Most of SB26-149 reads like a legal maze — pages of civil commitment procedures, review hearings, primary-diagnosis findings, and the difference between an "enhanced protective placement" and a "civil commitment." But when the Capital Development Committee took it up, the question underneath all that language was blunt and physical: where do these people go?
The bill deals with defendants found incompetent to stand trial who won't be restored to competency in the foreseeable future — people the state can neither prosecute nor, under the Constitution, simply hold indefinitely. Sen. Cleave Simpson (Republican-District 6), the Senate minority leader and one of the bill's prime sponsors, framed the stakes without softening them.
"Having folks that are incompetent to proceed and non restorable," Simpson said. "The state just has not done a good job historically of accommodating those folks and protecting their constitutional rights. You can't just lock people up forever in those conditions."
That is where the capital committee comes in. For all its procedural heft, the bill's connection to this committee is construction: roughly 32 additional beds for individuals on enhanced protective placement or with neurocognitive and intellectual and developmental disability needs, with the Department of Human Services expected to refurbish units at Pueblo and Fort Logan in the near term. The measure also requires CDHS, no later than October 1, 2027, to construct and operate an outpatient treatment facility for adults with behavioral health needs — including those found incompetent and unlikely to be restored.
The overhaul is a bipartisan, bicameral effort. Its prime sponsors are Simpson and Sen. Judy Amabile (Democrat-District 18) in the Senate, and Speaker Julie McCluskie (Democrat-District 13) and House Minority Leader Jarvis Caldwell (Republican-District 20) in the House. McCluskie and Simpson presented the measure as the product of grinding negotiation. Simpson noted the bill was amended at least 50 times in the Senate, as he described it in committee, after a year of talks between district attorneys and public defenders — two camps that rarely find themselves at the same table for long.
The rewrite is expansive. Under the bill, prosecutors could ask a court to civilly commit or order enhanced protective placement for certain unrestorable defendants if they prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the person has a mental or developmental disability, committed an act that would amount to homicide, a crime of violence, or a felony sexual offense absent that disability, and poses a substantial risk of serious harm to others. Courts would be required to place people in the least-restrictive setting adequate to protect victims and the community, with annual reviews and paths to termination if a person no longer poses a danger. The bill carries a substantial price tag, including capital construction appropriations to CDHS across two fiscal years.
Vice Chair Rep. Tammy Story (Democrat-District 25) praised the depth of work behind the bill before moving the support letter.
By this point the bill was well along — it had passed the Senate in late April and was clearing its final votes in the House. The committee's action here was narrower: the capital piece, the beds and buildings that make the legal framework something more than words on a page. Because without somewhere to put people, a law about where people go is just a promise.