City Attorney’s Office
Reference: Study Session Item to Discuss Amending Section 1-24-10, Related to General Penalties, and Article 9, Related to Criminal Offenses and Penalties, of the Brighton Municipal Code
To: Mayor Gregory Mills and Members of City Council
Through: Michael P. Martinez, City Manager
Prepared By: James Gallagher and Michael Davis, Assistant City Attorneys
Date Prepared: 1/23/2025
PURPOSE
To update sections of the Brighton Municipal Code (“BMC”) that no longer reflect current law or that are outdated or incorrect. At a future meeting, the City Council will consider amending Section 1-24-10 of BMC related to general penalties and Article 9 of the BMC related to criminal offenses and penalties.
BACKGROUND
On December 22, 2025, in In re People v. Camp, 2025 CO 64 (Colo. 2025), the Colorado Supreme Court held that while offenders may be prosecuted in municipal court for offenses that have comparable state offenses, municipalities may not impose penalties that exceed the maximum penalties authorized under state law for the comparable state offenses. The court’s decision establishes a limitation on the exercise of home rule municipal authority.
The City prosecutes municipal crimes and the Municipal Court sentences offenders under the general penalty section of the BMC that allows for incarceration up to 364 days and/or a fine of $2,650 dollars. For certain state crimes where the elements of the state crime match the elements of the same crime in the BMC, the City penalty exceeds the penalty that a defendant would receive for the same crime if charged in a state court. For example, a defendant who commits a petty offense and is charged in County Court can receive a maximum sentence of 10 days in jail and/or a $300 dollar fine. The same person committing the same crime can be charged in Brighton Municipal Court could be sentenced to 364 days in jail and fined up to $2,650 dollars. The Colorado Supreme Court ruled that such discrepancies are prohibited.
The City Attorney’s Office has been aware of the lower court cases and had been waiting for the Colorado Supreme Court decision. To prepare, our office has been reviewing the elements of all the crimes in the BMC and comparing them to state statutes. This has been labor intensive detailed research plus multiple meetings as our office has sorted through each and every crime in Article 9 and other articles and compared them to state statutes. As a result of that research and upon receiving the Colorado Supreme Court decision, the City Attorney’s Office began preparing an ordinance to update the penalty section, update the criminal code sections, and make other updates to the BMC.
An ordinance will be proposed that amends the City’s general penalty section to reflect the recent change in the law. Now, every criminal municipal offense that has a comparable state offense will have a penalty that does not exceed the comparable state offense’s penalty. Because the state has penalty classifications, the new general penalty section will mimic the comparable state penalty classifications: class 1 misdemeanors will have a maximum penalty of up to 364 days in jail, $1,000 fine, or both; class 2 misdemeanors will have a maximum penalty of up to 120 days in jail, $750 fine, or both; and petty offenses will have a maximum penalty of up to 10 days in jail, $300 fine, or both. For every criminal municipal offense that does not have a comparable state offense, the City’s general penalty of up to 364 days in jail, $2,650 fine, or both, will still apply.
The proposed ordinance will amend the City’s criminal code by making sure every criminal municipal offense that has a comparable state offense will reference the correct penalty classification of either class 1 misdemeanor, class 2 misdemeanor, or petty offense. There are certain criminal offenses where the penalty classification, and thereby maximum sentence, will vary depending on the circumstances. For example, theft is now classified as either a class 1 misdemeanor, a class 2 misdemeanor, or a petty offense depending on the value of the item stolen.
The proposed ordinance also removes various criminal violations that are either outdated or encompassed in other sections of the City’s criminal code. These violations include refusing to aid a police officer; defacing or damaging posted advertisement or bill; theft by rental property; theft of food or accommodations; intentional bodily injury (replaced by the charge of assault); and bodily injury/criminal negligence.
Finally, the proposed ordinance amends various criminal offenses to align more with state law or to tailor the charge to local concerns. These offenses included trespass, theft, harassment, assault, consumption prohibited, and firearms prohibited in or upon public facilities.
While the legislature made changes to the state criminal charges, the proponents of those bills told lobbyists for the Colorado Municipal League that it would not apply to municipal charges, the State Supreme Court has now decided differently. Unless and until there is a legislative change made at the State level, the City is obligated to comply with the Court’s decision. This item will be brought back for Council’s consideration as an ordinance in March.
ATTACHMENTS
Presentation