The budget
What the city was allowed to spend in 2026, and out of which funds.
Citywide totals
What this counts Total City of Fort Collins appropriations for the calendar year as adopted with the biennial budget: all City funds, gross of interfund transfers and internal service funds, including the GIDs, URA and DDA appropriated by separate ordinances.
GROSS OF TRANSFERS BY DESIGN — the book's own glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations". Never read as spending; the Net City Budget is published beside it.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts The operative appropriation for the year after the annual appropriations ordinance: the City Charter requires each fiscal year its own spending approval even inside the two-year budget cycle, and the Year-2 ordinance can amend the adopted figure before the year begins.
For 2026: Ordinance No. 186, 2025, adopted on second reading November 18, 2025, amending 2026 before it began. A DIFFERENT QUANTITY from the as-adopted figure — the two are labeled at every occurrence and never swapped.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts The adopted budget excluding internal service funds, interfund transfers, the GIDs, URA funds and the DDA — the book's own de-duplicated view of the same year.
The publisher's own "Less" block, printed identically under Expenditures by Type and Expenditures by Area.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts How much of each $100 of the as-adopted appropriation the City's own Net City Budget removes: internal service funds, transfers between funds, the two general improvement districts, the urban renewal authority and the downtown development authority.
STATED ON THE AS-ADOPTED BASIS ONLY, and labeled that way wherever it appears — the amending ordinance restates no net figure, so no amended equivalent exists and none is invented. Both operands are the publisher's own printed totals.
How this figure was reached ($876,247,295 - $657,860,360) / $876,247,295 x 100 = $24.92 of every $100 as adopted. The $218,386,935 difference is the book's own "Less" block. AS ADOPTED, never as amended — the ordinance restates no net figure.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
Public safety
What this counts The adopted budget for the Police Services service area: Investigations, Police Information Services, Patrol, Community and Special Services, and the Office of the Chief.
DELIBERATELY NOT CALLED A CORRECTIONS BUDGET. The city budgets no corrections function — the jail is the Larimer County Sheriff's, in the county's own budget, which this locale does not cover. Fire is also not here: Poudre Fire Authority is a separate entity funded by intergovernmental agreement, and the city line for it is a contribution, not a department.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
Sales tax
What this counts The City of Fort Collins sales tax rate as published on the city's own current-rates page. Home-rule and self-collecting, so the city's page is the authority, not the State's courtesy table.
THE RATE ALONE, deliberately: the budget book assumed two 0.25% dedicated taxes expired at end-2025 yet this rate is unchanged, and which dedicated taxes compose it in 2026 was not established. No composition is derived.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
Home-rule and self-collecting (filing through MUNIRevs), so the State's DOR table is not the authority on this rate — the city's own page is. THE RATE IS PUBLISHED ALONE, deliberately: the adopted budget book assumed two 0.25% dedicated taxes expired at end-2025, yet this page still prints 4.35% and the July 2026 monthly collection report still shows a "General Fund Renewable (.25%)" line collecting. Which dedicated taxes compose the 2026 rate was not established from any document read here, so no composition is derived — the components quoted (city + county + state) are the page's own printed lines, and they are asserted to sum to the page's own total.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts What a buyer pays at the register inside Fort Collins: the city's rate plus the county and state components, as the city's own page prints and sums them.
The publisher's own sum, re-added in integer basis points on every run. Lodging and grocery food carry the city's own special rates and are not folded in.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
Home-rule and self-collecting (filing through MUNIRevs), so the State's DOR table is not the authority on this rate — the city's own page is. THE RATE IS PUBLISHED ALONE, deliberately: the adopted budget book assumed two 0.25% dedicated taxes expired at end-2025, yet this page still prints 4.35% and the July 2026 monthly collection report still shows a "General Fund Renewable (.25%)" line collecting. Which dedicated taxes compose the 2026 rate was not established from any document read here, so no composition is derived — the components quoted (city + county + state) are the page's own printed lines, and they are asserted to sum to the page's own total.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What the money is budgeted for
What this counts Offers funded under the "High Performing Government" outcome in the City's Budgeting for Outcomes recap, as adopted.
The Offer Recap's own subtotal; the seven outcomes plus the offers not included in outcomes sum exactly to Total City Appropriations.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Offers funded under the "Culture and Recreation" outcome in the City's Budgeting for Outcomes recap, as adopted.
The Offer Recap's own subtotal; the seven outcomes plus the offers not included in outcomes sum exactly to Total City Appropriations.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Offers funded under the "Economic Health" outcome in the City's Budgeting for Outcomes recap, as adopted.
The Offer Recap's own subtotal; the seven outcomes plus the offers not included in outcomes sum exactly to Total City Appropriations.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Offers funded under the "Environmental Health" outcome in the City's Budgeting for Outcomes recap, as adopted.
The Offer Recap's own subtotal; the seven outcomes plus the offers not included in outcomes sum exactly to Total City Appropriations.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Offers funded under the "Neighborhood and Community Vitality" outcome in the City's Budgeting for Outcomes recap, as adopted.
The Offer Recap's own subtotal; the seven outcomes plus the offers not included in outcomes sum exactly to Total City Appropriations.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Offers funded under the "Transportation and Mobility" outcome in the City's Budgeting for Outcomes recap, as adopted.
The Offer Recap's own subtotal; the seven outcomes plus the offers not included in outcomes sum exactly to Total City Appropriations.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Transfers between funds, debt service, retiree payments, insurance and similar items the Offer Recap carries outside the seven outcomes.
The recap's own sub-total. Mostly transfers — the reason the gross total double-counts.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (2) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
Where $100 goes, by fund group
What this counts Enterprise funds: the 2026 appropriation for this fund group as amended, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 table.
The five city fund groups cross-foot on their own rows and sum to the ordinance's printed TOTAL CITY FUNDS; adding the other-funds line reaches the Total 2026 the ordinance also states in words.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Enterprise funds: the share of each $100 of the City's 2026 appropriation AS AMENDED, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 fund-group totals.
CALC — the group figure and the total are the publisher's own; the division is ours, formula shown. GROSS BASIS: the internal service and other-funds lines are themselves the duplication the book's glossary describes, which is why the receipt names them rather than netting them away.
How this figure was reached Enterprise funds, as amended: $335,178,732 / $889,115,826 x 100 = $37.70 of every $100 (largest-remainder rounding; the six lines sum to exactly $100.00). Gross of transfers, the basis the ordinance itself appropriates on.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts General Fund: the 2026 appropriation for this fund group as amended, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 table.
The five city fund groups cross-foot on their own rows and sum to the ordinance's printed TOTAL CITY FUNDS; adding the other-funds line reaches the Total 2026 the ordinance also states in words.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts General Fund: the share of each $100 of the City's 2026 appropriation AS AMENDED, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 fund-group totals.
CALC — the group figure and the total are the publisher's own; the division is ours, formula shown. GROSS BASIS: the internal service and other-funds lines are themselves the duplication the book's glossary describes, which is why the receipt names them rather than netting them away.
How this figure was reached General Fund, as amended: $244,046,137 / $889,115,826 x 100 = $27.45 of every $100 (largest-remainder rounding; the six lines sum to exactly $100.00). Gross of transfers, the basis the ordinance itself appropriates on.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Special revenue and debt service funds: the 2026 appropriation for this fund group as amended, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 table.
The five city fund groups cross-foot on their own rows and sum to the ordinance's printed TOTAL CITY FUNDS; adding the other-funds line reaches the Total 2026 the ordinance also states in words.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Special revenue and debt service funds: the share of each $100 of the City's 2026 appropriation AS AMENDED, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 fund-group totals.
CALC — the group figure and the total are the publisher's own; the division is ours, formula shown. GROSS BASIS: the internal service and other-funds lines are themselves the duplication the book's glossary describes, which is why the receipt names them rather than netting them away.
How this figure was reached Special revenue and debt service funds, as amended: $140,483,374 / $889,115,826 x 100 = $15.80 of every $100 (largest-remainder rounding; the six lines sum to exactly $100.00). Gross of transfers, the basis the ordinance itself appropriates on.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Internal service funds: the 2026 appropriation for this fund group as amended, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 table.
The five city fund groups cross-foot on their own rows and sum to the ordinance's printed TOTAL CITY FUNDS; adding the other-funds line reaches the Total 2026 the ordinance also states in words.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Internal service funds: the share of each $100 of the City's 2026 appropriation AS AMENDED, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 fund-group totals.
CALC — the group figure and the total are the publisher's own; the division is ours, formula shown. GROSS BASIS: the internal service and other-funds lines are themselves the duplication the book's glossary describes, which is why the receipt names them rather than netting them away.
How this figure was reached Internal service funds, as amended: $113,466,673 / $889,115,826 x 100 = $12.76 of every $100 (largest-remainder rounding; the six lines sum to exactly $100.00). Gross of transfers, the basis the ordinance itself appropriates on.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Other funds: the 2026 appropriation for this fund group as amended, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 table.
The five city fund groups cross-foot on their own rows and sum to the ordinance's printed TOTAL CITY FUNDS; adding the other-funds line reaches the Total 2026 the ordinance also states in words.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Other funds: the share of each $100 of the City's 2026 appropriation AS AMENDED, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 fund-group totals.
CALC — the group figure and the total are the publisher's own; the division is ours, formula shown. GROSS BASIS: the internal service and other-funds lines are themselves the duplication the book's glossary describes, which is why the receipt names them rather than netting them away.
How this figure was reached Other funds, as amended: $45,809,749 / $889,115,826 x 100 = $5.15 of every $100 (largest-remainder rounding; the six lines sum to exactly $100.00). Gross of transfers, the basis the ordinance itself appropriates on.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Capital improvement funds: the 2026 appropriation for this fund group as amended, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 table.
The five city fund groups cross-foot on their own rows and sum to the ordinance's printed TOTAL CITY FUNDS; adding the other-funds line reaches the Total 2026 the ordinance also states in words.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Capital improvement funds: the share of each $100 of the City's 2026 appropriation AS AMENDED, from Ordinance No. 186, 2025's own Section 1 fund-group totals.
CALC — the group figure and the total are the publisher's own; the division is ours, formula shown. GROSS BASIS: the internal service and other-funds lines are themselves the duplication the book's glossary describes, which is why the receipt names them rather than netting them away.
How this figure was reached Capital improvement funds, as amended: $10,131,161 / $889,115,826 x 100 = $1.14 of every $100 (largest-remainder rounding; the six lines sum to exactly $100.00). Gross of transfers, the basis the ordinance itself appropriates on.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts The six fund-group receipt lines summed.
Asserted to be exactly $100.00 every run, before anything is emitted.
How this figure was reached The six receipt lines sum to exactly $100.00 after largest-remainder rounding, asserted every run before anything is emitted.
Where it came from Fort Collins City Council
Open the source document ↗
The DocView.aspx link the City publishes is a fake-200 Laserfiche viewer: an invented route returns 200 within 4.2% of the real body size. The WebLink ElectronicFile.aspx path serves the actual PDF (3.8 MB, scanned with an OCR text layer). The As-Amended column reconciles four independent ways: every fund section cross-foots, the sections sum to TOTAL CITY FUNDS, city funds plus other funds equal Total 2026, and Section 2 states the same total IN WORDS. One Additions cell (DDA Operating) fails its row cross-foot by exactly $540,000 — a misprint or an OCR misread; the published figure rests only on the As-Amended column and the words, and a guard fails this run if that discrepancy changes, so a reissued ordinance gets re-read rather than silently trusted.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
Paid to Poudre Fire Authority
What this counts The City of Fort Collins' 2026 line for Poudre Fire Authority in Expenditures by Area, inside both the as-adopted gross total and the Net City Budget.
COUNTED INSIDE THE TOTAL, NEVER ADDED TO IT OR SUBTRACTED FROM IT (ruled 2 October 2026). Poudre Fire Authority is a separate authority; the city pays it by intergovernmental agreement. The offer page prints a different 2026 figure; the area table is the one read here.
How this figure was reached Poudre Fire Authority, 2026 as adopted: $41,598,084, as Expenditures by Area (page 41 of the book) prints it. Counted inside the gross and the net, never added to or subtracted from either.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts The line to Poudre Fire Authority as a percent of the Net City Budget, 2026 as adopted.
A CALC; the formula is on the methodology page. AS ADOPTED ONLY.
How this figure was reached $41,598,084 / $657,860,360 (Net City Budget, 2026 as adopted) x 100 = 6.32%.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts The line to Poudre Fire Authority as a percent of Total City Appropriations, 2026 as adopted.
A CALC; the formula is on the methodology page. AS ADOPTED ONLY.
How this figure was reached $41,598,084 / $876,247,295 (Total City Appropriations, 2026 as adopted) x 100 = 4.75%.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Sixty-six percent of the 2026 property tax budget, the share the budget book says is given to Poudre Fire Authority under an intergovernmental agreement.
A CALC. It is a part of the line to Poudre Fire Authority, never an addition to it: the city's line is larger because the city also funds the authority's operations, maintenance and capital under a revenue allocation formula.
How this figure was reached $51,730,356 (Property Taxes, Revenue Summary, 2026) x 66% = $34,142,035, rounded to the dollar. The book says 66% of Property Tax is given to Poudre Fire Authority by intergovernmental agreement (page 20).
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
Capital
What this counts The sum of the individual capital projects the City of Fort Collins funded and listed in the 2025-2026 Adopted Budget, for the year: the book's own TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS line.
NEVER CALLED THE CITY'S CAPITAL BUDGET. The book says twice, in its own words, that this schedule is not the total capital in the budget. Reconciled seven ways before it is emitted: every offer to its outcome subtotal, the subtotals to this total, every fund row to its own printed total, each fund column to Total Citywide Capital, and the book's two presentations of the same money against each other. A different quantity from the capital improvement fund class in the appropriation ordinance and from the all-capital line.
How this figure was reached $15,486,119, the TOTAL CAPITAL PROJECTS line of the Capital Projects schedule (2026, as adopted). Not the total capital in the budget: the book says so itself.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts The Capital line of the Total and Net City Budget table in the 2025-2026 Adopted Budget, for the year: all capital-related items in the city's citywide appropriations.
PRINTED IN MILLIONS BY THE PUBLISHER, to one decimal, so the value here is that figure times one million and carries no precision the city does not offer. Proved to be on the same basis as this locale's own headline: the table's Total City Appropriations row must round to the citywide totals published to the dollar. The book says the line is significantly greater than the sum of capital project offers; the difference is a figure no publisher prints and none is derived.
How this figure was reached $63.7M, the Capital row of the Total and Net City Budget table (2026, as adopted), printed in millions to one decimal.
Where it came from City of Fort Collins
Open the source document ↗
The COVER carries both a RECOMMENDED and an ADOPTED title page — the stage is identified from interior text. Three tables (Offer Recap p.49, Expenditures by Type p.38, Expenditures by Area p.39-40) print identical citywide totals to the dollar; the summary NARRATIVE on p.26 prints different totals ($921.4M/$863.9M) than the table directly beneath it and does not say what it excludes — the tables are read, the narrative never is. The gross total double-counts by design: the glossary says a dollar "may be counted twice, occasionally three times in arriving at total appropriations", which is why the Net City Budget is published beside it, each labeled. The 2027-2028 RECOMMENDED budget lands on the same page in early September 2026 — a proposal one link away from the adopted book, the eight-for-eight trap.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
The county’s own money
What this counts Larimer County's own adopted budget for 2026 — total expenditures, all funds.
The county's own budget document, read at the county's own printed total. This is Larimer County's money and NOT the city's. Two separate governments; the same dollar never appears at both levels, and no figure here is ever added to a city figure or to another county's.
How this figure was reached $770,372,250 — 2026 Adopted, total expenditures, all funds — the county's GROSS figure. NAME THE QUANTITY: the county publishes two totals for this year and its own Expenditure Summary states both, this one and a net operating expense budget of $466 million reached by removing $148 million of non-operational expenses, $3 million of disaster recovery and $154 million of capital. Both are the county's; this is the gross one and the net is never printed under this name. THREE presentations inside the book state it and agree exactly — Table 7, whose 27 department rows also sum to it to the dollar; the Section D all-funds schedule, read down 22 object categories; and the balanced-budget table, whose column header still carries the stale word "Proposed" from the draft this book replaced while printing the adopted figure underneath it. The separately published Budget in Brief states $770 million again and calls it adopted. This is Larimer County's money and NOT the city's. Two separate governments; the same dollar never appears at both levels, and no figure here is ever added to a city figure or to another county's.
What this cannot be compared to This figure is on the basis “adopted appropriation”. A figure of the same name on another basis is a different thing, and the two must not be set against each other. Where it came from Larimer County, Colorado
Open the source document ↗
A 75 MB PDF, 421 pages, parses cleanly, a PDF read as text; the host 404s an invented path. THIS HOST TURNS AWAY A BROWSER-STYLE REQUEST AND ANSWERS A PLAIN ONE, so this source is requested with a plain client name rather than the site's usual one. RESOLVED, NOT CONSTRUCTED: the county's 2026 Budget page carries five document links and this one's link text is "2026 Adopted Budget". THE PROPOSAL AND THE ENACTMENT SIT ONE PATH SEGMENT APART, as they have on every jurisdiction read for this project: the same page links "2026 Proposed Budget" at .../2026-proposed-budget-narrative.pdf, a complete, reconciling, HTTP 200 document whose grand total is $751,204,110 against this one's $770,372,250. THE ADOPTED BOOK CARRIES FIVE STALE "2026 Proposed Budget" LABELS from that draft, one of them the column header over its own balanced-budget table — which prints the ADOPTED total underneath it. That is a stale label rather than the proposal's figure, and it is proved rather than assumed by the two books disagreeing. It is NOT the Douglas County shape: all 101 page footers here are stage-neutral, none says "Proposed", and both column rulers a figure is read against name the adopted stage themselves. WHAT IT DOES NOT PUBLISH: the Sheriff's Office is budgeted at DEPARTMENT grain broken out by expenditure category, never by division, so there is no jail line to read and this county's jail figure is refused. Section E, the adoption resolutions, is scanned images and carries no extractable text.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts The whole Larimer County Sheriff's Office for 2026 — every division, all funds.
Published where the county publishes NO jail line, so a reader is told the whole that the unpublished part sits inside rather than being shown nothing at all. This is Larimer County's money and NOT the city's. Two separate governments; the same dollar never appears at both levels, and no figure here is ever added to a city figure or to another county's.
How this figure was reached $98,881,110 — the elected Sheriff's whole department for 2026, all funds, as the county printed it. It is NOT a corrections figure: it also covers patrol, investigations and the office's other divisions. The whole elected Sheriff's Office for 2026, all funds, as the county printed it. Its five expenditure categories sum to it exactly on the Sheriff's own page, and the countywide department table states the same figure from an independent presentation. This county publishes no jail line, so this figure is the nearest thing to one that exists and it is NOT it: the jail is one part of this department and the county does not print the split, which is stated on the page rather than left for a reader to assume. This is Larimer County's money and NOT the city's. Two separate governments; the same dollar never appears at both levels, and no figure here is ever added to a city figure or to another county's.
What this cannot be compared to This figure is on the basis “adopted appropriation”. A figure of the same name on another basis is a different thing, and the two must not be set against each other. Where it came from Larimer County, Colorado
Open the source document ↗
A 75 MB PDF, 421 pages, parses cleanly, a PDF read as text; the host 404s an invented path. THIS HOST TURNS AWAY A BROWSER-STYLE REQUEST AND ANSWERS A PLAIN ONE, so this source is requested with a plain client name rather than the site's usual one. RESOLVED, NOT CONSTRUCTED: the county's 2026 Budget page carries five document links and this one's link text is "2026 Adopted Budget". THE PROPOSAL AND THE ENACTMENT SIT ONE PATH SEGMENT APART, as they have on every jurisdiction read for this project: the same page links "2026 Proposed Budget" at .../2026-proposed-budget-narrative.pdf, a complete, reconciling, HTTP 200 document whose grand total is $751,204,110 against this one's $770,372,250. THE ADOPTED BOOK CARRIES FIVE STALE "2026 Proposed Budget" LABELS from that draft, one of them the column header over its own balanced-budget table — which prints the ADOPTED total underneath it. That is a stale label rather than the proposal's figure, and it is proved rather than assumed by the two books disagreeing. It is NOT the Douglas County shape: all 101 page footers here are stage-neutral, none says "Proposed", and both column rulers a figure is read against name the adopted stage themselves. WHAT IT DOES NOT PUBLISH: the Sheriff's Office is budgeted at DEPARTMENT grain broken out by expenditure category, never by division, so there is no jail line to read and this county's jail figure is refused. Section E, the adoption resolutions, is scanned images and carries no extractable text.
Date not published by the source.
✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
Crime
Reported vehicle theft, on the federal basis.
Vehicle theft
What this counts Motor vehicle theft offenses reported by Fort Collins Police Services for the calendar year.
FBI CDE agency endpoint. CSU police is a separate agency inside the city; campus offenses are not in this count.
What this cannot be compared to The FBI retired summary (SRS) reporting nationally; NIBRS counts every offense in an incident rather than only the most serious. This agency has reported NIBRS since January 2006 per the FBI's own roster, so its own counts do not cross a system seam inside this window — the break is recorded because any national or state line read beside this series does cross it, and a year-on-year comparison spanning it on those lines is not a change in theft. Where it came from FBI Crime Data Explorer
Open the source document ↗
AN INVENTED ORI ALSO RETURNS 200 (national series, no agency series), so the agency is asserted from the response body — the offense key must name Fort Collins — never from the status code. The FBI names this agency "Fort Collins Police Department"; the City's own name is Fort Collins Police Services. NIBRS since 2006-01-01 per the CDE roster, so no SRS-to-NIBRS seam crosses this agency's own counts in the published window. The endpoint returns the agency's own population served, which is what makes a city rate possible — and publishes NO per-agency coverage series, so the state locales' 90% gate cannot be applied here; a non-report floor on the count itself stands in for it. Colorado State University police (ORI CO0350500) is a SEPARATE agency inside the city's geography: these figures do not cover campus.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (11) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
What this counts Motor vehicle theft offenses reported by Fort Collins Police Services per 100,000 people it serves.
FBI CDE agency endpoint, with the agency's own population served as the denominator. NOT comparable with a state rate on the FBI matched population, and not ranked — the rank is a state-level measure.
How this figure was reached 313 offenses reported by Fort Collins Police Department / 170,509 population served x 100,000. The agency's own population, published in the same response — not a Census city figure and not the FBI's state matched population.
What this cannot be compared to The FBI retired summary (SRS) reporting nationally; NIBRS counts every offense in an incident rather than only the most serious. This agency has reported NIBRS since January 2006 per the FBI's own roster, so its own counts do not cross a system seam inside this window — the break is recorded because any national or state line read beside this series does cross it, and a year-on-year comparison spanning it on those lines is not a change in theft. Where it came from FBI Crime Data Explorer
Open the source document ↗
AN INVENTED ORI ALSO RETURNS 200 (national series, no agency series), so the agency is asserted from the response body — the offense key must name Fort Collins — never from the status code. The FBI names this agency "Fort Collins Police Department"; the City's own name is Fort Collins Police Services. NIBRS since 2006-01-01 per the CDE roster, so no SRS-to-NIBRS seam crosses this agency's own counts in the published window. The endpoint returns the agency's own population served, which is what makes a city rate possible — and publishes NO per-agency coverage series, so the state locales' 90% gate cannot be applied here; a non-report floor on the count itself stands in for it. Colorado State University police (ORI CO0350500) is a SEPARATE agency inside the city's geography: these figures do not cover campus.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (11) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.
People
How many people the police agency serves.
Who the agency serves
What this counts The population Fort Collins Police Services serves, as published by the FBI in the same response as the offense counts.
The rate's denominator, kept as its own series so the printed table can be checked column by column. NOT a Census city population and not the FBI's state matched population.
Where it came from FBI Crime Data Explorer
Open the source document ↗
AN INVENTED ORI ALSO RETURNS 200 (national series, no agency series), so the agency is asserted from the response body — the offense key must name Fort Collins — never from the status code. The FBI names this agency "Fort Collins Police Department"; the City's own name is Fort Collins Police Services. NIBRS since 2006-01-01 per the CDE roster, so no SRS-to-NIBRS seam crosses this agency's own counts in the published window. The endpoint returns the agency's own population served, which is what makes a city rate possible — and publishes NO per-agency coverage series, so the state locales' 90% gate cannot be applied here; a non-report floor on the count itself stands in for it. Colorado State University police (ORI CO0350500) is a SEPARATE agency inside the city's geography: these figures do not cover campus.
Date not published by the source.
Every period published (11) ✓ Sealed. Read from the checked data and re-derived against its own source record. Nothing here was worked out for you.