DENVER | The $43.9 billion Colorado budget proposal released Monday includes increases for K-12 and higher education operations in 2025-26, but would be far less than what school leaders say they need.
The budget would bring statewide K-12 spending to about $10 billion, up from $9.8 billion this year. It shows a K-12 general fund increase of $150 million next year, with the state making cuts to certain programs.
Higher education spending would increase by $39 million next year for college and university operations and student financial aid, an increase of 2.5% over last year. Higher education spending, which includes museum programs, would total $1.7 billion.
Lawmakers plan to increase the state’s total budget by $3.3 billion, up from $40.6 billion last year. But the powerful six-member Joint Budget Committee, which helps craft the budget, also had to wrangle a $1.2 billion budget shortfall due to increases in obligations such as Medicaid. That required painful cuts to services in the 2025-26 budget.
Despite these challenges, budget lawmakers repeatedly committed to an increase in funding for K-12 and higher education operations. Lawmakers also will file a school finance bill that spells out how the state will fund schools. A proposal is still in the works.
The initial 2025-26 budget introduced on Monday comes short of what was promised in a school finance formula deal struck last year when lawmakers updated the state’s 30-year-old school finance formula and called for $500 million in new funding phased in over six years.
The House and Senate lawmakers will use the coming days to file amendments and debate and finalize the budget. Both chambers will vote again and send it to Gov. Jared Polis to sign into law.
What does this budget mean for K-12 operations?
The budget fallout for schools began even before the proposal’s introduction.
Adams 12 Five Start Schools Superintendent Chris Gdowski said less than expected funding from the state, the end of pandemic relief money, increasing costs for health insurance, and the increasing costs of utilities and maintenance mean this year’s budget won’t be enough.
Gdowski said at a Friday news conference he expects $27.5 million in district cuts, including 150 layoffs. He said the district employs about 5,100 educators, support staff, and administrators this year.
While the JBC committed $150 million in the budget, lawmakers have yet to decide on the exact structure to distribute funding.
Colorado lawmakers must annually file a Public School Finance Act. The bill requires state per-pupil funding to increase by inflation plus the state’s student population, but lawmakers also committed to a new funding formula last year that would change how the state allocates money to districts.
To make the formula a reality, lawmakers promised $500 million more over the course of six years. Yet lawmakers have said the budget will require changes.
The governor has released a funding proposal, and Colorado Speaker of the House Julie McCluskie, a Dillon Democrat, has been working on another.
Polis wants to change to the formula so base funding would be calculated on a single year of enrollment instead of funding districts based on a four-year enrollment average. Polis’ proposal would eliminate students who have left the district but are still counted toward the average enrollment. Polis said he would use savings from no longer funding those students to help fund the new formula.
Superintendents and education advocates have argued the four-year average softens the blow of one-year swings in enrollment declines. The change would result in an immediate and difficult decrease in funding for some districts, they’ve argued.
McCluskie has been working on a proposal that would leave enrollment averaging alone next year and scale the school finance formula enactment timeline back to seven years. The proposal would then reduce the average to three-years in the second year.
Some lawmakers have called for a halt to the formula.
Gdowksi and other superintendents have chastised lawmakers for going back on last year’s funding commitment to implement the formula fully and increase education funding by state mandated levels, especially because districts are taking on a greater share of state K-12 funding. He said lawmakers should leave per-pupil student averaging alone.
Lawmakers need to figure out a way to raise more money for K-12 schools, he said, especially after 15 years of using mandated education funding for other priorities.
“And over that 15 years, no one out there, in a convincing and credible and courageous way, has been saying we need to invest more in public education to do right by our kids,” he said.
What else is in the budget for K-12?
The budget also features other increases and cuts.
The state would also spend an additional $17.8 million next year to supplement funding for students with extra needs. The money goes to help those that include English learners, special needs, and gifted and talented students.
The budget proposes to provide only $8 million in funding for the Healthy School Meals for All program, a universal free school meals program. The money would fund the program for half the 2025-26 school year and decrease the number of eligible schools statewide. JBC members hope voters will approve a measure to increase funding for the program, which would eliminate the need to scale back the program.
The state would spend $6.2 million more on the Charter School Institute Mil levy equalization program through the State Education Fund. That would bring state funding to offset local gaps in funding to $54.6 million a year.
The budget increases the Building Excellent Schools Today program funding to $157.1 million. The program helps school districts pay for construction projects.
The budget proposes a $5 million cut to high-impact tutoring programs grants.
Lawmakers also plan cuts to bullying prevention, student career advising, and extra aid to at-risk students, which includes those from lower income backgrounds.
What is included for higher education?
Late last year, higher education leaders projected they needed about $95.3 million in 2025-26 for operations and financial aid.
In a letter to JBC members, they said the increase would help students access higher education and help compensate college workers to keep pace with inflation.
The $39 million in the budget for colleges and universities and student financial aid is far less than requested, but schools would have more authority to increase tuition under the JBC proposal.
Of the money million, $31.7 million would be spent on college and university budgets, with about $7.3 million going to financial aid. Total spending for those two budget items would increase to about $193 million a year.
Colorado’s public colleges and universities would also be allowed to raise resident tuition by 3% and non-resident tuition by 3.5% next year.
Jason Gonzales is a reporter covering higher education and the Colorado legislature. Chalkbeat Colorado partners with Open Campus on higher education coverage. Contact Jason at jgonzales@chalkbeat.org. Chalkbeat is a nonprofit news site covering educational change in public schools.
I’m not a native Coloradan, but that fact provides me with a perspective on Colorado education that many natives don’t possess. I’ve been in higher education – mostly in grants for 30 years and since retired. My daughter is a Science Department Head at JeffCO Senior and Junior High School. She taught in Texas for years before coming here to join our family. Simply put, the long-time lack of funding for education in Colorado is starting to show. The Fitsimmons Building on Anschutz Campus, where I finished my career, was filthy and poorly maintained. The grant accounting, contracting, and pre-award departments were under-staffed. My daughter’s salary is well below what she was paid in Texas, one of the worst states in student retention in the country. She took on an extra class in addition to her leadership role to make ends meet last Fall at JeffCO. However, our family’s housing costs increased significantly from the Houston area where we lived. These are the realities for workers in education, but the real short-change is being made to students. My daughter has to decide between needed components for lab supplies, I know! My wife and I have volunteered to reorganize and lable those lab supplies because the Science teachers run out of time to do so. Still, the district is considering closing the school and consolidating elsewhere. What will that mean for students? What will that mean for class sizes? What will that mean for teachers? I understand that schools often have tough choices to make – their already making them as best as they can, but making changes under already burdensome budget constraints, is awful. I worked with budgeting for those 30 years. Impossible choices are being made! If Colorado wants to remain a competitive state, they need to up their stake in education. Stupid rules, like TABOR, may seem appropriate for a certain time frame, but they lose their usefulness over time! In Colorado, the law has long overstayed it’s welcome!
As a native Coloradoan and over 50 years old, I have gone through the states school systems and college system. It is what you make of it. I worked hard in school, got a good education, graduated from college and got a good job living with a single mother who sacrificed a significant amount to ensure I studied hard and graduated. She even lost her job during the recession of the 1980’s while I was in high school, but we made it through.
I have also worked for the State of Colorado, and I cannot even begin to explain the amount of wasteful spending and use of our tax dollars the State performs year over year. They simply see our tax monies as a steady flow of income that they can do with as they please. I didn’t support TABOR before I worked for the State, but afterward I understood why we need it. If we leave it to our legislators to tax and fee us to death so they can waste our money, then we gain little. Never trust a politician with money, regardless of party affiliation. The problem is that government operations, but nature, are not fiscally accountable. The people need to dictate how much tax money the State can take from us, and that’s how TABOR protects us all from being fleeced. How they spend the money we allocate them is why we have representation. I’m fine with improving education spending, but it needs to come at the expense of other, less necessary government operations within the constraints of the available budget. Without TABOR, we’d end up like California (not that we aren’t already heading well in that directions) and have taxes and fees and fines for every minute thing.
On top of this, my wife works for a respected school district, and they can’t even manage their money effectively. The teachers unions protect useless teachers from being rightfully fired for under performance, and bad politics at the administration levels prevent good employees from growing and benefitting the district and its students. I, for one, am very hesitant to want to waste any more tax money into the government at any level.