Boulder approves slimmed-down budget in the face of uncertainty
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Sarah Grillo/Axios
Boulder's pared-down 2026 budget was approved by City Council Thursday night by an 8-1 vote.
Why it matters: Like many cities and counties, Boulder has had to make numerous cuts in the face of financial uncertainty driven by flattening tax revenue and federal funding concerns.
Driving the news: The 2026 budget proposed by city manager Nuria Rivera-Vandermyde comes in at $521 million compared to the 2025 approved budget of $589 million.
Threat level: Boulder must make up a $7.5 million shortfall in its general fund as sales and use tax revenue has slowed, according to a city release.
- Additionally, about $50 million in federal funds remain undistributed.
Between the lines: The spending plan eliminates three staffed positions and 16 vacant jobs. And already, Boulder has also been in a hiring freeze since June.
What's new: To help close the deficit, the budget factors in new revenue from higher affordable housing cash-in-lieu fees, a 50-cent increase in city parking rates and new speed enforcement cameras.
- It also includes a new transportation management fee narrowly approved by City Council Thursday night prior to the budget.
- Yes, but: At the same time, the budget anticipates less revenue from electronic smoking and marijuana taxes.
By the numbers: The city's dashboard divides the budget into seven categories.
- The largest share, about $127.8 million, will go to what the city calls "responsibly governed," which includes $45 million in citywide general expenses.
- Just under $100 million is going toward public safety, including $27.7 million for police services and $23.5 for emergency operations.
- Other categories include $73.3 million for environmental sustainability, $54.3 million to health, recreation and culture and $53.4 million to living infrastructure.
The other side: The lone "no" vote was cast by Taishya Adams, who felt the budget would impact low-income families in particular and objected to the share of money being spent on governance and safety.
- "Who is safe and what are we governing if people can't afford to live here?" Adams said.
What they're saying: "Not surprisingly, economic uncertainty in the world is changing local spending habits and stretching the resources we have," Rivera-Vandermyde said in a statement. "We need to account for this as we consider what community expects of us."