Summary#

SB 26-159, titled Inmate Earned Time Formula for Sentence to Department of Corrections, amends Colorado’s earned-time law, section 17-22.5-405. Its stated goal is to help manage the Department of Corrections’ capacity; that goal is not a guaranteed result.

• For eligible people serving certain lower-level felony sentences, the maximum earned-time deduction rises from 12 to 14 days per month. The credits may be awarded only if the person meets the law’s conduct and program-compliance conditions and demonstrates positive progress.
• People convicted of, or previously convicted of, listed crimes—including felony motor vehicle theft—remain limited to 12 earned-time days per month.
• The Department must change its policies to increase incentives for self-improvement activities. The bill gives examples involving comparable programs, work engagement and program completion.
• It allows achievement credits for program milestones and phases, with a general limit of 120 days and a 150-day limit for specified behavioral-health program achievements. The executive director may also award up to 60 days per instance of exceptional conduct promoting safety, with a separate 120-day limit.
• It creates a temporary Department of Corrections working group to recommend a capacity-management plan. The group must seek input from named groups and report in December 2026 and June 2028; it does not itself have to implement its recommendations.

What it means for you#

• People in Department of Corrections custody: If you meet the eligibility rules, you may be able to earn up to 14 days per month instead of 12. This is a maximum, not an automatic credit. People with the listed convictions are capped at 12 days per month.
• People seeking achievement credits: The Department must revise its policies to strengthen incentives for self-improvement. Awards remain subject to the stated limits and, for exceptional safety conduct, the executive director’s discretion.
• Department of Corrections: It must make the policy changes and provide the working group’s chair and other support as needed. The bill does not set staffing levels.
• Victims, incarcerated people, families and others named in the bill: The working group must seek input from these and other listed groups. The bill does not guarantee that any particular recommendation will be adopted.
• General public: The bill changes earned-time rules and creates a planning group; it does not directly create a new public service, tax, fee or fine.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

• The bill requires Department policy changes and creates a working group, but gives no cost estimate or staffing budget.
• The working group chair may seek and accept gifts, grants and donations for the group’s work. The bill does not state how much it may receive or spend.

What is unclear#

• The supplied materials do not state the effective date. No publicly available information.
• The bill does not define “exceptional conduct” or specify how achievement-credit decisions must be made, reviewed or appealed.
• The bill requires policy changes but does not set a deadline or say how the Department must measure whether the changes maximize incentives.
• The working group must make recommendations, but the bill does not require the Department or lawmakers to adopt them.
• The full current statute was not supplied, so the amendments’ interaction with other earned-time rules could not be verified.

Case for#

• A possible argument for the bill is that more earned-time credit for eligible people could encourage positive conduct and program participation while helping manage prison capacity.
• Requiring the Department to strengthen incentives may make credits more consistent across programs and reward sustained work engagement or program completion.
• The working group brings Department staff, people with criminal justice experience, victims and other named groups into planning about programs, release processes and prison capacity.

Case against#

• The bill raises the maximum monthly credit for some people, but does not require that they receive the maximum. The result may depend on how progress and compliance are assessed.
• The bill requires policy changes without setting a deadline, detailed standards or a clear review process for credit decisions.
• The working group can recommend changes but cannot ensure they are carried out. Its planning work may also require staff time or other resources without a stated budget.