City Council - Regular Meeting

Hey, Denver, it's time for the weekly general session of your Denver City Council. Tonight's coverage of Denver City Council starts now.

Oh, there we go. Let me start over. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for taking the time to join us for Denver City Council's meeting. Today is Monday, June 29th, 2026. Tonight's meeting 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, gladly. 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, who 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. Good afternoon everyone. My name is Samuel Guzman with the CLC. And together with my colleague, Jasmine, we will be interpreting today's meeting into Spanish. Thank you very much, Sam.

Welcome to the Denver City Council meeting of Monday, June 29th, 2026. Councilmembers, please join Councilmember Cashman in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Councilmembers, please join Councilmember Cashman 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 and present and future and those who have stewarded this land throughout generations. We also recognize that government, academic and cultural institutions were founded upon and continue to enact exclusions and erasures of indigenous peoples. May this acknowledgement demonstrate a commitment to working to dismantle ongoing legacies of oppression and inequities and recognize the current and future contributions of Indigenous communities in Denver.

Thank you.

Madam Secretary, roll call. Councilmembers González-Gutierrez? Here. Charity? Here. Sawyer? Here. Alvarez. Here. Flynn.

Here.

Gilmore. Here. Hines. Here. Cashman. Here. Lewis. Present. Romero-Campbell. Here. Torres. Here. Watson. Here. Madam President Sandoval. Here. 13 members present.

There are 13 members present. Council has a quorum. Approval of the minutes. Are there corrections to the minutes of June 22nd? Seeing none, the minutes stand approved. Council announcements. Are there any announcements from members of council this afternoon? Councilmember Alvidrez, why don't you start us off?

Thank you, Council President. I wanted to take a moment to recognize an event I was able to attend this morning. I was able to attend the Maxim Food Truck Expo at the Denver Coliseum, where Denver Department of Public Health and Environment Licensing and Consumer Protection and Denver Fire were all there to help our food trucks know about how and when to get licenses and all the rules that are required for food trucks. It was a really great event and it was originally started by the Denver Fire Department. I also wanted to give a special recognition to all our firefighters who are fighting the fires across colorado right now and send my condolences and my heart with the three firefighters that were lost over the weekend thinking about all our firefighters right now please do not light any fireworks this fourth of july and have that in mind thank you council president

Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

I just wanted to have two pieces and very personal ones that I'd like to share. One, on the good news side, my son is getting married this next Saturday and I think I wanted to just give a shout out to Geronimo and Aspen. This is an exciting time and a new time on their journey in their life together and it's just, it's So cool and also terrifying that I'm old enough that has a son that can be married. On that end, I also have sad news because one of our community members has passed away and was in hospice for a short period of time. But some of you may know him. Bruce Basket has passed away and there will be a memorial service on July 11th. But I just wanted to recognize him because I think he really exemplified civic engagement. He was active. He probably, I think he's emailed everybody on this council, agree with him, disagree with him at any time. And we always had very robust conversations. But I just appreciate how incredibly committed he was to the community, to the neighborhood, and to the city and county of Denver. And so I just wanted to recognize him. Bruce at this time for all that he has had had done to contribute to the community so more information to come and we'll be sending a little link in our newsletter for his memorial service thank you thank you next up we have councilmember Flynn

Thank you, Madam President. I was absent last week, and so forgive me if someone made note of this at the time, but I wanted to acknowledge the loss of one incredible journalist, Lynn Bartels. Lynn passed away, I think, on the 18th. Several years, at least, she and I were partners at the Rocky Mountain News in covering this very body and the mayor's office and the administration. Lynn was a veritable encyclopedia of Colorado politics and people involved in them. And when she went up to the statehouse, she just grew her Rolodex exponentially. Widely respected women. her encyclopedic knowledge of who was who and who did what to who and where the bodies were buried and which ones she buried could fill a book. And with her passing, there goes just a repository that can never be duplicated. She was a bipartisan attacker. Didn't matter which side of the aisle you came from, she would cover you fairly. And a lot of people talk about being backstabbers, and I would refer to her as a frontstabber because you would know she was coming. And it was a pleasure for me to work with her in this building and then to watch her continue to grow. And just the enormous amount of outpouring of respect and condolences that her death occasioned from people all over the state is testimony to the incredible job that she did while she was here on this earth. I have no doubt that she's grilling St. Peter at the pearly gates before he lets her in. She's going to know his whole background and probably write an expose about him before she gets into heaven. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Councilman Gilmer.

Thank you, Council President Sandoval. I am excited to share that last Wednesday Councilwoman Lewis and myself, along with many advocates in the community, announced some work that we've been doing along with Councilwoman Paradis and that we're very eager to get this legislation before you and essentially this legislation are protections for members of our families who are part of the trans community and we all know that the federal administration has been ramping up their threats against trans and gender expansive communities. And we want to make sure that in Denver, we're very clear around what we protect people in and how we do that essentially. And so this legislation will reduce unnecessary documentation around gender and sex expression, any markers that are not essentially required, we will not collect those anymore. And so we're working together with the Council President to find a date sooner than later hopefully because we know that there are many folks from Kansas, from Oklahoma, from other parts of the United States that are now essentially refugees in our community because they had to uproot their entire lives, many times under threats of government persecution, license plate or excuse me license driver's license removals etc that make it impossible for people to make a living and so looking forward to more conversation on that because the protection needs to be done again sooner than later and then lastly want to send congratulations to miss diane cooks and Families Against Violent Acts, we celebrated with them on Saturday, the 20th anniversary of the Heal the Hood festival and celebration, and this started out of an outpouring of community really through mothers having children who were hurt during the summer of violence, who continue to suffer great grievances and loss within our communities. And so Diane Cooks and her folks have always provided a safe space. community to have that consistency they meet weekly and you don't have to have suffered a loss specifically of an individual they are there for anyone under any circumstances and just want to relay that message but we were happy to celebrate with them on Saturday and it was great to see Councilwoman Lewis in Montbello at the Montbello High School as well thank you council president

Thank you. Next up, we have Councilmember Watson.

Thank you, Council President. First, I want to share two quick things. There is still time. If you have not turned in your ballot to vote, you can still drop your ballot off. To add to what Councilmember Gilmour was stating, there are two anti-trans bills that are on the ballot. We need folks to go out and ensure that we protect our trans community. Ballot Initiative 109 and Ballot Initiative 110. We need to be clear that these ballot initiatives goes against our families, it attacks the people that live in this city. And we are not only a welcoming city, we fight for those that need our support. So supporting our trans community, we should be voting no on those bills and ensuring that we protect their freedoms. With that, I want to be also clear, Pride Fest parade this weekend, and I want to applaud the folks from the center. This year, because of construction on Colfax, they had to move the entire parade to 17th Avenue. That is a massive undertaking for an organization, a nonprofit, as small as they are, to make a switch like that, to change not only the entire route, but all of the security necessary for 500,000 folks coming to Denver. So to Kim and her team at the center and everyone else at One Colorado and everyone that worked together to put on a safe and successful pride parade and then the festivities along 16th Street. If you haven't seen, if you weren't there and you haven't seen the pictures, it was, I think, the fullest. I've seen 16th Street and I've been in Denver since 87 that I've ever seen and I just thought it was a remarkable weekend. So congratulations to the center and to everyone and please vote and turn your ballots in. You cannot mail those ballots. two events that will be happening in District 9, actually one in District 9, and one that will be in District 6 or 7. I'll have you all fight over where in Wash Park this is at. But in District 9, this weekend from 1 to 3 p.m. is the largest community July 4th parade. It begins at 23rd and Dexter. It's something that's done every year for the Fourth of July, and I want to encourage folks to come on out. You can walk with my team in my office. Just come out and enjoy a really great family activity. And then that evening on Saturday, July 4th, I have the pleasure and the honor to actually sit with and read what's being referred to as the Lincoln Portrait of the 4th of July concert at Wash Park from 7 to 8.30 p.m. It's a composition done by Aaron Copland. So I'll be sitting in with the Denver Municipal Band and reading from that composition. And I encourage folks to come out and join the festivities at Wash Park this Saturday from 7 to 8.30 p.m. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Councilmember Lewis? Yeah, thank you so much. I wanted to take the opportunity to congratulate Fire and Fire Station 27 for completing their paint renovation project, which includes a beautiful mural. If you all have the opportunity to see it, I would encourage you to complete it by local artist Philip Munoz. It is fantastic, and he can also tell you the story about how he arrived at the completion of this mural. In addition to that, as Councilwoman Gilmour stated, had a wonderful opportunity to attend the FAVA event, the Families Against Violence, and their Heal the Hood event at the Montbello High School. While the group's mission is sadly more relevant than ever today, they have been putting this event on for 20 years strong, and so really want to celebrate them in providing resources to our communities and congratulate them on putting together another beautiful community event despite the winds that literally tried to blow us all away and hurt some folks in our community. Pride was also mentioned. I had such a wonderful time this weekend at the Pride event and barely avoided a heat stroke. It was quite hot outside, but it was splendid seeing everyone out and about pushing back in this time of uncertainty and being their beautiful selves. And I want to take the opportunity to thank Claudia, who is our high school intern. She's an intern at North High School who created a beautiful collage of photos and videos of the event. So if you haven't been on our social media, you should certainly check it out because she's a talented high school student. within our Denver community. And then finally, I wanted to also mention that the Denver City Council is seeking candidates to be considered to serve on the Denver Department of Transportation and Infrastructure or DOTI Advisory Board. And so if you are interested, we would encourage you to one, apply. and to reach out to our office. If you're not familiar with the advisory board, this board is charged with advising, dieting on transportation policy and operations of the department, along with reviewing and commenting on the proposed annual department budget. They do meet virtually once a month, and the terms are two years, and so if you're interested in joining, please reach out to our council office or anyone, honestly, up here. I'm sure they're happy to get you connected. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilmember Cashman?

Thank you, Madam President. I just want to take a moment to echo Councilman Flynn's comments about Ms. Bartle's passing. I will never forget her relentless commitment to uncovering the truth and reporting the truth, no matter who got lifted up or who got taken down. She will be missed, an important journalist. I also wanted to join Council Pro Tem Romero Campbell in remembering Bruce Baskett. I often tell people we have maybe 730,000 people now in the city and county of Denver. And I'm guessing, I don't know what the number is, 3,000, 5,000 people who are really involved. who, in addition to supporting their families, they find the time to go to neighborhood meetings, to get on commissions and committees, and make their voice heard to make Denver a better place. And Bruce was one of those people. In the years I've been on council, what I always appreciated is he was very direct, but always in... in pursuit of a better policy for his community. So we'll remember Mr. Baskett fondly and wish him well on his next journey. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Council Member Hines.

Thank you, Madam President. Thank you to Council Members Watson and Lewis also for talking about pride. I want to thank the censor, the censor, the centurr, That's censor something else. Thank the center for having me as a guest in the Pride Parade. It was a lot of fun being right there at the very front. Second, I want to... Spread the good news about the Independence Day themed Sunset Cinema and Drone Show on July 3rd, 2026 at Sculpture Park. It is in the Denver Performing Arts Complex. It will feature a screening of the movie National Treasure, and there will also be a drone show. In case you don't know, I am a, the governor appointed me to the Colorado 250, sorry, America 250, Colorado 150 commission, and the drone show is something that is one of the priority 250, 150 signature events. So it's Friday, July 3rd at Sculpture Park in the Performing Arts Complex. and the cost is free. Doors open at 5.30, and the pre-show entertainment begins at 6. Movie begins at 7.30, and after the film is the drone show called Stories in the Sky. Also, So as Councilmember Watson is on Independence Day performing with the Denver Municipal Band, I will also be with the Denver Municipal Band the next evening. That is Sunday, July 5th at the Cheeseman Park Pavilion. The detail is Sunday, July 5th at 7. The Pavilion Achievement Park is at 1900 East 11th Avenue, Denver 80206. The cost also is free. You don't even have to get tickets. And the highlights are that the concert band will play Patriotic Standards and feature a special guest, Denver District 10 City Councilmember Chris Hines. I hear he's in the room somewhere, narrating Aaron Copeland's Lincoln portrait. So very similar to Councilmember Watson. So I guess we're going to have a voice off on the 4th and the 5th of July. I do also want to give a shout out to Capitol Hill United Neighbors, which is also sponsoring the July 5th event. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Just as a reminder for the public, as the 4th of July occurs this Saturday, City Council will not convene on Monday, July 6th in observation of Independence Day. And I would invite all of you all to come and celebrate the 4th of July in the Highland neighborhood at the annual fourth of july parade in the north side you can decorate a bike a wagon a stroller it starts off at 9 30 at the holiday theater off a 30 second in clay um and then they always go down 30 seconds to hershorn park and have a wonderful little ice cream after party um And then for those who are interested, please come to my third annual yoga in the carousel. It's not in the park, but it's in a carousel. We'll be Wednesday, July 22nd from 6 to 7 at the historic Elitch Carousel Dome on 38th and Tennyson. Once again, that's Wednesday, July 22nd. And just want to give a shout out to my staff and my whole team for putting on an amazing concert in the park. We had a concert at Rocky Mountain Park this past Friday with the Denver Municipal Band. And it was amazing. It was a great turnout. It was a beautiful night. And it was community coming together. So once again, thank you so much for all your hard work over the last year, Alessandra. It was a great event. Seeing no other comments in the queue, council members in the queue. There are no presentations this afternoon. There are no communications. There are no proclamations being read this afternoon. Madam Secretary, please read the bills for introduction.

From the Governance and Intergovernmental Relations Committee, 26-0687, a bill for an ordinance submitting to a vote of the qualified and registered electors of the City and County of Denver at a special municipal election on November 3rd, 2026, a proposed amendment to the Charter of the City and County of Denver to expressly clarify that the Auditor's Office may continue to enforce wage laws, worker protection laws, and other workplace rights laws in accordance with ordinances passed by City Council. From the Health and Safety Committee, 26-0852, a bill for an ordinance amending Chapter 11 and Chapter 32 of the Denver Revised Municipal Code, repealing outdated provisions of the regulations around child care establishments and to align with state law and regulation. And from the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, 26-0618, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed intergovernmental agreement between the City and County of Denver and Colorado Department of Transportation to perform maintenance on traffic signals citywide.

Thank you, Madam Secretary. Councilmembers, this is your last opportunity to call out an item. Councilmember Cashman, will you make the motions for us this evening?

Yes, Madam President.

Thank you. Now I'll do a recap. Under resolutions, council resolution 0968 has been called out for a comment by council member Lewis. Under bills for introduction, no items have been called out. Under bills for final consideration, council bill 0654 has been called out for an amendment by council pro tem Romero Campbell. And council bill 0328 has been called out by council members Lewis and Gonzales Gutierrez for an amendment. Both bills have scheduled required hearings this evening and their amendments will be heard and considered during the 5.30 session. Under pending, no items have been called out. Madam Secretary, please put the first item on our screens. Resolution 0968, a resolution authorizing and approving the expenditure and payment from the appropriation account designated liability claims. The sum of $80,000 and no cents made payable to SIGLA LLC FBO, Bucket, Bing, and Chennai Ting in full payment and satisfaction of all claims related to the civil action captioned Bucket, Bing, and Chennai Ting versus the City and County of Denver and David Briggs, which was filed in District Court City and County of Denver case 2025 CV 32358. Council Member Lewis, please go ahead with your comments on Council Resolution 0968. Thank you so much.

I see it as my responsibility to make sure that the public is aware of every tax dollar being approved as an expenditure and payment of funds for a settlement with the City and County of Denver. With the approval of 260968 tonight, the City will approve settlements in the amount of $80,000 to settle a case brought against the Denver Police Department. This brings the 2026 total for taxpayer dollars in city settlements to $3,947,000. In this budget environment, especially, we need to pay close attention to how the city spends our money and make sure that these decisions accurately reflect the needs and investments we want to see in our community.

Thank you. Thank you. This concludes the items to be called out. All bills for introduction are ordered published. Council members, remember that this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote aye. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote. Council Member Cashman, will you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills in final consideration for final passage on the floor?

Yes, Madam President, I move that the resolutions be adopted and bills on final consideration be placed upon final consideration and do pass on a block for the following items, all series 2026, 0708, 0849, 0835, 0836, 0837, 0838, 0839, 0840, 0841, 0842, 0843, 0844, 0845, 0853, 0832, 0833, 0968, 0613, 0755, 0829, 0831, 0863, And that should do it.

Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, roll call.

Council members, Gonzalez-Gutierrez? Aye. Parity? Aye. Sawyer? Aye. Alvarez? Aye. Flynn? Aye. Gilmour? Aye. Hines? Aye. Cashman? Aye. Lewis? Aye. Romero-Campbell? Aye. Torres? Aye. Watson?

Aye.

Madam President Sandoval?

Aye. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 13 ayes. 13 ayes. The resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. Tonight, there will be a required public hearing on Council Bill 0619, changing the zoning classification for 17671 through 17675 East 64th Avenue in DIA. A required public hearing on Council Bill 0654, changing the zoning classification for 3001 South Federal Boulevard and 3058 South May Stanton Way in Harvey Park South. and a courtesy public hearing on Council Bill 0328, updating the classifications and penalties for municipal criminal offenses. 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. Hey, Denver.

Here's what's happening around the Mile High this week. Cool it down a bit, Denver, by jumping in the pool. Did you know that Parks and Rec has 29 pools throughout the city? Check out the website for all the locations and an all-ages activity guide. Don't worry, if it rains, we have indoor pools, too. Pride Month is just about over. To get out there and showcase what you've learned, this Pride-themed trivia is celebrating inclusivity and equality with good times and good drinks. Show us what you got. Head over to Redline Arts Center for their annual youth art exhibition with themes of identity, voice, and collective belonging. These themes invite young artists to explore what matters most to them while recognizing their power to shape their communities at a time when many feel pressured to shrink or conceal parts of who they are. This work insists on the opposite, to know oneself fully and to be seen. The Delta Sonics have been the Mile High go-to band for touring blues national acts for 15 years. The band has backed national blues acts and were voted Westford's best blues band in Denver the last six of eight years. See what the fuss is all about at Dazzle. Celebrate Independence Eve with an extra special event, an outdoor screening of the movie National Treasure. Then celebrate Colorado's 150th birthday with a drone show after the film. Best of all, it's completely free. Celebrate the 4th of July with a laid-back summer evening full of good food, good music, and the best views in Denver. Kick things off in the hydro backyard with barbecue from Meats and Sweets, a live outdoor set with DJ Kayla Marquis, and kids' crafts and lawn games to keep the fun rolling. Then head to the roof at sunset to check out all the fireworks. Start and end your 4th of July weekend with the Colorado Rockies as they take on the San Francisco Giants. They're going to be playing all weekend, and July 3rd and 4th will have fireworks after each game. Stay up to date with what's happening in Denver by following our socials. Sonny can help you with questions you have about the city. And don't miss out on great stories from around town by checking out Denver TV.

And so over many, many, many years, there's been this slow integration of some of these different environmental considerations. The geomorphology, how does the land change over time? Just because we put a channel here today doesn't mean that's where it's going to be in 50 years. But the bridge is.

Our waterways and our highways, they have to co-mingle no matter what. You cannot... you just can't change that, right? It's how our roadway system has been set up. So we wanted to create a design that created that type of resiliency for the next event. Our philosophy has changed to say, okay, these aren't two different systems. These are two commingling systems that we have to navigate in our design and how we construct the PR phase back.

So what I love about being part of hydraulic engineering and part of our work here at CDOT is I get to help drive that science by gaining that knowledge. So our team of experts from across the state and from other states has really helped us figure out how to build infrastructure that works, plays and operates in concert with the natural functions of our watersheds rather than in conflict.

But yeah, that was a huge element of trying to balance the structural components that we needed to protect our roadway, but also maintain the visual, the beauty that it had previously and will have again. Yeah, it is a destination. The Estes Canyon at the end is kind of the ultimate destination, but the canyon itself, there's a lot of features. There's a lot of fishing, a lot of recreation. And we worked with Forest Service and other agencies to help preserve what was there to our best of our ability knowing that it had been completely re-landscaped because of the flood.

That was a lot of the concept we went with was sounds a bit odd but almost a softer approach than putting in a big tall wall that disconnects the two. How can we recognize that the two are connected and then plan for that?

One of the ways designers were able to help the road survive the next flood was blasting away part of the mountain to allow the road to sit on bedrock. This plan would mean floodwaters might go over the road in the future, but the road would survive. The first project to use this approach was on US 36, just up from Lyons.

There's a lot of blasting, realigning the roadway, building the roadway back up. Fire in the hole. So I think blasting is tricky. It's definitely an art and a science to it. Anytime you're cutting into or blasting into big rock mountains, you have to analyze the fracture type of the mountain and understand where your drill split lines should be and how that impact will allow the rock to fall away from itself.

Bringing other partners to the table resulted in other environmental goals as well, like on the Colorado Highway 7 lower project.

we were able to have our contractor on through the design process which allowed us to innovate and save money and reduce I believe it was 20,000 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions that we reduced as a part of this project.

We've learned so much in the 2013 flood for all the damage that it caused and all the unfortunate things that came it has been an education in that holistic approach.

In the floods of 2013, where rivers and roads met, the roads lost. But there was one town that was at the intersection of three rivers and two roads where the town lost.

So where we are is just to the north of Milliken, Colorado, and Milliken's an interesting community because you have three large rivers that all kind of combine just east of the town. So you've got the Little Thompson, which is a little further south of where we're standing here, and then you've got the Big Thompson, which is just kind of down You can almost see the tree line in the background is right where the Big Thompson comes through here. And so you've got those two rivers and then out to the east you have the South Platte. And so Milliken kind of sits in the middle of all of that. And during the flood, we had high waters, 100-year floods on all three rivers. And the rivers took out the bridges in almost every single direction into the town. So not only do you have floodwaters and homes that are flooding, but you've got no way out. The town is effectively an island. I mean, the water was down at the intersection of the road. You can see here in the background, the water came over the top of the intersection of 257 and 60, about four, four and a half feet above. There's actually pictures of water that's up to the railroad gates that are there, which is pretty crazy to think about when you drive through there today.

And back in the day, somehow they had rerouted the channel in that area to kind of make a square corner. And so that didn't help with the flooding in that area.

So one of the things that we discovered when we were working in the Milliken area, State Highway 60 and State Highway 257, is we were able to take one of our interns and say, if you did this differently, how would you do it? And our intern in 2016 did something very unique. In a couple days, she had this rendering and said, I think all of the previous technologies missed something. And she was right.

And so for the PR project, we went in and we rebuilt both of those bridges. So those bridges probably came up eight feet. and then we rerouted the channel so it was a direct shot from one bridge to the other.

And so when we showed our management at CDOT this new opportunity, not only for communicating how to understand the interaction of infrastructure and water, but also how to analyze it, they said, why aren't we doing this everywhere? And it started a brand new program that we're trying to launch to do 2D quick checks everywhere. And we found within 20 hours, and at very little cost to the traveling public, we're able to have insight into critical flaws, into safety efficiencies, and more effective means that actually stretch the public dollar on projects statewide.

So yeah, both of those bridges, it'll be able to handle the water in that area now.

The US-34 Big Thompson Canyon emergency repairs were overseen by resident engineer Scott Ellis, who had a love for the canyon that few could equal.

Scott was a remarkable human being. I forget how long he had been at CDOT, but by the time that the permanent repairs rolled around, he was approaching retirement. But 34 was, I mean, both from the personal side and the work side, just so near and dear to his heart. He was an avid cyclist. And I forget how many months in a row, even throughout the wintertime, he had a group of friends that once a month, they would ride up and down the canyon.

and so for him it was just there was a very strong personal tie there scott ellis needed me to get some signs and cones right up here to county road 31 up by the carter lake cut off and i said well i can't get through on 34 how do i get there and he gave me the weirdest route i've ever been on and i've driven it numerous times to commit it to memory so that if i ever have to get there again It is, you go down First Street, you come back through some neighborhood, you drive through Bob's Field, you come around a dirt road, and somehow you come out by Carter Lake, and next thing you know, you're on County Road 31. and it was unaffected by the flood. And here 34 is washed over with debris and I said, only Scott would know this way around here.

I think it meant a lot to him. You don't realize the impact that a corridor like this has on not just Colorado, right? That's a huge tourist highway. You know, Estes Park being a huge tourist destination for Colorado. but just the residents, which is what I never really understood. Because it's a canyon, you kind of drive through, pretty scenery, you see all of the houses, but don't really register it. But when you start talking to residents of the canyon and you see what this means to them and this impact that this had on them, and I think Scott realized that right out of the gates. I think he knew that. And so he was great, you know, working with people directly, whatever we could, he started that communication with the residents. And I think he just... from experience or just intuition, but he knew the impact that this was gonna have on the residents of the canyon.

He was one of the REs that I enjoyed working with the most. He was a kind, respectful, brilliant, just human. And he was, I mean, he was just a, he was a pleasure to work with. He had a team that enjoyed working with him. He created such synergy. But he had a real care for the community and a care for the impact of the flood recovery. So I think he humanized the event and he never lost sight of that when we were doing our repairs and we were thinking about solutions.

If you spend any time with Scott, when he was engaged with you, it's like you felt very important. It wasn't about Scott, it was about you. And that's something that I very much appreciated about him. He valued everybody. So Scott, I can say Scott was on his way towards retirement. And so he knew that he wasn't going to get through the entire permanent repairs before he retired. So I think he saw an opportunity for me to be the leader for the Big Thompson Canyon.

Having made plans to put James Usher in charge of the permanent repairs, Scott Ellis left that weekend in 2016 to participate in the Leadville 100 Bike Marathon, an event he'd done 19 times before. but around mile 80, Scott had a heart attack and later passed away.

Little did I know that he had a phone call with our RTD at the time, and basically that phone call was to talk about all the reasons of why Johnny should put me in as the project director for the Big Thompson Canyon. And I didn't know that until after the fact, but actually his wife Connie, she gave me, it was actually from an old steno pad,

This concludes our general public comment session. If we did not get to you today, please join us for our next session or submit your comments in writing. The next session will be held on Monday, July 13th. Sign up begins at 5 p.m. on Thursday, July 9th. As a reminder, we do not meet next week in honor of the Fourth Independence Day. We look forward to hearing from you again and thank you for attending. of Business from the earlier session. There is one proclamation being read this evening. Council Member Flynn, please read proclamation... Oh, sorry. I jumped the gun. We have to sit for three minutes. I can't open up the meeting until 5.30. Sorry. We can have a...

from April through November. We're asking you to stay ahead of the game by keeping our city streets clear for our street sweepers. Street sweeping helps us clear the level and keeps our air and water clean by removing dirt and debris from our streets. To find out when it's your turn to play, check the red and white signs on your block. Or check in with your player 2, the city's chatbot Sonny, for your street sweeping schedule. Move your car to the correct side of the street on your sweeping day and level up by avoiding a ticket. Denver Street Sweeping, April through November. For more information, visit denvergov.org slash streetsweeping.

Do you live in Denver? We know you want to stay updated on all the things that make our city great. Sign up for the Denver Local, a newsletter with all the info you need from your local government in one place. Signing up is easy at DenverGov.org slash Denver Local. You can also follow Elevating Denver for exclusive video content on our YouTube channel and broadcast on Denver Channel 8, Tuesdays at 7 p.m. Connect to your city. Connect with community. With the Denver local and Elevating Denver.

On this episode of How to Denver, how to start a podcast here at Denver Community Media. Do you and your friends have great ideas or conversations and more people should hear them? Check out the state of the art podcast studio at Denver Community Media. Memberships get you access to equipment, space, and expertise from their staff to help you start your media empire. Go online to denvercommunitymedia.org to learn more and sign up. Once enrolled, learn how to script, plan, produce, and record your very own podcast. The knowledgeable staff can help you at any point and offer guidance to make sure you are making professional content. In fact, I recorded this from inside their studio. Thanks for watching, and if there are any city services you want to learn how to take advantage of, leave a comment down below.

Your time is valuable. That's why we're making it even easier to do business with a city. Just check out our new online services hub. One click and you'll find a world of services at your fingertips. Question about street sweeping? Check. Trash collection schedules? Check. Report an issue in your neighborhood? You bet that's a check. You can even find out where the snow plows are in your area. So don't spend time searching. Just check out our one-stop shop at the online services hub at denvergov.org.

Hey, Denver, it's time for the weekly general session of your Denver City Council. Tonight's coverage of Denver City Council starts now.

Council will now reconvene from our earlier session. There is no unfinished business from the earlier session. There is one proclamation being read this evening. Councilmember Flynn, will you please read Proclamation 0972?

Yes. Thank you, Madam President. Proclamation number 26-0972 honoring Patricia Calhoun for her 49 years as the editor of Westward. Whereas Patricia Patty Calhoun started her journalism career while attending Cornell University and working for the Cornell Daily Sun, the oldest continuously independent college daily in the United States. And whereas after graduating from Cornell in 1976, Patty and some college friends decided to start a newspaper called The Sandpaper on Long Beach Island, New Jersey. Hey, Jersey Shore. a paper that still publishes today. And whereas, not loving the grit of the sandpaper, Patty decided to head west to Colorado, where she loved the skiing. And whereas, on September 1, 1977, Patty and her colleagues Sandy Widener and Rob Simon launched Westward, a self-styled alternative newspaper, where she took on the role of editor-in-chief, and started making a name for the new publication, despite Denver already having two robust newspapers, the Denver Post and the Rocky Mountain News. And whereas, over the past 49 years, Patty and the Westward staff under her direction have covered stories that have both informed and entertained the people of Denver. From the rise of Denver's own dog, the Bounty Hunter, to hard-hitting investigative journalism about violations around radioactive contamination at Rocky Flats, to hiring the country's first ever pot critic. And whereas, Patty has been inducted into the Colorado Press Association Hall of Fame, the Association of Alternative News Media Hall of Fame, and the Colorado Restaurant Association Hall of Fame. And in 2019, Patty was named the inaugural recipient of the Association for Alternative News Media's Lifetime Achievement Award. And whereas much of Patty's time at Westward is spent on the mechanics of getting the paper out the door and the content published online, depriving her of the time needed to write the stories she has on the back burner, can't wait to hear what those are, and keeping her from sounding off about the issues on which people need to know more. And whereas leading up to the 50th anniversary of Westward, Patty has decided to drop the reins of running the media outlet and instead return to causing a little trouble. And writing those stories, she's had simmering, leaving the operational issues in the hands of a capable team. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed by the Denver City Council, Section 1, that the Denver City Council hereby acknowledges and thanks Patricia Calhoun for 49 years of dedicated news leadership in Denver and for making Westward more than an alternative newspaper, but rather an institution for information that matters to the people of Denver. And Section 2, that the clerk and recorder of the City and County of Denver shall affix the seal of the City and County of Denver to this proclamation, and that a copy be transmitted to Patricia Calhoun.

Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. Your motion to adopt?

Thank you, Madam President. I move that Proclamation 26-0972 be adopted.

It has been moved and seconded. Comments by members of council. Council Member Flynn.

Thank you, Madam President. I really don't know where to start because this seems really, really strange. First of all, me being up here in the first place and you being down there retiring after all this time. I do want to mention, Patty, that at the beginning of this meeting, I made note of the passing of Lynn Bartles. And it reminded me that frequently you were mistaken for Lynn and Lynn was mistaken for you. I'm also just slightly disappointed that the construction of the new chamber was finished ahead of schedule, because when we scheduled this for today, which is your last day, correct? Tomorrow? You can go in late tomorrow. That when we scheduled this, we were still meeting in the Par Widener room. And for those who don't know, the Parr-Weidner room is named for Sandy, her former partner, Sandy Weidner, and her husband, John Parr, who tragically passed away on a snowy Wyoming highway. many years ago. And it would have been very nice to be there, but I know that we're thinking of Sandy today as well. Patty, for 49 years, you know, that is almost, you're going to feel really old when I say this, if you don't already, but that is like almost one-third of the entire time that Colorado has been a state. That you have... Really. I mean, that's old. But in that time, you, more than many other people who've come in and out of journalism in Denver, end up in the same plane, the same strata, I would say, as people like Gene Amell or Tom Gavin or folks of that stature. Patty, I think you have become an institution in Denver. I think that's quite a remarkable achievement for anybody, let alone someone who started out from scratch and built something that no one would have thought of in 1977 and taking on and becoming as important a publication as any other that was publishing at the same time in Denver. I think I first really got to know you in the early 80s when you gave me a Best of Denver award in your annual Best of Denver edition. I think it was 1985. Best euphemism of the year. For an article I wrote about one of the members of the hit squad that assassinated Allen Berg, and I made note that one of the members of the hit squad had experienced great gastrointestinal distress. during the murder, and you took it to the basest level and reported what I really meant, which I couldn't put in Iraqi. So thank you. Also got to know you very well from being on the panel at Colorado Inside Out. on Channel 12 over many years and of course you were one of the inaugural members and I don't think there are many Friday nights that people in Denver have not been able to tune in or have been able to tune in to Channel 12 to see Colorado Inside Out and not see you at that table since, I don't know how long, 30 years, 35? How long has that been on here? And you've been through every iteration and every host from Peter Boyles to Raj Chauhan to Dominic DiZutti and now to Kyle Dyer. You are the one constant, reliably giving out consistently incisive viewpoints on the news of the week. And I don't miss it. I record it because I'm not always, you know, that's date night for me. So I watch it on Saturday. So thank you for all that. And we also have something in common because you and I have both won Emmy Awards for Colorado Inside Out for the annual, which they don't do anymore. The Time Machine Edition, where we go back and talk about the issues of the day in 1876 or 1923 or 1972 and with the wonderful supporting cast that we had there. But I think the coolest thing that was not in this proclamation... is, and I hope you're expecting this, how you saved, with a couple other investors, the marvelous Wonderview Tower in Genoa, Colorado, out on the eastern plains. Anybody going up to the top of the Wonderview Tower? One guy. If you haven't been to the Wonderview Tower in Genoa, right off of I-70, the claim is that you can see six states. from the top of the Wonderview Tower. Frankly, I don't believe it. But I'm hoping, Patty, you'll be able to clear that up. And how in the world can I see South Dakota and New Mexico from the top of the Wonderview Tower in Genoa? I have a feeling that that's fudging it a little bit. But thank you for all the time and truth that you've given to people in Denver over your 49 years. And I know that you've brought some family and some staff members from Westford. Can I ask anybody who's here who's worked with Patty to stand? Hey, nobody wants to admit it.

Come on. Come on.

There you go. And your mom. Hi, Mom. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilmember Cashman.

Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman Flynn, for bringing this forward. Patty, congratulations on an outstanding career. There are many institutions that have formed the backbone of our Mile High City over the past century and a half. not many more impactful than Westward. Many people have contributed to the incredible evolution from when we began on the banks of Cherry Creek, few as much as Patty Calhoun. I got involved in Denver journalism with a neighborhood paper called Washington Park Profile a couple of years after Westward took flight. Being the quitter that I am, I spent... I spent only 36 years in that role. We worked hard. I'm proud of what we did with an underpaid group of dedicated writers and staff. We informed and reported on our community. During that same time, continuing through today, Patty Calhoun and the ever-evolving, incredible team at Westward changed our city. The investigatory articles on local issues, some even considerably farther reaching, informed and changed minds among the readership. Denver's incredible music scene, which now has a national reputation, would not have become... what it is without the westward pushing it forward. I truly believe that to be true. Denver's politicians over the years were given great praise and occasionally dragged through the mud. I think this was deserved. My view of what Westward has done, whether it's hard investigatory journalism, reporting on the music scene, speaking about who should or shouldn't gain office in our city or our state, Westward just printed the truth. And with what we see going on in especially a lot of online journalism, It is something that is to be revered and respected. And Patty, again, congratulations. I hope whatever you do with your time from now on brings you great joy as much as you brought to our city. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Council Member Watson.

Thank you so much, Council President. Patty Calhoun, when I think of you, I think of La Fiesta and margaritas with Councilwoman Elber Wedgworth. And I know that is one of your favorite spots. And I look forward to, in whatever time in your life you're calling this, with meeting you all down there and having a few drinks and celebrating. I wanted to jump in and share. A lot of folks today speak of the Fifth Estate. And they speak of the importance of having non-traditional media outlets. The Westward was the epitome of the Fifth Estate before that was bandied around. In 1977, when we had the traditional newspapers, you all came in and shook it up a bit, and you continue to do that. I know that residents of Denver and regionally, they looked at Westward for those stories that The Post and Rocky Mountain News wouldn't touch. You elevated discussions and news on marijuana long before anyone else even said the word on local news stations or in either of the papers. You have been a voice and an ear for many communities, the arts communities, so many folks who didn't really have a voice. I know that your Westward is continuing, and you will be there investigating and doing all of your reporting, but you at the helm guided a newspaper that really changed the face of Denver. Oftentimes, we wait. until folks are no longer here. Your good friend Lynn received some flowers, but maybe not as many flowers as she should have while she was with us. And so I am so proud and honored that my good friend Councilmember Kevin Flynn has chosen to elevate you and give you your flowers while you're still kicking, fighting, and drinking margaritas. And I am so happy to know you. Thank you for the ways you've contributed to Denver in making us a more funky city and a city with eyes on it and those eyes over the westward. Thank you so much and congratulations.

Thank you. Council Member Hines.

Thank you, Madam President. Hi, I'm Chris Hines. Nice to meet you. It's crazy to think that you founded Westward back in 1977. For close to half a century, you have been the independent voice of the city. So I think Councilmember Flynn talked about two other publications. They were kind of duking it out for the paper record. But I think... Westward had pretty solidly established itself as the independent voice then and continues to be the independent voice now. So what else happened in 1977? Westward was founded the same year as the Apple II, Star Wars, the Voyager probes. And like the Voyagers, Patty's voice has been traveling steadily outward ever since, still going strong nearly 50 years on. So in addition to the Westward, you launched the Best of Denver in 1984 and just put the 43rd and final edition under your watch to press, a guide that's grown to more than 16,000 awards over the years and shaped how generations of Denverite discovered their own city. So... since we're politicians. For decades, you have held us accountable. By your own account, you were often distracted by cranky politicians while running the paper. So it's fitting that today the politicians get to return the favor and honor you. I hear an interesting rumor, though, that you're not actually leaving, that you're going to stay on as editor emeritus, and you're going to keep your column, and that you're going to help steer Westward on towards its 50th anniversary on September 1, 2027. So I'm going to have the opportunity to ask you, Ms. Calhoun, is that true? Please let us know here in a few. We'll get you up to the mic here in a few minutes. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. I'll just be very brief. I just wanted to thank Councilmember Flynn for bringing this forward, and I think the words that my colleagues have said are just so fitting for the role that you've played in Denver. But on a very personal note, my husband is a fanboy. He reads everything. He watches anything that you're on TV, a podcast, whatever. Such a fanboy of Patty Calhoun. And we often have very robust conversations about the articles and your opinions and just everything that you've brought to Denver. So I just wanted to let you know that. He was texting me and like, ooh, and like so forth. So he's watching now. But just on a very personal level, his name is John Calhoun. He's John Public. He is a big fanboy of Patty Calhoun, and so I'm just very pleased, and he will be ecstatic to know that you will still be contributing and writing moving forward. But thank you again for your service. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam President. Yeah. Thank you, Council President. Thank you, Councilman Flynn, for bringing this forward. And thank you, Patty, for all you've done to bring the Westward to Denver. I think that it has been really important, especially in my district, highlighting local shows and local small businesses. It was an easy, more affordable way to advertise. And so I remember... I have a few copies saved at my house, particularly like the South Park cover with Trump. That was a good one, one of my favorites. But I just want to thank you for your work. I think journalism right now is under attack, and we need to uplift journalists every day because this work is so important, because we need people that are telling the truth and telling people what's going on in our city. So thank you all for the work that you do. Thank you, Council President.

Thank you, Patty. Thanks for being a Northsider. Thanks for showing up at events and holding all of us accountable. I think one of the first time I met you was at La Casita with my dad. Today, he would have been 82 years old. It's his birthday today, and I remember when he was sick, you coming to La Casita and covering his story, and you did it in a very compassionate way, but being real with who he was. And I'll just never forget you looking at me one time when I was sitting next to him, and I was losing my dad, and you were just really present. And I'll just never forget that memory. So thank you for serving Denver. Thank you for publishing stories that oftentimes other publications would not publish. Thank you for being thought-provoking. And I cannot say enough about the work you've done and the legacy that you have left Denver with. So from the bottom of my heart, thank you from one North Sider to another. Really appreciate all the work you've done in Denver.

Madam Secretary, roll call. Council Members Gonzales Gutierrez?

Aye.

Parity? Aye. Sawyer? Aye. Flores? Aye. Alvitrez? Aye. Flynn? Aye. Gilmour? Aye. Hines? Aye. Cashman? Aye. Lewis? Romero-Campbell?

Aye.

Watson?

Aye.

Madam President Sandoval?

Aye. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. Twelve ayes. Twelve ayes. Proclamation 0972 has been adopted. We now have time for the proclamation acceptance. Councilmember Flynn, who will you be inviting up to accept the proclamation?

Well, let me see. Patty, would you come up and try not to embarrass us by telling any stories on city council?

I am truly honored. I mean, your speeches were so wonderful. It's really an honor. And wow, 49 years, I kind of lost count. And now I'm a little humiliated that it's been 49 years. But I remember when I first came in this room almost 50 years ago, and it was not as fancy as it is today, that's for sure. And let me also say that the group up here looks a lot different from the good old boys who were just about the only people representing, allegedly representing Denver back in 1977. We came here because you couldn't watch TV to figure out what was going on at City Council. So we did come to talk to officials. More than anything else, however, we came to pay off our traffic tickets. Councilman Flynn, I am pretty sure the first time you ever talked to me was you called me from the Rocky Mountain News and you asked if I was the Patricia Calhoun on the boot list. Yes. I don't know how many of you have been on the boot list, but I might have the record in this town and paying off my boots might have paid for your new renovation. Anyway, now, of course, you've got to do all that stuff remotely anyway, and it takes you many months. So I've been on good behavior lately. When I came up here, Mayor McNichols was still in office. I have been through every mayor since then, and I have watched with great pleasure as the constitution of this organization changed. So congratulations for really representing Denver now. No one is more surprised than I am that Westward has gone for 49 years and will continue to go for many more years. As you noted, the Rocky Mountain News and the Denver Post were in a robust newspaper fight when we started as an alternative to them because we thought Denver looked so much more interesting than they made it look. And I'm happy to say Denver still looks more interesting than the lack of newspapers makes it look. Let's say we've lost the news after 100 years. It died right before its 149th birthday, correct?

Right before 150.

Right. And the Denver Post, we just lost the sign on the building outside that's now owned by the city. So it is not a good time for journalism. And Washington Park Profile, we all miss that. That was my first home before I became a North Sider. So it has been tricky, a tough time for newspapers. Councilman Hines, I am really sorry you're accurate. I am not, I'm a fraud. I'm not completely retiring. What I'm going to do is not be involved in the day-to-day of Westward. That is... Thomas Mitchell, our news editor, our other writers here, they will be able to do a great job with the website, with the paper. I am moving on to cause you as much trouble as I can. I know all of you have stories here. Councilwoman Gilmore, your district, you've got some good things going on there that we're going to be talking to you about. Councilman Hines, the 5280 trail leads to you, so we'll be talking to you. Councilwoman Torres. With the stadiums, there is nothing we don't want to talk about there. And Councilman Watson, obviously, I will be talking to you a lot over margaritas, which means it will be off the record. But there's so many great stories out there, both bad things we need to uncover, good things like your father, Councilwoman Sandoval, who we need to cover, things that are important in this city. So it has been a pleasure and privilege to cover Denver for 49 years. I hope to do it many more, probably not 49. But again, I am really honored, but I'm not done yet. So thank you so much. Thank you.

We have two required public hearings and one courtesy public hearing this evening. As a reminder, council members need to turn their video on during the vote. For those participating in person when called upon, please come to the podium. On the presentation monitor on the wall, you will see your time counting down. For those participating virtually, when called upon, please wait until our meeting host promotes you to speaker. When you are promoted, please accept the promotion, turn on your camera if you have one, and your microphone. All speakers should begin their remarks by tallying council their names in cities of residence, and if they feel comfortable doing so, their home addresses. If you have signed up to answer questions only, state your name and note that you are available for questions from council. Speakers will have three minutes, and there is no yielding of time. If translation is needed, you will be given an additional three minutes for your comments to be interpreted. Speakers must stay on topic of the hearing and must direct their comments to counsel as a whole. Please refrain from profane or obscene speech and refrain from individual or personal attacks. Councilmember Cashman, do you please put Council Bill 0619, changing the zoning classification for 1617671 through 17675 East 46th Avenue in DIA on the floor for final passage?

Yes, Madam President, I move the Council Bill 26-0619 be placed upon final consideration and do pass.

Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. The required public hearing for Council Bill 0619 is open. May we please have the staff report?

Good evening, Council President and Council Members. I'm Liz Weigel with Community Planning and Development, and I'll be providing the staff report for the rezoning of 1761. Oh, I'm mixing up the numbers too. 17671 and 17675 East 64th Avenue. I will walk through the request, give you background on the location, the proposed zoning, the process, and then I'll close with the review criteria. So this proposed rezoning is proposed by United Airlines to facilitate the development of a flight training facility and other related uses at this site in Council District 11. United Airlines is the largest private employer in the city. They currently operate a flight training facility at Quebec and Martin Luther King in Council District 8. And this is a proposal to expand those training facilities to another location. and allow for additional uses over time. The site is located in Council District 11 at 64th and Yampa. It's approximately 114 acres. The area is generally vacant today. There are some agricultural uses on the western portion of the site. It's bounded by Dogwood Gulch to the north there and just to the west is the A line and Pena Boulevard. As I mentioned, this is in Council District 11, which is Councilmember Gilmour's district, and it's located in the DIA neighborhood, which is largely the airport itself, but it does include some areas of other uses. The zoning today is in former Chapter 59 districts. These are old code districts. You can see them on the map here in gray. Much of this area remains in former Chapter 59. There are some surrounding suburban mixed-use districts, IMX districts, and DIA, which is the airport. This map shows uses in the area. The site is shown as agriculture, which I mentioned there are some agricultural uses on it. There is a mix in the area of some other office and commercial uses, and then residential uses to the east and the south. This is an aerial view of the site looking north from 64th. As you can see, again, that it's largely vacant. You can see the A line there to the left of the screen. And then you can see some of the commercial uses along Tower Road and Yampa there on the right. This site, given its size, did go through a large development review. It actually started that process back in 2023, and the large development framework was completed in 2024. The applicant has been working on both engagement, working on drafting the PUD that's proposed here, as well as their infrastructure master plan that includes plans for open space on the site, as well as street connections, like connecting Telluride Telluride gray. I'll walk through the proposed rezoning. So this is proposed as custom zoning to PUDG number 40. So it'll be our 40th PUD in the city. So the proposal is to use a PUD in order to facilitate diversification of uses to really support those varied employment uses over time, to encourage innovation of this development of the site as a corporate campus, and to make sure that the standards are compatible with the neighborhood context. The general structure of the PUD is it breaks the area into two sub areas that I'll walk through. Sub area A really covers most of the site, and then subarea B is the corner near 64th and Yampa. So subarea A is based largely on the campus EI district, which is our educational and institutional campus district, really intended for some of our larger campuses in the city, like college campuses, where we're looking for some flexibility in building placement, open spaces, really looking at those types of sites that have one large user. And largely the PUD keeps all of the standards from campus EI in place. The one customization in this area in terms of building form standards is to lower the height that's allowed in that district to 110 feet. And this is consistent with the area plan guidance in this area. The second sub-area in the PUD is sub-area B. Again, as I mentioned, this is that corner of Yampa and 64th. This area follows generally the standards of SMX 8. Our SMX districts have stronger standards in terms of build-to requirements, that's where the buildings are located on the site, screening requirements adjacent to parking, and transparency for buildings. the applicant and I'm working with staff where they felt that that corner was especially important and wanted to apply those mixed use standards in that corner. And then in general, the PUD does have customizations that would apply across the site and these are largely about uses. So the uses are really a blend of those allowed both in the campus districts and in the suburban mixed use districts that would allow that mix over time as the campus develops. This part of the city is in our airport influence overlay, which is an overlay district that prevents residential uses north of 64th Avenue and surface parking, like stand-alone surface parking, like commercial parking lots. And that's intended to help support the success of the airport over time. So that overlay is carried forward in the PUD itself. And then another customization is around fences. So it is anticipated that this would be a secure campus and this PUD would allow for fences up to 12 feet in height. It does have standards on both the materials and the transparency to ensure that has a good edge around the site. So I will walk through the process. As I mentioned, the large development review process started back in 2023, but the rezoning itself was filed earlier this year. It went to planning board in May and it is before city council today for a public hearing. We do have a number of comments in support. I think there were eight letters included in your packet, and you may have received three additional letters in support after the staff report was submitted. But we do have a letter of support from Montbello 2020 and beyond, which is the registered neighborhood organization in the area, and then seven letters of support from a neighboring property owner and organizations throughout Denver. The key themes in these letters note the valued partnerships with United Airlines in terms of community organizations, support for United's expansion in Denver, workforce opportunities, and planned consistency. Planning Board heard this item, as I mentioned, in May. They voted unanimously to recommend approval. They, in their discussion, discussed the appropriate use of the PUD, the unique nature of the proposed development and owner, and plan consistency. So I'll now walk through the review criteria. As you are aware, we have three standard criteria in the Denver zoning code. We also have five additional for custom PUD districts. So I'll first walk through the three standard and then I'll get to the other five. So in this area, in terms of adopted plans, we have three adopted plans. We have our two citywide plans and then the far northeast area plan that was adopted in 2019. So in the staff report we outline that we do find that this rezoning furthers a number of our comprehensive plan goals and strategies. I'll highlight a few of those. One is increasing access to quality of life and amenities. So both with the potential creation of jobs and also with some of the park improvements that would come with this development and the zoning, we do find that it furthers the strategy. There are a number of strategies in comp plan around economic mobility and economic diversity, supporting workforce training, and keeping our economy competitive. So with this rezoning facilitating additional employment uses, we do find that it furthers these strategies. And we also have some regional goals in Comprehensive Plan 2040. And with this rezoning facilitating more airport-related uses and employment, we do find that this supports embracing Denver's role as a regional center for growth and Denver's role as a transportation hub with connections to the region and beyond. So I'll now walk through Blueprint Denver. So Blueprint Denver identifies this area as within the suburban neighborhood context and as a community center is where we see a mix of office, commercial, and residential uses. It also calls for heights up to five stories. I'll put the caveat that the neighborhood plan provided additional detail around what was anticipated in this area and the heights that are recommended. But in general, this rezoning, which is based on our campus and our mixed-use districts, would further this vision in Blueprint Denver. Given the size of this site, we did look at our equity metrics in Blueprint Denver, and we have three major concepts. Those include improving access to opportunity, reducing vulnerability to displacement, and expanding housing and jobs diversity. I will say that given that there's not a lot of uses existing on the site today, we don't get a lot from the data on the site itself, but we do see that improving this rezoning would help improve access to open space, but what would be required to be developed on the site, and also increase our jobs diversity and jobs opportunities. Blueprint Denver, as you've heard us say many times, recommends coming out of the old code and into our new code. And this rezoning would help facilitate that goal. It also speaks to the airport and continuing to support the airport and also furthering commercial development nearby the airport. So this rezoning would help facilitate that as well. And lastly, you'll note that the rezoning helps address some of the climate goals in Blueprint Denver by encouraging dense development near transit and close to the airport, making this campus less auto-dependent by having some of the training close to the airport itself. I'll go over the Far Northeast Area Plan. The Far Northeast Area Plan was actually adopted very close to the adoption of Blueprint Number, so the neighborhood context, place, and growth strategies are consistent between the two. As I mentioned, the Far Northeast Area Plan has a more specific height map and guidance, and it recommends going up to eight stories. Our eight-story districts allow that 110-foot height limit, so that's consistent with what is proposed with the PUD. There's also guidance around more specifically this neighborhood and the plan recommends more investment and employment centers in these greenfield sites in the DIA neighborhood and it sees this as an opportunity to connect jobs to the nearby residential communities. This plan also recommends rezoning at a former Chapter 59, and it supports rezoning efforts that would increase job opportunities in the area. And then moving from adopted plans to our second criteria, staff does find that this rezoning furthers the public interest. That's by implementing our adopted plans and by encouraging use of this greenfield site for airport-supportive commercial and for helping to build out connectivity and open space in the far northeast area. And staff also finds that the rezoning is consistent with the neighborhood context zone district purpose and intent. And that will relate to the PUD criteria that I'll walk through here. So these are the five additional criteria that the zoning code has for PUD districts. And I'll... briefly go through each of these. So the first criteria is that the PUD itself that we write has to be consistent with the intent and purpose of PUDs in the zoning code. And we did find that this site has special characteristics related to the scale of development and the more customized need for the types of uses that may be on the site. And we find that the PUD will result in a diversification of land use, open space connectivity, and advance a number of our city goals as I outlined. The second criteria for PUDs is that it complies with all their standards and criteria, so the code outlines what should be included in a PUD, and this PUD is consistent with that. And then there is a criteria that the development is not feasible under any standard zone districts. We really did find, looking at the site, that the blend of the campus and the SMX districts really met both the needs of the longer-term development and was consistent with the planned guidance in that area, and that we didn't have a right fit with just a standard district. Going to the next one, the PUD establishes uses and building forms that are consistent with those in the adjacent area. As I mentioned, this is the blend of campus and SMX. You do find a number of SMX districts in the area, and I think the campus and employment uses were really envisioned by the adopted plans. So with that, going through all those criteria, staff recommends approval, finding that they have all been met. And I'm available for questions. Thank you.

Thank you very much. We have more than two. Let me see. 11 individuals signed up to speak this evening. If you are here in person after your name is called, please make your way up to the front bench. If you are on Zoom, please accept the promotion when called upon. First up, we have Scott DeJong.

Good evening. My name is Scott DeShong, Parker, Colorado. And I have the privilege of serving as the CEO of Make-A-Wish Colorado. In our world, we get to walk alongside families and kids during some of their hardest moments of their lives and help them experience something hopeful again. And nearly 75% of the wishes that we do for kids in Colorado begin and end at Denver International Airport. DIA isn't just about infrastructure. It's where hope takes off. It's where a child battling a critical illness boards a plane to see the ocean for the first time, meet their hero, or simply feel like a kid again. And I'll just add that United Airlines has been an incredible partner in that work. Make-A-Wish Colorado was founded here in Denver in 1983. And United Airlines has been an amazing partner since day one. They show up for our families, they support our mission, and they do the same for so many organizations across the community. And that's why this project matters. When we invest in Denver International Airport and strengthen the ecosystem around it, we're not just driving economic development, we're investing in possibility. DIA is one of the most important economic engines in our state, but for us, it's also something deeply human. It's where hope quite literally takes flight. I respectfully encourage you to support this rezoning. It reflects the kind of investment that strengthens our community, expands opportunity, and helps create more moments of hope for Colorado families. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, we have Jessie Paris.

Yes, good evening members of council, those in the council chambers, those watching at home. My name is Jesse LaShawn Parrish and I represent for Black Star Action Movement for Self-Defense, Positive Action Committee for Social Change, as well as the Unity Party of Colorado, the North Park Hill Coalition, Frontline Black News, Shabaka's Black Experience Enhanced the Revolutionary Agenda. And I am a candidate on the ballot for House District 8. The election's in November. And I reside at the Roach and Bedbug Infested Legacy Lofts in Darrell Watson's District 9, the fine District 9, historically black district of five points. Okay, so this seems like it's good on the surface. It really does. Let me solve the criteria. I just wanna know, like, what is the timeline for all of this? And how is this really gonna benefit those in District 11? Ms. Micah, please answer that question. I would greatly appreciate it. I'll see you on the next one.

Thank you. Next up, we have Kayla Garcia.

Good evening, Council. Good to see you all. Thank you for the opportunity. I'm Kayla Garcia with Girls Inc. Metro Denver, here to speak on behalf of United Airlines. For the past nine years, they have been far more than a corporate partner for us. They've been a true champion for the girls that we serve. During that time, they have invested in financial support, in in-kind donations, in volunteerism, and travel, creating opportunities that have transformed lives for the countless young women that we serve. In the last few years alone, more than 60 of our girls have traveled on leadership experiences to places like Alaska and New York City and next week, Chicago. Many for the first time, these trips represent their first time on an airplane, their first time leaving Colorado, their first opportunity to see the world beyond their neighborhoods. United has also opened doors to careers that historically have lacked female representation. Since 2003, they also have hosted our girls at Girls in Aviation Day, introducing them to pilots, mechanics, engineers, aviation professionals, who all look at them and say, you belong here. And this is all hosted at the training center. They've also held STEM camps and invited us in for innovation technology and learning far beyond we ever knew what went into their company. At Girls Inc. in Metro Denver, we believe every girl deserves a chance to grow up to be strong, smart, and bold. United Airlines has helped make that belief a reality by expanding horizons and confidence. We are in support, and thank you for the time today. Thank you. Next up, we have Ethan Hemming.

Hi, my name is Ethan Hemming, CEO of Warren Village. Great to see so many supporters of Warren Village. And I am just happy to be here to testify in support of United Airlines. United Airlines, for 10 years, has been a critical investor in our transformative growth in Denver. Those of you who know what we do, we provide affordable housing, workforce development, health and early learning for single parents who are coming out of homelessness and domestic violence. Because of investment and support and leadership from companies like United Airlines and United Airlines specifically, we've more than doubled our service impact in Denver. If it weren't for their investment financially, their leadership investment, and their volunteerism, I don't think our organization would be where it is today. Three things specifically I want to call out. Obviously, as a nonprofit, we rely on financial investment from donors. United Airlines, in that nine years, has invested almost $1.5 million in our organization. But on top of that, they've helped us expand our brand and our awareness in Denver and helped us grow to new audiences. They've also invested in us intellectually. We've had two United Airlines executives on our board for nine years now. They bring great different ideas to help us grow and expand our services, measure our impact, And we wouldn't be the organization we couldn't be without their intellectual gifts to us. But really, when I think about what matters to me after seeing that growth over 10 years with the organization and with the United Airlines, it's the volunteers. It's the volunteers who show up at our evening life skills classes teaching a course on budgeting or on conflict management. It is the folks who come to our holiday shop and wrap gifts. It is a memory of our first board member, Rob Biddle, who is a very large gentleman who dressed up as Olaf. and took kids around and went to their apartments to see their home. And he shared with them that his upbringing was not that different than theirs. And they saw in him a role model for their growth and their future. Everywhere I go at Warren Village, at any event, I see United Airlines volunteers. I often wonder if they're on staff, and I would love that, but we can't afford that. But they show up. Hundreds and hundreds of volunteers have come to us over 10 years. They spread the word. They bring in more folks to support us and to help us. And I'm incredibly grateful for them because in an era where we lose a little bit of faith in larger entities, they're bucking that trend and they're showing us that it's not about necessarily the global brand. It's about the thousands of employees they have who are invested in the community. They are more than the company to us. They're the individuals that show up and mean something to our families and provide role models and leadership. And they're super kind people. So thank you and I hope you support this.

Thank you. Next up we have Jonah McGrath.

Good evening, and thank you for having us tonight. I'm Jonna McGrath, the Vice President of Operations for United Airlines here in Denver, and I'm from Parker, Colorado. I'm really proud to be here tonight to represent the 11,000 employees that we have in Denver as the largest private employer. Over 40 of them are here tonight with us because this project represents growth for us. And when we talk about growth, just from 2025 to the end of 2026, We are adding 3,000 new additional family members at United here in Denver. That growth brings jobs for our community, investment in our community, and it helps us bring more flights in that take our community to different places in the world. You know, we have jobs from entry level, ramp service, customer service, warehouse, stores, and then we go all the way up. So we have leadership jobs, we have technical jobs, we have tech ops jobs. We have avionics professionals, people who teach. We have safety professionals. And so when you look at this broad spectrum of what we bring to Denver, it really is impressive. And then lastly, we also have our pilots and flight attendants. And you see some of our pilots here in uniform tonight. And they are mostly based at our flight training center here. And they'll talk a little bit more about how much we bring through Colorado to train our world-class pilots. You know, myself, I started as a frontline ramp service agent 37 years ago. We are bringing career opportunities, not just jobs. There is upward trajectory throughout our organization, and many of the people that will talk tonight or you'll meet with United have followed similar paths that I have. We really are excited to keep investing in the DNA of our community and to grow in this community and this land gives us that ability. So thank you for listening to us all tonight and have a good evening.

Thank you. Next up we have Captain Robert Thomas.

Good evening Madam President and members of council. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak tonight and address this request. As the vice president of flight operations planning and development and a captain with United, I'm responsible for our pilot development, pilot hiring, and pilot training across the airline. Denver is home to the only flight training center that United Airlines has globally and the largest such facility of its kind by any airline on the planet. This facility and the people who work here in Denver are critical to our ability to keep our global operations safe, transporting more than 600,000 passengers daily. Each of our more than 18,000 pilots is required to come back to Denver for their recurrent training, which is required by the FAA. During that recurrent training, which occurs more than once annually, that requires more than 31,000 unique visitors coming into Denver. They require more than 200,000 hotel rooms annually, driving $60 million in hotel spend alone. In addition to the economic impact, we also employ at the flight training center alone nearly 2,500 employees that run that training center and train our pilots and keep our people safe. The training center by itself within United's portfolio would make up still a top 10 employer in the city of Denver. And we're proud to continue this investment moving forward. In 2024, we completed the expansion of our flight training center with the construction of a building that required more than $145 million of investment. However, given our expansive growth and hundreds of aircraft on order, more investment is needed, and we want to make that investment here in Denver with an additional training facility. This opportunity is something we don't take lightly. We're very grateful for your consideration, and thank you for giving us the opportunity to invest in this community.

Thank you. I always just say Ms., so I'm going to just say Ms. Cordero.

Got caught off by the full name. Thank you, Madam President. I'm Ms. Ryan Cordero, and I reside in Denver. I'd like to at least conclude the staff, the United Staff presentation here with gratitude. This project so far has been nearly three years in the making. And throughout that time, we've had the privilege of working alongside an extraordinary team across the city and county of Denver. To CPD and to the many departments and agencies that have been part of this process, thank you. Your professionalism, thoughtful guidance, and willingness to collaborate made this a better project. We know your work doesn't end tonight, and we look forward to continuing that partnership as we return with design plans and continue investing in Denver. I also want to thank Councilmember Gilmour and her team and all of your Council offices and teams. Your careful review of this application, your questions, your feedback, and your suggestions have strengthened this proposal. We appreciate the time you've invested in the seriousness of this, which and the seriousness with which you've approached this process. Finally, I want to recognize my United colleagues who are here this evening. These projects represent the work of dozens of people across our company. from corporate real estate to flight training to flight operations, environmental affairs, communications, legal, community market impact, and many others, and airport operations as well. Their dedication and collaboration and commitment to Denver have brought us to this moment, and I am deeply grateful to stand here with them tonight. United has been woven into the fabric of Denver for more than 80 years. We appreciate the opportunity to continue growing here, continuing to invest here, and continuing to partner with this city for many years to come. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you. Next up, we have Kaitlyn Quander. Next up, we have Sean Raley. Next up, we have Bethany Gravel. Nick, last one is Mark Adams. All right, so colleagues, please note that those are all the people who are here for questions. That concludes our speakers. Now, do we have questions from members of council on Council Bill 0619? Council Member Flynn, why don't you start us out?

THANK YOU, MADAM PRESIDENT. LIZ? OH, THERE YOU ARE. The, was it 11 acres of contiguous open space and trails? It was on slide 24. I just want to make sure I clearly understand, given the security issues, how, because I didn't see any mapping, how is the publicly available open space and trails kept separate from the campus itself as far as security and fences? How does that work?

I'll start by responding and the applicants happy to come forward and also have Stephen Wilson here from our large development review team. So the requirement in the zoning code requires 10% of the site to be open space. They are proposing more than 10% and that has to be publicly accessible. So the Fencing I'm talking about would be of the private uses, the flight training facility, but the open spaces themselves would be publicly accessible and connected to the streets and the trails around them, if that makes sense. So a fence would not be around a public open space.

Okay.

Did you want to hear more from the applicant? Yeah, just to get a visual.

Just get a visual. People walking on the trails can't actually access any of the flight training center, obviously, but how does that work? Because it seemed to me the way in the presentation that it was interwoven or you have somebody behind you. I hope he has a better answer.

Thank you. Good evening, Council. Mark Adams, I'm the Director of Corporate Real Estate for United Airlines. I oversee our design, engineering, and construction. The open space we've allotted to, so we have to extend Telluride Boulevard from the south side to the north side. And a lot of the open space was going to be located along the west side of Telluride Boulevard, and a lot of it also along Dogwood Gulch. So primarily, we're putting most of the open space along the north side of the property and the west side of the property. So it will be accessible by the public.

Thank you. I think that's good. I saw the map with the street grid and everything else, so that puts it into context for me. I appreciate that very much. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Councilman Gummer.

Thank you, Council President. I really thank the folks who spoke tonight and shared their perspective, and especially Stephen and Liz for all your work on this. My first question is in regards to the subarea A and the subarea B. I just want to make sure that folks who are watching this hearing that they understand the differences between those two sub areas. And if you could just restate that for us, Liz, that would be really helpful.

Yes. So sub area B, which is the, sorry, maybe I should go back to a slide if I can show it. One second. So you have a visual. Too many slides, huh? Oh, there we go. Okay, so subarea B is the area at the corner of Yampa and 64th. And remember, this is 114 acres, so it's not too small of an area. But that area is, the building form standards are largely based on SMX districts, which are our suburban mixed-use districts, which are largely what's mapped around this for areas that have rezoned into the new code. So there's more standards around Build 2 where buildings can be placed, around transparency, around screening of any parking that may be put on that edge to really try to enforce that as a good pedestrian edge. We don't expect people will be able to access that. the campus necessarily, but that they would have a nice edge to walk along as more development maybe happens in this area, we might see, we want people to feel comfortable being able to walk along that edge. And that was really prioritized in the PUD as an important edge. Subarea A would largely follow our campus districts, which allows more flexibility on where the buildings are placed, doesn't have as many requirements in terms of where the build to and the screening. So there'd be more ability to locate buildings throughout that larger campus area as it develops over time.

Okay, I appreciate you explaining that a little bit more on how those two were split up. Now, are there traffic infrastructure that are going to be required by United or where are we at as far as traffic calming or traffic infrastructure?

I'll pass that one to Stephen Wilson, who's been working on the infrastructure master plan.

Thank you.

Good evening. As Liz mentioned, Stephen Wilson with Community Planning and Development. So, yes, in terms of the project, there is a mobility study that goes with the Phase 1, and then when they do additional development, that mobility study will be updated in the future. Some of the mobility commitments that come with the project is building Telluride Way, so that won't be with the Phase 1 development, but the United is responsible for building Telluride Way between 64th and 66th. Then additionally, along 66th, there will be some additional right of way that's granted to make that the width that accommodates the necessary lanes.

All right, thank you for that. And then my last question is for Ms. McGrath with United, because I know we've talked a lot about the career and job opportunities, and we did have nonprofits that, you know, have partnered with United. Some of those maybe serve residents in District 11, maybe some of them don't, but where you're looking at partnerships and expanded work with not only high school students and schools, but then also college age and others who are career ready.

Yeah, we have a lot of partnerships in the Denver area. When you look at some of the schools, we actually are doing a project with Grid Alternatives to put some solar on a school in the next couple weeks. I'm not sure exactly the date. We also partner with DPS Foundation, and we do career mentoring. We do helping writing resumes. We do different... interview skills, and we bring them out to the airport for different events. Also we've got Make-A-Wish, we have Girls Inc., Boys and Girls Clubs, and we do a lot of different types of events starting at young ages to introduce them to aviation and all the different careers that are available and frankly to get them excited about STEM careers and achieving their dreams. So United really is committed in the community, as you can tell by our community partners that have shown up, to be out there and to be training and inspiring the future generations.

Great, I appreciate the younger students that you concentrated on. Could you talk a little bit about those who are maybe college age or after college, how you're also catering to that group as well?

Yeah, we do internships at United, both locally and on a headquarters level. Here in Denver this year, we have, I believe, 11 interns out at the airport. In addition, we do a program called USA Ambassadors, where we bring local community members college-age students to come out and learn about the airport and experience different aspects of the airport for about nine to ten weeks. So those are both local programs that we do and get involved with. We also do have, with our 11,000 employees, we have a lot of people that have different community involvement and get involved with different organizations. So there are several organizations that help us prepare kids for college or for coming out of college and how to get ready for the real world. And we have lots of our employees that volunteer in that space.

Great. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you, Council President.

Thank you. Council Member Alvarez. Thank you, Council President. My question is for United around reading through the Far Northeast Area Plan. It talks about climate change being a major challenge and the impacts that the airport has on this particular area. So I wanted to give an opportunity again to speak to how United is working to address climate change and be a good neighbor in that regard.

Thank you for the question. I can reflect on a couple things. The last building we just completed at our flight training center, we had a lot of new initiatives. We had LEED accreditation on the building. We're looking at ways of reducing the energy consumption at our buildings. These simulators require a lot of cooling, a lot of energy. We're completely covering our roofs with photovoltaic to generate our own electricity on the site. For this new project, we're gonna look even farther and push ourselves even towards LEED Gold, but also we were looking at net zero construction or carbon neutral construction on this new campus. We're already investigating mass timber construction to do for this new building out there, really trying to be on that forefront for environmental awareness.

I appreciate that. And during committee, when I asked about this, there was also talk about the fuel used for the airplanes. Can you speak to that?

I'm not a very good candidate on fuel use for airplanes, sorry.

Thank you, Councilwoman Alvidrez. I think you're referring to sustainable aviation fuel. We are the largest purchaser of sustainable aviation fuel and user of sustainable aviation fuel in commercial aviation. We, this year, in collaboration with the state legislature, were able to convert a tax credit that will help us purchase and bring to Denver and begin using sustainable aviation fuel hopefully later this year.

Great, thank you. That's all I have for questions. Thank you, Council President. Thank you, Councilwoman Lewis.

Thank you. I just have one question. In the presentation, you all showed us some of the benefits of what this might bring, and I'm curious as to if you all had studied what maybe some of the negative impacts might be, particularly to the Green Valley Ranch neighborhood. That's probably, yeah, I was... Yeah, thank you.

I would say in reviewing the plan and particularly the equity analysis was just one of the pieces. It was looking to how would this increase opportunity, increase open space, increase connectivity. So I think like It's ensuring that the benefits that maybe could come from this are shared with the neighborhood and I think part of the goals of having that nice edge on the site and increasing pedestrian access and ensuring that the other parts of the plan were also achieved through open space, through the connections and facilitating the job opportunities that we felt that helped share the benefits. with it, because there's certainly an opportunity that those benefits don't go to the direct community, and we felt that it did help further it.

Talk to me about, explain to me what you mean by benefits not going to the direct community.

I think it's a matter of how does this development not only impact Greater Denver, but how does it impact the immediate community and what were the goals in the area plan for redevelopment of these sites. So that's where I'm speaking to some of the goals around more open space, more job opportunities, connections, and making sure that those pieces were integrated into the plan, if that makes sense.

For the connections piece, I am curious because I think one of the opportunities for the GVR neighborhood is to see more of the east-west connections, being able to get folks out of the neighborhood. And so as a part of this plan, have you all had any consideration about how we might be able to get more east-west connections so that you don't have that heavy traffic that GVR is seeing currently?

Stephen, do you want to say anything about the connections through the site? Just as there is the main Telluride connection, but I think there is anticipated connections into the site. Okay, thank you.

Good evening. So I've worked on the infrastructure master plan, and part of the infrastructure master plan and the LDR was looking at the east-west connections. So there is the 64th that's east-west full modal for automobiles and pedestrians, but then there's also a connection at 66th So that's sort of at the very northern portion of the site. And at the beginning of the project, that's gonna be a pedestrian connection. So there'll be a trail that's along the Dogwood Gulch. And then if in the future, there will be a building with public access, then that will become a public street. In the meantime, the access locations will come into the site, there will be access controlled and it will be people just for the campus.

Thank you so much. You mentioned the LDR and that was actually my next question if this site required an LDR and I was going to hopefully ask for you to speak to the specifics of that in terms of what you all were planning.

Yes, I'd be glad to. Thank you. So we did do an LDR review. It was several years ago. An LDR was applicable for the site, and then we did create a large development framework for the project. In that large development framework, it mapped out process, including the rezoning for tonight because the proposed... use didn't fit within the existing zoning. And in that large development framework, we talked very broadly about open space that we've covered here tonight that's largely gonna be on the west side of Telluride Avenue. We did talk about the campus and the need for security with the campus. We talked about internal circulation in the large development framework and then also the external circulation around the site.

Okay, and then I have one more question for you, maybe it's for you, around the impacts as you all are thinking about the creation of more jobs. Do you anticipate that it will have an impact in terms of increase for housing or the need for housing in the GVR neighborhood? Or are you all training folks who are more likely to be trained in your facility and then be housed elsewhere?

So I can't speak to who's trained and where they live, but in terms of the site, so 64th Avenue, based on the airport overlay zone, there's no residential allowed north of 64th. So that's why you don't see any residential development proposed within the project is because it's not allowed. Yeah, no, I understand that. And then in terms of the project, right, it's an expansion to the existing training facility, and so then certainly the additional jobs would come from the actual facility, plus the people coming here to use the facility and the additional jobs that would be with, for example, hotels that are used by those coming to use the facility.

Yes, I understand that and I understand the reason for no residential as it pertains to the FAA and the requirements around security. My question is actually about the number of jobs that you all are anticipating in bringing if those jobs are going to require an increase in the need for housing in that area because you're bringing in more people and more jobs.

So maybe I could get some help from somebody from United who would like to talk about the housing issue.

Thank you so much.

And then just one thing before I turn over the microphone is that for expanding housing and affordability, we're anticipating that they'll pay the impact fees at the time that they're doing the development. So they will be contributing to affordable housing within Denver.

Lovely. Thank you so much for your time. Ms., is this you? I'm Wessel.

With my double team. Okay. Am I understanding your question correctly? You're referring to housing that would be necessary due to the increase in jobs in the area?

That's correct. Okay. Yeah, thank you.

I mean, we're really happy that we'll bring more jobs to the local community and enhance the community by virtue of doing that. We don't necessarily dictate where exactly our employees will work. We have lots of employees that currently work in our Denver hub and at the flight training center who live in your districts. But as our vice president of airport operations, some live down south and in different places. So we don't get to tell them exactly where to go. But I would anticipate most of us love to live near where we work. So it's possible that there may be an additional need based on the growth in jobs in that community.

Okay. And based on what you've seen currently in terms of the folks that you all employ, and maybe you don't collect this demographic data, that the majority of the folks that you employ or a large percentage of the folks that you employ tend to stay in the Denver metro area, or are they kind of spread throughout? a housing need might potentially be in the future?

Yeah, it's hard to make a direct connection. Yeah, really hard. I would be hard-pressed to be able to tell. I don't know if we have anyone in the team to tell us exactly how many live right in the city or outside.

Okay, Ms. I think you wanted to... Ms., don't go too far because I have one more question for you. Okay. Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember. So the types of jobs across the facility may be different, whether they be staff, administrative, security folks based there on a more hourly basis, Monday through Friday or seven days a week. Generally, at our flight training center currently, the vast majority, more than 80% of those jobs are domestic, local to the area. Okay. But for our pilots who conduct the training, oftentimes they're based around the country at some of our nine bases. And they have the opportunity to travel. And the other staff and other positions at the building also have that opportunity. Just the lifestyle that pilots are typically used to, the commute, is something that they're more apt or ready to do. And so more than half of the jobs, I would safely say, would be held by folks local to the area. But it is likely that up to maybe 25 to 50% could be commuters. But it varies depending on how much training we're doing and the type of training we're doing and the needs of the airline.

Thank you so much. Thanks for being here. Really appreciate it. Thank you. One more question for you, Ms. and I'm sure you can anticipate this question. So as you know, United has a large landscape in Council District 8, and I just want you to say for the sake of public record that you all do not anticipate that you will be changing your operations there, but instead this is an opportunity to expand in another district so that they could have what we have.

Thank you again for the opportunity, Council Member Lewis. Yes, we are investment in your district where we have our current flight training center is not going to change. We're going to stay there. This is an expansion because we've ran out of room there.

Great. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Alvarez. Thank you. I did have one follow-up question, and this could be for DOTI or for United. I'm not sure. But what is the public transit options? What are they going to be for people to get to and from the site?

Anybody?

I'll jump in and try. So we are like 1,500 feet from the 61st Street station for the light rail. So we have that there. And we already use shuttles to efficiently move our staff and our pilots back and forth from the airport to their housing to the flight training And so we'll also be doing that so that not every person that's coming in for training is renting another car, right? So we do use shuttles, buses, and stuff like that to move those staff around as they're coming in and flying through to be a little bit more efficient there.

And does United provide ECO passes or RTD passes for staff members that will be working here permanently?

No, we don't. Not currently.

Is that not part of the traffic demand management plan for the site? Is there anyone from DOTI here that can speak to the traffic demand management plan?

Sorry, on the eco passes and the train, United provides the option for employees to have parking or to get a train pass. So we do have people that utilize one or the other options. Do you know what the percentages are of those? I do not know the percentages, but we can probably find out for follow-up for you. Okay.

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

Thank you, Madam President. Mr. Condero, a question for you. I want to kind of extend a little bit on Council Member Lewis' questions about what you could do with the space. She had mentioned, you know, she's asking questions about housing. I mean, it's 114 acres. I'm assuming you're going to build a fair amount of offices there. Could it fit, like, I don't know, a corporate headquarters there?

Thank you, Councilmember Hines, for the question. Just asking if it could. Really appreciate it. We won't be making news in that sense tonight.

We have the press here. Okay, thank you. That's my only question. Thank you.

Thank you all. Seeing no other questions. Council members in the queue. The public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 0619. Council Member Gilmour, would you like me to start with you?

Thank you, Council President Sandoval. Thank you again to all all the members of the public who have been following this process in the far Northeast for a little bit over three years. We have seen a lot of Bethany, Ms. Shawn, at community meetings, not only Montbello 2020 and beyond, but also in Green Valley Ranch. Lots of festivals, tabling, just to talk to the neighborhood about what this possible opportunity looks like and how This flight simulator being located in District 11 will also help us finally attract the different retail, personal service, and entertainment amenities that we have waited for close to 30 years in the Far Northeast to get. And what this really means is that for the first time at the 61st and Pena, transit-oriented development, which it does hold the last A line before you get to Denver International Airport It was planned years ago to be very highly dense, walkable, to have locations that have hotels, event centers, so that you can take the A line and hit 61st and Pena and basically have a one-stop shop. That has always been the dream. We were headed towards that direction and then 2020 came with the pandemic. And so that set it back a little bit. But this is so exciting that we are finally here tonight to hopefully get this plan started. And I appreciate the questions by my colleagues tonight and you know, what's unique about representing the airport, especially an airport that was a replacement for an airport previously that had residential built up basically right across the street from it or it was already there. We have specific regulations within the city that there shall be no single-family residential past 56th Avenue going north to the edge of Denver. And so that's why there will only be apartments. There is a lot of development on the Aurora side, housing-wide. And so I would ask, you know, as follow-up information, it might be helpful to not only have the Denver housing statistics, but to also look at Arapahoe and Adams County because it's a patchwork out there and everybody's building homes. new housing in that area. And so we are very excited about what this will look like for us. And I do want to end with that in the staff report, there are actually urban guidelines for Denver Gateway, which this is the neighborhood is Green Valley Ranch Gateway Statistical Neighborhood. And it applies to the large area between 40th Avenue and 72nd Avenue between Chambers Road and Piccadilly Road. That's a massive area. If you just think about Chambers Road all the way to Piccadilly Road. And this is what I want to have on the record. The design guidelines for Denver Gateway are intended to promote four notable attributes of the area. One, magnificent views of the Front Range. Two, the legacy of High Plains agriculture. Three, the contrasting riparian environment of First Creek and the West Fork of Second Creek and the heritage of Denver's park and parkway system. And so United has approached this in a way that they have exceeded the criteria for the parks and open space. They are also helping us actualize and realize more connection to all of the other parks and open space that are in this area that right now perhaps don't have those connections, and this large area will help us do that connecting, especially along Telluride Street within this area. And so I believe that this has met all of the criteria to pass tonight. I will be voting in favor of it, and I respectfully ask my colleagues to as well. Thank you, Council President.

Thank you.

Councilman Alvarez. Thank you, Council President, and thank you to everyone that came to speak on behalf of United. United has been a good partner, and I really appreciate the jobs that they bring. I have talked to quite a few United employees that are extremely happy working for United, and that has been touching. I will be in support of this tonight. I am impressed also by the initiatives around climate change and taking it seriously. I just would ask that one thing is that I hope that you all consider to focus on public transit and maybe not give either or. You either get an Ecopass or a parking, but encourage people to use public transit. I think congestion around Pena, we're doing a NEPA study right now, is a continuous problem and then it wasn't necessarily designed to build all this housing in that area. So maybe pushing a little bit more for the public transit use, I think would go a long way, especially for air quality and the pollution that is in this area in general. So I appreciate that. I appreciate the work that you're doing at the state and as a company as a whole, and I hope that we can do even better. Thank you. Thank you, Council President. Thank you, Council Member Hines.

Thank you, Madam President. So obviously, we have legal criteria that we have to consider. And whether a corporate headquarters is or isn't built isn't one of the legal criteria. So we could make the announcement tomorrow if you wanted. But seriously, Captain Thomas, you shared a lot of statistics. I have a computer science degree and MBA in finance. Numbers are my jam. And just talking about how just a flight center alone would be a top 10 employer in the city. I think that's pretty impressive statistics. Our largest hotel in the city and county of Denver is the Sheridan. And I forget, I just... one of your many, many employees who are spending the night at the Sheridan, I saw at an empanada store across the street and this employee was saying that there's like tens of thousands of nights booked every year at the Sheridan. So in addition to the training center, which, as you said, is the largest in the world and the only one in the United Family, the economic impact is already massive. We don't happen to be the seat of your corporate headquarters, but we have more flights. We have more employees in Chicago. We've got a couple other airlines. Den is the largest airline. largest hub for both of those airlines as well. You know, Dallas, Love Field isn't the spot of the most flights for Southwest. We are right here. And so I see that not only do we have something that meets the legal criteria, I think we have an opportunity for a large employer to continue to grow and flex in a city that's clearly has space we could deliver you six more runways on top of the six we already have because the amount of land space we have. So it meets the legal criteria and I'm very thankful that you, as an employer and frankly as a family, because of all the nonprofit hours you provide to the nonprofits here, are excited and ready to make this even a bigger family here in Denver. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Thank you all for taking the time for the many hours of briefings. Thank you for answering my questions at committee. I feel like those were really important. Were you in the boundaries of the NEPA study? I think that's something that I'm going to be tracking. And I look forward to having this come to Denver and be utilized. And to Councilman Gilmer's point, point about the guidelines and standards, I really look forward to seeing those be built out as well. I think placemaking is really important, even if it's in light industrial use, right? You're going to not have people staying there, but you're going to be having people go in and out daily. And so making placemaking a part of the neighborhood is really important. And I also will be supporting this this evening. Madam Secretary, roll call.

Council Members Paradis.

Aye.

Sawyer. Aye. Flores.

Aye.

Alvarez.

Aye.

Flynn. Aye. Gilmour. Aye. Gonzalez Gutierrez.

Aye.

Hines. Aye. Cashman. Aye. Lewis. Aye. Romero-Campbell. Aye. Watson. Aye.

Madam President Sandoval. Aye. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 13 ayes. 13 ayes. Council Bill 0619 has passed. Thank you all. Congratulations. Council Member Cashman. Councilmember Cashman, will you please put Council Bill 0654, changing the zoning classification for 3001 South Federal Boulevard and 3058 South May Stanton Way in Harvey Park on the floor for final passage?

Yes, Madam President. I move that Council Bill 26-0654 be placed upon final consideration and do pass.

It has been moved and seconded. There is another motion on the floor.

It's that one.

Council President Romero-Campbell, what would you like to do with Council Bill 0654? Sorry.

just going to give it a moment. Okay. Thank you, Council President. I move that Council Bill 0654 be amended in the following particulars. On page 12, line 15, strike 20th day of May 2026 and replace with 25th day of June 2026. On page 12, line 15, strike 2025 On page 12, line 18, strike 20th day of May 2026 and replace with 25th day of June 2026. On page 12, On page 12, line 18, strike 20260080 and replace with 2026080A. Thank you.

It has been moved and seconded. Questions and comments by members of Council on the amendment to Council Bill 0654. Council Pro Tem Romero-Campbell.

Thank you, Council President. The amendment replaces draft versions of the PUD district plans with PUD district plans in final form. The final form of PUD district plans did not make any substantive changes from the draft forms.

Thank you. Madam Secretary, we'll call on the amendment to Council Bill 0654. Council Members Paradis?

Aye.

Sawyer?

Aye.

Torres?

Aye.

Alvidrez? Aye. Flynn? Aye. Gilmour? Aye. Gonzalez-Cutilleras? Aye. Hines? Aye. Cashman? Aye. Lewis? Aye. Romero-Campbell? Aye. Aye. Madam President Sandoval. Aye.

Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 13 ayes. 13 ayes. The amendment to Council Bill 0654 has passed. Council Member Cashman, will you please put Council Bill 0654 on the floor for final passage as amended?

Yes, Madam President. I move that Council Bill 26-0654 be placed upon final passage and do pass as amended.

The required public hearing for Council Bill 0654, as amended, is open. May we please have the staff report?

Thank you very much. Good afternoon, members of City Council. My name is Fran Peña-Fiel, and I'm a principal city planner with Community Planning and Development. And today I'm here to present you two new PUDs. This is 41 and 42, following 40, the one that you just approved. These two PUDs are for Laredo Heights. So I'm going to go first over the location and context. We're going to move on to the existing and proposed zoning. We're going to touch on the process. And finally, we're going to look at the review criteria. The subject properties are located in Council District 2, which is Council Members Flynn District. And they are in the Harvey Park South neighborhood. The sites were originally rezoned in January 2021 after the approval of the Laredo Heights Small Area Plan. This rezoning primarily consists of a really small targeted adjustment of the PUD boundaries. As you can see here on the screen, to the left or to the west, we have PUD currently, PUD G25. And to the east, we have what is currently called PUD G24. To make it easier, I'm gonna call them the one to the PUD G25, I'm gonna call it the residential PUD. And PUD G24, I'm gonna call it the campus core. I would like to note that while the total area to be re-sown in these two PUDs is about 58 acres, 58 and a half actually, the purpose of the re-sowning is just a very small boundary change that it's only 14,000 square feet. That it's gonna move from the residential PUD to the campus core PUD. You can see here in the clouded area, that's a small area that we're requesting to move from the residential PUD into the campus core. And that area is in the new subarea C. Under the current residential PUD, the site is designated for residential uses and it does not allow for a parking structure. There's no other changes proposed to the subarea or any other sections of the PUD. The applicant, who is here to answer any questions later on, it's Arts and Venues, and they're proposing this rezoning so that they can allow for a small parking garage that would serve the theater and the library uses. Because the parking structure will function as an accessory used to the civic facilities, the subject parcel is proposed to be removed from the residential PUD and incorporated into the campus core PUD. As previously mentioned, the current zoning of the sites right now is PUD G24 and PUD G25. And you can see that there in the middle, there is an area of Laredo Heights that it's UMX3. That area is not being rezoned. And then you can see also there's like a school to the south that it's CMP EI2, and that area is not being rezoned either. So it's just the two areas in the yellow. Now looking at the land use, the site is currently mostly vacant, with the exception of a few public, quasi-public buildings, some office building, and a few residential and mixed-use buildings in the north of the site. Here you have the iconic admit building, and you have also the theater and library that are the buildings that we're hoping to get this parking for. And then on this side, I just included two images to get an idea of what's in the surroundings. So then we have a house that is to the north, and then there is the Royal Chateau that is across the street on Federal. Now moving on to the proposed zoning. These two maps highlight where the boundaries are proposed to be changed for each PUD. We're looking at, as I said, a very small change. There's no changes proposed for the residential PUD, so the one that is to the left. The only change is on the boundary. There's no actual changes in that PUD. And the only proposed changes to the subarea C that we're proposing to the campus core PUD is to lower the height and to have a bigger setback. These residential standards for the new subarea C ensure that any future structure on the parcel would provide an appropriate transition to a protected district located to the north and the west. Here you can see the residential beauty that as stated earlier is not proposing any changes. Now moving on to the process. The informational notice of this rezoning went out on January 27th of this year. We presented at planning board on May 6th and we properly noticed a public hearing on April 21st. We then presented at community planning and housing committee in May 19th and we're here today for the final public hearing. At the Planning Board hearing of May 6, the Board voted unanimously to recommend approval. And so far, we have not received any position statements from the RNOs, and we have only received one letter of position from a neighbor that was concerned with potential traffic impacts. Now looking at the review criteria, for a resigning to be approved by city council, it must be found that the requested map amendment is consistent with three review criteria plus our additional review criteria for a PUD. The first criteria is consistency with adopted plans, and here we have three applicable plans. We have comprehensive plan and Blueprint Denver, so those are like our two citywide plans, and then of course we have the Laredo Heights area plan from 2019. Well, the proposal is to rezone the whole area of the residential PUD and the campus core PUD. For the purposes of this presentation, I'm just gonna focus in that small 14,000 square feet property in how it complies with the review criteria. But of course, you have all the details in the staff report. Stated on the staff report, the Risoni is consistent with several goals of ComPlan 2040. This map amendment will continue to support the efforts to preserve and reuse existing historical buildings in Laredo Heights area. Now looking at Blueprint Denver, the process that it's moving from the residential PUD to the campus core PUD falls within the special districts context, the same context assigned to most of the campus core PUD. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the special district context plan direction as it will continue to support the preservation and adaptive reuse of historic buildings and new residential and commercial developments on the campus setting. It is also identified as campus in the future place type map in Blueprint Denver. The proposed rezoning will continue to address the historic core of the former Laredo Heights campus with the preservation and adaptive reuse of the historic buildings and new residential and commercial development in the campus setting. The proposed zone district continues to be consistent with the future place guide mapped in this area. Blueprint Denver in the land use and build form section provides some additional strategies for adaptive reuse. This proposed rezoning is consistent with Blueprint Denver as the PUDs will continue to facilitate and support the adaptive reuse of the historic buildings on the site. The proposed rezoning also supports the city's goals to reduce climate impacts by supporting and facilitating the adaptive reuse of existing buildings and amenities. Blueprint Denver also provides guidance on when we should allow for the use of custom zoning. In this case, due to the many unique attributes to the property, including the challenging topography and the variety of remaining historic resources located in the center of the site, there is no standard zone district that can address the site's unique and extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, the use of a PUD is consistent with the recommendations of Blueprint. Now looking at the Laredo Heights Small Area Plan, consistent with Blueprint Denver, the neighborhood context and future place type designations remained unchanged. The subject site is identified within the special district's neighborhood context and as a campus future place type, with allowable building heights up to five and eight stories. With the addition of the subject parcel, the future place type designation remains unchanged. The campus definitions emphasize the importance of transitions, stating that when adjacent to low intensity development, the campus should transition gradually to respect the surrounding neighborhood. Consistent with that guidance, subarea C includes specific development standards intended to ensure that any future structure provides an appropriate transition to a lower density residential zoning to a north and west. Now looking at the public interest, the proposed rezoning will further the public interest through implementation of City's adopted plans, including the Laredo Heights Small Area Plan. The changing boundaries for the PUDs will continue to facilitate the preservation and reuse of some of the existing structures on the former campus. Then when we look at the third criteria of the standards review criteria is consistency with neighborhood context on district purpose and intent statements. And with the PUD we're actually called on to give more refined reflection on this. And so I'm gonna move on to the five additional review criteria from the PUD.

First, the PUD must be consistent with the purpose and intent of PUD districts.

In this case, staff found that the site has special characteristics related to the scale of development and that the PUD will advance numerous city goals. The PUD complies with the standards and criteria required for a PUD. Further, we found that the PUD is necessary as there is no standard district that applies appropriate standards and the PUD will enable development that is consistent with the plan guidance. And lastly, the PUDs will enable uses and building forms that are compatible with those in the surrounding area. So finding that all the review criteria has been met, CPD recommends that City Council approve the proposed map amendment. I'm happy to answer any questions. And we have mat form arts and venues here.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Fran. We have one individual signed up to speak this evening, Jess Parris.

Yes, good evening members of council, those watching at home, those in the council chambers. My name is Jessica Sean Parris and I'm representing for Black Star Action Movement for Self-Defense, Positive Action Committee for Social Change, as well as the Unity Party of Colorado, the North Park Hill Coalition, Frontline Black News, Chewbacca's Black Experience Enhanced Revolutionary Agenda. And I am, once again, a candidate on the ballot for Colorado House District Representatives for House District 8, the elections in November. And I reside at the Roach and Baerbug Infested Legacy Lofts in Darrell Watson's district of District 9, defined District 9 as a historically black district of five points. Um... All I want to say is I was over here recently at this site or whatever. It's like night and day. One side of federal looks completely different from the other side of federal. Actually, the last time I actually set foot in that summit was at one of Flynn's events with Chairman Sekou. That must have been about 2018, 2019. Since then, I've seen that y'all done a lot of development over there, hopefully for the better, and hopefully the people that have patrician caught that area home have been allowed to stay there. All this is a math amendment, so it meets all your criteria, even though you reduce the criteria, because it used to be five criteria, now it's only three. And it's just a POD, now it's four. So I'll see y'all on the next one. I've been waiting on the next one anyway. Thank you.

Thank you. That concludes our speakers. Do we have questions from members of Council on Council Bill 0654 as amended? Seeing none, the public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 0654 as amended. Council Member Flynn?

Thank you, Madam President. This may be one of the simplest rezonings we've ever done here in my time, but it's such a complicated path to get us there, not because of the PUDs. What it consists of is a little piece of the campus that had been in the Westside residential for townhomes that the master developer had sold to Thrive Homes. And at the city's request, after we acquired the theater by a donation and then purchased the library building next to it as a future cultural hub, arts and venues, and the city generally realized that the magnificent view from the library building itself, if there were town homes going up just beyond it next to the parking garage for the theater, that it would be right in the view. And so the city requested the master developer to repurchase back from Thrive Homes those five lots and convey them to the city as a donation. or as part of a transaction on the library. And so this is the result of taking those five parcels from the residential PUD into the campus, the main campus hub PUD. And for all that, how long has it taken, Fran? Maybe it's a year, year and a half? But I'm finally glad to have it here. I do want to acknowledge the concerns that residents have nearby of the increased traffic that this will bring and that the development area has already brought. And just continue to work with Dottie and Matt to work on the circulation plans and maybe figure out a way that we can direct most of the traffic from the theater to go out to the new traffic signal at Bates. rather than going to the west side into Harvey Park neighborhood, and also the traffic signal at Dartmouth, because it's a much safer way to get out from the campus itself. A brand new traffic signal there at Bates and Federal. So with that, I will be voting in support of this, meets the criteria, and ask my colleagues to do the same. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. Seeing no other comments by members of council, Adam's secretary will call on council bill 0654. Council members, Parity.

Aye.

Sawyer. Aye. Suarez. Aye. Alvarez. Aye. Flynn. Aye. Gilmore. Gonzales Gutierrez? Aye. Hines? Aye. Cashman? Aye. Lewis? Aye. Romero-Campbell? Aye. Watson? Aye. Madam President Sandoval? Aye.

Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 13 ayes. 13 ayes. Council Bill 0654, as amended, has passed. Congratulations and thank you all. Council Member Cashman, will you please put Council Bill 0328, updating the classifications and penalties for municipal criminal offenses, on the floor for final passage?

Yes, Madam President. I move that Council Bill 26-0328 be placed upon final consideration and do pass.

It has been moved and seconded. There is another motion on the floor. Council Member Lewis, what would you like to do with Council Bill 0328?

Thank you, Council President. I move that Council Bill 260328 be amended in the following particulars. One on page 23, excuse me, one on page 23, line two, insert mutually agreed upon by the mayor or his designee and the city council members on the working group after representatives. 2 on page 23, line 11, insert 9, Denver District Attorney's Office, 10, Colorado Office of the Alternate Defense Council, 3, renumber subsequent sections accordingly.

It has been moved and seconded. Questions and comments by members of Council on Amendment 8 to Council Bill 0328. Council Member Lewis.

Thank you, Council President. So the purpose of this amendment is to clarify the committee selection and that it will be in collaboration between the Mayor's Office and Council and adds representatives from the Denver District Attorney's Office and the Colorado Office of the Alternative Defense Council to the working group.

Thank you. Thank you. Madam Secretary, we'll call on Amendment 8 to Council Bill 0328. Council Members Parity?

Aye.

Sawyer? Aye. Flores? Aye. Alvarez? Aye. Flynn? Aye. Gilmour? Aye. Gonzalez-Cutilleras? Aye. Hines? Aye. Cashman? Aye. Lewis? Aye. Romero-Campo? Aye. Watson? Aye. Madam President Sandoval?

Aye. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 13 ayes. 13 ayes. Amendment 8 to Council Bill 0328 has passed. There is another motion on the floor. Council Member Gonzales Gutierrez, what would you like to do with Council Bill 0328?

Thank you, Council President. I move that Council Bill 260328 be amended in the following particulars. One, on page six, line 32, strike Department of Public Health and Environment and replace it with Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. On page 8, line 6, delete after child. 3, on page 8, line 8, insert is after child. 4, on page 23, lines 27 and 28, strike these sections and replace with the code. 5, on page 24, strike lines 10 through 12. 6, renumber subsequent sections accordingly.

Thank you. It has been moved and seconded. Questions and comments by members of Council on Amendment 9 to Council Bill 0328. Council Member Gonzales-Gutierrez.

Thank you, Council President. The purpose of this amendment is just simply to fix some drafting errors that were found, you know, as we were making sure we had everything ready to go on this bill.

Thank you. Madam Secretary, we'll call on Amendment 9 to Council Bill 0328. Council Members Parity.

Aye.

Sawyer. Aye.

Aye.

Suarez? Aye. Alvarez? Aye. Flynn? Aye. Gilmour? Aye. Gonzalez-Quinteros? Aye. Hines? Aye. Cashman? Aye. Lewis? Aye. Romero-Campbell?

Aye.

Watson?

Aye.

Madame President Sandoval? Aye. Madam Secretary, close the vote and announce the results. 13 ayes. 13 ayes. Amendment 9 to Council Bill 0328 has passed. Council Member Cashman, would you please put Council Bill 0328 on the floor for final passage as amended?

Yes, I move that Council Bill 26-0628 be placed upon final passage and do pass as amended.

It has been moved and seconded. The courtesy public hearing for Council Bill 0328 as amended is open. Council Members Gonzales Gutierrez, Lewis and Parity, do you have any opening remarks prior to hearing public testimony?

I'll just say a few words, Council President.

Yeah, I want to turn your mic on.

It is on.

Okay, perfect.

No, I just want to just start off by saying I want to appreciate everybody that has taken the time to do the work. I mentioned this last week, but this has been a tremendous lift of work starting even well before the beginning of this year. And so the bill you have before you as you come up to speak publicly tonight, is very different from where we started. And that is because that is what you do when you legislate. That is what you do when you create policy. You do it in a way that is co-governing, that is seeking feedback from folks. And that's what's before us. So I just appreciate everyone for taking their time to provide their voice to this issue. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. This is a 30-minute courtesy public hearing, and we have 28 individuals signed up. So what that means is we have more people signed up than we have time. So if someone has spoken before you and you're repeating something, feel free to cut it short. But you do have your full three minutes. I will be cautious of time. We'll have a timer. If we're in 30 minutes and you're speaking, don't worry. I'll let you finish. If we feel like there needs to be a last-minute person, I will use my discretion and do that. But we'll try to do our best to stick to 30 minutes. And what we did was we did, just so everybody in the audience knows how we lined it up, we did four against and neutral. Four against and neutral, and it seemed to be a third and a third and a third when we got the sign-up today. So what happens is in a required public hearing, you go in order that you signed up because it's a required public hearing. On a courtesy public hearing, we usually go for and against, but we had a lot of neutral, and so I made the decision today to go for, against, and then neutral, for, against, and neutral, just so everyone sees the pattern of how it goes this evening. First up, we have Terrance Carroll.

Madam Council President, members of the Council, my name is Terrence Carroll. I know some of you. You might know me. I'm former Speaker of the House, attorney, resident of downtown Denver. But I'm here today as an ordained Baptist preacher, as a member of the clergy, and a concerned citizen in support of this measure on this day. My faith tradition teaches me that one of our most important ethical obligations is how do we treat those who are in the margins of society, those who don't have anyone that speaks for them, those who are, as Howard Thurman would call, the disinherited. And one of the things that we can do if we stand in their shoes and we say that we are concerned morally and ethically and theologically for those people is to ensure that those of us who are public servants like you do not place impediments in front of them, especially as they're going through poverty, especially as they're going through things that most of us could not ever imagine, in particular, in this case, being incarcerated. As a lawyer, I do have some concerns about the equity related to the city having different sentencing requirements as opposed to the state. And there has been a state Supreme Court ruling that says otherwise. But I don't want to spend too much time there, and I'm not going to take my entire three minutes, which is funny for a Baptist preacher to say. So I'm going to try to take less than my three minutes. But what I want to talk about briefly is that this city council has an opportunity to do something that most city councils don't have an opportunity to do. To think through more thoroughly and be more proactive. And how do we help those who are living on the edges of society be brought back into the beloved community, as Dr. King would say? This is an opportunity for us by reducing sentencing to make it more just and make it more right to bring those folks back into the beloved community. And I just want to say this piece. There are some folks who think that the purpose of the criminal justice system is to punish people primarily. I find that position to be completely immoral. The purpose of the criminal justice system is to restore people, to make them whole again, to help them become productive members of society again. And when we place impediments in front of them and pose roadblocks that they can't overcome, especially our poor citizens, we make it hard for them to be restored. We make it hard for them to show repentance. We make it hard for them to be rehabilitated. So I ask that you support this measure and that you create an environment where all of Denver's residents, no matter how poor or how rich, can be part of our beloved community. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up we have Jimmy Spurs.

Thank you, Council President and Council, for taking the time to set aside this 30 minutes. My name is Jimmy Spurs. I am a resident of central Denver for the past 28 years and currently reside in Council Watson's district. Through the history of time, society has stopped bad behavior because something corrects it. A parent says no, a school says we're going to give some discipline, an officer shows up and gives a good resolution to a problem. This is how society has been shaped. pretty much through history. I have a number of things to speak on, but I appreciate the sponsors sending out some clarifications today to a couple of the issues I had. And I would like to add a response to that. One, everything is still a crime that is currently a crime. Currently, if we walk a couple blocks in any direction from this building, we are going to run into people who are smoking fentanyl in our streets. While every other city across the country has lowering use and less overdoses, Denver really bucks that trend. In 2019, the Colorado legislative body passed a bill that defelonized all drugs of four grams or less. And essentially what this did was it took one dose of psilocybin, which is a schedule one drug, and made it the same as 2,000 doses of fentanyl. and took that down. And since then, that has been reduced to two grams, but we're still facing this problem. Because police can't do anything, because it's been defelonized, because there is less of an impact, this is going to continue. And even if we pass a new piece of legislation this November at the ballot box, I just saw that carfentanil has reached the border of Utah, Colorado, which is a rhinoceros and elephant tranquilizer 200, excuse me, 100 times as powerful as fentanyl. And so now on our streets we have defelonized approximately 200,000 doses of carfentanil. This brings in people who enjoy using drugs. This bill here is not going to bring in businesses. It is going to bring in criminals. This working group, as much as people might think, is here to reduce the penalties for all these crimes. And so I ask that a clean bill be introduced and passed to align with the camp decision and that members vote no tonight. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, next up we have Lindsey Webb.

Good evening. My name is Lindsay Webb. I'm a Denver resident. I'm also a law professor at the University of Denver. I teach and write about criminal law and practice, including on the topic of sentencing proportionality. I have represented clients in municipal courts throughout the Denver metro area, including multiple clients in Denver Municipal Court. I also serve on the commission of the Denver Office of the Municipal Public Defender. And my views here, of course, my own and do not represent my employer. My position on Bill 260328 is a neutral one, which is to say I support the passage of this bill, but I do not believe it goes far enough to address concerns about sentencing disproportionality and inequities in Denver's municipal sentencing laws. A majority of the changes this bill makes are mandated by the Colorado Supreme Court, which held that municipalities may not authorize harsher sentences than state law allows for an identical offense. Those changes are not discretionary, even if some disagree with them, and thus this version of the bill should pass without controversy. But this leaves unaddressed the ways in which Denver's municipal sentencing laws continue to permit long sentences for many municipal court offenses. And while the working group this bill creates contemplates these issues, the liberty of those charged with crimes in Denver Municipal Court is at stake. And I remind those here that the vast majority of people charged in Denver Municipal Court are indigent, and thus these sentences disproportionately impact the most vulnerable members of our community. I also remind those here that long jail stays and sentences cause substantial harm in terms of disrupted lives, loss of work and family upheaval, and do not clearly serve the goals of deterrence or safety that opponents of sentencing reform often invoke. The law to have legitimacy must be transparent, consistent and fair capping municipal court sentences at 10 days as occurred in prior versions of this bill would be a step towards those goal goals. This bill falls short of my view, and I urge those serving on the working committee to work together for a sentencing structure that does not conflate lengthy sentences with justice or safety. Nevertheless, because this bill does what the Colorado Supreme Court mandates and is a necessary reform, I urge the council to support it.

Thank you. Next up, we have Chucha Montoya.

Chucha Montoya.

Good evening, Council. Please forgive my lack of eye contact. I've been going through some homeowners insurance drama, and it's been for the last three weeks, so I'm exhausted. Normally, I like to speak off the cuff. My name is Quika Montoya, and I am the Senior Director of Homelessness Programs at Colorado Village Collaborative. I stand here. I closed my screen. Oh, my goodness. Some days. Forgive me. I'm just gonna read it after this, I'm so sorry. I'm here today in support of the municipal sentencing reform ordinance led by Council Members Paradis, Gonzales Gutierrez, and Lewis. Colorado Village Collaborative operates micro-communities serving individuals experiencing homelessness and poverty across Denver. Every day I work alongside people who are actively trying to stabilize their lives, access treatment, secure housing, reconnect with family and friends, and recover from trauma, mental health, and substance misuse. I also bring lived experience with homelessness, incarceration, mental health challenges, and substance misuse, which gives me a unique understanding of the barriers many of our community members face. What I see every day is that criminalizing homelessness and poverty does not end homelessness and poverty. Long sentences for low-level and survival-based offenses do not create housing, improve recovery outcomes, or increase stability. In many cases, they do the exact opposite. Many of our community members are already navigating significant challenges while trying to move forward. Extended incarceration can disrupt medical care, treatment, employment opportunities, housing navigation, family connections. It can make it harder for people to access the very supports that help them exit homelessness and become more stable. At CVC, we know what works because we see it every day. People are more likely to succeed when they have access to shelter, housing, behavioral health services, peer support, and community. Those are the interventions that reduce future system involvement and improve public safety. The people we serve are not defined by the worst moment of their lives or by the circumstances that brought them into homelessness or poverty. They are people working towards stability and a better future. This ordinance recognizes that accountability and public safety are best served by our responses that are effective, proportional, and focused on long-term outcomes. On behalf of the individuals we serve every day, I urge you to support this reform. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up we have David Howard

Thank you. My name is Don Quijote. I'm sorry. My name is David Howard. I'm in District 6. Thank you. And for 31 years. Again, I urge you to vote no on the municipal sentencing bill and start over with a clean measure that solely addresses the camp ruling. This bill was built on overreach from day one. After a dozen backroom iterations to water it down, the city attorney's office has cried uncle, but they don't find it palatable. You are exactly right, though. There's not that much that's still left in it to object to. Yet, the enthusiasm of the bill's sponsors remains incredibly high. Why is that? There are two possible reasons. First, it's perfect advertising. It carries immense PR value for the voters in Denver who view the world strictly through a lens of oppressor versus victim, a worldview I entirely reject. I live in America, the land of equal opportunity, or a country that strives for that. But the sponsors and their supporters drink all this up. Somehow they morph the actual perpetrator of disorder into a victim of society. They seek to apply different penalties to different people based entirely on group identity. That is fundamentally un-American. I believe in equity. But that advertisement is simultaneously heralding Denver as open for crime and open for chaos to the rest of the western United States. Other cities are all too happy to let their most troubled street populations find their way to a consequence-free promised land here in the city of Denver. And we all know what it advertises to current and potential businesses, that we're going to stick it to the capitalists. Vote no. The second reason for their enthusiasm might be that they're tricking you. It might be that the bill's most effective machinery remains intact. The class five misdemeanor is an empty bucket just waiting to be filled. The commission is then tasked with moving current misdeeds into that no consequence bucket. Sure, the Commission may look more balanced now, and thank you very much for that, but there will be committee representatives who want to defend actual victims, like the local retailer who repeatedly has to clean up human feces. But... The driving enthusiasm of this committee and the direct pressure will remain squarely on the side of the anti-carceral, pro-chaos members. They will insist on excusing away the destructive behavior because of the characteristics of the frequent perpetrators. Imagine how well attended the ceremony for the inevitable rollbacks will be when it's signed by Mayor Calderon. I urge more members of this council to join your courageous colleagues who are standing up to oppose this measure tonight. Vote this down and replace it with a simpler, cleaner bill that fixes the camp, that limits itself just to the camp decision. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam President and council members. My name is Anaya Robinson. I'm the public policy director at the ACLU of Colorado. Here today to support portions of this municipal sentencing reform effort, but also to push for further work in this arena as I live in District 1. At its core, this is about fairness, legality, and aligning Denver's code with our values and laws. Denver's municipal sentencing structure is outdated, unpredictable, and in some cases, unlawful. The threat of lengthy sentences alone has real consequences. When someone faces hundreds of days in jail, many plead guilty just to avoid the risk, even with a valid defense. This undermines the right to trial and creates a coercive system that falls hardest on the most vulnerable. These broad sentencing ranges disproportionately harm low-income residents and communities of color. When poverty-related offenses carry the possibility of months in jail, we are criminalizing survival. For immigrants, these penalties carry the added risk of deportation for the lowest level conduct, tearing families apart, possibly forever. Much of Denver's code is also now out of compliance with the Colorado Supreme Court's unanimous decision in Simons and Camp, issued now more than six months ago, which makes clear that municipalities cannot impose harsher penalties than state law allows for the same conduct. That includes current penalties for trespass and petty theft. Compliance with that ruling is a bare minimum, not a choice. The proposed solution is straightforward. Align Denver's code with state law, create a working group to look at proportional sentencing ranges, and establish a 10-day maximum for poverty-based, municipal-only offenses. We understand the political realities here, and we support this change. But we are clear that this is a starting point. While the working group may address some of the issues left out of this bill, in the meantime, people will still face 300-plus days in jail for conduct not severe enough to exist in the state's criminal code. Ultimately, all municipal-only offenses should be capped at 10 days to eliminate the coercive nature of Denver's municipal code. No one should face months in jail for a municipal violation that would carry far less or nothing under state law. This is about restoring balance, protecting constitutional rights, and ensuring our local laws do not deepen poverty or inequality. We enthusiastically supported the introduced version of this bill. We urge you to support the reforms before you today and to continue this conversation until the criminal code is fair and balanced across the board. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, we have Marilyn Ackerman.

Good evening, President Sandoval and council members. My name is Marilyn Ackerman. I am a member of Montview Presbyterian Church and Together Colorado's Denver chapter. I live in Central Park, Council District 8. Genuine public safety is built upon trust. A fair, equitable, and reasonable system of justice builds the community's trust in that system. There's a reason that Lady Justice is depicted with her eyes covered. We are all supposed to be equal under the law. Everyone, despite their background, race, income, zip code, or a box checked on a summons, deserve to be treated fairly, equitably, and reasonably. Anything less is unjust and damages the public's trust in the justice system, and therefore damages public safety. The Colorado Supreme Court agrees. This still puts us in compliance. Great. We can do more. Arbitrarily punishing low-level crimes of poverty unjustly does not reflect my values or the values of my faith tradition. I believe that everyone, every human that has ever lived or ever will live is precious, has value beyond measure, and should therefore be treated with dignity and respect. Laws are a social contract, codifying a community's values and priorities. My Christian faith values align with fairness and human dignity for everyone. No exceptions. There is no white nationalism in my Christian faith values. I am so proud of the co-governance that council members Gonzales Gutierrez, Paradis, and Lewis have built and struggled with over the past three years by convening so many stakeholder meetings, meetings with city staff. You have created the most beautiful example of listening, adjusting, listening again, and then adjusting further. Your product is extremely creative and fair for meeting the needs of all of Denver for the violations that are outside the camp decision. Thank you, Mayor Johnston, for your seal of approval, and hopefully every city council member here as well. I'm sure all of you will vote tonight in favor of this new municipal code ordinance that checks all the boxes for still serving the victims of many crimes and yet better helping those who are fined or jailed for their low-level crimes. Poverty crimes can ruin an already tenuous life by being jailed for more than 14 days. Loss of Medicaid, jobs, belongings, and housing, both temporary or permanent, causes recidivism, not a change in behavior. Your establishing a commission to decide complicated offenses that are not Supreme Court decision related is such a great example of what Together Colorado expects in co-governance. We hope to see more of this work with recommendations that are listened to and not just given lip service. Please vote unanimously tonight to approve these important changes to Denver's sentencing structure to better reflect the values and priorities of Denverites and to build better trust in our justice system, which improves public safety for all.

Thank you. Next up we have Carrie Marin.

Good evening, Madam President, Mayor Johnston, and council members. My name is Carrie Mirren, and I'm a Denver resident in Council District 6, a business owner, and a mom. I'm here tonight to ask you to reject Bill 2603-28. Denver should comply with the People vs. Camp decision. The question is whether this bill does more than that. If this is really about camp, then keep it about camp. If it's about broader criminal justice reform, then have that debate openly. For my family, this is a deeply personal issue. Two years ago, an individual threatened to kill my then 11-year-old son at a school park just two blocks from my home. Police told me the individual had a lengthy history of prior arrest, law enforcement contacts, and an outstanding warrant. Thankfully, no one was physically harmed, but no parent should have to wonder whether their child is safe at a neighborhood park. That experience reinforced for me that public safety isn't an abstract policy debate. It's about protecting the places where our families live, work, and raise our children. Residents and neighbors that I've talked to are all saying the same thing. We want safe neighborhoods. We want thriving businesses. We want our children to play in parks without fear. And we want a justice system that is both fair and accountable. The concern is simple. Why are we reducing consequences for offenders when so many residents remain concerned about crime, public disorder, and repeat offenders cycling through the system? Accountability isn't punishment for punishment's sake. It is one of the foundations of public trust. If this bill is truly about complying with the camp decision, why does it create a new working group to shape future criminal justice policy? That goes well beyond implementing a court ruling. Council members, with respect, please don't ask Denver residents to view this as simply a camp compliance bill. If these broader policy changes are the goal, then present them openly and let the public debate them on the merits. This debate ultimately comes down to a basic question. What message do we want to send? Do we want to tell residents that Denver is serious about safe neighborhoods, thriving businesses, and accountability? Or do we want to tell them that reducing penalties is a higher priority? Denver can comply with the Supreme Court's ruling without going further than necessary. The city can follow the law while still standing firm on the side of public safety. Do a clean camp fix, nothing more. Denver families deserve accountability, transparency, and safe neighborhoods. I respectfully ask for your no vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, we have Leanne Fix.

You'll have to help me with that one. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Leanne Ficus and I am a social worker with the Denver Municipal Public Defender. Thank you to the bill sponsors, all the stakeholders who have worked to bring this legislation forward and for council members for giving us an opportunity to speak. In my daily work, I see people cycle through arrest, jail, and release without addressing the root causes that often drive low-level municipal offenses. Over 80% of our clients live with mental health conditions, substance use disorders, and traumatic brain injuries. Many are also experiencing homelessness or housing instability. As a Cap Hill resident in Lucky District 7, I understand the concerns of my neighbors and local businesses. However, jail is not an effective deterrent for these low-level crimes, and in fact, reinforces the very cycle we are trying to break. And at around $250 a night, jail is a costly, ineffective solution. Jail is not treatment. Incarceration often worsens mental illness, increases overdose risk, and destabilizes housing, employment, benefits, and families. Even short jail stays can exacerbate the very cycle we are trying to break. Municipal sentencing reform gives us the opportunity to address root causes by addressing in what works. Investing in what works like supportive housing and coordinated care. Earlier this year, one client with several low-level municipal charges received supportive housing and intensive case management. Since being housed, they've engaged in treatment and they haven't had any new municipal charges since. I'm hopeful because this bill begins to align Denver's municipal code with our city's values. Right now, there's very little nuance in our criminal code because the default sentence for almost any crime is 300 days, almost a year in jail. This bill will reduce the penalty for crimes like having your dog off a leash or spitting on the sidewalk to a more reasonable 10 days in jail. However, there is still more work to do to make sure that the punishment on the books in Denver fits each crime. For instance, this bill makes the punishment for damaging someone's property, if worth under $300, a max of 10 days in jail. But it keeps the punishment for just threatening to damage someone's property without actually damaging it to 120 days in jail. That just doesn't make sense to me. I hope this council will use the working group to continue reviewing and improving our municipal code. While I do have reservations about this bill, it has been over six months since camp and we have to start somewhere. With that in mind, I ask you to vote yes on this bill, but also continue the work through the working group and invest in real solutions that help end the cycle through jail. Thank you for your time and all you do for Denverites. Thank you.

Next up we have Zerara Gonzalez. Gallegos, sorry. No? All right, next up we have Jen Gardner.

Good evening, members of Council. My name is Jen Garner, and I'm a resident of District 10. I live off of Colfax, and I have for the last 25 years. I live by the Bluebird District. I had made all these great notes to talk with you about why I think it's so important that you reject this bill and just comply strictly with CAMP. I was going to talk about the difficulties with the working group process that keeps open this idea that we need to further reduce penalties in the city of Denver. It's a closed process, not transparent at all, and it introduces some really toxic concepts like that we're not all created equal and that we are not to be treated equally under the law. We're to look at disparate impact of outcomes, not treatment, but disparate outcomes. So if our working group was in San Francisco, where it is well known that Hondurans control the street-level drug dealing in the Tenderloin District, and we looked at the statistics for prosecutions of drug dealers in San Francisco in the Tenderloin, we'd see, gosh, probably 88% are from Honduras. Your bill currently underway directs that working group to look at a statistic like that and to mitigate it. Takes away any and all accountability of individual action and individual agency and says if the proportion of people prosecuted for this offense is different from their representation in the city and county of Denver, The penalty has to change. The impact has to change. That is the direction in section 24 for the working group. It's in your language. It says disparate impact, not disparate treatment. Further, those wonderful compromises that you all made with Amendments 6 and 7 last week to secure for prosecutors the ability to hold up their domestic violence cases, great changes, fully support them. Yet with each amendment, language was included to direct the working group to look at those offenses again. It's temporary. You all are kicking the can down the road and building up a whole new process to look at these issues again, to again tell stories about how we don't need consequences for crime, to never talk about victims of crimes, you know, who are never people who offended against us. We've never been caught. We've never had justice. And I'll close my last two seconds, ten seconds of... Of 12 years of sobriety at the end of September with God's grace and working a program of recovery, we need to be held accountable. Addiction is not an excuse for not being held accountable for our crimes. Thank you.

That concludes the 30-minute allotted time for public testimony. Now we'll start with questions from members of council on Council Bill 0328 as amended. Madam Secretary, if you'll clear the queue. Right at the bottom. Do we have questions from members of Council on Council Bill 0328 as amended? Council Pro Tem Romero Campbell.

Thank you, Madam President. So some of the things that I've heard from my residents are wanting additional information about the working group. And can the sponsors go over how the working group was composed, the purpose, and the overall objective?

Yeah, thank you so much. So the working group is comprised of three members of city council, the mayor or his designee, and the following members, the city attorney, the municipal public defender, Denver police, Denver sheriff, Denver fire department, the department of public health and environment, the department of licensing and consumer protection, Denver County Courts Peer Forensic Specialist, a community-based survivor-driven organization that advocates for crime victims. A nonprofit group with expertise in municipal court sentencing practices and criminal justice reform. A business improvement district, an organization that represents people experiencing homelessness or living in poverty. an organization that advocates for immigrant rights, an organization that advocates for racial justice reform, a statewide association of criminal defense lawyers, an instructor at an institution of higher education and who has expert knowledge about criminal prosecution in municipal courts and the impacts of incarceration on individual defendants in public safety, and any other member mutually agreed upon by the mayor and the city council members of the working group. I did want to add that we have added as of tonight with the amendments, the district attorney and a member of the state office of alternate defense counsel, because we believe that this working group reflects a nice variety of viewpoints and experiences in this issue. I'm going to go out just a little more further to just give you a little bit more detail. So the working group is tasked with looking at several things. So that includes where fines are appropriate and at what amount, how fines accrue, what jail time is appropriate and at what level, whether certain misconduct that currently can be criminally prosecuted should be decriminalized or repealed, how best to address and deter misconduct by corporate actors, and weighing the current sentencing for certain crimes including threats and violation to protection orders. The working group is not required to reach any predetermined conclusion as to these provisions. It is entirely possible given the makeup of the group and the changes involved that the working group recommends that fines and jail time increase and that nothing is decriminalized. The idea behind the working group is that we take a hard look at these things using data, lived experience and common sense and get a sense of where we're at and what the city actually needs. And then in terms of the scope of the working group, the working group issues recommendations. But if the group does make a recommendation, those recommendations alone do not change the Denver City Code. Those recommendations would need to be turned into an ordinance and would be subject to the normal process of legislation similar to this, including a required public hearing to city council votes and subject to mayoral veto.

I hope that's helpful.

Thank you. That is helpful. Those are the questions that I've received. And I think the last part. Councilwoman, is your mic on?

I don't have my mic on. Thank you.

Thank you. Those are the questions that I've been receiving. Can you just clarify for the last that it's recommendations that would be made in a report at the end, or would they be coming to council as they're being decided or as they're being discussed through the committee?

I report at the end, and the recommendations that are made does not mean that City Council would adopt said recommendation. Like, it would be up to the entire body to determine if any or all of those recommendations move forward.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. That's my question. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Councilman Navidrez. Thank you, Council President, and thank you to the sponsors for all your work on this and everyone else who has been working on this. One of the things that came up during questions was around substance use, and I wanted to give some clarification if this bill addresses that.

Yeah, I can answer that. Thank you, Councilwoman Alvidrez, for that question. And I'm glad that you brought that up. I think we heard during public comments some concerns specifically related to substance use and possession, specifically fentanyl possession. Those are actually filed under our state courts, which in Denver, these types of offenses are heard in a higher court. In those courts, those are prosecuted by the district attorney, which is why changing the possession penalty was actually made at the state level. And so when we bring up those kinds of things, all of those changes happen at the state level, which means they then impact state level crimes. So this would actually not fall under the purview of our municipal courts.

Thank you. I appreciate that answer. I think that one of the biggest struggles around this bill that I've had is the misinformation and the assumptions and a lot of things that we hear in the news or in community that aren't true. And so I appreciate you clarifying that piece. I was curious about the work group. One of the things I appreciated from the public comment was talking about actually making people whole and I think about actually helping people as well. So I'm curious how if that is like something, because I didn't understand that part was going to be in the work group, things like giving housing and treatment and how would that be funded is kind of my question. Is that part of how you're structuring the work group? Either one of the sponsors that are here can answer.

OK.

I'll take that one. It's hard. We're sitting across the room from one another. Thank you for that question, Councilwoman Alvidrez. I think there are some of these things that we cannot predict what the working group should come up with. I think that's why we're asking this number of experts, people with lived experience, people who are experts in the field, legal expertise, to be part of a working group to then make a determination. Are there ways that we should be better serving not only the people that are being prosecuted or alleged offenders, but also the victims? And also making sure that there is clarity in our courtrooms, there's clarity in our municipal code for our courts, for our public defenders, for our prosecutors, for our victims, and for those that are the accused. And so I think that is really important. the really meaning behind all of this. And so if there is a need for potential services, again, as Councilwoman Lewis stated, nothing gets implemented immediately. Anything would have to come back to us to go through the legislative process. And then it would be determined whether or not there's a cost associated with that.

Great. I really appreciate that because something I hear from residents in my district a lot is that they don't want to call 911 or report crime because of the impact that it could have on that person. And I personally know what that feels like. And so people are very torn because our system isn't providing justice. So that gives me hope. I appreciate that. Thank you, Council President. Thank you.

Seeing no other members in the queue. Public hearing is closed. Comments by members of Council on Council Bill 0328 as amended. I'll start with any of the speakers. Council Member Paradis, do you want me to start with you?

Sure. Thank you, Council President. I'm not going to speak for long. I'm not feeling terribly well, but I'm really proud to be here tonight. Mostly, I think what I want to say in response to hearing all the public comment and everything else is just that this bill is not something to be afraid of. When we talk about offenses that are not covered by the camp decision, the reason they're not covered by the camp decision is because they're not state crimes. And they are things that personally I didn't even know you could get jail time for in Denver for the most part before we ran this bill. So we're literally talking about spitting in public, not on anybody. We're talking about blocking the right of way. We're talking about, again, having an off-leash dog or not vaccinating your pet. You know, and the list goes on. Smoking on the 16th Street Mall. Jail is a really serious thing. I've been in the Denver jail. I know a lot of our speakers tonight who are in support of this bill have spent a lot of time serving people in the jail and have gone there on visits or as attorneys or other things. And it's not something to treat lightly. Ten days in jail is actually a pretty serious thing to impose on someone. That could be enough to lose a job. That could be enough to risk losing custody of your kids. And so for these kind of low-level offenses, it would be a moral outrage for us to continue to leave them at 300-day sentences, especially after the camp decision where similar kinds of offenses that the state does address are being brought down to 10 days. The key to a sentencing regime is consistency. That's how you know that you're being as even-handed as you can be is if you're treating offenses of like seriousness similarly. And if we don't pass this bill, we will be abjectly failing that test. There's a lot more I could say about how much we really do criminalize behavior that is only criminal because it's happening in a public place because someone doesn't have another place to be. But I will leave that for another day and just say, These are really minor crimes, and they're not, I think, things that in any way warrant larger than a 10-day jail stay. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilman González-Cutillera.

I'll say my comments for the end.

Same. We're in comment section.

I'm assuming other folks, you're asking us if we want to speak, and I'm saying if my colleagues want to speak.

Does anyone else want to speak?

There you go.

Okay, sorry, no one was in the queue and now suddenly everyone is.

Council President Romero-Campbell?

Sorry, I have it. Council Member Watson?

Thank you so much, Council President. I wanted to first thank the sponsors and their staff. I know that this bill has required more of your time, energy, emotions than you may have first anticipated. To the community members that are here, In the chambers and those who have spoken online and those who have engaged, thank you for your time and energy. To the nonprofits, city departments, and the mayor's office, thank you for your engagement throughout this process and not just the last six months. The bill before us will impact every resident and every visitor to the City and County of Denver. For this reason, I have intensely debated the merits of this bill, or even the proposed changes of this bill. The Colorado Supreme Court, in their decision on Kemp v. Westminster, requires that municipal sentencing guidelines must be changed to match identical sentencing guidelines for state petty crimes and offenses. The sponsors of this bill in January presented a bill that went well beyond that requirement. They presented a robust criminal justice reform bill that included reducing a series of criminal penalties to class four offense of 10 days and $300 fine maximum. These included a maximum class four offense of 10 days and $300 for criminal acts. I want to provide a few examples, because I want to make sure that folks who are watching understand that the crimes that were included were things that many folks, at least in District 9 that I've spoken to, and I'll describe the communities that I've spoken to, have every right to be as concerned as they are about this bill. For criminal acts like public indecency, trespassing into someone's property, violation of protection orders, brandishing weapons, and threats to personal property. These are just a few. We have a whole list of what these crimes that were included in the bill that was presented to us in January included. The sponsors initially amended the entire Denver Revised Municipal Code with a 10-day catch-all for all penalties and fines. That included items like interfering with health inspectors and reducing the penalties for lack of compliance with Department of Denver Fire Code, once again, to name a few. The idea that Denver City Council was debating a bill that had such negative impacts on victims was a cause for alarm for many members of our community and was cause for alarms for myself and my office. That concern remains even after now 16 plus amendments and several more tonight. The consistent message to my office has been, why is Denver City Council considering reducing criminal penalties on any crimes not mandated by the state Supreme Court camp decision? I'm a no and have been a no for this very reason. Your District 9 office engaged with neighbors, businesses, city agencies, and nonprofits throughout this process. My office and I met with crime victims throughout these six months of negotiations. We met in person with each city department impacted by these proposals. We met with victim advocate organizations like Rose Andam Center. We met with the district attorney's office. And then twice a month, we met with a city attorney's office. Attended five registered neighborhood organization meetings in person. Attended the business improvement district, general improvement district coalition meeting. We also met one-on-one with each of the Business Improvement and General Improvement District within District 9. We held one-on-one meetings with residents and small businesses. We met several times a month with the Office of the Mayor, met with the sponsors, met with Together Colorado, and several meetings with Denver County judges. And I want to pause and take a moment to speak to the discussions we've had with the county judges. I want to thank them first and foremost for immediately implementing the changes needed to satisfy the state Supreme Court camp decision. During this entire six-month plus revision process, our courts have effectively administered sentencing based on the requirements in the camp decision. Our judges are not waiting for this bill to pass to ensure that sentencing guidelines are met. Our courts today have consistently provided clarity to every individual that have come before them and our judges have stated the expectation for sentencing guidelines in each case. Our courts provided every member of city council five years of sentencing of individuals that committed crimes impacted by camp. The five years of sentences demonstrated that our judiciary, in leveraging their discretion, have provided sentences less than the 10 days for most of the identical state sentences. And this is prior to any changes being made here tonight. What it also demonstrated is that for repeat offenders, our judges used their discretion to direct individuals committing these crimes to diversion programs instead of jail time, so that individuals have a chance to break the cycle of criminal behavior, and more importantly, so that the victims of their crimes were not under continued concern of being victimized again. The data over the last five years does not demonstrate, and I'll say it again, the data over the last five years does not demonstrate that judges have used their discretion to provide long sentences. And that's five years of data. On average, if sentences were made, and that's if sentences were made, the sentence has been 12 days, not including early release. I want to thank you also, I want to say thank you also to the Office of the City Attorney, and I especially want to shout out Marlee Borbeski, I always destroy your last name, Borbeski, and your team. I want to thank you for your leadership and dedication and your tireless efforts to ensure that this bill before us tonight removed provisions that would have adverse impacts to victims. The proposed commission is also concerning to me, and let me share why. In both public testimony, letters to counsel, and amendments passed last week, the yet to be codified commission will be reviewing and debating if any or all the provisions removed from the bill should be added back to be a Class IV 10-day and $300 maximum sentence, or if some criminal actions should not have any penalties, at all. It is my contention that the commission or working group or task force should have been created prior to legislation being codified. The outcomes recommendations from that group of individuals should have then been elevated and discussed with counsel within a regular legislative process. This process of debating lessening criminal penalties from the discussions I've had with crime victims has been emotionally draining to them. Even though they are resilient, the idea that in six to eight months, based on the outcomes of this commission, they will have to go through this again is difficult. I want to thank you to all of the crime victims. who've shared their stories with my office and who have granted me the, I don't even know what to even call it, granted me the time to sit with them, to listen to their stories and to hear their concerns. In closing, the bill before us tonight includes many necessary amendments, but also still goes beyond camp. This, from my perspective, is the wrong solution and absolutely at the wrong time. I encourage my colleagues to join me tonight and vote no on this bill. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Madam President. I want to take the moment to thank the sponsors and your staff and the people who were able to speak here tonight and those who also signed up and not able to speak. And thank you as well to my colleagues who have asked questions throughout this process. I appreciate the thoroughness and the perspective. And I do not take this lightly at all, and I've asked many questions to the sponsors throughout this process. One of the top concerns in Southeast Denver is safety, and it's really important for the residents of my district and the city and county of Denver to feel safe and maintain trust in our courts. My biggest concern with this change was lowering any penalties for serious crimes. However, penalties like domestic violence are not going to be lowered, and the sponsors worked diligently to address my concerns regarding violations of protection orders where instances of people violating multiple protection orders were taken into consideration. I've also raised concerns in reducing crime charges to bad actors who have undermined tenants' living conditions, and the sponsors, again, address those concerns. As a member or as the representative of District 4 in Southeast Denver who strongly believes that safety is a top priority, many of the concerns raised by residents were severe crimes, and those crimes that are under the scope of the camp decision. This ordinance has been a work in progress, and there have been numerous changes, and these were necessary changes not only to address concerns of council members, but to ensure that we get this right. I am also looking forward to the discussion held within the working group, and I wanted to reiterate that the composition of the group, and thank you for further clarifying the information, but that it's balanced and that we have multiple life experiences and the expertise to create holistic recommendations. Again, I think that the recommendations are just that, recommendations, and would be considered by this body in the future. But with those recommendations, I want to emphasize that we as a council are ultimately going to decide what recommendations we believe are appropriate. If it came to council four months ago, I would have voted no. However, the sponsors have worked to get this to a place where I'm comfortable to have a vote for yes tonight.

Thank you. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Madam President. I want to begin by thanking my colleagues, Councilmember Gonzalez-Gutierrez, Lewis and Paradis, and your teams for the work behind the bill. It's been through committee many times, and it's taken a great deal of feedback, and it carries real amendments through the process. I certainly acknowledge the good faith in the effort, and I share many of the goals. So, I want to be clear about where I agree, because it's most of the bill. In camp, our Supreme Court told us we can't punish an offense more harshly in municipal court than the state punishes the same conduct. It's already binding law. Camp controls our courts today and whether or not we amend the code tonight. So, if the bill did only that, conform Denver's code to camp, I'd be a yes tonight. Would have been yes months ago. The bill goes further. It reduces penalties on a broad set of municipal-only fences that camp doesn't require us to touch. And on that, I'd ask my colleagues not to listen to me, but to the people in our center city, both those who do business there and those who live there. Today, council received a letter from Colorado Concern, the Denver Metro Chamber, the Downtown-Denver Partnership, and Visit Denver, the organization whose employers, workers, and visitors are the entire project of our recovery. They support conforming to camp and ask us to limit this bill to that and leave the rest of the working group. In their words, our process is fragile, which incidentally is the word I used last week. And reducing these consequences now sends the wrong message at precisely the wrong moment. But this isn't purely business interests, and I want to be careful about that. The Lower Downtown Neighborhood Association, thank you for being here, a residence group, my constituents, voters who lived in District 10, wrote to me this week, on June 23rd, their board voted unanimously to oppose the bill. And in the very same meeting, the board voted unanimously to support a narrower bill that reduces municipal sentences only as far as camp requires. A second downtown neighborhood leader wrote to me independently and reached the same conclusion. Do the camp-only bill first, let the working group review the rest, and bring back a finished ordinance in that order, not the reverse. That is not obstruction. That is residents asking us plainly for the order of operations I'm urging tonight. I represent the center city crime is down across the city and that is real and worth celebrating but it's not down in district 10 there are people who came downtown a few years ago saw on campus and decided not to come back and For the most part, they have not come back. Perception isn't always reality, but perception is what fills the sidewalk cafe or empties it. And right now it shows up in our sales tax, our property tax, and in those who choose to live here. So my disagreement has never been with what the bill wants to accomplish. I believe that some of our municipal only penalties are too high.

like the rents are also too high.

And I want to be clear, the working group that this bill creates in Section 24 is a good one. City attorney, public defender, police, sheriff, public health licensing, victim advocates, a business improvement district, and advocates for people living in poverty, and... A couple new members even added it by amendment today around one table. That is exactly the body that should decide where these penalties land. My disagreement is with the order and the bill's own structure shows why. Section 24 hands that working group a clear task to review the code and to determine in its words what the best penalties are, where jail time is appropriate and at what level, and what should be decriminalized. But this bill sets those penalties tonight, before that group has held a single meeting. Ms. Fricks? Frickis? Frickis. Excuse me. With her testimony about lumpy sentencing, it further makes me want to have a working group review these sentences. But the working group isn't required to convene until the end of July, and it isn't due to report to this council until the end of March of next year. Meanwhile, the reduction stake effect this fall. So we could cut first and read the analysis that's supposed to guide the cuts months later. Or... We're basically putting the cart in front of the horse. And that matters, because whatever this body sets tonight becomes the starting point the working group is then asked to revisit. Look at what this bill actually does to address the public safety concerns raised about it. It strengthens penalties for threats to property and for violating a protection order. And then in Section 24, it directs that same working group to go back and specifically reassess those exact penalties. We could be strengthening these protections in one hand and cueing them for reconsideration in the other. We may not be getting what we think we're getting, so set the floor that CAMP requires now and let the working group do the job this bill gives it, including getting threats and protection orders right, and then right-size the rest with its report in hand. There's a practical point here, too. Conforming to camp tonight doesn't change how our bench handles these cases day to day. Our judges keep the discretion they have now, and the task force can refine it with data. But if we lower the ceilings tonight across the board, we give up something that we can't easily give back, the ability of a Denver judge In a genuinely egregious case, the rare defendant whose conducts deserve more than the new cap allows. We'd be removing that option before the very group we're convening has had the chance to tell us whether we should. Keep the discretion in place, let the data come in, and then decide with eyes open where these ceilings belong. That is the order I urge. Conform to cap. convene the working group, use the recommendations to right-size our municipal-only penalties. I agree with the operations, disagree with the order, and I'll be voting no, but I'll also be an enthusiastic partner the moment we take these reforms up in the sequence that downtown's residents, employers, and frankly, in the opinion that I keep getting from my constituents, the common sense that we're asking for. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Councilmember Cashman.

Thank you, Madam President. I had a few issues with this bill in its earliest iterations. I believe public safety is our number one charge. Everybody I've talked to in my district lists that as number one. They've got other concerns about the city running smoothly and roads and all that stuff, public safety is number one. As I started to say, I had a few issues with this bill in its earliest iterations, and my colleagues reworked the bill to take care of my concerns. Then in the past many months, I've heard colleagues and constituents in the mayor's office raise additional concerns. And my colleagues reworked the bill to take care of those concerns. We got a letter today from District Attorney Walsh that he's satisfied with the bill. We got a letter from the mayor saying he's satisfied with the bill. I don't know how many of you people have worked directly with those folks. They don't cave. They don't—they're not weak. I have fought with the mayor for 11 years on various bills that I have felt passionately about, that this council has felt passionately about. They don't cave. As far as the working group goes, we'll look further into this topic. As has been mentioned, you know, they'll make recommendations. They won't present us with a bill. And I'll look at the recommendations they come up with the way I looked at this bill. And if I don't think it promotes, protects public safety, I'll vote no on what they come up with. You know, as was mentioned by the professor from the University of Denver who testified early this evening, increasing low-level sentences for low-level offenses does not bear fruit in the way of reduced recidivism. Someone urinating in public does not care about what the sentence might be for that. Someone whose family is starving isn't really worried about that. They're trying to... get some grub on the table at home. I just reject the belief that we're going to solve crime by making punishments so severe no one will ever break the law again, or that we should punish our way to lawful behavior. That just isn't going to happen. a reasonable group of people or a reasonable number of people, I don't know how reasonable they are, who find life so difficult they'd intentionally commit crime to end up in jail because they find being out of jail just doesn't work for them and they would prefer, yeah, throw me in, give me three hots and a cot. If we truly... want to reduce criminal activity rather than just catch and incarcerate criminals, we must finally readjust or add to our public safety budget to ensure we're spending appropriately on the root causes of crime and not just for the police officers who are gonna do their best to catch those people who do break the law. I feel like a broken record, but if we don't spend on mental health, if we don't spend on drug treatment, if we don't spend on the necessary supports for our families, after-school care so kids have someplace positive to go rather than just roaming around, on and on and on. As Pastor Carroll reminded us, The charge of incarceration is not simply to punish, to demand accountability for illegal acts, which I think we need to do at one level, but more importantly to rehabilitate inmates so they don't return to criminal activity to meet their needs. If we were going to punish our way out of crime, we'd be out of crime. I mean, in the United States, that's what our public safety budget has been spent on for 250 freaking years. I am not... a defund the police guy. I don't know what the proper number of cops is. We might have it. We may need more. I do not know that. I am a fund that other part of public safety that we keep ignoring or underfunding. I told one of the sponsors a dozen times along the way, I never promise a vote until it comes to this point where we hear all the arguments, where the public hearing's been held, and now we make our decision. I'm a yes. I think this is... a bill that deserves to pass, and I'll be looking intently at what the working group comes up with, for sure. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you Madam President. I truly and sincerely want to thank the sponsors for all of the hard work they did and the compromises and the collaboration that took the initial drafts and brought them to the point where we're at. And it's been a frustrating process, too, because the data show that while we're talking about 300 days maximum sentencing, the data show that No one is getting that. Maybe not no one. But the data showed that only a small percentage of sentences out of the municipal court are longer than 10 days to begin with. So that's really been frustrating to argue for months about lowering sentences to 10 days when 96% of people who are sentenced are sentenced to 10 days or fewer sentences. Or no jail time. And that's been very frustrating. I want to recognize some of the points that were made by Councilman Hines and Councilman Watson. And I will be joining them in voting nay. And I know that this has the votes to pass, so it's not... it's not going to turn on our votes. I think I might disagree with Councilman Hines to one degree. With this bill, I think it's too late to go back and say we should do the working group first and decide and just do camp. I would love for that to have happened, but it hasn't. But I do have a concern that the working group not become a vehicle for undoing a lot of the compromises that led to the DA and the mayor and other parties if not giving their support, at least saying we no longer object to the final version. I would like to see a little more balance on the working group toward hearing the voices of victims of crime. And they're not all crimes of poverty, certainly not. If you look at what's in municipal court, a good number of them are, but not all of them. So to characterize them as crimes of poverty and criminalizing poverty, I think, misleads the big picture. So I would rather see the working group form and give its opinions maybe two years down the road and to let this bill, which is going to pass, result in some body of data under which we could then see how effective it has been on the rate of crime, on recidivism, on the number of individuals who committed reappear, reoffend, et cetera, rather than have the working group immediately go to work and perhaps undo some of the delicate balance that we're doing right here. So that's my biggest concern. I know the working group was one of those collaborative compromises that was made along the way. So for me to be taking this position is kind of going against the grain. But I really have a concern about undoing what we're doing here in the next couple of months by next March. And then the other reason to paraphrase or to adopt what Councilman Watson had to say, given that very few people are sentenced more than 10 days to begin with, I hesitate to remove the discretion from the court in making appropriate judgments individualized. I think one of the speakers mentioned this point, to individualize each judgment in each case to that particular person who appears before them. So I hesitate to take away the judge's discretion, and I would rather leave that in their hands. And so for those reasons, those two reasons, I will join several other folks here in voting no tonight. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Councilwoman Sawyer?

Thank you, Madam President, and thanks so much to everyone who came to speak tonight. I want to first acknowledge the sponsors. I'm so grateful for all of the work that you have done. I shared alarm with my community over the initial forms of this bill that we saw. We have gotten it to a place, I think, that I truly appreciate, and that is a space where, you know, when this passes tonight, I believe there are the votes that it will pass tonight, it will not be um the sort of death knell of community safety that uh that you know it was touted to be by opposition significantly um you know about six months ago so i really i really appreciate that i truly appreciate um everything that my fellow colleagues have said. I have always been a no on this bill. I am still a no on this bill. And I will say that I think, you know, my colleagues have really covered the reasons why, and so I don't need to kind of go back into that. But I do want to acknowledge one thing. Last week, I was at the Colorado Municipal League Conference, which I attend every year. I used to sit on the executive board. But I came by continuing legal education credits there. And so last week on Wednesday morning, the incomparable, brilliant, amazing David Broadwell taught a continuing legal, CLE, continuing legal education class on home rule. And it was a very interesting class that I learned a lot in because his argument was that the Supreme Court of the State of Colorado got the camp decision wrong. based on home rule principles. And I think that that is an incredibly interesting and incredibly valuable piece of this conversation that no one is talking about. So I wanted to bring that up here because I don't disagree with him and I have voted no on several items that have come from mostly from the state to require the city to do things in frankly violation of our home rule policies. and the home rule of the city and county of Denver. And this is another one of those. And so I will be a no because my community shares a lot of concern about this bill. And frankly, I think the one thing besides the home rule issue that hasn't really come up is the perception problem that we're facing here. The way that these changes have rolled out, the way that there have been nine amendments in the last two weeks on the floor to this bill, the confusion that the community feels around what camp actually says, what the Supreme Court said in camp versus the changes that we are making here. All of those things tell me that this is a perception problem that has not been managed. And I get that, and that's okay. But like Councilmember Hines, I would prefer that we put together the working group and have a conversation about the things in this bill that do not align with camp to go there first. and then to roll it out to the community. Because in that way, that perception problem is managed. It is clear what the process has been. It is clear where the decision points were. It is clear what the impact will be and all of those different things. And that's what I hope will come out of this commission. But I would have hoped that it would have come out of this commission for all of the crimes that do not align with camp and not just certain specific ones that have been cherry picked. So I will be a no. That said, I truly appreciate the sponsors and all of the work that they have done in getting us here. And I truly appreciate everyone who came out to speak tonight and share your thoughts and concerns. Like I said, I know it has the votes to pass tonight, but I was elected to represent my community and my community has some significant concerns about this bill. And so I will represent them and their desires by being a no. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Mentors.

Thank you, Madam President. I just want to remind folks that this isn't the first time our municipal sentencing structure has seen reform. In 2016, everything was $999 and 365 days. Everything was. And we changed that in 2017. And we didn't do it with a committee. We did it based on our best intentions to ensure that we weren't wrapping folks up into federal immigration consequences for small municipal crimes. I think it's possible. for our municipal sentencing structure to change. And I think it's our responsibility to keep that structure modern. And so I think this is just one of the things that we should do and shouldn't always come because somebody sued a municipality and took it to the Supreme Court and came down with an opinion. Sometimes we have to do it because it's actually the right thing to do. I will be supporting tonight. I also have residents who are opposing my vote. I have residents who are supporting my vote. This comes, my vote comes, I think, because of the work that's gone into this, the agreement that things have been arrived at. And I appreciate the sponsors going through all of those steps to get that done. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Councilwoman Gonzalez-Gutierrez. Thank you, Madam President, and I want to thank my colleagues for your remarks tonight. I know that this was a lot of work, but it is our job, right? We are the city legislators. We are the legislative branch of the city. So it is our job to take legislation and review it and research it and ask questions and ask if things can be changed or adopted. And so that's exactly what this is a product of. It's of what our roles are as legislators at the local level. We started this work now years ago. That's because of Councilwoman Paradis' foresight of the disparities in our sentencing structure due to state legislation passed in 2021. It didn't actually, the legislation did not directly impact municipalities, but what it did was it lowered the penalties for state-level petty offenses. But in doing that, it made those at the municipal level with similar conduct, offenses with similar conduct, out of alignment, making our penalties much higher for that similar type of conduct. So we saw the discrepancy. We saw our law enforcement struggling. They'd have their ticket, their citation, what should be charged. They had one side a state, one side municipal. We were putting them in a very difficult position in having to make that choice, right? And we brought that to this body over a year ago as a concern. We also heard from law enforcement and by way of even footage that oftentimes they wrote the ticket under the municipal level because they thought they were giving the person a warning or doing them a favor. But in fact, they were putting them at risk of potentially a harsher penalty without even knowing it. I've heard several members of this body say time and time again on different pieces of legislation that you have a good piece of legislation when no one is happy. when not everyone got everything that they wanted. And I truly believe that we have accomplished that today. After stake holding with agency departments, city prosecutors, public defenders, survivor rights organization, advocates in the mayor's office, this is what is before us. And I can't go without saying how much I appreciate the work from all of those entities in partnering and collaborating on this. And I know there were times that were hard. I know we had some struggles along the way. But again, that is part of the process. through that process we asked which crimes that are filed in municipal court are the most egregious we asked that from the beginning we asked our city prosecutors tell us what are the most egregious crimes and concerning that we must ensure that our prosecutors can continue to prosecute at the level that they have been we asked that We didn't get it right away because we knew there was some bumps in the road. It took a little bit of time to get that information. And when we received it, we acted, right? So when everybody talks about where this bill started, it is because we were lacking information, crucial information that we needed. And when we received it, we acted. We made those changes. Our code has not been updated in some time, as we've heard our colleagues discuss today. Although there is more work to be done, this is just one step, right, to make sure, one, that we're in compliance with the Supreme Court ruling. I want to note a couple of things about this bill. We are not removing or creating any crimes, right? We are not changing that. We are aligning sentences for certain crimes that were mandated by the People v. Camp and the People v. Simons, cases that went through the Colorado Supreme Court. We are addressing some municipal-only crimes that have no equivalent at the state because these behaviors the city has decided to criminalize. Aligning these types of offenses is important to ensure that we are not seeing higher penalties for things like barking dogs, disturbing the peace, failing to pick up dog excrement, which in our current code right now are captured under the general penalty with up to 300 days in jail and a $999 fine. This is what we are talking about. We're creating a working group to continue the work on the topics that require more stake holding. And we talked, I think, at length about that, so I won't go back over that. We know that the working group will have up to eight months to deliberate about our criminal code, determine if there are changes needed to that code, to our regulatory offenses, to address issues in our fire code, animal protection, and licensing. We're also shifting, and this is, I think, what is really important about this. We're shifting from having a general penalty and two classes. That's all we have right now, right? Everything just falls under these big buckets, to creating an actual classification structure to ensure crimes are being captured under appropriate penalties and sentences based on the severity of the crime, creating more certainty and clarity for all involved in the system. are judges, public defenders, prosecutors, victims, and the accused. I don't know a lawyer that doesn't appreciate having, whether it's state statute, municipal code, they use those laws to guide how they argue their cases. Those judges use those laws to guide how they determine their sentences. That's why this is important for all of these types of crimes. At this time, I'm going to read the letter that we received today from D.A. Walsh and to the record. Dear Denver City Council President Sandoval and City Council members, I am writing regarding Ordinance 260328 related to municipal criminal sentencing. Much of this proposed ordinance is a response to the Colorado Supreme Court's recent opinion that establishes controlling state law, limiting municipal sentencing. As you know, however... I opposed a prior version of this ordinance on behalf of the District Attorney's Office because it contained provisions that went beyond the Supreme Court's decision in ways that would have concrete negative impacts on our ability to protect community safety. My concerns were especially focused on our ability to address domestic violence, harassment, and stalking offenses, among other issues. These concerns have been addressed and mitigated by recent amendments to the proposed ordinance. Given that fact, and also given that the Denver DA's office will be a voting member of the new, it's a working group, but he says commission, the ordinance establishes the Denver DA's office does not oppose the amended proposed ordinance. Our office will continue to work in close partnership with the City and County of Denver, the Denver Police Department, and the Denver City Attorney's Office to protect and enhance community safety in our city. Now I want to take just a few minutes to clarify some of the misinformation that we've heard either throughout the bill, process of this bill, and even tonight. One of the things we did talk about already was around some of the drug-related crimes, which I think we already cleared up. There is also a lot of opposition that I think we've heard from, whether it's business groups and folks that want to retain excessive sentencing for low-level conduct, especially conduct that's not criminalized by the state. Those that are municipal-only offenses, including... offenses like public urination, panhandling, or urban camping. These are sentences that are currently in our code at 300 days in jail compared to offenses covered under the Supreme Court ruling, such as shoplifting and theft under $300, trespass or disturbing the peace, which are under... under the ruling are classified with a sentencing of no more than 10 days in jail and up to $300 fines. Now, let's take a look at that and compare those two kinds of offenses. Because you don't have a bathroom to use, should you be at risk of going to jail for up to 300 days, but then you shoplift under $300 and you can only get up to 10 days? Let's take a look at that. judges rarely and we've heard this now a couple times tonight if ever sentence people to more than 10 days for these municipal only offenses that is true meaning actual sentencing outcomes would realistically not change because of this bill so I think that point has been proven right sizing sentences for these offenses. The last thing I think I just want to go over is Oh, there was one other thing I wanted to address because I felt like it was very, I think it may have sparked concern from folks. And it was the example given of someone threatening to kill a child. That would fall under menacing. It carries the highest penalty in our municipal code with up to 300 days in jail and a $999 fine, but if charged under the state statute. So we gave it a highest penalty that we can, but it's also captured under the state statute. It is an even higher penalty. So I want to be clear with some of the examples that have been brought forward, either they are actually state crimes that are being prosecuted at the state level, or we've accounted for them properly in this legislation. Lastly, the amount of work and meetings with partners, one-on-one conversations, community meetings. We did hold community meetings. We pushed the information out so that we could hear from folks. We wanted to hear from you. And we heard by way of our colleagues, our district colleagues, our at-large colleagues. I've gotten emails. We all have received information. All of that has been put into this bill and it has not been taken lightly. That is why we have what we have before us today. So I want to thank every single person who took the time to understand this, to offer their feedback, to engage with the sponsors and our staff. Your time and expertise and experiences are valued and appreciated. I want to thank every single one of you. The last thing is that I want to thank our staff. they have worked tirelessly throughout this process. All of our council aides and not just our policy aides, like our scheduling aides, like everybody, this was a full team effort. So when I say we didn't take this lightly, we did not take this lightly. Every time there were changes, we offered briefings to our colleagues every single time. And I think that's where we land. That's where we get to this piece of legislation. And this is what co-governance is. This is what legislating is. This is what the city doing city governance is. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilman Lewis.

Thank you so much. So there's been a lot of talk about intent. I believe our intention, our intent is reflected in our actions. As such, our intent has been shown to be collaborative, pragmatic, and common sense. We started with this legislation to address a problem in the city, and as we met with stakeholders, we worked to understand their positions and viewpoints, and where there was a concrete ask for compromise, we did. The proposals related to violation of protection orders, threats to property, and others were originally class floor offenses in the discussion of the bill draft were reclassified as harsher sentencing classes after the process was over, and the general penalty of 10 days in jail or a $300 fine was eliminated in favor for the status quo. In short, this bill has changed a lot from where it started. And that's a good thing. It's a normal part of the legislative process for things to change, and I cannot recall another instance in my time on council where the debate on a bill did not revolve on the merits of the final bill, but instead looked at the starting point of the process. Certainly the folks we have worked with on this bill have assumed good faith. We could call this good faith, enthusiasm, if we wanted to, I suppose. I would like to quote the mayor, who released a letter dropping his opposition to the bill, in which he stated his, quote, sincere gratitude to the sponsors of this legislation, Council Members Gonzalez-Gutierrez, Lewis, and Parity, for their collaboration throughout the legislative process, your willingness to listen to the concerns raised by our public safety and agency officials, community stakeholders, and victims' advocates to incorporate meaningful feedback into successive drafts of this ordinance reflects the very best of how the legislative process should operate." We have had quite the odyssey in committee, but the point is this. At every stage, we have jumped through the hoops of the process. We have done what is required of us and more to get this bill done. There is no flaw in how this bill came to Council. So much for the process. I want to spend some time on the merits of this bill, since ultimately that is what matters most. This bill, this is a bill that addresses inequalities in our sentencing scheme. I should start at the very founding of this country with slavery, with the history of slave patrols and the birth of policing, but let's keep it local. More than 30 years ago, the city was faced with the summer of violence. Like so many other cities at that time, the city chose to punish as its solution to the problem. Until 2016, it never moved from that position, even as the scholarship, economics, and even the law, in other words, our understanding itself, has moved away from that position. How does that show up in our society? Well, it shows up in the populations of our local jails increasing, even as the amount of crimes are decreasing in the city. It shows up in the exhaustion of the deputies staffing the jails who are doing more than their best, but who face understaffing and low morale as a result. It means taxpayers are spending around $240 per day per person to house in our jails. The majority of these people are minorities or both. The female population in the Denver jails is 63% black indigenous people of color. Meanwhile, the male population is 67% black indigenous people of color. This too is one of the ways that this shows up in our society. This situation does not increase deterrence. As my colleague Councilwoman Parity would put it, punishing poverty does not solve it. A person will not suddenly find means to afford market rent because they are afraid to be arrested for being unhoused. The carceral crackdowns on petty offenses do not create a safer, healthier society. It does not change the treatment that is available for folks who need help. It is just punishment, or unjust punishment, as the case may be. It certainly does not change perception. If it did, how did we get to this place where it is perceived that the city is unsafe despite empirical evidence to the contrary? When the sentences are the same, they've been for the better part of three decades. Ultimately, we now find ourselves on the wrong side of the law. The Colorado Supreme Court has preempted the punishments for so much of our code. While the courts are already implementing the requirements, the words in our code reflect outdated language. This bill rectifies that issue. At the same time, we have revisited sentencing for other crimes such as off-leash laws or smoking on the 16th Street Mall. to reflect that these are not the pressing issues of our time and for which the punishment or the specter of punishment badly outweighs the act. I recognize that some of these actions require further work, as do my co-sponsors, and that is why we have the working group to work to resolve the issues left outstanding by this bill. And I want to speak to the comments made by Ms. Webb earlier, who stated a neutral position because the bill does not go far enough. I agree with her. We started out with something stronger, and ultimately those stronger parts were areas thrown to the working group for decisions on those parts to be made by the diverse group of folks selected. This time... The time is now for this legislation, and I want to conclude with a thank you to my co-sponsors, Councilwoman Paradis and Gonzales Gutierrez, and the council aides from our offices who work so hard on these issues, our community, our partners, our coalition. I appreciate each and every one of you, and I appreciate everyone who reached out on this issue, whether you were for it or against it. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Before I get to the ordinance, I just want to speak around the narrative surrounding it. Public safety is not served by fear. It's served by facts. The facts tell us that Denver is safer today than it was a few years ago. That's a fact. You can look it up. Crime is down. Violent crime is down. Homicides are down. That doesn't even mean our work is finished and it doesn't erase the experiences of victims. I just want to be clear. It really doesn't. Every victim matters and every crime matters. I've been a victim of crime. And I didn't feel like I was the victim. I felt like the two young boys who carjacked me almost at gunpoint, they were the victims. I was not. They were part of a system. But we should not write policy based on a narrative that simply isn't true. We don't make safer Denver safer by pretending crime is rising when it isn't. Crime is not rising. We don't make Denver safer by making sentences longer simply because it sounds tougher. And we don't make Denver safer by ignoring the law. This ordinance is about ensuring that our municipal code complies with state law. and that justice is applied fairly and consistently. We constantly hear that from developers, that they want something that's consistent, they want dependability, but yet in our criminal code, we can't have that. We should be tough on crime, this I agree on, but we should even be tougher on the causes of crime. That means investing in policing, supporting victims, prosecuting violent offenders, expanding mental health care, creating housing stability, and giving young people opportunities before they ever enter the justice system. Justice is not measured by the length of a sentence. Let me say that one more time. Justice is not measured by the length of a sentence. Justice is measured whether our communities are actually safer. And as someone, as I mentioned, who's been a victim of a crime, I refuse to allow fear to replace facts. Facts. I refuse to tell Denver residents that their city is becoming more dangerous when the data says otherwise. And if you don't believe me, look at the crime data on denvergov. It's there. It's refreshed all the time. Crime is down. And I also refuse to support the idea that harsher punishment alone is a substitute for smarter public safety policy. Our responsibility is to protect our residents, uphold law, and tell the truth. That's what this ordinance does, and that's why I will be voting yes. Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Bill 0328 as amended.

Council Members Paradis?

Aye.

Sawyer? No. Torres? Aye. Alvarez? Aye. Flynn?

Nay.

Gilmour?

Aye.

Gonzalez-Cutilleras? Aye. Hines? No. Cashman? Aye. Lewis? Aye. Romero-Campbell? Aye. Watson? Nay.

Madam President Sandoval? Aye. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. Nine ayes. Nine ayes. Council Bill 0328 as amended has passed. Congratulations sponsors. There being no further business before this body, this meeting is adjourned. And just as a reminder, we do not meet next week in observance of the Independence holiday. Thank you all.