Sanctuary bill risks millions in federal jail reimbursements, Slaugh warns

DENVER — Colorado’s latest sanctuary-policy bill carries a state fiscal note of $131,643, but Rep. Scott Slaugh says the real cost is the federal money the state stands to lose if it walls off local jails from immigration enforcement. House Bill 26-1276, titled “Protect Safety of Individuals Who Are Immigrants,” cleared the House Finance Committee on a 7-4 vote on April 13, 2026, and is now in House Appropriations before a possible floor vote.

The preamended bill would layer new restrictions on top of existing Colorado law limiting state engagement with federal immigration authorities. It creates civil-penalty liability for state agencies whose employees intentionally violate personal-information protections for immigrants, and requires any agency served an unsealed federal immigration subpoena to forward a copy to the Colorado Department of Public Safety for public publication and to notify the subject once the subpoena is fulfilled.

The bill also bars governmental entities and airports from engaging with federal immigration authorities to transport detained individuals, with civil penalties for violations. It expands the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment’s authority to inspect facilities that detain noncitizens for civil immigration proceedings, adds reporting obligations for law enforcement agencies in multijurisdictional task forces, and authorizes license-revocation penalties for facilities that refuse inspection.

Slaugh, a Republican who represents House District 64, told listeners on The Kim Monson Show on April 20, 2026 that the bill’s most consequential effect is not in the state budget. It is in the federal reimbursement stream tied to Colorado’s cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

“The state of Colorado gets over $4 million all total between the state and individual counties in reimbursements from the federal government when they cooperate between state and federal agencies,” Slaugh said. “We’re potentially at risk for losing that reimbursement if this bill passes and if Colorado continues some of its sanctuary state policies, which is obviously concerning when we have the massive budget struggles that we have in Colorado.”

The program Slaugh is referring to is the federal State Criminal Alien Assistance Program, or SCAAP. According to the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Assistance, which administers the program with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, SCAAP reimburses states and localities for correctional-officer salary costs of incarcerating undocumented inmates with at least one felony or two misdemeanor convictions who were held at least four consecutive days.

According to Slaugh, Colorado and its counties received more than $4 million in SCAAP reimbursements in fiscal year 2024. In a guest commentary for the Rocky Mountain Voice published April 13, Slaugh wrote that the Colorado Department of Corrections applied for and received $1,388,784 in 2024 “for incarcerating several hundred criminal alien felons,” and that county awards ranged from $1,224 to Mesa County to $300,701 to Adams County. Those figures are Slaugh’s own breakdown of 2024 SCAAP awards and have not been independently verified against a Bureau of Justice Assistance award list.

The state fiscal note tells a different, narrower story. The Legislative Council Staff Second Revised Fiscal Note dated April 16, 2026, projects $131,643 in new state revenue in fiscal year 2026-27 and $72,315 in fiscal year 2027-28, all flowing into a newly created Immigration Facility Inspection and Detention Cash Fund at CDPHE. State expenditures match that revenue, with $107,283 appropriated from the General Fund to CDPHE in the first year. Because the new revenue is subject to TABOR, the fiscal note projects a matching $131,643 reduction in taxpayer refunds in fiscal year 2026-27.

Crucially, the fiscal note’s federal-funds line is zero. Legislative Council Staff did not attempt to quantify any potential loss of SCAAP reimbursements or other federal funds tied to immigration cooperation. That omission is at the heart of Slaugh’s critique. The state is counting a small inspection-program revenue gain while the federal exposure Slaugh documents sits outside the official ledger. The same fiscal note confirms that the Colorado Department of Law’s Federal Initiatives Unit is already defending two lawsuits challenging prior state legislation limiting cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

The bill’s prime sponsors are Democrat Reps. Elizabeth Velasco of Glenwood Springs, representing House District 57, and Lorena Garcia of unincorporated Adams County, representing House District 35. In a March 17 statement released by Colorado House Democrats after House Judiciary passage, Rep. Velasco said the bill “pushes back against federal overreach to safeguard your constitutional rights and shore up existing privacy protections.” Rep. Garcia said the bill “is about keeping all Coloradans safe” while “ensuring accountability and transparency.” Twenty-six House Democrats have signed on as cosponsors.

The bill first cleared House Judiciary on a 6-5 vote March 17, 2026, with Reps. Bacon, Carter, Clifford, Garcia, Mabrey and Zokaie voting yes and Reps. Espenoza, Flanell, Keltie, Slaugh and Soper voting no. House Finance then advanced the measure 7-4 on April 13, 2026, with Reps. Camacho, Garcia, Marshall, R. Stewart, Titone, Woodrow and Zokaie voting yes and Reps. Brooks, Gonzalez, Hartsook and Soper voting no. Slaugh sits on Judiciary and Energy & Environment, not Finance, and recorded his no vote at the earlier hearing. The bill now sits in House Appropriations; Slaugh said on the show he expects a full House vote “next week or soon.”

Slaugh is a freshman legislator. A Republican vacancy committee selected him on the first ballot in September 2025 to fill the seat vacated by former Rep. Ryan Armagost, who resigned to move out of state. A 23-year U.S. Army Reserve officer and owner of a Johnstown homebuilding company, Slaugh represents West Greeley, Johnstown, Milliken, Berthoud and Mead. He has flagged several other bills this session as priorities for his district, but immigration cost exposure is the issue he has taken most public.