House committee advances bill to make social visitation a statutory right for people in Colorado prisons

Rep. Leslie English introduced House Bill 1013 on behalf of herself and Assistant Majority Leader AML Bacon, urging the House Judiciary Committee to adopt a law that would make in-person visits, phone calls and video calls for people in state prisons a right rather than a privilege.

“When people in prison maintain regular contact with their families, everyone benefits,” Rep. English said at the hearing. “These ties decrease misconduct in prison, help individuals cope with stress, and foster optimism about leaving prison.”

The bill would require the Colorado Department of Corrections (CDOC) to treat social visitation as a right that may be limited only for routine facility operations or safety reasons. It also sets out that reasonable notice of life events — for example, births or funerals — should trigger “all efforts” by CDOC to enable participation, and it preserves existing administrative grievance processes for challenges to denials.

Why it matters

Supporters said the bill is intended to reduce recidivism and protect family bonds that advocates say are essential to rehabilitation. Several witnesses cited recent academic studies showing reductions in rearrest and reconviction correlated with prison visitation. “Visitation isn’t just about seeing someone face to face. It’s about being reminded of who you are beyond the confines of incarceration,” testified Darius Taylor, who described his own experience in prison and the role family visits played in his rehabilitation.

Hundreds of family members and community advocates testified in favor of the bill during a multi-hour hearing. Mothers, spouses and other relatives recounted long drives, search procedures, abrupt cancellations and the emotional toll denied visits can have on children and incarcerated people. “The difference between surviving incarceration and being broken by it is a hug or touch,” said Stephanie McGuffey, who testified about her son’s long incarceration and the effects of denied visits on his mental health.

Department of Corrections concerns

Adrienne Sanchez, policy and legislative director for CDOC, testified in an amend position. Sanchez said CDOC is not opposed to expanding visitation but warned that making visitation a statutorily protected right could create a path to new litigation. She explained that although the bill does not create a private cause of action, an exhausted administrative grievance under the Prison Litigation Reform Act can lead to district-court litigation. Sanchez told the committee the attorney general’s office and state risk management expect the potential for increased civil claims and that the Department of Law has suggested an additional attorney general FTE could be required to handle the caseload.

Fiscal and legal tradeoffs

Witnesses and fiscal staff gave competing cost signals. A departmental risk-management estimate described a scenario that could lead to roughly 24 additional claims and, on that basis, projected liability costs in the order of about $1 million. The committee fiscal analyst, in contrast, modeled a lower near-term cost and proposed a more modest state budget impact (the analyst’s draft fiscal note showed a first-year general-fund request in the low five-figure range for AG support and a smaller ongoing liability assumption). Supporters argued the long-term savings from reduced recidivism and improved reentry outcomes would offset litigation risk and operating costs.

Committee discussion and outcome

Lawmakers pressed sponsors and CDOC on implementation specifics, grievance timelines and whether current rules already limit visitation as needed to preserve safety. Several committee members praised the breadth of public testimony. CDOC said it would continue negotiating details with sponsors. Committee members voted to advance the bill to the Appropriations Committee with a favorable recommendation.

Action

The committee moved HB 1013 forward on a recorded vote. The bill was sent to the Appropriations Committee with a favorable recommendation.

What’s next

The Appropriations Committee will consider the fiscal implications and any appropriation requests before the bill can move to the House floor. Sponsors said they will continue working with CDOC and the attorney general’s office to narrow operational issues and grievance timelines.

Ending note

Supporters framed the bill as a policy that spans public safety, mental health and family stability; opponents raised litigation risk and implementation costs. The committee advanced the measure, and lawmakers will now weigh fiscal tradeoffs at Appropriations.