Adams County public works staff on Monday presented the second part of a revised five‑year capital improvement plan (CIP), asked commissioners to set the department’s 2026 work slate, and outlined how the county could use a new state “fuels impact” enterprise fund to accelerate large transportation and bridge projects.

Brian Staley, Public Works director, said the CIP update is intended for ongoing review and decisionmaking: “The CIP plan is a living document that you all will begin this year, and we will review ... you all will always have an opportunity to review and then make decisions based upon that discussion.” Staley told the board the department had compiled an extensive file of project materials—about 4.5 gigabytes—and had added a new budget table showing original budgets and year‑over‑year changes.

The presentation flagged two funding items that commissioners focused on: (1) a $12.8 million balance the county already has from the state fuels impact enterprise fund created by Senate Bill 2328 and (2) continuing annual distributions Staley described as “about $6.4 million annually” tied to that program. Staley said the statute requires funds awarded to be spent or allocated to projects that are substantially underway by the program’s deadlines (staff identified a December 2029 spending milestone in the slide deck).

Why it matters: county staff said the fuels impact fund is intended primarily to mitigate freight impacts and improve safety, and commissioners pressed for a process that balances rapid delivery of projects already funded by grants with inclusive stakeholder engagement for the new state fund. The county’s recommended five‑year list includes nine projects totaling roughly $38 million, with about $8.6 million of that amount already associated with grant or partner funding. Staff emphasized that some externally funded projects carry expiration clocks that would require spending in specific years or risk returning the funds to the grantor.

Most urgent projects and tradeoffs

Staff identified the Calhoun‑Bowers Bridge (the presentation described an approximately 11‑mile detour if the bridge is not repaired) as the county’s top priority and noted another neighborhood bridge as an urgent safety concern. Staley and other staff advised that if the county applies the fuels impact dollars now—for example the $12.8 million in hand—it could accelerate Calhoun‑Bowers into an earlier construction year and then free up county cash flow to advance other projects (such as 70 Third Avenue).

Staff also pointed to other candidate projects that could qualify for the fuels impact fund (Brighton Road, Bowdoin Road and several others) and asked commissioners whether the county should advance the top of the 5‑year list into the 2026 budget or use fuels impact funding to move projects between years. Renee Valdez, CIP manager, and Janet Lundquist, deputy director, joined Staley in explaining scoring, grant timelines and cash‑flow constraints.

Commissioner direction and next steps

Commissioners gave staff conditional approval to set the projects shown for 2026 while retaining flexibility for years 2–5 of the plan. Several commissioners asked staff to treat externally funded projects with expiration risk as operational priorities to be executed so grant dollars are not lost. Commissioners also instructed staff to stand up a stakeholder process—including CDOT freight representatives, affected municipalities (Commerce City and Brighton were specifically discussed), regional planning partners and freight operators—to develop a recommended approach for allocating fuels impact enterprise fund dollars and to return to the board with timing and recommendations in January.

Staff said they will:
- Convene the stakeholder group and invite regional partners and freight operators;
- Provide a detailed timing column for the CIP spreadsheet showing grant award years and any expenditure deadlines; and
- Establish quarterly project and financial reporting so the board and public can track progress against the 5‑year plan.

Community communication and project maturity

Multiple commissioners raised concerns about neighborhoods that participated in prior outreach and have seen promised work delayed. Commissioners asked staff to highlight projects that have active community engagement and to prioritize communication (email lists, website updates, door hangers where appropriate) so residents can see what the county plans and why schedules shift. Staff said they will identify a small set of projects that have advanced design or right‑of‑way work (examples discussed included 70 Third Avenue, Dahlia Street Phase 2, Bowness Street Phase 2, Berkeley Gardens and neighborhood gutter/sidewalk work) and mark them for targeted outreach.

Funding detail and caveats

Staff reiterated that the recommended 5‑year slate contains projects funded from assorted sources: county road and bridge funds, stormwater utility, federal and state grants, and the fuels impact enterprise fund. A cash‑flow table presented to commissioners showed how grant timing, partner contributions and county reserves interact; staff warned that moving one large project forward may require re‑sequencing others. Staley and Lundquist also noted there is legislative and budgetary risk at the state level that could affect enterprise funds in future years, and they advised demonstrating timely spend of receipts already received to reduce the risk of those dollars being rescinded.

Where the issue goes from here

Commissioners accepted staff’s recommendation to finalize a 2026 list now and to treat years 2–5 as a flexible, living plan that will be revisited during the 2027 budget cycle and via quarterly updates. Staff will return in January with the stakeholder plan for fuels impact funds, a revised CIP spreadsheet that includes grant expiration/timing columns, and a proposal for quarterly public reporting. The board directed staff to prioritize spending awards that are at risk of being forfeited and to craft outreach materials for neighborhoods with previously promised work that has been delayed.