The Colorado Senate approved legislation on Wednesday that would add 15 new judgeships over the next two years, a scaled-back version of the original proposal for 29 additional judge seats across the state.

Senate Bill 24 passed by a vote of 26-7, with all Democrats who were present voting in favor and all no votes coming from Republicans. Five Republican senators voted in favor, including John Carson, R-Highlands Ranch, who tentatively cast a no vote last month in the Senate Judiciary Committee based on budgetary worries.

SB 24 is the Judicial Department’s top priority this year.

Chief Justice Monica M. Márquez previously told lawmakers the original request for 29 judges would still fall short of full staffing. The projection is based on a series of recent workload studies estimating Colorado needs approximately 43 more district judges, 20 more county judges and six appellate judges.

“Our need for judges has been palpable for some time. But our sense of it was largely anecdotal,” she testified last month. 

Márquez and other members of the judiciary told legislators that additional judges will help with overwhelming workloads, burnout among judges and delayed resolution of cases.

Before final passage, one of the bill’s sponsors, Sen. Dylan Roberts, D-Summit County, introduced an amendment to slash the number of new judges to 15. The move was an attempt to minimize the fiscal impact of the legislation in the face of a $1 billion state budget deficit. As it stands, SB 24 would cost approximately $3.3 million in its first year.

“This is an essential function of government,” he said on Tuesday.

Among the alterations, the Court of Appeals would no longer receive any new judgeships, nor would half a dozen trial courts originally earmarked for additional seats. The amendment eliminated new judgeships for the Adams County Court and the Arapahoe County Court, instead reallocating them to the district court benches in those jurisdictions.

The bill’s critics took aim at the inclusion of $621,000 in the Senate-passed bill for the public defender’s office, reflecting the need for additional personnel to staff courtrooms headed by new criminal judges.

Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, R-Brighton, who is a member of the Joint Budget Committee, argued at length that the legislature should not fund additional public defenders through the bill. She also alleged the Judicial Department had provided no suggestions for where its budget could be cut this year, in contrast to other state agencies.

“All of the excessive spending that has happened throughout this branch and through this executive administration has led us to a structural deficit. On a path that we cannot sustain,” Kirkmeyer said. Spending money on new judges “means I have to go look for more cuts in the Behavioral Health Administration, in the Department of Education.”

Senate Minority Leader Paul Lundeen, R-Monument, indicated he was casting “a very uncomfortable ‘no’ vote” on the bill because he deemed the need for new judges a priority, but he wanted to send a message about the severe budget shortfall.

“We did have agreement on the Joint Budget Committee that we needed more judges,” countered Sen. Judy Amabile, D-Boulder, who sits on the budget and appropriations committees. “The bill before us today has an even lower fiscal impact than what the Appropriations Committee passed.”

SB 24 now heads to the House of Representatives. Reps. Matt Soper, R-Delta, and Michael Carter, D-Aurora, have signed on to sponsor the bill in their chamber.