Colfax council authorizes application for Prop 64 public safety grant after heated public exchange over skate park funding

The Colfax City Council on March 25 authorized the city manager to apply for a Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) Proposition 64 public health and safety grant (cohort 4) to support a proposed youth-resiliency project that staff said could include gap funding for a planned skate park, a citywide camera and lighting system, fencing and enforcement coordination.

Katrina Olson, the city’s administrative services officer, said staff engaged a consultant to prepare the application and outlined draft line items the team was considering. "So the total the the goal that we're asking for, is 775,000. We're eligible for up to 1000000, but we're, you know, keeping it in scope and focused to what our needs truly are," Olson said. Olson described draft allocations including $245,000 for the skate park gap funding, $150,000 for a camera system, $110,000 for lighting, fencing and gates, $15,000 for signage, $185,000 for phased public safety coordination, and amounts for evaluation and administration. She told the council the application is due on the 30th.

The proposal prompted robust public comment and council discussion about scope and oversight. Longtime attendee Larry (S5) objected that approving the application could function as a "backdoor" way to fund the skate park and noted proximity to his property that prevents him from participating from the dais. "When this skatepark was proposed, there would be no public money... There's already $480,000 of public money in this," he said, adding that approving the application could put the council out of the loop if the grant included skate-park funds.

Other commenters asked how the grant dollars would be allocated and whether nonprofits or private entities could receive awards; staff said the grant must be used on city property and that the contract with the consultant to prepare the application is capped at $11,250 and had not yet been billed. City manager (S9) and staff emphasized that the agreement before council was to submit the application, not to commit the city to spend awarded funds on specific projects without further council action.

Council members debated whether to label the application language more generically ("park security, fencing and safety") to avoid inflaming concerns about the skate park. Council member Sean (S3) urged framing to reduce controversy; others sought assurances that the city would retain approval authority over any final spending. The council held a roll-call vote; the clerk recorded the motion passing 4–1 (Mayor Pro Tem Hilberg recorded 'No').

The record contains two different figures cited for the grant total in the meeting: staff described a draft request of $775,000 while the mayor later referenced another number ($707,175); staff said line items would shift and that final application figures may change as the consultant finalizes the submission.

Next steps: staff will finalize the application with the consultant and submit it before the deadline; any acceptance of grant funds or allocation of awarded funds would require further council action.