Hey, Denver, 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 happy holidays.

Thank you for taking the time to join us for Denver City Council's meeting.

Today is Monday, December 22, 2025.

Tonight's bean 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. My name is Sam Guzman with the CLC, joining you virtually through Zoom.

and along with my colleague, Jasmine, we will be interpreting today's meeting into Spanish.

Please allow me a quick minute while I give instructions in Spanish on how to access interpretation.

Buenas tardes a todos. Mi nombre es Samuel Guzmán con la CLC.

Y juntamente con mi colega, Jasmine, estaremos interpretando la reunión de hoy al español.

Si se une con nosotros virtualmente a través de Zoom,

busque en su pantalla un icono de globo que dice Interpretación.

oprime ese botón y de ahí seleccione la opción de escuchar en español.

Si se une con nosotros presencialmente y está ahorita en la cámara,

por favor busquese al fondo hacia la derecha

y encontrará un asistente que le podrá dar audífonos para escuchar en español.

Muchas gracias and thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Sam.

Thank you for all your service this over this past year.

We really appreciate it.

Welcome to the Denver City Council meeting on Monday, December 22, 2025.

Council members, please join Council Pro Tem Romero Campbell in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Council members, please join Council Pro Tem Romero-Campbell 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 Arapaho peoples.

We also recognize the 48 contemporary tribal nations that are historically tied to the

lands that make up the state of Colorado.

We honor elders past, present, and future, and those who have stewarded this land throughout

generations.

We also recognize that government, academic, and cultural institutions were found 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 and recognize the current and future contributions of Indigenous

communities in Denver.

Thank you.

Madam Secretary, roll call.

members Gilmore, Hines, here, Sawyer, here, Torres, here, Albitrez, here, Flynn, here,

Gonzalez Gutierrez, here, Cashman, here, Lewis, present, Parody, here, Romero Campo, here,

Watson?

Here.

Madam President Sandoval?

Here.

Twelve members present.

There are twelve members present.

Council has a quorum.

Approval of the minutes.

Are there any corrections to the minutes of December 15th?

Seeing none, the minutes sound approved.

Council announcements.

Are there any council announcements this afternoon from members?

Council Member Flynn?

Thank you, Madam President.

I wanted to take this meeting to make another historical note that today is the final meeting in the chamber here before we start a necessary accessibility renovations.

Probably the first renovation since 1970 when the council expanded to nine members, from nine to 13 members.

When we were nine members, we used to have our desks up against that wall and all the pews faced that way.

And so while we meet in the Parr-Widener room downstairs until at least June, I want to make note of the historical point in time where we're at.

127 individuals served in this chamber.

Since the very first meeting when the city and county building opened, the first city council meeting in this room was February 6, 1933.

Those 127 people, 80 of them, have served since the 1971 expansion to 13 members.

I know that these desks will be looking for a home.

We are trying to find suitable places for them.

Councilman Cashman's desk, we've learned through photographs of the time,

was the last desk that was used by Councilman Elvin Caldwell,

who was the first black member of the Denver City Council.

And so we're trying to see if the Blair Caldwell African American Research Library

would like to have this on display.

We're looking for homes for some of the other desks as well.

I'd hate to see them just sit in a bin in a room gathering dust for the rest of time.

I know that I don't presume to speak for my colleagues, but I think I can say that every one of us is deeply honored

by the role that the voters gave us to sit in this room for all the time that we have, whether it's four, eight or 12 years.

And so, Madam President, I just want to make note of that moment. Thank you.

Thank you. I was going to say something similar, but you did it much better.

Councilmember Alvarez.

Thank you, Council President.

I just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge that we had a tragic passing at the airport last week on Thursday.

I was able to connect with United Airlines today about the individual that passed away,

and OSHA and United are taking this matter very seriously and looking into it.

It's always a sad day to lose a worker.

My background is construction, and I remember the times where people were hurt,

and I remember when I was a little girl and the airport was being built and someone died.

My dad was working at the airport, and so it is a devastating loss.

Everyone should come home from work, and that's why OSHA exists.

I just wanted to acknowledge that.

Thank you, Council President.

Thank you.

Council President Romero-Campbell.

I just wanted to also let the residents of District 4 know that the library, Ross University Hills Library, has officially closed for renovations.

We're super excited about that, but for your library services, please go to denverpubliclibraries.org forward slash southeast,

and you will get a whole schedule of where, what programs are there and available, the bookmobile schedule, et cetera.

Both the Hampton Library and Ross University Hills is closed, but you still can go to any library in the city and our neighboring jurisdictions.

So thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Councilwoman Lewis.

Thank you. I just wanted to announce that my first set of office hours in 2026 will be held on January 30th.

That's a Saturday, as well as our town hall. More details to come. Thank you.

Thank you. And if anyone is looking for any last minute holiday gifts in Northwest Denver,

we have some great retail locations. We have Tennyson Street from 38th to 44th. We have 32nd

Avenue on Lowell. We have 38th and we have Platte Street where I have my office. I was just down

there this morning and it is rocking and rolling. And remember after the holidays, if you'd like to

recycle your Christmas tree, it turns into free mulch for the residents of Denver in the spring.

So you can learn more, but the places to drop off, I'm going to only say the ones in Northwest

Denver. We have a Sloan's Lake drop-off date, January 3rd, 10th, and 17th. Same place where

you can take your leaves for anyone in Northwest Denver, but please recycle your Christmas tree.

It turns into that wonderful mulch. And yes, for those who are watching,

you won't see us again here in these chambers until June

and it will look completely different.

Even where you sit will look completely different.

That desk will be completely different.

So have some patience with us while we're under construction

and we take refuge in the PAR Widener

and thank you to the mayor's staff and the mayor's office

for letting us use the PAR Widener coming up in January.

Seeing no other council members in the queue, there are no presentations, there are no communications, there are no proclamations.

Madam Secretary, please read the bills for introduction.

From the Community Planning and Housing Committee 25-2051, a bill for an ordinance designating 1407 East 11th Avenue as a structure for preservation.

From the Finance and Business Committee 25-2034, a bill for an ordinance amending Article 2 of Chapter 6 to repeal the sunset date for entertainment districts.

And from the Governance and Intergovernmental Relations Committee 25-2036, a bill for an ordinance amending Chapter 13 and Chapter 15 of the revised Municipal Code and renaming the Office of Legislative Services to the City Council Central Office.

Thank you very much.

and I'd like to officially welcome Councilwoman Gilmore to the meeting.

Council members, this is your last opportunity to call out an item.

Council Pro Tem Romero Campbell, will you please make the motions for us this evening?

Yes, Council President Sandoval.

Thank you. Now I'll do a recap.

Under resolutions, Council Resolution 1795 has been called out for postponement

pursuant to Rule 3.6 by Council Member Alvarez.

Council Resolution 2017 has been called out for questions by Councilmember Lewis,

and Council Resolution 1583 has been called out for a vote by Councilmember Lewis.

Under bills for introduction, no items have been called out.

Under bills for final consideration,

Council Bill 2009 has been called out for a vote by Councilmember Lewis,

and Council Bills 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850 have been called out for a vote by Councilmember Lewis.

Under pending, no items have been called out.

Madam Secretary, please put the first item on our screens.

Council Resolution 1795, a resolution approving a proposed contract between the City and County of Denver

and the Colorado Village Collaborative for supporting programming and operations

at the La Paz Micro Community in Council District 7.

Council Member Albedrez, what would you like to do with Council Resolution 1795?

Thank you, Council President.

Pursuant to Rule 3.6, I would like to postpone this item to the next regular

Council meeting on Monday, January 5th.

No motion is required.

Council Resolution 1795 has been postponed to the next Council meeting on Monday,

January 5th, 2026.

Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screen.

Council Resolution 2017, a resolution approving a proposed third amendatory agreement between the City and County of Denver and CH2M Hill Engineers, Inc.

to provide continuing program and critical project management services in support of the delivery of the National Western Center.

Council Member Lewis, please go ahead with your questions on Council Resolution 2017.

Thank you.

I did get a briefing on this this morning, but I did have one lingering question.

So the existing contract runs through January 31st, 2027.

And so I'm curious as to why they are requesting this item now instead of closer to the deadline.

Thank you for the question.

Mike Bouchard, Executive Director of the Mayor's Office of the National Western Center.

So, yes, the current contract term goes through, as you mentioned, January 31st, 2027.

We are bringing this now because as a program, we plan on a multi-year timeline.

And the projects that we are currently looking at extend into 2028, 2029, and beyond.

And this contract is one of the critical tools that we have to deliver the program, the projects within the program at the National Western Center.

And by bringing this through now, we can ensure that we have the tools that we need to be able to plan on that time horizon.

Thank you. And then would a delay allow you all to firm up the sources of funding for this contract?

I'm sorry, could you repeat that?

Would a delay allow you all to firm up the sources of funding for this contract?

No, a delay would not.

So the funding sources for the contract, as you mentioned, are not fully defined at this time.

Okay.

And they will become evident as we move through the course of the program.

And we will make the specific allocations of dollars to this contract as the work presents itself over the next few years.

So no, it would not change that in the short term.

And then you and I spoke about the return on investment for the entire project.

Can you speak a bit about that?

Because I did have a chance to quickly go through the documents you sent me regarding the study.

But I wanted to see if you could just speak a bit about the return on investment.

Sure.

So the study you reference is an economic and social impact study for the National Western Center that was procured by the National Western Center Authority, so it was not by NUCO's office.

So I'm not super familiar with this report, but I can say that the sort of bottom line is that the overall economic impact of the campus between 2022 and 2027 is estimated to be at over $3 billion, both locally and regionally.

And that includes construction, GDP during construction, it includes construction jobs, and it includes revenue from events that happen on the campus from the facilities that those construction projects built.

Do you have the return on investment once it's fully built out?

No, we do not have that information yet.

Okay. And then we spoke about the $48 million and that you all projected that number based on, can you talk about that formula a little bit? Thank you.

Sure. So the $48 million, which is the amount being requested in this contract amendment, is a projection of the annual amount that the program has spent on these services to date.

So we took the previous eight years and did the math and are projecting that same amount out for the next five years, which we believe will lead us to largely complete the program as it's currently envisioned.

Great. Thank you. Those are my only questions.

Thank you, Council Member.

Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screen, Council Resolution 1583, a resolution approving a proposed fourth amendatory agreement between the City and County of Denver and the Salvation Army to support shelter operations, as well as provide longer-term support for households to transition into permanent housing.

Council Pro Tem Romero Campbell, would you please put Council Resolution 1583 on the floor for adoption?

I move that Council Resolution 25-1583 be adopted.

It has been moved and seconded.

Questions and comments by members of Council?

Council Member Lewis?

Thank you.

So I'm calling this item off tonight to vote no, which is consistent with my past positions

and reflective of my continuing lack of confidence in this organization.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Resolution 1583.

Council Member Gilmore?

Aye.

Hines?

Aye.

Sawyer?

Aye.

Torres?

Aye.

Alvarez?

Aye.

Flynn?

Aye.

Gonzalez Gutierrez?

Nay.

Cashman?

Aye.

Lewis?

Nay.

Parity?

Nay.

Romero Campbell.

Aye.

Watson.

Aye.

Madam President Sandoval.

Aye.

Madam Secretary, close the vote and announce the results.

Ten ayes.

Ten ayes.

Council Resolution 1583 has been adopted.

Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens.

Council Bill 2009, a bill for an ordinance

amending Denver Revised Municipal Code Section 2 through 428

concerning the proposes and allowed uses of monies in the city disposable back fee fund.

Council Pro Tem Romero-Campbell, would you please put Council Bill 2009 on the floor for final passage?

I move that Council Bill 2009 be placed upon final consideration and do pass.

It has been moved and seconded.

Comments and questions by members of Council?

Council Member Lewis?

Thank you.

So I'm calling this off to vote no, as I did last week when it was on first reading.

And just to reiterate, I do not appreciate the process by which we did this,

and I don't feel comfortable permanently changing the uses of this special revenue fund.

It will be difficult for council to claw back funding in future budget years

if this funding is allocated according to the new uses, and this council cycles off.

It will be difficult for future councils to understand that this use was once different.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I see no other members in the queue.

Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 2009.

Councilmembers Gilmore?

Aye.

Hines?

Aye.

Sawyer?

Aye.

Torres?

Aye.

Albitrez?

Aye.

Flynn?

Aye.

Gonzales Gutierrez?

Nay.

Nay.

Cashman?

Aye.

Lewis?

Nay.

Parody?

Aye.

Romero-Campo?

Aye.

Watson?

Aye.

Madam President Sandoval?

Aye.

Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the result.

11 ayes.

11 ayes.

Council Bill 2009 has passed.

Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens.

Council Bill 1552, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed stadium property agreement

between the City and County of Denver and Denver Real Estate Ventures LLC and Broadway

Station Metropolitan District No. 1.

Council Bill 1553, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed agreement to intergovernmental

agreement.

Sorry, let me start that over.

Council Bill 1553, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed first amendment to the intergovernmental agreement between the city and county of Denver and Broadway Station Metropolitan District 1, amends an intergovernmental agreement 2017 IGA between the city and county of Denver and Broadway Station Metropolitan District 1 in Council District 7.

Council Bill 1554, a bill for an ordinance making a recession from and appropriations in capital improvements and capital maintenance funds.

Council Bill 1580-1850, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed first amendment to international intergovernmental agreement for stadium site project between the city and county of Denver and Broadway Station Metropolitan District 1,

amends the 2025 Intergovernmental Agreement for Stadium Site Project 2025 IGA

between the City and County of Denver and the Broadway Station Metropolitan District 1 in Council District 7.

If there are no objections from members of Council, these items can be considered and voted on in a block.

Are there any objections?

Seeing none, Council Member Lewis, what would you like to do with Council bills

1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850.

Thank you, Council President.

I move to take Council Bills 1552, 251553, 251554, 251850 out of order, postponing consideration

of these items until after the vote on Council Bill 251541 during the 530 session.

It has been moved

Council member, it might die from not having a second

Okay, it has been moved and seconded

Comments by members of council

Council Member Lewis. Thank you. Sorry. I just wanted to be able to vote on these in the block,

but I also had a question for the Department of Finance.

This isn't the question point. This is just moving them until 530. Oh, sorry. Okay. So you

just want to? Yes. Because you want them. Okay. Yeah. Sorry. Madam Secretary, roll call on taking

Council Bills 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850 out of order.

Council Member Gilmore, do you have a question?

Yes, Council President.

I did.

So we're just voting on taking on postponing it, correct?

No questions on the actual bill.

Yes, this is just a motion to taking them out of order.

I'm postponing to 530, correct.

Okay, thank you.

Yep.

Thank you, Councilmember Torres, for catching that.

Madam Secretary, roll call on taking Council Bills 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850 out of order.

Councilmembers Gilmore?

Nay.

Hines?

No.

Sawyer?

No.

Torres?

No.

Alpidrez?

No.

Flynn?

Nay.

Gonzalez Gutierrez?

Nay.

Cashman?

Nay.

Lewis?

Aye.

Parity?

Aye.

Romero Campbell?

Nay.

Watson?

Nay.

Madam President Sandoval?

Nay.

Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results.

Two ayes, 11 nays.

11 nays, Council Bills 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850 have not been taken out of order.

We will now proceed with consideration of Council Bills 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850.

Okay. Council Pro Tem Romero-Campbell, would you please put Council Bill 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850 on the floor for final passage in a block?

Yes. I move that Council Bills 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850 be placed upon final consideration and do pass.

It has been moved and seconded.

Questions? So, Councilmembers, this is when you can ask any questions for the four bills associated with the National Women's Soccer League, 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850. First up in the queue is Councilmember Lewis.

Thank you. I have one question for the Department of Finance.

This shouldn't be too terrible.

I've asked this question, but I just wanted to make sure that we got it on record,

that you all have been super helpful on this point in committee and in briefings that we've had.

And so my question is, will the bond interest used to pay for the stadium improvements have an impact on the long-delayed implementation

to a number of elevate bond projects in Central Park, including the MLK and Central Park intersections?

Nicole Doheny, Chief Financial Officer.

And Councilwoman, the answer to your question is no.

It will have no impact on the delivery of those projects.

Thank you.

That's it.

Thank you.

Councilmember Gilmore.

Thank you, Council President.

I have my first question is, I believe, for Jeff Dolan.

Hi, Jeff. Do you want to introduce yourself?

Great to see you, Council Member. Jeff Dolan, Mayor's Office.

Great. Thank you. So for the public, I appreciate my colleague's question about if the investment in this will impact other projects.

And I wanted to understand a little bit more for my constituents.

And so please remind me and the viewers, how much bond interest did the Elevate bond generate?

Yeah, and I may call a friend from our Department of Finance as well.

But the number I recall, I think I shared with you earlier today, is $64 million in interest.

Is that right?

I think from the email, just for the record, since we're recording this and it's part of the meeting, you in your email this afternoon said $65.4 million in interest was generated by the Elevate bond.

And so for the Rise bond, how much interest has been generated to date?

You could call up Nicole.

You don't have to answer.

That's not your job.

Let's bring up our CFO for this one.

It's better just to go on record so that, because, yeah.

Nicole Doheny, Chief Financial Officer.

RISE is significantly less interest.

I don't have that number with me, but there are no RISE funds or RISE interest implicated in the decisions and these bills today.

Definitely.

I appreciate that, Nicole.

But I do have a follow-up question for you.

So the number of the interest that has been generated from the RISE bond is $21.6 million in interest.

And so I appreciate you all trying to delineate the two different bonds.

But as you're suggesting with these bills, you're wanting to use elevate bond interest savings.

And so a curious development has happened in District 11, where I am finding out that a project that was voted on by the voters for the RISE bond has been significantly reduced.

and $13 million has been allocated for a maintenance shop in District 1,

but only $2.5 million has been allocated for what was supposed to be on the bond package,

the same product. Only now $2.5 million is being allocated for District 11.

And so my question to you, Nicole, is if there was going to be a delta for the District 1 regional maintenance shop and you weren't going to be able to fund District 11's fully,

Why didn't you all take some of those Elevate Bond savings and put it towards that D1 maintenance shop instead of taking it from District 11's maintenance shop?

Thank you, Councilwoman.

So there were $15.8 million in RISE allocated for those two facilities.

The bond team very closely with the Parks Department to scope those two facilities to meet the parks maintenance needs.

Those are internally facing facilities driven by their operations.

I'd be happy for Director Clark to speak a little more about their needs and the sizing of those projects.

Thank you, Joel and Clark, Executive Director of Parks and Recreation.

Good evening, Council.

Those were packaged in a maintenance bundle in RISE.

Again, there's no RISE funding being touched for what you're debating tonight.

The one facility was a regional facility, so it's going to look a lot more like our big regional facilities with all of that.

The one in the far northeast was always a satellite center.

I think some of the confusion here is the department did acquire land in the far northeast for a maintenance shop.

There may be a future need for a larger facility there, but we are building to what we need today.

And what we need today is a satellite office, which significantly reduces drive time in the far northeast.

So that's how that's been scoped.

And that was scoped again long before there was any conversations on these bills or about a soccer stadium.

It's a completely separate issue I'm happy to dive deeper into, but it's not related at all to what you're debating tonight.

Oh, so, but it is, Director Clark, because we're being asked to allocate dollars that were voted on by the Denver voters for bond projects.

And Parks and Rec, in the ballot language, it's very clear.

It does not say in the ballot language that one would be a regional maintenance shop and one would be a satellite maintenance shop.

I've already sent over the ballot language to you and Jeff Dolan and Mayor Johnston this afternoon.

But the question, it is related because if the soccer stadium project is proposing to use elevate interest savings of there was 65.4 million generated for elevate interest savings.

Why did you not take some of that interest savings and put it towards the D1 maintenance shop?

Because only $7.9 million was supposed to be allocated for the RISE bond.

I know that because I was on council when we referred it to the voters.

And so I'm asking, why are you not utilizing those interest savings to backfill, but you're taking from District 11 and you're changing the scopes?

Yeah, if I could just before I pass out, I'll just again say no money has been removed from that bundle.

And we are building what we need today with those regional shop and a satellite shop.

So one follow-up for Clark while he, since he answered that, please.

And then Nicole would love to hear your response on that.

So, Director Clark, you know, I was really happy when there was a response that, you know,

the scope of voted on bond projects cannot be changed.

And so as a follow-up, I guess I would like to hear from a lawyer then why.

If they can't be changed, Parks and Rec changed the scope of that maintenance shop project.

Clearly, you've stated on the record that you changed it.

And it's my understanding that it can't be changed.

So that'll be a follow up question with that.

But I'll let Nicole go ahead and answer.

Yeah.

Thank you, Councilwoman.

I think to clarify, we can't use interest from the Elevate bonds on projects that were in RISE.

So to very directly answer your question as to why these dollars cannot be used on those particular projects,

we cannot move those interest earnings across.

And so since you can't move those interest savings across,

can you utilize capital improvement funds to close that delta?

So I think we would continue to take these projects and evaluate them as we do all the rest of our capital program and needs.

This scoping was developed in partnership with the Parks Department, as Director Clark spoke about, in terms of the current needs of the department.

And we certainly always intake opportunities for additional project and additional needs as we plan CIP out into the future.

All right. I appreciate that.

Director Clark, I have a follow-up question for you.

I'll let you get up to the podium there.

So since there has been a change in the scope that the voters voted on for the RISE bond,

I guess I'd like to understand then how exactly you're funding the District 1 maintenance shop, because it's my understanding in the development agreement that there were supposed to be matching dollars from the River Mile development deal.

Were those matching dollars used or did you just allocate rise bond dollars to that maintenance shop in District 1?

Yeah, again, I never said that there was a change in scope.

I said that we are using the dollars that were allocated to build two projects.

What we need in the far northeast today is a satellite office.

That is what we're building.

What we need in Northwest is a regional office and that is what we're building.

So I want to be clear that I don't think there is a change in scope from what voters approved

and from what we're building and that has been in the pipeline for long before this conversation.

I'm happy to go as far down the rabbit hole, Council President, as you would like me to

on this specific project in District 11 here.

But again, I know you have a lot of questions that are pertinent to the items that you're

voting on tonight.

So if you'd like me to keep digging, I can.

I don't have right in front of me.

I'd love you to answer my question instead of hedging the answer.

I'm not hedging.

So you said that.

So I'm asking, did there get allocated matching funds from the River Mile?

It's not your decision to decide what questions are appropriate for council members.

I'm here prepared to answer questions on the soccer items and the items that you are.

I don't have the capital stack for the facility that is a RISE project and is not related to this in front of me.

So I can try to get that information and come back up, but I don't have that in front of me.

Okay.

So as the director of Denver Parks and Rec, you're not able, Director Clark, to share with council when we're asking about, you know, we're allocating a lot, multiple millions of bond dollars, be it elevate.

But I'm asking questions on rise because I have to be accountable to my constituents.

And you trying to tell me that I'm not asking the right questions, it seems odd.

And so I'd just like to know, with the development deal, because River Mile is a big signature project, and if you as Parks and Rec decided to move money from a bond item that was clearly a half and half and give $2.5 million for a maintenance shop in District 11

and $13 million for a district shop in District 1.

That seems like a pretty appropriate question to be asking

because you're asking us to vote on trusting the administration

to manage these bond funds

and not degrade the funding for projects that the voters voted on.

And so can you answer, was there matching dollars available for the Kauravaka regional shop versus having anything for the satellite shop in District 11?

Councilmember Gilmore, I'm chiming in here because you keep referring to Council District 1, and that's my council district.

And I've been monitoring the Kauravaka shop since before I got into office.

That deal started in 2015 when Councilmember Espinosa was in office.

I was a council aide.

It got finalized when you all voted on it in 2019.

You were here.

Councilmember Clark was here.

He was not the director.

And that project has been moving forward.

I did not know about the satellite office in your council district.

But to my understanding, from the time that for 10 years that I've been following this project, part of the capital stack to build out the Cornavaca maintenance facility in Council District 1 at Cornavaca Park has been part of the River Mile capital stack.

we have to vote on that public hearing in a few weeks so if you want to ask those lines of

questions during that public hearing i can't remember exactly when it was postponed to can

someone help john do you remember when it or elissa do you remember when the cornavaca park

was postponed to january 12th january 12th we have a public hearing for that project

January 12th because it was postponed. So I appreciate that, Council President. I think it

will become even more clear at that when that bill comes forward that there is a huge discrepancy

and that there was not an honoring of the scope of the bond projects. There was very significantly

a degradation of the bond projects. And so I appreciate everybody's allowance for me to

shine a light on this and put it into the public record. Thank you. No other questions.

Thank you. Council Parity?

Thank you, Madam President. I have a couple of questions, I think primarily for Department of

Finance. Let me just roll up so you all can. And actually, yeah, Nicole, that's fine. I'll start

with you. Thank you so much. The City Economist, I think, is not here tonight. Is that right, Lisa?

She is available online if we have questions for her. Okay. I think my question is for her,

so if you want to hang out there in case I'm wrong about that, and then maybe we can promote

Lisa Martinez Templeton if she's there. I got an out of office from her, so I actually,

my apologies, Lisa, that you're here. Let me know when she's ready.

producer do you see her

okay lisa can you hear us this is council member parity parity yes i can hi how are you great good

thank you so much for being here um i was looking at a looking back at the um economic study that

um that you completed which was provided to council quite a while back now i think over the

summer maybe um and then some email back and forth that we've had about it a little bit more recently

and I just want to try to square one specific statement in the study with a statement from

your email. So if you want to pull up that email correspondence, that would probably be helpful.

In the study itself, talking about the projections around consumer spending around the venue,

as you know, something that I've been wrestling with throughout this is the degree to which

that spending would be new spending, where people wouldn't otherwise have gone out that night and

spent money in the city, versus just displaced spending, where they would have been out doing

something else that evening somewhere else in Denver otherwise. So in the study, you say it

should be noted that due to the large amount of local consumer spending projected, it could be

merely representing a transfer from other local consumer spending, so the substitution, not net

new spending. And then you cite another 2019 study. It's from Stitzel and Rogers. And you say

that that study found that in nearby eating establishments, there was a positive complementary

impact. However, there were decreased sales in nearby entertainment businesses like theaters,

bowlings, and arts venues, which would indicate a substitution effect. So you leave that question

of substitution for consumer spending specifically, and therefore for tax on that consumer spending.

as I read it in the study, sort of uncertain or open. And then in your email from earlier

this week or last week, you say that all other inputs in the model besides construction spending,

which clearly is going to happen on site, are endogenous or dependent variables, meaning they

do already account for substitution effects, which are derived from changes in model outputs based on

the interaction of the exogenous and endogenous variables taking place within the model itself

and the majority of economic output is still net new, even when accounting for substitution.

So can you help me understand, those two things seem contradictory to me, like the idea that

the model is accounting for substitution, that's not how I read your original study. Can you just

talk to us a little bit more about that and how we should be thinking of what we know or don't

know about substitution effects or like a range of possibility of those? Because it's obviously

really important to the numbers that come out in that in your study thank you yeah so um the

first part that we are talking about so the exogenous variables those are the variables that

are directly related to the stadium either build or taking place at the stadium itself so that would

be all stadium related spending the surrounding development is all of the endogenous or dependent

variables those are the ones um that do account for some substitution effect which is taken into

account with the modeling um the reason that this is taken into account is because these are things

that um like off-site surrounding restaurants or surrounding lodging um things that aren't taking

place within the stadium itself so that's being accounted for as far as substitution the things

that aren't and still could be taking place for consumer substitution are direct stadiums

spend within the stadium itself.

And the reason that isn't taken into account is because we did have to model it as endogenous,

and that was either they build the stadium or they don't, which means the spending directly

at or in the stadium happens or not.

The reason that the note that the bulk of the economic output is still new, even when taking into account some substitution effects, is because roughly three-fourths of the output, the total of the $2.2 billion, comes from stadium-related spending itself.

And that mostly has to do, it comes from the bulk of construction-related spending, and that has to do with multiplier effects that come by when you're talking about economic output.

So construction has a really high multiplier effect, which is why it's accounting for the bulk of the output.

But then the consumer spending, which is the regular quarter or so within the surrounding development, there could be some substitution still taking a place that wasn't accounted for.

But again, it's not the bulk of that net new that wouldn't happen if not for the construction.

Okay.

Can I just interrupt?

Can you introduce yourself for the record since this is?

Sure.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Sorry, Madam President.

Lisa Martinez-Templeton, I am Chief Economist for City and County of Denver, and I am a

housing department of finance.

Thank you.

And I think I'm going to go back to the table now in the study itself, but I think that

the table doesn't pull apart the sources of different predicted economic impacts, right?

So you look at different categories, so how much of it is actually tax revenue to local

government, how much of it is an impact to disposable personal income of people who are

positively economically impacted and so on. But it's not tracing those things back to what's coming

from construction impacts, what's coming from predicted consumer spending, what's coming from

spending at the stadium versus the surrounding area. Is that right, that we don't have that in

the study? That's correct. In the study, it's not specifically calling that out within the tables

that were included. Okay. Do you have that on a table that was not included? So how we can get

at that on our end is we model everything separately. And when we are doing it that way,

then we can see the output that is tied specifically to those exact variables. When you have to start

blending everything is when it gets a little tricky, but that's how we kind of are able to

derive those more particulars is when we model them independently. Okay. And just to be clear,

did you model those things independently and then together, or did the model actually look

at them all at once to give us this table? When we model, it's all together.

Okay. So you, in fact, that wasn't like an intermediary step that you went through?

No, they are not additive. Okay. Thank you. That answer was actually really helpful and

gave me exactly what I wanted to know. Can you tell me, though, for the sort of limited

set of economic activities that are folded into this model where there could be some unaccounted

for substitution effects. Do you have a sense of what kind of range of possibilities we're talking

about or did you look into that at all? So for example, the impact on people who are literally

coming to a game one night instead of going to the theater, the bowling venue, those kinds of

things that you listed. Did you make any effort to put a range of numbers on those effects?

So those are the ones that specifically we have no way, you know, a priori, right, of being able to measure.

But I think we did mention in the study, we now have a lot of data systems in place, but this is definitely something I would like to, and I think we should track moving forward into the future as time goes on that we are able to measure these things.

But as of now, no, we don't know for sure.

Thank you.

Super, super helpful.

I appreciate you being here tonight.

That was all I wanted to ask you, at least coming from me.

And then my other question is for Dura.

So if Tracy's here.

Thanks, Nicole.

Sorry you had to stand up there.

Tracy, I also have been going back and forth a little bit with you by email over the last week.

And what I've been trying to understand is what I know to be an extremely contingent model that you did of the likelihood of, I know, I know.

Trust me, I heard you when you said it could be very subject to change.

But what you modeled for us as the head of the Urban Renewal Authority was how much future sales and property tax income we could be looking at in the entire metro district surrounding the stadium in future years after, well, I guess, taking into account trying to figure out how much, who would be reimbursed through TIF income or through a TIF mechanism through that income until the district ends in 2042.

That was also really interesting and helpful to me.

We got some information on it for the first time the last time.

This was in committee two weeks ago, and I've been looking at it and talking to you about it since.

Could you give us this, and we all know what a huge caveat this comes with because they're projections,

and they're projections in a very uncertain economy, so I'll just say that for you.

Thank you.

But that being said, could you talk about how much projected TIF revenue will be left to go to either the stadium ownership group or the city at that 90-10 split in what years?

You can even give us a range, whatever makes you comfortable.

But we've looked at it, and I want the public to hear it too.

Tracy Huggins, Executive Director of the Denver Urban Renewal Authority.

Councilwoman, I will answer your question as far as I can as that pertains to the tax increment flowing to the metropolitan district.

and then I likely will turn to the Metropolitan District Representative to speak to the last part of your question as far as the 90-10 split.

So thank you for the clear acknowledgement that a projection is definitely going to be different than what actually happens.

But we have to start somewhere.

And so what we have done is to take the anticipated development that has been put forward by the current property owners as well as what might be undertaken on the northwest quadrant in addition to the stadium to then anticipate what that development would look like under what time horizon, made some assumptions regarding when the construction is going to happen,

Therefore, then when it gets brought on to the tax rules to then ultimately estimate how much incremental taxes, both sales and property, that Dura would be looking to collect and then how we would use those monies to finance the reimbursement of costs that the Metropolitan District has incurred.

incurred. And for listeners, I'm just going to give the context that the Metropolitan District,

the land on which the stadium sits, is already subject to a very large number of obligations

where any tax intake has to go before it can be used to reimburse the stadium ownership group,

the city for its investment, or to just come back into our coffers as tax. And those obligations

exist already. Nothing we can all do about that tonight. So that's the context. Thank you, Tracy.

And Councilwoman, if I may, there are already also existing obligations between the Urban

Renewal Authority and the Metropolitan District. So to date, we have agreed, we Dura, to the extent

that the incremental taxes are in fact generated to reimburse costs previously incurred by the

Metropolitan District of approximately $44 million. When we looked at then the projection

of total incremental taxes that we may stand to collect between now and the expiration of the

tax increment area, that is anticipated to total about $158 million. Now, I want to be clear,

the $158 million will be used to reimburse not only the $44 million plus interest,

so when we borrow, or when the Metropolitan District is borrowed and we are looking to

reimburse them, it isn't just that $44 million, it is with an interest obligation that goes along

with that. And with that, then we look to say, how much more might we be able to obligate ourselves

to reimburse the metropolitan district? And that amount is about another $36.5 million.

So with all of that, if the development happens as we have projected, we, Dura, would have total

obligations to the Metropolitan District for costs that they incurred of about $80 million.

And it would take that full $158 million to reimburse that $80 million because of the interest

that is accruing. So Dura would look to pay that over, satisfy our outstanding obligations,

really starting in 2026 would be the first time that we would be in a position to start paying

down some of the principal of those existing obligations. And those payments would continue

until the tax increment area has run its course in 2042.

That's the Dura side of the answer to your question.

At this point, then, if it is all right with you,

I'd like to defer to the Metropolitan District Representative

to speak to, upon receipt from Dura,

how they would then utilize those monies

because it is under the agreement in the 2025 IGA

that that 90-10 split occurs.

Yeah, and I look forward to that answer.

And just before you do that, I thought,

and I may have misunderstood, that you were modeling some small amount beyond the $158 million

that would be brought in by Dura, or brought in as sales tax income?

No, the schedule that I had provided at the last council committee,

the sum total of the cash flows is that $158 million.

Okay. All right. Thank you so much, Tracy.

Thank you, and you can also introduce yourself.

The council president reminded me.

Good evening. Mark Tompkins.

I'm a director with the Broadway Station Metropolitan District.

As Tracy said, the expectation for the use of the $158 million when it's received by the district

is to then pay the district's existing obligations.

There are two obligations in front of any split that we would do between the club and the city.

There is the 2023 bonds that are outstanding,

and then there are existing developer advances in interest

that are needing to be paid down before the 90-10 split would occur.

So the district is projecting, using those same projections that Dura used,

the district is projecting approximately $133 million would be subject to that 90-10 split.

Okay.

I think I've just lost the plot a little bit.

So you are forecasting $133 million that would be available beyond existing or predicted obligations to junior bondholders through the Metro District that would come in before the end of the TIF?

Yes.

I see.

Can you come back up here?

I'm sorry.

All I'm trying to get at is the bottom line, right?

Everyone has run some projections.

literally all I want to know is with all due caveats after we pay off the existing and predicted

metro district debt and you know all of that what do we think will become available under this

modeling before the whole district expires to be subject to that split and be split between the

ownership group in the city so 133 million again Tracy Huggins Denver Urban Renewal Authority

I believe Mark provided the answer to that, which is the $113 million.

$133.

$133 million, I apologize, that then would be subject to the 90-10 split between the club and the city.

Okay, thank you.

I appreciate that.

That was my question there.

And I think Mark was my missing piece because I was emailing Tracy.

So that would be about $150 million.

Sorry, I just did that wrong.

Okay.

So those were, I think, all my questions for now, Madam President.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Alvidrez.

Thank you so much, Council President.

I just wanted to take a moment to ask a question of one of the 14ers support group members

that I've been able to meet since this whole thing started.

I've learned a lot about soccer and a lot about pro athletes.

So I have some questions for a member of the 14ers group, Sarah Ingram, who is also a former

semi-pro athlete.

and two-time NAIA national champion, All-American.

As you could add to that, thank you so much, Sarah, for being here and helping me learn so much.

One thing that I'd like for my colleagues to learn that I've learned about is what is a support group like the 14ers group?

And beyond game days, how do they support the culture, accountability, inclusion, and long-term partnership

when it comes to a professional sports team?

Yeah. And what's the difference between you and the actual team ownership groups?

Great question. Sarah Ingram, I'm a Littleton resident, so I will be bringing my Littleton

dollars hopefully to Denver. So I'm an officer for 14 years, which is a supporter group. We are

the dedicated and super excited fans that come along with a soccer team. There are supporter

groups for almost every team within NWSL, MLS, USL, et cetera. And we are the ones that generally

speaking are the ones that are standing, waving flags, drums, chants, we bring the spirit.

And typically speaking out of that, they are independent entirely from the team. So part of

the reason that we are independent is so that we can criticize the team without any type of

financial ramifications, any type of agreements or pressure from the team themselves.

If you are familiar with the protests that Centennial 38 did with the MLS Rapids, when

they were not taking care of their team properly, the entire section boycotted and left 38 minutes

into the first half with banners that said the team, the players, the community deserves better.

So supporter groups are the ones that definitely try to hold accountability to the team because we are not there to support the ownership.

We are there to support the players and the community.

So along with that, not only are we supporting the players and supporting the members that are on the field, but then there is a huge public interest that goes along with the supporter groups.

Most of us have 501c3s attached with our supporter groups.

We do fundraisers.

We do protests.

We do things that help push for human rights because soccer groups are notoriously community-based and pro-human rights-based.

so we bring along not only our money to the city but we also bring a lot of a massive sense of

community and just a huge commitment to the surrounding area. I really appreciate that

answer and it's been really inspiring to learn about how much you all care about human rights

and speaking to some of the members about the issues that we're facing today whether it be

immigration or flock cameras. So I appreciate that future partnership. My other question is,

as a former semi-professional women athlete, what does it mean to have a dedicated home stadium to

you personally, to the group, and what does a purpose-built venue mean in comparison to like

the opening games that will be at Empower Field, or why can't the team just play at Dick's Sporting

Ed's Park. So if you, one, if you've ever been a female athlete, you know that if you go to a venue

and you're looking at, especially as a female coming in, females are an afterthought. So

oftentimes they're coming to play into male spaces where they're not designed for females,

whether that's as simple as sanitary waste or more privacy capabilities for changing.

When you look at a lot of the research that's been done for female athletes, it's something astounding as minimal as like 30% of research for athletes includes females.

So females have consistently been an afterthought.

And when you're talking about trying to play at a different stadium, there is something, I mean, if you've been a college athlete even, being at your stadium with your logo and your locker room that you're able to hold and not have to share and go in and out of, it's a big thing when it comes to an athlete and having that home and having that investment and having that pride in where you're playing.

And on top of that, when you look at a lot of the stadiums that we have in the city, like Dix, for example, while everybody's like, why can't you just play at Dix?

For one, that field really isn't big enough.

And if you've ever gone to a soccer game at the stadium, you'll see that if the player tries to do a slide tackle on the sideline, they're almost immediately off the turf and it's dangerous.

So while, yes, games can happen there and they will happen there, consistently, you're putting players in danger.

I think you were talking about the football stadium there, right?

Correct. What did I say?

You said Dix, which is soccer.

Sorry, for Mile High or Empower.

That stadium is not big enough field-wise, turf-wise.

It's just not built for it.

when you come to look at Dix as somebody who's had season tickets since 2017 it is a pain to be

a West Littleton resident and to have to drive all the way to Commerce City and I have zero public

transport so when we're talking about moving one of the things that I loved about the bid for this

team and the way that they were intentionally trying to find a spot in Denver for this project

it was one of the first things that was supposed to be in this bid was to find a place that was next to public transport

so that people have easy access.

Because when you've got something that isn't accessible by public transport,

there's so many people who can't make it to those games.

So having something that's right off of the RTD that even myself,

I can go down to the South Broadway or I can go up to the Golden Station and ride in

and not have to worry about driving my car in and dealing with traffic right there.

Like, even that is so beneficial to me.

Thank you so much.

That's all I have for you.

I really appreciate it and all the knowledge that you've shared with me.

I did want to give an opportunity just because a lot of the CBA group

didn't have everyone from council here last time.

I know I see one of our three PA members, and I think we have some members.

I think Adriana from Valverde is online, and then Anita Banuelos is in the overflow room.

If we could just give them an opportunity to, oh, never mind, she's in the room in the house.

If she could come, if you all could take a moment and just speak to the work that you put into this

and how you're feeling about the process and moving this forward, that would be great.

Oh, and Jen from Oberlin.

Thank you, Councilwoman.

I'm Shelby Droolis, president of Platt Park People's Association,

and one of the members of We Knew, the West East Neighborhood United.

Anita Manuelos, the president of Athmar Neighborhood Association,

and one of the co-chairs.

Jen Graeving, president of the Overland Park Neighborhood Association,

and also one of the members of We Knew.

and adriana is is online yeah and she's promoted okay great hi everyone adriana

neighborhood association and one of the four

adriana do you want to start since you're online and then we'll go to the people in person

yes um i just wanted to say it's been a privilege and an honor to serve alongside the other committee

members who make up West East Neighbors United. We had the opportunity to engage in a news

story last week, and I just wanted to say again that this is a once-in-a-generation development

coming to West Denver, and we have asked really hard questions during the negotiations. We've

looked under every rock to try to figure out how we can make this a community-first process, and

And we landed with an agreement last week for the CBA that I think almost every member on the committee is proud of, given the timeline and everything like that.

So I just wanted to share those remarks today and say thank you to everyone who's committed so much of their volunteer time to this process.

Thank you, Adriana.

And then before we go to in-person, I heard Tim from the Baker neighborhood is also online.

If he can be promoted to give a few words.

I'm sorry, I missed that.

Oh, can you just share about the community benefit process and how you're feeling about where we are in moving this forward?

Yes.

So my name is Tim Lopez.

As I mentioned to all of you, I've been involved in 2005 with the original Gates, again in 2017, and now in 2025.

We've worked hard and diligently, usually three or four nights a week, an extra 10 hours on our own,

met with the team, negotiating, doing the best we can do, not just for our own individual communities,

but for all the communities and the city of Denver at whole.

And so I would just say I would encourage council members to support this.

Happy to take any questions that you might have.

I know there's some challenging issues, but I think that collectively we can answer those for you if you have any for the community.

Thank you so much, Tim.

And I will say Tim was one of the first people to reach out to me saying, I don't know if this is a good idea.

I have a lot of questions.

I have a lot of concerns about the environmental history here.

So thank you, Tim.

I'm really grateful that you've been able to be involved in the process.

Do you want to go ahead in the room?

Thank you.

Speaking to that environmental history, that was a big concern for our committee.

And we are extremely happy that we've partnered with the team to secure a LEED certification for this building,

that the team and the community are looking to plant hundreds of trees using the community funding.

The team will be contributing to our CIF fund.

the sustainability environmental focus of the community benefits agreement that we've come up

with was extremely important to our community we really wanted to make sure that this stadium

being built on the gates rubber factory site was something that could really bring our community

together this plot of land has been empty for so long there's been so many attempts to build here

to create something here and this almost feels like a final chance to have something on this plot

something that will really bring our community together, centerpiece for us,

uniting the west side, the east side, bringing everything together.

We've really poured hundreds of hours into this.

Our hearts, our souls, and we want something that will be this beacon for our community,

something we're really proud of.

I know that we are just incredibly excited to have this stadium here.

Being the president of the Platte Park People's Association,

we hear complaints all the time from residents.

We hear people complaining about parking for the farmer's market.

We hear people complaining about their neighbors putting up a flag that they don't like.

We have not heard a single complaint from our residents about this stadium.

It is unwavering support from our neighborhood.

Across the board, people are excited for this.

And we just want to urge you to listen to your residents, listen to your community members, listen to your constituents.

Please vote in favor of this.

We want a team here.

We're excited to have a team parade coming down South Broadway, cheering for our champion summit to be here.

Anita Banuelos.

It has been a long time coming to connect east and west.

My previous employment was with former Councilman Jolene Clark, and that was one of the things that we had constantly worked on is the connectivity.

And here we are, we're looking to redevelop the Gates Rubbers Company plot and bring a stadium together that will continue to unite east and west neighborhoods.

The community benefit agreement did take such a tremendous time and effort in bringing so many different people with different backgrounds.

And also ensuring that, you know, that's going to be $7 million investment over the next 10 years in communities of need,

especially on the west side of Alverde, Athmar Park, Ruby Hill, and Overland.

And I'm just really honored to be part of the process and being here today in front of all of you that I had worked with previously

and understand that community is fourth and foremost,

and definitely that we spent well over 100 hours just in meetings,

but also to, you know, looking over and crunching numbers

and meeting with Denver Summit weekly from, you know, September all the way until now.

And so I'm asking for you guys to support the new women's soccer stadium,

and let's make sure that Denver has and believes in women like we should.

And this is something that is a pillar for all of our community.

Jen grieving Overland.

And I will echo the comments made by Shelby and Anita in that I do hear a lot of complaints in Overland.

And so it was extremely refreshing to hear all of my neighbors on board.

Again, unwavering support like Shelby expressed.

and we appreciated that the team came to our registered neighborhood organizations meeting

and organized outreach to answer those neighbor questions

and to allay any dismay or issues that they had with the project.

The team has shown a considerable investment in the community.

Colorado has often invested in women.

In fact, as you know, many of you know, they had the right to vote for women almost 30 years before the 19th Amendment was passed.

And I think that the placement of this stadium at the intersection of Santa Fe and I-25 for our neighborhoods is not only a uniting thing, bringing us together, connecting some of those neighborhoods that have been divided for far too long.

But it is also a testament to anyone who drives through Denver that Denver invests in and believes in women.

And as we invest and believe in women, we elevate all of us.

And so on behalf of Overland, on behalf of Weenu, we ask for your approval and yes vote on the stadium.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate all of your time and labor in making this happen.

I did have a question for the ownership group around prevailing wage.

My understanding is that prevailing wage, which is typical with Dura projects, is required during construction, but also it will be required after the stadium opens.

Is that correct? Can you speak to that?

Yeah. Good afternoon, and thank you, Council.

Rob Cohen, Denver Summit FC.

So prevailing wage, we have agreed to pay for prevailing wage for the construction and the ongoing maintenance of the stadium.

Great. I appreciate that. Thank you so much.

I think that's a huge investment, and it's going, you know, speaking to that economic impact that this will have,

these jobs will be really high-paying jobs.

So thank you for that commitment and doing it not just during construction but the ongoing maintenance.

I would also just point out for the council's information, we will be the only stadium in the city and county of Denver that's paying prevailing wage.

So none of the men's stadiums are doing so.

Thank you for leading in that way.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council President.

That's all I have.

Thank you.

Next up, we have in the queue, Councilwoman Jamie Tars.

Thank you, Madam President.

My question is about the North Bridge.

So Jeff or Department of Finance and then probably Mark Tompkins might need to chime in on this.

So Bill 1850 amends the 2025 intergovernmental agreement.

It adds into that agreement the North Bridge as an item that the city is now on the hook for.

The district was previously the responsible party for that.

Can I get a reminder of the estimated cost and sources of revenue or potential grant mill levy dollars?

I'd for that.

Nicole Duheny, Chief Financial Officer.

Councilwoman, the cost of the bridge is estimated at approximately $20 to $25 million.

You are correct that one of the amendments before you tonight adds that bridge as an item that could be considered what is called as a regional project under the IGAs.

What that means is those bridge costs would be eligible for reimbursement pursuant to the regional mill levy that's already in place for the project.

We are currently working very closely with the state, RTD, and other partners to think through a capital stack for the bridge.

We submitted an application for a $4 million grant from the state under the TOSI program earlier this month, and we're continuing to look at other grants which may be available and plan to continue to work through a capital stack for that bridge in the coming months.

Nicole, can you confirm that $4 million? I thought it was a $12 million grant.

We are hoping to receive additional funds and apply for additional funds under that program in the future.

At this point in time, we have applied for $4 million.

We were hoping to seek more.

Got it.

The mill levy, how much can be acquired from that?

The projections on the mill levy, I want to not misspeak.

It's about, I believe, $14 million projected through 2046 on that regional mill levy.

But this might not be the only project that goes for mill levy funds.

That's correct. And I think that's why we will continue to look at the overall capital stack for this project.

The mill levy is likely to be a portion, grants that we may pursue with the state, the federal government or otherwise to build to that stack to deliver the bridge.

So how are you all thinking about what the city might need to pay for and when based on the stadium construction timing?

just trying to understand what dollars the city might need

or the mayor's office might be looking for to get that going.

And would we pay for design as well as construction?

I think as we continue to work through the capital stack,

we will also build out that schedule, Councilwoman, that you're asking about.

We already have done some work to build up some initial conceptual design

to inform that cost estimate that I just provided.

And then we'd also want to continue to work with our partners as well as the railroads to refine that design.

I think we're hopeful that we'll be able to receive positive news on the initial state grant that we applied for.

And we hope to apply for more state grants next year as well as Dr. Cog funds and federal funds.

I think as soon as we see some positive movement on any of those sources,

I'd expect that we would produce a more detailed schedule for delivery of the bridge and that overall capital stack to share with you all.

Can you make sure to bring that through the appropriate committee before it's a contract or some other official document, just so we have a sense of the line of thinking on funding?

Absolutely.

A question for Mark.

Thank you, Nicole.

question for mark in that same agreement um it says that the district then owns operates and

maintains and repairs and replacement of the bridge is that your understanding as well

uh good evening mark tompkins director of broadway station met district

it is councilwoman okay where does that funding come from

Like all special districts, we are reliant on future assessed value and property tax collection to be able to fund our activities.

And so very much like the tax increment financing projections, those are all reliant on future vertical development occurring that builds our tax base.

Will you know by the time we build the bridge that you've got the funding to maintain it?

I think that's dependent on the schedule to build the bridge and how much vertical development is underway at the time.

If you don't know that, would we not move forward?

I believe the district will move forward with its capital improvements as it has on all the capital improvements built to date.

And then the district relies on the property owners in the district with whom we have agreements to deliver that infrastructure to fund any operating deficit that we run into.

Okay. Thank you, Mark. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. And colleagues, just a reminder, if you'd like to make comments on any of the four bills before you, before we vote, this is also the appropriate time as well.

Next up, we have Councilman Lewis.

I think Gilmore's before me.

That's okay.

Councilwoman Gilmore? Sorry about that.

That's okay.

Thank you. I am happy to make comments regarding how I'm going to vote on these tonight. It's very, very concerning, given the longstanding equity issues that we see in District 11, which is a portion of the Montbello community, Green Valley Ranch neighborhoods and High Point and Avion.

I have $30 million worth of medians that I have in my council district.

I just showed you, excuse me, I just showed you tonight, excuse me, I just showed tonight,

excuse me, how the bond dollars have been allocated in a different way

for maintenance shops in our districts.

And so there is no way that I can trust what this administration is trying to do.

And it's very disappointing that you're not following through on the voted bond language that the voters voted on.

And because these are bond dollars, I do believe that this should have gone to a vote of the people, and it did not.

And so I will be a no on all of these bills tonight.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Colleagues, it's about seven minutes to public comment.

Councilmember Lewis, do you want me to go to you?

Do you think I don't want to squeeze you in?

or do you want me to go to say the public comment and then we can discuss?

Yeah, that's fine.

Okay.

Yeah.

So let me cue that up.

So for the public, we have public comment at 5 o'clock,

and so we're going to have to postpone, keep debating these until after 5.30

so that we can go to our public comment session.

Just so given everyone, because all this legal jargon up here

doesn't always make sense to the people sitting in the pews.

All right.

tonight there will be a required hearing

we already did the required hearing do I still say that

it's just the vote even though it's the vote okay

tonight there will be a required public hearing on council bill 1541 changing

the zoning classification of 709 south Delaware street in

Baker we already had the required public hearing so we'll just be voting

the public hearing. 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.

And if you celebrate Christmas,

Merry Christmas. Thank you all.

Council will now reconvene from our

earlier session. We will continue

with consideration of Council Bills

1552, 1553,

1554, and 1850.

Madam Secretary

oh, sorry.

Council Member Lewis, you're in the next.

Thanks. Appreciate it.

So I wanted to start with stating that I'm not in opposition to women's sports and hope that the team will serve as an inspiration for young women in Denver and across the region.

However, I am a no on these items because ultimately I do not think that this deal represents good precedence for the metro districts and the bondholders who invested in those metro districts.

For those of you who need more information, metropolitan districts and the bonds that they issue are one of the primary methods by which much-needed improvements can be implemented.

This will likely remain that way in Denver until TABOR is repealed.

As such, I believe it is important to ensure that we are keeping good practices regarding those bondholders, and I cannot say that I feel that way here.

Additionally, I want to make it clear that this is not the sole basis for my no vote,

though I would also like to add that while the use of the interests from the city's general obligation bonds

are a creative way to pay for the stadium improvements,

it came as a surprise to me and many other council members that this source of revenue even existed,

let alone was designated for this use, and it would have been nice to know about this source of funding in advance.

That's a structural concern for another time, and I'm glad that none of the District 8 Elevate projects will be impacted by the use of these funds.

The good news is, for you all here, is that you probably don't need my yes vote to pass this.

And the good news for me is that I get to stand in my values. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilman Gonzalez-Cuteres.

Thank you, Madam President. I have a couple of questions before I make some comments.

I wanted to ask Sarah Ingram if you would mind.

I had a couple questions for you based on some of the things you mentioned earlier.

Can you tell me how diverse is the 14ers organization?

It's a little hard to answer, to be honest.

We have kind of built our community digitally at the moment.

So we are still trying to figure out who all is showing up.

and we probably won't really know what our community diversity looks like until we get into the stadium.

However, what I can say from experience in being a supporter group for Centennial 38

and for American Outlaws who follows the national team

is that the supporter group tends to be a very diverse socioeconomic population

because typically the tickets that are affiliated with that group are the least expensive in the stadium.

therefore that accessibility tends to lean in more to you know especially with

the Latin community, queer community, etc. Are there folks from the organization

that are also here this evening? I know there's a couple members. Okay, another

question I had when you talked about human rights and that being something

that the organization finds very important. What kinds of work is being done or how are you engaging

in human rights advocacy? Great question. Our group admittedly is still fairly young in our

official organization. So we are currently we're filing for a 501c7 once we get the intention,

as far as I'm aware. Once we get a little bit more settled with our board and our group and

everything, then we wanted to wait and see what the community wants to do in terms of possibly

doing a 501c3 as well. What I can speak to is a lot of the work that I've done with Centennial 38

and the 501c3 faction of that, which is the Orr Foundation. And there, instead of having a

particularly directed type of boost for the community. We've done everything from

canned food drives into Food Bank of the Rockies. We've done stuff with Soccer Without Borders.

One of my favorites, we've raised funds for the Colorado Name Change Project for Urban Peaks.

And so there's a lot of different, we've done unhoused goodie bags and stuff that we've put

together. So there's a lot of different ways that we can help support. While the 14ers haven't been

around officially very long, we have already done a food drive as well as we participated in

supporting with a toy drive as well. Thank you so much, Sarah. Thank you for answering those

questions. I think I now would like to see if maybe, I don't know if it's Jeff Dolan and Nicole

Doheny. I just wanted to get some clarification of something I heard earlier this evening.

and that was around these actual funds, this interest earnings.

And I just wanted to get clarification around, one, the amounts, two, what they are allowed to be utilized for.

And so, because what I thought I heard you say was that these funds could not be used, that these interest earnings from the bonds could not be used for the respective bond projects.

So are you saying that the interest earnings for the Elevate bond could not be used for current Elevate bond projects and that the interest earnings for the Rise bond could not be utilized for the Rise projects or they could not be used interchangeably?

Nicole Doheny, Chief Financial Officer.

Thank you for that question, Councilwoman.

So with respect to the Elevate bonds, what we're talking about tonight is approximately

$65 million in interest that has been earned or will be earned in the next year on the

Elevate bonds.

That interest needs to be spent on projects included in the Elevate bond.

So as we have delivered the Elevate bond over the past several years, what has happened

is certain projects in the bond have been supplemented by CIP dollars in order to ensure

that we've delivered on time at the scopes that the community expected.

With these interest earnings, which resulted from some unexpectedly high short-term interest rates that we've really just seen in the past 24 months that we could not have predicted when the program was put together, what we are doing is we are taking those interest earnings, applying it to the prior Elevate projects that were supplemented with CIP dollars, and then freeing up those dollars so that we can spend those and invest those here in this project alongside the private investment that the team is bringing.

Okay, so can you then, I guess, explain how the earned interest earnings can be utilized?

Can they be utilized outside of the bond projects?

No, we need to spend them on an elevate bond project.

And so that is why we are spending those on those prior projects to free up and spend,

again, CIP dollars that we had previously allocated to top up and keep those elevate bond projects

on time and fully funded as we did the delivery over the past several years.

And how much will we have left in that CIP fund after this?

It'll depend on our actual interest earnings for the next year or so as we wind down the

program.

We're currently estimating the total interest earnings at around $65 million or so.

We are assuming that we spend $60 million of that here, so there may be a potential

for a small additional amount to be, quote, left over after we undertake this, but that

It'll be based on actual earnings in the next 12 to 24 months.

Okay.

So could those funds be used for other projects such as, I don't know, sheltering families?

I think what we would do is we continue to look at eligible costs and eligible projects

under the Elevate Bond ballot language and ordinance.

And we continue to talk about that as potential for part of a capital stack as future projects

come forward like we do with any project.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, so I, this has been a really challenging, um, I think challenging things that are before

us when it comes to the soccer stadium.

Um, I've gone back and forth in my head about, you know, what is, what is the right thing

to do?

Um, what is the appropriate thing to do?

Um, I'm a lover of soccer.

Like I'm, I'm a soccer player.

I played as, as an adult, even on women's leagues.

My daughter plays competitive soccer.

and one thing that has become very clear to me when it comes to especially sports in our city

in our state and across the country is you have to pay to play you don't get the opportunities

unless you are like able to afford them and and I know there are some organizations that do a really

good job of trying to provide scholarships and do all of these things and so I just I guess I want

to be very clear. Like when we talk about, you know, girls being able to see professional women's

sports, I think it is a great thing. However, how do we actually make it attainable when we see

young people at early stages where the division is already happening and you see which communities

it is happening in? And I look in this room and I continue to see that. And that's what I really

struggle with on a very, like, that surface level.

This is what's before us, right?

We know that this land has sat vacant for a very long time, a very long time.

And I know how important this is also for community development and what could be possible.

Is this perfect?

No.

I am worried about the possible implications of what could happen.

I am incredibly grateful for the work that was done by the neighborhood organizations and community members

that participated in the community benefits agreement process in a very truncated time period.

for your hours of unpaid time that you took.

Community members that I know have been in these communities for generations

stood up again, met the demand, and followed through.

I thank you for your work.

I see the time, the effort, and the funding that has been put into this entire process,

not just from the city, but from also external entities, whether it's investors, whether it's

the ownership group, whether it's nonprofit organizations, you know, special interests,

whatever be it our administration. I would like to see that same kind of time, effort, and funding

put towards helping our most vulnerable in our communities, our families. As we've heard earlier,

we see the juxtaposition we are in, right? We have families that are unhoused,

living in cars and struggling to get on their feet.

At the same time, we have before us an opportunity to address these parcels of land that have sat vacant,

a community that has had not as much attention, perhaps, or needs community investment, right?

Needs public investment.

And so this is the project that is before us. This is the proposal that is before us.

And this is why this has been such a struggle, because I see, as you all have heard tonight,

as you all have heard tonight, that there are many, many needs across our city.

needs. That's why I ask questions about, you know, what are we doing to address human rights,

right? What are we doing to make sure that we are addressing equity across our city?

And that is what keeps me up, right? How do we get to that place? How do we get

the people in our city, how do we get the administration to meet us in that place?

If you're going to work hard, you're going to put the effort in for something like this,

then I want to see the effort to help people who are living in the worst types of conditions.

That's what I want to see.

I'm still struggling with this, I'm going to be honest.

And if I vote no tonight, it's not because I am against women being able to succeed in professional sports.

It does not mean that I'm against women.

It is sad, though, that we don't have the level of investment from private investors as we do with men in men's sports.

That is incredibly frustrating that this is now coming upon us to publicly invest these funds with public dollars rather than having investors showing up and saying, you know what, I'm going to show up for women.

I'm going to show up for women's professional sports.

That's a sad, sad thing right now that I'm seeing.

So if I vote no, it's not because I don't care or I don't want to see women succeed.

Because believe me, I obviously am a woman and I have two daughters.

And I know how important these things are.

But I also know it's important to make sure that our kids are being taken care of for their basic needs.

and if I vote yes it does not mean that I don't care about the very families that have

shown up here week after week the families that I have personally met with that I've personally

tried to find resources for it does not mean that your words go unnoticed I will continue

to be there for you and I will continue to push this city to recognize what those needs are.

Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Council Member Hines.

Thank you, Madam President. I want to start by sharing that on December 10th,

I listed five concerns on the record in committee.

I'll list those concerns.

The first was that we engage and listen to the community and incorporate those words into a binding agreement.

I want to thank those who have come and provided testimony today, who came to provide testimony last week, that shared with us their interest also in that community agreement.

And I want to thank the administration and those community members.

We heard them on the record today say that they believe that the community benefits agreement is something that that will work.

And that makes a lot of sense. And so I want to thank the community for for coming together and volunteering their time.

Often when we have these community meetings, the only people who are not paid to be there are the people whose neighborhood is getting whatever the thing is under discussion happening to them.

So I definitely want to thank the volunteers because everyone else who is there were paid to be there.

So the second thing is I wanted to make sure that we had clarity on the city's financial commitment.

So I want to thank, again, Council President for talking about that, making sure that we understand the responsibility of Denver taxpayers.

And we have the line items of what our city's obligation is.

The third is that the ownership group build the stadium, not the people of Denver.

and that might work for other communities around the U.S.

Here, I believe firmly that the stadium should be built by the ownership group

and I want to thank the ownership group for doing just that.

The fourth item was the source of the funds committed by the City of Denver

And I think Council Member Lewis had great comments about the source of the funds, effectively, how come we didn't know about these funds until they were made available.

So rather than go too far down the same path that Council Member Lewis did, I'll just say that I very much agree with her thoughts and analysis.

And in the final, the fifth of the five was the importance of the North Bridge.

So that also has been discussed, and so I don't want to talk too much about it here again.

As people may know, I started playing soccer at a young age, and for most of my career, I played sweeper.

On August 26, 2008, that was the day I joined the disability community, I was on three soccer teams.

I was on one indoor, two outdoor teams, and I played defense on the indoor team and sweeper for both the outdoor teams.

And so as Council Member Gonzalez Gutierrez has mentioned, soccer is a huge component of my life and a lot of my formation, my leadership, my athleticism, my ability to work with the team and make independent decisions.

Both are important in soccer. Both are important in a professional career.

And I owe a lot of that ability to make independent decisions and be a team player because of my my years playing soccer.

Um, I, uh, I would also, um, uh, I'd also mention, uh, I'd also mention that, um, the, uh, the, the town, the town where I grew up, and I apologize that I'm out of town, I went back to visit the town where I grew up.

It's known for three things. First, it's known as the oldest town in Texas.

Nacogdoches, Texas, it is named after a Caddo Indian chief. So it is part of the

indigenous community is very much a part of the town where it grew up. It's second known as the

center of the debris of where the space shuttle Columbia broke up and ultimately, during reentry,

and ultimately landed in lots of pieces on February 1st, 2003. My high school home had

space shuttle debris on the roof. And then the third thing that Nagarovitch is known for

is it is the boyhood home of Clint Dempsey and where he graduated from high school.

Clint Dempsey is the all-time top scorer of the U.S. men's national team.

He is actually a tie, but he still holds the title.

He was the U.S. Soccer Athlete of the Year in 2011 and 2012,

and he played in three different FIFA World Cup competitions

representing the United States men's national team.

He is also universally recognized as one of the greatest U.S. soccer players ever.

So I, in addition to my soccer experience, I know that the town where I grew up was a formation for one of the greatest men's soccer players.

We have our opportunity here to make more news and more history once again.

And just as Nagadoches is known for the boyhood home of Clint Dempsey, I may have had my dog certainly on the leash in the Clint Dempsey youth soccer fields just last night.

And I did have I did have him there. He was definitely on leash.

But I see this as an opportunity for us to once again, for me to celebrate once again a feat for soccer.

And that would include having Denver be the home of a purpose-built women's soccer stadium.

I think that I care a lot about all of the issues that face Denver.

I am not the only sitting council member who has had in their past experiences with homelessness, including unsheltered homelessness.

And so the concerns that were mentioned in public comment and the concerns that colleagues have mentioned are not lost on me, just as they are not lost on my colleagues.

I believe that we can have nice things and help people at the same time.

I believe that the sales tax and other revenue that the city will get from a purpose-built women's soccer stadium can help pay for more things in the long term.

But I also expect the administration to lean into some of the other difficult, important issues that we're having, that we're experiencing today.

So some of the things that city council mentioned in its values letter to the administration were certainly heard.

Some of them we as council believe could have been heard a little bit better.

And so I see this as an opportunity for us to be part of history here in Denver.

I believe this is an opportunity for us to get more sales tax revenue to do more good for the people of Denver.

And I sure hope that we get more commitment from the executive branch as it prepares the budget for 2027,

that we are going to take care of those in need more as I vote in favor of this purpose-built women's soccer stadium.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Council Member Flynn.

Wait, sorry. I think I skipped.

Council Member Watson.

I think you skipped me, Madam President.

Council Member Cashman.

Yikes. That's what happens when I go down to the bottom of the queue and work my way back up.

So sorry.

Third place is still a bronze medal. I'll take it. I'll take it.

Thank you, Madam President.

I've worked since coming on council 10 plus years ago to increase and improve the facilities Denver makes available to house those who have ended up outside.

I've also worked since coming on council for the specific broad interests of Denver children.

I can't thank my colleague, Councilman Gonzalez Gutierrez, enough for her heartfelt comments about the conundrum we face tonight.

I'm sitting there watching this handsome young man snooze against his dad.

And I'm sorry he's snoozing on a hard bench, but I'm glad he's inside and warm.

After a great deal of serious consideration, I will be a yes vote tonight on the issues related to the National Women's Soccer League, Denver Summit Football Club.

Rather, as I did originally, rather than look at this transaction as giving a handout to the ownership group,

I choose now to view it as Denver becoming a full partner in an exciting new venture celebrating our young women.

If it succeeds, surrounding neighborhoods are going to reap ongoing benefits from its presence.

If it doesn't succeed, the city takes ownership of the land for whatever purpose it determines best.

And at that point, access to this long, fallow plot of land, the adjacent neighborhoods and light rail station will have been dramatically improved.

I'll be a yes vote because I believe the team in the community arrived at a community benefit agreement that by itself can have a transformative effect on surrounding neighborhoods.

I'll be a yes, because I believe building the stadium at Santa Fe Yards will stimulate positive development in the area and bring new attention and new dollars to current Broadway and Santa Fe drive businesses.

Will it be a game changer by itself? I don't believe so. I don't believe it's going to bring untold riches to those businesses in those particular areas.

But will it move the needle along with a broader reinvigorated surrounding area?

I believe that it will.

I'll be a yes because my concerns that the proposed stadium could create damaging competition with the nearby nonprofit Leavitt Pavilion Amphitheater,

My concerns were laid by a letter from Levitt CEO Megan McNamara, stating,

as an organization committed to building community through music in inclusive outdoor spaces,

we look forward to partnering with Summit, both leading up to the stadium's opening and moving forward as anchors in southwest Denver.

And I'll be a yes because the testimony at the public hearing on the rezoning was universally in favor of the stadium project.

Not one person showed up to say no.

Now, I have received numerous contacts from people who aren't in favor of financing this project.

I know that there are valid concerns on both sides.

But I believe that the majority of Denver voters would think that this is a worthwhile project.

And finally, I'll be a yes, because I think Denver will be a better city if we build it than if we don't.

That said, I will go back to Councilman's comments and echoed thus far by Councilman Heinzen.

I will tell you, I'm sure by everybody on council, we can't have anybody's children sleeping outside.

I don't care what our city economics are.

That is absolutely flat out unacceptable for any reason.

We, you know, we found a bunch of money and interest from bond payments.

we can find the dough that we need to keep our families inside.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

Council Member Cashman.

Council Member Watson.

Thank you so much, Madam President.

And I will be a yes tonight.

I want to be clear on the why for my yes.

As you considered a community benefit process that this neighborhood went through,

thorough. I think it's a game changer for CBAs going forward of really what that direct impact

is. Even the specifics around the CIF, of which we do not have many CIFs throughout neighborhoods.

I have on the east side, your transparency, your clarity, your annual responsiveness to grant

writing. Those are such unique touch points that require not only a level of understanding

of what your responsibility is for the legacy of the outcomes of the work that you did,

but also the demonstration that the first women's sports team provides a light and a way

for how to do business in Denver.

You didn't skimp on the work.

You laid into it.

And I'm a yes because I honor your work.

I didn't have to sit in those meetings, ignore my husband, ignore my family for all the time.

You did.

And you did a fantastic job.

I'm a yes because I've lived in Denver since 1987.

And I have been aware of Gates.

I was aware of their transition.

I was aware of the piece of dirt that's sitting there.

And I've been aware of the voices of community members asking for something more.

I'm a yes because of the great leadership of Councilmember Alvideris.

Her bringing community together to have those tough discussions.

To lean in for positive change and positive outcomes.

And to derive from this process something that she and her community can lean into, lift up, and exalt as really a template.

for how we as a city operate, bringing two parts of her communities together that have not

always seen eye to eye, have not worked with each other for common benefit. And I'm a yes,

because this is historic. As we look at the opportunity and we see really what a women's

soccer stadium will mean, not just for Denver, not just for the region, not just for the state,

but for our country. This women's team is built on the shoulders of the tens and tens of women

in the state of Colorado that has filled teams across this country but have never had the

opportunity to play in their own state, in their own stadium. I'm a yes. I thank you all for your

work. Thank you for being here tonight, the month before, the month before that. I look forward to

listening to Councilmember Alvidrez and leaning in and supporting her as she supports the people

in her community. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilmember Flynn. Thank you,

Madam President. This has been a very, very interesting proposal to weigh and measure

through the many months that we've had it and digging into all the documents. And thank you

for everyone who's been involved in bringing it to us. Bond issues always earn interest.

they just always do.

There's always millions of dollars in interest

that's earned on our arbitrage,

when we sell the bonds.

And the fact that we had to subsidize

some of the Elevate projects

with capital improvement funds

basically from our general fund budget

or from the capital budget,

excuse me,

while these interest earnings accumulated,

gave us this opportunity to refund our capital improvement fund with that interest in order to do this.

Between $35 and $50 million for the land.

I know that the land under a Mile High Stadium will eventually be turned back to the city as well,

if and when that stadium goes away and is relocated.

So I'm not as concerned about that aspect of it.

I am mostly very enthused by what Councilwoman Alvedra has brought out in the questioning in the earlier session by, and I think Councilman Cashman alluded to this,

the opportunity to bring together the east side of the river and the west side of the river.

I want to quote our departed council member from two terms ago, Paul Lopez, who's now the

clerk and recorder. I don't know if he's watching, but Paul and I were vecinos. I'm in District 2,

he was in District 3, and he, when I came on council, he said to me, you know, sometimes this

city treats the South Platte River as though it were the Rio Grande, and so to have the opportunity

to unite Athmar, Ruby Hill, Valverde,

and other Westside neighborhoods with Wash Park and Baker.

But more importantly, to see them, the volunteers,

come together and negotiate jointly in unison

and speak with one voice.

I know Tim Lopez. I know Anita.

I didn't know the other folks who were on the We Knew group.

But to see them work together was just really inspiring.

And then they came up with a CBA that, in my experience here, stands head and shoulders over most of the other ones I've seen in my 10 and a half years here.

And so I can't deny that effort and the enthusiasm that it's brought together.

And finally, on the housing issue and homelessness, this city spends a lot more than what we're talking about tonight every year on housing and homelessness.

And maybe we're spending it in the wrong way if children are still on the street.

And that's something we need to look at as well.

I can't disagree with that.

But we have those resources already.

We're not spending nothing on it.

we're spending hundreds of millions of dollars on housing and homelessness.

And maybe it's time if children or if that little boy has to go back out and live in a car,

maybe we need to examine how we're spending that money today.

But to me, it doesn't negate what we can do here as well with this old gate site.

And so I will be a yes tonight as well.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

Council Pro Temer, Mayor Kimball.

Thank you, Madam President.

what a journey this has been so far

I first want to thank my council colleagues

for your questions and your inquiry and for the comments

and the sentiments about children and families

I feel it deeply with the family shelter in my district

and I'm working intentionally with

the transfer to a new provider that will happen on

January 1st. So I feel deeply that need that we have to be able to serve families here in Denver.

I was thinking about what to say, and I think that where I am tonight, and I have talked to

a few of you, is I will be a yes. And I'm going to be a yes because I believe we have a better

product. I appreciate the thoroughness in the questions, the knowledge about the zoning,

the questions for funding. I believe that we as a council, that's our job to ask those questions.

It's our job to listen to those answers. And I appreciate the city staff for providing those

answers. Council Member Alvedres, I appreciate you being a champion for your community.

for thinking about the broader community here in Denver, but really shepherding this process through.

The community benefits agreement has been mentioned multiple times.

Really is, I think, a document that will be a template for future CBAs to come.

The community members that pulled this forward and moved it forward, I know it was intensive,

and I really believe that you worked for a very good project and agreement, and a strong agreement.

I really like how, Councilman Cashman, you put it, I think we're a better city because of this project.

Better than if we leave it as an empty plot of dirt.

So those are some of the reasons why I'll be a yes tonight.

There was some comments, and I know that we've talked about consumer spending around the venue,

new spending, display spending. Let me tell you about the hundreds, if not thousands,

I think people who will be coming into the metro Denver region and folks who were not coming

to Denver for food or entertainment. I believe some of you might be in the room,

and we've spoken about this opportunity.

You know, Denver does well, the region does well,

the region does well, Denver does well.

There was a comment earlier, and I believe you made it,

about the idea of soccer and innately built into the sport,

this community, this sense of community built into the sport.

And I think that's one of the most amazing things about soccer

and what we're talking about tonight, you know, football.

technically a low-cost sport to play is played with anything that resembles a ball and you don't

need to choose to play to do it with skill or grace. I'm a return Peace Corps volunteer and I

don't often talk about that but when I was I visited multiple villages. I played a lot of soccer

and I made friends and had experiences that I wouldn't have imagined because of the sport

and this is where I see we have an opportunity to do that now.

I'm a second generation Denverite and the Santa Fe Yards,

formerly the Gates Rubber Company, has been vacant for years

and I think of this again as an opportunity,

that opportunity to be able to bridge communities together.

There's a strategy in soccer, so this is where I kind of,

I'm going to just tell you a little bit about strategy in soccer

to all these people who have strategy in soccer.

but there it's like when you play to an open space right there's not a player there but it's built

and you pass for the possibility do you know what I'm talking about you play to that open space

it's when you're playing aggressively it's when you're playing to win it's when you're thinking

forward and I think that that's when like the receiver anticipates and runs to meet the ball

And I think there are so many similarities to that move to where we are now.

It's to meet the moment.

It's to play to the open space.

It's to run to what that opportunity is.

I think we have intentionality to be female-focused.

Pretty cool.

We have premier major leagues in this city.

And I know there's probably a joke in there,

but we have premier major leagues in this city.

You know, it's going to be like,

damn, the Broncos, the Nuggets, the Rockies.

But we have them, and they're here, and they play,

and we should have women have that same opportunity

in a city with a team,

and heaven knows what we have come to in this city

for players who have come to the metro area

and play at the most competitive and national level.

I shared in the past that I played soccer in my neighborhood,

parks growing up. And if it wasn't for the teams that I played on, I don't know if I'd be here

today. I was able to run and be loud and to be a defender, to score goals, to learn how to be a

teammate. I also learned how to lose. I learned how to win. And both of those trying to do it with

grace. But thank you to the ladybugs. And again, these are the names. So we know what girls'

teams have been. So, you know, to the ladybugs, to the UFOs, to the black diamonds, to my middle

school team. I played for Thomas Jefferson High School. I played on co-ed teams. I played indoor.

I coached my daughter's team for many years, and I cherish those hours spent with the speedy pink

butterflies. My husband and I have spent hundreds, if not thousands, of hours taking our kids, now

young adults to their soccer practices, soccer games. I've been a soccer player, a coach, and a mom.

And for those speedy pink butterflies a mere 20 years ago, a women's soccer team would have been

inconceivable. That's about the time that the Rapids were starting. And I feel like this is a

full circle moment for them. In soccer terms, we have a moment where we see talent on the team.

we see hard work. Now we need to have the visualization to win.

Think about that. We need to have the visualization to win. And I'm saying win,

win for all of us, win for Denver, win for families, and win for families wherever they are.

And we don't know who will come through the ranks. Absolutely, we don't know. But we will be,

who will be inspired or who will be the next champion or who will be the next Olympian,

the leader in their school, at work, in the city, or nationally, internationally.

But we often say, you know, in education, when you educate women, you educate the family.

And I think in terms of where we are today, when you invest in women, we invest in the community.

So I will be a yes tonight. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Councilman Sawyer.

Thank you, Madam President. I really appreciate it. And I will be quick because I think my fellow council members have said a lot of really, really important points.

And so I will make my comments because I know it's hard to go back and forth between online and in chambers for the for the all five of the packages.

And I will start by saying, as it comes to the rezoning, which we will vote on separately in a few minutes, this meets the criteria for the rezoning.

And so I will be a yes.

In terms of the rest of the package, I want to start by saying thank you to the community for the extraordinary work that they have done to bring to us,

I think a more comprehensive and a more valuable community benefits agreement than we have ever seen in my seven years on council.

And I know that that is because not only of their hard work and their time, but also the team coming to the table and being willing to negotiate with the community to come to a common goal.

No pun intended.

And what is that common goal, right? It is to bring something absolutely special to the city of Denver. How lucky are we that we get to even be considering something like bringing National Women's Soccer League Stadium purpose built for women to our city?

What does it say to our girls? What does it say to our community?

It is such a special opportunity. And I really want to say thank you to my fellow council members

who have pushed very, very hard to get a ton of answers to a lot of very detailed questions,

because this is big stuff and it's a risk, right? But we have been provided all of those answers

And we have been provided to the best of everyone's abilities because projections are estimates.

The opportunity to partner with an organization like our team ownership who wants to do something extraordinary for our community.

And I am excited to let them.

You know, I just, as a reminder, about 60%, a little less of our general fund is made up of sales tax dollars.

We have to have strong sales tax in order to have a strong city, in order to have dollars for homelessness initiatives, in order to have dollars for safety initiatives, in order to have dollars to build infrastructure.

And so the opportunity for us to, over the next 30 years, potentially bring in $2.2 billion of revenue to the city of Denver for us to invest in infrastructure, in safety, in communities, in homelessness initiatives, in building additional housing, in all of these things that all of us want to do.

That is an incredible opportunity, and I am so excited about it.

And I will just say one last thing.

As a mom of three teenage girls, one of whom has played soccer, the other two have no interest in soccer.

But if we ever want to talk about bringing a women's basketball team here, call me up.

I am not going to look them in the face tomorrow and tell them that even though the community came to a fantastic groundbreaking agreement,

even though the team was willing to give up a lot of things to come to the table to stay in Denver,

even though council members know this is a risk and have concerns,

even though the mayor's office and all of the city agencies provided us everything we asked for,

I'm not going to look them in the mirror tomorrow and say, I voted no on this.

I'm not.

And so I want to say thank you to everyone who was involved.

I will be an absolutely ecstatic yes tonight, and I am thrilled to see what comes next.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next up, we have Councilman Torres.

Thanks, Madam President.

There are a couple pain points that I have with the project.

And one is that we've got to find $25 million to build the bridge that is actually really needed for residents who are traveling to the stadium to actually get to the stadium.

No matter what, those of us who live and represent near rail lines and rivers and gulches know that we need bridges throughout the city.

And we need, I think, to become much more upfront about their costs to maintain and repair in addition to building.

So I ask that and just lay that on the line because it's going to be coming up more and more.

I haven't particularly appreciated that some of the details from the administration have had to come through force and not more of a willingness to share.

I think we've arrived at a stronger place because of the partnership and several members around on that dais right there and around the table who have been more willing, I think, to dig in to the details and really make sure that we're understanding really complicated old deals and how kind of new information is laid and integrated into them.

So I appreciate everybody's participation in that.

I do believe residents and businesses in the area are really supportive of this project.

I've been approached by residents further west in my own district.

I think it's a really worthy project of city dollars.

And just saying those of us on the South Platte committee know what it means to have industrial corridors that are turning over from hard and often dirty uses to something that feels more welcoming to neighbors.

It costs a lot to transform those spaces, and not everyone is up for it.

We shouldn't all be shocked that all of our stadiums are along rail and the plat.

And we've got to put in the hard work, even as a city, to make sure that those spaces are done right and done well and are sources of pride to the people that live next to them.

So I'm grateful for all of the work that's been done thus far.

I think residents in particular did really laudable work to get to a place of support and a place where they felt like this is mutually beneficial.

So I appreciate that.

And I'll be a yes on these four and the rezoning tonight.

Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilman Parity.

Yeah, thank you so much.

Um, so public spending is always a comparative exercise inescapably.

Our budget is so limited.

Um, and I wish that, um, we were talking about this stadium subsidy because that's what this

is in the context of the exhaustive bond and budget processes that we had this summer and

fall where we were comparing penny for penny for penny, all the stuff that we have to do

here, um, for this to be a beautiful and safe place for all of us to live.

Um, and so kind of in that spirit, here's what this package really involves.

What the city is spending is $20 million for kind of road and bridge and infrastructure around the stadium site.

I have no quibbles with that.

This neighborhood deserves that investment.

We could spend that regardless.

We don't have to have a stadium going in to do the park and do the bridge and the rest of that.

We're going to need $25 million for the other bridge for the traffic and everything else to work out.

We don't have a source for that yet, so TBD.

we're spending $35 million to buy the land underlying this private stadium, which I'm

going to say a little more about. And what we get for that is essentially, again, the enticement of

the stadium itself, getting them to come here instead of to another city, and the option to

buy it back at some point in the future, at which point it would have a defunct stadium sitting on

it that would cost probably $100 million to take apart. And then we're spending $15 million for

improvements to that lot itself, some of which are sort of stadium-specific and some of which

would be needed no matter what's going in there, but which typically a private developer that

owned that land would pay. Not only that, what it means for the Metro District, which is a public

entity, to ultimately be the landowner, the city is going to pay for it, the Metro District is going

to own it. What that means is that this is essentially tax-free and rent-free for this

wealthy private ownership group. So we're letting them build this private stadium on land that will

be owned by a public entity, which means they will not have to pay property taxes ever on that land.

So just the implications of that, it's not just that we're paying for it, it's that it takes it

out of the ultimate tax base for the area. So this $50 million for the parcel itself and the

improvements to the parcel are really just a subsidy. The $20 million for the surrounding

improvements, not so much. I don't begrudge anybody that spending, but this $50 million

is a subsidy. It's the way of picking up part of the tab for a privately owned for-profit facility,

just like a shopping mall or something like that. And I can tell you that there are many

development projects in the city, including safer housing, that would love that kind of subsidy and

that kind of tax break. Every developer in the city would love that. Now, not only that,

But what we just heard tonight, I took to be a bombshell.

It was a number that I had not heard before.

And as you heard, I've been trying and trying and trying to get down to the bottom of this.

What I just heard on the mic for the first time tonight from Mr. Tompkins from the Metro District is that projections, this could go all kinds of different ways, right?

The economy is nutty right now. Fine.

But we are projecting that based on the split of what will happen with tax revenues that come into this district after the existing debt is paid back, the ownership group is expecting or projected to get $120 million of the cost of building their stadium paid back to them from other tax that is generated on the rest of the parcel, not counting property tax that they will pay.

So that is a double benefit to this wealthy private ownership group.

and I'm stunned by that. I've been chasing that information for a long time. I can't get behind

that and I can't understand that. I just can't because the premise of TIF funding is basically

that you're spurring development that otherwise wouldn't happen and that you are then as a city

going to benefit from that in the form of taxes or in the form of that development providing things

that people need, like housing. The rest of this parcel has been cleaned up. That's what all the

debt on the district is for, is for environmental remediation and then some of the basics that go

into preparing land to be developed. It's true that it hasn't been developed here to date.

Whether or not, you know, markets being what they are right now, this is the moment when finally

the folks who own the rest of the parcels in the district are going to decide it's time to build,

I don't know. But as far as residential development, which is what we desperately need,

I fail to see why it's economically more feasible to build housing just because there's a stadium

next door. Maybe we have such a housing shortage, you're going to have renters for that housing.

You don't need to rely on people being extreme soccer fans or something like that to rent units

in Denver. That's not the case. So if it's time for this land to develop, what we need there is

housing. That's what we need in the entire city. And it's very hard for me to see how the presence

of a soccer stadium is going to be the only thing responsible for spurring all this development,

especially if we spent the $20 million on the park and the road and bridge work and the other

things that we need to do, or even some of the money that we're spending to buy this land.

We could put the $50 million into infrastructure around this area if we want it to develop so

badly. And then the existing owners who have filed plans and created this metro district in

an attempt to create residential development would go ahead and do that, and we would get that $120

million in taxes and be able to keep it for things we desperately, desperately need, desperately need.

What are we getting on the other side of this deal? The $7 million of benefits calculated to

be the value of the community benefits agreement. That makes this hard for me because I know these

neighborhoods need and deserve the things that they negotiated in that CBA. $7 million compared

to $170 million subsidy, though.

It's math.

And I really,

Council Member Alvedrez knocked that process

out of the park. The neighbors got together.

They put a huge amount of work into it.

I was really impressed with the agreement that came back.

So given that, you know, if this goes forward

tonight, I'm happy for those neighborhoods that they will

see those benefits.

But there are some fundamentals here that the CBA

can't obscure.

We will get sales tax revenue in 20 years

once this whole metro

district expires. Until then, and

property tax revenue. Until then, we get no taxes on this entire partial because it's already subject

to a Dura and TIF district. So the $2.2 billion in economic activity, the problem with that is

we don't have a comparison. Anything that's placed on this land would lead to economic activity.

If we were to have bought this parcel and spent $50 million or $70 million on it and went ahead

and let some non-profit housing developers come and build housing on it, which by the way, again,

would be a huge boon to them.

Land costs are one of the biggest barriers

to building housing in the city.

So suppose we had done that.

That also gets constructed.

That's part of the economic value

in this economic impact study.

Anything that gets built on this land

leads to economic impact.

And if we were not to decide

to become the owner of that parcel,

then we would be looking at tax revenue on it instead.

If we decide we're going to own it

to spur housing development or something else,

then we would still get the construction benefit.

So that number, it's meaningless unless you compare it to something else.

And we didn't get an economic impact study for something like the city buying the parcel

and then allowing affordable housing to be built on it.

One thing I will tell you is that there is almost no stronger economic stimulus than affordable housing

because first you build it and you get the construction jobs and all of that.

And then the people who live in it are no longer rent burdened.

And no dollar circulates more times in a local economy and more immediately than the dollar of a low-income person who has had their rent reduced.

That is one of the best economic stimuli you can provide.

And we learned that during the pandemic.

So it's a compared to what question, which it always is when we sit up here.

In addition, yeah, and so the majority of that economic activity is what we just heard from our city economist.

three quarters of what she predicted of that $2.2 billion is from the construction itself.

And again, we could finance the construction of something else on that land and still see

those kinds of benefits circulating. It doesn't have to be a stadium. So then at the end of this,

yes, we own the underlying land or rather the metro district does, and we have the option to

buy it later, again, with the stadium sitting on it. And the more we build climate integrity into

our building codes, the more expensive it is to tear down a stadium. So as we start to do things

like try to recirculate those kind of materials. A stadium is a massive, massive thing to try to

take apart and dispose of. And as we do better and better with that as a city, the more and more

expensive it is for us to eventually take something like that apart. This is five times what we would

have needed to purchase a family shelter, or sorry, to rent and operate a family shelter for a year.

It is about what it would take for us to purchase a family shelter. And it's true that we have 400

families on our wait list, families with children who cannot get shelter in Denver right now,

which is something that's never been true in the history of the city.

These are capital improvement dollars.

They can only be used for land, buildings, infrastructure, that kind of thing.

We have multiple bridges in the city that are rated an F.

I'm not going to tell you which ones they are because we all drive on them,

and I'm not trying to be scary about that, but that's a fact.

We are so hamstrung that we have $7 billion of capital projects on the wish list from our agencies

that they consider things that should be funded right now.

We have about $700 million a year of capital funding,

including all of our bond funds.

And so this $70 million is a very meaningful number

in the context of those lists.

And these are things like irrigation,

things like our stormwater system

so that we don't have a 100-year flood

that wipes out people's houses,

roads, bridges, basic stuff that you guys trust us to provide.

These are the facts.

so and here's the thing i really want people to think about um i really wish that instead of

directing your advocacy towards this city council as though our decision to spend 50 or 70 million

dollars tonight was the make or break for whether this um soccer team could come here

your advocacy could have been directed at this private ownership group and here's why

because um they told us back um when we first saw this project that they were estimating that

the stadium will cost $150 to $200 billion, and that our investment of $70 billion would be a

make or break for whether they could afford it. Now they're estimating that it'll cost $300 billion.

They're still planning to build it and spend it. Where's that other $100 billion coming from?

That tells me that it was never a make or break for us to put in $70 million of public money,

because they're going to fund that interregnum. They're going to fund that additional $100 to

$150 million. They're going to raise it. They plan to build it. Maybe they're not.

maybe the economy won't support it, but telling us that our public dollars, our tax dollars that

are so scarce, we're the make or break, and then saying, well, we can still afford this thing

despite the cost increase, that just sits with me. I also understand how appealing it is to see

this vision. This ownership group has spent, I don't know how much, showing us PowerPoints and

plans and doing marketing and hiring lobbying teams and signing people up and turning people out.

We don't do that.

We don't have budgets to do that for public goods.

You know, we're not going to turn out people with a big lobbying effort to fix our bridges.

It's not how it goes, right?

I could put on a pretty beautiful lobbying effort for partially publicly owned housing on this land if we had budgets for that, but we don't.

So just keep that in mind.

It's comparative for us up here.

Zooming back out to the bigger context, you have heard that federal funding for things like roads, bridges, electrification,

the energy grid, even public health infrastructure.

Denver Health is falling down.

All of that is being slashed, slashed.

The state is about to face a billion-dollar budget shortfall.

That will trickle down to us in Denver,

and many of those types of things that get federal and state funding

are infrastructure that we could spend this money on,

and it's not a tiny amount of money.

It's a lot of money.

So we only spend money in context.

I'm not up here to vote no on women or women's soccer.

Council Member Gonzalez-Gutierrez and I were the primary movers behind Colorado's First

in the Nation Equal Pay Act, partly inspired by the national women's soccer team when they

started pursuing their equal pay.

If this team comes here to Colorado, then I hope that the women on the team will be

paid every penny as much as they deserve.

But that will be a private decision, not a public decision, because this is a privately

owned team, a privately owned stadium.

all of those decisions will not be made by us as a city or those of us up here on the dais.

We are essentially paving the way for a private profit enterprise to come into our city,

and we're doing that in competition with other cities because we've all gotten in this habit

of trying to compete with each other to provide subsidies for these kinds of high-profile types of projects and things.

And I just, at some point, we have to stop doing that as cities.

So, I mean, the last thing I want to say is that, again, I'm not voting no on women.

I'm not voting no on women's soccer.

We could spend this money for soccer fields that we would own in our public parks.

We could spend this money on out-of-school programming, which is when people get that exposure to sports, which is also being slashed and is going away.

We're losing it.

We don't know what's going to happen.

Kids are not going to have anywhere to go after school if they're low income.

Parents are going to have to quit working in the coming year.

because we do not have OST funding that used to keep their kids occupied so they could go to their

jobs. That's the kind of place that we're in as a city. I wish that that weren't true. If we were

in a flush moment, I would be thrilled to spend this money. I think it's, I love the vision of

the project. I really do. I love the CBA. I really do. But budgets are comparative. And so I can't

be dishonest with you all about the kinds of things that were comparative. And I can't vote yes on

this. I really wish I could. Thank you all for being here. Thank you, Council Member Parity.

Council Member Gonzalez Gutierrez. Oh, I'm also in the queue, I think. Sorry, Council Member Alvarez.

Sorry, sorry, sorry. I was reading an email. Okay, thank you, Council President. I just want to

acknowledge a few things. Some things that were said that when it comes to stormwater, all homeowners

pay into a stormwater fee, so there is a budget, there is money for that particular fund. I also

do think we need bridges. And if you want to have a job, building a bridge is a good job. It's how

my family actually made a living doing construction. And so this will bring jobs. I will say that

we did have opportunities to invest and we voted against the $2 million Goodyear building that the

mayor was going to purchase with capital improvement dollars that he was going to give

away to a developer to build housing because that was coming at a contingency. So there has been

opportunities. It's not like we're not investing in affordable housing or don't have those funds.

But I do want to acknowledge the terrible, painful testimony that we heard from our immigrant

community here today. Many new migrants from Venezuela who are unhoused and struggling.

And this isn't a this or that. If we vote this down, it doesn't mean we're going to get

to be able to pay your rent or to buy you a house.

That's not the reality of this situation.

There is a continuum of struggle tied to poverty and displacement

that has made this city a hard place to live for the average person.

Housing is not something that most people can afford.

A lot of the people that I grew up with can't live in this city either.

And so I want to acknowledge that.

and a thriving city is not just the amount of housing units.

It's defined by whether people have good-paying jobs.

Not having a job is one of the leading causes of homelessness.

And jobs are what allow people to be stable, to rent.

We did the rapid rehousing.

We did pay people's rent for a year,

and then a year later there, we're unhoused again.

That's not the type of continuum that is successful.

And when we talk about equity across our city,

We recently had the opportunity at the Park Hill Golf Course to create mixed-use housing, mixed-use development that included housing and a park.

But we voted that down as well.

Something that could have directly addressed the housing crisis that we're hearing about over and over tonight, where we could be having houses built over on that land today.

And we're not.

So I want to acknowledge that big fact.

and the amount of investment that we have seen in areas like Northeast Denver.

When we talk about when Council President asks,

who has a space to have a budget retreat for the council?

Guess what? District 7 never does.

Our rec centers are tiny.

They're old.

They've been forgotten.

Overland doesn't have one.

Platte Park doesn't have one.

Platte Park has a park that is the size of my front yard almost.

It's so small.

and they don't complain about not having a park.

And so I want to acknowledge that I'm not upset that Northeast Denver gets a lot of investment.

I'm not complaining about it.

And they deserve it.

What I'm saying is that this project represents a historic level investment of Southwest Denver,

and thank you, Councilman Flynn, for mentioning that.

Southwest Denver is always forgotten.

We don't have these fancy new rec centers.

We don't have, our bridges are falling apart.

And yes, we need bridges to be able to get to work.

I need to cross a bridge and that bridge is actually falling.

And a fire truck can't cross that bridge in case of emergency.

So that is a real problem.

And so is getting children off of our streets.

Voting no does not create new housing.

It does unlock land.

And this land does need a lot of investment in order to get there,

in order to build the infrastructure that we need.

And there is housing that's waiting to be built, like Archway, which will be in our neighborhood of Athmar.

And so this idea that it's this or housing is just not a reality.

And I also want to acknowledge that what happened in Venezuela is terrible.

And I would leave with my kid and cross and walk and risk my life as well.

And my father did that from Mexico.

He came across the river with a recipe in his hat and nothing to his name.

He abandoned his culture, his language.

This is not a joke or something that I don't relate to.

I have family members who are undocumented right now, who have no help from the government, period.

and we come together as a community to help support each other and find ways to live and talk to each other about what is the plan,

if ICE comes tomorrow, those are conversations I'm having with my family.

I don't take this lightly.

We are not your enemy.

We are not your enemy.

We care, and we're trying to govern in probably one of the most difficult times that people have had to govern.

And as six Latinas on council, I will say that we care.

And my colleagues that are not Latino also care a lot.

Councilwoman Lewis cares a lot.

Councilman Cashman, I've seen shared tears.

Councilman Flynn, Councilman Watson, everyone up here cares.

That's why we're a welcoming city.

That's why we're a target at the national level.

That's why Denver's in the news all the time, because we're fighting for you and me and my family.

We're fighting for each other.

So this idea that we want to just hand out money to billionaires and not care about people experiencing homelessness is insane.

It's absolutely insane.

We're fighting so hard every day.

I take my personal time.

I don't pass a woman crying downstairs a month ago who was hit at work, who was an immigrant, who was afraid to talk to her employer.

and I took her into my office and we stopped everything that we're working on that we get

yelled at someone has a pothole whatever and we sat with her and we figured out how to help her

and she was calling me right now I have helped Venezuelan immigrants get housed in the affordable

housing in my neighborhood I took time I went down there I translated because I speak English

I sit with them and I talk to the leaseholder, the landlord and all of those things.

This idea that we're just not caring is not the truth.

We are fighting a beast at the national level.

We are fighting to make sure that people don't hate you all.

And when we took flowers out of the park, I got hateful emails that were going crazy.

Oh, because you're helping immigrants.

Now I don't have flowers in my park.

and people were actually upset.

That's the reality that we face on a regular basis.

And this stadium is not gonna solve,

you know, international problems and immigration.

It is not.

But I think Councilman Cashman said it best,

when it's gonna move a needle,

it's gonna provide some jobs at a time where we need them

because businesses are closing every day.

And I also wanna talk about District 7, District 7,

And these human beings that spend so much time on this have also been yelled at over cold weather shelters,

yelled at over tiny home villages, and they've been holding it together for our community

so that we can provide homeless shelters, urban peak shelter for youth,

so many other services to this city that not every district has shelters.

Not every district has a cold weather shelter.

Not every district has a shelter for youth.

We have the Second Chance Center that was just built.

We have Archway Community Affordable Housing, and the Affordable Housing where I was able to help some of our migrants.

And our community is very welcoming.

Les damos la bienvenida a los vecinos de Venezuela.

Porque somos latinos y sabemos que difícil es.

Hay carnes. Todos están tratando de apoyarles a ustedes.

We are trying to support our immigrants that are here because District 7 has always been a welcoming place for immigrants.

The district number 7 has always been giving the welcome to the shelter for the migrants

in Zunay, to my family who found their home there, to the Vietnamese people who are there.

The Vietnamese people have made a home in District 7.

The Mexican people have made a home.

And now we have Venezuelan people to make a home in District 7.

And I love that.

I can't wait to see more Venezuelan restaurants, just like we have all the taco shops and those

gallitos and tarascos, and we can't even go down to Torres' down in Council District 2.

And those are the opportunities. You guys can be selling your cultural goods, your art,

or your food outside the stadium to people that are walking in, and I guarantee you

that a lot of these people are going to want to buy it. So this is not against you.

it's not against you this is for us and i'll just leave it at that thank you council president

thank you council member lewis yeah i just wanted um to say something briefly um just to

offer a correction um for councilwoman alvidres when she says we voted down housing she doesn't

mean council members she means the people because it was put to a vote of the people in denver and

So I just wanted to clarify that.

And I also wanted to share that I heard pretty extensively from my community that they were concerned that they would be displaced,

which is why many of them were a no on that vote.

So just wanted to clarify that as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Colleagues, thank you all for your candor and just your candor.

For those who've been watching, I've probably taken a lot of arrows.

I've asked this to be held.

I've asked a lot of questions.

And as a woman who grew up in Denver, I absolutely believe in investing in women, period.

Women's athletics deserve visibility, resource, and respect.

and I'm proud that Denver is a part of the broader movement to elevate women on and off the field.

At the same time, I want to be honest about how we arrived here.

The process has felt compressed, highly complex, challenging, personal, and very difficult to navigate.

This proposal has required significant time and due diligence to fully understand,

And I have spent countless hours reading the contracts, asking tough questions, working to understand long-term implications of what we've been asked.

For those who don't know, in all my free time, which I don't have a lot, being Council President, I'm also getting my master's.

And I have asked my professors at UC Denver to help me to look down off these contracts.

What am I missing?

How am I thinking about this?

How am I objectively thinking about this?

How am I not?

Am I jaded?

Am I bringing emotion into this process?

And they have helped me better understand all of the complexities and have helped me redirect some of my questions when I'm confused.

used. And the reason why I say this is this is particularly important because this proposal

reallocates $70 million in capital improvement funds. It does. Simple. That's simple. That period.

It reallocates $70 million of capital improvement. And what can be used on capital improvements are

city-owned assets and infrastructure, such as buildings, such as this building, transportation

networks, which my community has asked me for, for safe bike routes. Recreation facilities that

I do not have updates on that have been needed updates for as long as I've been around.

Water and sewer systems, even though, yes, we do pay water, we still need to create green

infrastructure. Public art, parks outside. I could go on and on, but I won't. I think you

all are getting the point. And these projects are typically directly open accessible to the public

because it's your tax dollars. It seems super simple, right? And tonight's conversation

doesn't exist in a vacuum, as you've all heard my colleagues talk about.

During public comment, we have families who are here who are experiencing homelessness.

For those who may not know, I had the biggest homeless encampment in northwest Denver off of 27th and Zuni, and I did not shy away.

I showed up every night, my husband and I, doing whatever we could.

Sometimes I brought trash bags because literally they needed to move their things and they could not be provided trash bags.

I don't think you all understand when it's Thanksgiving and it's snowing outside to see a little baby in diapers running down the street thinking it's going to get hit by a car.

That was my reality for a while here.

So my family, same as Councilman Albedras, same as a lot of ours up here, have owned a small local restaurant in northwest Denver.

and I know a lot of our families and a lot of our infrastructure and a lot of our things in

Northwest Denver, even though it has gentrified, need money. So it gets back to while we're debating,

why has this been such a debate? For me, personal, I say I statements, because it's 70 million

investment. And that brings a very, like it's a contrast of our responsibilities. You all saw

them here today. I don't think you call could see any more contrast more clearly. Really.

We're giving, we're asking to be invested in two separate things. And also as a part of this

with community, we've had a community benefit agreement. We had neighbors who spoke up,

who stayed engaged. They spent their time, their expertise. And then I will say that I was

adamant about getting some of the waterfall, the payback. I'm not going to go into it. It's

too complicated. So I just want to say thank you, Rob, for negotiating that with me. That was me

going to my professors, asking them, hey, I do not understand why we are not getting that.

I sat down with people, and I finally came up with something.

I was like, all right, what if I could ask for a percentage of the waterfall?

And I had taken a negotiation class for my MBA, and they were like, use those skills,

Sandoval.

You know how to do them.

Present it in a way.

So I want to say thank you for negotiating with me.

Thank you for me taking time to understand where you were coming from in the negotiation.

I think you always understood where I was coming from, that I wanted the city to be

paid back in a different way.

we were able to get that into this process.

But my goal through the whole entire process to slow things down

is to fully understand the proposal,

to ask the hard questions,

and ensure that Denver residents,

especially those that are impacted by budget choices,

remain at the center of this decision.

I understand that these teams are going to come and go.

my I only have a short window of political capital and I was represented to not go along

the get along I do not do that I was elected to represent my community and it's especially

challenging as council president because then I have to call councilwoman Alvidas and say hey

this is in your council district how can I help you how can I assist you hey councilwoman in other

council district. And do I whine about it to my family? Yes. I 120% to anyone who will listen

other than my residents who I represent, because it's a lot. I oftentimes feel like I'm being pulled

in 500 different ways, except for in the way that I actually really want to be pulled. And so you

can hear that from all of us up here. You really can. So whatever the outcome of tonight's vote is,

how this goes down, I believe it is critical that we approach investments of this scale with care,

clarity, and clear commitment to the public good. I do not have any more questions. I've been asked

all day, do you have any other questions? I did not have any other questions.

I'm not going to talk about the rezoning.

I will be a yes on the rezoning because it meets all the criteria.

I'm a rezoning geek.

They sent me the reason I did.

I've been meeting on the rezoning.

The rezoning actually is the easiest part in this whole entire thing.

And I keep coming back to this in my public comment.

Why do I care so much about rezonings?

It's because it's clear.

And if you don't like the rules, you can change them because I'm a land use person.

I'm a land use commissioner, and I've changed the rules in Northwest Denver so that they get better outcomes for my community.

And that's why I like rezonings.

These contracts, adios me.

I did not go to law school, so it has taken me time and time and time and time and time again to read them and fully comprehend them and regurgitate them back to who I'm talking to.

And they always usually say, yes, you've got it.

I don't like the fact that we are landing on the North Bridge, that we are responsible for it.

It is what it is. It's in the contract. I do not agree with that. I'm going to go on the record

and say I do not agree with that. And with that, I will also be a yes today for all five things

moving forward. And I hope in 20 years from now that I am sitting with my daughter

and that this isn't a regret.

I've had one regret that I have voted up here on city council,

and it's still coming to fruition.

And every time it comes up, I'm like, I should have voted with my gut.

And it's hard as a woman in leadership to vote with your gut

because they think you're emotional.

You're not emotional.

You have a second set of intuition that can tell me.

So I'm hoping to the leadership of the team, please, in 20 years from now, let's not have this be something where we say this was a regret.

Because I really did all my due diligence.

I put every single ounce of time and effort I have to the point where I was not even very well suited at my semester this term.

I probably barely, barely got the lowest grade that I've ever gotten because I spent more time on this deal than I did on myself.

Because it's for the greater good and it's $70 million of tax dollars.

It's a lot.

So with that, with no one being Alice in the Cube, Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850.

Council Members Gilmore.

No.

Heinz?

Aye.

Sawyer?

Aye.

Torres?

Aye.

Albitrez?

Aye.

Flynn?

Aye.

Gonzalez Gutierrez?

Aye.

Cashman?

Aye.

Lewis? Nay. Parity? Nay. Romero-Campel? Aye. Watson? Score! Aye. Madam President Sandoval? Aye.

Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 10 ayes. 10 ayes. Council bills 1552, 1553, 1554, and 1850.

have. So I have to call. I have to call order. I'm not even done. I have a whole nother council.

I have a whole nother thing. So can we please just have order? Because this is our last council

meeting. My son just got home from three months and everyone's at home eating without me. So I

would just really want to get home. But this is so important. This is what we give up.

All bills for introduction are ordered published.

Council members, remember that this is the 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.

Council Pro Temer, Mayor Campbell, will you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passage on the floor?

I move that the resolution be adopted and the bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration and do pass in the following items.

In series 25, 1989, 19...

Wait, wait.

Go to the top.

Oh, wait.

No, go to the top of your screen.

You're at the bottom.

Oh, I'm at the...

Thank you.

Please, thank you.

In the block for the following item, series 25.

1796, 2006, 2025, 2026, 2027, 2028, 2029, 2030, 2031, 1971, 2033, 2032,

2017

1808

2021

1978

1974

1976

1989

1975

Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call.

Council Members Gilmore? Aye.

Hines? Aye.

Sawyer?

Aye. Torres? Aye. Albitrez? Aye. Flynn? Aye. Gonzalez-Cutierrez?

Cashman? Aye. Lewis? Aye. Parity? Aye. Romero-Campel? Aye. Watson? Aye. Madam President Sandoval?

Aye. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 12 ayes. 12 ayes. The

resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and due pass.

There are no proclamations being read this evening. We have one required public hearing

on Council Bill 1541. As a reminder, the staff report oral and written testimony from members

of the public and council members' questions on this bill were heard last Monday, December 15,

2025, and the public hearing was closed. Upon request of the administration, the vote on this

item was postponed to today when the four other bills related to the soccer stadium

financing would be on final consideration, which is passed.

As such, Council Pro Temer-Maryl Campbell, will you please put Council Bill 1541, changing

the zoning classification of 709 South Delaware Street in Baker on the floor for final passage?

I move that Council Bill 1541 be placed on final consideration and do pass.

It has been moved and seconded.

Do we have comments by members of council regarding Council Bill 1541,

changing the zoning classification of 709 South Tower Street in Baker?

No?

All right.

Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 1541.

Council Members Gilmore?

No.

Hines?

Aye.

Sawyer?

Aye.

Torres.

Aye.

Torres.

Aye.

Albedrez.

Aye.

Flynn.

Aye.

Gonzalez Gutierrez.

Cashman.

Aye.

Lewis.

Aye.

Parity.

Aye.

Romero-Campo.

Aye.

Watson.

Aye.

Madam President Sandoval.

Aye.

Madam Secretary, close the voting.

Announce the results.

11 ayes.

11 ayes.

11 ayes.

11 ayes.

11 ayes.

11 ayes. Council Bill 1541 has passed. Now you can celebrate. On Monday, January 5,

2026, Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 2051 designating 1407 East 11th

Avenue as a structure for preservation. Any protests against Council Bill 2051 must be filed

with the Council offices no later than noon on Monday, December 29, 2025. There be no further

business before this meeting this meeting is adjourned

Follow Follow