Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Transportation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Boulder resident urges council to approve Folsom Street project and let staff move to final design

5548949 · August 8, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

During public comment at the Aug. 7, 2025, Boulder City Council meeting, a resident urged council members to approve the Folsom Street project and allow staff to advance the design, citing past reversals on protected bike lanes and recent electoral changes on council.

Eric Budd, a Boulder resident, told the Boulder City Council during the Aug. 7 open-comment period that council should approve the Folsom Street project and allow staff to move the plan to a final design.

Budd, who said he helped organize protests over earlier removals of protected bike lanes, contrasted the city—s situation in 2015 with the present and urged councilors to support the project now that the council and staff have signaled a more ambitious approach to transportation.

"Let the staff move forward," Budd said, adding later, "We have an incredible city transportation staff, and they should be supported and moving Folsom Street to a final design. Now is the time to build on our progress." He also thanked elected officials and council supporters by name during his remarks.

Budd said he had been involved in protests in 2015 when the city removed protected bike lanes and urged council members to avoid repeating that step. He named council members he said have supported the plan and praised city transportation staff for their work.

The comment occurred during the council—s public comment period; the transcript of the meeting does not record any formal council action on the Folsom Street project during the session. The project remained an agenda item referenced by speakers but no vote or directive was recorded in the public comments portion of the meeting.

The public comment period at the Aug. 7 meeting had 20 people signed up, with one withdrawal noted by staff before the session began.