City and County of Denver

Referred Question 2IBudget and appropriation process; optional two-year budget (Charter amendment)

Official ballot title

Shall the Charter of the City and County of Denver be amended to adjust the City and County’s budget and appropriation process, and in connection therewith, allowing the City Council to adopt a two-year budget planning and adoption process and modernizing or repealing certain charter sections?

Verbatim from: Denver 2026 Ballot Information Booklet (Denver Elections Division)

Summary

Amends the Charter’s budget provisions so City Council may, by ordinance, adopt a two-year budget term, moves the Mayor’s proposed-budget release date earlier, and updates or repeals certain Charter sections.

Plain-language summary written for this guide from the sources below.

What a YES vote does

The Charter’s budget provisions are amended: City Council may adopt a budget term of two fiscal years by ordinance (it is not required to), the Mayor’s proposed budget release date moves from September 15 to the first Friday in September, and certain Charter sections are modernized or repealed.

What a NO vote does

The Charter’s current budget and appropriation provisions stay in place, including the September 15 release date for the Mayor’s proposed budget.

Plain-language description, not official text. The Denver Ballot Information Booklet and TABOR notice do not include official yes/no vote descriptions for this measure.

How it got on the ballot

Council Bill 26-0864. Sponsors: Councilmembers Lewis, Gilmore and Sawyer. [Legistar: Council Bill 26-0864]
Council committee: approved for filing June 30, 2026, 4–1 (no: Flynn; absent: Sandoval, Torres). [Legistar: Council Bill 26-0864]
Full City Council: passed July 20, 2026, 10–2. [Legistar: Council Bill 26-0864]
Voted yes: Gilmore, Gonzales-Gutierrez, Hinds, Kashmann, Lewis, Romero Campbell, Sawyer, Torres, Watson, Sandoval. [Legistar: Council Bill 26-0864]
Voted no: Alvidrez, Flynn. [Legistar: Council Bill 26-0864]
Absent: Parady. [Legistar: Council Bill 26-0864]
Signed by the Mayor July 22, 2026. [Legistar: Council Bill 26-0864]

Placed on the ballot by: Denver City Council (referred Charter amendment)
Vote needed to pass: Majority of votes castThe cited Denver sources do not state the threshold; this is a plain-language description, not official text.

Official fiscal information

The amendment “does not mandate a biennial budget but grants Council the power to do so.”
Estimated one-time cost to reconfigure existing systems for a two-year budget term: approximately $50,000 (budget development system about $30K; budget publishing system about $20K). Both costs are expected to be non-recurring. (Estimated)
No anticipated costs from moving the proposed budget release date from September 15 to the first Friday in September.

From the official source’s fiscal section. Figures marked “(Estimated)” are estimates or projections in the source.

Sources

Commentary (opinion)

This section is opinion. It is separate from the sourced facts above.

Vote No on 2I.

A two-year budget adds risk without a clear benefit. About 56% of Denver's general fund comes from sales tax, which fluctuates month to month, and the city faced a mid-year shortfall in 2025. Forecasting two years out is harder, a point the city's own Budget Director has acknowledged.

It is also not truly a two-year budget. The second year is only a draft that must go through the full process again: a mayoral proposal, Council amendments, and possible vetoes and overrides. That means two rounds of work, not less.

The stated benefits do not hold up under scrutiny. Nonprofits and city partners have long planned their staffing without certainty about the following year's funding, and that has not changed. Likewise, program evaluation does not require a dedicated off-year; with today's tools, a year of data can be collected, analyzed, and acted on within the normal annual cycle.

Finally, 2I bundles several unrelated changes, including new deadlines, renamed reserves, and an automatic spending-cut rule, into a single yes-or-no question. A better approach is to keep the annual budget and pursue the worthwhile pieces, such as earlier public input, on their own merits.