Bilingual students in Colorado could soon earn recognition — and possibly college credits — for proving fluency in a foreign language learned at home, thanks to a new bill passed by the House Education Committee.

House Bill 1028 does two things: It changes educational requirements for the biliteracy endorsement program, and it creates a new diploma enforcement for bilingualism for graduating high school students.

Existing laws surrounding biliteracy credentials on high school diplomas, passed in 2017, allow school districts to grant diploma endorsements in biliteracy to students who demonstrate proficiency in at least one foreign language, in addition to English. 

More than 114,000 students — approximately 13% of Colorado’s K-12 student population — are identified as multilingual learners, yet only 55 out of the state’s 179 school districts offer a biliteracy seal.

“Currently, we have students who clearly meet the skill level for biliteracy, or bilingualism, but they cannot access recognition simply because their school doesn’t offer it,” Rep. Elizabeth Velasco, a Glenwood Springs Democrat and one of the bill’s primary sponsors, said during the bill’s Feb. 5 Education Committee hearing. 

House Bill 1028 would expand access to biliteracy credentials by allowing students in school districts that do not offer the program to still complete it through other department-certified entities, which could include partnering with other school districts.

A biliteracy diploma endorsement is awarded to students who can read, write, speak and understand English and an additional foreign language. Bilingualism endorsements, which would be created under House Bill 1028, would be awarded to students who can speak and understand another language but don’t possess reading and writing skills — sometimes because the language is primarily oral and doesn’t have a standardized written form.

“The reason why (this distinction) is so profoundly important is because … we have many languages that also don’t have written language, and that in itself precludes them from being able to demonstrate and highlight that they are in fact bilingual,” said Rep. Lorena Garcia, an Adams County Democrat and one of the bill’s primary sponsors.

For higher education institutions that recognize the seal of biliteracy and bilingualism in high school diplomas, students with these seals could see them transferred into credits or be placed in a higher-level language class.

The seal would be especially beneficial to students who learned a foreign language outside of a classroom setting, who otherwise wouldn’t receive any credits or recognition for their abilities.

“The kids of immigrants are speaking their native language at home, but they might not have any AP classes or any classes where they’re learning how to write it,” Velasco said.

Jorge Garcia, Board Chairman and CEO of the Colorado Association for Bilingual Education, testified in favor of the bill nine years after supporting the original 2017 legislation. Garcia said the legislation “had a very powerful impact” on thousands of students across the state, some of which received college credit for having the seal and had better access to scholarships.

Expanding access to the seal of biliteracy through third-party organizations, Garcia said, increases these opportunities for students without lowering existing standards or reducing the rigor of these endorsements.

Educators and other community members also asked lawmakers to consider amendments, such as updating how bilingual proficiency is measured and including equivalent credits outside of those acquired through Advancement Placement assessments, which are designed for students planning to attend college.

James Yoder, who helps coordinate a biliteracy program in Aurora, said only two colleges and universities in the state currently recognize these seals. He suggested that language be added to the bill requiring all state colleges to recognize the achievement either through credit, higher-level placement in language classes or another benefit that helps students save on tuition.

“As it stands, the seal of biliteracy is basically a certificate and a pat on the back,” Yoder said.

Despite all 50 states offering the seal of biliteracy, Colorado is one of six states that does not collect data on students that receive the seal. Yoder requested that language be added to the bill that requires the Colorado Department of Education to collect and report that data.

If passed, the bill is projected to cost the state over $36,000 during its first year (2026-27) and $24,000 in the years following, most of which would come from the general fund during an already tight budget year.

Some lawmakers expressed concerns over the bill’s financial costs, pointing to bill language that says school districts that don’t already have their own program would have to pay a fee to work with a college or educational nonprofits.

Rep. Dusty Johnson, representing House District 63, shared that some of her smaller school districts are barely able to keep track of their K-12 costs, and that unintended fees could put them at more of a deficit.

Offering either endorsement program remains optional for school districts, Garcia said. One of the bill’s amendments further clarifies that if a student needs the services of another school district to attain a seal of bilingualism or biliteracy, an agreement has to be made between the school districts.

The bill passed the House Education Committee Thursday with an 8-5 vote and was referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

“I think for many of us immigrants, when we come to the U.S., we are met with a system that sees us as lacking something because we don’t speak English. But we’re actually bringing so much more,” Velasco said, recounting her own experience of arriving in the United States when she was 16 years old. “For me, it’s very very important for students to be able to celebrate … those skills that they have and are bringing from home, or from a different country.”

One day before the deadline, states in the Upper Colorado River Basin reached consensus on how to manage water rights and dwindling resources moving forward, but the Lower Basin states rejected the plan as unfair.

Representatives from Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, California, Nevada and Arizona have been working to reach a new agreement as demand and threats to the river’s water supply continue to increase. Management of Colorado River resources has been governed by the Colorado River Compact since 1922, but disputes over water use and resource constraints have led to lawsuits in recent years.

The Bureau of Reclamation says several decision documents and agreements governing the river’s operation are set to expire at the end of this year. The western states have been working to renegotiate the water use pact for over two years and missed the November deadline to reach a new agreement. A new deadline was set for Feb. 14.

Representatives of the seven states entered talks in the nation’s capital at the end of January.

On Friday, the four Upper Basin states, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming and New Mexico, announced that they reached consensus on a “durable, long-term, basin-wide agreement on post 2026 Colorado River operations.” They say that everyone in the basin must learn to live within the available supply, and that the Upper Basin is preparing for necessary and painful cuts to its water supplies.

A statement issued by the Upper Basin states on Friday said, “Upper Basin water users are preparing for reductions of more than 2.0 MAF this year. Across the entire Upper Basin, this will amount to reductions greater than 40% of the proven water rights. Meanwhile, our downstream neighbors are seeking to secure water from the UDS that simply does not exist.”

John Entsminger, general manager of the Southern Nevada Water Authority in Las Vegas, also issued a statement on Friday, explaining that the states have “failed to reach an agreement to collectively protect our respective communities and economies in the face of almost certain reductions to our use of the river.”

Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, California Gov. Gavin Newsom and Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo said in a news release that management of the river “must be built on a foundation of shared contribution and innovation, with all Colorado River water users stretching to conserve water.” They asserted that the Lower Basin states have already offered to reduce their share and asserted that their stance remains “firm and fair.”

The Lower Basin states added that they contain approximately 75% of the population, employment, and crop sales supported by the river. They also include 25 Indigenous tribes that depend on it. Utah, Arizona and Nevada are also among the top ten states in percent growth from 2024 to 2025.

Upper Colorado River Commission Chair and Colorado Commissioner, Becky Mitchell, said, “We’re being asked to solve a problem we didn’t create with water we don’t have. The Upper Division’s approach is aligned with hydrologic reality and we’re ready to move forward.”

New Mexico Commissioner Estevan Lopez warned that unrealistic demands on the system will damage the entire basin.

“The River is telling us the truth every year,” he asserted. “We can either negotiate based on real conditions, including this year’s critically low hydrology in the Upper Basin, or we can keep repeating outdated assumptions until the system breaks. The Upper Division is choosing realism and responsibility.” 

Seven states are facing a deadline to come to a consensus on how to share water from the shrinking Colorado River.

The deadline for seven states to agree on how to split up the water from the shrinking Colorado River is looming.

The debate has pitted the Lower Basin states of Arizona, California and Nevada against the four states in the Upper Basin: Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and New Mexico. The states are struggling to find a way to save enough water so that the two largest reservoirs on the river and in the nation — Lakes Mead and Powell — retain water levels capable of producing hydropower and of supplying downstream users in the Lower Basin and Mexico.

The states have tried unsuccessfully for more than a year to reach a voluntary agreement to replace dam-operating guidelines that expire later in 2026. Federal officials have said they want a consensus on a deal that will last 20 years by Feb. 14, though that deadline may not be firm.

For months, the Upper Basin states have argued they would only make voluntary cuts because they don’t use as much water as the Lower Basin and can’t control the drought that has afflicted them.