Welcome back to this monthly meeting of the parks, Arts and Culture Committee of Denver City Council.

Join us in the Parks Arts and Culture Committee starting now.

Hi, good morning.

Thank you for joining us this morning at Parks Art and Culture Committee, the best committee on this beautiful morning.

And I will my name is Flora Alvidres.

I'm the chair of Parks Arts and Culture Committee, and we can start today by introducing the council members.

I'll start with my co-chair to my right.

Vice Chair.

Vice Chair.

Hey Denver.

Chris Hines, Denver's Perfect Dead.

Chantel Lewis, District 8.

Darren Watson, Flying District 9.

Diana Romero Campbell, Southeast Denver, District 4.

Really excited to hear from Parks today.

So Jesus, you want to take it away and introduce your team.

For sure.

Good morning, Council members.

Jesus Arranti Community Engagement Specialists with Parks and Recreation.

We have several items that we will bring presenting to you today.

I'll have them introduce themselves and then we will get right into the presentation.

Thank you.

I'm Jessica Anderson, the Urban Ecology Supervisor with Denver Parks and Recreation.

Good morning, everyone.

I am Kristen Beer, Design Construction Supervisor with Denver Parks and Recreation.

So as I mentioned, we are we have 19 on call contracts that will be presented as an action item.

In addition, we will be presenting 10 ecology contracts to you all.

Those are running about a week behind, and so we want to make sure to be able to present them.

Those are not on action.

So those we will not be voting on today.

Today for the agenda, we will be talking about on calls, what uh how we use them, the reason that that they're a good thing, and we will provide some background on these contracts and how they will work.

Uh I will be kicking off uh the purpose and the use of our on-call contracts in relate in relation to uh the design and construction or the landscape architecture and related design services.

Um, some of the benefits on our on-call contracts, um, it provides a list of consultants that are pre-approved with experience and knowledge of the DPR standards and park focused design teams.

Um it condenses timelines and provides more efficient process project starts.

Uh it produces procurement or reduces procurement timelines and supportive of all small business and reduces proposal generation.

Um we also encumber funds on an ongoing and as needed basis.

Um, our selection process is very competitive.

It uh follows the formal RFP process and it's public publicly publicly um issued through BidNet.

Um we also have selection committees consisting of at least five internal subject matter experts.

Um it does follow the selection rating criteria and evaluations.

Um I think that is it.

Umil calls through mini-bid processes.

We have a procurement committee um set up within the um planning design and construction um teams.

It's a group of internal management level subject matter experts that review scope, details, and scale of the project to ensure that we provide equitable opportunities for all firms to propose on projects.

So the committee um actively monitors workloads across um all firms, provides oversight without slowing delivery processes, and prevents disproportionate allocation to one consultant.

Um so we want to just make sure that we're being very equitable as we're distributing all the work among all of the on-call consultants.

Um as funding is available, projects are approved and they're presented to a select group of consultant firms.

Um we we do have a formal bid process for three or more firms if the anticipated budget is 150,000 or more.

Um the on-call contracts are that are being presented today.

Um we have 19 total contracts for the on-call landscape architecture, planning, design and related services contract.

They'll be utilized for citywide and specific um site-specific vision planning, community engagement, and parks and trails design.

Um then also uh Jessica will be providing more information on the future um council consideration.

Yes, thank you.

So as Jesus mentioned, our ecological contracts are about a week or so behind, so they are not an action item today, but we wanted to present to give you the full picture of these services.

The RFPs went out at about the same time.

So this is for our restoration ecological and technical services contract, which will utilize we will utilize citywide and for site-specific ecological restoration, our landscape transformation program.

So we're moving bluegrass and replacing with native landscapes, our natural resource inventory and analysis projects, monitoring, natural resource planning and design, aquatic resource management, wildlife management, and some environmental site assessment and remediation projects.

So I'll continue to present those first and then I'll hand it back to Kristen with the action item today.

So our restoration contracts, we received 19 proposals when we put this out to RFP through BitNet, and we've selected 10 firms.

Five of those firms are new to this on call contract list with the city.

Each contract has a maximum capacity of three million dollars over a four-year period with the option for one year extension.

This is the exact same capacity and number of firms as our previous restoration on call list that was issued in 2022.

This list does not have a specific DISPO goal due to the specialized expertise and limited firms in the region that provide these types of services.

However, many of these firms do meet MB Weebe and small business enterprise requirements or have subconsultants that do.

So while they don't have the goal, they're still doing a lot for our small business community.

And our 10 selected firms include AloTera Restoration Services, Biohabitats, Elite Industries, ERO resources, GEI consultants, HMI, land tech contractors, matrix design group, mergent, and Stantec Consultant Services.

And the typical scope and service kind of example projects that this on call list of firms has performed in the past and likely will in the future include maintenance district specific weed management support contracts and site-specific restoration scopes of work.

This includes our habitat connectivity study that we are wrapping up now.

We previously did a turf grass study throughout the city, and we have our landscape typology data set.

This group also performs some of our landscape transformation projects.

Some of the current ones include City of Takayama Park in Cherry Creek, Roseman Park in South Denver, and our Quebec medians that I know you've all heard of.

This list has also contributed to our Sloan's Lake Environmental Assessment, so working on lake management across the city, and then habitat-specific improvements, such as the Duck Lake Cormorant Nest platforms at City Park and Prairie Dog and Beaver Management support throughout the city.

And with that, I'll hand it back to Kristen to elaborate on the landscape architecture design contracts.

Jessica.

So for the on-call landscape architecture design related services action item, we received 28 proposals and we have 19 consultant firms that are wanting to be selected.

There are 14 consultants for the MWBE pool, and we also have five consultants for this specific SBE pool.

Within those two pools, we have four new contractors that will be new to DPR.

Within the MWBE group, it is a $2.5 million contract capacity.

We also have a 1.5 million dollar contract capacity for the SBE pool.

The larger capacities for the MWBE group are to deliver DPR capital program and bond projects.

And both pools will have a four-year contract term with one-year extension option.

The selected consulting firms for the MWBE is Civitas, DHM Design Corporation, Dick Studios, Horde Coplin Mock, Livable City Studios, Matrix Design Group, Mundus Bishop, Norris Design, RBI Planning Landscape Architecture, Sasaki Associates, Stream Architecture, Stream Landscape Architecture, the Architari Group, Valerian, and Wink Associates.

For the SBE firms, it's NDUB Design, Flow Design Collaborative, Goodbye and Associates, Studio Compo, and Studio Superbloom.

In regards to the DS BO, the MWBE goal for all contracts for the main pool.

Each contract within this pool has an MWBE participation requirement of at least 20%.

For the SBE, the small business enterprise, they have a SBE contractor self-performance requirement of 30%.

So the idea behind the SBE enterprise is to build the next generation for parks design and consultants.

So we're really trying to make sure that they have the ability to be able to self-perform and not needing to have to comply with the MWBE requirement.

This really kind of helps bring them up into understanding park standards and being able to eventually hopefully become an MWBE.

The scopes and services examples.

Improvements and upgrades to system-wide assets for regional trails, greenway systems, bridges, and medians.

So we are requesting for council approval for the 14 on-call MWBE contracts for landscape architecture, planning and design and related services, and also for five of the on-call for the SBE contracts.

And then Councilmember, just one quick point of clarification.

These will be skipping next week's mayor council.

So if it is moved out of committee, you will see them on the floor next Monday on the 13th, is when they would be on the floor.

That's more due to the time sensitivity on these and making sure that we're able to transition any projects before our contracts are out.

I will also say as we get to questions, I forgot to say that we do have other members of Denver Parks and Recreation here in case we are unable to respond.

We have our director of planning design construction, Gordon Robertson, and several from his team that are here.

Great.

Thank you so much.

Wonderful.

Well, we'll start with uh Councilman Heights in the queue.

Thank you.

And I agree this is my favorite committee.

Dang.

You said there's some time sensitivity.

Um can you help explain what the time sensitivity is?

Absolutely, I can take that question.

Um sorry, can I just interrupt for one second?

I need to apologize to Council President, is online, and I forgot to acknowledge her and go to council members online and the just wanted to acknowledge that.

Go ahead.

No worries.

Thank you, Councilman.

Um just to answer that question in relation to the sensitivity of the timeliness of this.

Um, our existing on-call contracts, um, they are expiring in June of this year, and so we want to make sure that our new existing or the new proposed contracts are executed and fully able to be used, um, so there's no gap with producing and moving work forward for to support both our CIP projects, legacy, and also the bond projects.

All right, thank you.

Um, the other kind of uh thanks to another agency, I have gotten a newfound um bit of reservation on on-call contracts uh that the on-call amounts are at most two and a half million, or is there some that were three million?

Um the the size of the contracts um give me less pause than uh then you know if they were 30 million dollars or I don't know why I pulled that number out other than those are a lot of the amounts of DOTI on-call contracts.

Yeah.

Um but uh what I see uh as I as I mentioned to um to another agency, um the things that are um operational in nature, like we should mow the lawn until we um you know replace bluegrass with uh native vegetation.

Um we have to do you know sprinkler repair and and whatnot.

And so those items that are operational in nature, I don't have any concern with um you know with on-call contracts, but I see in slide five and um and then again in one of the end slides uh that you're also um some of these contracts are for citywide and site-specific vision planning.

Um contracts that are kind of strategic in nature.

Um there's one example, Congress Park um had a public process to determine how to uh do some modification in Congress Park.

Um the public process included some pickleball courts, and after the process wrapped up, there was a decision made um not to do pickleball courts that wasn't um you know part of the uh the public process.

Um and so um hopefully we stakeholder everything in our city because um everyone you know at the table is funded by taxpayer dollars and um and all the work that we do, including all the on-call contracts are paid for with taxpayer dollars, and so we want to make sure that we um include the community.

So perhaps you could tell me a little bit more about what site wide and specific vision planning um are are part of these on-call contracts.

And and I'm sorry, one other thing.

Um by saying yes to on-call contracts, city council is um removing its own ability to um to uh uh to weigh in on contracts that are over 500,000 or 500,000 and over.

So that's you know, if we're um if we are voting to remove our our oversight, like to understand a little bit more why.

Thank you.

That's a great question.

Um so for the site specific vision planning or citywide um you know specific projects that kind of more aligns with um, for example, like Park Hill framework planning.

Um we knew that we needed to do kind of an overview, a framework, a vision plan of like what is this new park going to be.

Um so that um that specific um project and contract utilized our on-calls for or one one of the one of the on-calls that's on on the current um master on call list to to produce that work.

Um for other site-specific vision planning.

We you know, we're really understanding like what other park projects that will be needing kind of like a more higher level vision plan.

Um I believe Hershorn Park is one that's on the bond um list as well that we are hoping to utilize the on-calls to support that.

And would those be more than $500,000 in those vision plans anyway, or would they be like uh Park Hill Park people said yes, not uh trying to be shady.

No, no, no.

We should get rid of that part.

Um but you know that's uh uh would we have a fair amount of bond, we have a bunch of bond funding for for Park Hill Park and um uh but Herschel Park, I think was the one you mentioned, maybe um maybe that vision process wouldn't be 500,000.

I don't I don't know.

You I I'm not as familiar with all the park system as probably parks it.

Yeah, we we anticipate that we would be able to utilize our on-calls for those specific um vision planning um because we're hoping we're envisioning and anticipating that budget amount would be less than 500,000.

Thank you.

Thank you, committee chair.

Thank you.

Uh we'll go next in the queue with Councilman Lewis.

Oh, thank you so much.

Uh uh Councilman Heinz got a few of my questions, but I I was curious, do you all have a timeline of the projects?

Like if you have these number of on-call contracts, how you are going to be using the specific project or the specific contracts for specific projects?

So if it's CIP, if it's bond, what it might be for the on call call on call contracts.

Um yeah, we we utilize um the on-calls to support you know uh variation of you know funded driven projects, so it can be bond CIP legacy, um, and really those can run concurrently.

So we often have um you know two or three that are going out to request for a proposal for our design consultants to provide a proposal on.

Um and so I think that the timing of it, we we kind of take them as they come up, um, and then as soon as our project managers um and planners do have capacity to take more on as well.

So, how do you arrive at the number of on-call contracts that you all bring before council?

Is it based on like a long-term plan, the the parsing out of projects or um timelining out of projects in order to determine like I need 19 on-call contracts in order to be able to deal with the next six years?

Yes, yeah, great, great question.

Yes.

So we so our existing on-calls that we have now, we have 13 on calls for the FWBE pool, and we have five for the SBE pool.

Okay.

So we're only increasing it one extra firm, but we're also increasing the term a year longer.

Um and also acknowledging that we've um the bond just also passed, and so we're also anticipating we're gonna get more projects through the bond and also through the CIP.

So we're trying to kind of balance that.

We did take into consideration how much of the capacity was used in this last on-call and we we had enough capacity to kind of you know gather or be able to support the additional projects that we anticipate for the next um four years.

So if you add one, is it going to be enough capacity to support all of the bond projects meeting forward?

Yeah, okay.

And then do each one of these on-call contractors have subcontractors?

I I just looked at Wink correctly, yes.

And they had like nine listed, is that pretty common for yes.

Okay, yeah, okay uh and the reason being is because they are a landscape architecture prime.

And so if we have specific community engagement consultants that were like, hey, we have a robust community group that we would want some additional support with, um, their subconsultants can be able to provide those services.

Or if they have um specialties in irrigation design or landscape transformations, things like that, we're able to have a robust team to take on the whole project.

Got it.

And then restoration, is that like the part are they pool in Councilman Watson's district?

Is that restoration?

When you all mentioned restoration in your presentation, you say ecological restoration.

Is that example?

When I was talking about restoration, I'm referring to ecological restoration, so landscape uh uh weed management, landscape restoration, like Quebec, like Quebec, yes, yes, whatever.

Yes, thank you.

So not um structures, not traditional pool amenity restoration that would be through our um that could potentially be through the design on calls or through construction on calls.

So the the last question is just about Quebec.

When when do we fix that?

The medians on Quebec.

It is still under establishment for the this summer.

We still have establishment and maintenance funding with that contractor, so they are still doing weed management.

These projects can take three to five years before they're fully established.

So we continue to ask for patience as this looks more like our constituents just don't share that same joy with me on the book.

Thank you.

Those are only questions.

Thank you so much, councilman is councilwoman Romero Campbell.

Um thank you.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for the presentation.

Um, you actually touched on a few of my questions, so that's great.

We're good on the um the I guess the finer point on the next tranche of projects.

Where would we see the projects that are coming up next?

It's not just all bond projects.

Um is it in the strategic plan or is there a way that we could see what is coming down the pike?

Um great question.

Um I believe that we do produce like a quarterly report on like how on-calls and our current contracts are being utilized.

Um, and I'm not sure, Jesus.

I don't know if you have more information on when the last one was shared or when we're gonna be able to post the next.

So I think there might be two two separate questions.

The report that we produce are for the on-call capacity and what was used for the previous quarter.

Uh I think council member, if I'm understanding correctly, what you would like to see is a list of projects that will be used within the on-call.

Yeah.

Um, so I don't know if there is a full list.

I know recently we were doing CIP briefings with all council members on projects that are ongoing for 2026 and what is being considered into 2027.

I don't know if that's uh an exhaustive list of projects.

Um that would be something that we could follow up on and make sure that you know, if we have a list of those projects that were gonna be used, that we are able to provide that for you.

Okay, great.

Um, that would be wonderful.

I appreciate that.

Um, and then also would and my next part to that specifically to um my district, uh, when you mentioned trails, uh, there's a lot of work and a lot of I think momentum around the Highline Canal, and just wanting to know if there would be additional um connection or would a subcontractor be used to help design um in collaboration with like the Highline Conservancy and Arapaho County, the Highline Canal.

I can take that question.

Um council member, good question.

Right now, the current trail projects that are under design with Highline Canal Conservancy and Arapahoe County are going through our landscape architecture on calls.

So the firm supporting that current design process is through these on-calls.

Okay.

Good.

I want to make I want to make sure we're still moving forward with the Highline Canal.

And I think that related to that, we also have, you know, we just got put into stage one, you know, water restrictions or to drought.

Are all of these on-call contractors also taking into consideration?

Like, is there are you going to expedite some of the water use?

So if it's the landscape transformation, I mean, is there is there something else that's going hand in hand with the current drought that we are experiencing?

Yep, that's a great question.

Um, we do have a water conservation group that works directly with Denver Water, and so they are understanding kind of what our restrictions or limitations are, especially when we are proposing new projects.

Um so um there was discussion of potentially having a waiver kind of put in place just so we can really understand that we do get the support of the full establishment for all of the the native conversions and and um different landscapes that are going to be put in and installed for these projects.

Yeah, we don't know all of the information, but we can definitely provide more once we know.

Okay.

Um and then I think just more than anything, it's um as these I know that I'm just thinking of like the CIP conversation that we had specific to the projects.

Um of them are trails, some of it is you know, playground restoration, um, and thank you for the tarp that did get put up, I think, in this last week at Hampton Heights Park.

That was big win.

Just saying, big win.

Um so a shade tarp was uh this was a big deal.

Uh but I think that the um what we're finding is is that there's a lot of trails, a lot of parks, a lot of the um landscape transformation, the medians, all of those pieces are just really coming fast and furious um in District 4, and so hopefully some of these projects or these subcontractors could be used to make sure that these projects come to completion.

How about that?

Anyway, um, thank you.

Thank you, madam chair.

Great.

Thank you for those questions.

And I will say this is a topic we all hear a lot about as council members.

People really appreciate the work that you do, and it's very important.

Councilman Watson.

Uh thank you, uh, committee chair, and I'm gonna start my question with giving you the answer that you're gonna provide me insisting that you will parrot that back so whether it's you Jesus or the director.

The answer to my question is going to be yes, Councilmember Watson.

And in the next 30 days, we'll put this in writing.

So I'll ask the question.

Don't play.

Oh, Ms.

Mr.

Curtis Barr pool.

We've had a robust discussion over the last several years, and I um applaud parts and rec staff and consultants and everyone for the good work that you've done to make sure we've come to a conclusion that community has informed, community is led, and community is agreed to.

Um, for the record, can you uh Jesus or someone else from the team share that yes?

Um we are on track with Mysticia Curtis Park to begin implementing based on the last schedule that was provided.

It's a little bit longer than the 2027 date within the bond.

Um so someone I would love for someone to say that yes on Mike.

So Gordon, I'm looking at you with a side eye.

So it's someone's gonna stand up and say yes.

So we're gonna wait this meeting until someone does.

What is the exact question?

The question is that we're gonna move on the current schedule for execution of Mystice of Curtis Park based on the schedule was that was last communicated.

It won't be 2027, but 2028.

My question to you is is that still a yes, and you have to say it in a mic and introduce yourself.

Yes, right.

Good morning, Gordon Robertson, director of our planning design construction.

Uh the answer is yes, Councilman Watson.

All right, and the follow-up question to that is that we were looking at a larger budget.

We don't need to go into the specific numbers, but that larger budget also impacts um um for kind of the calculation for the arts and venues piece that follows this which we're beginning discussions.

Has that larger budget been solidified as to what that approximation is?

And will we in the next 30 days be able to communicate that um out in writing to community so we can begin the calculation, clear calculation for arts and venue spending?

That work is underway, Councilman Watson.

So that'll be that 30 days.

Well, you give me a timeline.

We will get that information out to you as soon as we have it.

It is being worked on.

We do anticipate to have the whole funding.

Yeah, exactly where those dollars are coming from, and maybe not yet been fully decided, but we will get that to you.

I'll let you squirm on that, but I want to make sure we are clear because this has been robust, great community process.

I want to put a close on that and move to the next step.

And this is related because it's bond related, so based on your presentation.

Thank you, Gordon.

Thank you.

No other questions.

Thank you, Councilman Watson.

Now I know where all the outreach we've been needing in district seven.

Um that is something that I wanted to highlight.

I know there's been a few park projects, one Platte Park that was a bond project, and Asperger and Park has been on the design list for a long time.

There hasn't been any movement or outreach on what that design could look like.

Could you let me know where we're at, when we can expect those projects to get started?

And one of the questions, yeah, we'll start there.

Um good questions.

Um I will start with Platte Park.

So Platt Park was on the approved bond list.

Um so we are working with the bond team, um, strategizing what project managers are going to be taking that on and really solidifying those timelines.

Um so hopefully within the next couple weeks, more information will be presented to the council and community groups.

Um as it relates to Aspergan Park, um, that is on one of the projects that is the next one to assign to one of our project managers.

Um so we are working on getting that assigned in the next month or two.

Okay, great.

And then previously uh with councilwoman Romero Campbell's question about um the trail currently being worked on.

You said that is part of these contracts, however, these contracts are not approved yet.

So, how is it being worked on but yet still part of these contracts?

We do have existing on-call contracts that um are um currently executed.

Um they do not expire until June of this year, and so um any new um park project requests or work orders that are going to be um being able to utilize some of our consulting services that will um assume to be on this new on-call.

Okay, so currently, if there is an assignment, it's off of those contracts, and that can go past June, right?

One of the sub-contracts under the on-call contract, correct.

Yeah, and so um we are working with our contracts team to understand the duration of how long um the existing contracts that are on our on-call currently can extend through.

Um, but those will continue until that work is completed.

Great, and I really do appreciate you speaking to the small business aspect and the minority women business enterprises.

That's really important to see that we're uplifting.

And I appreciate especially that there's new businesses that you're adding to the repertoire.

I think that's also extremely important.

Um, and just to clarify, when we talk about these, it's 2.5 million per contract and 1.5 million per SBE contract.

And those are subcontractors or those are the primary contractors on these are the primary contractors.

Okay, great.

Um, and so when we look at this dollar amount, and how many years are these for four years?

Four years.

What um these projects are only funded through the budget process, correct?

So that's what they're capped at, not the dollar amount that we are seeing in front of us today.

Correct.

And and the funding sources for those, like you mentioned are variety from some are bond funded, some may be general fund, and some may be special revenue fund.

Is that the case?

Correct.

And you don't have any kind of breakdown of what that looks like because we really don't know, right?

Correct.

Um, great.

I appreciate that.

Um for the RFP process, is that a hundred percent managed by DPR?

Yes.

Okay.

Um I think I'm just going through all the questions I read down, but you answered some while you were going through it.

So I appreciate that.

For these contracts, are they design and build, or is that a whole nother RFP process that will have to come for the actual construction of the it's called landscaping, but I'm also curious: does it include playground design?

Um so the current on-call that we're speaking of is for the landscape architecture design and related services.

So the construction and implementation that's going to be a different on-call that will be presented closer to September.

Okay, so there's current on-calls for construction then that are expiring when in September.

Okay.

So you're coming right when they're expiring.

Um well, a little bit before.

We don't have the timeline set up yet.

Um we're going to be issuing that out for public RFP in the next week or so, I believe.

Okay, and then the other question around the design is this strictly plants when we talk about landscaping, or is it also playgrounds and anything else that a park may need?

Um to answer that question, yes.

Sorry, I didn't answer it before.

Um it covers all of the like trails, plants, uh, playgrounds, tennis courts, fields, anything that's more of the like horizontal um like park scope of work that we typically see.

Great.

And then you also mentioned maintenance districts, and so that should be funded by the maintenance district.

So is this just a service we're providing to the maintenance district, and then they then pay us for, or can you clarify that for me?

That might have came from my presentation on the restoration ecological on calls of I mentioned having district weed management contracts.

So that provides support to our open space team and our operations team to make sure we're managing all statewide listed noxious weeds.

So that means hiring contractors to help us do some of that management.

Most of that comes out of the operating budget that each district has assigned.

That the maintenance district has assigned.

So it's it's supporting the maintenance of the parks.

And that money gets paid back to the city, or how does that work?

So it's it's our operating districts.

So it's it's DPRs, yeah.

It's not a local maintenance district or anything like that.

No, it is the the dollars that are specific to our operations, and then it is pulled from theirs depending on how much is needed be between them.

So of the six districts.

And what I I would like to see a list, and you can send this after of what the nauseous weeds that we are trading are.

Um just very curious around what that what that is.

Um you mentioned how much capacity was used previously, how much capacity of the previous tranche of these contracts was used.

I don't have that specific information as of yet.

Um we following me.

Yeah, I don't know if we will have the exact numbers, but we'll follow up and get you what has been spent down on on the capacity for the previous on calls.

Great.

And then lastly, I just want to uplift.

I had a similar question to councilwoman Diana Romero Campbell around obviously the drought conditions and how we're taking that into account when you think of landscaping.

The first thing I think about how I'm landscaping my yard this year is going to be different than how I've landscaped it in the past, and so I love to hear more follow-up on how we're thinking about integrating those drought conditions into some of this, even thinking about, for example, aspirate Burgund Park, it's almost all grass.

Um, probably not a great use of water.

Uh, and how are we thinking of I know we're working on that on a on some level, but I think for you know, my district just thinking about Houston Lake Park right now being completely empty, people are really upset about that, and then we have all of this grass, it's kind of not adding up at the moment, and it seems like something we need to urgently address rather than in the next 10 years we're gonna do better.

Um, so I just want to continue to uplift that.

So thank you for bringing that up, Councilman Rao Kempel.

That's all we have.

So thank you so much for this work.

Really excited.

Do I have a motion to move these forward?

Second moved by Council Ownless, seconded by Councilman Hines.

Uh I'm not sure if you're on this committee, but uh any opposed?

Great.

That's the story of my life.

Yeah.

Great.

Thank you.

Uh so we can go to the next presentation.

Thank you.

Yes, thank you both.

Don't you worry.

Well, slim budgets these days we've seen what we can do.

It's mobile.

Thank you.

And then I will be presenting on the Globeville Community Center lease agreement.

Um, I do want to let you know that we do have well, Denver Park and Reparation leadership here.

We have our real estate uh director here in case there are any specific questions for real estate.

Um, the selected vendor, Denver Dream Center is also here in case you all have any questions for them, and then a partner that they're working with to uh staff the community center global first is also here in case you all have any questions for them, or you think that we're unable to respond to uh as an agency.

So we are here to for council resolution 260476, which is a use agreement between the City of Denver and Denver Dream Center for 90,000 and for three years to occupy and program the Gloville Recreation Center, the former Lopeville Recreation Center in Council District 9 at 4496 Grant Street.

Denver Parks and Recreation operates 30 recreation centers throughout all the city.

You are able to see through the map where those recreation centers are in that small little red square where I-70 and I-25 meet is where this Globeville Recreation Center is in the Globeville neighborhood.

So just to give you some direction, there are quite a bit of recreation centers in that area, and this will be one that if this contract is approved, will also be online to be used by community members.

Some history in 2010 due to a capacity, there were three recreation centers that were removed from management by Denver Parks and Recreation and were actually managed by a third party, so separate vendors.

Since then, two of these recreation centers have come back to operations through Denver Parks and Recreation.

That's Johnson in north of I-17 in Globeville, and then in far southwest Denver, we have College View.

Those are now back online, and they've been for several different years.

Globeville has maintained as a recreation center that we have programmed through a third party.

It is also important to know that the agreement that was with a previous vendor ended in the fall of 2025, and so that's why we started this RFP process.

The RFP process, we had used the 2017 RFP as a basis for this current one.

That one had a lot of community input in it, and so we wanted to make sure that that was moved on and still used for this RFP to make sure that there was still community insight into what how the center would be programmed and what vendor we would be looking at.

You could see how the RFP was written.

One of the most important aspects for this RFP was access and utilization of the center, making sure that it's open for community members to be able to go in and use it, offering a what wide variety of programs that everyone could use.

The actual RFP was published on July 1st.

Similarly, it was publicly available through our bidnet process.

The it closed on August 28th, 2025.

There were three responses, and those responses were scored by council staff that included recreation directors and administrative staff looking at those and scoring them on the criteria written by the RFP.

The selected vendor is Denver Dream Center.

They are a local nonprofit that has 15 years of experience doing high impact work in all ages, abilities, and backgrounds throughout Denver.

Their current headquarters is in the five point uh in the five points neighborhood.

They're really good about offering wrap around services to address immediate needs and also work with people for long-term needs.

Annually, they serve about 50,000 people through their programming and have served one million meals since 2018.

They're really community-centric, have a lot of strong partnerships, both with very high-level entities and very grassroots.

And as I had mentioned earlier, one of the potential partners that's really focused in the global neighborhood is here, as they are working together to be able to program this recreation center to meet the needs of that neighborhood.

The actual agreements of the term, so the center will they will have access to the center for three years.

There is a rent payment that they will be paying to the city.

You could see the amounts.

So they really laid out programming almost hour by hour from 7 a.m.

to to when they're open, two closures some nights at 8 p.m., others at 10.

So they really have laid out how they're gonna program the space to make it accessible for all in this neighborhood.

Uh as you can see, they really focus on the youth adult in senior programming or active older adults as we we say in uh in Denver Parks and Recreation.

You can see that they really try to focus on what is needed for those groups, and they plan it throughout the days so that the center is constantly having people come in and out, families are able to enjoy and so they're really programming the space for everyone in the community with the type of programs that uh that they're having.

I'll leave this slide here for a bit since I know there's quite a bit of information for for everything that that they are offering.

Our staff, since the tenant move out, has been hard at work to get the rec the community center back up to a standard where we could bring in a new tenant.

We are confident that the center is um is now ready.

If this agreement is to be approved, uh Denver Dream Center uh is ready to move in.

We have the the space ready to have a tenant move in.

You could see some of the pictures and some of the work that uh that they did.

The previous tenant did leave the in in good condition, but there were things that needed to be improved to make sure that that those improvements are something that the new tenant did not have to take care of.

Finally, we're here uh for approval of uh council resolution zero four seven one for the use of Globville, the former Globeville Recreation Center on an agreement with the city and county of Denver and Denver Dream Center for 90,000 and three years, a three-year term.

And with that, we will take any questions.

Thank you so much, Jesus.

No problem.

Um we will start with fine district nine.

Uh thank you so much, committee chair.

Thank you so much, Jesus sent DPR staff.

I know this has been a um lengthy ongoing discussion with community and with some freight ends, quite frankly, community members with some concerns about the contracting process, uh, the community process before.

I know Jesus said you've participated in the RFP process.

Can you describe why the um the community informed process that that was done in 2017 was not duplicated during this process?

What was kind of the thinking within DPR for um simply leveraging the outcomes but not duplicating the steps that we're taking in 2017?

So, as I mentioned, we did use that as a basis.

Also, we felt comfortable since this was not something new that that was taking place.

It was something that we had previously done and moved forward.

I think if it was going to be a completely new process, similar to some of our other previous recreation centers that I had mentioned in Johnson and College View, we would have done a more robust uh uh a more robust community engagement process, but because this was something of a continuing programming, we we decided to keep it because we don't know.

We uh we don't know who is gonna apply, right?

It could have been that simply the previous vendor would have applied, and so they are already meeting what the community is asking for in this particular RFP as it progressed.

We did have different applications that needed to be scored, and so that's why, because it wasn't a new process, it was a continuing process, and you know, we didn't know who was gonna apply, so we were really using that basis of the community input that we had received previously.

And and I would say as the council member um for that um uh neighborhood, the council member for district nine not having this same process as 2017 um uh created what felt from community, and as they've communicated very clearly to me, that that was a miss.

There was an opportunity because it was a robust and very contentious um uh community process back in 2017 to begin with, um, to for DPR to not take that step.

Um, I think um we could have reduced um a lot of the questions community members have if they were informed and part of the RFE process, and we've done this um throughout um different projects within Globeville, and so um I consider that to have been a miss, and I've shared that with UASUS shared up with a director.

I'm gonna ask on Director Clark, I have a question um for you.

If this to move to the floor, and if this is to be approved, this contract three-year contract, are you and DPR able to commit?

Because this is a three-year contract, that within kind of the horizon of this contract, I'm going to throw out a timeline because I have no idea what your review timeline is.

Let's say within 1.5 years, within the first year or closer to the second year, before you begin another RFP process after the third year, would you you and DPR uh commit that you would engage with a similar community informed process as you did in 2017 and not just simply derive data from this experience that you've just had?

Thank you, Councilman Joel McClark, Executive Director, uh Denver Parks and Recreation.

Um and yeah, thank you for that feedback.

I think that the team was well intentioned and followed the process that we have in terms of are we pivoting as the RFP already been set by community um for continuation of service, even if the RFP never dictates who the provider is.

And so I think that was all well-intentioned, but hear you loud and clear, and we'd be happy to commit to uh over the course of this term uh looking at at what that process looks like with community um like we did more similar to 17 for the next uh renewal period.

And I think that'll also give us the opportunity to say what has changed since 2017 is does the community want uh different stuff in that RFP versus a continuation of that RP.

So thank you, Director Clark.

Uh committee chair, I've got three more questions.

I don't want to monopolize.

May I ask those questions?

All right.

Uh so the umst um curiosity uh wasn't fully described, and since you're here, Director Clark, I'll ask, and obviously, hey Seuss, um, please jump in.

Um there are three centers that were third party um managed led.

Um there's only one left, Globeville Rec Center.

Why is that?

Why is Globeville Rec Center the only remaining out of the initial three in which this program began?

Yeah, I think um John might be better able to answer that question over the years of what's happened.

I think it's different in each case.

Um, you know, I was uh when I was uh in in district seven seat, I was closerly more closely involved with the college view.

Um that was something community had asked for um for years was for it to come back in.

Uh, where that had pivoted in terms of what was being provided was away from youth sports and away from some of those things that the community wanted back, and so that was a conversation as budget had evolved from when that decision was made about what was being offered, who was able to offer that, and was the department best situated again to do that.

But it was a totally different conversation, I believe, at Johnson and at College View and at Globeville in terms of what the community wants are, and is it truly a uh a traditional recreation center?

Are there other recreation centers nearby?

We also have a uniqueness in this area with the number of these centers uh that in close proximity versus some of those other places that also dictates that, and some of those more community center uses versus recreation center uses.

And that's helpful.

I know John has some detail, but I don't know if I I I want to go that deep.

My question is specific.

Um it's my understanding that the global recenter is actually a dedicated space um and dedicated um land to parks.

Can you explain that?

Is the the center itself um dedicated um as a park use?

Or if you are I see Lisa is here as well, can describe what the the actual um space is.

As an interesting um uh situation uh similar maybe to Carlo Madison rec center a little bit in that there isn't really a park, Carl Madison has a little bit of a dog park adjacent, but is really a standalone center, um, but the land underneath it is designated parkland.

Uh so that part that is something that stays with DPR unless there is a vote of the people to remove it.

And so uh uh the the um that is where we have to first exhaust you know kind of that does the department have the bandwidth, the ability, and the demand uh for it to be run by us, and if not, then we can open up to community uses on designated parkland, but the but the land itself and the center itself couldn't be sold um uh because the the land underneath it is a designated park.

This remains with Denver Parks and Recon this cannot, this building cannot be removed.

Correct.

Because it's um uh the the building itself, I mean I guess you could demolish the building and just have a park there, but you couldn't um say, hey, fully turn the community center over to uh to a community operator or or to a private party without going through a vote of the people.

All right.

Um I have a question for Dream Center and then also for Global First, then I'll stop and go back into the queue to see what my colleagues uh questions are.

So for the Dream Center, um, Pastor B, do you mind coming up?

You'll speak in the mic here, introduce yourself.

Um, can you introduce the Dream Center?

And then one specific thing that I want you to highlight as well.

Um, I've had community questions, and since your um work that you do in community is um actually it's rooted in um um uh religious belief in Christianity.

I just want to you know communicate who you are, what the Dream Center is, and how do you work in community and what impacts, if any, based on kind of your faith uh traditions, uh how that impacts the work that you are.

Yeah, Pastor D, the uh founder and director of the Denver Dream Center.

Um we've been here in Denver now for 2020.

20 years uh Dream Center has been around for 14 years, well, 15 years of uh uh being a nonprofit.

Um yeah, I mean it's it's faith-based uh at the root of it, but we're similar to like you would say volunteers of America, uh Red Cross, um, but we're community-based.

So all the programs we run, whether it's re-entry, recovery, community parks, sports camps after school.

We work with public schools, different parks and rec, department corrections.

Uh we focus on the virtues piece.

So a rec center is all about sports activities, program opportunities.

Um we have a separate faith piece that we do in partnership with churches and local faith communities.

Um the heart of what we do is based on serving the community.

Okay.

And we may have follow-up questions, but that's um specific.

I know that um the RFP listed out the the types of um efforts within the center, and I'll see if we have questions on that, and maybe call you back.

I did want to have a quick question with Becky and with Milo from Global First.

If you both don't mind coming up, um you can stand at the mic here.

Would love for you to introduce yourselves, full names, um, share a little bit about what Global First is and kind of where you're seeing your uh coordination with Dream Center as far as providing um support to the Global community.

Okay.

Uh Milo Valdez, uh lifetime community member, multi-generational community member, uh president of Globe First.

This is Hi, I'm Rebecca Treehouse, long time.

Sorry for saying Becky.

So that's what I call you.

I shouldn't have been.

Sorry, so I'll call you Rebecca.

Sorry.

Uh longtime uh multi-generational resident and also on the board for Global First.

Share a little bit as to who Global First is and what um is the collaboration you're looking for within um the community center.

Okay.

So Global First is uh nonprofit organization, being that we're from Glovale, we grew up there our whole lives.

We really try to focus on the needs of the community.

So we don't necessarily have programs that the community has to come in and be a part of.

We tailor make our programming and our resources to what the community needs by knowing them personally.

Uh we help a lot of our elders with uh lighting in their yards so they can see what while they're walking.

We do rails uh for them in their restrooms or bedrooms.

Um we help on a number of different things in the community.

We've helped um some of our members by closing the winter, you know, codes to stay warm.

So we really try to focus what we do community-based and community-oriented to serve the needs of the community as they come up because I mean they change continuously.

Um as far as the relationship with the Dream Center, we're under the understanding that we'll be provided community space and um to do community programming events, and also uh get a chance to even learn from some of the resources they provide coming in, but more so to have meetings and have make sure that the community has a voice inside of that rec center, like it has for many years.

Uh me personally, backstory coming up.

Boogie Mondragan had had the rec center open from the 80s to the early 90s.

Uh we were in there wrestling, uh playing all kinds of sports, you know, basketball or soccer.

It was closed right around, I want to say maybe 93, 94, and a lot of us in there um were kind of kicked out of the rec center, uh, turned to the streets, had to go through some of the hardships of doing that, uh, the hard knocks.

Uh it was actually given to the fire department, I want to say in the early to mid-90s, to where a lot of us didn't have anywhere to go for sports or programming or anything like that.

So we actually sat outside while the firefighters played inside.

So we know what it's like to have outside organization come in and occupy the space that really should be for the kids.

And I mean, not just the kids, you know, for the seniors, for young young adults, um, and the kids as well.

Uh so we think that it's just important and vital, and where our agreement comes in is the understanding that we will have space in the rec center.

Uh, so we think that it's just important and vital, and where our agreement comes in is the understanding that we will have space in the reg center, we will be able to do programming in the rec center, have events, have community meetings, and make sure that that tradition that boogie and a lot of the community members and leaders from before gets passed on with us is still having a space instead of watching uh outside organization come in and we're kind of begging for space or watching us not even have space while they utilize the space.

So that's really the agreement that we're under, uh, and the understanding that we're under that that's that's gonna be provided by the Dream Center occupying the space, and we look forward to you know exercising that with Brian and the Dream Center and utilizing the space like it was when I was a kid.

Um previous organizations had programming, and this isn't a shot at anyone, but it was to selective audience, and if you don't fall within those programming guidelines, it wasn't open to the community and whole.

And we really want the it's we want it to be a community rec center, the Globale Community Rec Center, just like it was growing up a place for the kids to go, you know, adults to go, seniors to go when issues are coming up in the neighborhood that they like to address and for us to know for the continuing changes and and address issues coming up in the neighborhood as well.

Um Rebecca, any final thoughts that you may have.

Um, not really.

I wasn't expecting to speak, but I I know Rebecca and my I appreciate you all.

Thank you so much for sharing.

Um I'm gonna hit on bird seed, but uh, I'm gonna turn it back because I know we have a queue.

I would love to hear your thoughts on um the bird seed transition and also the access of the groups that were using the center now for three months, they have not been able to get into the center.

So I'll stop here, community chair, and I'll come back in the queue.

You want to okay.

I was gonna see if anyone else was in the queue.

I think that's the one.

Yeah, there are a couple people in the I'll come back yet.

I don't know the answers to the question though.

Maybe I'll ask it.

Um I have a I have a few questions for you, and I'm glad you're um here, Director Clark.

Um, so with Birdseed Collective, my understanding is that CATs are that they were on the list for CASA for the Promotoras, um, and they are trusted partners in climate education and outreach.

And so I've just kidded curious how you all considered that as a factor in your selection of the Dream Center with the absence of that uh expertise.

Um I don't know if you can we want to speak to what was in the again, we were working off the RFP that came from the community process in 2017 for what should be in this center.

That doesn't mean that this will serve every single need um for everyone in the community, but um, I I'm not sure that their cast the CASER program was specifically part of the RFP on what our team was reviewing.

Uh no, it wasn't.

It was really more about the utilization of the recreation center and making sure that there was uh programming for the community.

There was a part of the RFP that talked about partnerships.

Um it's you know in the in the proposals that they may have spoken about their relationship and what they're working with CASE, but that would only be one aspect of all the different uh criteria that were being shorted.

What were the criteria for the scoring?

Um I don't have that off the top of my head, but that's something we could definitely get for you on what the RFP said and where the scoring would be.

Okay.

Earlier, um, you mentioned that this was the continuing program, and I'm not sure I understood what you meant by continuing program.

Would it can you explain that a bit for me?

We were not gonna stop the programming that we felt it would be very similar programming.

So from what was being done since 2017, we were not gonna go to what Director Clark was saying in a completely different direction, right?

Where we were gonna change.

Yeah, I think the RFP sets the table for what are we looking for, and that was what was built with community in 2017.

It does not uh say it has to be specifically this vendor by design, right?

The RFP says this is what we want, who all is interested in that, who can provide it, and it's up to those organizations to say, hey, we can we can meet that RFP in the following ways.

So generally, if we were gonna switch that RFP and completely pivot in a different direction and say, hey, actually, there's now a need for something totally different at that center.

New RFP means new programming in there that is just a total departure.

That's when we would go circle back with community and say, hey, what do you need?

What we're hearing is the reason we think we're needing to pivot that whole RFP.

But if the RF the RFP stays the same, we're still looking for the same kind of programming, the same stuff the communities wanted, but it may be that different vendors have a different capacity than they did in in 2017 to step up and provide those, and that the RFP remains the same.

That is when we generally don't go back and include community in that because we're still it's a continuation of that of what they created in that RFP.

Does that make sense?

So it's not about there's the individual vendors who are providing programming, but it is about the programmatic approach to what's happening in the center didn't change.

No, that that does make sense.

It actually brings up two additional questions for me is what was the process in terms of community to build out that RFP and what is different that the Birdseed wasn't bringing to the table that the Dream Center brings to the table in terms of that programming.

I think that's um John would be much more knowledgeable.

Uh good afternoon, uh good morning, everyone.

Uh John Martinez, the deputy executive director.

Uh not quite sure the the question.

Uh so in 2017 we did that robust uh RFP uh in community engagement process because um we there was a gap in service in that community.

Uh and so we felt it was necessary to bring the community together.

Um so I I made the decision not to go back out to do a robust community.

Um so I take full responsibility for that.

Um, did we miss the mark?

Probably.

Um, but as Jesus said, we wanted to have that continuation of program, like a traditional rec center, and that's what we were looking for.

So what Birdseed was providing was arts and cultures and food.

What Denver Dream Center is bringing is bringing that plus 90 plus hours of programming, youth sports, partnering with Global First.

So it's a different approach.

But not an approach that the community asked for, one that you made a decision about in absence of community, it sounds like so.

We use the 2017 information for that.

Um again, did we miss the mark to go back out to community?

Uh absolutely, and we're committed to doing this, you know, a year and a half into this new contract, going back out and doing robust.

Um, but at the time we didn't feel there was a need to shift from what the current uh RFP was.

And again, the the RFP in 2017 and today both called for that recreational component.

In 2017, there wasn't a provider who bid on it who was able to provide all of that.

And there was this time.

Uh and again, the just the total number of hours that the center will be open that somebody from the community can go in, um, is very expanded.

Um, we have a partner in the Dream Center who again is bringing in other community partners to provide that full spectrum that was originally envisioned in that RFP that wasn't fully realized.

Um so it's that same RFP, but when you don't have as many people bidding, you might not get everything out of that RFP in 2017.

Um, Birdseed was selected as getting the most of those things.

But this time with three different um bids coming in, Dream Center was uh selected as being able to provide the most of those things from that RFP of any of the bidders.

I intellectually I understand, and I think philosophically, I think there's just a difference in terms of you all saying that you did a community engagement process, and then the RFP was then drafted from the feedback from community, but it sounds like you all didn't have conversations with community that you did to community, and then you ask community, hey, please love this thing that we are not we are now giving you, which typically happens with black and brown communities, low-income communities, that you just tell them what you're going to do, and you don't bring them to the table and ask them what is it that you all actually need.

And again, that that conversation about what do you need was built into that RFP.

That is the same RFP.

We have we have now vendors who are able to deliver on a fuller scope of that RFP, which is what the community asked for.

So let me ask a different question, and maybe specifically to you.

How do you atone for that?

You meant you said you missed the mark, so how do you atone for that for the GES community?

So I'm I'm personally from GES community, so I think that's a good thing.

Um yeah, and and again, when we went out in 2017, we did a very robust um community engagement.

Uh and the communities was loud and clear what they wanted.

They wanted a traditional recreation center in lieu of the city running it.

We didn't have the financial capacity to do it at the time.

And so when this came up for renewal, that's what we wanted, right?

That's just something that at the community I heard from different community members throughout 2017 from 2017 to today.

I've heard from community.

We have rec centers there.

We knew there was a gap in the Glowville, and so we decided, me personally, I signed off on it, I take full responsibility, um, to use that current RFP to make sure that we didn't have a delayed gap, right?

Of services, and so that's where we we landed.

And I think you know, to Councilman Watson's point, should we went back out to a robust community?

Would we had the same result?

Probably.

But yeah, again, and I take responsibility for that.

I'm not I'm not shying from that.

Um, but we are committed from learning, right?

I think we're gonna know what the Denver Dream Center brings, and you know, if they miss the mark, then we go back out and do it.

Uh and what we're looking at now is bringing more partners in.

So it's not just an individual organization.

Um we're looking at Birdseed, Global First, any other partner that wants to come in, and that's one of the things that the Dream Center does, they're community connectors, and they want to bring in outside partners because they don't specialize in everything, and so that's what Globeville First is gonna bring in the youth sports piece, right?

To uh come complement the Denver Dream Center.

Yeah.

So uh so moving forward with Global First as well as with the Dream Center.

Would do you all have plans to have community conversations once the Dream Center and Global First is, and maybe this is more specifically to you all unless for you, um uh conversations to be able to start that atonement and that healing and that true partnership with communities.

Absolutely, and I'm gonna be leading that effort, right?

I think that's where growing up in that community.

I I I've known Milo since we were kids, you know.

I I learned to play basketball at Globeville Rec Center.

Um so I've actually personally taken on this contract, working with the Denver Dream Center, working with Globeville first, working with the other community leaders um to make sure that you know this is gonna be a community space where you know Global First, the Dream Center, Bird Seed, we're all gonna be at the table.

Like, how do we meet the community needs?

And I think the more resources, the you the better off the greater community benefit for that for Globeville.

I don't disagree with that.

Do you all have a timeline for when you all plan to come together?

So once once this is finalized, right?

Once we get over this hurdle, the contract's finalized, it's immediately we're going into community engagement.

All right.

Sit down with the partners, and I'm personally gonna leave that.

All right, yeah, I believe you actually.

And I appreciate that you that you came in here and said we made a mistake and we are gonna do better.

Like that doesn't happen often.

Um and it certainly doesn't happen with uh government officials, elected officials, even.

So I appreciate your integrity integrity in that moment.

The one thing that I will say, and this is for Director Clark and you all who will stay much longer than me because you know we got elections, um, is if you all um when this comes up for bid again, it's it's it's that you can make a commitment to make sure that you all do this differently and that you work with community, ask what they want, and make sure that the folks who are at the table for that decision making are actually folks in GES, um, so that you can have a outcome that you all can be proud of, and that doesn't feel contentious or that isn't contentious.

I I will still be around when this is us.

I won't.

That was more for me than you.

Bye.

And you have my commitment that I will, right?

I will make sure that we have a robust community process from day one that we get in the rec center, we have the Denver Dream Center in Global First, that we're working on that from day one.

Okay, thank you.

And then I oh good.

I was I was gonna add just one quick note.

As far as engagement, I do just want to say that Denver Dream Center had already built into the proposal to do quite a bit of community engagement, even though they're very familiar with the community.

I think they wanted to still do a robust engagement process.

This was in their proposal even prior to being selected, and so it is something that they had planned.

I think because of some of the sensitivity around it, that is where our deputy director said, okay, in addition to what they want to do, we want to make sure that DPR is involved in those separate from the conversations that they wanted to have.

That way it is that they know we're working together with them.

I appreciate that.

Thank you for that additional information.

I just have one more question or comments.

And I would, and it's it's based on what you just shared.

I'd love to hear from Globeville First as well as the Dream Center about what you all are thinking about in terms of your engagement, and I would also love to hear about your success metrics.

Yeah.

Um yeah, I mean, the the first part is we're we're incredibly community driven.

So the partnerships, um, whether it's DPD, public safety, parks and rec, working with Councilman Watson.

We're off the 21st in Curtis.

We're able to mobilize a lot of people, love referring back to 2020, 2021.

We uh took on quick opportunities to work with the Denver Nuggets and Crockett Sports.

We turned the parking lot into a Friday feed the city that went for a full year, so actually moved four million pounds of food and fed 700,000 people, but involved the the community coming together.

So we've been meeting with Global First.

They gave a proposal of their program's ideas.

The hard thing for me is we haven't had a contract, and so my answer has been like I love it, but I can't say yes or no to anything because I don't know when or if it's moving forward.

That's real.

Um been meeting with Birdseed Collective because again, our heart and we've even mentioned if we need to step aside, we're willing to step aside.

We want the community to win.

And so we've been meeting with Birdseed.

Um, Anthony was with me on Saturday.

We served in Quick Newton's for three hours together, and then I got them a block of tickets, and he took a bunch of people to the Rockies game on Sunday.

So we're already in partnership.

Pat Rodriguez is from Globeville and his family.

Uh we've been doing events in Argo Park and in Globille, sending Christmas presents and toys for what 10 years or so.

So we've been loosely in that community.

Um so our our goal is we've already got some uh um block parties playing at Argo Park to bring the community together.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Thank you, Councilwoman.

Councilwoman or Mara Kempwood.

Thank you, and thank you for the presentation.

Actually, you answered my questions.

So thank you for the outline of what it's gonna look like for that engagement and connection back to community.

And I also think you know, John, uh that commitment to say, okay, how do we go back and reassess but make sure that it's a success.

Um and I forgot your name, sir.

Brian.

Brian.

Um I think you said it at the end.

It's it's that community wins, and what are we gonna all do, or what is everybody gonna do to make sure that that happens.

I appreciate that.

Um, and then for um the statements that were being made by Globeville First, I think um that partnership and what that vision is and um being able to have to think about like what the young people need in community is so critically important.

Um and so I just appreciate your involvement and commitment and the work that you've done for community over time.

And then there's a part of me for Southeast Denver District 4, and I look at that map and you see this big void of what that you know transferring that, you know, we don't have that in our community.

We don't have a we have one rec center on the far east side of our community, but we have high community needs on the west side, and we don't have a place for our young people to go, for our youth to hang out, for organized sports, for I mean, you're almost in an embarrassment of of riches of having all of these really strong community-based organizations.

That's I know you know, but I but I think it truly um having very strong community-based organizations, um, and again, not without need, not without cause, but um like in my mind, I'm thinking, how do we get some of that for you know our our communities over in um Southeast Denver that are so incredibly isolated and do not have access.

So I just wanted to um say something about that.

Sure.

We really don't know.

So what I love when you're saying that, and I'm hoping part of that answer, because it gets my heart excited, that we are incredibly community-driven.

We we mobilize 20 to 25,000 volunteers a year now through through the dreams and high school, sports teams, pro-athletes, and it is community to come together.

And and our hope honestly is that we can create a model working with Councilville Watson through this, that we can start having discussions of what does it look like to have multiple organizations come together because we would love to be a part of that solution in Southeast Denver.

My heart's like a quick yes, I can't do it yet.

We want to get this done, and I don't know if Council can let me out of district nine, but but I think that's that's that's the model we're looking for is how do we create this that is replicable to other areas.

Um, you know, one of the exciting things for what we're talking about is we have a lot of uh I've got a lot of our Bronco players, and there's great guys, they just want to have a place to volunteer.

And it's not through the organization where the news is there and it's pre-fabricated, but it's because they want to be part of the difference.

And now we get to go to communities that get over overlooked, and now they get to connect and hang with pro athletes and be a part of camps.

We're doing a big football camp June 13th at Northfield Park, and there's just ways that like we would love to be part of that solution.

That's a big one.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Councilwoman.

Councilman Heines.

Thank you, community chair.

I just want to thank you for this has been a pretty interesting and exciting uh committee meeting.

And uh Mr.

Martinez, thank you for your vulnerability and and ownership and uh to what council member Lewis said, you know, we don't see that a lot.

And um, and so having um you know, having authentic conversations, which I you know, I I believe these conversations in the last you know hour have been authentic, so uh that's been um that that kind of fills my heart.

I mean, it did so it's uh certainly I had heard some concerns about the uh the change in the in the process.

I want to thank you for being here for showing up and um and I I'm feeling really good um with uh with what you've shared.

So thank you so much for being here today.

Thank you, Councilman Heinz.

Um, I did have a couple of questions.

Um I just want to circle back with what was mentioned about their goal was not to have a gap in services, but what I'm hearing is that there is a gap in services right now.

Is that the case?

Correct.

Yeah, our goal always is to to do, but uh obviously you know hit some bumps along the way here, um, and that's why we would love support and getting this approved as soon as possible so that we can get folks in, um, all these groups collaborating and get back the doors open to community as soon as possible.

So, what happened there?

Was it that the old contract ended before this one could start?

Is that what's what happened right now?

Yep, the old contract ended as you heard back at the end of last year.

Yes, um, and and there was a gap at us being able to um work through all of this and get it in front of you for a vote.

Great, I appreciate that.

And then my other question was just how much was the previous operator paying for this space.

Um we can get that for you.

I don't have it right here, but we can get that for you.

Great.

Well, I appreciate my colleagues' questions.

I know Councilman Watson, you wanted to get back in.

Do you want to say some last words before we wrap up your yeah, just very quickly?

I just want to say thank you, um Madam Chair, for for bringing this uh discussion.

Thank you so much to uh uh Milo and Rebecca from Global First for being here.

Thank you so much, Pastor B for and the many meetings.

These is there have been tons of meetings behind the scenes.

One of the things are that I want to commit not just to y'all but also to um um um Birdseat Collective is that the agreement um that you all are discussing, I will be very much involved in that process to ensure that that agreement is sticky for these three years, and then to Bertsey Collective, Anthony and Calla and folks, we've been in these ongoing dialogues to make sure that they are still a part of this process.

Some of the specialties and the work that they have done, which is something they're excellent at, um, should remain within the center, and I know that I've got commitment from Paz to be that those would also be integrated.

So I want to thank you all for being in a thank you committee chair.

Thank you.

And then um one uh one question I did have as well was just in in part of that re-engagement in three years or a year and a half, are is there gonna be exploration of why is this the only rec center that we're not investing in our own staff and our city running?

Uh we can certainly have that conversation about the resources and about and um I'll say candidly sometimes um we have community groups, especially when they all come together who can provide services that we can't specifically as a parks and rec department, right?

That can reach across into um some of those other areas that were in that RFP, and so just because um it's not in some communities that was not working.

What what they were offering, I think in other communities it can be very successful.

I think we can absolutely have that conversation with community as well about the pros and cons of the what are those services.

What's that?

So what are those services that parks and rec doesn't provide that?

I think some of these community groups are are much better about um in terms of having space in there to bring community together around the table, doing some of the work that you heard uh Bobville talking about out in people's homes is not a parks and recreation function.

Um while we do participate in a lot of um uh food access, the way that some of these community groups do it uh at the scale they do it is much better than we can.

We do have you know uh you know, an arts and culture kind of component, but that can be totally different when it's community run.

Um they can bring all kinds of uh other resources, volunteers, donations in a different way than a traditional rec center can.

So I'm not saying that there's there's it is always the right answer one way or the other.

I think we have to fully vet what does the community want out of this space, and are we best positioned to do that, or are these community groups better positioned to do that?

And we have that model um, I think coming together in West Denver with a true community center as well that's different from rec center.

Here we've got that uniqueness of it's in a designated park, so there's a recreation component, not just a pure community center, but do we get more of the community center pieces of it by engaging with our community partners as the lead on it instead of directly uh run by the city?

And is that gonna be incorporated into the rec center um work that you're doing now?

I know you're doing like an assessment of rec centers, and I'm curious.

Then does that open up current rec centers operated by the city where the community wants certain services that the rec center isn't providing to actually move from being a city-run rec center to opening up to more community organizations?

Is that something you see, or is that going to be evaluated in that rec center um evaluation?

We're just at the beginning of that, and we're we're leading with hearing from community about what what do they want from a recreation center and from an access to a recreation center?

So it certainly can be um conversations that we can have, but that's gonna be community-driven on where that goes.

Great, thank you.

I appreciate that.

And I think uh community sometimes gets confused when they're asked for input if you're asking for a put out of a rec center.

Is that even an option to talk about bringing in new services?

Because when I think of a rec center, I think of the pools and the sports and other things, but um appreciate that we're asking these questions and figuring out per community what's best.

Um can I get a motion to move this then to the floor?

Great, Councilman Watson.

Second by council member Heinz.

Uh roll call vote, please.

Council members Heinz.

Aye.

Lewis?

Nay.

Watson.

Aye.

Madam Girl Igres.

Aye.

Thank you.

Um was there any consent items?

There's one item on consent.

Nobody has called it off, and that is the case, then we stand adjourned or sit adjourned.

Thank you so much for the presentation.

Thanks.