Monday, July 27, 2026, 1:30 p.m. (Denver time), City & County Building, Council Committee Room, Room 391 1437 Bannock Street
Committee: Budget and Policy Committee
The Budget and Policy Committee heard two presentations. First, sponsors (council members whose names are not clearly identified in the captions) presented a proposed reform of the Transportation and Mobility Special Revenue Fund, created in 2021 from a parking meter rate doubling, arguing the administration has diverted money to parking enforcement and operations; the reform would restrict allowable uses to Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School and Denver Moves projects, protect the fund balance, and add community accountability. Council members raised questions about the advisory board's approval authority, which plans the fund should reference, and whether dollar amounts should be tied to programs; DOTI staff described current spending and committed to providing better breakdowns. Second, Council Member Kashmann presented draft legislation to codify the police chief's low-level traffic stop policy into ordinance, with discussion of limited stop data, racial equity concerns, and strong disagreement from Council Member Flynn, who argued traffic enforcement should remain a policy matter. No votes were taken; the committee discussed both items.
0:08 Welcome back to this biweekly
0:09 meeting of the Budget and
0:09 Policy Committee of Denver
0:15 City Council. As for the
0:16 discussion the Budget and
0:21 Policy Committee starts now,
0:31 I think we're ready to get
0:33 everyone welcome to budget and
0:38 policy today is JULY 27 and
0:39 ready for the budget policy
0:40 meeting. My name Diana Romero,
0:41 Campbell. And I'm going to
0:43 start introductions here to my
0:47 right. Afternoon, Chris. Time
0:48 members perfect. Time.
0:50 Afternoon, everyone. Having in
0:51 southwestern numbers district
0:59 2. Jamie was Denver District.
1:01 About request a district to
1:03 list today. Only but the
1:06 district 7 Cashman, something
1:07 British accent. Comes all
1:07 content is one of your council
1:09 members at large. You know,
1:12 Watson, Fine District 9,
1:16 great. And do we have any
1:19 councilmembers online? Thank
1:23 We have one item today at
1:23 transportation mobility,
1:24 special revenue funds. I'm
1:27 going to turn it over to the
1:29 council members to Take it
1:31 away when you read you so So
1:33 thank you for the opportunity
1:36 for us to pay cent on the and
1:38 mobility. Special Revenue Fund
1:40 or counts on the parity and
1:42 COUNCILMAN All the dress from
1:47 so quick background on tea it
1:50 from ation and purpose. So the
1:51 transportation and Mobility
1:51 Special Revenue was created in
1:53 2021. But Denver City Council
1:56 to a doubling of parking meter
1:57 rates to invest the
1:58 incremental revenue and to put
1:59 that to pedestrian and bicycle
2:01 transit and vision, 0 safety
2:03 improvements. The rate
2:05 doubling generated about
2:06 15 million dollars each year
2:09 for dollar increase in MAY
2:11 meter rates. Why you might ask
2:13 Because council during that
2:14 time wanted to take action
2:15 service of safety community
2:18 and our climate values.
2:21 Failing Vision. 0 goes, Dan
2:23 and we bailing them out these
2:24 investments. Continuously
2:25 demanded by many community
2:27 members and organizations and
2:28 to meet our cities, climate
2:30 goals. We need more safe
2:31 infrastructure. So people feel
2:33 safe moving around the city in
2:35 these alternative modes
2:36 disaster is the primary
2:38 guarantee funding source for
2:38 those functions. With that, I
2:39 would try everything you can
2:42 to win. Thank you so much.
2:44 COUNCILWOMAN I would just echo
2:46 my colleagues concerns. I
2:48 think that we continuously are
2:50 looking for funding sources
2:51 with the city and this was a
2:52 supposed to be for these
2:52 star is that was specifically
2:56 purposes. We think that has
2:56 been stretched and we're
2:59 looking to make sure that we
3:00 have the little money. We have
3:01 invest in these programs that
3:02 we actually continue to
3:03 happen. So I'll start with a
3:05 quick background on that tms
3:12 rf. Information, purpose, that
3:12 transportation abilities,
3:13 Special Revenue Fund was
3:17 created in 2021. By a slight
3:24 break. Fight out. I have a
3:25 slight break down where the
3:26 funds money comes in and where
3:29 you currently goes on. The
3:31 revenue slide. Fund pulled in
3:35 16.5 million in 2026. And
3:37 that's made up of 7.2 million
3:38 from parking meter revenue,
3:39 which is original source
3:44 created the fun back in 2021.
3:46 5.5 from enforcement, fine
3:49 revenue 3.8 million roll
3:50 forward from 2025 which
3:54 include speed camera revenue
3:56 on that use, use a slide at
4:00 that 16.5 million. He's
4:00 supposed to be spread across 4
4:03 program. Programmatic areas
4:05 chipped in transportation,
4:06 mobility programs. Things like
4:08 multi-modal investment, micro
4:09 transit and bike share safe
4:10 routes to schools covering
4:12 education, cross cars and
4:14 community engagement, Vision,
4:18 0 safety covering the speed
4:20 program, safety software and
4:22 education and enforcement
4:24 parking operations. And here's
4:24 the Graphic makes visible
4:28 enforcement and parking
4:31 variations alone. Now consume
4:31 8.4 million way more than half
4:35 the entire find. Only leading
4:36 a 0, 1 million to peace. But
4:38 across the 3 safety and
4:39 mobility programs that fund
4:43 was actually created to pay So
4:44 the problem with here today
4:47 just saw is the gifting uses a
4:48 of this done by the
4:50 administration in recent years
4:52 that cuts against the court
4:54 goals which and form the Esser
4:57 creation some examples. So in
4:58 2024 200, Kate was spent out
5:02 of the time to remove not safe
5:03 bike infrastructure downtown
5:04 and 20 2500 k was meant to
5:06 replace that its safety design
5:07 on Alameda Avenue after
5:10 wealthy residents complain.
5:14 And finally in 2026, and the
5:14 2026 budget, a collateral
5:18 consequence of that budget 0.4
5:19 million of the fine was
5:21 allocated to parking related
5:21 contracts, which is more than
5:24 half the fun in When we look
5:25 at this pattern in conjunction
5:28 with the overall cuts have
5:28 daddies workforce and budget.
5:31 We see public spending on the
5:32 outline priorities decreasing
5:34 even as community demands have
5:36 ground. And the ensuing time
5:37 this indicates the need for
5:39 council to restore the fine to
5:44 to its intended usage. Yes.
5:47 And so what does the fix look
5:51 things. First, it aligns
5:51 like this reform does 4
5:54 investments with our adopted
5:55 plans. This is required that
5:56 that this require this is
5:57 requiring that the dollars
5:59 from this fund actually go
6:00 towards implementing Vision, 0
6:02 action plan, the safe routes
6:03 to school action plan and
6:05 Denver moves that moves bikes,
6:07 pedestrians and transit trails
6:09 and transit green
6:09 infrastructure elements tied
6:12 to those projects would also
6:13 be allowed. Second, this is
6:15 the core structural fixed. We
6:18 protect the fund right now.
6:19 There's nothing stopping for
6:23 from being swept out were
6:24 redirected. This reform
6:26 prohibits transfers to the
6:28 general requires the balance
6:30 to roll over year to year
6:32 instead of disappearing and
6:33 locks and a 50 50 split
6:35 between capital and
6:37 operational expenses that
6:39 balance matters. It means that
6:40 find can't be quietly hollowed
6:44 out on one side. Say all the
6:46 capital and no operations are
6:48 vice versa. The way events the
6:52 way we've since seen with the
6:54 current time Captain Forsman
6:56 parking spending. 3rd, we add
6:57 community Accountability.
6:59 Dottie would be required to
7:00 present their proposed used
7:01 for the to the Dottie advisory
7:04 board. 4 of you and approval
7:06 every year. So there's a
7:07 public check before the
7:10 dollars. Get out the door and
7:13 4th, we define clear allowable
7:14 and not allowable uses which
7:17 the next 2 slides will walk us
7:19 this slide, we've outlined a
7:20 broad range of allowable uses
7:23 of the srf. And we've got a
7:24 specific to make it clear as
7:26 possible to daddy and the
7:29 administration. What councils
7:29 intend it uses we did that
7:30 divided up the eligible uses
7:33 by capital side in operations
7:34 expenses. Capital side
7:37 includes protected bike lanes,
7:38 accessibility, lanes forms of
7:40 vertical traffic, calming
7:42 south enforcing interventions,
7:44 light bulb outs and below the
7:44 current bike scooter
7:45 courthouse. But stop
7:46 infrastructure, transit, speed
7:49 improvements and road diet.
7:51 I'm the special provision was
7:52 special his and I want to
7:53 speak speaks to traffic
7:54 signals because I know going
7:55 to come up like the r and the
7:59 Hawks. It knows the predicting
8:00 the provision allows the use
8:02 of these tools only when it is
8:03 in conjunction with self
8:06 enforcing traffic calming
8:06 infrastructure. The reason for
8:09 this is twofold. First, the
8:10 cost of the signals is very
8:11 high and can run over
8:14 1 million dollars per The
8:15 1 million dollars each and the
8:16 high expands reads consuming
8:20 the Esser funds by itself. And
8:22 secondly, the save the
8:23 effectiveness of these signals
8:24 is reduce what not paired with
8:26 other traffic calming
8:28 measures. Still, the signals
8:29 are frequently requested by
8:31 communities that we landed on
8:32 this condition allowance to
8:34 balance these concerns. And we
8:34 can talk about that more in
8:40 turn. Great. This light is the
8:41 flip side of allowable uses.
8:42 It clearly spells out what the
8:45 fun can no longer play for
8:46 that includes purchasing
8:48 installing reconstruction or
8:50 re timing. Traffic control
8:51 signals source similar
8:52 equipment like pedestrian
8:56 activated, flashing beacons
8:57 and hawks signals and excludes
8:59 a great teammate street
9:02 maintenance that isn't tied to
9:03 mobility improvements,
9:04 marketing or educational
9:06 campaigns. And studies designs
9:07 are engineering that aren't
9:08 tied to an allowable capital
9:12 project. It also excludes
9:13 signage, unrelated to
9:16 allowable capital projects,
9:18 police base enforcement and
9:21 traffic modeling given what we
9:25 just saw in the problem side,
9:25 it's explicitly that that
9:26 explicitly prohibits using the
9:29 find vision, 0 pedestrian
9:31 bicycle, our transit related
9:34 infrastructure that directly
9:35 closes the loophole that let
9:36 200,000 be spent in 2024. To
9:40 rip out safe bike
9:41 infrastructure downtown and
9:43 the 120 25 to reverse a safety
9:49 design on Alameda. So in the
9:52 6th stick holding side of This
9:53 is a matter that
9:54 transportation advocates have
9:55 been sounding the alarm for
9:57 for several years. And this
9:58 bill reflects those community
10:01 demands. We've heard time and
10:02 time again. Our staff in
10:03 advocates have met with daddy
10:03 numerous times and those
10:05 conversations have been
10:06 productive. That has been very
10:08 open to requests for Dayton,
10:10 have engage good faith about
10:12 what the impacts of their
10:13 agency would be. If this
10:15 proposed ordinance were
10:17 enacted. The biggest flag
10:18 we've heard in those
10:20 conversations as the cost of
10:21 the date that parking
10:22 contracts council is broadly
10:23 aware of this problem and
10:25 included it in his 2026 budget
10:27 letter to the administration,
10:28 a recommendation to properly
10:30 fund the city's parking
10:31 programs this ordinance does
10:32 not dictate what mechanisms
10:36 the administration chooses to
10:37 cover those costs. But it does
10:38 in community that that he ate
10:41 and ems are Is it an
10:42 appropriate source to utilize
10:46 for that function? Having just
10:46 secured draft language last
10:50 week, we hope to meet with and
10:51 it and get particular feedback
10:53 on the language you work
10:54 towards a productive landing
10:56 spot to address these issues.
10:58 A final open question for this
10:59 conversation and for council
11:00 is the feasibility of
11:03 implementing ordinance and the
11:05 2027 budget which kicks off in
11:06 SEPTEMBER. As you all there's
11:08 a strong preference to make
11:08 this change immediately. But
11:11 we want to hear from the
11:12 administration and their
11:13 perspective perspectives on
11:15 the timeline. And so with
11:19 that, we're open for
11:20 questions. Great thank you.
11:21 And I just want to clarify, we
11:22 do have another presentation
11:24 after this bout low-level
11:28 traffic stops with COUNCILMAN
11:29 The key was open. That's go
11:31 ahead and start COUNCILWOMAN
11:33 Forecast. Thank Thanks,
11:35 ladies. Where would I find
11:37 information about what the srf
11:38 currently? What's the language
11:44 is sitting code or is it in?
11:45 The budget book? Why coach,
11:50 what's the code number? Taken
11:54 whether getting love to see it
11:58 looks like you're at in the
11:59 language or just modifying one
12:03 section of that. You're not
12:04 eliminating something. You're
12:06 just adding language to it to
12:08 make it my specific. I mean,
12:13 we've had some discussions
12:14 having allowable uses and not
12:16 about not not allowable uses,
12:17 but there's no precedents for
12:20 specific on the allowable
12:20 And so we wanted to get more
12:21 uses, said that there wasn't
12:25 any discretion, if you will,
12:26 about one might interpret the
12:32 uses to be the 4 areas brought
12:35 a link there. It doesn't seem
12:36 like can make create some
12:38 justification for why there
12:44 current use is fit with times
12:45 that they're super outside of
12:47 this poor areas that would
12:49 like that. The current
12:52 findings that the current but
12:54 for areas feel like they're
12:57 very street now. Yeah, I would
12:58 just I don't know how it's
13:01 written now. Just looking
13:04 today as presented today. That
13:04 they can create a
13:05 justification for what they're
13:06 spending has Or are you
13:07 finding that the spend was
13:09 very much outside of those 4
13:09 areas? I mean, the way that we
13:11 interpret it is that it was
13:14 outside the areas and that it
13:16 was being interpreting
13:17 interpret it differently than
13:18 it was intended when it was
13:20 enacted by council in 2021.
13:22 And I think when it comes to
13:23 that parking enforcement piece
13:26 specifically is all right.
13:30 Getting away from in actually
13:31 productive. You that from that
13:34 improve traffic And answer
13:37 your question, we just found
13:39 it. It's councilmembers cb.
13:44 21. 1, 2, 9, I'm asking which
13:47 section of code of
13:55 kind of and you can follow up
13:58 later with because I want to
14:00 read what's there now and be
14:01 able to the rest of the
14:02 contacts The only other
14:05 question that I had is in
14:06 charter and its repeated later
14:11 in our charter permissive like
14:12 gives you the permissions that
14:12 you given. Doesn't mention
14:14 that you don't have that
14:17 permission and the Saudi
14:18 advisory board is only allowed
14:21 to advise review and comment.
14:22 So that's why I'm wondering,
14:23 like where where you're
14:24 backing is on allowing them to
14:28 approve a budget. Yeah, to be
14:29 honest with you. I am not
14:31 quite clear on it. We've some
14:32 discussions on Friday if it
14:34 was possible for us to do
14:36 that. And I think that's more
14:38 of a conversation in terms of
14:39 exploration. And Mike, this is
14:40 what we're proposing and its
14:43 debt and set in stone, that's
14:44 a thing. Those are the
14:47 questions and I have. Do you
14:48 have timeline yet you're
14:50 willing to talk to
14:50 administration about it. We
14:54 have to talk to And the