Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Legislative Budgets topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legislative service agencies present FY26 requests; OLS seeks $11.69M, LCS requests IT funding from cash fund
Summary
Office of Legislative Legal Services, Office of the State Auditor, Joint Budget Committee staff and Legislative Council staff presented FY26 budget requests and staffing proposals. No final appropriations were adopted; committee members discussed options including reverting legislative cash fund balances to the general fund for one year.
Legislative service agencies presented their fiscal 2025–26 budget requests and staffing proposals to the Executive Committee on Tuesday. The committee heard presentations from the Office of Legislative Legal Services (OLS), the Office of the State Auditor (OSA), Joint Budget Committee (JBC) staff and Legislative Council staff (LCS). No final appropriations were adopted at the meeting.
Ed DiCicco of the Office of Legislative Legal Services told the committee, "Our total ask is $11,690,950 general fund," a 3.1% increase over the prior year driven largely by personnel costs and higher publication costs for supplemental materials. DiCicco outlined staffing and program changes including a request of $31,000 to cover publication costs that have risen since 2021 and $15,232 related to the Colorado Commission on Uniform State Laws.
Keri Hunter, State Auditor, summarized the OSA request and described a proposed request that remained flat in general fund terms while reflecting common‑policy salary and benefit increases and a modest inflationary increase to audit contract billings. "Overall, we're not requesting any general fund increases in our budget given the budget situation," Hunter said.
Craig Harper of Joint Budget Committee staff said his office's primary increase was a roughly $142,000 placeholder for compensation and benefits tied to common policy. Harper also proposed converting a year‑round administrative position to seasonal to reduce net FTE and recommended cuts to professional development and travel while preserving limited IT contracting funds.
Natalie Castle presented Legislative Council staff's request, which includes IT items the committee reviewed previously and a net requested change of 2.8% in total funds for the portion included in the legislative appropriations bill. Castle described a proposal to annualize prior-year legislation and to retain one fiscal note FTE that had been authorized for greenhouse-gas reporting (the law sunsets in September 2025). She also described options to finance certain IT work from the legislative department cash fund and the Black, Racial and Ethnic Equity cash fund.
During the budget presentations, the Madam Speaker proposed exploring a one‑year reversion of unspent legislative cash fund balances to the general fund to assist with the state’s broader budget shortfall. Craig Harper outlined options: (1) a statutory change to direct reversions to the general fund; (2) estimate reversions now and reduce this year’s appropriations accordingly; or (3) a one-year transfer from the legislative cash fund to the general fund of a conservative round number to provide predictable balancing for next year. Harper cautioned that precise reversion estimates are difficult and that appropriations cuts should be conservative.
Committee members asked follow-up questions on aide benefits and special-session budget assumptions, and staff said some decisions (for example, aid hours and wage rates) would be taken up separately. Directors stressed personnel, insurance premium increases and publication costs as the principal drivers of requested increases and said they would seek further guidance as the appropriations process proceeds.
