Colorado House Bill HB1139

Colorado 2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/29/24
• Report Pass: 2/8/24
• Refer: 1/29/24
• Engrossed: 2/13/24
• Refer: 2/8/24
• Report Pass: 3/7/24
• Refer: 2/13/24
• Enrolled: 3/15/24
• Refer: 3/7/24
• Engrossed: 3/26/24
• Engrossed: 3/27/24
• Enrolled: 3/28/24
• Passed: 4/4/24

Caption

Death Benefit for State Employee Surviving Spouse

Impact

If enacted, HB 1139 would directly affect the Colorado Revised Statutes, primarily focused on sections relating to employee death benefits. By changing the stipulations surrounding remarriage and its effect on death benefits, the bill seeks to enhance protections for families of state employees who have passed away under certain hazardous job classifications. This legislative change underscores the state's commitment to supporting families that may face financial hardships as a result of such tragic events.

Summary

House Bill 1139 aims to amend the current provisions related to death benefits payable to the surviving spouse of a state employee who worked in a high-risk classification. Specifically, the bill proposes that death benefits should be paid to a dependent widow or widower for life, even after remarriage, provided that the deceased state employee was classified as working in a high-risk job. This amendment is intended to provide greater financial security to surviving spouses who may otherwise lose critical benefits upon remarrying.

Sentiment

The general sentiment around HB 1139 appears to be supportive among legislators and advocates who see it as an important step forward in ensuring the well-being of surviving spouses. By addressing the needs of these individuals and providing them with ongoing financial benefits, supporters argue that the state recognizes the sacrifices made by employees in high-risk roles. However, there has been some opposition concerning the fiscal implications of extending lifetime benefits and the potential impact on the state's budget.

Contention

Notable points of contention arise from concerns about the long-term financial sustainability of providing lifetime benefits after remarriage. Critics might argue that such provisions could lead to rising costs for state employee benefits, prompting debates about funding and resource allocation. Additionally, the bill may provoke discussions regarding fairness in benefits distribution among various employee classifications, as those in high-risk roles might receive disproportionately favorable conditions compared to others.