Summary#

SB 26-155, titled Increase Access Homeowner’s Insurance Enterprise, is an enacted law that adds a new part to Colorado’s insurance laws and changes insurer reporting requirements. It creates the Strengthen Colorado Homes Enterprise inside the Division of Insurance; its stated goal is to improve homeowner’s insurance availability by funding roof upgrades and related work.

• The Enterprise’s board must collect an annual fee from insurers offering certain homeowner’s policies and use the money for the law’s purposes.
• The board must award grants to homeowners for qualifying roof retrofits, subject to available funds and rules the board must adopt. At least 85% of fee revenue must go to homeowner grants.
• The board may fund training and certification for people who install or certify resilient roofs, and must study insurance risks and competition in high-risk wildfire areas.
• The Enterprise may issue revenue bonds, invest money, and hire outside service providers. It is a government-owned business within the Division, not a new independent agency.
• Insurers must make annual filings on policies, resilient roofs, discounts, and wind and hail claims after the Insurance Commissioner adopts rules.

What it means for you#

• Homeowners: You may be able to apply for a grant to retrofit a roof against wind or hail. The board must prioritize primary residences, but a grant is not guaranteed. The law does not make grants available for general roof maintenance or repair.
• Insurers: Beginning in 2027, insurers covered by the law must pay an annual fee equal to 0.5% of premiums collected in the previous calendar year on covered policies. They may not add that fee as a surcharge to policyholders. The FAIR Access to Insurance Requirements Plan is excluded.
• Roofing contractors and workers: A homeowner receiving a grant must use a state-licensed contractor who meets program rules, including membership in a qualifying professional association. Contractors receiving grant money may not waive homeowners’ insurance deductibles. The board may also fund training.
• Homeowners in wildfire-risk areas: The board must study insurance risk, competition, and a possible high-risk program. This law does not itself create that insurance program.
• Taxpayers and the public: The Enterprise is within the existing Division of Insurance. Its board meetings and records are generally subject to state open-meeting and public-records laws.

Money#

The law appropriates $66,250 for legal services in fiscal year 2026–27 and creates ongoing fee-based funding, but gives no full program cost estimate.

• Insurers pay the annual fee; they cannot directly surcharge policyholders for it. The board may lower or stop collecting the fee to keep total fee revenue below $100 million over the Enterprise’s first five fiscal years.
• At least 85% of fee revenue must be allocated to grants for homeowners’ wind and hail retrofits. The fund may also receive gifts, grants, appropriations, and bond proceeds.
• The fund is continuously appropriated for the Enterprise’s work and reasonable operating costs. The law permits revenue bonds but does not state how much, if any, will be issued.
• The $66,250 appropriation assumes an additional 0.3 full-time-equivalent position for legal services. No publicly available information in the supplied materials gives the expected total staffing or operating cost.

What is unclear#

• The board must set grant amounts, timing, and eligibility rules. The law lists factors it must consider, but does not set final eligibility thresholds or say how many grants will be available.
• The law does not give a grant application start date, review timeline, or appeal process.
• The law’s text sets an effective date of August 12, 2026, if the legislature adjourned on May 13, 2026, but a referendum petition could delay it. No publicly available information in the supplied materials confirms whether a petition was filed.
• The supplied materials do not include the prior statutes, so it is not possible to verify how these changes compare with current law or overlap with existing programs.
• The board may set a similar science-based roof certification standard, but the law does not specify which alternative certifications will qualify.

Case for#

• The bill is designed to address insurance costs and availability by reducing wind and hail damage to homes, which could reduce claims and insurer losses.
• Grants could help homeowners pay for upgrades that may otherwise be costly, while directing support toward higher-risk areas and primary residences.
• Training grants and roof standards could build a workforce and give insurers a consistent way to identify qualifying roofs.
• The wildfire-risk study could provide information before the state decides whether to create a separate high-risk insurance program.

Case against#

• The fee is a required cost for covered insurers. The law bars a direct surcharge, but does not establish whether or how the fee could affect insurers’ overall costs or premiums.
• Grant funding depends on available revenue, and homeowners have no right to receive a grant. The eventual rules will determine who qualifies and how funds are distributed.
• The board has wide authority over grants, standards, investments, and contracts. Some outside-service contracts are exempt from the state procurement code, though board meetings and records are generally public.
• The law’s claims that roof upgrades will improve insurance availability and market stability are goals, not guaranteed results; it does not set measures or targets for achieving them.