Senate committee advances bills to shift wolf program funds, proposal on governor’s budget authority
WolfBill2-RFP-082525
Colorado legislators began to advance proposals dealing with an $800 million budget shortfall on Thursday, just hours after the legislature officially re-convened to deal with the revenue shortfall.
They started with a hearing on Senate Bill 1, which adds a requirement to the existing state law that outlines the governor’s authority to make spending reductions in case of a significant drop in revenue.
Under SB 1, Gov. Jared Polis would be required to develop a plan and present it to the Joint Budget Committee before it goes into effect.
Lawmakers and the Polis administration have indicated that budget cuts should be put into place by Sept. 1 in order to spread out any reductions over 10 months, instead of waiting until next February, when budget adjustments to the current spending plan are typically made.
Mark Ferrandino, director of the governor’s Office of State Planning and Budgeting, testified in favor of the measure and told lawmakers that using the state’s general fund reserve, about $2.2 billion, to cover the shortfall would put Colorado in a precarious position should even a moderate recession take place in the coming year. The state agency has predicted a 50% chance of a moderate recession in the following year.
The general fund reserve is required by law to stand at 15% of general fund expenditures, as dictated by the current year’s state budget.
No one else testified in favor of or against SB 1, which Joint Budget Committee member Rep. Judy Amabile, D-Boulder, and Senate President James Coleman of Denver, authored. The committee made no amendments and approved the measure on a party-line 3-2 vote.
Its next stop is the full Senate for debate.
Both sides have good ideas, and both sides should be utilized, but Republicans were left out of the discussion, according to Sen. Rod Pelton, R-Cheyenne Wells.
WOLF FUNDING
The next bill, which deals with Colorado’s wolf reintroduction program, saw more fireworks, with more than 50 witnesses signing up to testify.
Senate Bill 5, sponsored by Sens. Dylan Roberts, D-Frisco and Marc Catlin, R-Montrose, would shift $264,000 from the wolf program to the Health Insurance Affordability Enterprise to help cover the subsidies that would be lost as a result of the federal budget.
The federal budget ends enhanced premium tax credits used to purchase health insurance on the state’s exchange.
The topic of health insurance premiums is a sore one on the Western Slope, where premiums are expected to rise by 38% in 2026.
The cut in funding to the wolf program is about 10% of its annual appropriation. Under Roberts’ proposal, Colorado Parks and Wildlife would not be able to bring in more wolves. The balance of the agency’s funding would be used for conflict minimization efforts and to pay for depredation claims.
Polis has indicated he is not in favor of the bill, and a veto threat hangs over the measure.
Roberts discussed an amendment to ban the wildlife agency from using general fund dollars to bring in more wolves, which he said reflects a compromise with the Polis administration. That, however, would not prohibit the agency from raising money from gifts, grants, or donations to bring in more of the apex predators.
Sen. Matt Ball, D-Denver, who offered the amendment, said it is his understanding that CPW has access to non-taxpayer dollars to bring in more wolves.
Roberts described his bill as fiscally responsible.
The cost of the program has increased — Roberts noted the General Assembly Blue Book estimated an annual expense of $800,000. In 2024-25, the price tag was $3.5 million.
CPW has reported that the cost of the program over five years is more than $8 million.
“We want to see the wolf program succeed,” Catlin told the committee.
This bill would allow the program to take a breath at a time when CPW’s reputation is in tatters, he said.
Catlin said there’s also precedent for a pause. In the early 2000s, the state’s lynx program, which he said is now successful, was briefly put on pause after “hard releases” of lynx resulted in the deaths of four due to starvation.
The Gunnison County Stockgrowers, represented by Greg Peterson, said it is critical to put a pause in place for current releases in the north and future releases in the south. There are no management efforts in place in the southern release area, with the release of wolves expected just a few months from now, Peterson said.
Tim Ritschard, a fifth-generation rancher who heads the Middle Park Stockgrowers Association in Grand County, said his producers know well the impact of wolves. Three producers in Grand County submitted claims for lost and dead livestock for 2024 for more than $575,000 — $225,000 more than the state has budgeted.
He said he believes claims in 2025 will exceed those in 2024.
Doug Bruchez of Grand County, another fifth-generation rancher, said improvements have been made, but much more must be done to make the program successful.
There are a lot more wolves in this state than is being reported, he said, not just the wolves brought to Colorado. He said he is disappointed in the amendment, as the bill as drafted could have saved millions of dollars for the state, referring to the depredation costs.
The state wildlife agency has indicated it will bring in 15 wolves for the southern release area, which is Gunnison County and south. That’s adding fuel to a fire, said former state Rep. Kathleen Curry, who also represents the Gunnison County Stockgrowers.
SIERRA CLUB WEIGHS IN
Delia Malone, wildlife chair for the Sierra Club and whose partner is a CPW commissioner appointee, said she opposed the bill as drafted but approved of the amendment.
“Non-lethal co-existence methods” need to happen proactively, not after the fact, she said.
Rhonda Dern, one of two people accused of illegal lobbying in favor of wolves in 2024, testified against the bill. The complaint against her was dismissed, but her companion was fined.
Dern told the committee that Conway Farrell, a Grand County rancher whose livestock was most heavily hit by wolves in 2024, got almost $1 million for wolf compensation claims. Farrell, in fact, has so far received just over $387,000, with another $112,000 in claims still being negotiated.
Several witnesses claimed ranchers are to blame for wolf attacks because they kept open carcass pits on their land. The state wildlife agency confirmed the Farrell ranch has an open pit and cited that in denying a lethal removal permit last year
The amendment got support from CPW Director Jeff Davis, indicating support from the Polis administration.
Davis acknowledged that the wolf management plan calls for the importation of up to 50 wolves over a three to five-year period, and that the requirement wasn’t in the ballot measure approved by voters. He said it’s important to put out one more round of 15 wolves.
As to the claim that the release in the southern area isn’t yet ready, he said the state is fully committed to working with producers and other stakeholders.
Rebecca Burkhalter, a member of ColoradoWild, said the bill would halt the wolf reintroduction without the amendments.
“A pause sounds reasonable, but I don’t believe it because of the hatred and ignorance around wolves,” she said, claiming a large number of wolves had been poached for which no one has been prosecuted.
According to CPW, nine wolves have died, and two of those wolves had gunshot wounds, although one died as a result of a fight with another wolf. The other was the male of the Copper Creek pack, which was in poor health when it was captured last year and died shortly after.
The Rocky Mountain Wolf Project has offered a $50,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of those who engage in “illegal wolf poaching.”
Michael Cerveny, a rancher in Pitkin County who lost livestock to the Copper Creek pack in May, asked: If CPW cannot manage the Copper Creek pack that has killed livestock in both Grand and Pitkin counties, how will it manage the rest?
There are only nine range riders in the whole state, who spend their time counting bodies, not hazing wolves, he told the committee.
Many wolf advocates testified against the bill but said they would support the amendment banning taxpayer dollars to pay for bringing in more wolves to Colorado, including Defenders of Wildlife.
Sen. Tom Sullivan, D-Centennial, who voted no to both the amendment and the bill, said he is “unclear” about the intent of the legislation, claiming that, with the amendment, there will be practically no change in the wolf program. He surmised the governor and some of his “billionaire friends” would put up the $264,000 that the wolf program will lose and sign the bill.
“If we don’t pass this, I would encourage the governor and those billionaires to keep writing those $264,000 checks,” he said.
Committee Chair Sen. Mike Weissman, D-Aurora, said he had been a “no” before the amendment, claiming it stretches the governor’s call.
But he called the bill a modest change and said that the symbolism might be more important than the substance.
“Symbolism matters, too,” he said. “I appreciate the temperature of this issue.”
Roberts, before the vote, said lawmakers are turning over every rock to save money to pay for programs and services that Coloradans need right now. The money from the wolf program — $264,000 — isn’t a lot, but it will help, he said.
After a three-hour hearing, Senate Bill 5 passed on a 4-1 vote and it now heads to the Senate Appropriations Committee.
All told, nine bills were introduced in the Senate on the first day of the special session, plus one concurrent resolution, and all received initial hearings. Both the wolf bill and the budget authority legislation won preliminary approval in the Senate, though the full chamber still needs to vote on them on Friday.
The Senate also cut down the number of committees to just four, including appropriations, making it a long day for lawmakers, particularly in the Senate State Veterans and Military Affairs Committee, which was assigned seven of the 10 measures.
