Colorado · Fiscal notes
Bills and Laws
Updated Oct 12
What a fiscal note is
Colorado prices its own bills before it votes on them. A fiscal note is what the legislature's own nonpartisan staff estimated a bill would cost the state, written again each time the bill changes. This page has read the note on 7,078 of the 7,310 bills listed, at the first version of the estimate and at the last; the rest have no note in this record yet.
Every figure here is a forecast at a version, not a cost.
Find a bill
Type a bill number, or a word from the title. The boxes filter; they never answer — you pick the bill.
Press / from anywhere on this page to jump to the box. When your typing leaves exactly one bill, Enter opens it.
7,310 of 7,310 bills · showing the first 150 — narrow the list, or add more below
"Moved" is the distance between what the state first said a bill would cost and what it last said. A negative figure is a saving, not a mistake. A note books reduced spending as a negative expenditure, and the sign here is the publisher's own. "At introduction" is the earliest note in this cache and "Latest" the last one. The last one is often not a final note. A final note is not guaranteed, even for a bill that became law.
A fiscal note is a forecast at a version. It is not a cost. Every figure above carries the date it was written and the version it describes. What a bill actually cost is a different question, and Colorado does not publish the answer.
This is the one table on this site that needs JavaScript. Every other table here works without it. This one cannot: sending all 7,310 rows at once would make the page too large to load, so the search box, the filters, the sorting and all 16 sessions are put together in your browser.
The finding
Most price tags never move. The ones that do, mostly fall.
Comparing each bill's first estimate with its last needs both to carry a figure. 3,675 bills do. Here is what happened to them.
Of the 1,081 bills whose estimate moved at all, down beats up by about 2.1 to 1. The most common thing that happens to a Colorado bill's price tag is nothing. The second most common is that it is taken out of the bill.
2,213 bills had no state fiscal impact
Their first note prints no impact table, because the state's own analysts found the bill costs the state nothing, and the note says so. That is a finding, not a gap. It is the largest single group here, and it is counted on its own so no other total can absorb it.
512 bills were priced in words
Older notes often print a sentence where a figure would go — "Workload increase and potential cost increases." That is a real published finding. It is carried as the sentence the state wrote, labeled PENDING (qualitative), and it is never turned into a zero.
18 bills were priced only if something happens
Their only table is headed Conditional State Fiscal Impacts — figures stated for a condition that may not hold. A conditional is a different claim from a forecast. So these are kept apart from the bills with a figure and from the bills with none.
The record
What is here
Every bill gets a fiscal note. There is no dollar threshold, so a bill the state expects to cost nothing gets a note that says so.
232 of the 7,310 bills have no note in this cache at all. They are listed with that reason rather than dropped. A bill missing from a list of every bill is the one thing a reader cannot see.
The Outcome column starts in 2025
This page reads what happened to a bill out of the fiscal note. Only a note written after the bill was disposed of prints it. Where a bill in 2025 or 2026 has no such note, the page takes the ending from the bill history on the legislature's own page for that bill: the Governor's signature or veto, a committee voting to “postpone indefinitely”, or a floor vote that lost it. Nothing else. So 1,310 of the 7,310 bills here carry an outcome. Every one of them sits in a 2025 or 2026 session. The other 6,000 are marked Not stated. That is this page not having read it, not the state not having published it. The legislature prints every bill's disposition on the bill's own page, and every bill here links to that page. So the outcome filter narrows you to 2025 and 2026 as well.
What this page will not tell you
Three questions, and one of them has no answer anywhere
What a bill actually cost
No Colorado source reports spending bill by bill. A fiscal note estimates what a bill will cost. The Long Bill — the state's yearly spending act — gives money to departments. Neither says what was spent because of one bill. So the question a reader most wants answered cannot be answered, and no number is offered in its place.
What all these bills add up to
Refused, and not pending better data. A dollar total of these estimates is dominated by single bills in every sample measured. On one sample it moved +83.2% across 200 bills and +3.8% with the one largest swing removed. A total like that is a statement about one bill wearing the clothes of a statement about the legislature.
The per-bill direction is stable. That is what is published instead.
Bills before 2016
PENDING Notes exist for every Colorado bill since 1989, on an older state system that still answers. It is recorded here so the gap is a known absence rather than a silent one. It has not been read yet.
There is no scorecard here and no party column. Adding up the estimated cost of the bills a member sponsored would invent a measure and dress it as a fact. A party column would make everything above it read as a partisan scorecard. This site is neutral infrastructure.
How this is read
Method
Which note comes first
Each bill's notes are put in order by the date each note prints about itself. Where two notes carry the same date, the FINAL banner an older note prints at the top of page one breaks the tie. Where neither settles it — 26 bills — both notes are shown and no direction is claimed. A direction there would be a coin toss wearing a percentage.
This matters more than it sounds. The cached file names do not run in date order: the two are the other way round for every session before 2026. Read them by file name rather than by printed date and "down beats up 2.1 to 1" becomes the opposite claim. Every other check on the page still passes.
Which figure is compared
The comparison is state expenditures in the budget year — the fiscal year the note itself labels as the budget year. Notes print two, three or four years. The column count also changes between versions of the same note. So the year is bound to the ruler the note prints, never to a column position.
What each note is checked against
Where a note prints a fund breakdown, the fund lines must add up to the total the note prints. That total must also equal the figure in the summary table. Both checks run on every read. A note that fails is reported, never quietly dropped.
What a bill is about is the legislature's own summary
Each bill record opens with the Bill Summary written by Colorado Legislative Council Staff, printed word for word from the bill's own page on leg.colorado.gov with the date it was read. This site does not write, shorten or rephrase it. The summary says which version of the bill it describes, and that note is printed beside it. Where the legislature publishes no summary, the record says NOT PUBLISHED and the space stays blank.
Sponsors are shown as the legislature's own identifier
The record gives each sponsor as a web address fragment, such as chris-degruy-kennedy.
Turning that into a name means guessing where the capital letters go, and this site does not
guess about a person's name. Each one links to the legislature's own page, which prints it
properly.
Source
Fiscal notes and vote records are published by the Colorado General Assembly at leg.colorado.gov (opens in a new tab). Notes are required by Joint Rule 22, with House Rule 32A and Senate Rule 25(e). The notes on this page were taken from each bill's own page on the legislature's site on 17 August 2026; the notes of the 139 bills that changed since then were taken again on 2026-09-23; the notes of 4 more bills were taken on 2026-09-24.
Disability Rights Protections in Public Schools
Concerning disability rights protections in public schools.
Cost estimates
Every figure here is an estimate by Legislative Council Staff on the date shown, about the version of the bill in front of them that day. It is not a cost.
The appropriation
The note states no appropriation is required.
An appropriation is money the legislature sets aside. It is not money spent.
The appropriation field, read from the note: No appropriation is required. See State Appropriations Section.
Bill summary
The act prohibits a school district, a charter school authorized by a school district, a charter school authorized by the state charter school institute, the state charter school institute, or a board of cooperative services that operates one or more public schools (LEP) from discriminating against an individual who has a disability and who is entitled to a free public education (qualified student with a disability) based on the student's disability.
The act requires an LEP to allow a qualified student with a disability to participate in and enjoy the benefits of the provider's programs, services, or activities in the same manner as a student without a disability. When providing any aid, benefit, or service, an LEP shall not, based on disability:
- Deny a qualified student with a disability an opportunity to participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service in a manner that is equal to that afforded to other students;
- Provide a qualified student with a disability with an aid, benefit, or service that is not as effective as that provided to other students;
- Provide different or separate aids, benefits, or services to a qualified student with a disability unless such action is necessary to provide a qualified student with a disability with aids, benefits, or services that are as effective as those provided to other students;
- Aid or perpetuate discrimination against a qualified student with a disability by providing significant assistance to an agency, an organization, or a person that discriminates on the basis of disability in providing any aid, benefit, or service to beneficiaries of the LEP's educational program or activity; or
- Otherwise limit a qualified student with a disability in the enjoyment of any right, privilege, advantage, or opportunity enjoyed by students without disabilities who receive an educational aid, benefit, or service.
The act prohibits an LEP from using criteria or methods of administration that:
- Have the effect of subjecting a qualified student with a disability to discrimination on the basis of their disability;
- Have the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the LEP's program or activity with respect to a qualified student with a disability; or
- Perpetuate the discrimination of another LEP if both LEPs are subject to common administrative control or are agencies of the state.
In determining the site or location of a facility, an LEP may not make selections that:
- Exclude a qualified student with a disability from a facility or deny a qualified student with a disability the benefits of a facility, or that otherwise subject a qualified student with a disability to discrimination; or
- Have the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing the accomplishment of the objectives of the program or activity with respect to a qualified student with a disability.
The act requires an LEP to:
- Adopt a disability rights grievance process that incorporates appropriate due process standards and that is satisfied by following the grievance procedures in section 504 of the federal 'Rehabilitation Act of 1973' and to designate at least one responsible employee to oversee compliance with the provisions of the act relating to discrimination and to serve as a point of contact for students and families;
- Make a reasonable modification to a policy, practice, or procedure when the modification is necessary to avoid discriminating against a qualified student with a disability on the basis of disability;
- Provide a reasonable accommodation to a parent with a disability who is seeking appropriate access to programs and activities for parents in relation to that parent's child;
- Ensure that a communication to a qualified student with a disability is as effective as a communication to a student without a disability and to furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford a qualified student with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity of the LEP;
- Ensure that a qualified student with a disability is not denied access to the LEP's services, programs, or activities because of facilities inaccessible to a qualified student with a disability;
- Provide a free and appropriate public education to each qualified student with a disability who is in the LEP's jurisdiction, regardless of the nature or severity of the student's disability, and if necessary, ensure adequate transportation to and from any placement premises;
- Provide for the free and appropriate public education of each qualified student with a disability with students without disabilities to the maximum extent appropriate to the needs of the qualified student with a disability;
- Place a qualified student with a disability in the regular educational environment operated by the LEP unless it is demonstrated that the education of the student in that environment with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily;
- Provide nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities in such a manner as is necessary to afford a qualified student with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in the services and activities;
- At least annually, identify and locate every qualified student with a disability residing in the LEP's jurisdiction who is not receiving a free and appropriate public education and take appropriate steps, with the permission of the qualified student with a disability and their parent, to evaluate the student;
- Ensure that a qualified student with a disability is free from harassment that is sufficiently serious to create a hostile environment or interfere with or limit the student's ability to participate in or benefit from the LEP's services, activities, or opportunities; and
- Conduct evaluations and reevaluations of a student in the student's primary language, communicate with a parent with limited English proficiency in a manner that provides meaningful access to information, and provide interpretation and translation services for communication with a parent with limited English proficiency.
Subject to sufficient funding or resources, certain provisions of the act take effect, which:
- Allow the department of education (department) to provide training and technical assistance to LEPs about the requirements of the act;
- Establish a complaint process and specifies that the department may investigate and resolve complaints of alleged violations of the provisions of the act pursuant to the complaint process;
- Specify the circumstances under which an individual may file a complaint with the department;
- Allow the department to order specified remedies as determined necessary by the department to remedy violations occurring pursuant to the act and to prospectively ensure compliance, if the department finds a violation; and
- Allow the state board of education (board) to withhold state funds from an LEP if the board determines that the LEP has intentionally violated the provisions of the act and demonstrated an unwillingness to enter into a corrective action plan to address the violation. No later than December 31, 2026, the board shall adopt rules that establish procedures for the withholding of funds. The board must provide due process to an LEP before state funds are withheld.
The act prohibits an LEP from coercing, intimidating, threatening, or discriminating against any individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by the act, the federal 'Individuals with Disabilities Education Act', the 'Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990', the 'Exceptional Children's Educational Act', or the 'Protection of Students from Restraint and Seclusion Act' (anti-discrimination laws) because an individual:
- Makes, has made, or because an LEP believes an individual has made or will make, a complaint pursuant to an anti-discrimination law; or
- Testifies, assists, or participates in any manner in an investigation or proceeding regarding an allegation or complaint pursuant to an anti-discrimination law.
FACT Bill summary by Colorado Legislative Council Staff, read 2026-09-23. Printed as published, word for word. Source: leg.colorado.gov (opens in a new tab)
What this bill appropriates
Two totals, two bases. An appropriation is money the legislature authorized to be spent, not money spent. For FY 2026-27, the Long Bill alone appropriates $49,560,763,693 FACT. The Appropriations Report from the Joint Budget Committee staff adds the other bills of the session: $49,694,444,712 FACT.
The General Fund is $17,351,445,407 FACT in the Long Bill alone and $17,461,279,123 FACT in the report. Both are correct, and we never add them. See both totals, with their sources.
Sources: HB26-1410 as enacted (opens in a new tab), chapter 436 of the Session Laws, read 8 October 2026. The FY 2026-27 Appropriations Report (opens in a new tab), read 11 October 2026.