defensible adoption processes and to address unintended consequences. Potential critics may view the extension as slowing wildfire-risk mitigation efforts, while others may be concerned about the added administrative burden or the implications of broader appeals by any impacted person. The committee action suggests that these implementation and policy-balancing issues were significant enough to prevent the bill from moving forward.