Denver City Council Meeting: Collective Bargaining, Urban Renewal, and Waste Ordinance Amendments - September 8, 2025
It's time for the weekly general session of your Denver City Council.
Tonight's coverage of Denver City Council starts now.
Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for taking the time to join us for the Denver City Council's meeting.
Tonight, today is Monday, September 8th, 2025.
Tonight's meeting is being interpreted into Spanish.
Sam, would you please introduce yourself and let our viewers know how to enable translation on their devices?
Of course.
Yes.
Thank you for having us.
Hello, everyone.
My name is Sam Guzumano with the CLC.
And along with my colleague Jasmine, we'll be interpreting today's meeting into Spanish.
Please allow me a quick minute while I give instructions in Spanish on how to access interpretation.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much, Sam.
Welcome to the Denver City Council meeting of Monday, September 8th, 2025.
Council members, please join Councilmember Sawyer in the Pledge of Allegiance.
And to the Republic for which it stands.
Underground indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
Council members, please join Councilmember Sawyer as they lead us in the Denver City Council land acknowledgement.
The Denver City Council honors and acknowledges that the land on which we reside is the traditional territory of the Ute, Cheyenne, and Arapahoe peoples.
We also recognize that government academic and cultural institutions were founded upon and continue to enact exclusions and erasures of indigenous peoples.
May this acknowledgement demonstrate a commitment to working to dismantle ongoing legacies of oppression and inequities.
Cashman.
Approval of the minutes.
Are there any corrections to the minutes of August 25th?
Seeing none.
Councilmember Sawyer.
Thanks, Madam President.
It's that time of year again, so twice a year.
This fall it's going to be Sunday, the 28th of September.
Meet us at 8 30 AM at Montclair Rec Center.
Um you'll pick up supplies, get some breakfast, and then head out to clean our parks and repaint some of our bus stops.
So please come and join us.
There's a sign up genius.
You can find it on our social media.
Um, please uh feel free to come and join us.
We'd look forward to having everybody.
I would say last year we calculated out we had about over 400 volunteer hours um done by volunteers from District 5 in our community to keep our parks and our bus stops looking fresh.
And as we know, people when they feel uh at feel see something that is clean and safe, they actually feel safer.
It can impact the way that they experience the environment.
So excited to participate in that.
Please come and join us.
Thanks, Senator President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Heinz.
Thank you, Madam President.
Excuse me.
Thank you, Madam President.
Or blue, thank you, Madam President.
I am excited to be wearing the sheet, the shirt.
I'm gonna have check my English today.
Um I am excited to be wearing the shirt of Teller Tigers.
If you don't know who the Teller Tigers are, you should.
It's actually Teller Elementary in Congress Park.
And today, this morning, uh we were at Teller Elementary to uh showcase the city of Denver's first fully electric trash truck.
And so I wanna thank those uh second grade students who were there to celebrate the the uh unveiling of uh the new electric vehicle trash truck that Dotti will be bringing around the streets um and alleys in Congress Park.
I also want to thank uh Dotti for the um promises made, promises kept.
Uh, more than a few years ago, um uh we promised to uh the neighborhood of Congress Park that the first electric vehicle uh trash truck in the city would be in uh Congress Park.
And so uh I want to thank our current administration for um uh agreeing to continue the promise made actually by our last administration.
So uh thank you so much.
Also, there's a proclamation tonight on consent um this uh this month, September is National Service Dog Month, and um and I will be um uh not reading that here in the chambers, but uh but I do want to uh make a shout out to all of those who um help service dogs get it trained and in the hands of people who need them.
Thank you so much.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilwoman Gonzalez Gutierrez.
Uh thank you, madam president.
Uh I wanted to let people know about an event that myself and Councilman Cashman will be kicking off the neighborhood engagement workshops.
And this is to have conversations with our community about the registered neighborhood organizations.
That will kick off this Wednesday, September 10th from 6 to 8 p.m.
And we're starting in Southwest Denver.
We'll be making our way around the city and having these workshops throughout the city.
So this will be in Southwest Denver at Westwood Community Center, 1000 South Lowell Boulevard.
Um we will have uh, you know, refreshments, food, and refreshments for folks.
If you are able to RSVP, please do, um, as we will plan to have interpretation um as needed.
So uh come and join us and let's talk about our how we're gonna engage in our neighborhoods.
Thanks.
Thank you.
Councilmember Watson.
Uh thank you, Council President.
Uh, this uh Wednesday, September 10th, uh, from 6 to 8 p.m.
Uh neighbors are gathering in five points uh to have a discussion around Mestizo Curtis Park swimming pool and cultural arts um process.
Um we have had uh a delay or actually an extension of a delay of uh opening of the swimming pool from Mestiesa Curtis Park.
The park, the pool will not open until 2027.
This discussion uh from community led by community is to get information from Denver Parks and Rec and uh Denver Arts and Venues on really the full timeline and the ability for us to get that pool open for our kiddos.
So this is once again it's gonna be at the armory at 2565 Curtis Street on September 10th from 6 to 8 p.m.
a discussion of Mestizo Curtis Park swimming pool and cultural art uh discussion in five points.
Thank you.
Councilwoman Taras.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um just wanted to share a shout out.
Uh, the Denver Regional Council of Governments, Dr.
Cog recently uh presented some awards, and they awarded one of their Metro Vision Awards to the Denver's people's budget.
Um so I just wanted to give a shout out to the CBD team uh that uh Kiki Turner leads in the People's Budget for that recognition in the prior two cycles of funding.
They engaged over 6,000 community members and successfully budgeted $3 million dollars that were community identified and community selected infrastructure projects in their neighborhoods.
Um, really wonderful.
We just wrapped up a cycle that was in the West Area plan, and they're um starting up cycle three, so just wanted to um acknowledge them in an award well acknowledged.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councilmember Gilmar.
Thank you.
I wanted to let uh folks know uh that were laid off uh last month if they are still interested in support services to reach out uh to the union.
They can email myself.
Uh I will also um, because of the way and the manner in which um it was done, provide a letter of reference for anyone who is trying to gain employment.
Um, and so I have had many more people reach out to me as it has continued to be in the news because other laid-off uh employees are bringing issues forward, and uh we are here to support you and uh please make sure that you're reaching out.
There's gonna be a meeting scheduled um of folks um here soon, and so please make sure and reach out to council members who have been very vocal.
Um, again, I wanna um recognize council members um Lewis uh Parody and Gonzalez Gutierrez for uh their action in bringing together uh informational meetings for people to uh get supports and information, especially around even getting uh an employment because the way in which it was done, folks were on the phone with their supervisor and their emails were shut off at the exact same time.
And so they were given no warning to download their workday pay stubs so that they could even go uh and get uh an employment benefits, and we know that especially for families with one adult and if you have children or your caregiving for others, uh any lag in those supports and resources through uh workers um through unemployment uh is so vital and important, and so please know that uh we are with you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilmember Gilmore.
Council Pro Tem Romero Campbell.
Thank you, madam president.
Um I have two announcements.
One was just a thank you for everyone who was able to turn out for the event that we had on Saturday.
It was the wrap-up of the South by Southeast Summer Festival series of events, the heart of Southeast Denver, um, where you belong.
Uh it was a great turnout.
We had Denver Jazz Orchestra there, and just a nice evening for people to come to come together and to build community.
Uh also wanted to uh make an announcement for a 5k running race that's on um Sunday.
And this is the El Grito.
Um it's for to celebrate Mexican Independence Day.
But it started about 30 years ago, and my parents were part of it starting.
So Richard and Esther Romero and a whole group of friends um wanted to raise, wanted to one do a 5K, but to raise funds for um scholarships for kids to go uh that are going to college.
And so this race went on for a number of years.
It kind of stopped during um the pandemic, but they are bringing it back.
It's gonna be at the Auraria campus this Sunday, September next, excuse me, Sunday, September 14th.
Um, if you do walk up registration, it's uh starts at 7 30 in the morning, but the race actually starts at 9.
So if you want more information, um go to the website El Grito, L E L G R I T O, the number 5K at Comcast.net.
Um, and it's a lovely way to come together and build community, and it'll be at the Auraria campus this Sunday, 9 a.m.
Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Protem.
Councilman Lewis.
Thank you.
I wanted to start with uh a thank you to everyone who attended my office hours.
We had a lot of great discussion and had the opportunity to learn about some of the um concerns in community as well as some celebrations that are happening as well in District 8.
Um, I wanted to give a shout out to everyone who had the opportunity, both in person or online, to attend our conversation around civic assemblies.
Folks are very, very excited about the opportunity to potentially be able to bring a civic assembly to Denver.
Um it would be the first um uh to come to a major city in the U.S., so it's super super exciting.
So thank you, folks.
Um, and that conversation will continue, and I hope to be more expansive of um other council members and council districts.
But we did have great represent representation from throughout the city, so that was super exciting.
Um Saturday, September 13th.
Um, I'm inviting you all to the Park Hill Park open house at the Hiawatha Davis Recreation Center where we will have the opportunity to discuss what the potential um uh um design of the park could look like.
And then finally, I wanted to make you all aware of our budget book club.
Um, it's still being the details are still um being ironed out.
Um, however, this is a partnership with my council office, councilwoman Torres, Councilman Heis, Councilwoman Gonzalez Gutierrez, Councilwoman Alvidres, Council Councilman Cashman, and Councilwoman Perity.
Um, and we will be working with you all um to discuss the 2026 budget.
And so on September 10th from 6 to 7 virtually, uh, we will go through how to read a budget book and the priorities on September 24th from 3 30 to 7, it will be a budget happy hour, which will be very exciting to just kind of go over different parts of the budget, and then finally on October 4th, um, from 11 a.m.
to 1 p.m., it will be a compon uh a convening on the budget proposals and what council members may be um bringing in terms of amendments um to the November 3rd um meeting for council.
So that's it.
Thank you so much, Council President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Alviderez.
Thank you, Council President.
Uh yes, I'm looking forward to the budget book club.
Um definitely thanks for helping putting that together, Councilwoman Lewis.
Sure.
Um I wanted to share that the National Women's Soccer League will be having an open house in partnership with Denver Parks and Rec at Burndown on Broadway on the 11th.
So I think that's Wednesday at 6 30 p.m.
Also this Saturday will be a very busy Saturday in District 7.
We have Lincoln Broadway Corridor RO is having their summer festival and at 11 a.m.
Alamo Placita neighborhood is having their pancake breakfast at 9 a.m.
And also Oktoberfest will be this Saturday on South Pearl Street.
So come visit District 7.
It's a great time to spend a Saturday in District 7.
Thank you, Council President.
Thank you.
This um Wednesday, my office is hosting our last series of yoga in the Elych's historic corral.
It's not in the park.
So we'll be doing yoga from 6 to 7, and we're partnering with Canopy Yoga.
This will be our fourth series on the last one.
It's been great.
Um, so if you want to come down, it's on the corner of 38th and Tennyson from 6 to 7 this Wednesday.
And then similar to Councilwoman uh Sawyer, we're having a clean park cleanup at Rocky Mountain Park on Mark Your Calendars on this coming Saturday, September 13th from 10 a.m.
to noon.
Um just go down to Rocky Mountain Park if you're a north sider, and if not, you'll just meet at the frog.
And if you know what that means, you'll know what that means at Rocky Mountain Park.
Just meet at the frog.
Um, no need to say any more.
So meet us at the frog at 10 a.m.
this Saturday.
Seeing no other council announcements.
There are no presentations, there are no communications.
There are two proclamations being read this afternoon.
Councilmember Watson, will you please read proclamation 1290?
Uh thank you, Council President.
Um proclamation number 251290 celebrating the dedication and bravery of crossing guards.
Um, whereas throughout Denver Public Schools, there are 53 active crossing guards working in our community, protecting our kids every day who are biking, walking, and using transit.
And whereas Crossing Guards work closely with Denver Public Schools, families, teachers, and parent-teacher associations, and whereas, Crossing Guards are a critical partner in a safe routes to school action plan's goal of doubling the rate of students walking, biking, and rolling to school from 14% to 30% by 2026.
And whereas crossing guards are dedicated frontline workers who protect the safety of our students, families, and staff each day.
And whereas they stand at our crosswalks in all conditions, facing dangers from traffic and at times hostility, yet remain steadfast in their duty, and whereas, despite these challenges, crossing guards serve with professionalism, patience, and care, becoming trusted protectors and everyday heroes to the children they guide.
And whereas their present presence provides not only safety, but also encouragement, kindness, and I can attest to that, and reassurance to the families of Denver, and whereas to countless students, a crossing guard smile and wave, and steady presence become part of the school day rhythm.
A reassurance that someone is watching over them with care and commitment.
And whereas the people of Denver owe a debt of gratitude to these frontline workers who embody service above self and remind us all of the power of steadfast guardianship.
And the final whereas, it is fitting that we recognize and celebrate their courage, commitment, and invaluable service to our community.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Denver City Council, Section 1, that the Denver City Council does hereby honor and recommend crossing guards as frontline workers and community heroes, deserving of our deepest respect and gratitude in section two, that the clerk and recorder of the city and county of Denver shall fix the seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation and that a copy be transmitted to Andrea Garcia, School Crossing Guard Manager for Denver Public Schools.
Thank you, Councilmember Watson.
Your motion to adopt.
I move that proclamation 25-1290 be adopted.
It has been moved and seconded.
Comments by members of council.
Councilmember Watson.
Thank you so much, Council President.
But prior to doing that, I have been haronged into crossing guard duties by some of the folks sitting in the audience today, whether it's at Whittier K through 8 or it's at the many other schools throughout the Fine District 9.
I don't think anyone would be shocked that as a seventh grader, I was a crossing guard myself.
Standing in traffic, stopping cars like I was Batman, not Superman, because Batman was my favorite.
And having my fellow students who walk by.
Thank you so much for your service, each and every one of you.
We had the first annual crossing guard summit this year.
We will be doing it every year as long as I'm here, because your work is essential.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Madam Secretary, we'll call.
Council members Albidres.
Aye, Flynn, Gilmore, Gonzalez Gutierrez.
Aye, Heinz, Cashman, Lewis.
Aye, Parity, Romero Campbell.
Aye.
Sawyer.
Aye.
Torres?
Aye.
Watson.
Aye.
Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close the vote and announce the results.
Thirteen ayes.
Thirteen eyes proclamation 1290 has been adopted.
We now have time for the proclamation exception.
Thank you so much, Madam President.
Um Andrea Garcia and any of the members of the CrossCard community that would like to join her.
Please come up to the podium, introduce yourself, and um share a few words to uh the listening public and folks here um within the chamber.
Good afternoon.
Thank you for passing this proclamation.
I'm a big crybaby, so don't mind me.
I'm very proud of my team, not only today, but every day, as Councilman Watson said, the hard work that they put in, the things that they endure on a daily basis.
It's a tough job, but they're a tough team, and I am a proud, proud manager today.
And again, I just thank you for the humbling privilege and opportunity to stand here and receive this proclamation today.
It means a whole lot to me and the Department of Climate and Safety and my team members that are currently present.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
I have nothing to say.
If you want to just introduce yourself, thank you all very much.
Um, we appreciate it.
And obviously, there's a lot of people who are out at their shifts right now.
So I just wanted to thank all of them for being out there right now in the hot sun and uh taking care of our community's kids.
So yeah, thanks to them.
Do you mind introducing yourself?
Oh yes, uh, yeah, my name is Bradley of Veda.
Thank you.
Oh, dear Polaris Elementary over on uh Tremont and Park Avenue.
Yes.
Thank you.
Um, how long you're on the school, you're right.
Okay.
Um my name is Angie Berez.
And I work to the Mombello Middle School.
And thank you.
Thank you.
Um I'm Alison Torvik.
I'm at downtown Denver Expeditionary School at 19th and Lincoln.
So as you whiz by, I'm the one with the that's giving you that look.
Um I stopped someone from stealing a bicycle last year, who was just prowling around because every all the parents were looking at their kids, and all the teachers were looking at these kids, and I was looking at these strangers.
Because you get to know the people on your corner.
And it's really it's a wonderful job.
I highly recommend it to anybody.
You spend 20 minutes on a corner with the same kids every day, you begin to understand the traffic patterns and what their problems are.
So thanks for your gratitude.
Thank you.
I'm Janet Schulenberger, and I work at Maury Middle School, which all I'm gonna say is it's the best school ever.
Don't start any trouble now.
Thank you all.
Councilmember Watson, will you please read proclamation 1291?
Uh thank you, Council President.
Um proclamation 251291 recognizing September as National Blood Cancer Awareness Month.
Um, whereas Blood Cancer Awareness Month is a global event helping to raise awareness of one of the world's most prevalent and dangerous cancers, blood cancer.
And whereas September turns red each year, as a spotlight is put firmly on blood cancer and the impact it has on our communities and the urgent need for more action.
And whereas raising awareness of blood cancer, its signs and symptoms, and its impacts will help to improve early diagnosis, encourage policymakers to prioritize the disease, as well as help everyone with blood cancer feel connected and heard.
And whereas an estimated 1,629,474, 1,629,474 people in the United States are living with or in remission with leukemia, lymphoma, myeloma, MDS, and MPNs, and whereas approximately every three minutes, one person in the US is diagnosed with leukemia, lymphoma, or myeloma.
And an estimated and whereas an estimated combined total of 187,740 people in the U.S.
are expected to be diagnosed with leukemia or lymphoma or myeloma in 2025.
New cases of leukemia, lymphoma, and myeloma are expected to account for 9.4% of the estimated 2 million new cancer cases that will be diagnosed in the US in 2025.
And whereas these diseases are expected to account for 9.4% of the deaths from cancer in 2025, based on the estimated total of 611,000 cancer deaths.
And whereas organizations like the mountain region, Blood Cancer United, formerly the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and annual events like Rocky Mountain Light the Night that will be held this year on Thursday, September 25th at Wash Park or Washington Park, provide support and hope to thousands of families and survivors.
There is hope.
Today, more than 80% of all patients diagnosed with Hodgkin lymphoma can be cured by current treatment approaches.
More dedicated funding and research is needed to increase the cure rate of all blood cancers.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Denver City Council, Section 1, that the Denver City Council hereby acknowledges the importance of the annual recognition of September as Blood Cancer Awareness Month, celebrating the survivors of these cancers and remembering those whose lives were lost.
And section two, that a clerk and recorder of the city and county of Denver shall affix the seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation that a copy be transmitted to Mountain Region Blood Cancer United.
Thank you, Councilmember Watson.
Your motion to adopt.
It has been moved and seconded.
Comments by members of council.
Councilmember Watson.
Thank you, Council President.
Each year I have sponsored this proclamation.
For the sole reason, in 2011, I was not feeling quite myself.
I was feeling ill and didn't really know what was happening, went to my primary doctor who was my doctor for I think my entire time that I worked at my former company, which was 23 years.
I think back at that time it would have been about 17 years.
And they couldn't figure out what was wrong with me.
They thought first I had acid reflux and a whole host of crazy things that they couldn't figure out until finally they did an ultrasound and did a few other types of um blood work and identify that I was stricken with there wasn't a um level four cancer, it was simply said it was advanced non-Hodgkin' lymphoma.
And what struck me as my primary care doctor shared the response with me, he began crying.
Um it's not really great bedside manner, by the way.
Um, but he began crying, um, because he's known me for a very long time, and I've um have not been one to be ill, and therefore the um the misdiagnosis, and there are so many folks like myself, especially with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, where the symptoms are very similar to a whole host of things, and it's uh often or not folks who have uh really good health, as it appears to be, uh maybe stricken by this.
Um I went through about nine months of of of treatment um and it was successful.
I'm sitting here today because of the research done by scientists and by doctors, because of the numerous doctors that I spent time with, and the hours in chemo, um, my mom and my husband sitting by my side um as I sat for sometimes eight hours a day having drugs pumped into my veins that I could smell from a mile away.
Um it is important at this time um for us to understand the importance of research, the importance of science.
Without science, without research, I would not be alive.
The remembrance of this month and all the folks who will benefit from the treatments I receive require that our government, federal, state, and local, continues to invest in research, continues to invest in facts.
That we do not pull back from the science of curing curable diseases.
Um I am grateful for the strength that I have, the family I have, and the doctors I had that finally diagnosed me.
And I am so grateful for the communities that keep this awareness going every day, keep these events happening every year to make sure other families um don't have to live through what my family did.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Councilman Torres.
Uh thank you, Madam President.
Um, how fortuitous, Councilman Watson, that you would be um offering this proclamation, and I want to thank you for it.
Um, over the past three weeks, I've been on a family communication chain about a niece in her teen years who was just diagnosed with um B cell leukemia.
Um we also have um lost a family member who con who came um was diagnosed with leukemia just before um he turned eight years old.
Um, and so the legacy of leukemia in my family is really heartbreaking, but also one full of strength and um love and learning.
I had no idea how difficult it is to find matches uh for bone marrow when you have leukemia.
Um, the difficulty in finding treatment um for the care that needs to be received.
Um so just want to thank you for this and um sending the prayers out to my family.
Thank you.
Thank you both for being so vulnerable and sharing um such an important proclamation for just cancer awareness.
My father passed away of pancreatic cancer.
Um, and so I know how devastating cancer can be to a family.
So thank you both for sharing that.
Madam Secretary, we'll call.
Council members Albitres.
Flynn, Gilmore, Gonzalez Cutieres.
Aye.
Hi, Cashman.
Lewis.
Aye.
Parity.
Aye.
Romero Campbell.
Aye, Sawyer.
I.
Torres?
Aye.
Watson.
Aye, Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close the voting, announce the results.
13 ayes.
13 ayes.
Proclamation 1291 has been adopted.
Councilmember Watson, who would you like to call up to accept the proclamation?
Uh yes, uh, Council President Courtney Kinney from Blood Cancer United Mountain Region.
Uh, Courtney, if you don't mind coming up and introducing yourself and sharing a few words.
Hi, everyone.
Uh Courtney Kinney, I'm the campaign development director for our light the night walk.
Uh, that's coming up, as you mentioned, um in September.
And uh just want to thank both Councilman Watson and Torres for sharing your story.
I really really appreciate it.
Um, and just want to thank you all so much for this incredible honor uh on behalf of Blood Cancer United, formally the Leukemia Lymphoma Society.
I'm uh honored to accept this proclamation, recognizing September as National Blood Cancer Awareness Month here in Denver on behalf of our entire team.
This recognition really shines a spotlight on the thousands of individuals and families in our community impacted by blood cancers, including leukemia, lymphoma, myeloma, and other related disorders.
It also reminds us of the urgent need for continued research, advocacy, and patient support.
And locally, we're proud to share that last year alone, we provided 2.8 million in co-pay assistance to help patients afford their treatments and served over 2200 patients through education programs and support services right here in Colorado.
And these numbers represent lives changed and hope restored, made possible because of the generosity of our supporters and the commitment of our community.
Our new name, Blood Cancer United, reflects our commitment to uniting the entire blood cancer community, patients, families, researchers, donors, and advocates around one mission to save lives and improve the quality of life for everyone affected.
While our name has changed, our mission remains steadfast, funding research, providing free patient support, and advocating for access to quality care.
So again, just want to thank uh the city of Denver and all of you for joining us in this important awareness effort.
Together, we can amplify the voices of those impacted, educate the public, and inspire action that truly makes a difference.
So thanks again for standing with us in the fight against blood cancer.
Thank you.
Madam Secretary, please read the bills for introduction.
From the Community Planning and Housing Committee, 25 1186, a bill for an ordinance changing the zoning classification for 800 15th Street in Central Business District.
From the Finance and Business Committee, 25 1192, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed revival and amendatory agreement between the city and county of Denver and Community College of Denver for the Denver Construction Careers Program Incumbent Worker Training Program Citywide.
25 1208, a bill for an ordinance, amending ordinance number 400 series of 2008, as subsequently amended by ordinance number 1659 series of 2024, thereby increasing the number of board members of the Denver Downtown Development Authority, DDDA, and allowing for an option for city council members other than the current president to serve on the DDDA board.
25 1221, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed cooperation agreement between the city and county of Denver and Denver Urban Renewal Authority for the Rock Trail Property Tax Increment Area and Sales Tax Increment Area to establish, among other matters, the parameters for tax increment financing with incremental property and sales taxes in Council and District 9.
25 1222, a bill for an ordinance approving the Rock Trail Urban Redevelopment Plan, the creation of the Rock Trail Urban Redevelopment Area, and the Rock Trail Property Tax Increment Area and Sales Tax Increment Area.
25-1223, a bill for an ordinance, amending ordinance number 0304 series of 2015, which created and established the Rhino Business Improvement District to increase the number of members of the Board of Directors to be appointed and to increase the number of board members required for a quorum.
25-1237, a bill for an ordinance amending section 54-816 of Division 2 of Article 15 of Chapter 54 of the revised municipal code of the city and county of Denver concerning disposal procedure of impounded vehicles.
From the Health Safety Committee, 25-1029, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed agreement between the city and county of Denver and Denver Health and Hospital Authority to enroll patients in and provide women, infant, and children with services during pediatric and OBGOIN appointments at several Denver Health outpatient clinic locations.
25-1214, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed second amendatory agreement between the City and County of Denver and Skyline Fire Protection District for the City to continue to provide fire protection services for the Skyline Fire Protection District.
25-1228, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed agreement between the city and county of Denver and Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing, HCPF, to receive payments from HCPF as incentives for providing Medicaid eligibility related work.
25 1229, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed sixth amendatory agreement between the city and county of Denver and Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing, HCPF, to continue receiving payments from HCPF as incentives for providing Medicaid eligibility related work.
And 25 1241.
Bill for an ordinance adding a new section to Article 4, Chapter 8, regulating the sale of animals by pet shops in the city.
Council members, this is your last opportunity to call out an item.
Councilmember Soya, will you make the motions for us this evening?
Yes, Madam President.
Thank you.
Now I'll do a recap.
Under resolutions, Councilmember Lewis has called out resolution 1202 for comment.
Under resolution for comment, council resolutions 1187, 1188 for comment and a block, and council resolutions 1224 and 1225 for comment and a block.
Councilmember Parity has called out resolution 1191 for comment.
Councilmember Gilmar has called out resolutions 0702, 1110, 1224, and 1225 for a vote in a block.
Councilmember Lewis and Parity have called out council resolution 1216 for a vote.
Under bills for introduction, Councilmember Lewis has called out Bill 1208 for questions, and Councilmember Parity has called out Council Bill 12 1029 for postponement pursuant to rule 5.10.
Under bills for final consideration, Councilmember Parity has called out Council Bill 1079 for postponement to a date certain.
Under pending, no items have been called out.
Madam Secretary, please put the first item on our screens.
Councilmember Lewis, please go ahead with your comments on Council Resolution 1202.
I just have one question.
If we have chosen the right guy for this position, Casheran, I couldn't help it.
I'm very excited to see you moving forward because I know you'll take care of the kids.
I have that same question.
That's it.
Thank you.
Council Madam Secretary, please put the next items on our screen.
Council resolution 1187, a resolution approving a proposed agreement between the city and county of Denver and Oakleaf Solar 60 LLC concerning a ground lease to build a new solar array at Denver International Airport.
Council Resolution 1188, a resolution approving a proposed agreement between the city and county of Denver, OLEC Oak Leaf Solar 60 LLC concerning purchasing electricity and solar renewable energy credits from a solar raid to be built at Denver International Airport.
Councilmember Lewis, please go ahead with your comments on council resolutions 1187 and 1188.
Thank you.
So I just wanted to call these items to recognize that the airport is working hard on tackling the energy demands out there in a way that is sustainable.
I appreciate the use of solar energy here and that there is thoughtful management of this project that will include a decommissioning plan and financial assurances for the array of it at the end of its useful life.
So just wanted to call that out.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens, Council Resolution 1224, a resolution approving a proposed purchase and sale agreement between the city and county of Denver, 4965 Washington Street, Al L P, which by which the city will acquire a unit in the planned community being developed at 4965 North Washington Street for the purpose of establishing a Denver public library in Council District 9.
Council Resolution 1225, a resolution approving a proposed land lease between the city and county of Denver and Global Redevelopment Partners LLC, which will be assigned at fine financial closing to 4965 Washington Street for the development of affordable housing units, a commercial community serving space, and the new Globeville Library at 4965 North Washington Street in Council District 9.
Councilmember Lewis, please go ahead with your comments on Council Resolutions 1224 and 1225.
Thank you.
So I was calling these items out tonight in a block because this is an exciting way of bringing a city library branch and much needed community meeting space and an affordable housing development.
I'm excited to see this model brought to other areas in the city on that share the same real needs for public places to meet and to read.
So love this project.
Thank you.
Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screen.
Oh, Councilmember Watson, go ahead.
I figured if uh Councilmember Laws gave the opportunity for a comment, I'll make one as well.
Um I see that um the team that brought this to us are in the audience, and I just want to say what an amazing um collaborative process.
Not only the opportunity to have that public library on Washington Street, but also to ensure that we have deed restricted housing for folks to be able to live in a community that they love.
Um we also have fantastic news that the funding for our distreet on Washington uh through the RISE bond um is fully funded.
And so sidewalks, um, uh traffic calming, all of the things that we need with having a library and having more density, more folks living on that street.
Um is coming together.
So thank you all for the many months, years of work together, years of work uh together to make this happen, and I could not be more excited to be the legislative sponsor of this and a partner with you throughout this process.
So congratulations.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens, Council Resolution 0702, a resolution approving a proposed loan agreement between the city and county of Denver, 4965 Washington Street LLP to finance the construction and income restricted units to be leased at affordable rent to qualifying households in council district nine.
Council resolution 1110, a resolution approving a proposed contract between the city and county of Denver and 4965 Washington Street LLP to provide funding for homeless homeless resolution project-based vouchers assisting with the delivery of permanent supportive housing units at 4965 Washington Street in Council District 9.
Council resolution 1224, a resolution approving a proposed purchase and sale agreement between the city and county of Denver and 4965 Washington Street LLP, by which the city will acquire a unit in the planned community being developed at 4965 North Washington Street for the purpose of establishing a Denver Public Library in Council District 9.
Council resolution 1225, a resolution approving a proposed land lease between the city and county of Denver and Globeville Redevelopment Partner Partners LLC, which will be assigned at financial closing to 4965 Washington Street, L L L P for the development of affordable housing units, a commercial community serving space, and the new Globeville Library at 4965 North Washington Street in Council District 9.
Councilmember Sawyer, will you please put council resolution 0702, 1110, 1224, and 1225 on the floor for adoption in a block?
I move that council resolutions 250702, 25110, 25124, and 251225 be adopted.
It has been moved and seconded.
Comments by members of council.
Councilmember Gilmore.
Thank you.
Uh my nephew Justin Gilmar has an interest uh in these projects, and so I will be abstaining tonight on it.
Thank you.
Madam Secretary, we'll call on Council Resolution 0702, 1110, 1224, and 11 1225.
Council members Albidres.
Aye.
Flynn?
Hi.
Gilmore.
Abstain.
Gonzalez Gutierrez.
Aye.
Hi.
All right.
Cashman.
Lewis.
Aye.
Romara Campbell.
Aye.
Sawyer?
Aye.
Torres.
Aye.
Watson.
Aye.
Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, we'll call close the voting, announce the results.
12 ayes.
12 ayes.
Council resolution 0702, 1110, 1224, and 1225 have been adopted.
Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens, Council Resolution 1191, a resolution approving a proposed revival and amendatory agreement between the city and county of Denver and Centro Humanitorio para Los Trapajadores to continue administering work ready Denver, which builds a pipeline of talent into jobs that are experiencing significant labor shortages by providing individuals who are on the path to work authorization access to education, training, and employment opportunities citywide.
Councilmember Parity, please go ahead with your comments on Council Resolution 1191.
Yeah, I just wanted to call this out for comment that people will remember during the last budget cycle, a commitment that we had from the administration to actually increase the funding for this program so that it could continue adding new uh people and new cohorts to the end of 2025.
And what we're seeing here instead is um not an increase in funding, it's just uh expanding the scope of the contract but without funding to bring in more individuals.
And so that's um, I mean, I know the budget situation that we're in, but that was not um where things were left with us at budget time last year.
So I just wanted to call it off and make that remark.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens.
Council resolution council bill 1208, a bill for an ordinance amending ordinance number 400 series of 2008 as subsequently amended by ordinance number one six five nine series of 2024, thereby increasing the number of board members of the downtown development authority, DDDA, and allowing the option for city council members other than the current council president to serve on the DDDA board.
Councilmember Lewis, please go ahead with your questions on Council Bill 1208.
Thank you.
Um, I just have a few questions uh for 1208.
The first one is um, why are we only expanding the board by two members?
Good afternoon, Council Donna Wilder, Department of Finance.
Uh, I am the program manager of the Denver Downtown Development Authority.
Um, I coordinate the activities of this board.
Uh thank you for the question, uh, Councilwoman Lewis.
Uh the reason why we are expanding to seven members from the current five members, um, is because in the amended plan of development that this council uh adopted in December, it contemplated expanding uh the board to um represent an expanded boundary within the district.
That boundary uh was contemplated on expanding to a potential uh area in our central business district.
Um however, at this time, in order to actually expand that boundary, properties have to petition into the district.
Um, and so we want to preserve some of these board seats uh to represent uh the folks in that area once that area has uh formally been expanded, so it'd be preserving those seats for future expertise.
Okay, thank you.
So I understand that you all are shifting board members partially based on the um vacancy with the RTD representative, and so I'm I'm curious as to why you all would um essentially not start from scratch as opposed to um swapping board members in and out.
Like start the board completely over.
Yeah, thanks for that question.
Uh so the we have two um that's going to be uh an ask action from city council that's coming at a subsequent uh time to uh recommend appointments and reappointments to the board.
Um this expansion just contemplates adding two new members to the board, um, and uh those two board members uh that we are recommending will come to um the governance and inter uh intergovernance committee um at a later date.
Yeah, I'm I'm sorry, I may not have been clear on my question.
I understand I understand that the five to seven, I was just more curious as to the actual folks who are sitting in those seats outside of the RTD representative.
It sounds like those folks would move, would stay in those four seats instead of five, and then you'd find two new board members to get you to the seven, and I'm just curious because the DDDA is expanding so greatly, like why not open all of them up and provide an opportunity for newer folks to come in?
Yeah, thanks uh for the clarification.
Um it is important for us to have uh some uh knowledge sharing of those new members so that they can get up to speed, okay.
Um, and it's a very complex structure, as you probably know.
And so we want an opportunity to educate those two new members, and we felt that um keeping two existing members um recommending for them for reappointment would allow us an opportunity to have that knowledge sharing.
Okay, that's super helpful to know.
So, what are the current demographics of the board?
Um, is it comparable to the surrounding areas?
Uh the uh existing board, there's a five-member board currently.
Uh four of those members um represents um property owners and developers within the current district.
Okay.
Uh the fifth member is uh council president uh Sandoval uh who serves as an automatic board member.
Um, and so uh it's really important for us to uh diversify uh the backgrounds and expertise of this board.
Okay.
And then my final question is: are there rent renters represented on the board?
Yeah, renters.
Do you mean can you clarify uh a residence living within the district?
Yeah, like someone who rents versus owns within the district.
Yes.
Uh so as I mentioned, we will under a separate action be uh recommending two um appointments to this board.
One is a resident within the current district, um, and then the other is a uh business lessee who operates within the district.
So when I when I say renters, because I want to make sure we're using the same language.
When you say when I say renters, what do you hear me saying?
Like someone who rents their home versus owns their home.
I'm using it in that that sense, okay.
My understanding is that they are a renter, got it, okay.
Yeah, got it.
Okay, that's my only questions.
Thank you.
Great, thank you.
Thank you.
Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens.
Council Bill 1029, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed agreement between the city and county of Denver and Denver Health Hospital Authority to enroll patients in and provide women, infant, and children services during pediatric and OBGYN appointments at several Denver Health outpatient clinics at clinic locations.
Councilmember Parity, what would you like to do with Council Bill 1029?
Um, I would like to uh postpone it for one week.
Thank you.
No motion is required concerning required council bill 10 29 has been postponed until Monday, September 15th, 2025.
And Council President, I'm so sorry.
Could I say one thing about the reason just for us to say?
Um essentially the understanding that this is because of the larger fundraising landscape or funding landscape, I should say.
Um, Denver's WIC program has really severe delays.
Um, and my office has just been uh concerned about that.
Um, and so we've had questions into Denver Health trying to understand a little bit more about um in addition to this funding, which I know will help um what else they are looking at in terms of how else they fund that program, what funding losses are impacting at what's causing the delays, just trying to understand that a little bit better because it's so consequential for the city.
So if anyone else is looking for that information, um let us know and we'll loop you into that conversation as well.
Thank you.
Thank you.
No motion is required for council bill 1029, and it has been postponed until Monday, September 15th, 2025.
Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screen, council bill 1079, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed contract between the city and county of Denver.
Oliver View County Group LLC, a development of approximately 6.69 acres located at 1717 East 39th Avenue in Council District 9.
Councilmember Parity, what would you like to do with Council bill 1079?
Sorry, give me one motion or one moment I'm just navigating there.
No problem.
Um I'm calling this item out for postponement to a date certain of Monday, September 15th, 2025.
Um, at the request of staff, this is to delay consideration until after the public hearing for its companion items, all of which will occur on September 15th.
Thank you.
Thank you.
This Madam Secretary, we'll call on the motion to postpone Council Bill 1079 to a date certain.
Council members Albitres.
Hi.
Flynn.
Aye.
Gilmore.
Aye.
Gonzalez Cutieres.
Aye.
Heinz.
Cashman.
Lewis.
Aye.
Parity.
Aye.
Premier Campbell.
Aye.
Sawyer?
Aye.
Torres?
Aye.
Watson.
Aye.
Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close the voting announce the results.
13 ayes.
13 ayes.
The motion to postpone Council Bill 1079 to a date certain has passed.
Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens, Council Resolution 1216, a resolution approving the collective bargaining agreement between the city and county of Denver and the Denver Police Protective Association for the years 2006 through 2008.
Councilmember Sawyer, will you please put council resolution 1216 on the floor for adoption?
I move that council resolution 25 1216 be adopted.
It has been how that let me get back up, let me get it caught up.
Madam Secretary, the it's still 1079 is on our screen.
Apologies, it's a strangely large agenda this week.
I'm finding the item.
No problem.
Perfect.
I put it on the floor and it's been moved in.
Second in comments by members of council.
I have Councilmember Lewis and Parity in the queue.
Councilmember Lewis, go ahead.
Thank you so much.
So I'm voting no on this, and here's the reason why.
Um we have paid five million one hundred and nineteen thousand in settlements against the Denver Police Department in 2025 so far.
Those funds, those are funds that are drawn from a liabilities claims fund that must be refilled from the general fund, which has an impact on all of us in the city, especially in times of economic stress like we are facing now.
And I can't in good conscience vote to raise the salaries of those employees in this current budget environment, which will reduce the amount of general funds for the rest of the city, while also approving settlements after settlements that further reduces the general fund, especially when the Civil Service Commission is pushing changes to more lightly disciplined officers who commit wrongdoings.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councilmember Parity.
For that reason.
Um, and so I just um before we, you know, while we're still in the dark as to what they were will proposed budget wise for the rest of our employees.
Um, I don't feel like I can vote yes on this.
And I do want to point out that um, you know, in um in 20 a couple years back, the um council voted no on an agreement um that would have given raises to police that would have started in 2022 for a similar reason, and those were three percent raises.
Um, but it was the same idea that you know, other city employees were um were not looking at raises, and so it's equity between the different departments.
Hopefully, this will correct itself somewhat once people across the city can unionize, and there's not that disparity, but we're not there yet.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Gilmar.
Thank you.
Uh I appreciate um both of my colleagues um calling this off and uh you know um having been council president uh back in 2020 when this council voted down the police collective bargaining agreement.
It um was a tough vote, but it was the right vote to do because there were two things at play.
One was the mayor's office hadn't consulted with city council before they started bargaining, and we weren't at the table, so we took care of that with a memorandum of understanding that myself at the time as council president and mayor Hancock signed so that that scenario would never happen again.
The second reason, though, was we were in the pandemic, we were in financial constraints, we didn't have businesses open to even bring in sales tax revenue.
And I remember councilman Cashman, I was serving with you as well on the Mile High Flood District board, and I was the president of that board, and they wanted to give their staff a big raise during that time, and it was unpopular.
It wasn't only Denver elected on that board, it was also Jeff Co.
Doug Co.
Boulder, Aurora, Adams County, and I have to say I am very proud of that Mile High Flood District Board back in 2020, because even the Republicans on that board understood that in Denver because the Denver City Council was contemplating voting down the police collective bargaining agreement, because the raises were not in line with the city's values, and I remember that board meeting with the Mile High Flood district because I was the chair of it, and folks were none too pleased that they weren't gonna be able to give the raises that they thought that they could give to the staff, but even the Republicans on that board voted down those raises because they knew that it was important to stand in solidarity to look at equity and to make sure that our values are represented in the budget of this city, the collective bargaining agreement is a agreement with the bargaining units to promise them those increases, this mayor and this administration were not truthful with this council about the budget when they were presenting this collective bargaining agreement to the council.
I could ask the question, but I know the answer already.
This council, no one on this day, has ever received a spread sheet from the Department of Finance with even a three-month projection of the costs and the revenues to this city.
But what we do know is that last month, after great anticipation and anxiety, city employees were laid off, and the majority of those city employees were from human rights and community partnerships.
They were the go-to organization that for me as a community leader in Montbello for the last over, geez, 20 years almost going to them to get support for sign language for ADA accommodations for immigrants and refugees, cut.
No plans to put the money back, no plans to fill that.
And then Office of Children's Affairs got cut too.
I don't know how many times we have to say the same old stories over and over again, but because we are the elected officials in these seats, if you ask any elders in a community of color or a marginalized community, do more police make you safe?
No, they do not.
Police show up after a crime is committed.
We do not live in a military state.
I know federal government is trying to go there, but we do not in the city and county of Denver, Colorado, live where we're going to allow Mayor Johnston to give police raises and then take away supports for people in the aid center.
When I pushed back against them cutting the aid center, you know what I was told?
People don't go in there enough and take advantage of the resources.
People go in there and drink their coffee and charge their phones up.
Huh?
If we want to mitigate crime and addiction and mental illness, maybe we should have more locations in the city and county of Denver for folks to go to get a cup of coffee, to borrow a cord if they need to, to charge up their phone, to get out of the heat, to get out of the cold, to maybe come down after doing drugs for the nth time.
But you know what?
This is the time that because of relationships that they've made with people, that person's gonna ask them again.
Is today the day?
And I pray that they have someplace to go for that person to say, right on, we're gonna get you into treatment today.
The police do not do this work.
In 2020, I had to go up against police chief payson and have very strong conversations with Mayor Hancock.
And Chief Pazin was blaming me and another council member that you're making it dangerous on our city streets.
It's because of you to loudmouthed women, you're making it dangerous for people.
I don't carry a gun.
I don't even have pepper spray.
All I have is my voice.
And when the men in power think that even by a woman speaking and speaking the truth, they're dangerous, we must speak up and keep speaking up.
I am against this.
We cannot criminalize homelessness, substance abuse, mental illness.
In 2020, police chief payson and mayor Hancock did not want to put the money towards the support team assisted response star.
That was their excuse.
It's a pilot.
We don't even know if it works.
Well, you know why I supported it?
Was not long after we started talking about it, there was a case in Montbello, and it was the case of a family that had struggled for years with a child who had mental illness.
The only help that the family could ever receive if their child did not stay on their medication or did not stay on a routine was to dial 911.
That was the only way for them to get help.
So they had called 911, the police came, arrested the child, the adult child, arrested them.
The police are like, you're calm down.
You didn't commit a crime other than scaring your family at home, we have to release you.
So they released them.
The younger daughter didn't show up to school one day.
The mom went home frantically looking for her.
She found her daughter stuffed in the trash can outside the home.
Her daughter was killed by her son.
The police were not there to protect them.
But the star van, support team assisted response, would have been.
So if this council votes on this collective bargaining bill affirmatively, they're saying that it is okay to put somebody in jail, if you act out, if you're making others in a public space uncomfortable, if you're talking loud and making people feel a certain way, and they call the police, they're coming because we're not gonna have a support team assisted response anymore.
There is no out.
And in the last 10 years, the most grotesque and horrific part of this job that no one tells you about is what we hear behind closed doors in executive session is what we hear that people who are paid by your sales tax revenue of go buying a shirt or whatever in Denver, that's who pays the police salary, Michael Marshall, Jessica Hernandez, Paul Cassaway.
Are we gonna pay people more and not be able to hold them accountable?
The Office of the Independent Monitor is speaking loudly about this.
The Citizen Oversight Board is speaking loudly about this.
Latino people are killed two times, if not more, by police, black people three times more.
We just recently had officers who were out at Denver International Airport and who gave some DJ a ride on Pena Boulevard and I-70 with lights on with their body camera turned off.
All they have to do is clip a car, and there's rollover everywhere on I-70.
You know who pays when that the family member sue, the taxpayers do.
You pay for those settlements, I know it's scary, but I'm I will maybe try and back in.
I'll go ahead and let Councilman Watson go, but I'll finish up with this.
Um councilwoman Torres in the Denver Right article back in September 14th of 2020, history repeats all the time, said the economic outlook doesn't look so rosy.
Guaranteeing a raise for police would be a difficult decision to explain to my staff and others who are getting furloughed, furloughed, Torres said.
As we look into the future, it's a pipe dream to think that revenue will miraculously return to pre-pandemic proportions where the money is flowing and we can honor our workforce with the salaries they deserve.
We know that there are grave problems within the Denver Police Department.
We are struggling because the chief of police right now is trying to reduce the discipline for officers, and it's being explained away as well.
You know, if they don't write a report right, if there's an accident between Aurora and Denver, you know, they could do better at that.
Okay, if there's a police, if there's a car accident between Aurora and Denver, great, have them watch a video for it.
But you know, officers write a bunch more reports, they write rape and sexual assault reports, and if an officer doesn't do that correctly, somebody doesn't get their DNA tested, and there is no evidence to gain justice for them.
We have the fiduciary responsibility to be accountable to the citizens and the residents, and not even the citizens, the people of our city, because you don't need to be a resident, you do not need to be a citizen to get supports in our city.
And I'll close by the missing and murdered indigenous relatives task force.
The native deaths by law enforcement are of in Colorado.
Native deaths by law enforcement in Colorado is the highest in Denver at 31%.
Only second to well, there's a lot of 7.7s.
Aurora, Lakewood, Pueblo, but Denver.
And so I have to ask this council are you willing to amend your values in what we say about equity and support this?
Or are you willing to vote this down?
It will be brought back.
And they will negotiate it again.
If they come to an in pass, it will go to an arbitrator.
So all this council is doing by voting this down is saying the situations have changed.
We were never presented with an accurate budget.
Thereby, we cannot vote on this tonight.
Thank you, Council President Sandoval.
Councilmember Watson, we have to switch over in about three minutes.
So I don't want to cut you short.
Do you want me to take a three-minute break and then go to public comment and then come back?
Thank you, Council President.
That would be my recommendation if that works for you.
Okay.
Just wanted to check in.
Okay.
So Madam Secretary.
Do I do the announcement?
Remind me what I do.
Sorry.
The pre-recess announcement.
Yeah.
Okay, so the pre-re-session.
Okay, perfect.
Thank you.
Tonight, council.
So just so you all know we're gonna come back to um council resolution 1216, approving the collective bargaining agreement between the city and county of Denver and the Denver Police Protective Association Intel public comment.
Because we have public comment that I have to queue up in about three minutes.
So this can this conversation will be um continued after 5 30.
Tonight, council will hold a required public hearing.
Let me take that back.
Tonight, council will hold required public hearings on Council Bill 1070, changing the zoning classification for 2501 South High Street in University.
Council Bill 1137, approving the amended and restated 27th and Lammer Urban Redevelopment Plan, and on Council Bill 0628 concerning recycling and organic material diversion and in connection therewithin, repealing and reenacting Article 10, Chapter 48, adding a new Article 11, Chapter 48, and adding a new Article 15, Chapter 10, and amending Article 1, Chapter 24 of the code.
If there are no objections from members of council, we will recess until 5 30 p.m.
Before convening the regular meeting, city council will provide a half hour general public comment session to hear from the public on city matters, except for any matter that is scheduled for a legally required public hearing.
The general public comment session will begin at 5 p.m.
Welcome to the general public comment session of September 8th, 2025.
Tonight's session is being interpreted into Spanish.
Sam or Jasmine, would you please introduce yourself and let our viewers know how to enable translation on their devices?
Yes, of course.
Thank you for having us.
Hello, everyone.
Buenas tardes.
My name is Sam Guzmán with the CLC.
And along with my colleague Jasmine, we'll be interpreting today's meeting into Spanish.
Please allow me a quick minute while I give instructions in Spanish on how to access interpretation.
Thank you very much, Sam.
City Council provides a half hour general public comment session to hear from the public on city matters, except for any matter that are scheduled to have a public hearing.
The Denver City Council has a pilot program that welcomes Denver's youth to speak at General Public Comment on the first Monday of the month.
Anyone can still sign up to speak.
However, on these Mondays, those 18-year-olds and under will be given preference.
And Cuomo, Mr.
Andrew Cuomo, who's running against him, of course.
And getting to where he's gotten to so far, and he hopes to continue to push that.
The point of this forum here in Denver, how does that affect us, you know, from New York to here?
It's it's about teaching, hopefully Colorado Progressive candidates in the future now and in the future on how to run against big money, how to get the community involved, and how to push for issues that really do affect us all directly.
Of course, the federal government and Donald Trump are also now pushing against Zoran Mamdani, and we want to uh try to get that out there.
Um it is Wednesday, this Wednesday, September 10th, two days out.
It's at DU.
Um, you can look up our Revolution Metro Denver on Facebook.
That's where we have a lot of the flyers for this event.
Um we're gonna have a panel, some panelists, four of them.
Colleen Johnston of Denver, Democratic Socialists of America.
She's a member and a national political committee member of DSA.
Um, also we'll have Sandra Parker Murray.
She's the Secretary Treasurer of CWA, that's Communication Workers of America, because unions and union labor workers and their unions are very important, of course.
Also, we will have, of course, the formidable Joe Salazar.
Uh Mr.
Salazar, he was he's a civil rights attorney.
He was a former Colorado State Representative, as we all know, and he was a former uh AG candidate.
He'll be there speaking, along with um Wynne Howe.
They are the state director of Colorado uh working families party.
Um, and the forum will be moderated by Professor Aaron Schneider.
So please look up um our revolution, Metro Dunber, and our event for Wednesday uh at 6 30 p.m.
at DU.
So thank you very much.
Awesome, thank you.
Next up, we have Philip Morano.
Philip Moreno.
Next up, we have Rokia not Nagom.
Sorry if I pronounced Rokaia.
Next up we have Reagan Benson in the council chambers.
Regan Benson.
Next up, we have Catherine Springs.
In the council chambers, Catherine Springs.
Next up, we have Vincent Broughton.
In the council chambers.
Vincent.
Next up, we have Anisa Mammel, virtually, if you'll accept the promotion.
No.
Next up we have Eileen Doninger.
Eileen virtually.
Yeah, go ahead, go ahead.
Thank you, Council President, and good afternoon, members of council.
My name is Eile Doniger, and I live in Wash Park, located in District 6, and I'm represented by Council members Paul Cashman, Sarah Parody, and Serena Gonzalez Gutierrez.
I'm 17 years old and I'm in a high school senior attending Colorado Academy.
I'm excited to speak with you about the Mayor's Youth Commission.
As a third-year commissioner, I'm consistently impressed by my peers and their ability to cause change in our community.
My favorite part of the Mayor's Youth Commission is getting to meet students from all around the city who care just as much about issues facing youth as I do.
In MYC, I've worked on the mental health and workforce development subcommittees, and this year I'm exploring the possibility of lowering the municipal voting age to 16.
As we begin the new program year, we are so excited to get to work with so many impactful and important projects.
But we know to do this, we need to do this in partnership with city leaders.
Next week on September 17th at 5 p.m., the Mayor's Youth Commission would like to invite members of city council to have dinner with us and discuss what partnership with your offices and our city agencies should look like.
We want to hear about the work you're passionate about, share the issues we're passionate about, and explore where we can work together to deliver more for youth in Denver.
Well, many may believe city government is too complicated for young people to understand.
I believe that we need to make it more accessible.
I believe a big first step is partnership.
I understand that as council members, you all have very busy schedules with competing priorities.
I ask that if you are unable to attend, you send a representative from your staff in your place.
Now is the time to ensure that young people are leading change across our city.
We would like to be a partner in improving our communities and elevating the voices of youth across Denver.
Thank you for your time and the opportunity to speak today, and I hope to see you on September 17th.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next up we have Arnie Carter.
Hello.
Um, first thing I want to say is that uh Jeanette Visquera has been in that damn prison for six months now.
She's a political prisoner.
All everybody out there is a political prisoner, but she's out there for using her free speech.
The next thing I want to address is um Palestine and Gaza.
I know that uh the city council feels that uh it's not appropriate for you to dabble in this and pass a resolution.
I know I've heard that from city councils, and I know that you guys, some people on the council have said that the vesting is too complicated, and then maybe the mayor's business.
Um I'll argue that another day.
I'll argue with anybody about that.
But today I want to ask what are you guys doing as individual council folks?
I know some of you have spoken up very bravely, but are you speaking up to our representatives and city councilmen people?
You have some power.
Are you telling them that you need to end this genocide?
Are you telling them that we cannot stand behind this?
Are you telling Bennett who's running for governor?
Hey, I can't support you because you're you've got blood on your hands, man.
Are you telling Hick and Looper?
Look, you got to do something here.
Are you asking the guette to pass to vote on the um block the bombs bill that's coming up?
What side are you guys on here?
You know, the democratic registered democrats are vastly against what Israel's doing here, right?
And the Mandani Um election proves this.
People don't want you to just go along with the party line anymore.
We this is different freaking, excuse my language, different freaking times.
Okay, we need to be standing up against genocide, against fascism.
Which side are you on?
Next up we have Timmo Jones.
Uh greetings to all of you.
Uh I'm here today because uh the days are getting shorter, and I have to uh be in by sunset because uh I was attacked on the H line uh August 6th by uh Pale Pink demoniac, and uh fortunately God has uh healed my eye that he uh hit me in.
I was wearing my glasses and he cut my flesh.
I had to have four stitches, was in uh Denver Hill for nine hours, and uh, but uh I hit a physical uh of my eye this week, and the Lord healed it, so I'm able to stand here before you tonight, and this is gonna be my last time speaking to you before next summer if I survived that long.
But the point is uh I uh wanted to give encouragement to you because uh the uh scripture that is brought to my attention by the Holy Spirit is that uh in uh Matthew 4-4, where uh Yeshua tells the Diabolos face to face that people live on more than bread alone, but by every Rhema, which is the word that comes from the mouth of God.
And then further, I would like to remind you of what I previously said about uh Matthew 19 12, where he announced uh to his disciples that uh unicost eunuchs are born, and there's no conversion torture that's going to clear that.
In fact, conversion torture is a sin.
And furthermore, when he says uh in uh the prophecy on Mount of Olives, he says that uh he's going to be coming immediately after the tribulation of those days.
Well, I have news for you.
We are in those days right now, because the Great Tribulation started in AD 30, when he successfully died for our sins, and triumphantly was resurrected and went back to heaven.
So he's coming uh at this when the open of the sixth seal.
We are now under the fourth seal.
Thank you so much.
Next up we have Mary Ann Thompson virtually.
Can I be heard?
Yes, you can, ma'am.
Go ahead.
Good evening, Consul, and all those watching.
Mariana Thompson formerly experienced homelessness while working as a nurse and an and an advocate for unhoused neighbors.
My topic today is families on our streets.
The former US vice president Hubert Humphrey stated in 1977, and I quote the moral test of government is how the government treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children, those who are in those who are in the twilight of their years, the elderly, and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy, and the handicapped.
With that being said, you have heard from the great advocate Amy Amy Beck with Together Denver in these chambers that these are fan that there are families on the street.
That was months ago when the mayor denied that allegation.
Denver's own David Heights, a journalist with lived experience of homelessness, wrote an article two days ago based on the findings of Anne, titled Denver Homeless Families Waitlist for Shelter, now at 400.
Let that sink in, Consul and all those watching.
400 people.
Hand has sent you their findings.
Whereas Consul in December, it was noted how hard it was to get someone into a shelter.
It took community of us advocates many hours and days to achieve that.
Friday I called the connection center number and at least 20 times, only to be transferred to a voicemail saying, and I quote, someone will be getting back to you within 48 hours.
Well, 48 hours is gone, and no one did.
Consul, this is inhumane, and I give give you an F-4ness.
Mayor Johnson, Consul, and the City of Denver need to be sued for neglect and abuse of children.
Families are in our street and a clean roach and mice free shelters with compassionate trauma informed staff that will assist in getting them housed.
Winter is around the corner, you all.
Remember who you work for.
You work for us, we the people, not the mayor.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Next up we have Eric Gross virtually.
Yeah, can you hear me, Council?
Yes, we can.
Go ahead.
Perfect.
So, of course, I can't pull up what I wanted.
That's okay.
So, as a couple of speakers have uh alluded to today, you know, we are in a particularly fraught moment in basically any venue that you want to discuss politically, economically, socially, morally, ethically, and the question that I think we all need to ask ourselves every day is are we meeting the moment?
Um, it's the type of thing where we say, we don't want to look back and say, I didn't do enough.
I didn't try, why.
Why was I at home when I could have been doing this?
And I do want to direct that to the council.
I know you all have different levels of uh not civic engagement, but advocacy, perhaps, and activism, for sure.
Um, from Jeanette, who is still being held in the detention center, the prison in Aurora, of which we may soon have half a dozen more spread throughout the state of Colorado, which may not be in your hands, but can certainly be spoken to and about and advocated against uh with colleagues in other cities and other towns in the state legislature, in the governor's mansion, to where our taxes are going when we have a 750 million dollar budget hole that they're trying to fill, uh, you know, including the city of Denver, firing 140 or whatever workers it was, um, that have taxes are going to pay for atrocities overseas that create enemies for us.
It's all to profit, you know, weapons manufacturers and tech conglomerates and banks and venture capitalists that don't care about Denver, that don't care about us and our neighbors that don't care about you, certainly.
So, what others are saying here about, you know, are you doing all you can, is certainly gonna come up when I know I personally, and I have a feeling many throughout Colorado are going to work to unseat some of the apathetic and do nothing bought and sold corrupted members of Congress that we have, including Michael Bennett, who's now running for governor, uh, including Jared Politz, who we assume wants to take that Senate seat.
Um, this also goes for a bunch of the congressional representatives, and any elected official who a year from now is looking back and people are saying, why weren't they doing more against rising fascism at home, against rising fascism abroad, against violation of civil liberties, including freedom of speech and protest, and just to go to court without being kidnapped by the federal government, we're gonna ask you so much.
Did you do enough?
We have show.
I don't see him here tonight.
Next up, we have Jesse Paris.
Yes, good evening, members of the council, those boxing at home, those in the council chambers.
My name is Jesse with Sean Parrison.
I'm representing for Black Star Action Movement for Self-Defense, Positive Action Commitment for Social Change, as well as the U.S.
Party of Colorado, the Northeast Denver Residence Council, the Quebec Street Corridor Task Force, frontline black news, Sabacus Bacchus First Enhance, the revolutionary agenda, and I reside at the legacy laws is council member Daryl Watson's district of the fine district nine.
Thank you all for allowing me to speak.
I got a lot to say.
All right, I agree with most of what the speakers previous to me have said, definitely Mary Ann.
That's my godmother.
Shout out to her.
She got me house when the city refused to do such.
Um, keep talking about genocide and all this.
I don't want to address the genocide that's been going on for 400 years against my people.
Foundational black Americans, the people that built this country.
So if you're not gonna address that, then you're not talking about nothing.
We got a whole genocide going on right here in the United States of America.
And y'all never want to discuss that at public hearings.
But I wanted to talk about with the uh the fact that you have all this money for these illegal immigrants.
So since you got all this money for the illegal immigrants, you need to sponsor a free Miss Borough for foundational black American Denver rights in FBA Cardians.
Reparations is a blood debt.
That is old, not a handout.
FBA Demborites are old for chattel slavery.
Yes, chattel slavery, yes, Colorado has slavery, yes, our legislative officials had slaves.
Yes, they did.
So we're old for that.
Uh Jim Crow, redlining, mass incarceration, eminent domain, and gentrification, just to name a few.
RWS, otherwise known as racism, white supremacy, systematic atrocities, and discriminator practices are still going on in twenty twenty-five.
The study is currently underway.
So Denver, do the right thing for once.
And sponsor a bill for FBA Freeman Borough.
Do right by Black Americans.
Not just when you want our votes.
And we know you're not gonna do it specifically for us.
But you'll jump out the window for these illegal immigrants who just got here yesterday.
But you'll continue completely ignore the needs and wants of your constituency, the black constituency that made this city so great and built this country.
Next up we have Brandy Majors.
M on Thursday, September eleventh.
We look from hearing we look forward to hearing from you again and thank you for attending.
Denver City Council broadcast coverage begins in two minutes.
Yes.
Okay.
Hey Denver, it's time for the weekly general session of your Denver City Council.
Tonight's coverage of Denver City Council starts now.
All right.
Thank you for that little music.
We got some music at council.
All right.
Council will now reconvene from our earlier session.
We will continue with the consideration of Council Resolution 1216, a resolution approving the collective bargaining agreement between the city and county of Denver and the Denver Police Protective Association for the years 2026 through 2028.
Councilmember Watson, I have you first up in the queue.
Thank you so much, Council President.
I first want to start by saying to each of my colleagues that spoke before me, that this topic and the issues that you elevated are important.
Um that we hold accountable those who have chosen to serve us.
And we make sure that within, whether it's in policy, whether it's in our law process, that we make sure that folks who are within our public safety um teams that are not abiding by the rules that are providing, that are not providing equal and safe protection for all um Denverites, that we hold them accountable.
That is our commitment, and tonight's vote on the police protective association, the PPA, the community the collective bargaining agreement, um has no bearing on our ability from my perspective, our ability to continue to hold accountable those who go outside of the law and go outside of their mandate to provide a safe community for all, including folks of color and including for myself as a black man.
I'm being asked to vote yes or no on a collective bargaining agreement that was negotiated between the city and Denver police.
We have opportunities for additional briefings throughout that process.
Each of us have an opportunity to provide our feedback and to engage fully within that process.
That will be the same process for all bargaining units that come before this body.
Um there are only three at this time, and they're all within the Denver Police, Denver Fire, and Denver Sheriff.
Beginning in 2027, all city um agencies will be able to engage in bargaining units based on their interest.
I intend to be consistent in the way in which I treat all collective bargaining agreements and the due diligence of our city attorney staff and those who are engaged in that process.
First, I wanted to also share that I know that in this time of budget cuts and impacts to the over 176 families um impacted due to layoffs.
That is an impactful and hurtful time for our city employees, our former city employees, and our current city employees that are bearing the load of um of those reductions.
And the decisions that we make here in council for our budget process and over the next several months, um, we have our responsibility to make sure that we treat our budget process and our investment in our employees with the respect that they deserve, and that we stand with our employees um strongly today, whether they're have CVAs or not, um, that we stand with them and we ensure that our word to them as legislators to not make their job and their work any more difficult.
I was not a city council member back um during um the beginning of the pandemic, but I paid very clear careful attention to what that process looked like and the impending impact uh to city employees that were was forecasted and the impacts across the city and county of Denver.
I worked a few blocks from here, the company I work for faced um quite a bit of impact.
I chose to retire in 2020 uh based on impacts to um the company I work for.
I want to share to the listening audience and folks here in the chamber that uh during the 2021 COVID um pandemic um and ensuing um budget crisis, all recognized collective bargaining units, that would be inclusive of police, fi and share, gave up or deferred negotiated compensation increases.
As a matter of fact, our Denver Fire, whom we're not speaking about tonight, um deferred um on other occasions as well.
I believe uh, as far as my individual briefings, my individual engagements on this collective bargaining agreement, and as a council member, I was provided the opportunity to understand fully the contract, listen carefully to the city attorneys who negotiated the outcomes to participate actively within executive session on all negotiations, and tonight's vote for me as city council member representing district nine is a commitment to each of the individuals and the teams that participated in collective bargaining to be consistent and to be in solidarity with them, as they have been in solidarity with all city employees each and every time they have been asked.
Um, once again, I understand the difficulties of what we are facing and what city employees are facing based on our budget.
I also understand the importance of standing in solidarity with collective bargaining agreements and those that negotiate it to ensure that we remain consistent within our process, and as a city council member for district nine, um, I take that extremely seriously, and I will be supportive of this CBA.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilman Gonzalez Gutierrez.
Thank you.
Uh Madam President.
Um I think this unfortunately comes to us at a time that is a very difficult time.
Um I will not be able to support the collective bargaining agreement this evening, as we are facing, according to our Department of Finance, a budget shortfall of 200 million dollars going into 2026.
And there were just 170 plus employees laid off, and we also have had furloughs happening right now in 2025, which includes some employees that hold positions that are not funded by general fund dollars and would not have an impact or contribution back to general fund, however, they are being made to still take furlough days with the idea to be in solidarity and consistency with all city employees.
I find that very troubling in the fact that now, you know, if we're talking about consistency, um, and that's what has been explained to me.
So, like those are the words that have been utilized as to why some of the city employees who are not funded through general fund dollars through other types of um funding streams, and have work that they are mandated to do actually by the state, in fact, some of those positions are also being made to furlough right now.
And so that's what I have a concern with at this point in time is the equity of this matter, fairness, and the fact that we don't know what 2026 has to hold when it comes to even raises for a city employees across our city.
And so I find it premature to approve something and approve a raise, um raises over the course of the next few years, when we don't know what that future has to hold.
And so I cannot support this tonight.
Um, and I think out of, you know, when we're talking about fairness, solidarity, equity, consistency, right?
All of these words that are very similar meanings, um, then I think we we need to uphold that.
Uh, and and I really appreciate and I do want to thank all the work that has been done.
I know that these collective these um uh agreements don't come through very quickly um all the time.
I think this one may have been a little bit different.
Um, but I want to say that um I appreciate everybody that's been involved in those conversations, and I would hope that you if, depending on the outcome of this tonight, um, that you would be able to continue and go back into those conversations um with the hopes that we can continue to stand in solidarity and equity and in consistency.
Thank you, madam president.
Thank you.
Council Pro Tim Romero Campbell.
Thank you, madam chair, or yes.
Thank you, Madam President.
Yeah, Madam Chair, it's yeah, Madam President.
Um thank you, Madam President.
Uh, I'll just make my comments real brief.
I just wanted to um say representing you know Southeast Denver District 4.
Um, I feel like we have had an opportunity over um well over a month or a couple months um and multiple executive um briefings with our city attorneys um as to the progress of the um collective bargaining as it has gone through.
Um I feel comfortable with what's being brought before council today.
Um I do think that uh again evaluate them each on their own merit, but I am comfortable um being a yes on this this evening um and to be able to move this forward.
So thank you, and I appreciate the comments of my fellow council members, um, that we can have this dialogue and be able to um share our opinions.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councilwoman Tars.
I thought I was further down.
Thank you so much, Madam President.
Um I fully remember my vote in 2020, um, and I don't regret it.
We were not at the table uh like council should have been at the time, and I recall when that negotiation went to arbitration, we lost.
Um I also know that since negotiations started this year in July, we've received daily updates um of every day that negotiation was taking place.
Um all along, we could voice our concern or opposition or request changes, have those discussed, brought forward back and forth.
That's what the negotiation period is, and it moves forward only with the feedback and consensus from us and the administration representing the city to a final package, and that's what we're looking at today.
So it isn't just a first and best deal, it is a negotiation.
Um we're about to start collective bargaining for all city employees, um, something I know we have all supported, and perhaps for this very reason that employee groups will see their CBAs honored by this body after they've been negotiated in good faith.
Um we have also unanimously unanimously approved the collective bargaining agreement for fire earlier this year already.
Even after we knew what the budget cuts were gonna look like and that um layoffs were likely.
Um it includes raises, and we're about to start a collective bargaining agreement for sheriffs.
This doesn't end, it is um a constant churn that I assume will likely include raises.
Um, if we come to the table in good faith, I think I should honor my word at that table.
I know my colleagues who will vote against this do so with conviction, and I respect it, and I fully respect them and their position, and I know that we'll continue to do work together for STAR, for our neighborhood safety, for community-based solutions for a better responsive um city for all of the things that our neighbors call us about, call 911 about, call 311 about, that does not change.
Um, but I will still be supporting this particular CBA tonight.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councilmember Cashman.
Yeah, thank you, uh Madam President.
Yeah, I will also be supporting this for the some of the reasons my colleagues said having to do with the collective bargaining process that we've been through, collective bargaining in general.
And as far as solidarity goes, I think it's a great opportunity for the Denver Police Department.
In that uh City Council staff is subject to furloughs.
City Council members are not.
Most of the members I've talked to, and I'm not going to speak for anybody else, are going to be writing a check for something like seven furlough days out of solidarity with our city workers.
I think it would be a great thing for uh the union to present to its members, and for the chief to present to his uh uh personnel, to stand with city workers and and uh take some fur furlough days, pay for some furlough days.
This is a unique time that we're in right now.
Um the other thing, well, one time I'm a repeat some stuff that I've said in these chambers a number of times.
One is I believe we need a well-staffed, well-trained, well-paid police department.
I do not know what the numbers should be.
I know what our quote unquote authorized strength is for DPD.
I don't know if that's the number of cops we need or not.
That's for someone else to try to figure out.
But I do know that we cannot arrest our way out of crime.
Uh, that's not my idea.
That's come from uh a couple of police chiefs I've talked to, a couple of district attorneys, city attorneys, uh chief justices of the Denver courts.
You know, we need cops because things things are out of control because we've done such an abysmal job of investing in our families in mental health in education.
I mean, Colorado is notorious for underfunding education, underfunding mental health.
What in the name of God is that?
How can how can we hold our head up and think that that does not affect what we're doing?
I'd like to make our cops' jobs easier, and the only way to do that is we need to come up with the dough at a time when we have none to throw around to begin the process of balancing the equation.
You can't get away with underfunding, child care, after school programs, making sure kids have enough to eat, making sure parents have the support they need when maybe by their upbringing they're not fully prepared to raise the kids they've been blessed with.
We got to come up with money, folks, and there's no um golden parachute anywhere.
It's gonna come out of your pocket and our pocket, but we've got to do it.
And if it takes balancing the budget in a different way, then that's what we need to start doing.
And I will be looking to see if uh uh the police department decides to join City Council in taking some unrequired furlough days, sending some money back to the city, and I'll be very anxious to see the mayor's budget this year, and I hope it's it's creative in ways that uh I don't really expect right now.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Alviderez.
Thank you, Council President.
Um, I will echo a lot of things all my colleagues have said.
Um, over the past several months, we have all been engaged in this process, and the truth is a lot of the questions and concerns that we are raising today should have been asked much earlier.
I want to acknowledge that because I share the discomfort that many of my colleagues feel.
It feels wrong and almost gross to be approving raises for one department at the same time, laying off staff in other areas that address the root causes of crime, the Office of Children's Affairs, Human Rights and Community Partnerships, and other vital services.
And yet I am going to vote in favor of this, not because I agree with that choice or the mayor's choices at all, or the departments that he gutted because I do not, but because these times we need to keep our city united and we need our police.
We lost the 2020 PPA arbitration after council rejected a ratified contract, and voting this down now could be just as fruitless.
It would put us right back in the same place without leverage and without stability.
We also have to remember the reality.
Thank you, Council President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Gilmar.
Thank you, Council President.
John Griffin with the city attorney's office.
So a lot of folks have mentioned that while we're getting information from you, that when people make a commitment to you, is that a binding commitment to you?
Jonathan Griffin, deputy legislative counsel to me personally.
When we are looking at the spreadsheet, and we talk about it in executive session, I've been privy to many of those.
When you do the one-to-ones or when we're an executive session, and we do a straw poll.
We don't um vote, of course, in executive session, but as a former council president, I knew I was always advised that don't bring something to the floor unless you have at least seven soft commitments so that it isn't a show-up here, and so that we don't have something come through negotiations, and then you do only have two people supporting it.
So could you explain?
Because I think a lot of folks, my colleagues have alluded to that during the executive sessions, they made commitments in some way that are now binding as they vote up here, and I would love for you to clarify that if you could please.
Sure.
Um I think I'm understanding I can't speak for any person who's spoken up here, but council's vote at this moment is the vote of that makes a decision.
If that this is this is the official action of council.
So everything prior to this would be an unofficial action, so to speak.
Very good.
Thank you so much.
I really really appreciate that because I think that that's super important for the public to understand that um, you know, there's questions that are asked in in executive session.
Um I could also um verify um that as the executive sessions were going on, there was never a budget shared with anyone.
Nothing was ever sent.
So this council is going off of the word of the Department of Finance.
Is that true, John?
Did was there ever a budget shared or anything like that?
Or I mean, pretty much the information that is presented to city council is the word of the Department of Finance.
In regards to the city budget.
Yeah, I'm not sure.
When you're in negotiation with folks around the table, is the Department of Finance present?
Yes.
Okay.
So the Department of Finance is present during the negotiations.
Department of Finance is there.
Did the Department of Finance, John, ever share with you to share with Council President and Pro Tem to share with Council any sort of financial supporting documentation?
I mean, I don't know if I ever asked for anything, but certainly Department of Finance always provided any information that any call any member of council would ask for, and we're always very transparent about how much things would cost.
Um, yeah, I mean, I they never I never didn't get a number that was asked for by a member.
Okay, so I appreciate that.
So you got a number for costs, but you never got a full breakdown of the costs, like what a spreadsheet looks like, you know, profit and loss, you have income, you have expenses.
You would ask a qu a council member would ask a question, how much does this cost, and you would get a number in response, correct?
Okay, all right.
Yes, John said yes about that.
So we don't know what it actually costs.
Nobody up here could tell you what the status of the city is right now in relationship to the current budget and the proposed budget that by charter the mayor has to provide to this council by September 15th.
There is no information.
So this council, whoever votes affirmatively for this, is going with the police, they are okay with more officers being hired to be placed into Montbello and Green Valley Ranch to stop kids driving in their cars to see if they're gonna get in trouble.
We're not even paying for place network investigations, which a majority of this council loved.
We're place network investigations to go out and look at a site, make sure there was proper lighting, trash removal, etc.
That's not gonna be taken care of in this.
We are giving raises to police officers without any social supports in the 2026 budget.
We don't even have staff to do those programs.
So by folks hiding behind or talking about that they made a commitment, there was nothing binding.
This is the commitment to the people of Denver today.
Our vote will say what an individual values.
If you value police, or if you value community, and that means children's programs, that means human rights and community partnerships, that means supports for refugees and immigrants.
That means supports for brown and black people in our city, trans, LGBTQ, IA, who are also harmed by the police at a higher rate than others.
Thank you, Council President.
Thank you, Councilmember Sawyer.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um, I'm really concerned about the tenor of the conversation that is going on right now, and I need to say something about it.
Cross-examining our city attorney is not acceptable.
John, I want to say thank you for working so hard on doing such a great job of keeping council members informed through this whole process.
Whether we vote yes or no is up to us, but I want to acknowledge the great job that you did during this process.
Every police officer in Denver, I want to say thank you.
Thank you for getting up every morning and putting on a uniform and going out onto our streets and risking your life for us.
Thank you.
Whether a council member votes yes or no on this contract is not a reflection of who they are, it is not a reflection of picking sides, it is not a reflection of anything other than the 13 people up here saying this is what I believe the voters who voted for me would like me to do, and here are the reasons why.
And that is okay.
Everyone up here is allowed to have a different opinion.
That is democracy, and that is healthy.
What is not healthy is passive aggressive comments towards other council members judging them publicly for how they might vote.
It is treating our staff members inappropriately, frankly, in violation of the council's anti-bullying policy.
I have had enough.
But tonight, I can say with 100% certainty that there is no problem with this process.
So if you want to vote no as a council member up here, because that is what you believe in your morals, and that is what you believe your voters said that they wanted from you, I fully support you in that.
And what I ask in return is that you fully support me in doing my job without belittling me, without calling me names, without suggesting that I am somehow in cahoots with our police department.
Come on, thank you, madam president.
Thank you.
Councilmember Gilmar.
Thank you, Council President.
I have witnessed um many other council members at times um bring city employees up, bring others up to the podium that interrupted them, et cetera.
Um, I did not interrupt John at all.
I asked John a series of questions and he answered them.
I can we please this contract, please.
I would love that.
But if someone is saying something about how I engaged with another person, please go back and watch the video.
Um there's plenty of other videos um around that.
Uh, no one interrupted at that point.
John was able to answer fully, and so um, if we're not supposed to have these difficult conversations in these chambers, especially because by the time that something bad happens, and it gets to us, and then we have to approve a settlement, none of us can vote against a settlement.
This is the time to have that conversation because once there's a settlement, if we vote against it, that would make the victims go back through the entire process again.
It would be victimizing.
Council member, can we please stay on the people?
I will go ahead and gladly we'll vote.
Thank you.
Thank you.
So thank you all for hearing our comments.
As we consider the collecting a bargaining agreement for our police officers, I'm mindful of the challenges that our city faces.
A family member of mine got laid off.
It's not easy to sit up here when your family calls you and say they have lost their job.
And dear friends that I have worked with, I've been here for it since 2012.
It's not easy up when you're sitting up here when we are the approval authority for the 2026 budget, and we haven't seen it yet.
We could come out September 15th.
That is not something that is easy.
Normally, when you're in a negotiations and you're working on a budget, um, hopefully you would be part of that process.
And the the way the process folds out is the mayor gets to propose a budget, and he gets to deliver it to us on the 15th of September, and then we have budget hearings and we'll have a deliberative process, and that's what we'll that's what how it's been played out.
It's been played out since I've been starting with the city since 2012.
Um at the same time, when I just was teamsing my council aide who does constituent services for me in council district one, I am constantly asked for more police presence.
I'm constantly asked for more police officers to help with speeding, help with traffic calming, help with um things that happen with police officers.
I don't think I've ever gotten one email since being elected in 2019 that says we do not need more police officers.
Not once.
Even when I was a council aide for seven years, I did not get emails that said we did not need more police officers.
In any organization, we get there are bad actors.
There are bad teachers out there, there are bad traffic officers, there's bad police officers, there's bad elected officials.
In every group of employment group, there are, I think it's like the average I'm in business school right now.
I think you have to average out for 10 percent.
10 percent are bad actors.
Do we want to not support everyone because of those 10 percent of bad actors?
No, I will not.
So my vote tonight is for this contract that we got very good information on.
And in 2020, that vote has come come up often in the conversation tonight.
I also voted no on that contract.
And what I experienced in 2020 was I got a call from our city attorney office, our city attorney saying that the contract was ready and it was coming to city council.
And any collective bargaining agreement, it's the mayor's office and city council that have to be in the entire process.
We were not in that entire process at all.
And I had to call the police chief at the time, who used to be my commander, who I knew very well, and tell him I was gonna vote no.
And it was not a no vote on the police, but it was a no vote on the process.
And at that time, Councilmember Gilmore and um Councilman Torres set up an MOU, a memorandum of understanding that clearly places city council at the process.
We got the letter that said that the process for the collective bargaining agreement was starting, and we went through the negotiations.
I sat there, I I did ask questions about our fiscal budget.
I did ask questions about what kind of raises.
I did push back on certain things that I heard.
I was very, very I made phone calls when he was at the collective bargaining table, and when I say he, it was John Griffin who represents us, our city attorney.
And so I just want to say that as the council president and as the representative for Northwest Denver District One, I will be supporting this because once again, as Councilwoman Sawyer said, that is what my community more times than not has asked me to do.
So with that, Madam President, roll call on council Resolution 12 16.
Council members Albitres.
Aye.
Flynn?
Aye.
Gilmore?
Nay.
Gonzalez Cutieres?
Nay.
Heinz?
Aye.
Cashman?
Aye.
Lewis?
Nay.
Parity?
Nay.
Romera Campbell.
Aye.
Sawyer?
Aye.
Torres?
Aye.
Watson?
Aye.
Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close the voting, announce the results.
Nine ayes.
Nine ayes.
Council resolution twelve sixteen has been adopted.
This concludes the items to be called out.
All bills for introduction are ordered published.
Council members, remember that this is a consent or block vote, and you will need to vote aye.
Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote.
Councilmember Sawyer, will you please put the resolutions and proclamations for adoption and the bills and final consideration for final passage on the floor?
I move that the resolutions and proclamations be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed on final consideration and do pass in a block for the following items.
And this is a huge list, and I think they're all 25 series.
1294, 1194, 1195, 1196, 1198, 1199, 1190, 1191, 1210, 1155, 1156, 1157, 1158, 1159, 1160, 1161, 1164, 1165, 1166, 1167, 1168, 1169, 1170, 1171, 1172, 1173, 1174, 1175, 1202, 1211, 1212, 1213, 1021, 1025, 1130, 1131, 1132, 1133, 1134, 1135, 1136, 1181, 1182, 1183, 1189, 1209, 1231, 1232, 1180, 1193, 1215, 1097, 1098, 1176, 1178, 1179, 1185, 1187, 1188, 1217, 1218, 1219, 1220, 1138, 1127, and that's it.
Well done.
It has been moved and seconded.
Council members Albidres.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results.
13 ayes.
13 ayes.
The resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass.
There are two proclamations being read this evening.
Councilmember Torres, will you please join me in reading proclamation 1292?
Oh, I started.
Sorry, sorry about that.
Whereas a proclamation 1292 honoring the retirement of Penny May.
Whereas on June 3rd, 2025, Penny May, Denver International Airport's executive vice president and chief commercial officer announced her retirement from the city and county of Denver, effective June 30th, 2025, after more than 28 years of dedicated and impactful public service to the people of Denver.
And whereas Penny's distinguished civic career began in 2003 as a city council aide, followed by service as the Denver City Council's Deputy Liaison for Special Projects, where she coordinated complex legislative initiatives and neighborhood outreach.
And whereas her commitment to good government next led her to become the director of excise and licenses 2009 to 2011, modernizing the city's regulatory framework, and then executive director of Denver Human Services 2011 to 2015, where she strengthened safety net programs that serve tens of thousands of Denver residents each year.
And whereas Penny subsequently served as Deputy Chief of Staff to Mayor Michael B.
Hancock, 2015 to 2018, advising on citywide policy and operations across three mayoral administrations before joining Den in December 2018 as deputy chief of staff.
And whereas at Den, she quickly rose to acting executive vice president and chief commercial officer 2020 to 2021, and in September 2021 was appointed to the permanent role where she guided all commercial strategy, including the airport industry leading concessions, airline affairs, air service development, business technology, and business operation functions, and whereas Penny's leadership helped shape Den's culture through initiatives and diversity, employee engagement, and strategic planning.
And during her tenure at the airport, secured and launched new nonstop international service to Paris, Dublin, Istanbul, and Rome.
And we're as a champion for equity and small businesses, Penny integrated equity diversity, diversity and inclusion requirements into every single den competitive procurement, resulting in more than 2,100 contracts awarded to certified local small businesses since 2020, while modernizing procurement systems and reducing average contract execution times from 293 days to 118 days, and whereas, under her guidance, the concession master plan introduced the small business enterprise concession certification, awarding seven SBEC contracts and welcoming 40 new brands to Den, 26 of them homegrown in Denver.
And whereas her remarkable journey, beginning with a degree from the Dallas Institute of Mortuary Science, and culminating as one of the most respected leaders in Denver's civic and aviation communities exemplifies versatility, vision, and an unwavering dedication to public service.
Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Denver City Council that the Denver City Council hereby recognizes and honors Penny May for her extraordinary contributions and lasting legacy.
We extend our heartfelt gratitude and our warmest wishes for a joyful and well-deserved retirement, and that the clerk and recorder of the city and county of Denver shall affix the seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation, and that a copy be transmitted to Penny May.
Um I move that proclamation 1292 be adopted.
It has been moved and seconded.
Comments by members of council, Councilmember Torres, you want to start?
Happy to.
Penny, I didn't even know you had life in City Council.
That was actually new to me.
So I appreciate knowing that.
Since 2003, we think about all of the things that the city has gone through, and all the ways that you've been able to help support city agencies and communities.
I'm just incredibly grateful for your leadership in all of those spaces, but also your friendship.
You're just such a warm and generous person.
So also really honored to know you.
Thank you, Penny.
Thank you.
Council Pro Temeral Campbell.
Thank you.
Um, I just wanted to say congratulations on a retirement and all of the listing.
I had no idea.
I only knew you through as a community member and working within the nonprofit sector when you were at human services.
I think that's when we first met.
Um but I remember how incredibly gracious and helpful and just welcoming to all of the questions and the things and the and the process that we were having at that time, and I had worked at Mile High United Way.
And I just want to thank you for all of your service.
Incredible.
Incredible.
Mortuary science, though.
That is that is a skill.
And I'm just gonna leave it at that.
That's it.
That is a skill.
So it served you well.
But congratulations to you and um to all your service for the city.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councilwoman Gonzalez Gutierrez.
Thank you, Madam President.
Umgratulations.
You made it made it through, made it through the city maze.
Um and uh thank you for for all your years of service, Penny.
I um had the opportunity to um interact with you in 2011, not under good conditions.
I remember you were serving as a director for human services, and I was just a lowly, you know, case worker utilization management when we had a um facility, uh a big um residential child care facility that had to be closed by the state because of some poor practices, and we had a lot of very high-need vulnerable youth at that facility that we had to place somewhere else on a whim's notice.
And I just remember um you coming in.
You came to our emergency meeting that we held, and I remember saying, um, or asking you, I hope that you can trust you know us as experts and know that you know we have um that that we have the best the interest of these children of these youth in mind, and I hope that you can trust us as you know the staff members who who know these things inside and out um to make sure that we keep these kids protected and and and do what we need to do, right?
Um, because I think we had dealt with other leaders who maybe come in and say, Well, this is what we're gonna do, but instead you you listened, right?
And you said absolutely, I know that you all hold the expertise um needed to get through this difficult situation, and you trusted us.
And so I thank you for that, um, and best wishes.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Gemmer.
Thank you.
Um, we've um known each other for quite a while, and um I remember when you shared with me um that your um family um had a long history um in the mortuary business, and how important of a job that is, and how there were times that you had thought, well, am I gonna keep doing this or should I go back and do that?
Because um you help people at the very moment that they are most vulnerable, and you give them respect and dignity, and so um that is always how um you have shown up um as well as a very witty fighter when you needed to, and um I have seen that side of you as well, um, and where um especially as a woman in these roles not backing down when others um try to um stop you from doing what you need to do, you always kept going forward, and um I honor that in you and um we'll try to emulate that as I move forward, so thank you so much for your service, Penny.
Um, thank you.
Thank you, Councilmember Flynn.
Thank you, Madam President.
There you there you are, uh Penny.
Uh I was surprised when I ran into you at uh lunch about two or three weeks ago when you told me that you were retired.
I had no idea you had that in in your immediate future because you don't look like your retirement age, right?
But uh moving on to, you know, moving on to other things is always is always good.
Uh probably won't surprise Council Councilmember Torres, but I met Penny in this in the halls down here when I was a reporter when she came on to city council, but I swear it had to have been before 2003.
Was it only 2003?
It seems like longer ago that I first met you.
Um, but congratulations on your well-earned retirement.
I do have to say that uh anybody who did not know you and your skills and your successes who read your, who read this proclamation might think that you had trouble holding down a job because you moved around so much.
Um but we know differently, and we value uh your service here tremendously, and we're very happy to see you go off on a well-earned retirement.
We hope that you enjoy it and come back and see us sometimes.
Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilman Councilmember Sawyer.
Thanks, Madam President.
Um, Penny.
Okay, if I see you, then I can't speak into the microphone.
If I move it over here, then I can see.
I'll make a quick ditto to everything my fellow council members have said.
I just wanted to say congratulations and thank you for your commitment to our city.
Thank you for the sacrifices that you have made um to stay here and do all of the things that you have done.
You have been an extraordinary asset to the city and county of Denver, and you will be sorely sorely missed.
And I hope that you go put your feet up on a beach somewhere and do something absolutely amazing, like nothing for like three weeks after this.
So thank you for everything and congratulations.
Thank you.
Councilmember Cashman.
Yeah, thank you, Madam President.
Uh way to go, Penny.
Great decision.
Great decision.
Um, I hope you have a blast in the next chapter.
Um, my experience with you is every interaction with you was uh met with great good wisdom, um, great sense of humor, and and I've just appreciated a great deal.
And uh uh my suggestion was going to be I see director Washington uh in in the audience tonight, and this will only uh ring true for the elders in the crowd, but I thought you might consider renaming one of the runways to be Penny Lane.
All right, well, maybe maybe Bannett Street in front of City Hall.
Thank you.
That's all, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Lewis.
Okay, Penny Lane is really cute though.
I do kind of love that.
Um, Penny, thank you.
As uh a new well, formerly biz chair, and then now the um new chair.
I came into work that already existed.
Work that was already moving prior to me coming to council, and you were very kind, um, you were very gracious.
You would take the time to answer any of my phone calls, any of the questions I had, and to walk me through the work that you all were already working on.
And it has been a pleasure to work with Den because I've had the opportunity to work with folks like you, Penny.
So thank you for your service, and I hope you have an amazing time.
You deserve it.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Councilmember Heinz.
Thank you, Madam President.
Ms.
May, um, I'm also having um technical challenges.
I can use the microphone or now I can see you both, and I can both see you and talk in the microphone.
Um, I have been vice chair and and chair of Biz for five years, so I had the opportunity to work with you.
Um, said with other leaders here, uh, Den leaders in the audience.
Um, uh, for a couple of years we were the third busiest airport in the world, and now that you're leaving, we're dropping.
Is that on purpose?
Are we just losing yours so much leadership that we're now what?
Down to number six busiest in the world.
So, no, but seriously, uh congratulations, and uh, I hope we I hope this isn't the last we've seen of you.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Watson.
Penny, I don't think we've had the opportunity to do all as much work with each other as many of the other folks on the dice here, but our interactions have been um failed me with knowledge and understanding of the way the city works and respect and love for the work that you all do at Den.
I gotta tell you, in 2020, I uh fake retired, and look where I'm at here.
So be very careful when you do that retirement as to what the next chapter is, but um much love to you and your family, and hopefully you take uh great time for yourself to enrich others in ways that you choose to.
Congratulations.
Thank you.
Oh, Penny, where do I start?
Just say thank you to the dedication to Denver?
Thank you to the dedication of always seeing the glass half full.
Um, thank you to always being there.
Um, I think I first got to know you.
I think we was my I was trying to figure out when I first heard your name.
I think it was with my sister Kendra when she was working for the administration, and you were guiding her in some of the work that she needed to do and um needing just an ear to lean on or to ear for advice and someone to lean on, um, strategic advisor.
And then I've gotten to go to a couple places with you and always just have great memories and you're always just so insightful and just really thoughtful, and I always just appreciated that about your leadership.
And sometimes when you're um in hard times, you just need a steady hug and someone just to smile and say you're gonna make it through it and it's gonna be all right.
And that has totally been you, and your smile and um infectious laugh will absolutely be missed at the airport and throughout Denver.
I was talking to Phil Workman the other day, and he was remembering when you guys were council aids together and working on a project.
And um, so you have so many deep roots and so many people out there who are supporting you that you probably don't even know of.
Um, so just thank you for your 28 years of dedication to Denver.
What a legacy to leave behind.
And I just look forward to seeing what you do next in life.
Madam President, roll Madam Madam Secretary, roll call.
Council members albites.
Aye, Flynn, Gilmore.
I Gonzales Gutierrez.
Aye.
Heinz?
Hi.
Cashman, Lewis, Parity.
Aye.
Romara Campbell.
Aye.
Sawyer.
Aye.
Torres?
Aye.
Watson.
Aye.
Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close the voting, announce the results.
13 ayes.
13 eyes.
Proclamation 1292 has been adopted.
We now have time for the proclamation acceptance.
And who would we like to invite up?
I invite Penny and I know that we have Director Washington here, so anyone from the Den crew who'd like to come up, um, please feel free.
Thank you so much.
Um, I have been so blessed to work for the city that I was born and raised in, and to give back, and it has been an immense pleasure.
I appreciate this acknowledgement.
Um, I actually thought I would be in the moratorium business for my entire career, made a pivot, and found the best unplanned career a person could have.
So I thank you all.
All right.
Councilmember Torres, will you please join me in reading proclamation 1293?
Is it me again?
You start.
All right.
Proclamation 1293 honoring Andrea Albo.
Whereas Andrea Albo, a proud Denver native, has dedicated more than 27 years to public service leadership, driving transformational change in large organization through policy reform, system strengthening, and improving the experiences of employees and communities they serve.
And whereas Andrea joined Denver International Airport Den in 2019, a senior vice president of culture and strategy, leading precedent-setting initiatives in strategic planning, wellness, employee engagement, equity, diversity, inclusion, accessibility, business development, workforce development, and creating the first of its kind, center of equity and excellence and aviation.
And whereas in 2022, Andrea was promoted to Deputy Chief of Staff at Den, supporting the executive vice president, chief of staff, and overseeing strategic planning, performance management, equity initiatives, and operationalizing key priorities for the CEO and whereas prior to her distinguished tenure at Den, Andrea served as the first chief of staff for the Denver Sheriff Department, leading the implementation of more than 400 reforms and spent over a decade at the Denver Department of Human Services at the Deputy, as deputy executive director guiding local, state, and federal programs focused on marginalized communities and generational poverty, and whereas Andrea's leadership and impact has been recognized nationally and locally, including being named a USDA champion of change, leader of the year by Denver Peak Academy, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, Trailblazer of the Year by Airport News Experience, and one of the outstanding business women in business by the Denver Business Journal.
And whereas Andrea is a first-generation college graduate from the University of Colorado Denver, a graduate of the Harvard Kennedy School of State and Local Government, the Lethino Leadership Institute, and a DEI master certified practitioner, embodying lifelong learning and transformation, transformative power of education and whereas Andrea has served her community through far beyond her professional roles, including on the Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation Board of Governors, Biannual of America Board of Directors, Denver Preschool Program Board of Directors, and the Denver Racial Equity Council, and whereas in September 2025, Andrea will begin a new chapter as the Executive Director of the Scientific and Cultural Facilities District, SCFD, following a national search where her people centered leadership will guide one of the nation's largest cultural funding organizations into its next 35 years of advancing access to arts, culture, and science for all residents of the Denver metro area.
Now, therefore be it proclaimed by the Denver City Council Section One that the Denver City Council recognizes Andrea Elbow for her exceptional service, visionary leadership, and steadfast commitment to advancing equity, excellence, and community impact in Denver and beyond.
And two, and section two, that the clerk and recorder of the city and county of Denver shall affix the seal of the city and county of Denver to this proclamation and that a copy be transmitted to Andrea Albo and her family.
Councilmember Torr uh Okay, so we did that.
I move that proclamation 251293 be adopted.
It's been moved and seconded.
Comments by member of council, Councilmember Torres.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um I am honored to call Andrea my friend, but I respected her even before she was that.
Um I watched her navigate at Human Services in new roles at the Sheriff's Department and at the airport, and uh watched her take really challenging situations with grace and with thought and with warmth and thinking about all of the people involved and not just what's easy, what's fast, and so um thank you for your service to all of those departments.
Um, okay, I can't look at you anymore because I'm gonna cry again.
Um thank you for your service to the city of Denver, and I know it doesn't stop.
Um I'm honored to be this county's rep on the SCFD board and look forward to working with you.
I think you are the most epic pick for leading that organization because it relies so heavily on how and why we love our communities, our counties, and it is usually because we're tied to an experience at a nonprofit, an arts nonprofit, a cultural nonprofit, a science nonprofit, and those shaped our experiences, knowing who we are in each of our neighborhoods.
Um I think you can do that best because you come from one of those neighborhoods, Valverde, that shines pride and resilience and fortitude.
Um it's crazy to me that we only met as adults.
Because we learned later in life that my aunt and Andrea's mom, you know, caused havoc in the streets of West Denver together.
And we but we never met.
And so I'm just so grateful that our cross did end up crossing, our paths end up crossing.
Because you enrich my life and those around you.
So thank you so much.
And I look forward to your next journey.
Thank you.
Councilmember Alviderez.
Thank you so much, Council President.
It makes me so proud to see you in this position at SCFD, and I know that you will take this to the next level because you always do with everything you do.
You take everything to the next level.
And to know that you're the first woman of color to serve this organization is very powerful.
And it's a great leadership, and I'm already proud, knowing that you're gonna do an amazing job at this, and that this isn't even just about Denver, this is a whole district, and you've already been talking to me about how you are gonna make sure that you cover all of the whole area of the SCFD.
And so you have been an inspiration for a long time that I don't even remember how we've met, but I've known I've known you for such a long time.
And I feel like in community we become like family when we just continuously see each other, continuously support each other.
There's very few people when I decided to run for office that I knew like would be in my corner, and you were definitely one of them.
Um and it's just so amazing to see.
And I grew up right by you too, because I grew up in Athmer Park, so I don't know how we probably did meet.
We were probably little kids together, um, running around and didn't realize that we grew up together, meeting your parents and how proud they are of you has been really amazing.
And now I understand why you're so chinguana because I met your parents and they're like, what are we gonna do about the soccer team?
Like, we gotta be involved and we gotta make things happen.
And I'm like, all right, we got people that care about our community that have been stepping up for community for a long time.
And I think about, I tell my parents all the time, like I would not be here if I didn't have you as a mom and a dad.
Because so many kids that we grew up with didn't have that.
And it's all those little things, it's having a good family, it's having people in community that uplift you, and I'm here to uplift you the whole way through this process and cheer you on and watch from the sidelines.
It's an honor to see and vote on this proclamation for for you today.
Thank you.
Thank you, Council President.
Thank you.
Council Pro Tem Romero Campbell.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um, I just wanted to say, so we've met most recently when I'm in this in when I've been in this role.
Um, and I remember meeting and talking with you, and I think it goes to what has already been said of your ability to create relationships so quickly and to be able to connect and have that familiarity um instantly.
Uh, and I really appreciate that.
Uh, you've been a great partner.
Um, I've known you mostly through Den, and I'm so excited you're gonna be at SEFD.
Um, what was so interesting was as we're talking and we're like, oh my gosh, I feel like I've known you forever.
How come we haven't met before?
How come we don't know each other?
Well, it turns out I knew your sister.
And and I was like, oh, I know your sister, you know, within the early childhood field, and we had just and we'd worked together, and it was a sense of just knowing.
Um I have two sisters.
Uh, and I had, you know, I I tell them about work and people I meet and so forth.
And I was telling one of my sisters, Carla, I was like, oh man, you've gotta meet this one gal.
You know, her name is Andrea, and we just, you know, she's just so familiar, blah, blah, blah.
And I'm just going on and just raving about you.
And she's like, I've known her for years.
And so I just think that it's like how small is our world, and how small is Denver, and how great is our community.
Um, I'm so excited that you are um going to be, or that you now, you're you're you're doing it.
You're doing first today's your first day at SCFD.
Congratulations, and you're still standing and having this proclamation um this evening.
Thank you to the sponsors for bringing this forward.
Um, both this sponsor, both this proclamation and for Penny May.
Um, what a wonderful way for us to celebrate um wonderful people who've who've um just really transformed, I think our city and all of our lives.
Thank you, and congratulations.
Thank you, madam president.
Thank you.
Councilmember Gimler.
Thank you.
Uh, congratulations, Andrea.
Um, it has been an honor um working with you and um I especially love that we were able to get together and um talk about um shared history in northern New Mexico and family and um road trips down dirt roads that you didn't know where they were gonna go to but at the end um it was a really great connection and a great story and uh I really look at the work that you've done within the city and county of Denver and knowing uh with scientific and cultural facilities district uh how important that role is and how transformational it really is for all of the children and families and people who have an opportunity to be part of arts and culture and how important that is for our community and especially you being in the leadership role now as we look uh to the next path for scientific and cultural facilities district around um the reauthorization that's coming up next year and where the equity conversations maybe need to go around tier one tier two and tier three and you are the exact right person to be in this role right at this time and um not only us um are celebrating you but all of your ancestors are as well and so I really appreciate that we were able to share that congratulations thank you thank you Councilmember Flynn thank you Madam President Andrew I know that you're going to do a great job at the SCFD and that you'll bring your very special unique experiences but also a special lens to that very important work on our on a regional level I know how proud uh your family must be uh at this but I also want to thank you on a personal level for all the assistance uh that you gave to me and probably to many other folks up here in your various roles here with the city they've been invaluable they've been timely they've been accurate and and always very professional I will always respect the work that you did here and I look forward to you doing great things at the SCFD.
Thank you Madam President thank you.
Councilmember Lewis thank you I just wanted to say thank you I think you've been crying enough tonight so I'll I'll spare you that but thank you for your partnership and thank you for your commitment and I'm just really excited for you as I've told you before thank you.
Thank you.
Councilmember Hang.
Thank you Madam President um I think I'm on to something again just a few years ago we were the third busiest airport in the world and we are plummeting in the rankings that's a joke by the way it's a sixth busiest airport in the world still pretty darn good but it used to be third and now we're losing two fabulous members or we have lost so anyway what a best of luck with SEFD.
It is a gem it is a um a mark of jealousy throughout uh throughout the United States and uh and it is something that helps uh make Denver special thank you madam partison.
Thank you um Andrea I'm so proud of you so proud to see that you I remember when you called me um that morning I'll never forget and you told me you were gonna leave Den and where you were going next and I got off the phone and just started crying because I was just so proud to see someone of from the West side someone who defied a lot of um hardships and had to go through a whole national search I think I remember talking to you and asking you how many interviews you had gone through and how you just were able to say something new every single time that you got interviewed, and I just started asking you about the process.
And um to for your family, thank you for raising such two amazing daughters.
Um, I was the uh I was in a Latino leadership Institute with your daughter who your Andrea's sister, and when I found out you two were sisters, my sister Kendra had been in the Latino leadership Institute, and I was like, of course, that just totally tracks for us.
Um, and for those who might not know, I think I met Andrea's husband before I met Andrea, and our husbands were in the same wedding.
I'm not gonna date us, but back in the day, I'll just say the chili pepper was still open for those of you who know Denver.
Their first date was at the Chili Pepper.
And we have just over the years just gotten to know each other outside of work and gotten to know each other's families and gotten to know our hard stories, gotten to know um things that have really transformed our lives, um, loss, love, illnesses, sickness, and most of all, for tonight, congratulations.
So, um, just couldn't be more honored to be a sponsor of this proclamation, and however, you need support in your next step.
You are not alone.
You lean on us because we'll be leaning on you as well.
Um, and I just look forward to supporting you in your future.
And um, you're not going too far from me, so just stay in touch, Madam Secretary.
Roll call on proclamation 1293.
Council members, Gonzalez Gutierrez, Alpitres?
Aye.
Flynn.
Aye, Gilmore, aye.
Heinz.
Aye.
Cashman?
Aye.
Lewis.
Aye.
Parity.
Aye.
Romera Campbell.
Aye.
Sawyer.
Aye.
Torres.
Aye.
Watson.
Aye.
Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close the voting, announce the results.
12 eyes.
We have 12 eyes.
Proclamation 1293 has been adopted.
We now have time for the proclamation acceptance, and I'd like to call Andrea Albala.
Wow.
I don't think I've cried this much in a while.
Um, members of council, thank you so much for this incredible profound honor.
I I really am speechless.
Um, tears of joy.
I want to thank my beautiful family who's here, my husband and kids, my parents, mom and dad.
You helped me believe in in the impossible.
And you built a bridge for my sisters and I that we'll never forget.
So this is for all of us.
This is for every person in Denver that doesn't see the possible path forward.
I started my career with the city when I was 18 years old as an intern.
I left for a little bit and then I came back because this is what it's about.
It's about raising up the voices, it's about building the path for people that can't see past the struggle.
And I'm so excited, I couldn't be more honored to be leading the SCFT.
Today is my first day, so what a wonderful day to top off.
I want to also thank my city colleagues and friends, um, a new colleague who joined us tonight.
It's such an honor to be here with all of you and celebrate this special moment, and I look forward to transforming more good things ahead.
Thank you.
Okay, all right.
We have three required public hearings tonight.
As a reminder, council members need to turn on their video uh during uh need to turn on their video to vote.
For the during the vote.
For those participating in person when called upon, please come to the podium.
On the presentation monitor on the wall.
You will see your time counting down.
For those participating virtually when called upon.
Please wait until our meeting hosts promote you to speaker.
When you are promoted, please accept the promotion.
Turn on your camera if you have one and your microphone.
All speakers should begin the remarks by telling the council their names, cities of residence, and if they feel comfortable doing so, their home addresses.
If you have signed up to answer questions only, state your name and note that you are available for questions to council.
Speakers will have three minutes.
There is no yielding of time.
If translation is needed, you will be given an additional three minutes for your comments to be interpreted.
Speakers must stay on the topic of the hearing and must direct their comments to council as a whole.
Please refrain from profane or obscene speech and refrain from individual or personal attacks.
Councilmember Sawyer, will you please put Council Bill 25 1070 changing the zoning classification for 2501 South High Street in University on the floor for final passage?
I move that Council Bill 25-1070 be placed upon final consideration and do pass.
It has been moved and seconded.
Oops.
Here we go.
There.
Good evening, Council.
My name's Will Prince with community planning and development, and I will be presenting the rezoning application for 2501 South High Street.
A request to rezone from ESUDX to ETUC.
This evening I will review the request, the location and context, the process, and of course the review criteria.
Again, this is a request to rezone from urban edge single unit DX to urban edge two unit C.
The property itself, highlighted there in the middle of the map in red, is 12,500 square feet and is uh a mix of a single unit property to the northern half of the property and a vacant or extended yard to the southern half of the property.
Continue on to the location and context.
This is located in Council District 6 with Council Member Cashman, and is located in the university neighborhood.
Again, the existing zoning is ESUDX, which is the majority of the area south of the Harvard Gulch there, and then also ETUC, which is to the north and west of the property, and then also abutting to OSA.
As for the existing land use, again, this property is single unit and vacant.
And then the surrounding areas a mix of single unit and two unit, again, mostly two-unit to the north and to the west, as well as open space with the Harvard Gulch abutting the property.
Here you can see the existing uh building form and scale.
Subject property again, a one-story, one and a half story uh residence.
And then we see a similar example of a two-unit property, a duplex at the rear of the property.
Again, uh largely one story kind of brick and stone combination for the context of the neighborhood.
Moving on to the process.
Uh this property this application received its informational notice in mid-May and was heard at the planning board hearing on July 16th and was recommended approval by the planning board.
It was heard at the CPH committee at the end of July and is here tonight at the City Council public hearing.
As for public comment, there have been no RNO comments received to date, and there were five public comments in support of the application, and those were included with the application itself.
Moving on to the review criteria, there are three criteria that we uh look at for all rezonings, and I will review each of these individually, starting with consistency with adopted plans.
Uh for this site, there are two plans that are applicable, comprehensive plan 2040 and Blueprint Denver.
Uh this proposed rezoning furthers comp plan Comp Plan 2040 by a few ways, including several goals under equitable, affordable, inclusive, as well as strong and authentic neighborhoods and environmentally resilient.
It meets these goals by increasing additional housing units and building forms at an infill location that are accessible to transit and mixed use services nearby.
Continue on to Blueprint Denver.
This is identified as urban edge for its neighborhood context, which contains single unit and two unit residential areas.
Commercial areas tend to be found along main corridors bordering residential areas with some larger centers throughout.
As for its uh future place type, this is identified as low residential, predominantly single and two unit uses on smaller medium lots, accessory dwelling units, and duplexes can be integrated where compatible and building heights are up to general are generally up to two and a half stories.
We have additional guidance when it comes to low residential, and this guidance is for when a request is made to change the zoning to allow two unit uses.
The appropriateness of the request depends on an adopted small area plan guidance, neighborhood input, and existing zoning patterns.
A departure from the established zoning pattern may be appropriate if the intent is to set a new pattern for the area as expressed by a small area plan or significant neighborhood input.
For this site, there is no small area plan or neighborhood plan.
The applicant did uh thorough neighborhood outreach and has support from as mentioned in the in the application.
Uh in this case, we see zoning support through zoning pattern.
As we've uh shown that there is an existing ETU C zone district that abuts to the north and to the west, and is a continuation of the existing zone district.
Continuing on with the Blueprint Denver growth strategy.
This is identified as all other areas of the city, which includes 10% of job growth and 20% of housing growth by 2040.
And there's one additional policy uh directly from blueprint, including land use and build form housing policy two, uh, to diversify housing options by exploring opportunities to integrate missing middle housing into low and low medium residential areas.
Uh wrapping up the remaining uh review criteria.
This will uh implement public interest by implementing our citywide plans and allowing additional housing options throughout the city, and is it this rezoning is consistent with neighborhood context, zone district purpose and intent by implementing the regulations and guidelines for ETUC and based on the staff report and information provided this evening?
CPD finds that the review criteria has been met and recommends approval of this application.
Happy to answer any further questions, and the applicant is available virtually.
Thank you so much.
We have one individual signed up to speak this evening, Jesse Paris.
Yes, good evening, members of council.
My name is Jesse Wissel Harrison.
I'm representing the Black Star Movement for self-defense, positive, I think, for self-change, as well as the Unity Party of Colorado, the Northeast Denver Residence Council, the X-free corridor task force, on black news, the box of leftists and the revolutionary agenda.
On that we did previously.
Watson Hines, Campbell, Flynn, Torres, Alvarez, Cashman, Sawyer, and Sandoval.
Y'all need to go in 2027.
Now, in regards to this, for those that don't know, I supported 80 use since 2019.
When I ran for city council out large, we got almost 15,000 votes with no money.
I still support them now.
Um the only concern that I have is that these are being used for short-term rentals, but nobody on the council seems to address that.
So I'm gonna ask the question as I usually do.
Um, is this gonna be used for a short-term rental?
Somebody the occupant or the council member cashman answer that question.
I would greatly appreciate it.
All right, I'll see y'all on the next one.
Thank you.
Uh please.
Questions from members of council on Council Bill 1070.
Councilman, sorry.
Thanks, Madam President.
Um, I'm just curious if the applicant is here to tell us a little bit about what the plan is for this site.
Uh they're available virtually.
Um Paul Hoffman is the applicant.
Producer Paul Hoffman.
H.
Stephen Side.
Stephen Side as well, yeah.
Thank you.
Awesome.
Are you there?
Can you hear me?
Hello?
Hi there.
Thanks so much.
Yeah, appreciate you being here.
Did you hear my question or do you need me to repeat it?
Please repeat it.
Yeah, I was just curious what your plan is for this site.
Twelve thousand square foot lot with uh ETUC zoning.
Is that six to eight units?
Um my plan at this point is to sell it, sell it to a developer.
Um, unfortunately, I can't afford to develop it.
It's a fam, it's been in the family for since over 1960, and I have to sell it to make money for my retirement.
Okay, really appreciate that.
Thanks for thanks for sharing.
Um, so then I guess is anyone from host here?
No, not tonight.
Okay.
Um, so my question is, and I don't know if you can answer it, but uh in the near southeast area plan conversations when we talked about future planning and future place type, um, the affordability conversation and the the displacement conversation um came up a number of different times, right?
Because here we have what is uh essentially an attainably priced home.
It's going to get rezoned, and there are gonna be six to eight units for duplexes that might end up getting built on there if the property owner is gonna sell it to a developer, that will happen.
Um, and one affordably attainably priced unit is gonna be scraped for um for you know multiple other units that are not attainably priced.
And so I'm curious whether there has been any conversation among city agencies to have an affordability requirement.
So general generally citywide, we're having the unlocking housing choices conversation, but for this site in space uh specific to clarify.
And talking with our team as well as Dottie, um, there's the uh the you really can only get two units on this site um based on the square footage and the the setbacks and so forth.
And the northern half with the existing property cannot be redeveloped due to the floodway with the gulch.
Okay.
So only the southern half could be developed, and it's still based on the square footage and the setbacks and all those elements.
Uh it could probably only be either another single unit or collectively for the whole site two units.
So you're not gonna see more than two units on this site.
Okay, so we're not gonna soon then about why there was a rezoning as opposed to just a lot split.
Uh because it wouldn't allow for this way, the property allows for two units on the whole zone lot.
So the zone lot can allow two units, but in order to get the split, it'll requires the two unit zone district.
So it's not an even split.
Yeah, unless you do the the T U zoning.
Yes, and then following that there will be a zone lot amendment where it can be split based on the parcel and then split off.
Okay, great.
Thank you so much.
Thanks, Madam President.
Thank you.
Seeing no other questions by members of council.
The public hearing is closed.
Comments by members of council on 1070.
Councilmember Cashman, do you have anything?
Yeah, I just want to say I do agree with with the staff report, and uh I think the uh proposed rezon rezoning is an appropriate use in that community, and I I look forward to supporting it and hope my colleagues will do the same.
Thank you.
Madam Secretary, we'll call on Council Bill 1070.
Council members Gonzalez Cutieras.
Aye, Torres.
Albitris, aye.
Flynn.
Aye.
Gilmore.
Heinz.
Aye.
Cashman.
Lewis.
Aye.
Parity.
Aye.
Romero Campbell.
Aye.
Sawyer.
Aye.
Watson.
Aye.
Madam President Zandoval?
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close the phone and announce the results.
12 eyes.
12 eyes.
Council Bill 1070 has passed.
Councilmember Soria, will you please put Council Bill 1137 approving the amended and restated 27th and Lairmer Urban Redevelopment Plan on the floor for final passage?
I move that Council Bill 25-1137 be placed upon final consideration and do pass.
It has been moved and seconded.
The required public hearing for Council Bill 1137 is open.
May we please have the staff report?
Good evening, Council President Sandoval and members of City Council.
My name is Tracy Huggins, and I'm the executive director of the Denver Urban Renewal Authority.
The state urban renewal statute appropriately requires approval by City Council of a material modification to a previously approved urban redevelopment plan.
As you will hear, certain components of an existing plan are being amended.
So consistent with statute, we are presenting Council Bill 25-1137 to approve the amended and restated 27th and Larimer Urban Redevelopment Plan.
In November of 2022, Council approved the original 27th and Larimer Urban Redevelopment Plan, which created the 27th and Larimer Urban Redevelopment Area and the 27th and Larimer sales and property tax increment areas.
The area is approximately five acres located in the five point statistical neighborhood in Council District 9.
The area includes a full city block founded by 27th Street, Larimer Street, 26th Street, and Lawrence Street, as well as several properties located just south of 26th Street on the northeast side of Larimer.
The area contains 15 properties, all of which are owned by Eden's, the redevelopers seeking to redevelop the area, except for one property owned by the nonprofit Volunteers of America, Colorado, which is their office headquarters located at the corner of 27th and Laramer.
The site was rezoned through a PUD, which allows for a mix of open space, commercial and residential land use, and a series of height allowances between three and seven stories.
As part of the rezoning effort, Eden's undertook an extensive community outreach process that directly led to the inclusion of certain aspects of their development program and making several public benefiting commitments associated with the project.
These included an affordable housing agreement with the city that requires that 10% of the project units be affordable to households making no more than 50% of the area median income.
Creation of a 10,000 square foot publicly accessible outdoor plaza space, and the implementation of an affordable business incubator program that includes offering commercial space at reduced rents with an emphasis on growing small BIPOC and veteran-owned businesses, the renovation of the VOA headquarters to allow that not profit to continue to operate in the community, to repair and integrate existing valued facades into their design, and provide neighborhoods serving retail along Lawrence Street nearest to the residential community to the east, so that community members can walk or bike to accomplish daily or weekly shopping.
In approving the original plan, council found the area to be blighted based on evidence presented in a condition study for the area, which found that four of the 11 statutorily defined factors of bite were both present and collectively limiting the developability of the area.
These blighting conditions, which include deteriorated or deteriorating structures, deterioration of site or other provements, environmental contamination of buildings or property, and substantial substantial underutil underutilization and vacancy of sites, building or other improvements are still present, and their impact remains.
Council also found the original plan to be in conformance with Plan 2040, Blueprint Denver, and the Northeast Downtown Neighborhoods Plan, and also found the area was appropriate for one or more urban redevelopment projects, including the project as it was originally defined in the plan.
The plan defined that project that supported the revitalization of the area through the creation of several multi-story buildings that would provide a mix of uses contemplated to include retail, residential, a portion again of which was to be set aside for low-income households, a publicly accessible outdoor plaza, and below grade parking to service the development program.
However, due to general and financial market conditions, the project as it was originally defined has not been feasible, and the urban renewal area continues to deteriorate.
From 2022, following approval of the plan by council through mid-2024, Eden's attempted to secure a partner to construct the residential portion of the project, but was not successful.
In early 2025, they proposed a revised project that focused on adaptive reuse of some buildings on the site to create new retail spaces, build new retail, including grocery buildings on the south and northeast portions of the site, replace the below grade parking originally contemplated with surface parking, keep the open space square footage with a modified design, and office space as originally contemplated, and postpone the residential development until market conditions were more favorable.
The developer has been able to secure financing for this newly defined reduced project scope.
And with this change in project scope, we are requesting council to amend and restate the 27th and Laramer Urban Redevelopment Plan to do two things to change the description of the project and to make the conforming changes to the city planning goals due to the removal of the residential component from the urban redevelopment project as defined in the plan.
I want to emphasize that Eden's remains committed to the ultimate delivery of housing in the urban redevelopment area.
The urban redevelopment project will be the initial phase of development with the housing phase to be undertaken when market conditions improve.
To reflect this revised project, the project definition in the amended and restated plan now says the term project means the adaptive reuse of several existing buildings and the development of new buildings in the urban redevelopment area that will provide uses contemplated to include retail, commercial, a publicly accessible outdoor plaza, and site improvements.
The revised project consists of 60,000 square feet of retail space, including a grocer, while maintaining the 10,000 square feet of publicly accessible open space and the office portion of the 2022 project.
The space plan for residential for the residential building and below grade parking would become surface parking for the project.
The existing buildings along Larimer Street between 26th Street and 27th Street will be adaptively reused.
A new building will be constructed for the grocer on the corner of 27th Street and Lawrence Street, and the existing buildings between 26th Street and 25th Street on Laramer will be demolished and replaced with new retail storefronts.
Every urban redevelopment plan must link the plan objectives, including the defined project to the city priorities and goals that are described across the applicable plans, including Plan 2040, Blueprint Denver, and the Northeast Downtown Neighborhoods Plan.
The original plan emphasized the conformance with several key city priorities and goals described across the applicable planning documents, including goals related to supporting development that featured high quality design and cultivating an engaging public realm as well as goals related to incentivizing the creation of a mix of uses across key corridors in the city.
While keeping many of the goals regarding high-quality design and an engaging public realm, the amended and restated plan removes the goals specific to housing and reinforces the goals specific to adaptive reuse and the development of complete neighborhoods.
On July 15th, the amended and restated plan was presented to the Denver Planning Board, who voted unanimously to find the amended and restated 27th and Larimer Urban Redevelopment Plan to be in conformance with Plan 2040, Blueprint Denver, and the Northeast Downtown Neighborhoods Plan.
With the change in project scope, Dura re-underwrote the need for tax increment assistance necessary to support this phase of the project.
The original TIFF commitment of approximately 19.6 million dollars has been reduced to approximately 9.3 million dollars.
These amounts represented and still represent approximately 12% of the total project budget.
The cost to be reimbursed by tax increment continue to directly address the blighting conditions found on the site and to support the development vision.
So to this point, my report has been focused on what is changing.
What I would now like to focus on are those items that will not be changing through the passage of the amended and restated plan.
The overall objectives of the urban renewal plan will not change.
The boundaries of the urban renewal area will not change.
The boundaries of the tax increment area will not change, and the timing to collect the tax increment will not change.
The termination date of 2047 remains in place.
Additionally, the agreements entered into with the other property taxing entities will not change.
Each property taxing entity was notified of the plan modification and acknowledged the continuation of the agreements as previously negotiated.
The Mile High Flood District will continue to allow Dura to retain and utilize amounts derived from their mill levy.
The Rhino bid, under that agreement, Dura will continue to remit to the bid any increment that we receive that is derived from their mill levy.
Denver Public Schools, there is no change to the original agreement.
Dura will be able to retain and utilize amounts derived from the DPS mill levy.
However, when the original project was defined in the urban renewal plan, DPS had calculated a fiscal impact on their ability to deliver services to the area of about $3.4 million.
Per the agreement with DPS, Dura will pay this amount in annual installments over the term of the tax increment area.
Because Eden's fully intends to develop the housing component when market conditions improved, and because the use of TIFF will eliminate the blighting conditions and further ready the site for the housing component, Dura felt it appropriate to continue to make the payments to DPS as originally agreed.
And while Dura is not a party to the agreements with the city that resulted from the PUD approval, this change in the urban redevelopment plan will in no way change the requirements relating to the delivery of affordable housing and other community serving uses.
In considering the approval of the amended and restated urban redevelopment plan, there are a number of additional findings that City Council may make.
Must find that the urban redevelopment area as described in the plan is found and declared to be blighted as defined in the urban renewal law.
This is a legislative finding by council based upon the condition study and other evidence presented to council.
Find that if any individuals or families within the redevelopment area are displaced or if any business concerns are displaced as a result of adoption or implementation of the plan, a feasible method exists for the relocation of those individuals, families, or business concerns in accordance with the act.
Please note that no businesses or residents within the urban redevelopment area will be displaced as a result of the adoption of the plan.
Written notice of this public hearing has been provided to all property owners, residents, and owners of business concerns within the urban redevelopment area.
That written notice was mailed on July 31st of this year, which is at least 30 days prior to this public hearing.
No more than 120 days have passed since the first public hearing before council on the amended and restated plan.
Tonight is the first public hearing before council on this amended and restated urban redevelopment plan.
This is the first consideration of the amended and restated urban redevelopment plan for this area, and this council has not previously failed to approve the amended and restated urban redevelopment plan.
Again, on July 15th of this year, the Denver Planning Board unanimously found that the amended and restated plan continues to conform with the Denver Comprehensive Plan and its applicable supplements.
The urban redevelopment plan will afford maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of Denver as a whole for the rehabilitation or redevelopment of the area by private enterprise.
As I noted previously, the project area is owned by Eidens, a private entity who intends on undertaking the project.
The agreements that I just described a moment ago with the other taxing entities remain in full force and effect as originally agreed to.
And finally, the city and county of Denver can adequately finance and agreements are in place to finance any additional city and county of Denver infrastructure and services required to serve development within the 27th and Laramore Urban Redevelopment Area for the period during which the incremental property and sales taxes are paid to Dura.
The plan allows for cooperative agreements between the city and Dura to address additional infrastructure requirements should they arise.
I very much appreciate the opportunity to bring forward this amended and restated urban redevelopment plan for council consideration, which will support the initial phase of development, eliminate the blighting conditions, deliver an asset to the community, and provide new commercial opportunities and neighborhood amenities.
Thank you for your favorable consideration, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, Chasey.
We have four speakers signed up for this evening.
First up, we have Keith Pryor.
Keith.
Next up, we have Jesse Paris virtually.
So the first question I have is exactly how many units are we talking about?
How is this affordable when you said 10% of the units are gonna be at 50% AMI?
Which means there's gonna have to make 50% of $85,000 to be able to afford to live here.
You said something about BIPOC.
I hate that broad ambiguous language.
Um businesses, uh black indigenous people of color.
That's what the acronym is short for.
Um it sounds good on the surface, but I don't really believe it, especially since we don't know we can't afford to live in this neighborhood anymore.
Um, a grocery store.
That's something about a grocery store.
What kind of grocery store are you talking about?
Are you talking about a chain grocery store?
Are you talking about a mom and pop store?
That was not mentioned during the presentation.
Also, can you explain to us why this area is glided?
Because if I recall several years back, there was a murder that occurred on the 27th in Lamer.
And that was a club that was present there, and I ended up getting shut down.
Then I had attended for um power tree slams and hip hop events.
The club got shut down.
If I please remind me of what the name of that club was, why there was black conditions here in the first place?
But we talk about feasible methods.
We've heard this before.
When I lived in the East Villages in the late 90s, early 2000s, we were told, oh, you can move back in five years.
Well, if you get this place, um, we weren't able to move back in five years.
This is in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002.
We were not able to move back in five years.
Now this place is called Benedict Place.
Right.
So if someone could please answer those questions, I would appreciate it.
And how is this meeting your criteria of consistency but adopted plans?
Public interest is not better in our public answers, especially if you're still allowing this location to go on in a predominantly black historically district.
Um, this is with neighborhood context.
How is the how is this even meeting that criteria?
If someone can please answer those questions, I would greatly appreciate it.
I'm sure the people at home with who as well.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next up we have Stephen Bennett.
Good evening, members of City Council, Council President Sandoval, and Councilman Watson from the Fine District 9.
Excuse me.
My name is Stephen Bennett, and I'm president of Curtis Park Neighbors Registered Neighborhood Organization.
I'm here to um, as Tracy Huggins acknowledged, or Curtis Park Neighbors offered a letter of support for the Dura TIFF financing to make this project come to light.
And I'm here to offer my verbal support as well.
I'd also like to thank Eden's on their commitment to community process and engagement.
Uh Tom Picarsick from Eden's presented to the neighborhood the cur the previous plans in May of 24.
Tom and their architect Nathan reached out to the board in March of this year and sat down with the board and a few community members and let us know of the changes in the plans and the due to the changing market conditions on multifamily development.
And we reiterated to Eden's the importance to engage the neighborhood at large and not just the board.
Therefore, Tom returned to Curtis Park Connects, our monthly neighborhood meeting in May of 2025 and presented their updated plans.
And then in July of 25, Eden's hosted another meeting with Tracy Endura and Councilman Watson at the renovated VOA headquarters.
The neighborhood at large was involved, was in uh invited.
Um, for those of you on council in 2022 when the PUD would rezoned, it was a marathon session that went until about 1 45 in the morning.
Uh the rezone was a very contentious issue in our neighborhood, specifically for our long-term residents.
And I would like to point out that many of those residents that opposed the uh the PUD three years ago attended the meeting with Dura and Councilman Watson at VOA, and there was no um opposition to the updated plan.
So therefore, the board took a vote and it passed unanimously, and we are providing our provided the letter of support for this project.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next up, we have Adam Larkey.
Thank you for the time to speak in favor of Eden's 27th and Laramer redevelopment.
Uh, this project goes beyond development.
It's about strengthening the community that I've served for years through my work with the Rhino Arts District.
I'm currently the interim co-executive director.
Um, also a property owner and community stakeholder.
Uh, every day I see the promises and challenges faced by so many in our diverse area, and that's why this Eden's redevelopment matters.
We know what's lacking, especially exterior spaces for the public to gather and a grocery store.
This project addresses a real gap, finally making it possible for residents, workers, and visitors to have both within an easy walk.
It would be a giant step towards making Rhino a healthy, balanced, and integrated 15-minute district.
Public tools like Dura Assistance and TIFF are vital to making complex redevelopment possible in a way that puts our community first.
Eden's has a proven track record, and this project gives us a chance to shape the growth beneficial for everyone.
And kudos to Eden's for their genuine engagement with our community and ongoing commitment to supporting small business owners, especially women in BIPOC owned businesses.
It is this type of dedication that makes for a lasting difference.
Thank you for the opportunity to share why this redevelopment is so important to Rhino and its future.
Thank you.
That concludes our speakers.
Do we have questions from members of council on 1137?
Councilwoman, I'll be there.
Thank you.
Um I did have a couple of questions, and this might be for host or it might be for Tracy.
So am I understanding that all housing was removed from the project?
Okay.
Yes, under the uh definition of project in the amended and restated urban redevelopment plan, there is no housing that is currently contemplated.
Okay, and so that is that means there's no future guarantees of any housing here as well, right?
So I would also just want to say that the redeveloper is here and can speak to this as well.
Um the rezoning allows for but doesn't require the housing, but they have been very public in their commitment to bring forward the housing component when the market conditions improve.
So there's needs it needs to be clear that there's a difference between the urban renewal project that is defined in the plan and the broader development vision that may uh likely include housing in the future.
Okay, and then um can you talk to me about how is that why it went from 23 million to 13 million?
Or of project costs for TIFF reimbursement?
Yes, in large part because the the whole scope and scale of the project has been reduced, and so accordingly, the amount of public assistance should also be reduced.
So, yes, it was we really just underwrote this project as defined in the urban redevelopment plan, which is different than that broader original project that we had brought forward.
And does this include remediation?
Yes, okay.
Um, is this a voluntary cleanup remediation project or do you know?
No.
Okay, I'm seeing the shaking of the head now in the back.
If you don't mind coming up and just speaking to the remediation that's needed, and that would be helpful.
Um, Thomas Picarsick with Eden's uh the remediation would be just interior asbestos in the adaptive reuse building that we'd be maintaining on 27th in Larimer.
Okay, and if you could speak to just the house, the future housing potentiality, that would be helpful.
So, everything that we're going about right now is to preserve that ability to bring housing when the market demands are there.
Um, so the ability to bring that, and when we do deliver that housing, uh, we signing a 99-year covenant uh for that affordable housing before we can get that first C of O when that residential project would be built.
But everything we're doing now will give us that ability to believe to deliver future housing on site.
Okay.
Um and how has I know that the uh neighborhood group is here, but I'm curious.
You obviously five points has experienced a lot of gentrification and curious how what efforts are being made to make sure that local residents are able to have access to whatever small business opportunities and things are available here.
Yes, uh we've been engaging with the local community uh through events that we host ourselves, and as well as as we pursue through door, we'll have the SBE requirements uh that we'd be maintaining uh to notify and to engage with the local community.
In addition, we work with Green Spaces with Javon Taylor to try to help with uh cultivate new upcoming businesses to incubate and grow in within our this asset and our neighboring asset.
Okay, thank you.
That's all the questions I have for the moment.
Thank you, Council President.
Thank you.
Council Councilmember Lewis.
Thank you.
I do have a few questions, Tracy, to go back to the um the slide where it shows the differences between the 2022 projected costs or the 2022 cost and the revised um project.
Can you talk to me about the significant increase for the demolition and site work?
Sure.
So in the original plan, there was not going to be the same level of demolition as we are going to see now in order to bring so those additional uh retail storefronts along a portion of the site.
So there's just been a change in the in the use there.
So tell me, explain that.
Explain that to me.
So what were you planning for with the 338,000 versus what is now being planned for with the 1.5 million?
I'm gonna ask Tommy T may have to come and help with this as well.
Um again, there is just a different level of work that is going to be done across the project.
And what I also want to be cautious and I'm gonna look for some other assistance potentially from from Mike in the background is we seek to find that place of intersection of the amount that the project needs in order to go forward and what those eligible costs are.
So as you can see, there was a significant reduction in the by the elimination of the below grade parking.
Uh-huh.
So when we took that out, there's the potential that there was an increase that we otherwise wouldn't have been able to meet on the demolition insight work as a result of this different uh project.
But I do know there is a different level of uh demo and site work activity because it is just a different development program.
Come on up.
Thank you.
Um to talk about the site work and demolition, a lot of allocation with the subgrade parking on the original plan, a lot of those costs were within the subgrade parking, which is how the contractor allocates costs.
Um so now without that subgrade parking, you're you're seeing the true detail on the site and a demolition that might have been within the subgrade parking numbers previously.
Okay, um, and then some of the the questions I have I I think oftentimes when I think about adaptive reuse, I think about it in the context of housing, but it sounds like there's not housing attached to this anymore, so can you talk to me about the 900,000 and the movement to the 2.3 million?
Yes.
Um the adaptive reuse originally was intended to really maintain the facade of the Joe's liquor building.
Okay.
Um, and now as we've looked at this plan, we're actually utilizing on 27th Street the entire warehouse minus one little section uh between Joe's and the large warehouse, so it's about 25,000 square feet of new retail that we're using the existing warehouse commissary kitchen from the Volunteers America and repurposing it so that existing structure you see there today would remain on the corner of 27th going down 26 down to 27th in Lamar.
Okay, and then can you help me understand for the ADA compliance?
It was uh for 2022 was zero, but now it's um three hundred and sixty-two thousand.
And so what what's the change there?
Zero is surprising, but just uh in the original design because we're building brand new construction.
Um it was based into the the design of the building while we're using the existing structures.
We have to modify and create ADA compliance within those structures so that warehouse building, we are maintaining the entire facade and keeping the street level exactly the same.
So there's a lot of ADA work to make it accessible for everyone that is required for the entrances of those buildings.
Okay.
Um thank you.
And then the soft cost, what's the soft cost?
Why was it so why was it 3.8 mil, and why is it zero now?
Do soft costs go away?
Sure.
In in answering these questions, I want to be clear, what you are seeing here are just the costs that the tax increment would seek to reimburse, not the entire project budget.
So to suggest that there were zero soft costs in their total budget would be inaccurate.
We were just saying we were not going to reimburse any soft costs.
That's super helpful.
And same on some of those other, like with the ADA compliance.
They clearly there would have been costs attributable to their development budget.
They just were not the cost originally that Dura was going to use the tax increment to reimburse.
Thank you.
And then my final question is what's a CEO fee?
Like an actual CEO?
You know, you are not the first person to ask that, and including our board members, and say, what is that?
Um CEO stands for the construction employment opportunities program.
Okay.
So this is a program that Dura administers where we require that the developer who is receiving tax increment from us to pay over to Dura 1% of the total amount that we are committing to put into the project.
We Dura then use those monies under our CEO, construction employment opportunities program, to provide funding to uh other providers in the construction industry in an effort to try to bring more uh workers into the construction industry.
Okay, okay, this is my final question for real.
Um with the um you all talked about the improved economic conditions and um housing.
What's a measure for improved economic conditions?
Like what does that mean?
So currently the site is vacant and has been vacant and is causing there to be additional burden placed on the community just as a result of its current condition.
So by being able to reactivate, re-energize, bring additional retail opportunities, bring the grocery store is clearly going to increase the economic output of the of the area.
And you said you said with surety that you weren't concerned about um displacement of businesses or displacement of residents with this um coming in.
Talk to me about those assurances because I grew up in five points, and it is very different.
And I just worry when we when I hear those assurities that there's no way to really to be able to protect that because it hasn't been protected.
So again, want to be very, very clear that the finding that we are asking you to make is that within the boundaries of the urban redevelopment area, there won't be any businesses or residents that are displaced because there's nobody living or working there now except for the VOA.
They are staying there.
The impact beyond the boundaries of the area can be a different consideration.
And so, again, making sure as best we can with the assistance of Eden's that they are mindful of the uh retail mix that is brought into the community, that it is not looking to um negatively impact the existing uses in there, but instead to really complement what is both in the community currently and what the community how the community intends to grow into the future.
Thank you so much.
I really appreciate it.
Thank you.
Councilmember Watson?
Uh thank you so much, Council President.
Um Tracy and team don't go too far on um the applicant, please come forward again.
Um Tracy would ask for you to also clarify for once again in case um folks wasn't clear on the taxing entities, which I found very curious.
Um impacts of this um dramatic change to the taxing uh entities um uh based on the change of what the TIFF is going to fund.
Can you share any changes to any of the taxing entities that um would be adversely affected because of the drawdown difference of this development?
So again, we are not anticipating based on the the conversations both previously and currently with those other taxing entities that their view on impact is changing as a result from of the reduced scope of the project, and instead we are really trying to honor uh the intention of our agreement with DPS because we do believe that it in some point there will be residents there and there will be students using their their facilities, and so since their tax increment is allowing, or the amount of the tax increment attributable to their mill levy is allowing us to remedy the blighting conditions in ready the site for that future, we felt it appropriate to continue to make those payments to DPS almost like an advanced payment on on the impact that they at some point in the future will experience.
And that's because of your anticipation of housing as described by the applicant um you felt to remain stable that tax increment for DPS.
Correct.
Another question on Dura and your commitment to minority businesses or small business can you describe what is um in involved in this process to um as far as door incentives or door obligations as far as MBE SBEM can you talk through any of this the enterprises that are impacted by that I am very happy to talk about those because we're really proud of the different types of programs that we require every redeveloper to participate in if they are looking to utilize tax increment so in no particular order there is a 1% for project art commitment so one percent of the amount that we commit in the tax increment must be used to install and make and have publicly accessible project art within the boundaries of the urban redevelopment area.
All retailers and any any new job that is created on the site is required to participate in our first source hiring program that is a program that is intended to provide the first employment opportunities created by any project to low income Denver residents and we partner with the Denver Housing Authority on outreach to make sure that those opportunities are known we've talked about the CEO program.
We also have a requirement that the redeveloper prepare and implement an SBE small business enterprise utilization plan with the target of having 23% of all of 23% of the total project budget so not of the TIFF commitment but the total project budget exclusive of land acquisition be made available to qualified small business enterprises in the contracting of the uh of the construction so we really look to try to bring as much public benefit through just the implementation of our programs as we can and that is separate and apart from the other requirements that other city departments may require thank you so much Tracy and Tom and just a few follow-up questions for you.
Can you share with um uh council members and folks that are watching um kind of the work that your team has done in Eden's as far as providing for um black indigenous people of color uh businesses in the entities on that same street talk through what that commitment looks like and then share what that commitment that you're making for this proposed retail on this side yeah it's really um been a huge commitment really to engage and enrich the communities that we work with uh we originally started with a museum for black girls who is now on 16th Street mall establish them over in Rhino actually took them to Houston and then brought them to DC and so allow them to get additional exposure to multiple markets that we partnered with mentioned before working with green spaces and cultivating working with Javon Taylor to find those uh incubating retailers that we can put into spaces um within our property um and continue to evolve with those um partners um and continue to find new retailers that are up and coming that are looking to start businesses in an easy way to kind of establish the pop up and to get exposure in the marketplace to get their the footing and as you contemplate a grocery store talk through what your thought process is as far as your target this is five points this is a community that um directly uh in this part of five points um there's there's not a grocery store um specific to this this part of um the neighborhood talk through what your thought process is as the applicant for that grocery store yeah edon's is uh uh national retail developer who started as a grocery company 60 years ago in Columbia, South Carolina.
So grocery stores are at the core of our business um as we look at rhino, that was the big component of this project, even on the vertical development is to bring in the newest neighborhood servicing retailers to really drive three and a half days, three and a half trips a week in 90 minutes worth of dwell time.
So as we think about the grocer there, uh we're we are thinking about a um conversations are between locals and nationals uh that provide daily needs and really meet uh the clientele, not that is within a 15-minute drive time and walking distance from the site.
Um, but it's really a multitude of grocers that we're discussing with.
Um it's but to really to adapt to and actually kind of work with the neighborhood and communities that they go into.
And finally, can you describe the commitment for affordable housing um that you have made to community um that you initially made through uh the the initial agreement that we're changing?
Talk through what that commitment is and what that commitment for long-term um affordability once the that development is.
Yes, so that commitment is um, as Tracy mentioned earlier, 10% of the units that will be built on the site in the future would be at 50% of AMI, and that would last over 99 years.
So as we look forward into the future, when markets are in a better condition before we can get that first C of O on site.
Uh we would be signing a 99-year covenant uh before those residential units could be occupied to maintain that 10% of those units at 50% of AMA.
Thank you so much, Tom.
And Council President, I don't intend to come back in for comments, so if if permitted, I just want to make a quick comment on the community process, and I know that um the president of Curtis Spark RO registered neighbor organization spoke to that.
Yes, but we are in the question section.
So I'm gonna just cut you off.
I'll try to be quick and get a question.
This is a public hearing, so we're in we've got to follow the procedures.
Thank you.
I appreciate that.
No more questions.
Okay.
Councilmember Parity.
Um, thank you so much, Council President.
I think um the first person I have a couple questions for is Tracy.
Thank you so much, Tracy.
Um, so I'm also I think struggling a little bit with coming into this part way through, like between two city councils.
Um, first question I have is just to be clear the the urban renewal area is not just this site, it's also like the whole block across 26th, right?
The actual URA.
I mean, I'm looking at the map.
I just have some questions about that.
You can go if you're able to see the map, it is the area outlined in red.
Yeah, so the full city block, then the the other moving down.
Yeah.
So it's the block that used to have Cold Crush that has the Laundry on Lawrence, a number of other businesses, and then and then just this site, it looks like on this block.
Um, when was that whole URA formed?
And was it formed um driven by projects on that other block to the north?
I'm just trying to understand the impetus for the creation of that area as a URA because it's just a block and change, it's not huge.
So the entire redevelopment program was presented to us by Eatons.
And so they had the development vision for the entirety of the area that you see encompassed in the urban redevelopment area.
Okay.
And what year um was it was it gonna become a URA?
I'm sorry, in 2022.
Okay.
Thank you.
Um, so uh I think my the thing that I'm struggling with and that I always struggle with um when we're talking about urban renewal is I understand sort of the concept of like um using this tax forgiveness element like TIFF financing, um, to drive development that we don't think can be financed in any other way.
But knowing this neighborhood as I do, um, and I also could understand doing that to get housing given the conditions that we're in.
Um, but this neighborhood is I mean, this has to be some of the most valuable real estate in Denver, I would assume, um, knowing what's around it and how much is skyrocketed in recent years.
Um, I just feel uh it's hard for me to gauge whether this is a tool that we really like need and should be using here or whether we're just sort of providing tax forgiveness that we don't need to provide.
Um so if you have any thoughts on that, I would love to hear them.
Because it's hard for me to assess.
Yeah, good.
I kind of thought you might.
I do, because we take our charge of advancing development consistent with what the vision of this the community, the city, as being brought forward by the developer, um, with the minimum amount of public investment very, very seriously.
We recognize that it is a tool that um needs to be able to demonstrate that but for this investment, the project won't happen, and also recognize that those revenues that are generated are not going to go where they otherwise would naturally go, that being the city and county of Denver, Denver Public Schools, urban drainage.
And so we are really very mindful of that point of tension in trying to determine how much we believe a project should be able to uh receive from the tax increment.
So in going through that exercise, we require a lot of information from the redeveloper.
We do a very, very thorough review of their development pro forma to understand where are those places where we can really um ensure for ourselves as well as the Dura board that uh we are making an appropriate investment to meet the market where it is, not above, not below, to really advance the project, really focused on making sure that that investment is what it needs to be without incenting the developer to do something otherwise.
So we are really very diligent in our underwriting to determine uh that a project does in fact need our assistance.
There are a number of projects that come to us that we do not provide assistance to because it really is important to us that we maintain the integrity of what the statute charges us to do, utilizing this very important uh public finance tool in order to advance those projects that again meet the criteria of what the city wants, what the community wants, and what a developer can deliver.
Okay, um, and I wouldn't expect anything less of you and your folks, honestly.
Um I think in this case I'm struggling with it a little bit differently because um, well, tell me to what extent you sort of fully redid all that work when the scope of the project changed, as opposed to saying, look, we've made this commitment to this project, maybe the scope has changed, but we're you know, in other words, did you go back and look at it from that same lens?
We certainly did.
We certainly did.
Okay, thank you for that.
Um, I also have um some questions for Eaton, I think, from the team from Eden.
And I'm sorry that I'm forgetting your name.
Thomas Picarsick with Edens.
Thank you so much.
Um, how much of the um someone may have asked this already, but if so, the number flew past me, the um eligible costs, which is now down to this um 13 million for the revised project.
Can you tell me again how much of the total cost that is?
It's approximately 12%.
Okay.
Off the top of my head.
Um, and uh I know that this is this was the um the VOA.
Are can you explain to me um there's something about the VOA office um listed both in the original plan of the amended plan and then parking spaces for them?
Will they be a tenant here or what's the what's the relationship with them?
Yeah, uh Volunteers America, the corner of 27th and Laramer owns um a condo ownership in the building there, the office on the second and third floor, and in the basement of the building, and we're reactivating with retail on the ground floor.
So they are owners of that building uh and would have rights to parking for their office tenants, their their office workers.
Okay, and I'm so sorry, I'm I'm feeling like I'm being extremely slow, but the so they own the current building that would be um the corner three-story office building, their owners of that building.
And that would stay there.
Correct.
Okay, I gotcha.
That's the historic building.
Not historic, but significant.
Yeah, significant, and they've been there for since 1930.
Okay, right.
I gotcha.
So the so they would remain on the corner and then um the the parcel that um you're developing would include parking for them.
Yes.
Okay, thank you for that.
That helped.
I don't know why I was missing that.
Um can you talk to me a little bit more?
I mean, I understand the um the desire to build housing in the future.
Um, how do we like what form does that commitment take beyond sort of it feels a little bit like a promise and an intention, right?
That like if the market gets better at some point, you'd like to be able to do it.
Is there anything more concrete than that um where we can rely on that happening at some point down the line?
Um, nothing more specifically concrete.
We've experienced really in Rhino over the last few years, two over 2,000 units being delivered each year.
So we've had a glut of supply.
Um, in addition where interest rates have gone uh required returns on development projects on the residential side have increased by 125 and 150 basis points.
So, depending on population growth in the city, uh absorption of that supply and interest rates, it'll really kind of triangulate when that moment would be right to move forward.
How many of those units that have um been built in rhino have been market rate to your if you know?
I do not know.
Um and then I guess I'll just ask this sort of outright like what what happens here from your point of view if the TIFF financing goes away, like what happens to this parcel and and your plans for it?
It would remain blighted as it is today um and not be activated uh without the support of the the Dora funds.
Okay, and can you talk to me a little bit more just as someone that you know I've never bought and sold real estate in my life?
Other than I moved into a house that my husband already owned, so I literally haven't.
Can you talk to me a little bit more about why this can't be financed with other tools?
Just I mean, just like I'm just asking the question from a place of total zero.
Yeah, uh really about hitting required returns.
Um so it's not about financing, it's really about hitting required returns when you go out to get debt and equity.
Um, and based off of the current uh kind of income stream and the cost to build, even to rehab, we're not able to meet those requirements.
Okay.
Um, there been a number of other like the market across the street was redeveloped recently, right?
Uh Denver Central Market or uh it was coming up on 10 years.
Uh where the owners and operators of that building there.
Was that built with any um public support of any kind or it was not and it's not within the URA?
No.
Okay.
Um are there any what's do you own any other properties, I guess, that are outside this um URA?
So across the street, um, that whole really the next block, we own about 150,000 square feet uh of additional retail and office between kind of uh Laram or Walnut 26th and 27th Street.
Okay.
And sorry, I just missed the intersections.
That that's the block that is within the URA.
Say again, that's the block that is within the URA, or not.
It would be across the street, so on the other side of Laramer, uh where Denver Central Market is, Patagonia, across Burden across Larimer.
That strip of retail is um our holdings there.
Okay, um, have the values in this neighborhood gone up quite a bit in the last couple of years.
I mean, are we wrong about that?
Uh real estate values have gone up as we think about bringing kind of neighborhood service and retail really a grocery uh the rents on a large uh grocer are not like they are for a small retail shop.
Yeah, sure.
And that I'm glad you brought that up actually because that's I know how valuable that would be in that neighborhood, and I know that like Melody Market, for example, went under pretty quickly that was would have been a couple blocks away, right?
Um and there's a small grocer, I think like in an apartment building in that neighborhood as well.
Um so talk to me about maybe a Tracy question as well, the solidity of the commitment.
I mean, I assume if you can't get a grocer there, um, that you won't lose your financing.
Is that right?
In other words, if that doesn't work out the way you hope.
Technical.
Don't go far.
No, because I think there are two parts to that.
Part is their ability to pull together their overall development program and have the um the revenues that the the grocer would be bringing to their development program be in place on the tax increment side.
Um I want to make clear this is I want to make a couple of things clear since I'm back at the microphone.
So on the slide that talks about the tax increment, it should have changed the font here.
There's a list of the total eligible costs that total 13 million, but we are only committing to reimburse 9.25 got it.
The reason for that is there are always city eligible.
Exactly.
So, but so I wanted to to emphasize that for correctly.
And this is going to be a developer reimbursement scenario, so that we will commit to reimburse these costs if they are incurred, and there is increment generated.
So if the development does not perform, we are not at risk in reimbursing those costs.
The developer is is at risk of just not receiving that full amount during the term that of the of the tax increment.
Sure.
And it's just a question.
I mean, from sitting up here, it's just always a question of whether we're overshooting and um using tax increment when the tax benefits would still be, you know, would still come along, right?
And then we would get the taxes.
Um so I understand you're saying that that's not the case here, but I'm trying to um I guess kick the wheels on that a little bit.
So, um, and I'm so sorry, Tracy.
The I I absolutely forget what it was that brought you back to the microphone, but I think we didn't get back to it yet.
I'm so sorry.
That is okay.
That's okay.
Well, all right, um, I think that's probably all.
Oh, the grocery.
We were talking about the grocery store.
So I just this is a common thing, right?
Like every development um genuinely wants a grocery store and every neighborhood genuinely wants a grocery store.
We we don't see them.
They I mean, I basically never, as far as I can tell.
Um, and that's grocery store economics, which is another thing I don't really understand.
Um so I'm just sort of curious, like if that's one of the most um one of the biggest benefits to the neighborhood here.
Um, how we how we think about that, like how we think about the likelihood of that actually happening, especially when again someone tried to make a go of it, you know, right there in the plaza and um wasn't able to do it.
Um, and I thought that was someone who would pay a lot of attention to what people were shopping for in the neighborhood and everything else.
So I'm just curious about that.
And you are not wrong that uh negotiating with grocery stores is very, very difficult.
That is the component of a number of urban renewal projects over the years, and Tommy is the only one that can speak to the uh the certainty of that.
Do you have are you in conversations with any particular grocers?
Like how how are you?
We're in active conversations with two two grocers.
Okay.
All right, that's all I need to know.
Thank you so much.
Thanks, Madam President.
Thank you all for the great discussion.
I see no other council members in the queue.
The public hearing is closed now.
We have comments of members and from members of council on Council 1137.
Councilmember Watson, I'll start with you.
Uh thank you, Council President.
Um, I I wanted to share it first.
Um, thank you to Tom and his team from from Eatens.
Um, the community dialogue that you engaged in, not just for this process, but the first PUD discussion, um, it was a door-to-door knocking on uh community members' doors, speaking with them, hosting several meetings that um uh went above and beyond the process of of seeking input and oftentimes with these types of of development changes, um the quick process is often taken.
And so I want to say, you know, thank you for taking those steps for doing that.
Um I want to say also to the neighborhood for being engaged and requiring that Eden and Tracy and her team in Dura came back to community that they listened and that they had a full process informed by the earlier process that occurred um several years ago to ensure that there were no gaps missing and community members that voiced concern previously um that you provided an opportunity specifically for those community members, anyone else who wanted to attend, but we had the names of numbers of the folks that were um not as supportive of the PUD the last time and specifically inviting them and giving them an opportunity to have as much time as necessary with Tracy and team.
Um I thought that was uh important nub was um it stood out within this process.
Uh I want to share to my colleagues uh the the Dura process and looking at that strip, um the five points area within the art district, um, there are a lot of um uh high performing um businesses, but if you visited Larimer Street on that strip, and the years uh almost decades of uh those several buildings um that have not um been successful even prior to Eden's uh uh providing retail or providing um a community benefit.
Um I know the community has come together and have asked for something to be done.
Uh in the time in of two years, two and two and a half, three years, however long it's been since the the rezone went through.
I think it was 2022.
Um from that time until now, the amount of steps and due diligence that Eden's had to take to make sure that property doesn't uh deteriorate anymore.
Um I think has been commendable.
We didn't speak to the experience to for VOA uh volunteers um um uh for the work of ensuring that they had a space to continue to work that they they began in that community almost what 80 years ago um and still keeping a space within five points for their offices, I thought was also um a brilliant touch.
And so I I share that this has been a very involved process.
Um the commitment to DPS uh demonstrating not reducing the mill, which would have been the normal process for something like this that doesn't have specific um housing attached to it at this um time period, um, that commitment by Dora for that mill levy to remain um is important, and it's important to demonstrate that that is a clearer expectation that there will be housing and there will be folks and direct impact of DPS for all of those reasons and the many years of dialogue within community, um, at least the two years that my office has been um involved in discussions.
I encourage my council members uh to support this change and allow uh this community to have uh development on this block that's been missing for um several years upwards towards uh a decade and a half.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Hangs.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um thank you, Councilman Councilmember Watson for your words.
Um, you know, we talked about this in committee.
I happen to uh serve uh as a member of the committee that heard this before it got to the floor and um and I mentioned in committee that uh I thought this was important to to mention uh at the floor.
Um this is kind of a we're in a housing crisis here in Denver.
It's a little weird that um that we're deleting um you know housing from the process.
Uh and so you know, it scratched my head a little bit, and I think, huh?
Um, you know, we just passed an ordinance eliminating parking minimums because we need shelter for people before we uh build shelter for uh our for cars.
Um that uh uh that this area wants to build um businesses and um wants to delay homes again is a bit of a head scratcher.
Uh we've got um Cherry Creek, the neighborhood um that wants to build uh 15 office buildings, and there's not really a whole lot of housing development happening there, but other than uh the Eden site and Cherry Creek, it's a bit of a national anomaly.
Um and then I thought what are what what's going on with these businesses, and then I I realized that you know we we cast a lot of votes, so um uh so I don't I don't remember the intricate details of each time each vote that we cast, and um, but I started dusting off the cobwebs of this vote because you know this is my second term, and um, and so I voted on this before.
I'm about to vote for it again just for what it's spoiler alert.
Um but uh this uh this particular program is all as a national anomaly in other ways in that it is incubating um uh minority women-owned businesses, and in a way that is uh quite successful um for uh for us here in Denver.
But as we heard Eden say, um, not only is it so successful here, it's been transported to other cities.
Um and uh so that uh and not just in Eden's, now there's uh uh Museum of Black Girls uh on uh 16th Street.
Deleted the four-letter word mall.
So um 16th Street, we've uh uh so this is an incubator that um that really I think very closely resonates with the values that we have uh uh demonstrated time and time again as uh as a council body and um and if housing is getting in the way of uh making sure that we have an incubator that um that is quite successful in making sure that we have local women, minority-owned businesses that um that see success that move outside of the five point statistical neighborhood uh to other neighborhoods in Denver, move outside of Denver to other cities around the U.S., we absolutely should celebrate that.
So I just want to make sure that that's uh out there as well, so because it on its face is a bit of a head scratcher, but like uh because uh because we're uh removing housing as opposed to leaning in on housing, but I believe that this is the right answer uh for us.
I believe it meets our value system.
Um certainly meets my value system, but I believe it meets the value system for us um as uh as a city, and I think the the with that extra description, I think that the people of Denver would understand and want us to vote in favor, and so that's what I'll do.
Thank you, Council President.
Thank you.
See no other colleagues in the queue.
Madam Secretary, we'll call on Council Bill 1137.
Council members Gonzalez Gutierrez, aye.
Torres.
Aye, Albitres.
No.
Flynn, aye.
Gilmore, aye.
Heinz.
All right, Cashman, Lewis, nay.
Parity, no.
Romero Campbell, aye.
Sawyer, aye.
Watson, aye.
Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close vote and announce the results.
10 ayes.
10 ayes, council bill 1137 has passed.
Councilmember Sawyer, will you please put Council Bill 0628 concerning recycling and organic material diversion and in connection there within repealing and reenacting Article 10, Chapter 48, adding a new Article 11, Chapter 48, and adding a new article, chapter Article 15, Chapter 10, and amending Article 1, Chapter 24 of the code on the floor for final publication?
I move that council bill 25-0628 be ordered published.
It has been moved and seconded.
Council Member Parity, your motion to amend.
Yes, ma'am, I was still closing the documents from the last thing.
All right, I move that council bill 250628 be amended in the following particulars.
And I'm sorry, Madam President.
Are we required to do the amendments before the public hearing?
Yes, okay.
Because we don't want to have testimony on the unamended version.
Yeah, because if the public hearing isn't on the amendment, so why would we have to move it, yeah?
Yeah, so then we have to do everything at the very end.
I'm just pausing because I know a lot of the testimony is relevant to the amendments, so um, but be that as it may.
Um I move that council bill 250628 be amended in the following particulars on page 9 life 12 following the words described under this article in the yeah, you're are you um too far down?
Yep, go back up a page.
We have to go back in here.
Um number one on page three, line 27.
Thank you following the word sub A, strike capital V and replace with from the effective date through December 31, 2035, the close quotes.
Number two, on page four, line 23, strike table one performance security deposit and replace with table one a performance security deposit through December 31, 2035.
Paragraph three on page five, line one.
Insert the new lines, insert new lines as follows.
C from January 1, 2036 onward, the following projects are exempt from the recycling and reuse requirements set forth in section 10414.
One, the construction or demolition of a building 300 square feet or less in gross floor area, to the interior improvement repair remodeling, tenant finish, or any other interior modification where the area of modification totals no more than 1,000 square feet of gross floor area.
Number four, immediately after the lines inserted at page five, line one, insert a new table as follows.
Three columns.
First column scope of work, second column amount required, third column, maximum amount of the performance security deposit.
First line, first column, new construction of 300 to 1,000 square feet.
Second line, second call first line uh second column, 50 cents a square foot.
First line, third column, 1,250.
Next line, column one, new construction more than a thousand square feet, column two, a dollar per square foot.
Column three, two hundred thousand dollars.
Next line, column one, demolition of a structure, three hundred to one to a thousand square feet, column two, fifty cents a square foot, column three, one thousand two hundred and fifty dollars.
And last line of the table, column one, demolition of a structure more than a thousand square feet, column two, a dollar per square foot, and column three, two hundred thousand dollars.
Uh and sorry, there is one more line: existing building renovation, tenant finish more than a thousand square feet, one dollar square foot, one hundred thousand dollars.
Number five, immediately after the table inserted at page five line one, insert the label table one B performance security deposit on or after January one, twenty thirty-six.
Number six on page four line sixteen, strike table one performance security deposit and replace with table one a performance security deposit through December 31, 2035, or table one B performance security deposit on or after January 1 of 2036.
Number seven on page four line eighteen, strike table one and replace with table one A and table one B.
Number eight on page five, line one, strike sub C and replace with sub D.
Number nine on page eight, line four, strike, and at least every five years after and replace with, and at least every three years thereafter until September 1, 2034, after which at least every five years, and number 10 on page eight line seven, strike collected pursuant and replaced with related.
Thank you.
It has been moved and seconded comments by members of council on amendment one to council bill zero six two eight.
Um, if I can start, madam president, and then yeah, if the other sponsors have a word to say about it.
Um for all the language, all this is doing is um uh keeping the size limitations for uh for remodels, new construction, and so on that need to comply with this act, keeping those size limitations the same as the mayor's office um and the city agencies have proposed for the first 10 years, and then in 10 years, um reducing those sizes at that time more in line with um what proponents have advocated for.
And I think that's um something quite reasonable because within 10 years, if all of the large projects in the city are having to divert, um it will be much much easier to um get this kind of material you know uh back into back into circulation um and dispose of it in a way that's that's in line with the ordinance.
Um so I think it's a strong compromise.
Um, 10 years is a lot of time to build that market up.
The other um, the other edit in here is that um all throughout the um these amendments, we're proposing that where city agencies are supposed to report back to city council that instead of doing that um every five years, that they do that every three years for 10 years and then every five years, so that we at least get one report with every new council in the first 10 years of this.
Um so it's essentially one additional report within the first 10 years.
Um, but I agree with proponents that that's important for us to be able to keep tabs on what's going on, because every five years is is an age around here, as you all know.
Um, so this this edit is in line with the other amendments in making that change as well, and that's really all this does.
Okay, any of the other sponsors' comments, questions, councilmember Flynn.
Thank you, uh Madam President.
What is maybe can someone answer?
I don't know, Councilwoman, if you can, or someone from a task force.
What is the reason for going down to 300 square foot interior rental is very you know, that's like one room and a house.
It could be a kitchen or a family room.
What's the rationale for having 500 right now?
And then in 10 years going to 300, other than we think you ought to, because markets will be there.
Well, what's the point?
Um, Councilmember Flynn, that's a good question, and I I may ask someone um to speak more to this, but I'm pulling up the um the the idea here actually is ultimately, or the original idea of the ordinance was ultimately to just require um that diversion targets be met for all projects of any size.
And you don't have to divert everything, it's not a hundred percent requirement, um, but you do have to meet whatever the appropriate percentage is.
And so the idea of exempting um smaller remodels um is in and of itself sort of a step back from that.
Um, and so I think essentially, you know, the idea of tightening that up a little bit after 10 years makes some sense to me.
Um and of course it's not as though this could never be revisited if there was some reason why that seemed impossible, but really the goal eventually is just to get to where we're putting these requirements on any anything that you would go and get a permit for any kind of significant construction demolition or anything like that.
So why we didn't just go to all projects in 10 years, I don't know, but trying to keep it gradual, um, because we've heard from the mayor's office and the agencies that that there's a feeling of a need for that, and that it takes a it does take time to build these markets.
Um I will say um Brian from Green Latinos is here, and he's obviously been like a point person among all of the proponents served on the task force helped get this on the ballot to begin with.
Um Brian, if you want to add anything to that, feel completely free, or you can tell me if there's a construction demolition expert here.
I don't see Anna Perks.
I know there, I know she's one that we've spoken to a lot.
Um, and I'm in the meantime I'm gonna try to pull up an email from Anna.
But Brian, is there anything you want to add to that?
Well, I would like to say that Denver is getting two C and D waste diversion sites and diverting from the landfill is as will be part of my testimony.
Um state goals as well, right?
So when we think about Denver's oldest housing stock, the the diversion requirements for the first 10 years.
Um ignore that, right?
I think it was uh councilman woman Lewis who talked about fixing flips and how in the original version that they're basically excluded from any diversion requirements.
They are the the the volume of space.
Jonathan, you might have some knowledge on this as well.
Because of the square footage, but the square footage requirements.
500.
That was 2500 to start with.
2500.
Yes, okay.
Yeah, so it goes 2500 down.
Okay, so 2500 is most of our old housing stock would not be required to have any diversion efforts in that process.
Okay.
Well, was this discussed at the task force?
No, this is we we had this, I don't remember which committee meeting, but we did we had several committee meetings where we had Tim's laughing.
I'm like, I don't know.
Do you remember that the one of the many times we had this discussion?
I was in it was in committee.
Um Council Member Flynn, the the task force recommendations were just focused on the percentages, right?
Um, and they did have a things have evolved quite a bit from those recommendations, um, which I think is just worth recognizing because um we could just be sitting here with an ordinance that just implemented those recommendations, and there's actually a lot of of changes um that proponents are not pushing back on that agencies requested.
Um but essentially the way those worked was for all of the requirements of waste no more, so composting construction, everything.
Um there was a very short um basically one year phase in that was based on square footage, but then you were complying with everything from then on out.
Um I remember that and I do remember the council committee meetings.
I was wondering about the task force meetings if this was discussed.
I was addressing the task force.
Right, yeah.
Okay.
Yeah, thank you.
All right, I think that's the only question I had on that.
Thank you, Councilmember Watson.
Is there anyone from the city that can speak to any question any thoughts they have as far as the amendments?
I'm very curious.
Is your mic on?
Oh, it was sounding like it was on.
Yeah, uh, thank you, madam president.
I was very curious.
I was looking to see if there are folks from the city that might coming forward.
The recommended um changes, amendments brought forward um would have to be executed by um the city.
Um can you share your thoughts, questions, share your impressions of the impacts of this on your implementation of um waste no more?
Sure.
Thank you, counselor.
Uh Jonathan Wachtel, Deputy Executive Director for the Office of Climate Action Sustainability and Resiliency.
Um, if you're it's hard to answer that blanket across all the amendments.
Um are you wanting to take the first one with the C and D question?
Let's walk through there's I mean it's not that many.
Let's go through one at a time.
Okay, sure.
And we have Eric Browning also from community planning and development that can speak a lot to the C and Dynamics.
Um the initial, there's a little bit more here than just are we exempting the construction side or the small interior remodels?
Um there's a compliance uh factor here.
And so in the original ordinance for the construction and demolition waste requirements, it was not a diversion percentage.
It had a list of materials that were required to be diverted from any C and D activity.
During the task force process, there was a recommendation made by the task force that we use a diversion threshold to measure compliance.
And so that's where these thresholds that say, you know, 50% of all the material generated during the project need to be diverted from the landfill.
They also recommended that we put in a system of collecting a security deposit, holding that deposit to ensure compliance, because if a contractor does not follow the rules, it can't correct it as you might other building code violations.
You can't go to the landfill and get this stuff back.
So, and these are things that other communities have put in place as well, and can be very effective to help ensure compliance.
Where the complication starts to show up is that on the demolition side, you have a lot of materials that we know we can recycle.
So on most demolition projects, there's going to be a significant amount of aggregates.
And those, if you look at neighboring communities that have these programs, those make up a huge percentage, you know, maybe 35, 40 percent or more of the diversion.
Um, and we know we have outlets for that.
Then you can add metal, right, which is highly recyclable.
You can start adding untreated wood, maybe salvaging some fixtures and pieces of other things.
Mark other percentages of these materials like drywall, there's not a scalable solution yet for recycling, and hopefully those will come on board.
And the intent the way this was written, was we could be able to add, you know, those things down the road when the markets support themselves.
So on the demolition side, putting in the task force recommendation for a 50% diversion rate with this deposit system where you're gonna get it back when you comply, works pretty well, and we've seen it work in other communities.
On the construction side, it gets a little more iffy because taking that approach when you're doing an interior remodel, there may or may not be a whole bunch of aggregate materials to pull out of that project.
There may not be a ton of recyclable or recapturable metal.
We could end up with projects that have a whole bunch of drywall just coming out and other items that not, you know, carpet, things like that by volume, but we're setting up a compliance system where we're saying you need to divert at least 50 percent and then ramp that up over time.
So it felt it feels a little bit like a difficult space without learning more about the nature of the material flows that are going to be coming out of those, which we'll learn a lot as this gets implemented.
Um, as markets evolve, we can be more certain that we're putting a regulation in place that people can actually comply with.
Um so that was the thinking behind it.
Certainly, it also does have this unfortunate reality where yeah, there could be a significant number of fix and flips, interior remodels that don't have to recycle these materials, and there will be materials that could be captured.
So it's not a perfect system, but it's a huge step forward, and the way we wrote it also aligns with neighboring communities requirements with that 2500 square foot.
Is there anything in the current rate way this is written?
Um I'm not talking about the amendments, the current way the as proposed by the city that would disallow you to make changes over time based on um learned experience, um, new materials, new technology.
Is there anything that stops you from having um um uh meeting expectations of of a continued um improvement of of what you're removing from um that's going into landfill?
There's nothing that should prevent us from changing or increasing those thresholds.
I mean, I think that's a city council action that can be taken, of course, as you know, your roles.
Um, and we built in this regular reporting mechanism, which is really intended to track are we making progress?
Are the markets evolving so that we feel more confident that we can increase these diversion percentage thresholds, help support, you know, the number of entities that can actually do this work, the costs hopefully come down all of those things.
And so as those evolve, the intent is to come back to council, say here's what we've learned and make a recommendation on ratcheting up the diversion percentage, ratcheting down the applicability.
Um, I think trying to see the future and write it in feels a little um it might work, it may not, and we can always still go through that process and evaluate it, I suppose.
So, no further questions, uh council personal.
Do you have any context to add?
I I don't want to um I want to give our you know building official the chance to add if he has any.
Thank you, Jonathan.
Eric Browning, uh building official of the community community planning and development.
The one other thing I wanted to add with respect to uh the threshold for those interior remodels, and the reason that we chose the 2500 square feet to begin with, which comes back to your question, Councilman, has to do with consistency with other communities along the front range, and that 2500 is similar in other areas.
There is also a disproportionately higher cost for some of these smaller projects when it comes to implementing this when you do have a very small interior remodel.
Yes, you can take maybe your toilets and your cabinets and your doors and you can repurpose those.
Um, but as Jonathan mentioned, your carpets, your drywall, the things where there are not resources, or quite frankly, in some cases where they will need to go to a landfill just because of their deterioration, um, you know, that just doesn't exist yet, but to force a project into that um early on doesn't make sense.
So we certainly appreciate maintaining that 2500, you know, for the first 10 years.
Um, we're gonna have a whole lot of data between now and when, you know, the recommended amendments would kick in.
And as Jonathan accurately mentioned, um, to your question as well, we can change that anytime between now and 10 years out if we decide we need to as well to make it more applicable for those projects to be able to succeed.
Um, we can tighten those thresholds if we need to.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Sawyer?
Thank you, Madam President.
Eric, don't go oh don't go too far, my friend.
I'm really so I'm really glad that you just said the second part of what you said um to council member Watson because that was my question.
So I want to just say back to you what I think you just said to me, and uh under the requirements of this um amendment.
So I have three teenagers, I love them, they are not clean.
And their white carpets are not salvageable.
And so I am gonna have to one of these days um replace three bedrooms and a stairwell worth of carpets.
That's going to put me over this thousand square foot threshold, right?
Does that mean I am gonna have to put down a deposit for a hundred thousand dollars that I will lose because it's carpet and it's gonna have to be recycled, it's gonna have to go in the landfill.
No, how can you?
Mike, can you explain to me, based on what you said and what I'm looking at here?
Like the legit like the actual operational implementation of this.
Absolutely.
So to begin with, the languages is proposed when it's initially adopted, would have that exemption at 2500.
10 years, yeah.
In 10 years, it does it's proposed through the amendment to drop down to a thousand.
However, the diversion of those materials would only be required if we change the ordinance between now and a decade out and say that carpet is a recyclable or reusable material.
Um, if we decide that's the case based on the data and the infrastructure, and it can actually be diverted or reused in some way, then it is possible, um, maybe it doesn't seem likely, but it's possible, that you may have to recycle that carpet.
Which means, yes, there will have to be an effort put into separating that carpet from whatever the other materials are, they go to a landfill.
Um, and then and but the deposit amount uh is based on the square footage.
So if you had a thousand square feet of carpet, um, and it's either 50 cents or a dollar a square foot.
So it'd be either 500 or a thousand dollar deposit, right?
And as soon as you this says a thousand square feet, a dollar a square foot, a hundred thousand dollars.
That's the cap.
That's the max the one hundred thousand dollars is the maximum amount.
So if you if you know there's a large commercial building, like a million square foot building, full of carpet still maxes out at that amount.
That is a lot more clear to me.
Okay, thank you very much.
I appreciate you.
Okay, thanks, Senator President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Parity.
Um, yes.
Uh so I wanted to just respond a little bit to I mean, one of the things that we're balancing here is that um, quite honestly, like we've heard from so many people that um have been frustrated with the pace of implementation here, which is just is what it is, um, but also have felt like uh what they voted for was really clear cut and it had 70% approval.
And so um if we're gonna be adding these kinds of restrictions where we're trying to account for present conditions, um I really feel like rather than rather than hope that in 10 years whoever's up on this dais um remembers that the original intention was to get everybody to comply and thinks, oh I better run legislation about that, um, I would rather we have that planned, right?
Um, assume that the markets will continue to grow, which they will, like this is going to impact things when it goes into effect, um, and have that in place as something that we can still alter legislatively, but that the default is that we're um making the scope of this a little bit bigger.
Also, 10 years is is a really long time.
Um, I know that in some there were negotiations back and forth um and at one point conversations about like putting into the legislation that uh these score footages would be affirmatively revisited by the city in like three or five years.
Um, and so this is a longer time out than that.
It's adding um some presumptive targets for that time, it could be changed.
Um, but I have to think that those things will be a lot more realistic then.
And I have also spent a lot of time talking about when you do a remodel, there's a sink, there's drywall, you know.
I think in 10 years we will be able to do something with drywall, I would hope, for example.
So um, it's just a little bit about what we want the default to be.
And I really um hope that people will vote yes and make a default in 10 years that we're gonna be doing a little better than we expect ourselves to do right now.
So I'll just leave it there because I'm not a technical construction person.
Thank you.
Councilmember Flynn?
Thank you, Madam President.
Just a quick question for our attorney, uh John.
Um, since we're talking about a 10-year period here where it will change in 10 years, and I think Councilman uh Parity, you had mentioned uh that in 10 years another council might want to revisit depending on changing circumstances.
We are not permitted to change or amend a repeal and initiated ordinance within 10 years without an I guess a majority vote of nine uh for 10 years.
So none of us will be here in 10 years.
But is it 10 year?
I mean, we'll be alive, I hope, but I didn't mean I didn't mean that.
Uh does does the tenure clock start from the final passage of the ordinance by the voters when it was certified, or does it does that tenure clock start when, and this is a dancing on the head of the pin kind of question, I apologize.
Uh does it start once we adopt this implementing ordinance?
Well, this isn't the implementing, but does it start once it takes effect?
So let me make sure.
Sorry, I was trying to pull it because I was confused where the two sections are because one's for referring to it.
Yes, because the language is kind of uh equivocal here to me.
But so if I'm understanding your question, uh Jonathan Griffin, Deputy Legislative Council.
So if I'm understanding your question correctly, it's when does when did the 10-year clock start?
Right.
It's so it would have started upon the Secretary of State Act certifying results.
You did a charter.
Perfect.
Okay, thank you, Madam President.
I just I just wanted to know when it would be a simple seven vote majority of the body, as opposed to a nine vote.
Thank you.
Thank you.
See Councilman Avidre.
Did want to um say a couple of things.
One, um, a question for CPD.
Um, when we talk about something that's 300 square feet, when would you need a permit?
Because I think people think they might need a permit to like put in carpet when they wouldn't.
So what kind of construction are we talking about?
This isn't like anything you do to your house, it's specific.
Correct, and that comes back to Councilwoman Sawyer's question as well.
Your carpet replacement doesn't require a permit anyway.
So it's a wash, a thousand square feet at 2500 square feet.
Um, and exactly to your point, the ordinance repl the ordinance applies to those projects which require a construction or a demolition permit.
Um there's a very wide variety of projects, but you can do flooring.
Um, generally you can do cabinetry type work.
Uh you can paint, you can do a very limited amount of drywall, um, as long as it's not a you know fire-rated wall and things like that.
Um, I think the basis for a permit is something like the percentage of a room or the house that's being remodeled.
Is that correct?
Or what is the threshold for needing a permit?
No, so if we're talking about residential versus commercial, it's about the the scope of the project that's being worked on.
Uh the cosmetic finish type elements generally is not going to require a permit in both residential and commercial.
Um, in this entire room, you could come in and redo all the furniture and the carpeting and the painting and the lines.
Um, you could, you know, replace the fixtures as long as you weren't moving electrical around.
Um none of that requires permitting.
But as soon as you start taking out floors and walls, obviously, you know, doors and windows, things like that would require a permit.
Is it a dollar amount or what is the threshold?
It's not.
So the way that the building code is written starts with a blanket of everything requires a permit, and then there's a laundry list of exemptions.
Okay.
There are a few dozen of them across building and trade related items.
Okay.
I appreciate that.
I think it's just important for us to understand like a lot of home remodeling and normal projects that a homeowner will do would not qualify for this.
There's a threshold that would have to be hit in order to get a permit.
Um that's all I had for you.
Thank you.
And then the last thing I wanted to know is that there's also a hardship exemption.
So if this is like your bathroom blew out and you're an elderly person and you need to remodel your home, you need to remodel your bathroom because you had a flood that would you could qualify for potentially an exemption.
So I just wanted to pin that part.
Thank you, Council President.
That's it.
All I had.
Thank you.
See no other colleagues in the queue.
Madam Secretary, on amendment one to council bill 0628.
Council members Gonzalez Gutierrez.
Aye.
Thoughtis.
Aye.
Albidris.
Aye.
Flynn.
R.
Gilmore.
Aye.
Heinz?
Aye.
Cashman.
Lewis.
Aye.
Parity?
Aye.
Romero Campbell?
Aye.
Sawyer?
No.
Councilmember Watson?
Aye.
Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close voting, answer the results.
11 ayes.
Eleven ayes, count amendment one to council bill zero six two eight has passed.
Councilmember Parity, your motion to amend.
All righty.
It's the one I started reading before.
Um I move that Council Bill 250628 be amended in the following particulars.
First, on page 9 line 12, following the words open quote described under this article, close quote, insert, open quote, and shall further one post an informational notice to be developed by the Office of Climate Action Sustainability and Resiliency about how to recycle and compost and two give a copy of such notice to every new tenant.
The responsible party must retain records of the requirements of this subsection C.
Number two, on page 10, line two, strike or food banks and insert or before food shelves.
Number three, on page 10, lines four to five, strike commissary of food processing wholesale and warehouse establishment or retail food establishment and replace with food waste producer.
Number four, on page 10, line six, insert, or in instances where there is no applicable license holder after the word use.
Number five, on page 10, line 11, insert and must ensure training is provided to employees and contractors on recycling and keep records reflecting such training after the word article.
Number six on page 10 line 14, insert and must ensure training is provided to employees and contractors on organic material diversion and keep records reflecting such training after the word article.
Number seven on page 10 line 32 after collect at least all, insert back of house decontaminated.
Number eight on page 11, line 10 after community garden, insert other legally permissible recipient of food for human or animal consumption.
Number nine, on page 13, strike lines 25 to 31 and replace with no later than September 1 of 2028 and at least every three years thereafter until September 1 of 2034, after which at least every five years, the director of the Office of Climate Action Sustainability and Resiliency shall provide a written report to City Council, which shall include but is not limited to compliance rates, market conditions, and other information related to this article.
Thank you.
The amendment has been moved.
And seconded comments by members of council on this amendment.
So I want to these there's a number of things that are accomplished within this one amendment.
So I just want to make sure I have my red line here as well as the amendment itself.
All right.
So going sort of paragraph by paragraph from our script, the first change is pretty simple.
It is just to say that in residential buildings, so basically apartment buildings, that landlords have to post something developed by CASER in the area of recycling on compost that talks about how to do it so that people know which bins they're supposed to sort things into.
We had a suggestion from the outside that landlords be required to conduct training, and we felt like that would be sort of inappropriate to tell tenants you have to go to this thing that your landlord is holding, but that posting a notice was quite achievable, and then also giving it to someone upon move in, so that people actually know what to do with those bins, and we don't end up with a bunch of contamination since it's new.
Line two is where we have greatly reduced this from prior drafts and conversations with the public health department.
The short version here is that the bill as filed by the administration fully exempts food banks.
But in digging into this a little bit, DDPHE licenses all different kinds of food businesses in the city, and that includes retail food businesses, which is more or less what you would think of as restaurants, it includes food warehousing operations.
And it turns out that if a food bank is handling open food and is open for enough days per year, they're actually just licensed by DDPHE exactly the same as a restaurant.
And so considering that they have the same licensure, and that many of them already do an excellent job of diversion, we're proposing to just use this the same way that DDPHE decides if they are a sufficiently sort of permanent operation and they're handling open food that they need to get that retail license, then they should be subject to waste no more, just like anyone else in that licensure category, which includes restaurants and everything else.
So not exempting whatever a food bank is, which also isn't defined in the bill, but just tracking how DDPHE does the licenses, which would capture food banks that are operating, you know, more than two months out of the year and actually handling open food.
And we have a letter from Meto Caring in support of that in the file.
The third paragraph, this is just a uh knit edit.
This whole list of categories is what our code defines as food waste producers.
So these are all the types of food waste producers, so we're just making that replacement.
Um paragraph four um is just capturing a building where, let me see.
Sorry, I need to look back at the red line for this one.
And get to the right page.
Because I don't want to misspeak.
But it's a catch-all provision related to residential buildings.
So line 10.
Sorry.
Right.
So if there's any um lack of clarity about um whether a license holder with DDPHE, if there's more than one license that's sharing a space, or if there is a space that falls under these definitions and nobody has a license with CDPHE, the building owner is then responsible for complying.
And it basically that's meant to capture a situation where perhaps somebody has not uh renewed their license, even though they would be defined as a food waste producer, but they're um skirting the law and not getting a license.
Then the following edit, um, the following two edits just say that um if you are a food waste producer, so you're a restaurant, you're a food bank, you're any of these things.
Um this is adding that in addition to having recycling and composting on site, you also have to train um your employees or your contractors about that, um, which I think is a reasonable proposal.
And then the last change is just again going from the five years of reporting to um every three years in the first decade and five years after that to us.
I will leave that there.
Thank you, madam president.
Thank you.
Councilmember Watson.
Um, thank you, uh Council President.
Um, is there anyone from DDPHE or from the city that can speak to these changes?
And and I've yeah, I'll leave it at that, and then I would just want to ask a question.
Madam President, counselors Alex Vidal, uh legislative liaison for the Department of Public Health and Environment.
We have Danica Lee online as well if there's something that I can't answer.
Yeah, and so uh um I was briefed on this about this morning, and so I'm catching up with all of the changes in this, which is not a norm for me to be voting on this and just learning of this.
Um your team has had the opportunity to review this amendment.
I mean, just start there.
Yes.
What are the questions?
What concerns what impacts on DDKE do you see with execution of this uh amendment?
Um, Madam President, uh counselor, um the amendments uh um clarifies to some extent the the um categories that would be covered, the licensing categories that would be covered by the the ordinance.
Um the main we know that um some of the discussion was around including, for example, mobiles and temporary, and though we're seeing that that's not in the amendment now.
Um and what um Counselor Parity was saying about food banks, some of them are licensed, some of them are not licensed, depending on how much food they handle, uh open food they handle.
And so um now uh under the amendment, um food banks that have a license it would apply to, and food banks that don't aren't required to get a license, it wouldn't apply to.
And so um, happy to answer more any more specific questions, but we're also just uh reading and interpreting the the amendments and essentially who it would apply to.
Um thank you.
Um, I see, yeah, please come forward.
Thank you, Counselor.
Any points?
I'm sorry, please elaborate.
Yeah.
Um I'll just clarify on the educational requirement piece.
Once again, Jonathan Wachtel, the deputy executive director for CASER.
Um, I think a lot of the amendments coming forward have some language that um gets pretty specific on how to sign post-signage, um, you know, rule, you know, what um some some kind of language around like what should go into the educational uh and training requirements.
I just want to clarify that there was like there is language in the proposed version now that that establishes that there needs to be educational requirements across all of the different topics uh in the in the ordinance, but it leaves kind of the description of exactly how to do that to the process of creating the rules and regulations that would come after this.
And so the intent there was really so that we could be tactical about each type of user and each sector and really develop the requirements for the training, the signage, the communications, very specifically, and also be nimble and be able to adjust over time as we see emerging issues and challenges where we have contamination, where we have confusion over what's taking place.
So I don't think there's anything fundamentally wrong with putting it into the ordinance language as proposed, but like it is already built in.
It was just that the specifics would be determined through the rules and regs, and this way would be a little bit of both.
So for whatever that's worth, that's the context.
That was what I was trying to get to.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilmember Alvidades.
Thank you.
Um I just wanted to clarify this change is really also about defining what is a food bank because some of them have to be licensed and some don't, and we wouldn't need to require composting for one that just has cans and things of that nature.
Um and then I also wanted to say that I think thank you for speaking to that, Alex.
I think when we talk about food banks, it's so important that we are taking care of all the food as much as possible.
Um, because we are I have a lot of food scarcity in my district, and so what we do with those leftovers is really important.
Thank you.
That's all.
Thank you.
Councilmember Sawyer.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um, I really I really appreciate all of these different amendments that have um been proposed tonight, and I think the sponsors have done a really thoughtful job of kind of walking through the changes that they want and why they want them.
I am I am very concerned about the idea of overregulation, right?
In the last um in the last amendment, what's gonna happen is that people who don't have to apply for a permit don't have to follow waste no more.
People are just not going to apply for a permit, even when they're supposed to.
We're incentivizing people not to apply for construction permits.
That's a problem because it's our job to care for the health safety and welfare of our residents, including when they are remodeling.
Same thing with the food bank here, right?
They're just not going to apply for a food bank license, and then we're not going to have the opportunity to um make sure that we're partnering with them that we're you know, you know, that the food safety is um in line with where it should be, et cetera, because they're not gonna apply for a license.
We're gonna see this coming up when it comes to small businesses.
At the end of the day, what these amendments are doing is over-regulating to the point where we are incentivizing people not to follow our laws, and what that's gonna do is it's going to mean either way, there's this is this trash is not being diverted, and so I appreciate so much um the the thought and the idea behind these amendments because I think that they're valuable, but at the end of the day, I can't support any of them.
Thanks.
Thank you.
I have a question for Danica who's online.
Tim, can you promote Danica?
Hey, good evening, can you hear me?
Yes, we can.
Um, just wanted to get your take on the amendments that are coming through.
Um yeah, thank you for that.
This is Danica Lee, I'm the director of the public health investigations division with the Denver Department of Public Health Environment.
And um, my team is the one that conducts inspections and investigations in food facilities around Denver.
Um, so we I haven't had a lot of time to look closely at the amendments, but we've worked with our city attorney's office today, and it sounds like substantively we are staying consistent with uh the last version that we had to see in like a track, a fully tracked form.
Um, and so while we certainly have um, you know, in the in the times of budget reductions and staffing reductions, we're gonna have challenges across the board um with inspections and investigations.
We're comfortable with our role um with this ordinance and with uh some enforcement from our agency and checking for compliance.
Okay, thank you.
Councilmember Lewis?
Yeah, I just had um a quick question for um, I think maybe for Alex.
Do you think that food producers uh will stop getting permits just because of composting?
Like, do you all anticipate that in your analysis?
Uh Madam President, counselor, um Alex Redal, legislative liaison.
Um, that is not uh an analysis that we've that we've done.
Okay.
Um we would continue to do our licensing and enforcement as usual.
Okay, thank you.
Thank you.
Seeing no other colleagues in the queue.
Madam Secretary, Madam Secretary, we'll call on amendment seven to council bill zero six two eight.
Council members cutieres.
Aye, Torres.
I'll be today's aye.
Flynn.
Gilmore, Heinz.
All right.
Cashman.
Parity.
I'm sorry, Councilmember Lewis.
It's okay.
Councilmember Parity.
Aye.
Romero Campbell.
All right.
Sawyer?
No.
Watson?
Nay.
Madam President Sandoval.
Nay.
Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results.
Uh eight ayes.
Eight ayes, amendment seven to council bill zero six to eight has passed.
Councilmember.
Hold on.
Councilmember Parity.
Your motion to amend.
Page 18.
No, no, I'm here.
Don't worry.
Okay.
Sorry, guys.
Um, I move that council bill 250628 be amended in the following particulars.
Uh on page 10, strike lines 19 to 25.
Hold on.
I see a different.
Oh my god.
I see a different part.
Yes, you're right.
Uh on page 15.
Yes.
I've got page 18, I think, right?
No.
No, on page 15 after line two, page 18, the document.
Yeah.
Yes, thank you guys.
We're all straight A students up here except I'm flunking today.
Um, I move that council bill 250628 be amended in the following particulars.
Number one, on page 15 after line two, add a new subsection C as follows.
C education and training.
The responsible party must work with waste callers and vendor staff to reduce contamination through control of materials allowed on site and ensure training on proper bin use is provided.
Two on page 15, line eight, strike 350 and replace with 300.
Three, on page 15, line 10, strike daily and replace with 50.
I'm not, I'm f I see on the script I have on page 15 after line one on page 15 line seven on the piece.
So staff um council member Flynn caught this that on the file version legislatar, we were one line off throughout.
Okay, okay.
And so then staff on the fly corrected it, and I meant to mention that before I started reading, but obviously why would I do anything that I plan to do?
Um so yes, all of these these lines that were that we're reading and are correct, and they also have been correct on legislatar, but they're not showing up on our monitors yet, apparently.
Is that right, Melissa?
Or in Alyssa.
Melissa Mata legislative policy analysts um Councilmember Parity, you are reading from the incorrect version.
Yeah, I'm reading my question.
I thought you might be.
I quit, no, I'm joking.
So do you need me to send you the little to the live version?
I actually am good.
Um, I actually am okay.
So let me I'll just start over with the reading.
Can you start over?
Yeah, but I know the correct ones in that case.
Melissa, I'm glad I chimed in.
I think we have thank you, Council President.
Melissa was shooting arrows at me with her eyes about this too.
Um, okay.
I have toggled over here now.
On page 15 after line one, yeah, add a new subsection C as follows.
C education and training.
The responsible party must work with waste haulers and vendor staff to reduce contamination through control of materials allowed on site and ensure training on proper bin use is provided.
Two, on page 15 line 7, strike 350 and replace with 300.
Three, on page 15 line 9, strike daily and replaced with weekly.
Four on page 16, strike lines 7 through 12 and replace with no later than September 1, 2028, and at least every three years thereafter until September 1, 2034, after which, at least every five years, the director of the Office of Climate Action Sustainability and Resiliency shall provide a written report to city council, which shall include but is not limited to data on how many permitted events met or did not meet the thresholds in section 48155, subsections A through C.
Explanations of adjustments under subsection 48, 155D, compliance rates, market conditions, and other information related to this article.
Thank you.
It has been moved and seconded comments by members of council.
Councilmember Parody?
Yes, thank you so much.
Let me scroll back up.
So here the this is the segment of the bill that um relates to events.
So composting at you know an event in a park or something like this that has to get a permit.
Um the first new subsection is just to add again a um a training requirement that um some kind of training on bin use has to be provided uh between the waste haulers and the vendor staff so that people aren't just throwing things in the bins willy-nilly.
Um the next two lines um have the effect of uh slightly reducing the size of event that um would have to comply, um, replacing 350 daily or daily attendees with 300 daily attendees if it's a one-day event.
Sorry, that's for recycling.
Um reducing from 350 to 300 daily attendees for recycling, um, and then for composting instead of the proposed threshold of a thousand attendees um in a single day, or sorry, a thousand attendees, uh changing that to um a thousand attendees over the course of a week.
And the reason I think that um is a fair compromise is that again, the um the proposals that came out of the task force didn't have any of these kinds of thresholds, they just had you know full compliance for basically all events.
Um adding some, you know, cutting out some smaller events, um, I think proponents have have agreed to that.
Um, but in particular, if you think about the difference between a thousand-person threshold um having to hit that in a single day versus setting that over the course of the week.
What that means is that if it's an event that takes less than a full day, you don't have to do the composting unless you do have a thousand people that day.
But if your event is going on over the course of like a week um and you hit a thousand attendees total over time, you are gonna have to compost.
Whereas under the draft, um you would only have to do that if they're all there in one day.
So it would capture like you know, a music festival where you have 300 people coming in every day for four days.
Um, this revision would mean that you would have to compost in that instance.
So it captures those like longer events where a space is really getting used quite a bit.
Um, but for a small event or a one-off event, it's no different as far as the composting.
Um, and then the same change about reporting every three years instead of every five.
Hopefully that was somewhat coherent.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Flane.
Um, thank you, uh Madam President.
I'll try to be as coherent as if possible.
I I I could support this amendment if it were only the education training, which I think should be in there, and the reporting, but I don't think it makes sense to change the numbers in the way that's being proposed.
I don't have a good picture of how many more events would be captured by going from 350 to 300.
That's so marginal.
I mean, what what could possibly be uh the the gain in allowing 350 instead of the proposed 300?
Or the 1000 over a week instead of a day, if you have 300 or 350 a day for three days, that's a thousand right there.
So it would be covered.
Uh regardless.
If it went to 350.
And it doesn't even have to go on a week.
My understanding is that the 350 and the 1000 numbers were based on how we permit events, and it makes it easier for enforcement and uh for uh monitoring these events.
So creating a second level of, well, does your event have 350 or does it have only 300?
Then that it's just a different and for it's just murky and messy.
And for no perceptible gain, I don't just I just don't see the sense of it.
So I I would support leaving the language the way it is, and if that second part were stripped out of this amendment and just had the education and training and the reporting, I could support it, uh, but I can't support it with these imperceptible changes.
That would make no difference.
Thank you, Madam President.
Councilmember Alviders.
I think your mic's off.
Thank you.
I appreciate that comment.
I think with the thousand, the thing is that the thousand really does make a big difference when you're talking about a thousand people for a day or a thousand people for a week.
But I did want to ask um if Brian had an answer on the 350 to 300, or anybody else.
Um Brian Loma Green Latinos, I think that the the number really came down to what the task force said.
Um when we went to negotiations with city with the city representatives about the changes that were made.
Um, and a lot of these people who are still here, some of who are on the task force or gathered the signatures the first round.
Um, there's a lot of work put into this, and the task force recommendations in many ways got looked over.
There were changes that were made that were not even discussed by the task force.
The task force number was 350, and as councilwoman parody said, um, the original amendment had no exemptions for any smaller entities.
When we look at things that happen, say the Saigon Azteca Festival in in uh the Westwood neighborhood, for example, those uh those can happen over two to you know, like a Friday night and a Saturday.
And so ensuring that they might not get a thousand per day.
Chris Kringle Village out here, uh the Christmas market, whatever, um, does not always get a thousand people a day attending, right?
So having the diversion understanding for the food waste because methane is so powerful and all the levels, even the state just had public hearings for the methane destruction, right?
If we had gotten to testify, you would have heard some of this first, um, or you know, to give our witness statements.
So I think that you know, do we come back to the table 3350?
Uh, you know, is there a significant difference?
I don't think that we're gonna be stuck on that.
I think that the concern here, the real portion of the concern here, is on the food waste diversion impacts for events that happen over a couple of days but might not get a thousand people a day, that the quantity of materials that are diverted, and I have one post and uh Capos Colorado representatives here as well, who are glad to answer questions about diversion.
Um, that those quantities are significant, and the amount of methane emissions that they generate are significant as well.
I hope that answers the question.
Yeah, and I just wanted to follow up on that.
The three hundred-ish number is about recycling and the thousand is for composting, correct?
Yes, that is correct.
I just wanted to point that out.
Um I'm not sure about the permitting is special events.
Yeah, yes, there you go, thank you.
Race.
Yeah, I think we have a um someone a proponent um who's been part of this coalition who can speak about this.
Is this right, Brian?
Yes, we have uh Capitol and Walmart.
Yes, okay.
So we may call them up next.
Sorry about that.
Yeah.
And if you could introduce yourself at the mic, that would be great.
Yeah, of course.
Rose Watts Denver office special events.
So we did run the math on both of these.
Um to Councilman Flynn's point, it would change the administrative processes of how we permit events both in parks and office special events.
The difference from changing from the 350, which was the original task force recommendation, because it aligned with city permitting tiers, um, that would be 0.2% of event attendees that we would encompass had we made this change.
Um, it would also create a change in our administrative processes.
And then for changing from daily total to weekly total, I certainly see the perspective there of multi-day events and trying to capture them.
But just know that for events that are under a thousand people, we have seven events that are permitted in the city that are under a thousand people that are more than one day.
So that percentage of event attendees that'd be impacted is.
No, I think that was helpful.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Council President.
Thank you.
Council Patemaro Campbell.
It's me already.
I was sitting there.
Um thank you, Madam President.
Uh I I had some of my questions have already been answered.
It was around the three, the 300 to the 350, um, and then also recycling and composting.
Um I think this is one that we do a summer series, um, a south by southeast summer series.
Yesterday or Saturday, it's been a long weekend.
Um, on Saturday, we had an event, um, that was between 300, maybe 350.
Or, like trying to, I'm like, well, how would I have said, you know, we would have been permitted and and what we would have had?
Um, and we did have the recycling um as well as the trash, it would have been really difficult for us to do the composting.
So I appreciate those thresholds.
Um for the larger events that we've had, um, for our um our grandfathered in uh uh event or for um the south by southeast, we would have thousands of people come in one day.
Um and a few years ago uh we were really trying to.
I guess my question would be let me ask my question.
Uh is this just for organic food waste, or would this also be a requirement for like compostable cups and plates and everything else?
Like is this just organic food waste that we're talking about for composting and and if somebody could answer that for what we're looking at here, like what's our threshold?
What are we looking at?
Thank you, counselor.
Uh once again, Jonathan Wachtel, deputy executive director for CASER.
Uh, the requirements for what would need to be um collected on the organic side would be promulgated through the rules and regulations.
And that's a really important piece of this because currently very few um haulers and processors will accept all of the actual compostables, you know, single-use um materials and serviceware.
Uh we'd love to see that change.
There was a point in time when a lot of them were were taking those.
There's been efforts at the state um through legislation to have truth and labeling and try to really get ourselves back to a place where that's not gonna just become contamination, but we're not there right now.
Um, and I think the event space in particular is one of the most um likely to just be really difficult to avoid contaminated waste streams unless you actually have, you know, kind of staffing and really careful sorting of those materials.
Sometimes that can take place off-site after a hauler takes it if they're a hauler that will provide that service, or you really need to staff it.
And so I think the the logistics and the cost and the risk of contamination is a big piece of kind of the puzzle we're trying to put together here to see how we can divert as much material as possible, which we all want to do, um, but make sure those materials are actually end up as we hope they do, um, and that it's you know not cost prohibitive.
So we're the as it's been proposed, was trying to find that balance point.
Um, the organic single use stuff is a real hindrance.
The fact that we can't really rely on that currently makes it more difficult if that helps.
So it'd be primarily just food at this point.
Um, and we could change those rules through or though the list of uh required materials to be diverted through the rules and regulations.
And we could change those anytime the market was ready.
Okay, um, thank you.
I appreciate that.
Um you said there's somebody here from the the organic or yeah.
Brian Lama Green Latinos, yes.
Um, does Civic Center Eats, right?
Yeah, um Noah Kaplan, I'm the executive director for Compost Colorado.
We're a local uh organics hauler and processor here in Denver.
Um, and just to um give some context here, there are local haulers and processors who take compostable items.
Um we operate a facility, processing facility at the National Western Center, and we're very proud about the process that we go through.
We collect um Civic Center Eats, we collect um Civic Center Conservancy events, we collect AEG events.
Um if you'd gone to Civic Center Park downtown this summer, chances are you use the compostable item that was processed by us in the city of Denver.
So I know that we're not the only ones that do that.
So there is opportunity.
It's not something the time is now.
We have the technology.
Um I do have a question, maybe you can answer uh just specifically like what is the cost right now to be able to do the like how much does it cost to do compost like to have the compost for a thousand person event?
It depends.
It depends on what that event is asking to do.
Um it depends on whether or not they've got food processing that's happening on site or food prep.
Um we do a back of house service for events um where we offer training to vendors uh and buckets for people to collect as they food prep food and in trucks and and other spaces.
Um, but it's anywhere between five hundred dollars and a thousand for our business.
We're not the only people doing this, and there are other opportunities as well.
Okay, thank you.
My name is Alex, I'm with OnePost.
And I just want to second as well.
There is opportunities for this.
Um we currently are accepting these bioplastics as well.
It is not just the organic food, although that is great for the environment, of course.
Um, and in addition, there is multiple price points depending on the event and the venue and what's needed, but not only just us two as haulers, there are other ones here that are capable for this.
Thank you.
Um I appreciate that.
I think also we would I just want to make sure that this is a public hearing, so you can't just come up and speak.
She has to ask you a question and then be called up.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, no, and you answered the question.
Um, I think that there is also uh I think the relationship between uh the food trucks that also come to the events, um, not all of them come with compostable um uh silverware and plates and and so forth.
So that is also something I think for consideration and education um and support within um the food truck world.
Uh I don't have any other questions right now.
I I just I don't have any other questions.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Council Member Watson.
Uh thank you, Council President.
Um, from special events, I wanted to clarify you provided a percent of difference of from the three 350 to 300 and uh the a thousand a day to a thousand a week.
But what I wasn't clear on is what is the amount of diversion from those changes.
Can someone speak to that?
Is it that simply the percent?
And I'm looking at you, I'm looking at cashier.
I just have I need to understand based on these amendments.
What's the diversion impact um for that slight of a change?
And I'll do a teacher pause until someone gets up and answer my question.
Good evening, council members.
Tim Hoffman with the mayor's office.
Thank you for the question, council member.
Um, it's at this point really impossible to tell um with any sort of specificity what the exact percentage shift in the amount of waste that would be diverted, dropping from 350 to 300 or making events at a thousand daily events uh a thousand on a weekly basis.
Um, the best proxy that we've tried to figure out, um, working with the office of special events and the and the parks team is looking at the number of daily attendees that come to events in the city and county of Denver that would be impacted by it.
Um, and so that's when you're talking about those percentage shifts at two or seven percent, um, that you're looking at um very marginal changes in terms of the amount of people who are coming to those events and thus producing the the different amount of waste.
Um, but we uh just don't at this point have the data on exactly how much uh would be shifted based on the changes.
I think what I'm struggling with is then what isn't that why we do rules and regs to have the flexibility based on the data points come in, based on the targets to make those changes instead of putting it within well, that's not a question.
Thank you, no questions.
You could you can say comments during this portion too, because it's I guess that we're doing on the amendment part.
So that's where my my head scratches at.
If it's a 0.7 percent difference, and uh and come on forward.
We can't determine the ideas for these amendments is to increase waste diversion.
We have no ability to identify from 350 to 300, a thousand a day to a thousand a week of waste diversion, anything that's material as far as material impacts.
If we are not seeing a material impact for an amendment, within rules and reg, do you have the ability based on data provided, evaluation of this process over time to make material changes to the thresholds, whether it's 350 to 300, a thousand a day to a thousand.
You will have information right now you don't have that waste diversion information, correct?
For special events, yeah.
No, I'm trying to like exasperate because I'm trying to if we're talking about waste diversion and we can't calculate by that in that small change.
Yeah, I we there's a lot of data we wish we had uh for this entire process.
Um and we are underway doing our best to collect it and also mine all the studies and work that's been done in the past to try to see what we do know and that we can tease out.
Uh as far as changing the thresholds through the rules and regs, I don't know if we could change something if it's in the code that says the exemptions 350 without coming back to you.
However, the allowable use is you know, like the list of materials that have to be uh diverted, the educational requirements, like the tactics, those types of things, we certainly can do uh how it's reported, and we will get a whole bunch of data for that.
For the volumes of organic material, the best I can offer you in context for the rest of your discussion is that there was a commercial uh waste study done in Denver a few years back.
I'll have to verify with my colleagues the year.
I think it might have been 2021.
And on the commercial side of things, so this is not including anything Dottie would pick up from single-family homes, you know, under eight units, curbside.
In the commercial sector, that study gave us an estimate of somewhere around 250,000 tons of organics through all commercial sectors.
That's including anything organic, not just food waste specifically.
Um, and so in some of the in anticipating some of this conversation, like to give you context, the um, and I should probably make sure I look at this numbers correctly, but the proposed as written before the amendment, a restaurant that would be exempted as we wrote it, that 16% that would have been covered if it remains with the the threshold as proposed, uh, they would basically be generating four um make sure I have the number here correctly.
I believe it's 400 tons.
Um, four thousand tons out of that two hundred and fifty thousand.
So that's about one and a half percent overall, and those are from those restaurants across the entire year.
So if that helps give you any perspective, um total organic waste estimates, estimates based on that study for all the restaurants in Denver would be at about 56,000 tons per year, if I have that correctly.
Yeah, 56,000 out of the 250 or so on the commercial side.
So though that's the best I can offer you at the moment, and we need to collect the rest.
Thank you so much.
Thank you, madam president.
Thank you.
Councilmember Parity?
Yeah, thank you so much.
And I'm realizing that in reading the amendment, I there's a fair amount of um context in the surrounding sections which are not subject to the amendment that I should have read in, and I'll do that now.
Um, these are not these size exemptions are not the only exemptions um from the requirement to recycle or compost at events.
Um there are also exemptions for permanent events that generate a de minimis amount of waste or demonstrate a proven economic hardship.
So that's I think an important one.
If we're thinking about an event that's really running on a shoestring, they can show that um, you know, the composting costs are still incredibly high.
Um, that's a way not to have to comply with this regardless of size.
Um obviously, if you don't have any food vendors on site, you don't have to do this as far as the composting goes.
And then in addition to that, I just want to correct something that Johnny um said or that came across on Claire, I think, in the back and forth just now.
Um, there's also a section here that says the executive directors of the responsible city offices and departments may adjust the exemptions of this section by increasing or decreasing the total number of daily attendees based on market conditions and compliance rates through an update to rules.
And so that's unusual in an ordinance to say, you know, we have these event thresholds, but they can be adjusted in rules, and that was um put in here again in the back and forth between the city and the original proponents to try to address some of these concerns about what happens if there's just this hugely unintended consequence and we don't have um you know events are completely unable to comply or whatever else.
So I just wanted to point that out because that's I think a fairly big deal.
If it turns out that these thresholds are a terrible idea, they can be adjusted in either direction without us coming back to them going forward, and that's in here in subsection D in the draft submitted by the by the administration.
And then finally, subsection E also says that even if none of these exemptions apply to you, if you show that you tried to get um you tried to hire a hauler a composter and you actually couldn't find anyone, you also can be exempt.
So that just takes care of the case where I don't know, there's so many events in one weekend in Denver that these guys can't make it out and get all the compost.
Um, and then the last thing I wanted to say is like why are we um why bother if we're really capturing a pretty small additional number of events?
And I actually, this is something that folks from the task force told me that I think is pretty compelling, which is that actually public events are one of the biggest places where um someone might encounter composting for the first time and actually like learn to do it.
And you all might laugh at me because you're from the big city, but I grew up in Wyoming, we did not recycle, we did not compost.
Um I learned to do this stuff when I moved to New York and then Denver, seriously, Sawyer.
Um, and it really does make a difference to see people doing it in public spaces if you have if you have no idea of like what this is.
So I think just in terms of like um having some publicity around the ordinance, having people like experience this and and someone standing there by the bin sometimes who actually knows how to sort correctly and can tell you what's compostable and what's not, I would really not underestimate the impact of that.
So I think it does matter even if it's not um a massive portion of diversion because it's a uniquely public-facing uh moment in all of this.
So that's all I wanted to add.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Sawyer.
Thanks, Madam President.
Um, yeah, I I already said I'm a no on this one, but I just want to talk a little bit about why, because it's something we haven't brought up yet, and I think it's really important that we look at the regulatory burden we are putting on our neighborhood organizations, right?
Um I'm looking at the Office of Special Events because we have this conversation a lot, particularly around stuff like the requirement for ADs, right?
When you have a movie night in a par in the park where the with food trucks, like the second there are uh two agencies involved in a permitting process, the office of special events gets involved, and there are all of these different regulations, and their regulations that are put on Taste of Colorado or you know, Civic Center Eats, they're also put on the hilltop 4th of July fireworks parade, right?
And the difference is that this organization is volunteers with zero money, they don't have a thousand dollars to pay compost Colorado to come and do the back end stuff, right?
And so, if we want to be a city where we are balanced and we are looking at incentivizing our volunteer neighborhood organizations to hold wonderful community events that create such an extraordinary sense of togetherness for our neighborhoods, which we want, and we also want to ensure that we are diverting as much waste as we possibly can because of the methane challenges that we have.
There's got to be a balance here, right?
And what I'm seeing in this amendment language is that there isn't a balance here, and what we're gonna lose as a result of that is this incredibly special section of small neighborhood events, more than 300, more than a thousand sometimes, but still neighborhood events, and we have to think about that.
That has to be protected, and so again, I'm already saying I'm a no, but I just want to talk about why, because again, we're incentivizing our neighborhood organizations not to hold these events anymore, because there's just too much stuff on their plate for a group of volunteers to do it.
Thanks.
Thank you, Councilmember Flynn.
Thank you, Madam President.
The because it was brought up that we can have exemptions based on hardship, financial or otherwise, or capacity, uh, just all the more, especially combined with what councilwoman sword just said, makes it all the more important to me that that we just don't make any change in the numbers here.
The tiny number of events going from 350 down to 30, uh 300 rather that we would capture, or from uh 1,000 a day to a thousand over the week, the tiny number of events compared with the administrative burden on the agency and on the uh small organizations that are doing these, is the the learning moments that we're talking about at the larger events.
It's only a tiny bit that we're talking about.
There's still gonna be at all of the other events that are more than 350, of which there are a huge number, more than a thousand of which are a huge number.
Uh it's not worth it to me to capture every single dang one of them in order to have somebody standing at the bin and say that goes in this one and that goes in that one for the 10 or 12 a year that that might happen.
And so I think this is just uh just not necessary.
I would support the amendment if I just had the training and the reporting, but not changing the numbers.
The task force had recommended 350, and so I don't see any reason to change it.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilmember Gimler.
Thank you.
Um I will comment on this one.
Um, you know, folks, at least in the neighborhoods that I represent are more concerned about diverting and not putting more into the landfill, that I wholeheartedly believe that they would be more than willing to have volunteers at sites, making sure that there isn't contamination and or working with other businesses in the community to do a sponsorship for the composting that needs to happen.
The small percentages are inconsequential when you look at the necess the necessity to divert this from the landfill.
We're talking about reducing greenhouse gases and methane, and it's curious to me that we're talking about, well, if it's 50 people more or 50 people less, but at the end of the day, that could be a whole bunch of tonnage of compostable items that didn't need to end up in the landfill, and that does add up minute after minute, day after day, year after year, and so I would hope that we can prioritize reducing the methane gas and diverting the compost versus going back and forth about 50 people and whether or not it matters, it matters because we're trying to reduce that greenhouse gas.
And I am definitely for this one.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilmember Alviderez.
Thank you so much.
Thank you for your uh comments, Councilman Gilmore.
I think those were some great points.
Ultimately, something that I did want to share over the weekend.
I was at both Auraria campus and at the um stadium for the CU Buffalo, and those college students are taking time and making sure that their campuses have zero waste, and I think that our young people are dying for us to just take care of these things.
I can also speak to the underground music showcase in my district who's make sure to be zero waste, and um those events alone have been so inspiring to see how much people do care and how much we need to care.
Because there are times when people walk past the trash on the sidewalk, but our young people are asking us to do better, and I think that is who is leading this and really wants to make sure that we are doing our best at events, and I will just reiterate what councilwoman parody read off, which is there's a lot of exemptions.
We're not trying to be hard, we're not trying to be impossible.
We want to make exemptions for your neighborhood event if your neighbors want that.
I would agree my neighbors want to get rid of all the trash in the right ways.
I get more complaints about not having composting out recycling at Wash Park than probably any other part complaint that I get, and I see a nodding agreement.
So I know I'm not alone, and I know this is frustrating.
It seems silly.
Maybe it seems like a small amount, but I also think it's it's a slap in the face to the people that work so hard to get these things passed and on the ballot that we're taking away little by little the validity and what the intention uh was when they passed this legislation.
So I'll just leave it at that.
Thank you, Councilmember Romeo Campbell.
Thank you.
Um I have my other question that I wanted to ask.
Um, and this was for the Office of Special Events.
Um, would you have to change your administrative processes with this um with this amendment or with these new numbers?
Yes, we'd have to overhaul the park policy for bourboning and the rules and regs for the office special events for permitting tiers.
It's also built into our systems, so we would have to change that as well.
And um, I do think the administrative burden would be a lot on our side, also on the community side, if we're putting the proof of burden on them to prove that they have financial hardship to prove that they weren't able to secure a vendor to prove what the minimis volume is.
The 350 number that came from the task force was an attempt to identify something that was quantifiable that would count as the minimum volume.
Um that would be easy and common sense to administer.
So it wouldn't be overly burdensome.
So, ask a follow-up to that then.
Um, what would be the okay?
So, if I think about this, it sounds like it might take some time to be able to figure out the the pieces.
Who sets those criteria for you know, um, if it's a burden?
Who's exactly that?
Who sets that criteria?
Do we have that criteria set?
No, we don't.
It would have to be developed in the rules and regulations process.
Rules and regulations, okay.
Um, and then if it's with rules and regulations, does that mean that that's within your department, or do you work with CASER to do that?
How does that process work?
Uh, that would be my department uh Dottie and Parks and probably DPD as well.
Okay.
Um, and then you were talking about the process for the applicant on the administrative side.
What does that look like?
Uh well, right now, per the ordinance, we require them to submit their waste management plan, but because we haven't rules and reg written the rules and regs yet, we don't have a way to enforce that.
So they're submitting their plan.
Uh, we're asking them to educate themselves knowing that these changes are coming.
Um, but we don't have a way to enforce the plan at this time.
Okay.
Um, that's helpful.
Uh, I am just trying to think.
I mean, with the events that we just currently have been putting on this summer.
I know we've done our waste plan.
I'm just trying to think about like the actual implementation or what it looks like on um the applicant side of it.
Um, right.
If we put the burden on the applicants to submit, we'll first we'd have to create thresholds for what constitutes a financial burden, um, what constitutes the minimum waste through our rules and rigs, then we have to create a system for which those applicants would have to provide sufficient documentation that we would then approve.
So it'd be burdensome on both sides.
Okay.
Um, thank you.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Cashman.
Yes, and I wanted to ask.
I think your mic is off, sir.
Thank you.
I see Brian coming back.
Question for you, uh, Brian.
That's all right.
Um, so I I I uh put some credence in councilman Sawyer's concerns for uh, you know, registered neighborhood groups that are volunteer run operations and so on, and uh what would seem like uh a real difficult situation for them to be able to manage.
Can you comment on that?
Well, you know, when we were doing this ballot measure, um city park, not city park jazz, the um five points jazz festival, we did that, we did the diversion for that that event um was volunteers.
Uh no, it was actually the the members of the waste force, uh the waste no more community doing the ballot measure.
Uh, when we talk about the underground music showcase, people get free tickets to come and put in an eight hour, you know, six hour eight hour shift, whatever it is, sponsorship's definitely an opportunity.
Um, and I'm really stuck.
I was left because I was trying to talk to my phone to find the information, the task force report, because it my memory says that the reason that this is up for discussion is that the number was three fifty, not three fifty, but three hundred as recommended by the task force, and that the number was changed by the city.
I'm quite sure.
I'm looking for it, but that's that's my memory.
Um, I don't think, you know, at the end of the day, 3350, anybody, as it was said, can, you know, the department heads can make changes to these things.
We're not, this is not our dying space, right?
We want we want diversion.
This is not the the the amendment that we're all sitting here for.
Gotcha, right?
But the diversion adds up as councilwoman Gilmore said.
And every time we divert, we're doing the next right thing.
Yeah, no, I I agree a hundred percent with what with the goals you're right on.
Um, but I also uh, you know, you're talking about the jazz festival.
Most of the community events that I'm thinking about are way smaller scale than that, but would still kind of fall under this ballpark.
So I'm trying to make sense on how it would best uh be handled.
You know, the Tefoya wedding, we diverted 95% of our waste, right?
And that was for a hundred-hundred and fifty people.
Um it all adds up significantly.
I agree.
Thank you, Brian.
Thank you.
Councilmember Heinz.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um, Mr.
Loma.
Brian.
Uh question for you.
When was uh when did the people vote on this ordinance?
Um so the vote was in 22.
We started the original people started this ballot measure in 17.
Yeah, so 2022.
Um how much did it pass by?
70.8% in math that I was raised in, we round up at that number, so 71% of Denver voters said we want diversion.
Yeah, um, and uh the citizen initiative as written is current, right?
I mean, that's um, but not enforced.
It says it on the website.
Yeah, yeah, that I I was gonna get to that.
But um, but that's that we currently have uh legislation in place passed by the people.
And um when did that happen?
So there was a particular time period when it was uh it became in effect.
So I believe there was like within 60 days or something after the vote.
Yeah.
When it came before council to like be acknowledged.
Early 2023, something like that.
Um, and uh and so I I hear um OSC say there are no rules and regulations, um, but there's legislation right now that has requirements, and so I I guess where I'm getting it with this is not to fleece uh OSE.
What I'm getting at is we've got a uh we've we've got a citizen initiative that passed uh with 71% of the vote.
We had a task force uh comprised of 26 task force members.
Um in that task force, they voted unanimously or unanimous minus one in each of the 15 different topics of consideration.
So there's broad consensus um from the task force uh on uh some of the details that perhaps were uh you know under consideration because um we were kind of helping with some of the rules uh and regulations um in the task force process.
In fact, the only thing that was not in consensus was how soon do we start this?
Right, 2025 or 2026.
That was the only one that was not unanimous unanimous minus one.
Yes.
So I I I was um I had the the pleasure of doing some hard work.
I was the only um council member that um that sat through the entire task force, and that was because council member clerk um chose not to go for reelection, and uh he started the first half.
Councilmember Parity took his place, uh but I was there for the whole um the whole task force.
And so I mean, I just I I guess um we can uh we can pass these amendments or not pass the uh these amendments.
The worst case is we have something that is more arduous.
Um we've heard uh you know the business community and uh and and other stakeholders say we've got something that is more difficult to implement, or we can pass these amendments that will theoretically is a compromise with um with mayor's office and others.
And so I just want to I want to get that framing because as we consider these amendments, the as you were saying you were you were looking through the task force um recommendations.
You'll see that I committed to, and it's in the minutes of one of the meetings to vigorously defend the the um uh the task force because it was such a broad consensus.
Um and uh and so here I am also considering these sponsoring, considering amendments, um, and so I kind of want to explain myself a little bit, and that's in part because um we're trying to make something that will actually get rules and regulations and get enforcement, and um, and so that's why I'm a sponsor.
That's why I'm interested in uh in some of the uh some of the amendments, and I think that uh we continue to vet with Green Latinos with the uh signatories, all those who did the hard work um to get it on the ballot, and those 26 task force members.
So um, so I I'm explaining myself a little bit by saying if we need to do this compromise to get the rules and regulations and to get it going.
Um Councilmember Elvidra said she went to the Auraria campus and also to CSU Pueblo and she said our young folks are dying to get composting and recycling.
That's what we're talking about.
Dying.
Our future generations.
We had we had a high schooler here, but I don't know if he's still here or not.
We wouldn't be talking about any of this if the $2 million dollar first of its kind threshold had been given up.
We wouldn't be doing any of this.
We would have gone with it with a compromise version.
Yeah, okay.
Thank you.
Uh thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Flynn.
Thank you very much.
Just a quick clarification of the task force report on page 16 says that the recommendation was events with less than 350 attendees, not 300.
Just want to make that clear.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Seeing no further comments in the queue, Madam Secretary roll call on the amendment.
Sorry.
We'll call on an amendment three to Council Bill 0628.
Council members Gonzalez Cutieris.
Aye.
Nay.
Albitres.
Aye.
Flynn?
Nay.
Gilmore.
Aye.
Heinz?
All right.
Cashman.
Aye.
Lewis.
Aye.
Parity.
Aye.
Romero Campbell.
Nay.
Sawyer?
No.
Watson?
Nay.
Madam President Sandoval?
Nay.
Madam Secretary, close the voting, announce the results.
Seven ayes.
Seven eyes.
Amendment three to council bill zero six two eight has passed.
Councilmember Parity, your motion to amend.
All right.
This is the short one.
I move that Council Bill 250628 be amended in the following particular one on page 10, strike lines 19 to 25.
It's been moved in second.
Comments by members of council to Council Bill 0628.
Yes.
So the purpose of this amendment is to remove an additional layer of exemption for smaller food producers that was added in after the task force process.
And I want to really emphasize that the task force which had a wide variety of representatives, including from, you know, different commercial interests, and specifically including a representative from the Colorado Restaurant Association, all agreed on this particular recommendation around exemptions for food waste producers.
And so what they settled on is a very generous exemption provision that says that a producer can request, and I'm just trying to find the exact language of it, even though I also know it, but can request an exemption based on financial need, based on lack of space in their, you know, in their restaurant, based on inability to secure a hauling contract, or any other reason.
And I think that we can be pretty confident that, you know, that the agencies in the city, they've told us over and over again, including throughout the task force process, that their goal is not to begin to come down on people really hard from day one.
Like this isn't going to be draconian enforcement right out of the gate.
Um it's going to be focused enforcement.
Um and so if a small business neglects to immediately apply for an exemption and then somehow comes to the attention of an agency, um, I think we can we can count on the idea that if they have grounds for an exemption, that that will still be considered at that time.
Um what the and what the amendment or sorry, the bill is filed by the administration includes is on top of that, um, this exemption for small food producers, whether that's restaurants, coffee shops, um, who make a certain amount of revenue or have a certain amount of employees.
And so um, and the idea is that then if they're in that category, they are exempt without having to apply.
And I think that's unfortunate for a couple of reasons.
Um, one is that I know a lot of businesses that would fall into this category who are willing to comply um and who aren't interested in being exempted.
And we would hope that over time we would see a shift towards people no longer requesting exemption because it just becomes expected and easy to do that.
Maybe their customers are looking for it.
Um, you know, it just becomes a normal part of doing business and part of the ethic of that industry.
If we continue to cut out um this large segment, then we're you know, we're not gonna get to that point.
Um, and some types of businesses uh we haven't heard loud requests because it's easier to compost for example in like a cafe than it is in a restaurant and this doesn't distinguish between those different types so what you're doing is you're creating an across the board blanket um category of exemption um that doesn't have to be requested on top of the extremely reasonable and generous exemption that was already baked in by the task force process that again says any other reason CASR can can accept um and I have heard people's concerns and I do understand the concern about um the idea that it's burdensome to have to sort of know to make that request um but again I don't think that that uh enforcement is going to sort of live or die on whether someone there's not like a specific timeline for this right it goes into an effect it doesn't say you have to request exemption by a certain time um nothing like that so there's nothing to stop people from requesting exemption whenever it does come to their attention um down the line including if that's because um CASR has contacted them so one thing I would like to ask actually is if CASR um could come up and um an answer just well I can wait madam president would you prefer that I wait and get back in the queue for this or is this okay?
That's okay.
Yeah can I part of the amendment explained the amendment correctly thank you uh it's getting late so my question here is just like would would your intention be as an agency with enforcement power over this um going forward to um to be really punitive if a small business did not affirmatively raise their hand and say hey we have financial hardship we'd like to apply for exemption it comes to your attention that they're not composting are you planning to sort of throw the book at them or would you still make the exemption available at that point if they qualified I think fortunate for for me I get to punt this one because the authority here I think is um with DDPHP the food waste uh producer side so I'll pass it that's all right is that you Alex or Danica I can answer if Danica's still online I yeah Alex if you're good thank you.
Uh uh madam president counselor um so um uh yeah the plan is to do education uh first before we do uh more enforcement okay um yeah I think that answers the question I mean and there's not a specific you're not setting a a deadline by which people have to apply for exemption or if they forever lost the chance or anything like that right we would look to um mayor's office and other agencies in terms of setting um the timeline for when to apply for an exemption um our concern might be um knowing who has and hasn't applied and who um does and doesn't have an exemption um uh but again for our agency the main concern is who does it apply to and who doesn't it apply to okay um and I think we can assume that since the mayor's office is proposing to exemp this entire category up front um regardless of of type and everything else um I think it's fair to assume that the mayor's office would not go out of their way to be punitive towards those businesses under the exemption that's already built into the um to the bill that as recommended by the task force um I will leave that there for now madam president thank you thank you council member Flynn um thank you madam president uh this council already adopted an amendment amendment one um by a vote I think of 12 to one that sets uh a precedent for keeping I believe this threshold-based uh wording in the bill as filed in place and not stripping it out uh when we adopted the uh the square footage the minimum square footage for construction and demolition debris uh as opposed to having to go through a cumbersome administratively burdensome uh process on our small businesses or restaurants and on our agencies not to have to do this uh on a case-by-case basis um among the public uh input we received was a letter from uh Hillary Portell.
I don't know if anyone had a chance to read this uh from Colfax Mayfair uh bid.
Um I'll just read a little bit of it if I could.
Uh just just to show how tiny the impact of this is going to be.
Uh small businesses and locally owned restaurants in particular face mounting challenges in Denver, in addition to rising taxes, which we're all familiar with, uh material costs, which I think we're familiar with, labor expenses, uh, which we've contributed to, uh, utility fees and insurance premiums, the uncertain economic climate continues to place pressure on these establishments.
Colfax Mayfair bid is home to 18 locally owned restaurants, many of which are struggling due to the broader economic downturn and changing consumer habits since 2019.
Denver's seen a 22 percent reduction in the number of restaurants while labor costs have risen 65 percent.
Locally owned restaurants all along Colfax Avenue corridor are also dealing with the disruption caused by large-scale construction for the Colfax BRT project.
This combination of rising costs and infrastructure challenges places immense strain on our local dining uh loop uh spots.
The exemption outlined in uh 0628 specifically targets only sixteen percent of Denver's restaurants, and let me uh let me uh just parenthetically add 16 percent of those restaurants, those are the smallest of the of all the restaurants, the smallest, so it's not even 16 percent of compostables of food waste that would come out of all restaurants or all of Denver, let alone restaurants as well.
And it is crucial for sustaining the small community-based establishments that anchor our neighborhoods.
These restaurants are not just places to eat, they're the heart of our communities, gathering spots where neighbors connect, celebrate and strengthen the fabric of our neighborhoods.
Um, every Denver area plan.
Residents have expressed a desire to support and grow locally owned restaurants.
Main streets do not thrive on their own, they require deliberate support, advocacy, and action.
The small restaurant exemption in the bill represents a vital opportunity to provide relief uh to these businesses.
Uh I we're driving restaurants out of the city with more and more regulations.
This is a tiny effort aimed at helping those that are struggling.
I don't want to see the city turned into uh I don't want to see Colfax Avenue lined with uh Chili's and Red Robin and Applebee's, as opposed to that's my district.
You come down to my district if you want that.
Uh but 16 percent of Denver's restaurants and even a smaller percentage of the waste, the amount of GHG emitted at the dad's landfill, the additional amount emitted by this exemption would not even be capable of being measured scientifically.
The effect on global climate would be in not only imperceptible, you wouldn't even, it wouldn't be noticed by setting this threshold for the exemption rather than making every restaurant go through the cumbersome process of asking for an exemption in the first place.
Um I just think this is the right thing to do, Madam President.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilmember.
I did the right thing to keep it and not approve the amendment, I should be clear on that.
Councilmember Watson.
Uh thank you, Council President.
Um Councilmember Flynn's first statement.
I I I agree with.
I think we just voted uh a supermajority on a threshold that I think would make sense um and that we should sustain that without creating another level of burden.
Um I'm curious since the Colorado Restaurant Association was brought forward.
I have no idea if there's anyone in the audience from there.
I see a hand raised that why don't you come on up, sir.
As you're walking up, please um introduce yourself as you get to the mic.
Um, and um, if you're part of the association, state that if you're a restaurant owner, state that and I just have a clarifiers for you.
Uh thank you very much.
Nick Hoover, I'm the government affairs director for the Restaurant association.
Um I'm um I'm curious from your perspective.
Um, when I first read the administration's um targeted um response to small restaurants, and as Councilmember Flynn said, the smallest, smallest of restaurants with the current um language.
From your perspective, when you read this amendment, what do you believe the impact will be on those smallest of the smallest of restaurants?
And I I'm I'm thinking of my spaces along Welling Street corridor, which we're doing everything in our power to fill those vacant spots.
So help help explain to me a little bit.
So the restaurants that are going to be impacted by this are in fact, yes, the smallest of the small restaurants in the city.
Um when I think about the impacts that not having the exemption would have on these individuals, we are talking about businesses that likely don't employ managers in a lot of cases every day of the week.
A lot of the administration is going to be done by the owner.
They're gonna be in the in the restaurant working 80 plus hours a week.
So this is another burden that's gonna be placed on them to try and cover the cost of whether it's training or sorting or whatever they need to do to comply with this.
Um I can tell you that we routinely hear from restaurants, especially in the city of Denver, uh, that every measurable cost has gone up for them in the last two years, and prices simply can't keep up, or they'll lose more customers, and customers are already down.
Uh one individual restaurant told us over the last two years, costs have gone up 39%.
Their sales is down four percent, and they've only been able to raise their prices 15 out of the fear of losing more customers.
Um, they have a they have a team model right now that's simply that is simply survive 25.
That's their entire team's motto right now.
Just today I heard of three more restaurants that had to close their doors.
This is another burden on these businesses.
We'd hope this exemption could stay.
Um, thank you so much, sir.
And from Castro, um I I asked this before and and I'm gonna see if I can get to this, uh, as far as waste diversion, but I I know you you don't have the exact numbers, but the smallest of the smallest, but my question to you then um are there any current triggers in the current law as passed, not executed and implemented, and or um based on the amendments that you and your team and the administration proposing that would allow you to go and review diversion impacts from the smallest of the smallest of the smallest.
If that accumulated impact is identified to have had a negative impacts ongoing, and there is an opportunity for for you to create rules, regs to change that and enforce increased diversion by them.
Is there anything that stops that without this amendment?
Thank you, Councilor John.
I'm just trying to get it.
Um let me make sure uh once again, Jonathan Wachtel with uh climate action sustainability and resiliency.
Uh let me make sure I understand your question.
Are you asking if these restaurants are exempt, is there anything to stop us from providing them with the tools, best practices, and resources um to help them still do this, even if they don't aren't required?
Correct.
Okay, um, absolutely not.
And um actually we do a lot of work in that space already.
Uh there's been a lot of programs and grants through certifiably Green Denver through our zero waste and circular economy team, really helping restaurants look at ways to not just divert their waste and reduce waste, but um change and transition to like durables and reusable goods, you know, and so we eliminate the waste in the first place.
Um so there's nothing to stop us from continuing those programs and to provide as we build out all the other educational uh resources, best practices, the rules and regs for the, you know, any entities that have to comply, we can still share all those best practices and resources with these small businesses, even if they are not required to comply if this if it stands as we're proposing.
And you're saying you're currently providing that at a very small scale in pilot programs, you know, um, and we have over the years, and certainly as resources are available, we will continue to do that.
Um, and and the data collection piece is also really critical.
So, like I said before, we don't have amazing data.
Uh we can tease out from that commercial waste study that you know that basically that 16% that this would exempt probably generate somewhere in the 7% of the total volume of the organics of the food waste coming out of restaurants.
So, but that's what we have now until we can complete some additional studies and collect data while we implement.
Helpful.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Heights.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um, Councilmember Perity asked about um uh the enforcement uh process, and um uh I know DDPHE gave a stab at it.
Um can we have XIS and licenses uh take a another um stab just as a different perspective?
And please introduce yourself when you get to the point.
Uh good evening, everyone.
Erica Rogers, I'm the deputy director of the department currently known as XIS and Licenses.
Um we do have a name change on the ballot this fall.
So um we issue all of the business licenses here in Denver, including uh food licenses, but we do partner with DDPHE to administer those licenses and take enforcement effort.
So um, you know, uh residential rentals is one area where that's uh pretty well understood, same thing in food.
We handle license compliance, DDPHE handles health and compliance.
So we stay in our lanes, but we work together and partner.
And so just thinking about kind of the burden and the uh enforcement of something like this.
Um the exemption, um, I think before I get there, I want to back up and kind of mention that um one of the recommendations from the task force number 12 was to create financial support programs.
And at the time we had the task force, it was uh October of 2023.
We were looking at a change in administration, and so the task force um talked about that and talked about the staff exploring policy.
They weren't certain that that was something we could do in ordinance, and so I think um it's important to remember that this uh proposal is uh an attempt to align with that recommendation from the task force.
Um but as far as enforcement goes, right, there's there is an easy way to kind of look at how people are getting the exemption, and I know councilman I think Watson asked about timeline.
Um we do have an annual renewal on the food license that we monitor, and so um it could be something that they certify each year on renewal or upon application of for a new license.
Um we do this with other sorts of uh tax compliance issues.
We partner with DOF.
Um so this could be something that we could uh modify our renewal application to include.
Um, and once we have that data and once we have those uh licensees in those different buckets, so to speak, we could even tailor the types of information that we share with them.
So if they're over if they don't meet the exemption rate, they can get um certain information that CASER puts together and we'll share.
Um, but we can also share some of those materials that Jonathan mentioned um regarding resources and providing in for additional information for folks who may meet the exemption but still want to take steps uh to reduce their waste.
So I'll stop there and see if anyone has any questions.
Um thank you.
That's the uh context I was looking for.
Um Mr.
Loma, I have a question for you.
Uh let's talk about uh the waste uh reduction plan, and uh, you know, you as a uh as an applicant, um obviously did a lot of research on um peer cities, um but you also uh did a fair amount of research uh on this city as well.
So um can you talk about um uh how you know what a waste reduction plan is, um, how businesses um could theoretically be more profitable as opposed to um, you know, if we're talking about um red tape, uh obviously that's uh a burden that is a cost.
Um, are there any upside benefits?
Uh you know, something that helps with profit instead.
Um you all got an email earlier today, Brian Lama, Green Latinos.
Um this version three from May of 2015 from the certified certifiably green Denver restaurant waste reduction.
This is 10 years old.
This is the 2024 food vision implementation part, the last three of the 24 pages talk about food waste reduction.
Leslie Basins of the Public Department of Public Health and Environment, who may be on Zoom, uh prepared to testify.
Um, as well as what Jonathan talked about, the uh reuse Denver programs, all of these programs are talking about how to improve the profitability of a business by reducing their waste footprint.
The food matters uh website uh for restaurants training them right now talks about how 40 percent of our food in America is landfilled, is wasted.
And so the waste plan that we start with is where we we figure out can we be more profitable by reducing our food waste?
Can we be more profitable by switching to divertible uh to um re durable goods versus disposable goods?
And the reusable Denver report showed an average, I think it was a minimum of average of $1,500 for for the $600 investment.
But the report talks that some businesses could save $10,000 a year by looking at their waste and seeing how they can reduce it.
So again, you've a couple of you have mentioned the exemptions and the idea that if you look into it, you're probably gonna increase your profit.
Um also I I appreciate the uh the bid, because the one thing that um that is really in this plan is that they could all be using the shared bins.
Okay.
Also, there we have to remember this is a regulation that is on commercial haulers, and so the profitability, the costs are there, but there are also other efforts to look at how we can allow for those businesses that are already on compost routes to opt in.
We're not there yet.
It's a state level thing.
I hope does that answer your question?
Yeah, thank you.
Um, and uh and in your um, I would also say we have worked to pass ordinances as well that help with profitability and and help the planet at the same time.
So I I um was the one of the sponsors with the council member black, who the skip to skip the stuff ordinance um so uh since now law in Denver that um uh that a uh restaurant, uh if you're ordering to go food, they can't just proactively put napkins and condiments and um uh and whatnot and uh cutlery in the bag, you have to ask for it.
You they you know, really the idea is uh because sometimes people will not use that colory and get it'll go straight from that restaurant to the landfill.
And um, but it also has the added benefit of um of saving money, then the the restaurants have to buy fewer cutlery um or napkins or uh so certainly there are ways that we can uh benefit the planet and benefit the bottom line of uh some of our businesses.
For 15 years, the city of Denver has been saying to do this in ordinance, and just remind you all that this is why the ballot measure went put forward, because the political will was the ordinances, but no mandate to make businesses take an extra step.
Yeah, thank you.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Sawyer.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um Flynn stole my letter that I was gonna read.
So the Colfax Mayfair Business Improvement District is in district five, uh, and council district nine as well.
Um and I really appreciate the letter that they wrote today.
I think um, you know, no ordinance is perfect.
I think it is incredibly important that we focus on diverting as much waste as we possibly can.
But at the end of the day, if this amendment passes, I'm a no on the whole thing.
We are gonna drive every business in Denver out of this city, and 60% of our general fund is sales tax revenue.
If we don't have strong businesses, we don't have a general fund.
There's no money for housing.
There's no money for special services.
There's no money for all of the different priorities that we want.
We have to have strong businesses enough with nickeling and diming them.
What we're talking about here are our tiniest businesses.
I think we can give them the respect that they deserve.
I think we should have allowed for them to have an opt-in.
I said this to Brian on the phone the other day.
I think it would be fantastic if they wanted to participate.
That should be their choice.
An opt-in would have been the right way to go here.
But that's not what we did.
Instead, we're gonna force them to do this, and then we're gonna have them close.
Or they're not gonna open their businesses in our vacant spots to begin with.
They're gonna go to Aurora, or they're gonna go to Lakewood, or they're gonna go to Sheridan, or they're gonna go any other place around here.
We are driving our small businesses out of Denver.
And this is why this nickeling and diming that we are doing.
And so I asked for an opt-in, it was too late.
The language was already put forward, I get it.
But at the end of the day, if this one passes, you need 10 votes to um move this ordinance because it was a citizen initiated ordinance.
You will not have my vote.
I will not be one of the 10.
Thanks.
Thank you, Councilmember Parity.
Yeah, I just wanted to address um speaking to the restaurant association.
It's not that it's not that there's anyone up here who's underestimating what restaurants are going through, in particular the smaller ones.
It's just that um I would hope that the restaurant association is communicating to its members that if they ask for an exemption, they can essentially get one on any reasonable grounds, and that I know the city is not going to be punitive about that.
So I don't um I don't want to see people being rattled and put into a state of fear when they really don't need to be.
This is a very pro-restaurant solution that was put into this bill um through the task force process, and that everyone on the task force, including the restaurant association at that time agreed to, because it is a very generous, very reasonable exemption.
So the fact that we're now layering on this additional blanket exemption, um, to my mind actually adds complexity and makes it more confusing because if I look at this bill and I'm a restaurant that has more than the somewhat arbitrary cutoff amounts that the mayor's office has added, I am going to be confused and think, oh, I'm not exempt, I must have to comply.
When in fact, I too can apply for an exemption if I have financial hardship, limited space, can't find a haul or any of those other reasons.
So I just think we are making this unnecessarily muddy when we have like the world's most generous exemption in here already.
Literally, you can ask for an exemption for any reason.
Um, and it clearly um we have an executive branch that is not motivated to um to be punitive about this to throw the book at people that will work with people on getting exempt that won't say you missed some arbitrary deadline to apply, you didn't know about this and you didn't apply, you're out of luck.
None of that's gonna happen.
So I just asked the restaurant association, please to tell your members that so they can apply.
And if they are having financial hardship, which I know many of them are, um, or they have another constraint that's not even financial, such as space, or because our market's not there yet, or whatever else, um, that they take advantage of that and they know they can do that.
So that's my ask.
Um, and that's all I wanted to say.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Gonzalez Cutieres.
Uh thank you, Madam President.
Um, yeah, so I just have a question for I think Mr.
Hoover from the restaurant association.
Is he still there?
Yes, he's walking out.
Okay, thank you so much.
Um, I just have a question because I I guess that's what I had heard, and I was under the impression that the Colorado Restaurant Association was part of the task force and also was in agreement with um this it wasn't an amendment at the time, but it was a recommendation.
Um, can you I guess clarify that or tell me, I guess, what has changed since then?
Um, sure, absolutely, McCoover Colorado Restaurant Association.
Uh, first, I wasn't the individual from our team that was a part of the stakeholder process, so I can't speak to what was in uh my boss's mind at the time, and why she did or didn't agree with the recommendation.
I can tell you that since then, every measurable cost on the restaurant industry has gone up, plain and simple.
And to address another comment that was made earlier, restaurants.
I'm a former chef.
I spent eight years in restaurants.
I can tell you right now that any restaurant that's good at what they do, they already limit waste as much as they possibly can if it winds up in messages.
I'm sorry, I was I have questions that I want to ask, and I'm sorry, it's um I apologize.
Um, yeah, thank you for that.
I wanted to see if I could ask DPAG a question.
Um, and I'm not sure.
I see Danica online, but I'm not sure who is um who is answering questions.
Alex is here, Councilman.
Thank you so much.
Um, just I guess for quick point of reference, and I think this might have been brought up earlier, was just um wanting to better understand that process again with DDKT because I think we've seen this with in other spaces, and and I know even working on um the bill with councilman Heinz around um healthy drinks for kids, right?
Where we talked about, you know, it's not always automatically punitive.
Um, and in this case, what I'm hearing at least is that um this is a matter of, you know, giving folks an opportunity or giving the restaurants an opportunity to either comment the compliance or to request an exemption based on financial hardship.
And so I just wanted to get that clarification um from DDPHE of what that would look like if they were to be in that situation with the restaurant.
Uh Madam President, Counselor Alex Vidal, legislative liaison for the Department of Public Health and Environment.
Um, so we would uh begin with um education and then wrap up enforcement from there.
We would want to be systematic rather than having kind of one-offs and making um uh individual uh decisions about um enforcement against the uh restaurant for this, and so um we would want to be as systematic as possible.
Okay, um, thank you so much, and thank you, madam president.
That's all I have.
Thank you, Councilmember Abidades.
Thank you so much, Councilant.
Um, I just wanted to emphasize again there's exemptions.
Also, we did get a few emails from restaurants saying that they wanted the exemption, and I took time to meet and talk to a lot of them, and they were very confused about the ordinance.
They thought it was for all food waste, not just back of the house.
When I told them it's back of the house, they were like, Oh, that's much easier.
Oh, I I also went to Populous over here across the street, and they just got a composting thing for the back of um their uh restaurant, and so they're easily like able to do that when it's just their professionals that can um do that work.
And when I went to a coffee shop that wrote me for my district, they were surprised at about it as well.
And they said that they used to put their coffee grounds out for people to take for their home composting, and that they'd be happy to do that again.
So I think that yes, restaurant owners are very stressed out right now.
Um, and that is totally valid.
I also think that one, they could get an exemption if they can't make it work.
We're just asking them to put together a plan so that we know they're thinking about it one day when they can, they can do it.
So we're giving them the option to opt out.
Um, and I don't think that should be taken with a grain of salt.
I think that this is again a very generous policy, and it would set a bad precedent for us to have this automatic exemption because this hasn't been done anywhere else in the country yet.
So then can we lead the country?
Denver leads the country.
So if we start moving away from the laws we're trying to have, the rest of the country can follow, and we know where our country is headed right now.
And so I think that it's important that we stay true to our values, have this.
They can opt out.
This isn't a mandatory that they have to do exactly what we say.
They can come up with a plan.
They can tell us that they can't afford it, that there's no haulers, all the exemptions that we've already talked about.
So this isn't like us trying to come in and tell a small business now you have to take on this burden, but it's telling them think about this part as well.
Um, and so I just wanted to share that.
I have reached out, I have had those conversations, and when you have an organization that maybe is telling their members that this is bad policy, but yet I go out into my district and talk face to face, sit down with the small businesses in my district, it's a totally different conversation.
So I would encourage like having those conversations with your constituents, and I do think this is the right way to go because people can just opt out.
And so I'll just leave it at that.
Thank you, Council President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Lewis.
Hi, it looked like you maybe had a few things to add, and I just wanted to make sure that we didn't skip you over.
Thank you, Erica Rogers.
Uh, excise and licenses.
Yeah, I just wanted to make a clarification about I think it was um Councilwoman Gonzalez Goodyear is about um the uh enforcement, that would also be under excise and licenses again, right?
If they're not the there's a compliance piece, and then there's the health piece, but the there's a third piece, right, which is uh applying for exceptions or exemptions.
And um I do want to clarify that um just because different exemptions live in different places or have different um, you know, are architected different in the ordinance, we would still treat those as uh a screening question on the application.
So just the for example, the de minimis or um financial hardship exemptions that currently apply, uh the uh this specific provision that's uh at issue in this amendment, um, they wouldn't be asked in different places or in different ways.
They would um all feed into the questions we ask on the application.
So an applicant wouldn't have to figure out or be confused by do I meet this exemption or that exemption?
We would make it easy for them to answer some questions, and if they apply for any of them, uh they would get that on uh upon that renewal.
So just thank you for that.
Thank you.
Appreciate it.
Is that it?
Okay, council pro temer cambo.
I'm already up.
Thank you, madam president.
Um I have a similar question, and I think you you started to answer it.
Um, I think I'll ask you again.
Uh I'm just trying to think about like what this looks like in practice.
So, um, a series of questions for the uh for a restaurant.
Um do we already have that criteria of what of what it would take for them to qualify to opt out if they needed to?
Like are those questions already formed or do you have an idea as to what those questions are and what would it take for them to be able to have a process if they did need to opt out?
Sure.
I think it would look similar to some of the other um ordinance-wide, program-wide, um, you know, de minimis or financial hardship.
I think some of that would be developed in rule.
Um, but the way we usually do it on a license application, for example, right now, um, food licensees can get an exemption if they are a nonprofit organization from certain fees.
Um other licenses get certain exemptions uh in ordinance from other fees, and so typically um when they're filling out their renewal application or if they're brand new, their new application, um, we would tailor those questions to ask specifically the information that we need from them so that it's less of a burden, and we're not asking them to say read this ordinance language and tell us if you comply, or tell us if you meet this exemption.
It's um how many employees do you have?
Um, do you have your tax return from last year?
Is there a if there's a report or a file number that we can pull from a different department in the city?
We can create those partnerships.
Um we obviously try to do that all the time in various ways like zoning uh use permits are a good example that we're trying to improve on.
But um, we would kind of try to pull that information where we could to verify that information, um, and then they could just move forward, and we would say at the end, um, you don't owe a fee.
Does that answer your question?
Yeah, yeah, that does.
That's that's helpful.
Um, I'm just trying to figure out like what is the burden um for a restaurant?
What's the burden to, you know, to be able to collect the information needed, and also um just the basic implementation.
On your end, what is that capacity needed, or what is your um capacity to be able to do those reviews?
Yeah, it's a minimal impact to our team because it would just be a handful of additional questions.
We would build that into our standard checklist of application review.
Um we would have the categories of um, it would automatically move through uh the SLA applicant portal uh that faces the public, so um there would be less of that human error, right?
So if if uh a series of questions are answered one way, it would automatically process the exemption of the fee, just like we do existing for those uh uh nonprofit fees for restaurants or food licenses, I should say.
Thank you.
Yeah, that that helps.
Um I had another question just about, and I don't know who would answer this.
I don't know if there was any consideration.
I feel like you know, we've got you can always motivate people from you know, with a carrot or a stick, and it feels oftentimes like this is like we're using a stick or with you know, as it mentioned earlier around um additional regulation.
Was there any conversation within the group to talk about like what is the what's the carrot?
What's the motivator?
Like if if we have a small restaurant, I'm just I I guess there's part of me where I just keep thinking, gosh, we really want those small restaurants, we really want those businesses, and was there consideration put forward for hey, and if you do this, what's that incentive to want to come to Denver to, you know, open those restaurants, but to also be in compliance with, you know, um recycling and composting and and um those things.
I guess I don't know who the question goes to, and maybe it's yeah, maybe it's Tim.
Good evening, council members.
Tim Hoffman in the mayor's office.
Uh one of the things that we did kick around, and I know the task force had discussions around this as well, and we talked about are there financial incentives that we can provide to small restaurants?
Are there ways um that we can try to curb those costs in the near term for those smaller restaurants to get on board?
Um, it's just one of those things that, like everything else, there is a big cost associated with that.
Um, I don't need to tell this group of people that the budget situation as is.
Um it's it's the the way that we thought it was most effective was to do this exemption for those smallest restaurants, um, because obviously on the front end uh for the administration and from the agencies who are going to be looking at the case-by-case exemptions were this amendment to pass, it's 16% of all restaurants in real actual numbers.
That's about 500 restaurants qualify for the two million dollars or less in revenue and the fewer than 25 employees.
Um so when you think about the burden on the administration that has to go through presumably hundreds of those applications in addition to the other um applicants who have other financial burdens, other things like that.
Um, it was that front-end concern on the burdens to the administration, and then as has been discussed ad nauseum with this group for the small restaurants themselves, um, making sure that they're aware of it, that they're able to apply in a timely manner, all those kind of things.
Um so there were to very simply answer your question, um, there were those other discussions, and um what we landed on was this was frankly the most cost effective way of trying to address the problem that I think we all see here.
Um thank you.
I think that, and I don't even know, and maybe Tim, this is also for you.
Um, was there any discussion about being able to pilot some of this?
I know that you know, trying to do large sweeping um changes, but always piloting gives you an opportunity to be able to see results.
Was there any?
So I I do think that in councilwoman parody has mentioned this a couple of times that there is built into this section of the proposed ordinance and the other ones that requirement that we regularly come back and revisit the exemptions and the other proposals.
Um, so uh to me that is essentially the pilot where for the larger restaurants in the city who have more of an ability to take on this type of activity, they would in that first three to five year period be the ones who are responsible for building it up.
Um we would then reevaluate all of the agencies, other folks would come to you all with that report and to be able to say this either continues to make sense to have the exemption as is, or um the market and the waste haulers and everything else have expanded to meet the massively increased market, and so the costs have reduced for everybody, and so it actually makes sense to reduce or eliminate it entirely.
So I think there is some uh type of pilot in the proposal that we have where the most potentially vulner vulnerable restaurants would be the ones who are not going to be impacted in that first three to five year period.
Okay, um, thank you.
I do have one other question, and this is for the restaurant, the small, is it not small restaurants, business.
Um, the restaurant association, slate.
Uh do you have uh with hearing this information?
Is that something within your members that you have also you know considered of you know being able to pilot or being able to support restaurants to be able to do these um these additional requirements as opposed to opting out to opt?
No, am I saying that backwards?
As opposed to the re that they would have to opt out.
I'm saying it backwards, but it's like a double negative.
Sure.
Um, so as part of the restaurant association work, we continually communicate how to stay in compliance with our members.
We try our best to make sure that they comply, and we would obviously make them aware of whatever option they had in order to opt out, especially in the cases where it was necessary for them for whatever purpose.
Um restauranteurs don't spend a lot of time sitting at their email looking for those types of things.
So I could see a lot of them not being made aware that are finding out or reading our emails no matter how many times we sent it to them, that these opt-out abilities exist.
So the ability for them to just be exempted would make it a lot easier, especially again for these smaller uh restaurants that don't have large staffs.
Okay, all right, thank you.
Um, I think what is challenging for me is just it feels like we have a lot of stick and having that carrot that we could be, it's like food.
Um, but having like a carrot, a way that we're incentive, it's late, um, that we would be able to incentivize um those restaurants to want to participate in this way because I think they do.
I mean, I think there really is a desire, and there's also challenges and obstacles to being able to do it and to do it effectively, and that is I think the conundrum that we keep talking about in around and so um I don't have any other questions, but thank you.
Thank you.
Councilmember Torres?
Thank you, Madam President.
Um I apologize if I missed this, and maybe this is for Erica.
Uh excise.
Is there a sense right now of what qualifies uh for the hardship exemption?
Uh Erica Rogers, excise and license.
I think right now um I would defer to kind of the citywide rulemaking process on making sure that we're uh adopting parallel um but tailored exemptions that fit in each category, so uh not at this juncture, but um whatever that would be, we could build it in in addition to or without uh, you know, this existing okay.
Thank you, Erica.
Uh Tim, quick question for you.
In the exemption category, was there ever a consideration about um uh the it being in place for a certain period of time and then opening it back up to it applying to all businesses?
Tim Hoffman with the mayor's office, uh councilwoman Torres.
Yes, that uh was one of the discussions we had, and I think that part of the compromise that we reached is that regular check-in that every three to five years where the report would be issued to city council and the relevant executive directors of agencies would opine on uh on whether or not the exemption still made sense given market and conditions at that time, um, and they could at that point change or remove the exemption via rules and regulations.
That's obviously something uh a report that would be given to city council, who would then be able to also make their own determination if they disagreed with the assessment from the executive directors.
So each of those check-ins would serve as a policy check-in for do we have the right language?
I believe that we have the right language in the current ordinance where there's a requirement that the as part of that report, the executive directors give that opinion of the current state of the exemption.
Okay.
Thank you for that.
One of the things that I'm wrestling with, thank you, Tim.
I don't have any other questions.
I'll just make a quick comment.
One of the things that I'm wrestling with, and I I there's some similarity here for the letter that was read by Councilman Flynn of Councilwoman Sawyer's constituency.
I believe that's probably East Colfax-based because what they're experiencing with uh BRT impacts can't be ignored.
West Colfax getting a bond project right now also sent me a letter that they support um the same exemptions.
Um we're about to get Morrison Road renovated and a lot of those businesses and restaurants that we cherish but that are hanging on by a thread facing similar threats, and then Federal Boulevard with uh bus rapid transit being proposed there.
That's those are my corridors for uh for small business restaurants that I also do worry about, um, being able to track qualify, probably I believe it's probably on an annual basis, however long um they're uh renewing their um their business license.
But um that that's one of the things that I'm struggling a little bit with on this one.
Um thank you, madam president.
Thank you.
Councilmember Perry.
Um, yes, I realize that we have a restaurantur who uh is here waiting to testify in the public hearing, but I'd like to um see if he's available to be promoted on Zoom.
Tim, his name is Chris Chiari, and I'm sorry, I should have texted you that sooner.
Um, C-H-I-A-R-I.
Chris Cierry, okay.
Um, Chris, when you are promoted and can hear me, let me know.
Chris Kiari, hello.
Can you hear us?
Okay, Tim is looking very encouraging.
Hi.
Oh, he's there.
Okay, great.
Um, Chris, I I don't I know that you were um part of this from the beginning, um, and so I wanted to hear what you have to say about this exemption.
Thank you.
Chris Chiari, owner of the Patterson, I was uh part of the uh petitioning committee originally and served as the small business representative on the Waste No More Task Force.
But one of the things that really strikes me about this whole thing is with 70.8% of the vote, we the people of Denver are asking to be bold.
And what this process that's taken years now to get in front of you at council has shown is that the motivation of the people has kind of been diluted as we get here.
As a small business owner, what I can tell you is I am under two million and I have a staff of seven.
Uh we are implementing solutions.
We got rid of the perishables for using reusable uh items.
Uh we cut down costs by doing that, but doing laundry already, so by incorporating more rags as opposed to paper towels into our process was a solution that was easy to implement.
There seems to be this belief that the employees in restaurants don't have the capacity to discern the difference between a fork, a plate, a napkin, and food waste.
And in fact, they do.
And I think that we are dismissing the capacity of the team members in these businesses to assume that we cannot execute and deliver when we can.
To make this work, we'll need to be creative.
Uh, for me, we did see increased costs in trash.
If I had the city hauling my trash, I'd be paying for two 95 gallon trash cans that would be insufficient to my needs.
Uh, what I was able to do is partner with a companion building right across the alley.
And we now have three apartment buildings in my business sharing recycling and trash, a recycling service that didn't exist for any of these tenants prior to me approaching the neighbor about doing it.
And of course, now we are uh executing uh these processes long before the mandates.
Um thank you, Chris.
I appreciate that.
I also wanted to um speaking of recycling, point out that um state law has created uh basically a funding pool where producers of recycling waste are being made to pay in.
So um large companies that create plastic and paper and all these things, they're paying into a fund um that will be used for relief from the costs of recycling for small businesses starting in 2030.
Um so I wanted, Chris, my lot my only other question for you is just um to talk about the expenses of um recycling versus composting and whether the relief from the burden of the recycling cost will be meaningful to you when that comes along.
We'll have to see how much it is, but I would make it clear that uh my desire to recycle as a business owner is still greater than the added cost burden has been incurred as a result of that ambition.
Uh my total trash cost, total trash costs a month are well under 200.
Uh, and I have to say that for the size business we are, that's a reasonable amount to pay to be able to have access the types of services that we wanted, which was recycling in this business.
So I don't think that the burdens are as big as we say.
My challenges with the city uh are numerous but have nothing to do with this cost.
Um, and so I do think that we're making a lot by exempting small restaurants.
I like the motivation of opt-in if you were to move this forward, move towards as quickly as possible and opt-in, but I do want to say that as a small business operator with a small team, that is also a reflection of the size of our volume.
We have the capacity to implement composting if we can find the solution of where to put a bin and how to get a good hauler uh that could service our size and our needs.
Okay, thank you.
I really appreciate that, and thanks for staying so late.
Um the last point I just want to make is that I think that I just heard um the mayor's office say that this is about 500 restaurants, which was a number that I had not heard before.
I remember asking about this in committee as they were still working through these revenue cutoff estimates and all of this.
Um, that is a lot of restaurants.
That's um maybe like a third to a quarter of all of them in the city.
So I actually am surprised by that, and this is not just the smallest of the small restaurants, this is a huge portion.
Um, granted, they're producing somewhat proportionally less waste, so I'm not saying it's a quarter to a third of all the food waste uh produced by restaurants, um, but it's a big a big portion.
So I don't think um we can vote for this and say that it's de minimis at all.
Um this particular exemption is gonna have a far greater impact um than I would say any of the other changes that were made from the task force recommendations.
So it's a big deal.
Um, and I don't think it's I don't think it is coextensive with voters' intent um because people thought that we were going to require food producers to divert waste um period full stop.
Um there's a generous exemption, and I'd like us to stick with that.
Thank you, madam president.
Thank you.
Councilmember Flynn.
Um, thank you, madam president.
Um I do think we can call it de minimis.
Uh it's a large, if it may be a large number, if it's 16 percent or if it's 33 percent, uh 500 restaurants.
If that's a uh if that's a quarter or a third, that means we have 1500 restaurants in the city.
Can you clarify that, Tim?
I think we have 1700 restaurants.
Today.
Uh so this is the information that at some point I believe was sent out to all council members uh pulled from the Department of Finance who looked at the tax records from 2024.
Uh the total number of restaurants that they have uh across the city is three thousand seventy-seven, and then so that's where the 512 makes the 16% of 16%.
Okay, thank you.
That's right.
So it's about 16%.
And again, on the smaller end of the scale, uh, that doesn't mean it's 16% of the organic waste.
It's much, much smaller.
I have some uh I have a list of all the restaurants in my district, and a lot of them are very tiny little shops uh in strip malls and places like that.
Uh I love Chris Ciari.
I'm very happy with what he's done at uh Patterson Inn.
If only that it's he's revitalized the former home of a an owner of the Rocky Mountain News from many years ago, and I'm glad he's kept it alive and thriving.
But I don't know that one person's experience is which was anecdotal can be transferred to all small restaurants.
There is a uh what I wanted to say here at the end is that there is a principle in economics that I think uh is applicable here, a variation of it, and that's uh the law of diminishing returns.
And the variation of it is that while we can apply the same process, the same requirements and mandates on all restaurants, but they are absorbed more easily by larger corporate-owned restaurants and operations or larger individually privately owned uh restaurants of which we have a quite a few here in Denver also, quite a large uh assortment of great restaurants uh that are doing well.
This doesn't apply this exemption doesn't apply to them.
This is exemption applies to the smallest of the small, and the law of diminishing returns basically says that when you go down the rank of all the restaurants and get down to the smallest with the same regimen, the same rules and mandates that apply to the largest restaurants to get this much additional organic waste out of the landfills, I don't think that's worth it.
As I said before, you wouldn't even be able to measure the reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions, and to force that on all restaurants when the sponsors themselves already passed an amendment that has a threshold, a flat threshold in it as along with hardship exemptions on construction and demolition waste, we've already set the precedent for applying this as well in this case, and I think that's what we ought to do uh here, and we should not approve this amendment.
And I think with the councilwoman Sawyer as well, if if this were to uh if this were to uh pass, I I would have to consider voting no on the entire ordinance then.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilmember Lewis.
Thank you.
I just have one question.
Um can you help me to understand how a rest how what it might look like to verify restaurants income and um number of employees?
What's that process?
Yeah, hello again, Jonathan with Casser.
Um that's a good question.
So I think I heard a lot of discussions about like the idea of an opt-out.
I think just to clarify, there is a list of of um categories where that would that can be considered in our rules and regulations that would enable an exemption.
We still need to establish those thresholds and what those would look like.
So part of the um challenge is are we gonna, you know, take an approach where we ask every restaurant that needs an exemption for an economic hardship to open up their books and show us some type of proof.
We have not defined what that would need to look like.
Um I think this approach, you know, was taken on for a couple of reasons.
One was the economic uh, you know, conditions and and challenges facing our restaurants right now, and also um to kind of streamline the most likely that would need support and make that administratively simple.
I can give you some examples of other communities if that's helpful though.
So in the city of Longmont, uh they have an economic hardship and they require some type of, and I wish I had it in front of me, but it's um something to the effect of you know, were your gross um was your gross revenue of the previous year less than 10% of your losses.
So, you know, there's a calculation there, it's not as simple as going to the tax records that we may already have or collect um to be able to verify for the proposal as it is right now.
That's all stuff that we don't we already have through the tax process, which is why um part of the reason that was identified.
Um, in some other communities, they do it based on volume of waste generated, which then requires verification on site of how much waste is actually being generated.
You have to look at different times of the year, you know, and and figure out how you're actually gonna measure that.
So there's different ways we could do it if we stick with, you know, kind of the language now, you know, with that if if this exemption, if this amendment passes and this exemption is not there, and we're doing it strictly on this other list of potential ways to exempt a restaurant, we'll have to define those, and we'll have to figure out how we're gonna um embed it into um the XIS and licensing, you know, process to verify it in the best way we can.
So to be determined.
Thank you.
Thank you.
That was super helpful.
That was my only question.
All right, thank you.
Thank you all.
I just attended uh a Eat Denver, um it's uh sponsored by I think Eat Denver, and it's with small local restaurants, and I went to one of my local restaurants, I think there were like four or five different restaurants that were there, and I asked them what was um what were some of the things that they were um concerned about what was happening in their small local businesses, and they all talked about waste no more.
They all mentioned it, they all said that they felt like it was going to really impact and these were small local businesses that would be part of this exemption.
So I met with um several of them, and some of them were in my council district, one is in a different council district, and she said that she's on the brink of closing, and it's gonna break her heart.
I heard another restaurant say they were on the brink of closing.
Um, and so I won't be supporting this amendment tonight based on that because I have gone around to my small local businesses and asked them how they feel about this, and I have not heard support from my small local businesses.
I have heard support from people who don't own small local businesses, but given this impact on the small local businesses in my council district, I can't support this this evening.
So with that, um Madam Secretary, we'll call on amendment four to council bill 0628, council members Gonzalez Gutierrez.
Aye, Cortez.
Hi.
Oh, I'm sorry, I'm really tired.
Uh Councilmember Albites.
Aye, Flynn, May.
Gilmore.
Aye.
Heinz.
Hi.
Cashman.
Lewis.
Aye.
Parity?
Aye.
Romero Campbell.
Nay.
Sawyer?
No.
Watson?
Nay.
Madam President Sandoval?
Nay.
Secretary, close the vote and announce the results.
Seven ayes.
Seven ayes, amendment four to council bill zero six two eight has passed.
Um council member Sawyer, will you please put Council Bill 0684 on the floor as for publicate?
Wait, hold on.
Council Member Sorry, will you please put Council Bill 0684 on the floor for publication as amended?
I move that council bill 25-0684 be ordered published as amended.
It's been moved and seconded, yeah.
Is that right, madam secretary?
Apologies a little slow over here.
Yeah, it's a little bit show up.
Okay, there we go.
Thank you.
The required public hearing for council bill 0628 as amended is open.
May we please have the staff report?
I think we're coming to help you.
Oh.
Okay.
The floor is yours.
All right.
Thank you.
Uh Jonathan Wagtell, Deputy Executive Director of the Office of Climate Action Sustainability and Resiliency.
Um, happy to have the opportunity to address uh council tonight on the waste no more ordinance update.
Um and so I'd like to, and I know we had a lot of conversations about this, so I'll make this fairly quick.
Uh, but I do want to start with just recognizing how important overall this implementing this this ordinance is.
Uh this is a significant opportunity um for us to advance our citywide diversion goals, which are 50% by 2027 and 70% by 2032.
Uh currently, though, we sit at around 22%.
So uh this type of universal waste ordinance has really been one of the keys to unlocking significant increases in waste aversion in other communities, and we can see that.
And I also just want to point out that what this also does is increase the access to these services for a significant portion of the city and county of Denver's residents and businesses.
Currently, if we look at what is provided by the city, um, you know, that's a much smaller percentage, 81% uh currently does not receive these type of services.
So this is gonna significantly increase access to critical services to support waste aversion, recycling, composting, C and D, waste aversion.
Um, and so we look forward to being able to move forward now that we've got some answers and get this thing implemented.
Uh, and just to bring some numbers here, we're talking about over, you know, around 170,000 multifamily units that maybe previously have not had access.
So 10,000 buildings, we talked about restaurants, um, huge percentage of annual attendees, and of that number now uh would be increased based on the shift.
Um, and we talked about the C and D.
So I don't need to get too further much further into that.
I do want to point out that a really key point here is that we also need to be thinking about the full cycle of these materials and how we make sure that there are uh markets to really take these materials once they're diverted and put them back into use.
Uh Councilmember Heinz uh talked about the timeline, so this is a long time coming.
We've gone through the process with the task force, um, taking the task force recommendations and reviewed those uh against administrative uh burdens and opportunities, and and brought forward this updated uh proposed um uh ordinance.
Um we have some data in here about how well we we did attempt to reflect the task force um topics, but we've talked a lot about that tonight.
So I'm gonna keep on going and give a summary of really what would happen next.
So uh this proposed update puts an effective date on all of these changes at September 1st, 2026, and that's because there's a lot of work to do with all the rules and the regulations and the resources and the educational uh materials and then just the administrative structure that needs to be put in place uh to bring this forward.
Um we'll be taking the education first enforcement approach as recommended by the task force and discussed here tonight, and bringing back regular uh updates to city council uh to talk about progress and revisit the thresholds.
Uh, quick overview of uh the applicability here.
Uh multifamily, non-residential and food waste providers.
Uh this requires recycling services, organic material collection for multifamily buildings and for the food waste providers.
Uh, these entities will need to have a current waste aversion plan.
There will be signage and educational requirements, and then there's a series of defined potential exemptions as we've talked quite a bit about tonight.
Um, those that we have not defined here tonight will now get um finalized through the rules and regulation process, which will be a public process as well.
Uh on the multifamily and non-residential side, there is uh some additional exemptions around things like parking garages or parking structures, you know, buildings that generally don't generate waste.
Um, and then some of these slides now are uh slightly outdated since uh the amendments have been discussed, but um, we can revisit those and update those for the record as appropriate.
Um, similar with permitted special events, we were talking about adding recycling and organic materials, the waste aversion plans, the education, signage, and education requirements, um, and then the exemptions of course will shift um to reflect the amendments that you all voted to approve tonight.
Uh construction and demolition, this affects uh most permitted construction and demolition projects uh with a target of a 50% waste aversion threshold, uh which meaning of all the debris that's generated uh during a project, at least 50% needs to be diverted, and that needs to be at least three different materials so that we make sure it's not just um you know uh the aggregates or the concrete, but that it's uh variety of the building materials.
It requires a waste aversion plan, a performance security deposit to ensure compliance.
Um with this update, uh assuming that um when and if uh council elects to approve the updates, uh the next steps will really require us to get to work in a pretty quick time frame to be able to turn this around by the September implementation date of 2026.
We'll be looking at rules and regulations, defining all the processes, the covered materials list.
Uh, we'll be having to do a significant amount of education and outreach.
Uh, for some of these sectors, we don't even have a full list of all the parties that need to be notified.
So uh we will be hard at work making sure we identify all of the applicable entities doing our outreach and education um to make sure everyone is aware, and that also goes to the to the users of those buildings, attendants, residents, and the public.
Um, and then there'll be significant amount of resources that need to be built online just to be able to monitor uh track all of the compliance and collect the data and do reporting back as required.
Uh, so with that, I will uh turn it back over to Council President.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We have eighteen individuals signed up to speak this evening.
I will start with Amy Gleaman Glaumman.
Amy Gleam.
Brian Loma.
I'll go next.
Ryan Call, and then I'll come back to Brian Brian.
Brian.
Good evening, Council.
My name is Ryan Call, and I'm EcoCycles Policy and Campaign Specialist.
EcoCycle has spent years connecting zero waste advocates across Denver and has campaigned campaign for systems changes that lead to more waste diversion in the Mile High City.
Additionally, I served on Denver's Sustainability Advisory Council's Zero Waste Committee and the Waste No More Task Force.
I work on these issues because zero waste practices, especially reducing food waste and composting, are cost effective and practical climate solutions.
Composting and food waste reduction reduce the amount of methane produced in landfills, and when finished compost is applied to our soils, it helps absorb carbon from the atmosphere.
I'm gonna go off script here given the amendments and just share the sentiment that I think that everyone here wants to see waste no more succeed.
It's just a matter of the details to get there.
Advocates have our perspective, the uh city staff have theirs, but I encourage us all to work together to continue to be a leader in climate policy.
Um I think that this ordinance, having worked on it, is really one of a kind in the nation that it is a citizen-led ballot initiative that's overwhelmingly supportive.
There are also innovative pieces in there, including uh innovative approaches to organics diversion.
Um I'd also like to share the sentiment that while I love composting, really, the ultimate solution is to reduce food waste upstream and to feed hungry people by uh donating edible food.
I walked by Mutual Aid Monday on my way just to City Hall, and it reminded me that we are throwing away food that could be uh nourishing our neighbors.
Um I think the last piece that I want to mention, I'll shout out to We Don't Waste in Denver Food Rescue for their hard work um feeding Denverites.
Um the last piece I want to just mention is I've worked with a lot of Denver's uh CASAR staff, and I think that they are some of the finest minds in waste diversion, and I just wanted to share that perspective because I think they'll do a fantastic job rolling out whatever you all vote on.
Um, of course, there was differences on how to best proceed, but again, Sedan County of Denver is a leader in this um area, and I encourage you all to uh vote to pass this ordinance next week with the supermajority.
Thank you for your time and listening to my perspective.
Thank you.
Next up, Brian Luma.
Good afternoon, evening.
It's almost morning.
Um I appreciate all of you.
I haven't had to hang out here for a long time, this late in a while.
My name is Brian Loma.
I am the owner, operator of Cut the Plastic Environmental Mitigation Solutions and an alumni of Metropolitan State University for waste diversion, sustainable infrastructure and practices is the title of my degree.
Uh, I work not only with Green Latinos, but I want to I want to show you this smiling little face right here.
This is the young Ian Thomas Tefoya, who is on his honeymoon in Peru right now.
He's been talking to us on Denver TV 8, where this is being broadcast right now for nearly two decades.
When they collected the signatures for the green roof Initiative, everybody said, Why does this matter?
My building doesn't have recycling.
We don't have composting services.
I talked about this earlier, 2015, 10 years ago, the third version of the restaurant waste reduction guide, the 24 Food Waste Program.
Food Matters actively calling right now for restaurants who are listening who are paying attention to this, to the fine folks that just walked out, to the people of Mayfair and all these other places.
The city has the tools and resources to help you reduce your waste reduction, right?
To have a plan to make it happen.
But what's most important here, and um I know a couple of you said, can we vote for this as amended?
What happens if you don't?
The original provisions, no enforcement mechanisms, no uh authorities by the departments necessarily to vote on that, you know, to make changes.
It's as written.
And so I think that's dangerous as well.
And I want to call that to your attention.
We can through the rulemaking processes throw enforcement down the line for these small businesses, right?
They're getting free recycling by 2030.
It's a statewide plan to offer diversion access.
The costs can be transferred down the road when we have those enforcement mechanisms.
But what you did tonight was prevent the creation of a first of its kind income revenue based exempt pre-exemption.
And I congratulate you for stopping that and creating an opportunity for other communities to create such pre-exemptions.
I'm gonna go now, but I sent you all an email.
It has my KGMU radio interview, it has my op-ed from this morning.
We're working on this as a state, and we're glad that the city of Denver is doing its part too.
Thank you.
Next up we have Moish Cornfield.
Sorry if I pronounced your first name inaccurate.
Hi, City Council.
Uh it's Moshe Kornfeld, and I'm the founder and executive director of Colorado Jewish Climate Action.
Earlier this evening, I was with uh Ami Gelman, who uh is a teen climate leader with the Jewish youth climate movement, and he had to go home.
It was a school night.
Um, so my first serious engagement with sustainability came over 20 years ago when I worked as an outdoor educator in Northwest Connecticut.
Each week, middle schoolers would come for week-long environmental education intensives.
We taught basic ecological concepts like the water and soil cycle, and to make it fun, we perform skits.
But the main lesson of those silly skits was serious.
There's no such place as a way.
When we throw something away, it doesn't disappear.
It ends up somewhere with real costs to people and to the planet.
With food waste, those costs often come in the form of methane emissions.
It might feel convenient or politically expedient to put those emissions on a kind of ecological credit card.
But the bill is coming due.
Methane is 80 times more potent than CO2 in the short term and is a major driver of the rapid warming that we're already experiencing.
Even Carl Pope, the former executive director of the Sierra Club, recent recently wrote that overlooking methane was one of the climate movement's biggest mistakes.
Reducing methane here and now is imperative.
That's one of the easiest and most cost effective steps we that we can take.
I don't dismiss the concerns of small businesses, but as composting services expand, costs will come down, and both businesses and consumers will adapt.
This is how markets and cultures shift.
I want to close with one point.
Addressing the climate crisis requires both policy and culture change.
Denver's waste No More policy has overwhelming public support.
Gives me pride and hope to live in a city where more and more people recognize that when it comes to waste, there is no such place as a way.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next up we have Noah Kaplan.
Good evening, Council, and thank you for your time and attention this evening.
My name is Noah Kaplan.
I'm with Compost Colorado.
We're one of the local waste haulers, compost haulers, and processors in the city here.
Speaking in enthusiastic support for the amendments in the passages of Waste No More.
Um I think we know we've echoed a lot.
We've all been here a long time at this point, but I do want to say that I think we all intuitively understand the insult to life on earth that it is to remove from the natural cycle of things all of nature's resources, and then to have those resources end up in a dead end at the land at the landfill is a symptom of one of our great societal ills, and it is the ease at which we throw things away.
Um the people of this city want to live in a place they are not forced to be complicit in this crime against nature and this crime against the future and this crime against our children.
And the spirit of this ordinance, the spirit of this initiative, um, must be preserved in its entirety to offer pre-exemptions.
Thank you for approving those amendments to offer pre-exemptions of businesses.
Um, especially when we understand the straw man argument that the exemptions or the pre-exemptions without them, these businesses can't possibly find that exemption.
Feels um really sad to me to hear this body debate it.
Um we understand these businesses who can't stomach uh the cost are going to be able to find opportunities, um, not to participate.
Um, but we have to encourage everybody to ensure they have a plan to ensure that they are doing everything they can to divert food to places that can eat it, um, to keep it out of the landfill.
And put companies like Compost Colorado, like Wampost, like Scraps, like so many of the great organizations, Ecocycle who are here today are enthusiastic about offering as much support as possible.
You want training, we'll give it to you.
You want discounts, we'll give it to you.
You want to cross-promote to make sure that your business and your employees and the patrons and stakeholders of your organization know how important this is to you to encourage their patronage.
We are here to help.
We have to be creative, we have to be imaginative, we have to be brave in the face of this moral and political imperative.
Um, this is not something we can kick the can on.
I understand we have to take care of our small businesses.
Um, but please, um, I urge you, this is something we all want.
Um, it's not, you know, if you are a small business, this is not something that they're gonna come knocking down your door for.
But let's make sure that we do everything we can uh to ensure people are doing their due diligence.
If we get the small things right at the waste bin, imagine what we can accomplish together.
Um, in 10 seconds, um, I want to give a shout out to Stacey Gilmer, who I listened to on a committee meeting, who had a great idea around microprocessing sites to build up the infrastructure.
Let's build density, let's build processing infrastructure.
We can build a sustainable circular economy in this place.
I appreciate it.
Next up, I have Julia Lennon.
Virtually.
Next up, I have Alex Callaon.
My name is Alex.
I work with uh WOMPost.
I want to express my support of the Waste No More Ordinance and my support in achieving these updates.
I work for Wampost Again, which stands for women-owned compost, and that incredible woman who owns the company is tuned in virtually right now, taking care of her new baby.
Uh, we serve many Denver businesses from the Denver Museum of Nature and Science to small businesses like Hearth Bakery.
We serve nonprofits like Metro Caring and Food Bank of the Rockies, as well as Aurora Campus and other schools.
It's very important to us.
Um, and as someone who works in this field for a compost hauler, I see and hear the barriers that these businesses face when establishing contracts and sales.
Sometimes they are serious, but almost always they are minimal.
Usually, as we talk uh to a decision maker, they're surprised by how affordable a compost service can be and how much we're willing to work with these small businesses.
Um oftentimes these barriers are used as a front when really it seems that these businesses do not want to be held accountable for their waste, all for an average of under 150 a month.
If a business cannot afford 150 a month, there are other problems that need to be addressed, and that should not be at the expense of the environment.
The previous rhetoric has been gotta do something with your trash, bury it in the ground, make it go away, out of sight, out of mind, put it in a landfill.
We know that landfill waste specifically from restaurants creates immense amounts of methane, a horrible greenhouse gas.
Composting bypasses the process that creates this methane gas and makes something good from it that flights that fights climate change, which is nutrient-rich soil for our gardens and our farmers.
And as far as small businesses go, I am so pro-smusiness.
I walk, bike, and drive out of my way to support these coffee shops and restaurants and venues.
It's something I really love about Denver.
Even more so, I love Colorado's natural beauty and the environment here.
It's really important to me and why I'm in this field.
Denver has an opportunity to make strides in this in this accountability.
Denver has an opportunity to support this citizen-led initiative, an already approved city council ordinance that holds businesses and corporations accountable in a very important way.
We are not just responsible for the products we sell or services we provide.
We are responsible for the waste and byproducts that come from those products and services.
We have grown past the times of out of sight, out of mind, and we now have a responsibility to uphold ethical business.
This is a step in the right direction.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next up we have Luca Cerna.
Hello, thank you.
Um, my name is Luca.
I am a student on the Auraria campus.
Um, and I also work at a local food pantry.
I also um helped to run another small local nonprofit.
And I didn't have time to prepare anything.
I heard about this last minute, but I still just wanted to come to express how important this is uh in supporting these amendments for students and for local organizers and for people who work at these food pantries.
I have so many co-workers and fellow students and local um organizers who couldn't make it tonight.
So they asked me to come and just share a little bit about that if I could.
But yeah, I think that in spending so much time working with again students and local organizers on so many, especially environmentally focused issues.
I've learned how important it is to so much of our community and to many small businesses.
I've worked directly with a lot of small businesses as well.
Um, and like a couple of folks have mentioned, I know it can be a even a small cost, like you know, 100, 150 dollars a month can feel like something really big, but when it's for something as important as composting, I want to just stress that that is I think the benefits will always outweigh the costs.
Um, and that so many students and people who don't have time to come to these um really important events um feel very, very strongly about.
So yeah, that's all.
Thank you so much.
Next up, we have Chris Chiari.
Virtually, Chris?
Hi, thank you again, Chris Chiari.
Owner of the Patterson Inn uh petitioner and small business representative on the implementation committee.
It's a relief to be here.
I'm sorry, it took this long.
Uh, I also want to introduce myself as the dissenting vote on many of the recommendations, and that motivation was around making sure that we were being old.
Um, so many times city departments came back and said in reviewing front-range policy in other cities, and at every time I would always bring up that the ambition of the voters with waste no more was for the city of Denver to be a leader in sustainability and to create policies that the uh surrounding municipalities would embrace and follow as we implement um international and national leading renewable and sustainability policies at the city level.
I just want to thank Ian Tefoya.
Uh, this is a generation of work that he's put in.
And the city set sustainability goals, but it took a citizen activist to put it in front of the people and push what we're doing tonight, which is putting into place now um ordinance that will allow Denver to become a leader.
Though I'm not happy with everything that ended up, I'm thrilled to be a part of the process that again will implement something that is so forward from reaching in its goals, and now it's our responsibility to implement to make sure we achieve them.
I spoke before, so I yield the rest of my time.
Thank you.
Thank you for the support, and I look forward to a successful vote.
Thank you.
Next up, we have Carrie Wigglesworth.
Carrie.
Next up, we have Max Thomas.
Max.
Next up we have Danella Wethaiyer.
Hello.
Hi, my name is Danny Withhar.
I'm one of the people who put forward the Waste No More Initiative.
I live in Denver City Council District 10.
I have a background in zero waste.
So all through college at the University of Colorado Boulder, I worked for the CU recycling services.
I interned for the city of Boulder, helping enforce the zero waste ordinance that they implemented back in 2015.
I first got inspired to care about zero waste because growing up in Denver in high school, my family and I lived in an apartment complex that did not have recycling.
I believe everybody should have access to recycling and compost.
I believe in it so much that I volunteered for two years to put waste no more on the ballot and pass it nights, weekends.
I personally gathered 2000 signatures, and during all those conversations, I promised Denver voters that we would hold businesses accountable for responsible waste management.
All businesses.
So when I heard that the mayor's office was delaying enforcement to carve out these pre-exemptions for restaurants that make under two million dollars a year in revenue, my heart sank.
Considering a blanket exemption after the implementation dates have already passed, makes me lose faith in the ballot initiative process as a whole, and also lose trust that the city will actually uphold the will of the voters.
So I'm here tonight to urge everyone on council to support the proposed amendments next week and say no to carving out these blanket pre-exemptions for 500 Denver restaurants.
Frankly, I'm just really terrified what it means for our future if council does vote no next week.
If we can't require all restaurants to just sort their waste back of house, how can we make the changes that we need to prevent Earth's entire biosphere from collapsing on us?
How are we gonna transform our food system to be more plant-based?
How are we going to force businesses to conserve fresh water when we eventually have to ration it?
How eventually we're not gonna be able to see the mountains at all because our air is gonna be so polluted.
How are we gonna tell businesses that they can't pollute anymore?
We have to force businesses to do the right thing sometimes.
It's not always going to be easy for everyone, but it's the right thing to do, and it's the right thing for our future, future generations, us ourselves, and our well-being.
And the intention of this initiative was to hold all waste-producing businesses accountable, and I believe that this is a fair compromise.
Yes, composting is an additional cost, just like trash, but it's the cost of doing responsible business.
Um, thanks to all the council members who've spoken up for sustainability tonight and um spoken in support of the Waste No More campaign.
We're in a climate crisis and we need to start acting like it.
And enforcing waste no more as voters intended.
Um will show that the council is committed to prioritizing sustainability and actually reducing our emissions.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next up, we have Catherine Lacey.
Catherine.
Next up, we have Courtney Zyker.
Sorry, so sorry about that.
Hello, good evening, everyone.
My name is Courtney Zercher.
Thank you for having me here tonight.
And we made it this far.
We're close, I think.
So I am a Denver resident.
I've lived here since 2019.
Um, I originally studied biochemistry and also entrepreneurship before taking a tech job in Austin, Texas, where composting and recycling at my office in or at Oracle was the norm.
Everyone did it.
And I moved here to Denver and I was so excited because I bought my home and I moved here to be closer to my family.
And I bought my home and I had the opportunity to participate alongside my cousins with the composting collection program.
And it completely transformed my entire train of thought.
And this is what I want to dive into is that this is so important because this is a concept of consciousness.
This is a concept of touching something and thinking about what you consume and where it goes.
So, excuse me.
So I've spent an incredible amount of my personal time, focus, and resources on this initiative.
I actually got involved when I saw Brian Loma at the uh City Park Jazz Festival, I think in 2021 or 2022, a long time ago.
And he was passing around, or he was asking to collect signatures for this initiative.
And I thought that was so cool.
It was the first time that I actually had that type of engagement.
Uh one night following that, and I woke up in a big sweat because I thought that I missed the vote.
And I literally was like balling my eyes out because I thought I didn't show up for the vote to enact the Waste No More initiative.
And so I actually reached out to Brian and I started to get involved with the campaign.
So that was in about 2021 or 2022.
And then we started actively ramping up the campaign again.
And it opened the doors, not only for the consciousness of composting, but to get involved in the community.
And so many of you here may have actually seen me throughout the community, whether it's in you know shopping on Tennyson or other areas of the north side where I live, but you also might have seen my face on social media, or you maybe have seen my face at community events.
And it's all because I got involved because I joined the community of people who cares about making this happen.
So it makes me so excited to see that Denver can be a lead can be leaders, and I'm please asking, please support this amendment.
All the amendments next week, please support this.
Next up, we have Michael Hughes.
Michael.
Next up we have Nicole Shayet Nabler.
Nicole.
Hi, um, I'm Nicole Shaynebler.
I'm in District 9.
Um I am an organizer with the Sunrise Movement.
I've been a Denver resident for eight years.
I voted in every election, including the one all the way back in November 2022 when 70% of my fellow Denverites and I passed the Waste No More ordinance.
I voted yes, and I expect my government will uphold the will of the people and enforce waste no more.
Especially with 70% of the vote, I should not have to be here today.
I've already voted to pass waste no more.
I've already made my voice heard, but because my city council either forgot that their job is to support the will of their voters, or because you're being lobbied by wealthy elites and the restaurant association who want city council to undermine the will of the voters by wasting by not enforcing waste no more, I am here.
We have made ourselves very clear, and we have done our jobs as citizens by voting in 2022.
We have made ourselves redundantly clear again today.
Denver voters want waste no more.
We want it enforced, and as city council, it's your job to enforce it.
By not enforcing it, you're ignoring the will of the people.
You're spitting on all of their votes, and you're showing that the Denver City Council cannot be trusted to fulfill your duties by not enforcing waste no more.
You're undermining democracy.
So I encourage you to enforce waste no more now.
Thank you.
Next up we have uh Michael Hughes.
Madam, thank you.
Can you clear the queue and put, yeah, thank you?
Go ahead, Michael.
Sorry, I couldn't get my uh mic settings set up there on Zoom.
Um thank you for the opportunity to speak.
Um, I understand the plight of small businesses and uh what has happened with rising taxes, uh, cost of labor, and all of the changes that have happened with construction in some of our bus uh big business zones in Denver.
Um with that said, I think we're asking a small change in precedence uh that can move society forward and again set Denver aside as a leader among cities of our size in being able to say, hey, we have the ability, we have the knowledge to know how to properly sort our waste.
We have beautiful mountains, waterfalls, forests that are just on the outside of our city.
We care about those things, and I like 190,000 other voters.
Uh, when I go out to hike, I make sure to follow the approach of leave no trace.
I believe in leaving places better than I found it.
I think that we're asking a very small task of of individuals, and it's somewhat insulting to think that restaurant owners and the employees of these restaurants, whether they're large or small, cannot uh innovate and find ways uh to be able to compost and meet the demands of what the people voted for.
So as a citizen of district one, uh someone who believes in composting, I learned to do it when I was young.
I found ways to continue doing it when I lived in an apartment and didn't have access.
I would keep compost in my freezer and find uh bins to be able to drop it into.
Um I think there's ways we can innovate.
People are always resilient.
We're going to find ways to um do these things, but uh first and foremost, and most importantly, 70% of the voters voted yes on this.
There's a precedent involved in this.
I've been out petitioning before, not for waste no more.
Um, I supported this cause, but for those petitioners who are out there spending their time and energy doing what our pro our political process encourages them to do as citizens, we should be listening to that and not overruling um the will of the people.
Um, I'll give back the time.
I know it's late.
I thank you.
And uh again, uh I see the the uh task at hand here, but our generation and the ones below us, we we want uh composting.
We voted yes for it and and want that in our futures.
Thank you.
Next up we have Jesse Paris.
Last one of the night.
Uh good evening, members of Denver City Council.
My name is Justin Bashaw Pierce, and I'm representing Black Star Action Movement for Self-Defense.
Positive community for self-separation, as well as the Unity Party of Colorado, the Northeast Denver Residence Council frontline black mills, the back of the spirits.
The revolutionary agenda and our result.
I am in full support for the snow more.
I too voted in favor of this.
I was part of that 70%.
I also saw the one Brian uh handed it to me in 2022.
2021 2022.
I can vote for Antifoya.
He's been doing this work for two decades.
Um, like the Senate.
Shout out to Broad Aloma, shout out to Ina Tafoya.
Shout out to Noah.
Y'all have been doing this work for a long time.
Um, I too have been uh doing common public work.
I ran a party for four years or park hill.
Composting at the garden.
We did compost uh building the distance to it.
And doing composting for quite two plus three years.
Um so it's not that difficult.
And as far as these uh vendors, um all you gotta do is make sure you have a recycling bin, and a compound, not rocket size.
It'll be that difficult to implement.
Does this council have the will to actually do it all the people?
I've been asking that for over a decade now.
I've yet to see it.
So maybe you can change my mind tonight for the council and actually implement what the people wants.
That would be a nice refreshing.
If you're trying to meet the climate goals, that's set forth over the years, the 2030 climate goal, limit the carbon footprint preaching about, which is not actually implementing.
So we would have to be speaking for the speakers before we have already said.
But like previously, but I'll be uh I'd say it almost bride, but uh restaurant associations to not go with this.
All the world people, 70% of the voters wanted this in 2022.
I was one of them, and it's all time, I shall implement this.
Thank you.
Thank you, Jesse.
Next up we have Richard Wagner.
Hey, good evening.
Um Rich Wagner, um, I'm a 28-year residence um of Denver in Sunnyside neighborhood.
Um, my second neighborhood, though, is the Rare neighborhood where I was a professor of meteorology climate climatologist um at Metro State.
Um, so thanks for the call out to Aurora campus.
Um, at Aurora campus, um, we had a little problem with the compost that we had a compost system set up, and then the rules changed, and uh we couldn't put napkins and things in there.
Um we solved it by um having our whole own compost system there.
Um, there are solutions out there.
Um but I you know I'm I also um I I enjoy the the uh retirement um tribute and I'm also retired after 28 years and and kind of see my next chapter now is still educating and um and thinking about what are the solutions for the climate crisis.
This is uh a serious thing.
I know this as an atmospheric scientist.
Um I also know that um when we look at um composting in particular, this is what excites me because um that we know that um we know that methane um well, whatever we do for methane emissions, that's what we're doing for next decade.
What we're doing for carbon, carbon dioxide.
Well, we're really looking trying to avoid the worst things 2050 and beyond.
That's really what our goal is.
But this is our opportunity.
We can think of that methane is really the low-hanging fruit, the low-hanging vegetables, uh low-hanging bone, all of this stuff that's going to go into the landfill.
Um I'm proud to live in in Denver.
Love working with all the nonprofits working on this space.
Um I'm part of accelerate neighborhood climate action.
I think uh two or three of you have been to our climate forums.
Um work with Bronworth Denver, Green Latinos.
The list goes on and on.
Um, when we look at at food waste, um, the uh not waste no more, but uh we don't waste uh Denver food rescue.
Uh someone mentioned let's uh avoid that food waste, agricultural waste in the first place.
Composting is the last thing we have to do, but we have to do it, we have to act.
Thank you.
Thank you.
That concludes our speakers.
Do we have any questions from council members on zero six to eight as amended?
All right.
Public hearing is closed.
Comments by members of council on council bill 0628 as amended.
Councilmember Perry, start us off.
Yeah, thanks.
I was fast on the draw this evening.
Um, so yeah, I just first of all I wanted to say that I still have my yes on waste no more sign at my house, and mine was printed on the back of a sign from some other initiative, um, which I thought was just very perfect.
Yep, there you go.
Oh, they all are.
Okay, fine.
Mine isn't special.
But I love my sign, um, and I've kept it all this time, and now I'm really mad that I didn't bring in here tonight because I could have told my husband, see, there's a reason that I've been keeping this sign for all these years.
Um, anyway, I have been a supporter of this from the beginning as well, and I'm really happy to have been able to see it through in this way.
I wanted to pick up on um one thread from one of the um speakers just now, I think maybe it was Mr.
Hughes, um, talking about taking it upon himself to bring compost home from work and put it in his freezer.
Um, and that reminded me of a comment um Brian Loma made to me during this process that was sort of like don't overestimate how many um food service workers go to great lengths and personal effort and expense to divert this waste from their workplaces on their own.
Um, and that in turn reminded me of my mom who has worked for the last couple years, although she she just um retired.
This is her first school year not doing this um this job.
She was a children's librarian, and then she was a recess aide um at lunch at a um elementary school um down in Phoenix, Arizona, and she um I'm getting her in trouble here because I think this is against federal law, but trust that they're not listening.
Um she would take all of the leftover school lunch food every day, and she had a whole little route that she would drive between um encampments and you know, church fridges, and and she would like get all the extra little fruit cups and everything out into community every day.
Um, so when Brian said that, it just um it just reminded me that uh my mom does that too.
And I think um this is the kind of thing that that is an example of um government nudging all of us to be better, right?
Like we know people are not gonna get around to doing this on their own necessarily.
Um we know that some people may need an exemption, that's fine.
Um, but it is time for Denver to just make this the norm and make this something that's expected of you if you're gonna operate in the city.
So um it's been a long time coming.
Uh we are uh, you know, behind where we should be, um, but pretty happy that we're here today and really really grateful to you guys that um pounded the pavement and gathered signatures and knocked the doors and did all of that work because um look, you did it.
Here we are.
Thank you so much.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Council Pro Time Romero Campbell.
Uh thank you, madam president.
I I think, and thank you for the comments and hopefully nobody's listening at 11 30 at night for that particular um moment.
Uh I think one of the things that I just want to bring it back and ground it in because I also voted for it.
I was one of those 70% of the people in Denver.
Um, and who would have thought that I'd be sitting here so many years later and actually voting on it to be implemented.
Um, one of the things that I think we forget is that Denver, we are so unique, and the detail that we talk about and have considered, and you know, the discussion, the discourse, and all of these pieces are part of what our democracy is about, and part of what I think makes this conversation so robust, right?
Devil's in the details, and we figure it out, we we, you know, you go through and and you have a robust discussion.
Um, but the fact that we're having the discussion, I think, is something not to be lost.
Um, on anybody in this room or anybody on this dais of um trying to be very thoughtful about what it looks like in implementation.
Um, and again, Denver's such a unique place.
We are having this conversation.
There is an initiative that passed a uh uh citizen-led ballot initiative that passed.
And so, I mean, I'm just very proud, and I don't think there's anybody up here, or I'll speak for myself.
I think that we all care deeply.
We all, you know uh have our ways, and what we've been doing for a number of years, not only composting but recycling and encouraging others to do the same.
Um the the fact that we get to do this or that we talk about this and that we have it in Denver is something that I think, you know, to your credit to those who are sitting here, to those who have worked on this initiative.
It's a very powerful thing.
And I think for the students that have been mentioned um previously, I do think that this is something that will be valuable.
I didn't vote yes on all of the amendments, but it doesn't mean that I'm not in support of having this move forward.
Um I do like the changes that have been um implemented or that have been suggested to be able to have check-ins.
I think it's the three-year check-in.
Um, I'm sorry, it's late, the exact language, but you know, to be able to look at it in every three years.
That is what I think we will have an opportunity to say what's working, what's not working, what do we need to tweak, how do we make changes, what are the improvements that are there, how do we start pilots, how do we move um the overall initiative forward.
Um so I've been relatively quiet on you know on this issue, um, but I know that it is something that is a value to me.
It's a value to um folks in my community as well.
I think there are challenges that we're gonna have to work through.
Um I think the small business challenge and making sure that people are able to, if needed, uh to have those exam exemptions, they need to be able to know how to navigate that, as we do with any, you know, uh with any citizen with any business being able to navigate within the city.
Um, so for that, I'm gonna be a yes on this tonight.
Um, and I just want to thank you all for staying and for the thoughtful work and collaboration.
I know it's not easy.
A task force that's worked for the last couple of years, um, amendments that came forward, um, and for you know, for CASER and I'm not gonna remember all the groups that were part of it, for excise and licensing, arts and venues, the mayor's office.
Um, I think overall, it is definitely something that um that as Denverites, we we have a whole different level of conversation.
They're not having the same conversation in other cities, um, unfortunately, in other places, not only in our state, but around the country.
And so I think sometimes we forget how far along we are in this conversation about sustainability.
Um, and so I just want to ground it back in that.
But I do appreciate all the work that you've done.
Um, and it's countless hours and thinking through and very thoughtful um ways to find um components that come together and work and that work for everyone.
Um, and I do expect it might be a little bumpy, but I think we're gonna be able to figure it out.
So um for that I'm gonna be a yes tonight.
Thank you.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Heinz.
Thank you, Madam President.
Um I uh feel so honored to have been part of the Waste No More Task Force.
Um I feel honored that um I have a uh sticker on my um on my door that um I was part of the certified green uh program.
I that actually I got that within 30 days of uh of taking office in 2019.
So um that was one of my priorities is uh because we could I mean we certainly um are damaging our own environment by not uh taking action, but we're also damaging the environment of our kids and our grandkids and uh and generations that come after us.
So um for me the generations that are here may not get the same quality of life um and uh and access to our planet that I got um as a uh as a kid growing up in rural Texas next to four national forests and 120 foot pine trees.
Um I do want to uh because of a couple comments that were uh made by uh members, um I I do want to talk about the order of events.
Um, you know, we passed uh the people um passed the Waste No More ordinance in 2022.
Um so what we're considering tonight is not whether waste no more is a thing or not a thing, it is should we factor in a whole layer of additional conversation uh into waste no more, a lot of that implementation layer into waste no more, or do we leave it as the citizens passed it um in 2022?
And so um I know that some people were concerned about uh voting for the um the ordinance itself um uh because of uh because of the way the amendments went by not voting for the ordinance you would be uh continuing with waste no more as the voters uh passed it exactly.
So um so voting no is not saying we're not going to do waste no more.
It is um do we want plain vanilla waste no more, or do we want the extra um year and a half, two-year, sorry, three years of stakeholder engagement.
And I think the answer is to incorporate that additional stakeholder engagement.
So I will also be voting yes.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you, Councilmember Flynn.
Thank Madam President, and thank you for Councilman Heinz for the introducing the topic that I wanted to talk about, because someone mentioned it during the public comment or public testimony.
It is common and usual for uh particularly for an initiated ordinance, a citizen initiated ordinance to go through a process.
Sometimes they're long, like this one is, sometimes they're not so long, but I can't think of very many citizen initiatives other than say some of the sales tax uh measures that passed that did not go through some kind of rewriting or stakeholdering, uh, magic mushrooms.
Uh you know, the the sidewalk fee.
I think passed the same same election as Waste No More.
Uh we just implemented that this year after a lengthy uh stakeholder process.
Green roofs, the green roofs initiative uh after the task force, the final product came out looking nothing like what was on the ballot because sometimes what what folks uh write in their living rooms just doesn't work in the civic structure that we have.
But one great example I can think of of cooperation was the uh uh fair elections fund, where the initiative got enough signatures to get on the ballot, but because it was delayed a year, it would have wreaked havoc on the 2019 elections.
It could not possibly have been implemented.
So we had to go to the we went to the uh the initiative uh committee, the the citizens, and we negotiated with two of them, and we literally rewrote the entire thing so that it would actually work within the city's processes.
So that's what this was about.
It was it was simply about trying to make it work uh better for for all the individuals uh who are involved and for the city as a whole.
So uh I just want that to be to be known that this is pretty normal.
Not normal to take three years.
Um, I also uh I'm gonna vote no uh because of the last amendment, which I think is being uh being passed, which I think is very, very unfair to uh some businesses that are we're end up we're gonna end up losing them uh because of it, and so I'm gonna vote no on the on the amended bill itself.
Uh but I just wanted folks to know that it is normal to go through this.
Thank you, Madam President.
Thank you.
Councilmember Torres.
Thank you, Madam President.
Uh, just a quick note.
I will also be a yes tonight, but I would like um some conversation both for me to have with my district because I my West Cox bid, for example, asked me to vote um uh in favor of the original draft and not the amendments.
Um, so I would like to go back to them and make sure that um uh they understand what's uh being proposed, uh, but also with the administration on uh potentially, and this is you know selfishly from my lens and council district three, looking at um major infrastructure corridors, perhaps those that already qualify for biofund or um uh support because of uh some of the city infrastructure projects like bond projects uh being able to en masse qualify uh for an exemption uh for the years that that construction might be um undergo underway.
So um hope to come back with some more information about those items next week, but I'll be a yes tonight.
Thank you.
Thank you, Councilmember Watson.
Uh thank you, Council President.
Uh I also will be a yes tonight.
Um I am I still are going to need a lot more information um between now and next week, and I want to be very clear.
Um my partial reading of any of these amendments was um uh a 15-minute discussion.
Um that's that was a difficulty uh tonight, especially the final um uh change um to the original amended position that brought was brought forward by the administration.
Um I am I'm still concerned with that.
Um, and um I look forward to sitting with the sponsors and with the administration um prior to next week's vote.
Um I also voted for Waste No More.
My husband and I take bones out of uh restaurants that we don't think they're going to compost.
Um we hike, bike, and um camp pretty much everywhere across this state and any of the other western states, and we always carry out our stuff.
We are uh super composters, super recyclers.
Um we work with our the restaurants, at least I do as a city council member throughout district nine, but I am saying very clearly um it is not the restaurant association that spoke with me or that I've spoken with over this this time, it is small restaurants that are asking us to stop putting more regulations at on them to give them the opportunity to survive, and those who are wanting to opt in while 90 percent or whatever the number is of larger restaurants and businesses that can do this with very little impact and would actually diversion numbers are going to reduce our carbon footprint, allowing them to take the lead and allowing us to work with restaurants in District 9 and other places.
This is my struggle, and I'm being very clear.
So, whether folks um think that is a um important or not, I am saying there are folks in uh communities that we serve that feel very differently um as to the ease of having that executed in those small businesses.
So I'll be a yes tonight.
Thank you, Councilmember Watson.
Um I'll be a yes tonight because it's introducing everything.
Um just want you all to know I met Ian Tefoye.
We graduated the same class.
He and I held our first sustainability um event at Metro.
We were both um part of the political science department.
Every solstice we host a zero waste party, and I will say it is hard.
I mean, it is hard at my mom's house now that Denver does not compost plates and napkins and things.
It is like my mom's 82, and we have to do hours and hours and hours of dishes.
And I asked my mom one time this last Christmas.
I said, Mom, do you think the amount of water and things that we're using equal what our efforts are?
And she said, I hope so.
And so I have a composter.
I don't compost with the city because I have a composter.
I have my fan, the one who goes to Christmas parties and takes all the tissue paper and all the wrapping paper and all the bags and takes them home and recycles them.
I don't my kids make fun of me.
Um, so and at the same time, I have to listen to my small local businesses.
Same as Councilmember Watson.
I was literally at an event, I think like three weeks ago with five, six local restaurants on 38th Avenue, and this was their main concern.
It really is.
I have tons of emails in my inbox from the small local businesses in Council District One that are concerned about this, and I think that there has to be some some way where we can get both.
We can do sustainability and support our small local businesses.
I will say my sister Kendra just left.
Um she was on the board at Naropa University.
She has her degree, her master's in environmental sustainability, and so she teaches a class called environmental justice at Naropa University.
You can look her up, Professor Sandoval.
She teaches this for a living.
So I have eat, breathed, and drank this.
She's my older sister of eight years, so I have learned more about this than you all would want to know.
And at the same time, my sister always and I always agree.
We have to figure out how to do this and support our small local businesses.
And sometimes when I haven't drunk enough coffee, I take their comp their grounds and I put it in my composter.
Because if anyone knows you need a good, you need good brown mixture.
You can't just have greens.
You have to have, I have wood in a chimenea.
Guess what?
You have to put the wood in there too because it helps break down the composting.
So and I have a garden, so I put all my stuff in the garden.
So just want you all to know that just because people vote up here on a certain way, it doesn't mean that we're against sustainability.
It doesn't mean we're against your work.
It doesn't mean that we don't actively participate, that I haven't gone around, and my whole husband's whole family calls me the biggest tree hugger that they know.
I buy most of my clothes at recycled stores.
I buy most of my clothes at boutiques.
So the segunda is where I shop.
My kids know that.
I love secondhand.
Um, I think that there's a joke that Latina has made up composting and recycling because we know how to re-gift and redo everything.
So there's a whole entire Instagram page on that.
So tonight I will be a yes, but with this as well, I will also need to have some conversations because getting these amendments today on a Monday um when I have charter and budget review policy and a full day is super challenging.
You do not understand how they get impacted.
Um, so um, just saying that I might not be a yes next week, just putting it out there.
Um Councilmember Gonzalez Gutierrez.
That's okay.
Um, Madam President, I could wait to till next week.
Okay, perfect.
Madam Secretary, roll call on or Council Bill 0628.
Council members Gonzalez Gutierrez.
All right, Doris.
I Albitris.
Aye.
Flynn.
Gilmore.
Heinz.
Cashman, Lewis.
Aye.
Harity.
Aye.
Romera Campbell.
Aye.
Sawyer.
No.
Watson.
Aye.
Madam President Sandoval.
Aye.
Madam Secretary, close voting, not the results.
11 ayes.
11 ayes.
Council Bill 0628 as amended has been ordered published.
On Monday, September 15th, 2025, Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 25 1222, approving the rock drill urban redevelopment plan, the creation of the urban rock.
Of the rock drill, urban redevelopment area, and the rock drill property tax increment area and sales tax increment area.
And on Monday, October 6, 2025, Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 251186.
Changing the zoning classification for 815th Street in the Central Business District.
Any protests against Council Bill's 1186 must be filed with the council offices no later than noon on Monday, September 29th, 2025.
There being no further business before this body, this meeting is adjourned.
Discussion Breakdown
Summary
Denver City Council Regular Meeting
The Denver City Council convened on Monday, September 8, 2025, for a lengthy session featuring significant announcements, public hearings, and contentious votes. The meeting included proclamations honoring public servants and awareness campaigns, the introduction of numerous bills and resolutions, and extended debates on a police collective bargaining agreement, a modified urban redevelopment plan, and amendments to the citizen-initiated 'Waste No More' recycling and composting ordinance. Key outcomes included the adoption of the police contract, approval of a revised development plan, and the advancement of the amended waste ordinance for final consideration.
Council Announcements & Proclamations
- Community Events: Members announced various district events, including park cleanups, neighborhood workshops, a discussion on the delayed Mestizo-Curtis Park pool, and a 'budget book club' series.
- Crossing Guard Proclamation: The council adopted a proclamation honoring Denver Public Schools crossing guards as frontline workers and community heroes. Several guards accepted the proclamation and shared their experiences.
- Blood Cancer Awareness Month: The council adopted a proclamation recognizing September as National Blood Cancer Awareness Month. Councilmembers Watson and Torres shared personal stories of family members affected by blood cancers.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Youth Engagement: A high school senior invited council members to a Mayor's Youth Commission dinner to discuss partnership.
- Policy Advocacy: Speakers urged council action on international issues (Palestine/Gaza genocide), local issues (homeless families, support for laid-off city workers), and called for reparations for Foundational Black Americans.
- Event Promotion: A speaker promoted a political forum featuring Zohran Mamdani.
- Spiritual Testimony: One speaker provided religious commentary on current events.
Discussion Items
- Police Collective Bargaining Agreement (Resolution 1216): A lengthy and heated debate preceded the vote on a three-year contract with the Denver Police Protective Association.
- Positions in Favor (9 votes): Supporters (including Watson, Torres, Cashman, Sawyer, Sandoval) argued the agreement was negotiated in good faith, that the council was involved in the process, and that consistency with other CBAs was important. They emphasized support for police officers while acknowledging the need for accountability.
- Positions Opposed (4 votes): Opponents (Gilmore, Gonzalez Gutierrez, Lewis, Parity) cited the city's budget shortfall, recent layoffs of other city employees, a lack of equity, and concerns about police misconduct and costly settlements. Councilmember Gilmore gave an extensive speech linking the vote to values of community investment over policing.
- 27th & Larimer Urban Redevelopment Plan (Bill 1137): The council considered an amended plan for a Five Points area, shifting from a mixed-use project with housing to a phased approach starting with retail, grocery, and adaptive reuse due to unfavorable market conditions.
- Proponent Position: DURA executive director Tracy Huggins and the developer (Edens) argued the change was necessary to begin revitalization, eliminate blight, and deliver community benefits (including a future housing commitment) with a reduced TIFF request.
- Community & Council Discussion: The Curtis Park RNO president expressed support based on community engagement. Councilmembers discussed the removal of housing, the rationale for continued tax incentives, and protections against displacement. The plan passed 10-3.
- Waste No More Implementing Ordinance (Bill 0628): The council debated a series of amendments to the administration's proposed rules for the voter-approved recycling and composting ordinance.
- Amendment Debates:
- Phase-In for Construction/Demolition: Reduced the square footage thresholds for compliance after a 10-year phase-in period. Passed 11-2.
- Food Producer Requirements: Added posting/training rules and narrowed exemptions for food banks. Passed 8-5.
- Event Thresholds: Slightly lowered attendee thresholds for recycling/composting requirements at permitted events. Passed 7-6.
- Small Restaurant Exemption: Removed a blanket exemption for restaurants with under $2M revenue and under 25 employees, leaving a case-by-case hardship exemption. Passed 7-6 after extensive debate about regulatory burden, voter intent, and small business viability.
- Public Support: Multiple proponents, including original petitioners and waste haulers, testified in strong support of the amendments and the ordinance, urging council to uphold the 70% voter mandate for comprehensive waste diversion.
- Amendment Debates:
Key Outcomes
- Votes on Major Items:
- Police CBA (Resolution 1216): Adopted 9-4 (Ayes: Alvidrez, Flynn, Heinz, Cashman, Romero Campbell, Sawyer, Torres, Watson, Sandoval. Nays: Gilmore, Gonzalez Gutierrez, Lewis, Parity).
- 27th & Larimer URA Amendment (Bill 1137): Passed 10-3 on final passage.
- Waste No More Ordinance (Bill 0628): Ordered published as amended 11-2 (Nays: Flynn, Sawyer). It will be up for final passage on September 15, 2025.
- Other Legislative Actions:
- Approved a series of consent items, including resolutions for the Globeville Library/Affordable Housing project (adopted in a block 12-0 with one abstention).
- Postponed bills 1029 (Denver Health WIC agreement) and 1079 (39th Avenue development) to September 15, 2025.
- Adopted proclamations honoring retiring city executives Penny May (Denver International Airport) and Andrea Albo (moving to SCFD).
- Approved a rezoning at 2501 S. High Street (Bill 1070).
- Directives & Next Steps: The amended Waste No More ordinance moves to a final vote. Public hearings are scheduled for September 15th (Rock Drill URA) and October 6th (815th Street rezoning).
Meeting Transcript
It's time for the weekly general session of your Denver City Council. Tonight's coverage of Denver City Council starts now. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for taking the time to join us for the Denver City Council's meeting. Tonight, today is Monday, September 8th, 2025. Tonight's meeting is being interpreted into Spanish. Sam, would you please introduce yourself and let our viewers know how to enable translation on their devices? Of course. Yes. Thank you for having us. Hello, everyone. My name is Sam Guzumano with the CLC. And along with my colleague Jasmine, we'll be interpreting today's meeting into Spanish. Please allow me a quick minute while I give instructions in Spanish on how to access interpretation. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Sam. Welcome to the Denver City Council meeting of Monday, September 8th, 2025. Council members, please join Councilmember Sawyer in the Pledge of Allegiance. And to the Republic for which it stands. Underground indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Council members, please join Councilmember Sawyer as they lead us in the Denver City Council land acknowledgement. The Denver City Council honors and acknowledges that the land on which we reside is the traditional territory of the Ute, Cheyenne, and Arapahoe peoples. We also recognize that government academic and cultural institutions were founded upon and continue to enact exclusions and erasures of indigenous peoples. May this acknowledgement demonstrate a commitment to working to dismantle ongoing legacies of oppression and inequities. Cashman. Approval of the minutes. Are there any corrections to the minutes of August 25th? Seeing none. Councilmember Sawyer. Thanks, Madam President. It's that time of year again, so twice a year. This fall it's going to be Sunday, the 28th of September. Meet us at 8 30 AM at Montclair Rec Center. Um you'll pick up supplies, get some breakfast, and then head out to clean our parks and repaint some of our bus stops. So please come and join us. There's a sign up genius. You can find it on our social media. Um, please uh feel free to come and join us. We'd look forward to having everybody. I would say last year we calculated out we had about over 400 volunteer hours um done by volunteers from District 5 in our community to keep our parks and our bus stops looking fresh. And as we know, people when they feel uh at feel see something that is clean and safe, they actually feel safer. It can impact the way that they experience the environment. So excited to participate in that. Please come and join us. Thanks, Senator President. Thank you. Councilmember Heinz. Thank you, Madam President. Excuse me. Thank you, Madam President. Or blue, thank you, Madam President.