Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts 2020 model traffic code after debate over study session and public notice
Summary
The council voted to adopt an updated model traffic code (2020 version by reference) after questions about whether the changes required a study session and how the city will educate the public about changes, fines and point reductions.
Englewood City Council voted Jan. 6 to adopt the 2020 edition of the model traffic code by reference, an update staff and the city attorney said primarily consolidates existing traffic provisions rather than changing statewide policy.
City Attorney Tamara Niles and Public Works Director Victor Rochelle told council the city first adopted an earlier model traffic code in 1977, updated it subsequently, and adopted the 2020 version in 2020; routine housekeeping during the current packet consolidated duplicative material and removed municipal code text already covered by the model code. Staff said the draft was reviewed by the Englewood Transportation Advisory Committee (ETAC) in October and ETAC offered no objections. After discussion, council approved the ordinance on second reading 7‑0.
Council debate focused on three themes: whether the update merited a dedicated study session for council and public notice, the public cost and logistics of required signage changes, and the practical impact of technical changes such as automatic points reduction language and whether prosecutorial discretion would remain. City Attorney Niles explained that the proposed update incorporates an automatic point‑reduction procedure available under state statute (Colorado Revised Statutes citation discussed in meeting) for motorists who timely pay certain penalty assessments; she said the municipal prosecutor still retains discretion to offer individualized plea arrangements and diversion options.
Several council members asked staff to provide an estimate of signage replacement costs before the next round of administrative updates, and to provide public education about any substantive changes that affect residents (for example, how point‑reduction and driver improvement options operate and how residential 25 mph limits are applied). Mayor and council members said they favored ETAC review and staff recommendations but asked that future substantive updates include a council study session and clearer documentation of signage and enforcement cost implications.
The ordinance passed on a roll‑call vote with all seven members voting aye. Council directed staff to flag any future, more substantive model‑code changes for a study session, and to coordinate public education on the new code provisions.
