Finance & Services Committee - Regular Meeting

It's time for this bi-weekly meeting of the Finance and Business Committee of Denver City Council. Join us for the Finance and Business Committee starting now.

It's Tuesday, August 11th, 2026. I'm Chris Hides. I serve on City Council representing District 10, Devers Perfect 10. You can move into the Finance and Business Committee, FINBiz. We have two action items and three, no, more than three. We have many consent items, eight items on consent. And before we get into the action items, let's start with introductions. Let's start online.

Good morning, everyone. I'm Kevin Flynn, Southwest Denver's District 2.

I'd start to my right.

Good morning, Amanda Sawyer, District 5. Good morning, Diana Romero-Campbell, Southeast Denver, District 4.

And good morning, Paul Cashman, South Denver, District 6.

Hi, everybody, Serena Gonzalez-Gucheras, Councilmember-at-Large.

Good morning, Daryl Watson, Fine District 9.

Great. Our first action item is 26-1096, a resolution amending the City Council Rules of Procedure. Council Member Lewis was going to attend online. She is not here yet. So, Council President.

Oh, I was just waiting because I think you need a motion.

Yes, if you have a motion, I entertain it.

Okay. I'd like to make a motion to postpone to a date certain. for September 29th. Council Bill 26. I took off my glasses. 26-1069. 1096? Yep.

That's what I meant. 1096.

Yep. It's incorrect.

It's wrong in our notes. Oh, it's wrong on the agenda?

It's wrong in the notes. 1096. Just in the notes.

Okay. That's a proper motion. Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and seconded.

What is it? Sorry, say the motion again.

To postpone to a date certain September 29th. So, I want to delay just a few seconds more in case Councilmember Lewis wants to... We're just going to move forward. Mr.

Chair, can you also go to the other item? Yeah, would it be possible to do the other item first? Just to give her an opportunity?

Sure. Yes. So if you're willing to rescind your motion and second, then yeah, that's a good idea.

Okay. I withdraw the motion for later in the meeting. Okay.

Great. Are you amenable to that? I'm good. Great. Okay. So I'm going to just, I don't have to ask for permission, right? I can just move to the other item. Okay. Let's move into 26-1169, which also might cause some challenges because General Services might have thought. Are you? You're incomplete? Okay, great. So why don't we have you come forward. The next action item or the first action item, I guess, is 26-1169. It amends a contract with FERCM to add $1.5 million for a new total of $23 million and by adding one year for new end date of August 31st, 2027 and to update Exhibit A1 pricing bid items for citywide towing services citywide. That's redundant. Okay. Welcome, General Services. If you'd introduce yourselves and take it away.

Good morning. Kami Jolyon, the Director of Business Services and General Services.

And Nicole Sedreth, I'm the Contracts Manager for General Services.

Thank you.

Well, thank you. Thank you for taking the time to meet with us today. We are here to present the final amendment to the agreement with Furcom Inc. for citywide towing services. So just a quick overview of what we'll be covering today. Overview the actual towing service agreement, any background information of the current contract, some towing data that we wanted to include from our last time here last year to do the First Amendment. provide you some data from the Department of Safety, as well as the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure, and then also including some revisions to Exhibit A1, specifically the bid exception or the bid items, which is the pricing in this case, and then provide you with a quick summary of the resolution request that we're presenting today for approval. So to go over a little bit of the current agreement, you will see that we started this contract September 1st, 2022, and the current term expires August 31st of 2025. Currently, that contract amount was $11.5 million. And last year, in 2025, we came before this body to request an approval to amend the agreement. First part of the amendment was to extend the contract term through August 31st, 2026, as well as increase the total contract value to 21. Today we are here for our second and final amendment of the agreement, and that would be to extend the contract term through August 31st of 2027, increase the total contract value to $23 million, and then update the pricing items in a few of those categories from the original pricing data that was submitted. So again, just to refresh everyone about the contract and what it's actually for and what it's providing, it does provide in-pound tows. There's also special event tows, specifically with row, DSD and DPD. Also looking at, they can provide tows for mountain park locations as well as right-of-way enforcement services. Additional services, which you will see in the data here, they can also provide jump starts for vehicles, specifically city-owned vehicles. They will clean up debris when accidents occur and also transport junker vehicles to the lot. So again, just to give you a quick overview of the yearly towing spend by agency since the inception of this agreement, we are currently at $16.679 million of spend. You will see in 2026 year to date, there is a difference a little bit. actually quite a bit from Department of Safety. In 2025 they actually encumbered 3.1 million. You'll see they've only actually encumbered 1.9 million and that is really around some reductions as well as we only ask agencies to encumber funds up to the term and date of the agreement. So we may go back on September 1 and with this amendment being approved and adding additional money, those encumbrance amounts may increase as well. So quick overview for tows by the service provider, again, just to kind of refresh everyone's memory. This contract is primarily with Berkham, which is our extreme towing and recovery. However, they also have four subs that provide service to the city under that agreement. You'll see from May 25 through June 2026, the city has a total of 26,361 tows and of those tows, the lion's share of those are actually going to extreme towing and then it's pretty evenly split. between Merage and Cast Iron for the majority of those and then ACE and APT towing also come in pretty much as well. So again, we can see that this idea of putting subcontractors under this agreement does provide and allow for tows to be moved at a higher rate of speed rather than just depending on one vendor. So we wanted to provide you all with some information on the top 10 toe raisin seed. reasons by all agencies over this last year. And number one is just a tow. Those can be a number of different variety of things. Not a short tow. Maybe it's just from point A to point B. Could be to the tow yard or for some other reason. Maybe a city vehicle being transported to Roslyn for repair. We also have number two is the abandoned vehicles. We have recovered steels in this as a top 10. We do have accidents coming in number four. You will see that short tows, which are primarily completed for Department of Transportation infrastructure, they have their street projects. They also have HOV bus lane tows that they need and just a general short tow as well. We do have impounds and arrests as well as some hit and runs also through the data that we collected. So to break it down just a little bit more on agency specific, again, Department of Safety, their primary reason is just a tow followed by the abandoned vehicle and recovered still. Again, you see the accidents in there and again, we're seeing the hit and run as well as some short tows that they experience as well. but with also including expired plates and tows that were done of vehicles that were either used in a crime or were used as evidence. So looking at the top 10 reasons for DOTI, again, not surprisingly, majority of those are short tows. We really wanted to break down the data to understand what the reasons are. If they're a street project, bag meter, traffic obstruction, or blocking a driveway. This helps DOTI as well as the city really see maybe where there can be some additional insight of what we're looking for when tow companies are actually being called out. You'll see item number four is the stadium impounds. And again, that makes very much sense because if this data is from May until June, that's during the Bronco season. So those impounds from the stadium are generally from those during that tow time. And one item just to kind of call out is a no-go. No-go's are really looking at They were called out and there was not a reason the vehicle needed to be towed. Maybe they'd already left the scene or they got their vehicle started, whatever it may be. They did not require those to be continued. So I want to quickly provide an overview of the revisions of the bid items. You will see there are two sections of that pricing that will be increased. Item one, which was heavy tows, we have two categories, under 11,000 pounds and then over 11,000 pounds. Currently, under the current agreement that expires at the end of the month, those rates are currently at $190 per tow for under 11,000 and then the price increase to $225 for anything over 11,000. In negotiation with the vendor and due to economies such as gas, insurance, things of that sort, we, the city, had agreed to increase the rate to $209 for anything under 11,000 pounds and over 11,000 pounds would be $248. And then item number three, again, specifically for heavy tows, we looked at item 3A, anything under 11,000, there will not be a change to that proposed rate of $60. But over 11,000 pounds, the current rate is $225. And through negotiations, we agreed upon $248. I do just want to also make everyone's awareness that, again, this is the final year of the agreement. So years one through four, there were no price increases from this procurement when it went out in 2021. So again, just in summary, we are here today to receive approval from this body to move forward with the amendment. In the amendment, we are requesting and advocating to increase the pricing items in Exhibit A1, increase the contract capacity from $21.5 million to $23 million, and extend the contract term through August 31st, 2027. Timeline of events. So, questions?

Thank you. For the short presentation, we have a couple people in the queue, starting with Councilmember Cashman.

Thank you, Committee Chair. Thanks for the presentation. So, it looks like the vast majority are pretty straightforward. It's a wreck. You've got to clear the streets and so on. But where my thoughts are going is vehicles that are being lived in. And what I'm wondering specifically is, does the tote company go out unaccompanied, or in a case like that, are they accompanied by law enforcement?

Thanks for the question, Councilman. So the tow company does not arrive before there has been outreach conducted with the individuals that are potentially living in that unit. If that's been determined that it is a junker vehicle, that does need to be removed from the street because it's unsafe, then those are posted in accordance with the ordinance. But there is connection. I believe there's a street engagement team. Unfortunately, we don't have anybody to answer that specific question for you. But the street engagement team does connect and DPD is well versed in in that process and how that works. So during the posting situation, that contact is made before the tow company ever arrives to clear from the street. So they're not directly having that interaction with the individuals that are living in that unit.

So are you saying that law enforcement does not go out with them or you're not sure? because i can check with safety my whole thought is you know uh it can be a complicated situation and wondering if these guys are just going out and no matter what they've seen law enforcement has done what they do and now they're pulling the vehicle period or if there's they have any authority to go Maybe I get back to safety. So I'll check in with DOS.

Yeah. From the junker perspective, because the RV disposal program lives within my team, we always have DPD on site. Whenever we are clearing a unit from from the right away, so it isn't something that we would have a tow company go out there without an individual, our staff person as well. Steve Gonzalez, who is the program manager occasionally will be on site as well. But typically that is DPD that is there as they're removing. And there are two different ways that we remove. Either we remove to the vehicle impound facility to sort of await a final designation on disposal, or if it's something that cannot be towed and it's just impossible to safely remove that from the right of way, then we'll dispose of it in the right of way. We always try to get it back to the vehicle impound facility. It's more cost effective for us. But right away demolition occasionally does occur.

Do you have any idea, are the numbers of those situations Steady, going up, going down. Any idea?

This year, as far as just RVs coming into the vehicle impound facility, it's pretty much on par with last year. I think we've done about 162 right now. And then right-of-ways, I believe we've done about 16. those which the right-of-way demolitions are up from last year but it's a little bit odd some of the things that we're starting to see in the right-of-way where units will get notified that a unit is there and needs to be disposed of and then we'll go back and not even 24 hours later and someone will have taken the aluminum siding off of them and and then they become really difficult to safely transport. So we're running into some of those interesting sort of things. Scrappers seem to be getting out there and scrapping as much as they can before we're able to remove the unit. Yeah, but all of the engagement with anyone that is potentially living in the unit is done by the street engagement team and DPD in advance of our RV disposal team ever showing up.

Thank you so much. Thank you, committee chair. Thank you, Council Member Cashman. Right after you started, Council Member Lewis joined online. So welcome, Council Member Lewis. Council Member Sawyer.

Thank you. Mr. chair. Thanks. You guys just a question. I guess let's start with when this contract was originally put out for RFP. How many responses did we get on it?

We received 1.

Okay, so there was no competition at all and instead just used anyone who would have been the competition as a subcontractor on their bid.

They, from my recollection, I have to go back and confirm.

That's my recollection.

Yeah, in that they submitted. Got it contractors with it, but yeah, okay.

We're looking forward to rebidding. Yeah, so that was my follow up question is why didn't you read this year given that? That's what happened last time.

Yeah, I do think and I'll defer to you on this as well. And this will be a large package that will be going out. And we'd like to prepare for that and give ourselves a pretty decent window to be able to do that and encourage some of that local competition. So I think in the interest of time, allowing for this last extension to occur so we can accommodate that timeframe. Did you have?

Yeah, no, exactly. Because we're also really looking at the scope and how it is developed right now and looking how we can align a little bit better with state PUC rates and things of that sort. So the scope will look very different in the next procurement. We're already starting to slate to get that and collaborate with our agency partners so we can work with those stakeholders to prepare to put that out to bid.

Okay. Is there any, requirements around customer service or anything like that? Do we have a satisfaction survey or anything like that?

We do not have a satisfaction survey currently. The only real, I would say, performance requirement is the time for a tow company to be on site from when they are called, which was a 45-minute window. However, knowing the direction of how new agreements how procurements are going out we're really looking at best value so that we can kind of capture that data not only from internal partners but external stakeholders as well so that will be part of the new procurement I will just give you a piece of feedback my daughter and I were in a very bad car accident that ended up being fatal in January and had to get towed away from the scene and the

Response was relatively quick given that it was a death investigation. So we had to sit on the side of the road for two and a half hours while DPD did their job, which they did a fantastic job. It was just a really awful experience. The tow truck driver was an absolute jerk. This is my personal experience in one of the most traumatic experiences of my life with a 16 year old kid in the car. So I think that we have a situation here where we have a contractor who was a sole bidder and used all of his competition as subs in his bid. So there was no competition. There are no metrics in the contract, excuse me, for customer satisfaction. And I have had a personal experience of extremely negative customer satisfaction. I am very concerned about this extension. This is a contract that should have gone back out for bid because obviously this is a contractor who is not concerned about the quality of their work. They are concerned about the amount of dollars that are coming in.

Well, first, I'm sorry to hear the situation that happened.

I'm still alive, so I'm grateful. Not everybody in that accident is.

That's horrible. I hear what you're saying, and that's something that we as a division have really taken a look at as we manage Contracts that are used operationally across the city. Where are our blind spots and where are we going to make sure that vendors are performing the way that we would want them to in situations like that? So, again. With looking at putting this RFP out, definitely putting some of that context into what we're really looking for in a vendor, because those scenarios are not uncommon, unfortunately, that you were in. And so really trying to figure out, are we doing the right thing with the contractors that we have and what our expectation as a city is?

Yeah, I really appreciate that. I have some real concerns about this. I will also say, as you mentioned in your presentation, part of the contract is a requirement that they clean up. And our streets are an absolute mess. There are bumpers everywhere. They're not cleaning up. And for the amount of money that we are paying them, for them to not be doing that job that they are required contractually to do is really concerning to me. Do we have any metrics in the contract or any way of confirming that they are doing that job?

So in the current agreement, no. Is there ways to do that? Yes. And why I say yes is the requirement is to use tow book. to actually track all of the tows. That's how we get our data. But a requirement could also be that we add in the new scope that you take a picture of the site after you're completed. So there are ways that we can creatively think of including those requirements within the scope. I appreciate the feedback, right? Because we generally don't hear anything back unless it's, oh my gosh, our billing is incorrect. So I appreciate you bringing that to our attention so that we can really thoughtfully think about it as we move forward.

Yeah, I really appreciate it. I will just say I have some real hesitation about approving this extension to this contract. And I know that this is a really tough one because we have to have this contract because they are a sole provider. And therefore, if we do not approve this towing contract, we do not have any towing capacity in our city for accidents, for any of those kinds of things. I don't appreciate being put in a position where I feel like I have to approve a contract because I have made an oath. to the city of Denver that I will put its best interests first and it is in the best interest of the city of Denver for us to approve this extension to this contract. And I don't want to because they are not doing what they are contractually obligated to do beyond the bare minimum for millions and millions of dollars. So I'm not sure that I will, this is ready to go to the floor. I will, you know, move it out of committee, but I'm not sure that I'm going to be a yes on the floor on this one based on my own personal experience with this company and this contract. Thanks.

Thank you, Council Member Sawyer. Council Pro Tem, Consuelos Gutierrez.

Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Sawyer, for expressing your concerns. I guess, and maybe I missed this and I apologize, but When can you tell me the timeline again as far as like when this needs to go through in order for it to be activated?

So the current agreement expires August 31st. So this new term extension is starting 9-1 through 8-31-27 for that final year.

And there is no like lesser extension that you could do in order to try to address some of the things that Councilman Sawyer has brought up as far as requirements in the contract. So could it be a shorter extension so that some of these things can be addressed?

We could do that. What would need to happen is we would take it back and determine what those changes would be within the agreement to then get it executed prior to and then really have a discussion with the prime contractor for their understanding of the concerns that have come. From this body, so we could possibly do it. Um, we would still probably need some funding at minimum for the end of the year just to get us through the end of the year. Um. Yeah, there's there's possibilities.

Um, any thoughts on that.

I mean, I think this is a situation where we, it has to be done right and I would fear that we would be putting general services in a situation where they would be working to get it done fast and not right. And I don't want to. Put general services in that situation, given the importance of this contract and the value of what they're providing. So. I appreciate the trying to find a resolution. I'm not sure that that's it. I think we want to get it done right when we get it redone. I just wish it had been now instead of an extension. So I really appreciate it, but I don't want to force them to rush and do it wrong.

Okay. Yeah, I guess I would just say then going forward and knowing this information, and because this is only through 2027, correct? Mm-hmm. So I'm glad that it's a year, right? So then we have that time to go back and evaluate and make some better choices around like how we're holding for accountability, the whole issue of, whatever's happening behind the scenes that they are doing these subcontracts and that there's no other competition. And so I would definitely support that work to be done. But yeah, I agree with your assessment. So thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is aligned. Some of the things that you had talked about, about taking a picture or doing the tow tracker, are those already in place? Like is the tow... I don't remember the name of the toe book toe toe.

What is it? So, you can actually upload pictures every. Every time that comes, they have the ability to take pictures and upload. I would say there is a lot of pictures that are already included. I know with the RV Junker program, they are taking pictures of those vehicles as well. So we could go through and look, but yes, there is capability because they are just doing it on their smartphone, entering the information when they get there, taking photos, tagging it, all the things that they need to do.

I don't think it addresses all the customer service issues that you highlighted, but it feels like could that be an amendment to the extension to have them start tracking after for cleanup? Because I also see the same thing. There's a lot of glass that's still left in the streets or in the intersections or just pushed over to the side, bumpers, a whole bunch of other things as well. Is that something that could also in the interim in this next year? It seems like we already have the platform to do it and just the requirement for them to start tracking for better customer service.

No, definitely. I can reach out to him, have that conversation. Because unfortunately, it's not just a Denver issue. I see it all across the metropolitan area. There's glass, there's bumpers, all the things. So I will definitely reach out to him, have that conversation.

When you have the conversation, we aren't asking, we're saying, hey, this is the contract and this is what we want to make sure that is included. I don't know if there are other customer service components that you also had or highlighted beyond, because I do, I hear you, the glass and the bumpers are definitely there. But if there are more, then we could just get back to you before you contact us. Because it seems like we would be able to do that in an extension period. And it's also a data point for us to be able to look at for consideration moving forward.

Correct.

Yep. I had another question, but it kind of was looking in my district we also seem to have an increase in RVs semi trucks that are being parked in the right-of-way is that what would they also be part of like towing for RVs I mean we've been trying to get on top of it but there just seems to be an increase in semi cabs, I get it, it's people's livelihood, but the semi cabs are parked as well as very large semi, what do you call them, those box truck? Trailers. Trailers, yeah, that are there. Are they also seeing an increase? I see that it isn't like a large number that are included, but it just seems like that's an increase in the city.

Or at least in my district, have you had some conversations with. DPD about tagging and and moving and all of that. So it doesn't play directly into the RV program. However, we have been contact. We've been contacted on number of occasions for. Something that's rather large that, you know, city staff would like for us to dispose of specifically if those are. Vehicles or trailers that can't be safely towed. And so we have assisted with some right away demolitions in those situations. Um, but I think the best resource is to just stay connected with and the individuals that can, um. Uh, that can tag those for removal. I think unfortunately we have individuals that play a little bit of the, you know, well, I'll park it here. For this time, and then I'm just going to go the minimum amount and park it here and people just kind of do that that sort of shell game, unfortunately. Um, but, you know, there isn't anything that I think the city from a, you know, enforcement perspective. can do. But if you have certain areas that are of concern, I would say stay connected with DPD on those. And if it becomes a nuisance type of situation, that's where that can then be removed. You know, we have a lot of different types of tow vehicles, flatbeds that can remove or heavy tow vehicles that can remove any size vehicles or we've we've actually had to and we have the ability to demolish but we've had to demolish large trailers on the street that have been abandoned somebody took the bins off of them they were untraceable and whatnot so there are a variety of things that unfortunately pop up on our city right-of-ways that we have to deal with. But the movement of vehicles that are still able to move from place to place, unfortunately, people understand the rules and they get around those from time to time. All right. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Madam President. Councilmember Watson.

Thank you so much, Committee Chair. I have a quick non-material statement. Nicole, you said for tows around stadiums, it was because of the Broncos. I don't want to be getting, people already told, but I don't want to be getting angry sports fans responding to us. Between May and June, it was the playoffs, Nuggets and Avalanche Stadium, which would be ball arena. Most likely the Toes were coming from, but that's just a correction from the record. Okay. That's it.

Thank you, Councilmember. Just a couple of thoughts. I don't see anyone else in the queue. With our micro mobility contracts, all the scooter vendors require those users to photograph the scooters at the end of the trip, yet we still see scooter litter everywhere. And so just as a food for thought, perhaps requiring a photo at the end to see if they've cleaned up, and then auditing a small percentage of the representative audit to see if the vendor is complying. I don't want to do too much of an extra workload for general services and have you look at every single one of them, but if you looked at a small percentage and they all looked good, If not, then you start looking at a larger percentage and see how compliant they are with the contract. And then also just another thought, perhaps a mid-contract survey with maybe even a third party just asking a vendor to do a statistically valid survey. You have to think about this industry is not Disneyland. So it's not an industry where people are always going to be satisfied or very satisfied. But, you know, the survey would still be helpful to see in context of the industry. Are people getting their needs met? And frankly, is the city getting a good contract with the with the vendor?

Oh, I do have another question.

Yes, Madam President.

One more question real quick. I meant to ask, what is the turnaround time between the time that an abandoned vehicle is reported and when it's towed?

I don't know. So it's 72 hours, typically. Yeah, because it has to be. Well, I was just going to say, let me let me back up. But that would be on the RV side for a vehicle. I need to pause because that's not my area of expertise. But whenever we tag an RV, it's 72 hours. unless that's deemed to be unsafe and in need of immediate demolition and then we do that immediately on on abandoned vehicles like say just passenger car and whatnot I'd have to get back to you on that okay so I appreciate that we also have a lot of abandoned vehicles we will go by people will make reports we will see that they you know may have a ticket or like a pink slip on the Windshield and then it's still there. Let me get back to you on that. Definitely. Unless you have that. I don't want to misspeak here. Okay. That'd be great. Thank you. Absolutely. Thank you.

Mr. chair president sometimes in district 10, people were abandoned vehicles and it turns out that they're actually being used as housing. And so they might. Someone might come to inspect the vehicle, turns out someone's living in it, and so there's a different kind of rules of engagement if the vehicle is inhabited as opposed to truly abandoned. And so sometimes that time period gets extended because it's not actually abandoned, it's housing. So there's a policy not to tow when there's someone in the vehicle. So sometimes that further complicates the challenge. But yeah, it's a good question. It happens at District 10 a lot as well. Have you spoken with vendors that did not bid and asked them why they didn't bid?

From my recollection, there was a requirement in the original procurement that required a specific company to be utilized for tracking of tows. And there was some dissension between some of those vendors and that company specifically. Again, this tow book, the current system that they're using is a system that by all vendors in present state and they were using that system prior to.

Yeah, thank you. Yeah, I'm dusting off the cobwebs of this original contract and I do seem to recall that there was a requirement for a particular piece of software that the vendors didn't want to use. Last question from me, and I don't see anyone else in the queue. Would you remind us what the... Well, actually, we may not have the people here, but the similar question, you know, how does a constituent identify a vehicle that, say, I've got a constituent who reached out this morning where there's a car parked in the alley blocking a trash truck from actually collecting his recycling, and that vehicle apparently has been there for... At least a day and and so he was asking me what I can do about it and I might as well ask you, but it might be a similar question to to what was already asked. Certainly we want to make sure that our. City employees can conduct city services like trash and recycling collection. But is that is that something you know?

Or I don't know. I always recommend that citizens contact 311. with their concerns, especially if it's a car blocking a city service, someone be able to get their trash moved, I would say call 311 and then they'll know the proper protocols for who to contact to have that vehicle removed.

Thank you for the presentation. Thank you for the questions. This is an action item. And the question is, is this good, is this contract ready to be seen by the full body?

So moved.

Council Member Watson moves. I'll second. Okay. Madam President Pro Tem, seconds. Any abstentions or dissensions? Okay. Thank you for your presentation. This will move forward to the full body. Let's return to action item 26-1096, resolution amending the City Council Rules of Procedure. I think Councilmember Lewis is still online. Great. Councilmember Lewis, since this is yours, would you like to say anything?

Yeah, thank you so much. I really appreciate it. I will say a few words, but my understanding is that there are some council members on this body who need a little bit more time to grapple with the language within this resolution. And so my understanding is that those council members are going to put a motion on the table. Um, to postpone this and to have it returned to committee again, but I would like to say explicitly while I. acknowledge those concerns around labor of other communities whose labor was exploited and understand the desire to make this more inclusive. I also think we have to ask ourselves, why does making something more inclusive require us to blur the history we are already acknowledging? We can acknowledge the exploitation, Of immigrant labor, we can acknowledge migrant workers. We can acknowledge the Chinese exclusion act. We can acknowledge the exploitation and displacement of Japanese and other communities and we absolutely should. We don't have to pretend that all of the histories were the same. However, and I think that's really important because slavery. Was not simply exploited labor. People were stolen from Africa, transported across the notion, bought and sold as property. And forced to labor without compensation or freedom, which I think is really important. Their children could be born into the same conditions, their bodies, families, names, and their lives were legally controlled by others. And so I just, I want to make sure that. We're understanding. That specific history and naming it specifically does not exclude anyone else. And that is not my intention. In fact, I believe the opposite that inclusion should expand our understanding of history, not flatten it. And so. It's important for us to acknowledge. for our acknowledgement to be more inclusive. It's important for us to tell more stories. It's important for us to acknowledge more communities, but I just don't want us to make the mistake of believing that the only way to include more people is to make the history we've already acknowledged less precise. And so this resolution is about that. It's more than just the words, it's about committing ourselves to understanding how our history continues to shape people's lives today. And then understanding and using that understanding to inform policy, which is ultimately the ultimately the long term goal here, because history doesn't change because we ignore it. And an acknowledgement cannot change the past. So, that's it, that's all I wanted to say, and I appreciate y'all. I know there are members of this body who have questions and concerns, and I will leave it to you. Mr. chair to address those.

Thank you. Thank you customer. Louis customer. Sorry.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Council Member Lewis. I really appreciate our conversation the other day. And so there was a motion on the floor to delay to a date certain of late September. And my question for you based on your comments is, Are you, is that delay worthwhile? Are you in conversation with other council members to make changes to the labor acknowledgement that you have brought forward? Is there a compromise on the table here somewhere? Or is this something that you feel really strongly about that you wanna just keep moving forward and have the entire body have a discussion about?

Yeah, that's a wonderful question and I appreciate you asking it. So I did offer council members briefings and a number of council members accepted those briefings. I'm also aware that councilman. Sent language over to every council member, excluding me and then eventually, including me with an. An alternate lens, and so my next steps, if you will, is which I shared in my 1 on 1 and I'll share with this committee is. I will take it back to the coalition because I have not been making any of these decisions in a vacuum. I've been doing it in lockstep with this coalition and so I plan to continue to do so. And so I'll meet with the coalition, give them the feedback that I've captured in the one-on-ones that I've had in those briefings that I've had and the conversations that I've had, and then allow them the opportunity to opine and then bring what I hear back from them back to the folks who provided me with the feedback. I will also I have also offered and council president knows this that if you all are interested in intending any of the conversations that we are having with that coalition, I am more than happy to extend that invitation to you all so that you can provide your, your thoughts and your input. But you can also engage with the coalition of folks who have been working on this.

Thank you. I really appreciate that. So it sounds to me like us delaying this to the end of September would be valuable for those conversations with the coalition and other council members to continue. Is that right?

valuable in the sense that it gives council members the opportunity to engage with the coalition. Because I work with them regularly, I have provided the feedback to them that I've received thus far, but it provides the opportunity for the specific request of council president to be able to sit at the table with the coalition. So it does give that time.

Okay, great. I just want to make sure that if, you know, it's worthwhile for you and valuable for you to for us to delay it, because otherwise, you know, we can move and have the conversation with the full body on the floor. So that's why I'm asking these questions. If I what I'm hearing from you is that that is valuable time. And so that's important. Thank you.

Yeah. My preference is definitely not to delay it, but I'm, but it sounds like that. It's necessary from other council members to get time to be able to grapple with it. And so I am amenable to that. If, if, if you will. Got it.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Council member. Council member Sawyer. Madam president. Oh, okay.

Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Lewis. I. Yeah, I mean, I'm in support, of course, of this moving forward. But hearing some of the things that are being requested, I guess I'm happy to be able to accommodate for that. I will say that in the language that was sent to us, I finally got a chance to respond. And I just had some additional concerns, because if we're looking to be more inclusive, that would require additional stake holding. With these other communities, and to my knowledge, that has not happened. And so, in order for if there is, like, anything on the table to modify or edit. The current what is before us right now, then there's work that needs to be done to make sure that those other communities are being brought in as well. As well as the coalition that Councilman Lewis has been working on, because it would be ultimately changing. Their their work, right? Um, and so I just want to be very clear and transparent about, like, what my communication has been on that front. Um, you know, just because there are 6 Latinas on Denver City Council, we do not represent. The entire Latino community, and I know, like, in 1 of the versions, it mentions Latino and so there's work that would need to be done. And I know there's been different proposals put on the table. And again, a lot of this, what it involves is going back to those representative communities to have that conversation about what they want to see and what they would like to see in any of these statements. And so for that fact, what Councilman Lewis has brought to us has been stakeholders. has had community members weighing in from that community. And so that's why I think that it should go forward. But of course, I will support the body today if it is that we need a little bit more time for Council members to have those conversations. I will, of course, support that. Um, but just wanted to state, like, the intention here. Um, of this particular statement is very specific and intentional. Um, and far too often. Um, and I can even say from members of my own community and my own elders are oftentimes. When things like this come up, they say, what about us? What about our struggles? What about our oppression? And that is all true. And I think... we don't have to take away from another community to make sure that we're including another community. And I think Councilwoman Lewis said it best, is that if it means we have to then acknowledge these other things, then we do that, right? And so that's where I'm at. Believe me, as a woman of color, as somebody who's been in these spaces, it has taken some time to grapple with, like, well, wait a minute. We had stuff happen to us too. It's maybe different and different time, different way, whatever, ongoing, it's all ongoing. But we also have to know when to step back and to allow these other groups to have that space because it is a different type of situation. And so I am become cognizant of that. And it's for me, I will say my own personal growth. It is time for me to sit with that And understand it because it is complex, but it is also necessary. So, thank you councilman Lewis for bringing this. I will support a postponement so that the conversations can happen, but I do intend to support it going forward. Thank you. Mr. chair.

Thank you.

If I might just open just quickly.

Yeah, yes.

Yes, ma'am. Okay. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. Thank you so much. Councilman Gonzalez Gutierrez for your words. I really appreciate it. And. And you're absolutely right. Like, I, I don't. Like. there is no intention for me to create a conversation in which we are playing the oppression Olympics. Like that's not my intention here. And that's not the intention of the coalition. And speaking of the coalition, I think it's really important for us to acknowledge and to your brilliance, Councilwoman Gonzalez-Gutierrez, that the expansion of this language requires the expansion of that coalition building as well as that outreach. And so my request would be of the council members who would like to expand the language that they go out in their communities into those specific communities and stakeholder their language as I have done with those communities If we're going to make it more expansive, I do not believe that work should fall on my shoulders. I believe that work should fall on the shoulders of the council members who would like to expand it for them to engage with those constituencies with those geographic. put that geographic of folks to make sure that the language that they are providing in terms of input is actually vetted in those communities. And it's not just a single perspective, but it is coming from a multitude of coalitions and a multitude of community members who have that buy in and who have that feedback.

Thank you, Council Member Lewis. And I also want to thank you. And the last time we had this conversation, you asked for specific language, not just you said you shouldn't be doing the work. And you've asked for the language in writing. And I just want to bring that up as well. And thank you for asking for that specifically. So, Council President and then Council Member Flint.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Council Member Lewis, because we did get a chance to meet. Part of the delay to this date was so that there could be additional conversations and briefings with council members. And when it had come to the floor, there was no time to be able to do that. So my understanding is that you've had an opportunity to connect with other council members. My question... then is a little bit of process because I hear you of, and thank you for being very specific about like send concrete language. For sure. And in order to allow for concrete language to be provided, I know that there are multiple council members that will and have done that. A question then goes back to hearing what you're talking about, like doing the stakeholdering with other groups and that language being provided. Is the turnaround time then adequate to be able to do that in a robust way? I really sincerely appreciate the openness to be able to sit down with the coalition of folks that you've been meeting with. At the same time, I am one of, you know, 12 members on this council and that invitation, I don't know if it's also extended, sounds like it's also extended to other council members to be a part of that. So, just wanted to ask, one, extending that invitation to other council members, but two, what it will take to be able to circle back with community for additional input voice rather than just individual conversations. So wanting to be able to honor that for how we are thinking about additional languages. And then that would, I imagine, be I'm just thinking process, a larger group that comes together and with the coalition that you've discussed as well. So just a little bit of process and question.

Yeah, thank you so much for the question. And President, my invitation to you was what was not. Because other council members are not invited is because that was the request that you had made. And so I wanted to honor that request again. The invitation expands beyond you and other council members feel free to attend. In fact, I've given my staff. The directive to invite council members to that coalition, the 2nd piece of that that you've asked in terms of processes, my process is to go back to that coalition, which I have done and which I will continue to do. I think the process of the council members who have brought that specific language language is councilman. Is pointed out is, I think you all have a responsibility to make sure that you are engaging with those constituencies and with those communities to ensure that the language that you are bringing forth is not the opinion of, or the ideas of just you as an individual council member. But you're representing the voices of those that are not at the table as we are. And so that is the process in my mind as I am seeing it. I'm happy to hear. I welcome the opportunity rather to hear how you all are thinking about what engagement looks like. from your perspective as you are looking to expand the labor acknowledgement to include more communities, what your engagement, what those communities look like in terms of them having an opportunity to opine on that language and to inform and to co-create that with and beside you all.

Thanks for the clarification. that's not a small task to undertake as you know, right? Because that's the task that you've been doing with a specific coalition of people, of people that you've brought together. So I'm just kind of thinking logistic wise of September 29th, That gives us this month of August to do the stakeholdering and to be able to come back. And I would imagine also having those coalitions of folks also meet with your coalition. Sure, and is that a time to be able to make that happen?

So, for me, it's enough time for me to make it happen. I think the question that I have is, I would defer to you all as council members, the council members who have provided additional language. I would ask you, is that adequate time for you to engage with those constituencies and the demographics? That you all are the targeted demographics that you all have uplifted into the conversation because my coalition exists. We're in regular communication, but it sounds like that. There's an opportunity for you all to maybe just to have that initial conversation. What those. Folks that you all have lifted into this conversation and so I would probably give the question back to you council president as well as other members of this body that have provided feedback. Is that sufficient time for you to engage those communities?

I know that there's other people in the queue. Let me get back to you on that 1 because I'm just. I'm thinking of our schedule. Um, and so I'm feeling like we will be rushing, but that's me. Um, so let me sit with that one for a minute and, um, I can get back to you as well. And just because I feel like in some ways that would be, again, we would be sprinting to have groups and work with other council members to be able to say, OK, who else needs to be at the table? I've got a few logistics, like you mentioned. There are six Latinas, six different opinions just with the Latinas on council. So thank you for that. And then I will give it back to you I was going to say Madam Chair, Sir Chair, Committee Chair for this one, but let me think about what that would take.

Thank you, Council President. Council Member Flynn.

Thank you, Chair. I just want to be really clear about what happened here in the last two weeks. After I listened to the committee recording, because I'm not a member of the committee and I wasn't present, But I listened to it and I heard some of the concerns that were raised by a few of the members about perhaps needing more inclusiveness in the acknowledgement. So I took a crack at crafting a draft and I shared it with the two members who, over the weekend, with the two members who had raised those concerns to see if there was any issue. And then I shared it with everyone. Obviously, I didn't do any stakeholdering because it was a week. and uh haven't been working on this this is just something that was presented uh and so there's not been sufficient time i do share the concern of council president that if we are to go out to the japanese community to the chinese community to the jewish community catholic community the latino community that september 29 is not going to be realistic to replicate what was done with the coalition that drafted the one before us. So that plus we have budget hearings in September. So that's going to eat up a lot of our time. So I just want to throw that on the floor. But I just want to be clear about, I'm just throwing this out because I heard the concerns and I thought I'd take a crack at seeing if something more inclusive would meet with favor. If it doesn't, it doesn't. And if it doesn't go any further, that's really no skin off my nose. So I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Flynn. Councilmember Cashman.

Yeah, thank you, Committee Chair. Thank you, Councilwoman Lewis, for your patience with all of this. My thinking since the last time this came before Committee has changed in that when the Councilwoman brought this forward and the thoughts started coming up about all of the different communities, probably deserve recognition in some format I just thought wouldn't it be great if we got together as a body and figured this all out and hip slick and cool and we got what we needed and everybody was honored but Thank you, Councilman Gonzalez-Gutierrez, for your comments, because it's not an easy task at all. All these multiple communities and so on, and while it would be nice if we could wrap it all up smoothly in a bow, the injustices that the communities we've been talking about were not smooth and easy in any way, shape, or form. And I do believe that without diminishing what any other community has gone through, I think slavery in the United States has its own uniqueness. I believe at this point that between now and September 29th, Is plenty of time to deal with what the councilman has has brought forward. Um, it is not even remotely enough time to deal with all the other communities that need to be recognized. And I just don't think we'll be able to tie it up in a boat. Like, I had thought wouldn't that be nice and maybe again, because of. the difficulties these communities have faced, maybe it's okay if it's not so smooth and that over time we piece together what this body thinks we need to be speaking about at the beginning of our meetings to honor those that deserve to be honored. So at this point, I'm very comfortable that September 29 date should give us time to address the councilwoman. And I'll look forward if more of these come forward in my remaining months on council, I'll look forward to looking at them. And at the same time, I do appreciate Councilman Flynn taking the shot he took because there was that voice of mine being one of them, hey, can we tie this up? And now I don't believe that can be done. So thank you, committee chair.

Thank you, Council Member Cashman. Council Member Watson.

Thank you so much, committee chair. I just want to share procedurally. First and foremost, I've read labor acknowledgments over and over throughout the last three years that I've been a city council member. And so that is something that's done in community and I have done that. Council President has asked for an opportunity to have a broader dialogue. I'm supportive of the delay in this discussion to get that timeline done, whether we're going to be able to have a full encompassing discussion with all communities impacted. I have no idea, but I think. The process of delaying this to a date certainly I think is necessary. And I think we just need a, my recommendation is that we get a motion on the floor and we move forward with a date certain and then we, at that date certain, we decide where we're at. But I think we've discussed this enough. Committee chair.

Yeah, Councilmember Lewis had something to share as well.

Yeah, I just, I wanted to just take the opportunity to remind folks the intention of the coalition and this labor acknowledgement that it was a labor acknowledgement to acknowledge the history of labor that built this country, the systems that exploited that labor and the ways that history continues to shape our communities today. And so I just cannot say that finally enough, I am amendable again to the September date. And if we, Need to delay again, because council members don't have the time to interface with their constituencies or with the additional groups that they have identified. I'm open to that. I would imagine that. coalition without speaking on their behalf. But going back to them would be also amendable to that. I'm not in opposition to council members language that they have provided to provide it. And I appreciate Councilman Flynn for giving that specificity. My concern was not the language. It was the process that it was provided to everyone on council and i was the last person to receive that language that was my that was my concern and so i'm not i'm not in opposition to anyone's providing additional feedback i appreciate it i'm happy to take that back to the um i'm happy to take that back to the coalition and with that please call the question

May I say, Mr. Chair, first, please. Thank you. Councilwoman, you were not the last to receive it. I sent it on Sunday last week to the three members of the committee who had raised concern to see if they had any issue with me presenting this. And then on Tuesday and Wednesday, I sent it, Tuesday or Wednesday, I sent it to every other member, including you. I did not make you the last. I took the three who had issues with it first and ran it by them to see if it was okay. And then I sent it to every other member.

We can agree to disagree. I received it before our briefing.

Well, that's how it happened. I sent them.

We can agree to disagree. I received it before our briefing.

Uh, what what's the, I, well, there was a motion was already reading the floor and so I am, I think that was your motion comes present. I'm not going to take your motion over. But if you would like to make a motion fantastic, let's.

Can I, sorry, can I just make one quick statement? Sorry, Chair. I just, just as far as like a process and as it goes to our decorum, I just want to address that. And this is something, you know, perhaps we can have more conversation about, but I think that if there are members, bills, things that you've been working on, I think it is somewhat customary to bring that information to those sponsors. I think that that's important. That's an important part of decorum rather than, and I think that's what I'm understanding from Councilwoman Lewis, the concern that she's raising. And I just want to make sure we don't just leave that here, but perhaps we can take it up in another meeting as a body with everybody, with all 13 members around that fact that, If you are proposing language or proposing some kind of change that perhaps you're working with the sponsor first and foremost. And then, you know, of course, talking to other council members. But that to me has always been kind of the way of doing things since I've been doing this for some time. So I just ask that we maybe table that conversation. I didn't want to leave it unfinished here because it was getting a little bit messy. So I appreciate, again, Councilman Flynn, your work. And coming up with some words, but I think it is important that we have some kind of decorum going forward with that. So thank you. Mr. chair. And of course, thank you.

Madam president pro tem last class. We did actually have a conversation about. council members engage with one another and perhaps we can chat about what that looked like and whether that makes sense. Obviously, Council President, I defer to you, but I'm happy to chat about those conversations with the last class. We do, Council President, you had originally moved 26 to delay 26 1096 to a date certain September 29th and rescinded that. Is that a motion you wish to make again?

Yes.

Okay.

I move that.

All right. So thank you, Council President, making the motion to delay 1096 to a date certain September 29th. Thank you, Council Member Sawyer, to second it. Are there abstentions or dissensions? Okay, great. So that'll move forward to the full body. No one has called off the eight items on consent. And so we have no further business and we are adjourned.

We'll be right back.