Denver committee hears how state will deliver Proposition 130 funds, and what’s still unclear

At a Denver City Council health and safety committee meeting on Oct. 1, legislative staff and state officials briefed councilmembers on the implementation plan for Colorado’s Proposition 130, the 2024 initiative that requires a $350 million state appropriation to a Peace Officer Training and Support Fund. Dominic Moreno, a city legislative staff member, told the committee the legislature enacted Senate Bill 25 3 10 to define allowable uses and distribution rules and has created a $500 million warrant to the Public Employee Retirement Association (PERA) to invest and generate earnings that will be used for annual grants to local agencies.

The briefing outlined several key mechanics and deadlines. Under the enacted plan, PERA will hold a $500 million corpus drawn from the state general fund reserve; earnings on that corpus—rather than the principal—will fund grants. The statute sets a minimum statewide annual distribution floor of $15 million. Based on PERA’s historical returns, Moreno and staff estimate roughly $30 million statewide could be available annually in many years, though the amount will vary with investment performance.

Emily Locke, legislation and policy with the Colorado Department of Public Safety, told the committee the state is not required to accept local certifications until Dec. 15, 2026, and said guidance from the department is expected in early 2026. “I can say that under the terms of the implementation statute, we are not required to provide our first certification of eligible employees until December 2026,” Locke said. She added the department is watching implementation details closely and that the forthcoming guidance should clarify permissible expenses and administrative processes.

Why it matters: the law’s structure means the state is treating the initiative’s obligation as a one-time funded corpus whose earnings will pay grants over time. Committee members repeatedly raised concerns about a possible fiscal cliff for municipalities if they come to rely on annual grant receipts that are not permanent. Moreno said, even under optimistic return assumptions, it would take roughly a decade to reach the initiative’s $350 million fulfillment target; if earnings are low and only the minimum $15 million is available annually, the statute’s total transfer could not be completed until as late as 2050.

What the statute allows and requires: the legislation limits eligible uses to items such as pay increases for peace officers (defined in the law to include police, sheriffs and some court marshals), reimbursement to attend a training academy, hiring and retention bonuses, and initial and continuing education. Local governments that apply must submit a certification to the Colorado Department of Public Safety that includes a council ordinance or resolution confirming the funds will not supplant existing local funding. The department’s distribution formula combines a per-jurisdiction base amount (intended as a floor) and a per-officer adjustment tied to the number of budgeted peace officer positions; the statute directs the department to use the number of peace officers a jurisdiction has budgeted for the upcoming year in calculating awards.

Councilmembers pressed staff and the state on several operational questions. Councilmember Paul Cashman asked for a Denver-specific estimate and, after an initial round of discussion, suggested Denver’s share would likely be in the mid-single-digit millions annually rather than a large one-time windfall. Emily Locke said the city can provide the department with the number of eligible, budgeted peace officers when guidance is issued and promised to follow up with a Denver-specific figure.

Supplanting, certification and governance: committee members sought clarity on how the state will determine whether a jurisdiction has “supplanted” local funds with the new state grants. Moreno said the statute includes language creating a rebuttable presumption and that local governments can appeal state determinations. He and Locke said the Department of Public Safety will establish rules and operational guidance—potentially after rulemaking—and that local jurisdictions must both adopt a local ordinance or resolution declaring no supplanting and later take a council action to accept funds.

Death benefit and other carve-outs: the statute preserves a separate line for a $1,000,000 death benefit for eligible first responders. Moreno said that payment is not part of the $500 million PERA warrant; instead, the legislature planned separate transfers of $5 million in 2026 and another $5 million the following year to fund that benefit.

Unresolved questions and next steps: councilmembers raised concerns about how awards will interact with collective bargaining agreements, whether local auditing and administrative costs can be charged to awards, whether Denver Health or other contracted EMT providers would be eligible for parts of the statute, and whether awards will reimburse retroactive costs. Locke said those details are among the topics the department hopes to clarify in early 2026 guidance and rulemaking. Several councilmembers suggested the city’s legislative committee begin discussing potential local approaches and advocacy now rather than waiting for the legislative session.

The committee did not take formal action on the briefing. City staff and the committee agreed to return to the topic once state guidance and rulemaking are public so Denver can decide how—if at all—to participate in the grant program and whether to seek local budget measures to sustain any increases funded initially by the state.