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.

Darn it. There we go. Now for real. Good afternoon. And thank you for joining us to the Denver City Council meeting. Today is Monday, August 10th, 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, of course. Thank you. Hello, everyone. My name is Sam Guzman, joining you virtually through Zoom. And along with my colleague Alejandro, today we will be interpreting today's meeting into Spanish. Please allow me a quick moment 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 Alejandro, we will be interpreting today's meeting in Spanish. If you join us virtually, please look on your screen for a globe icon that says Interpretation. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

Welcome to the Denver City Council meeting of Monday, August 10th, 2026. Councilmembers, please join Councilmember Hines 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.

Council members, please join Council Member Hines as they lead us in the Denver City Council Land Acknowledgement.

The Denver City Council honors and acknowledges that the land on which we reside is the traditional territory of the Ute, Cheyenne, and Arapaho peoples. We also recognize the 48 contemporary tribal nations that are historically tied to the lands that make up the state of Colorado. We honor elders past, present, and future, and those who have stewarded this land throughout generations. We also recognize that government, academic, and cultural institutions were 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.

Madam Secretary, roll call.

Council members Alvidrez? Here. Sandoval? Here. Sawyer? Here. Flynn?

Here.

Gilmour?

Here.

Gonzalez Gutierrez? Here. Hines?

Here.

Cashman?

Here.

Lewis? Present. Torres? Here. Watson?

Here.

Madam President Romero-Campbell? Here. 12 members present.

There are 12 members present. Council has a quorum. Approval of the minutes. Are there corrections to the minutes of Monday, August 3rd? Seeing none, the minutes stand approved. Are there any corrections to the minutes of August 5th? Seeing none, the minutes stand approved. Council announcements. Are there any announcements from members of council? Let's start with Councilman Watson.

Thank you so much, Council President. It's tough for me to, once again, to have to make this announcement. Many of our neighbors that live in Park Hill along 17th Avenue for the last three years, I know since I've been city council member, have communicated their concerns about speeds and speeding along that corridor. We've held several meetings over the last three years and have made small initial steps to provide for safer streets. This past week, unfortunately, someone lost their lives on that avenue. Many of the community members that I'm familiar with, that I've spent time with in these discussions, have shared with me that they actually witnessed this person, the accident that occurred, and it's actually, let me use the correct term, the crash that occurred. Because the city is aware of the speeds on that avenue, we have done several studies to demonstrate that the speeds are too high. Our offices have taken steps to lower the speed limit. However, hardening with vertical infrastructure to slow those speeds has not occurred. I understand the why. I understand the gaps in the budget. But the community members that saw that crash and saw someone die on their streets in their neighborhood is something that they will have to live with. And so I say to my neighbors in Park Hill, we'll continue working with you, collaborating with the Department of Transportation Infrastructure, the mayor's office and through our budgeting process to budget funds to ensure that we increase the safety on all streets across the city and county of Denver. And then to the family that lost a loved one due to this unfortunate crash, my heart goes out to them. And to those that witness it, my heart goes out to you, and I look forward to continuing listening and working with you on solutions. Thank you, Council President.

Thank you. Council Member Alvidrez.

Thank you, Council President. I just wanted to send a shout out and thank you to Police District 3 who helped recover a beloved bike this weekend. It was all over the news that a local DJ that uses a very special bike as part of his DJing had it stolen and it was able to be recovered. It took a lot of community looking around and finding it and ultimately DPD District 3 stepping in to help the people at Desert Social recover that. So I just wanted to say thank you. Thank you, Council President.

Thank you. Councilman Hines.

Thank you, Madam President. I have, I believe, four times so far this year talked about Vision Zero. And the last time I talked about it, I warned that this is the Colorado Department of Transportation says this is the most dangerous time of the year for pedestrians. And this is one of the statistics that we want a low score, but we continue to move up towards a high score. As of August 10th, there have been 41 traffic deaths, as in 41 Vision Zero statistics. That's not even including those who sustained serious injuries. 41 traffic deaths in Denver so far in 2026. And And I agree, Councilmember Watson, thank you for pointing out that we're doing what we can. We certainly want to make sure that our agency that has direct authority over making our streets safer for everyone has all the resources they need and the appropriate push from the legislative branch to actually implement those fixes. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

Council Member Torres. Thank you so much, Madam President. One, I just want to give a shout out to my Westwood community for putting on another Saigon Azteca Festival. It is just such an amazing event. And I want to thank Councilwoman Serena Gonzalez-Cutilleras as well for helping sponsor that event. My office, CASR, Climate Action, Sustainability and Resiliency, as well as the Office of Children's Affairs. It is through these partnerships that this event is even possible. And it is one of the things that is keeping Westwood alive and reflecting its culture and directly from community. So I just want to thank all of the folks who put that together. It is a ton of hard work. I also want to announce this Wednesday, the 12th, from 5.30 to 7.30 at the Lama Rec Center is the next open house to learn more about the small area plan for the Burnham Yard area. That's inclusive of the Broncos' proposed development, but it is much bigger. It goes all the way to the Platte River and all the way to Colfax. So I hope to see folks there for that one. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. Council Member Lewis. Thank you so much. So first I'd like to thank everyone who attended our Not Town Hall Town Hall, which was a combination of a town hall and a bowling event. We had some really in-depth conversations, heard a lot of really good ideas about how to address the issues people see within our district and across the city. And we had some fun in between. It was a great time. And thank you to the wonderful staff at FlightCo for helping to ensure that the event went smoothly. It was fantastic. I also want to make folks aware that Vibes in the Park is happening. And so I'm inviting you all to the next Vibes in the Park, which will be meeting on Sunday, August 23rd at Sunken Gardens Park in Councilwoman Torres' district. from 3 to 7 p.m. It's always a wonderful time, and I hope to see everyone there. And then finally, council members Sandoval, Torres, and I have worked over the past couple of weeks with the mayor's office to confirm the members of the municipal sentencing working group. And so our first broader group meeting will be at 9 a.m. to 10 a.m. on August 13th, this Thursday, and we will review that council bill, which is 260328, the municipal sentencing bill that Councilwoman Gonzalez-Gutierrez and Verity and I sponsored the aims of the working group and determine the co-chairs for the next steps. This is going to be our first regular meeting, which will run through March of 2027. And so I'll be sharing out frequent updates and I'll also be working to ensure that these are open aidings for a community to be able to attend because I know there was some interest in that regard. And I look forward to meeting with folks. And then I wanted to thank Councilman Watson for his remarks. We've been having conversations extensively with this community. And one of the things that would be useful in terms of helping to slow down the speeds is to put in bollards. But I think there's been some pushback aesthetically from members of the community. And so I would love for us to have a dialogue about the importance of the lives in our community over the aesthetics in our community. Thank you so much, Madam President.

Thank you. I do have an announcement as well. This Saturday, August 15th at Bible Park, we are going to do our South by Southeast summer concert in the park. And the event goes from 4 to 7 p.m. The Thomas Jefferson High School Orchestra is going to be the opening act. And the Don Elwood Big Band will be playing live music throughout the evening. So super excited. They're going to have a lot of swing dancing. So please come and join us. Also want to make sure you know there will be food trucks out there. We have city agencies that will be tabling and other vendors as well sharing information. And let's see what else. We'd love to see you there. So bring camping chairs, bring a blanket, bring a picnic if you'd like. But we'd love to see you there on Saturday, this Saturday, starting at 4 p.m. in Southeast Denver. Thank you. There are no presentations. There are no communications. There are no proclamations being read this afternoon. Madam Secretary, please read the bills for introduction.

From the Health and Safety Committee, 26-1036, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed agreement between the City and County of Denver and Denver Health and Hospital Authority to provide comprehensive correctional health care services for people in custody at the Denver County Jail and the Downtown Detention Center in Council Districts 8 and 10. 26-1060, oops, not that. From the South Platte River Committee, 26-1088, a bill for an ordinance amending ordinance number 0309, series of 2015, which created the Rhino-Denver General Improvement District to fix the number of appointed members of the District Advisory Board, fix the expiration date of appointed terms, and confirm the terms of the current appointed members. 26-1085, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed amendatory agreement between the City and County of Denver and Denver Health and Hospital Authority to amend exhibit A and exhibit B by adding an additional service location and updating the budget allocation to add a part-time WIC educator to continue enrolling patients and provide women, infant, and children services during pediatric and OB-GYN appointments at several Denver Health outpatient clinics. No change to agreement capacity or terms citywide. 26-1087, a bill for an ordinance approving a proposed second amendatory agreement between the City and County of Denver and Colorado Division of Criminal Justice for continued funding of Denver Community Corrections for the 2026-2027 state fiscal year.

We're good. Councilmembers, this is your last opportunity to call out an item. Councilmember Hines, will you make the motions for us this evening?

Yes, Madam President.

Now, I will do a recap. Under resolutions, Council Resolution 261116 has been called out for questions and a vote by Councilmember Lewis. Under bills for introduction, no items have been called out. Under bills for final consideration, Council Bill 261043 has been called out for comments by Councilmember Lewis. Under pending, no items have been called out. Madam Secretary, please put the first item on our screens. Council Resolution 261116, a resolution approving a proposed mandatory agreement between the City and County of Denver and Sunnyside Up Solutions LLC to enable continued collaboration on the successful launch of hashtag employee TV, hashtag see yourself TV, hashtag see yourself here. employment brand videos, and all ongoing video projects in accordance with the mayoral and OHR priorities and goals. Councilmember Hines, will you please put Council Resolution 261116 on the floor for adoption?

Yes, Madam President. I move that Council Resolution 26-1116 be adopted.

It has been moved.

Madam President, it was already seconded, but it's been moved to the top.

Okay. I see it's been moved and seconded. Thank you. That showed. It has been moved and seconded. Comments by members of council. Council Member Lewis.

Thank you so much. I just had a few questions regarding 1116. The first question is what are the success metrics for the existing contract as well as the success metrics for the amendment for the additional $600,000? Do I have someone here to answer? Oh, it's you.

Come on. Online. Name? Teresa. Teresa. Is Teresa online? Thank you. Teresa, please go ahead when you're promoted.

Okay. Okay. Thank you. She can hear me. Okay. Hey, Teresa, thank you so much for being online. I wanted to know if you can talk to us about what the success metrics for the existing contract, as well as the success metrics for the amendment for the additional 600,000.

Thank you so much for the question and for the opportunity. And for some reason, my video is not turning on. So I apologize for that. Okay. Let me first of all introduce myself, Theresa Marchette. I'm the Director of Marketing and Communications for the Office of Human Resources. And what we're responsible for is basically all internal communications for all city employees, as well as all external brand and employment marketing efforts for the city and county of Denver. And so in regard to your question, and I really am grateful for the opportunity, Councilmember, to kind of elaborate a little more on the success of our video content. Since we launched our in-house video content production in 2023, our social media platforms have shown incredible growth in driving job applications to the city. Our total social media driven applications, meaning people found us and applied through a social media platform, increased 12% from 2023 to 2024. So that's more than 14 000 applications up to over 16 000 in that time and then that stayed and we retained that throughout 2025 um and we were up 10 overall 10 and a half percent from 2023. our video forward platforms in particular um our applications grew on instagram by 53 from 2023 to 2024 from 90 overall Over a 2 year period from when we started this through 2025, LinkedIn increased 14% over just the 1st year as well on YouTube. The trend is the same. Our applications are up 35% over the 1st year climbing again in 2025, representing a 52% increase in applications. And even this year so far, the data show right now that. We have reached 64% of last year's total indicating we're at a pace to surpass 2025 numbers. It's been so impressive. In fact, that LinkedIn actually did a case study on us last year in 2025. We quadrupled the city's engaged candidate pool year over year. That means. Job seekers engaged with us 1st, before they applied 1 3rd of the new hires. for the city overall were influenced by our brand via LinkedIn. And how we did that was we put highly produced video content, telling stories about who we are as an employer and who our employees are and their roles on LinkedIn. We doubled our page visits. We continue to generate new followers on LinkedIn. We have an impressive 35% new hire retention. Our first year cost per hire is a fraction of SHRM's average at under $4,700. So we've had impressive returns on this investment, and it is a fraction of what competitors would charge and certainly much less than a full-time employee would cost at roughly $100,000 to $120,000 per year. Yeah.

Thank you so much, Teresa. I really appreciate that. So for a follow-up, with the $600,000 amendment, what is expected or what are we expected to get in terms of expansion of services from the contract and for the deliverables? Yes.

So first, just to clarify, the original contract was for three years. So this extension is we're seeking five years. So the contract amount represents two additional years, not additional funds. Per se, if that makes sense, it's because the link that the contract is longer. That's why the amount is larger from the last contract. So what we're doing is ensuring continuity and consistency. We've invested in a brand. I've in the budget cuts that you are all very well aware of over the last year have lost. My entire marketing budget, and so retaining some kind of assets for marketing is incredibly important. And also brand consistency is incredibly important. We have highly professionally produced video deliverables. We can feature these on multiple channels and. This is an incredible value. It's incredibly important. And it also helps us to sustain not only our previous investments, but to grow those through organic posts that we create with this content. So what we intend to do is just to ensure the consistency and continuity of our brands, of our investments so far, and to make sure that we are continuing to have a diverse and strong and qualified stream of applicants coming to the city and county of Denver that we're attracting the kind of people who love public service and who understand what that commitment is like and who want to work with us. And that's incredibly important.

Okay, so quick follow up because in the file materials, it reads, amends a contract with Sunnyside Up Solutions LLC to add $600,000 for a new total of 1 million and to add five years for a new end date of 12-31-2031. Is that, was that filed incorrectly? Because you said it was just years, not money, but it's money in the filed materials.

Well, correct. But the $400,000 of that was for the first three years of the contract. The request to extend the contract, so to extend it another five years, is $600,000. So that's the difference between $400,000 and $600,000 is the additional time that we're requesting, an additional two years for this contract above what we already have. Yeah, and money. So we have to pay for the time that we're asking for, obviously, and the services that we're going to receive. So that's why the extension is $600,000 versus $400,000, which was the original agreement for three years.

Yeah, no, I understand that. So what is the impact of the original $400,000 contract? Like, what has that been, and what was the decision – to move from the 400 to the additional 600,000 made.

Well, the additional 600 just covers the services for the next five years. So that's roughly $120,000 per year, which is much less than a full-time employee would cost the city. Under our current contract, so the one that you originally referenced, the first three years, what that has afforded us is more than 350 videos, more than 250 photos, Again, we have not spent the full amount of the contract as of yet, obviously, but the two competing, just for your information, the two competing RFPs we had when we put this out to bid. One of the companies, if we would have charged the rate that they quoted us, which was $14,000 per one three-minute video. I'll repeat that, $14,000 for one three-minute video. which, and I won't name, but a couple of agencies have paid, we would have spent over $6.7 million by now. If we would have followed the second Company who would have charged us 155,000 dollars for 8 video deliverables all under 2 minutes. We would have spent roughly 4.9M dollars by now. So I understand marketing communications isn't everyone's specialty. That's why I'm here. Hopefully to offer you some context and perspective as the expert in this field, the price quote. is millions of dollars less than we will ever find. We are very fortunate to have a public servant who works with us as a team member and cares about the work and does excellent work for the city at an excellent value for the city.

Yeah, no, I'm not challenging them. I wanted to understand what the results from the contract were and what was the reason for the increase. I understand that from a marketing and comms perspective as well as I studied it in school. And so I wasn't challenging what the numbers were on the table. I wanted to understand what the return on that investment was. And my final question for you is, can you help me to understand like as we're increasing this contract, how that scales with the layoffs? How did those two interface or interact? Because it sounds like we laid off folks and now we are extending a contract in order to bring more folks into the city.

Well, I'm really glad you asked that question because I think it's very important. And first of all, we didn't no way try to insult you at all about your knowledge about marketing communications. I think it's just a shocking figure for some people to understand in terms of how much it truly does cost. to do this kind of work. And the other thing I wanna reiterate too, and I did send a written copy, but in all of the data that I shared with you in terms of driving application, numbers of applications, in terms of driving engagement, in terms of driving followers online, those are all measurable ROIs for this investment. So I just wanted to reiterate that and I'm happy I've provided your aid on that in writing as well. But, you know, I want to I guess I want to is it that you're concerned about the total amount of the contract or I don't know how to equate that to what the total layoffs were. But what I can tell you is that's a spread out over a long period of time. And during that time, we will always have difficult to fill positions. We will always have the positions that we have to try to drive people towards that people either don't understand, or once they figure out what the job really entails, they don't want to do it anymore. And our clients, if you will, our partners across the city in agencies like the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure that have high turnover areas, like Department of Human Services, social workers are extremely hard to come by. These are things that we need to focus on and help with year round. And we are constantly innovating new ways to help people understand the importance of these roles, the value of these roles and what their career and future could look like with this city. But they are difficult to fill roles. And so regardless, unfortunately, of those positions that were lost, we still have to hire people year round. And unfortunately, that's something that we have to reconcile with. And we also have to spend money on. Otherwise, we won't be able to provide the services that the residents of the city and county of Denver deserve.

Yeah, thank you. Again, I'm not concerned about the value of the contract, the dollar amount, the $1 million. I mean, we approved $20 million contracts here at City Council. I just wanted to better understand what the additional $600,000 was for and what the return on the investment was. I really appreciate your time, Teresa.

No, and I appreciate your questions, and I hope that you will reach out anytime if you have any additional follow-up, please. Thank you. Thank you.

Council Member Torres. Thank you so much. Theresa, can you hear me?

I can.

Can you let me know how this is exceeding five years on the contract? Is it a particular fiscal rule that allows it to go beyond five years?

Well, that's why we're before you, I think, to get an extension. This is an extension, though, so it's basically an eight-year contract. Correct. The original was three years, and so we went through city attorney process, et cetera. So if this is outside of what's allowed, then I'm not aware of that.

Okay. Vic, do you have any background on this?

No. No. But I will say, Councilwoman, that really, again, you know, the continuity piece and the affordability piece are huge, and they matter a great deal in my world. And so also my inability to get an additional FTE for this kind of work.

I thought contracts had to go back out for competitiveness beyond five years. Someone's coming up to the dais. Yes. Can you introduce yourself?

This is Rob McDermott, Denver City Attorney. I wrote the contract.

Rob, can you explain that? Sure. Mayor's Executive Order 8. Oh, and sorry, can you speak into the mic a little bit? Sure.

I want to just pull the mic a little bit. There you go. The Mayor's Executive Order Number 8 allows justification to go beyond five years, and that's the process that was used for this contract.

Do you know which particular section of Executive Order 8? Because this has been... Memorandum 8B. Is that the continuity of service? That's one there's multiple justifications that an agency can use that's one of them, okay I'll just say this is the second time that that's been exercised in the past week and So I just it doesn't have to be like you could have extended it two years to get to the five years But we're adding five years

Without justification, yes, up to five years. But it's up to the agencies to make a determination whether they need a continuing relationship with a vendor, and it's up to the agency to justify that.

Interesting. I just get worried that we're circumventing some of the process that just allows for competitiveness, which would surprise me if this is the only vendor out in kind of the community that can do this. and why this is the only one. So this was just raised last week with Denver Health, why we were creating a contract without a competitive bid process. So I'll just raise my concern about that. If we continue to lean on Executive Order 8 without doing bids when we needed to, I think that's a problem. Thank you. Thank you.

Madam Secretary, roll call on Council Resolution 261116.

Council Members Alvarez? Aye. Sandoval? No. Sawyer? Aye. Flynn?

Nay.

Gilmour?

No.

Gonzalez-Gutierrez? Nay. Heinz?

Aye.

Cashman?

Aye.

Lewis? Nay. Torres? Nay. Watson? Aye. Madam President, Romero-Kimball?

Aye. Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results.

Six ayes, six nays.

Okay, six ayes, six nays. The council resolution has failed. Madam Secretary, please put the next item on our screens. Council Bill 261043, a bill for an ordinance designating certain properties as being required for public use and granting authority to acquire through negotiated purchases or through condemnation proceedings of fee simple easement and other interests as needed for the completion of the Quebec and Erlon bridge project. located in the area of Quebec Street between Sandown Road and I-70 in Council District 8. Council Member Lewis, please go ahead with your comments on Council Bill 261043.

Thank you so much. I'm sorry, I called this item out today because it represents an important step. in one of the unresolved issues from the vibrant bond process, and it's the second item that has come through recently as part of this project. Last summer, the folks in Central Park asked for the bridges over Smith and Sundown roads to be replaced. These are bridges rapidly approaching the end of their useful life, and they pose safety issues for the community and for others, such as the firefighters at Station 26 on MLK Boulevard, who are no longer able to drive. their engines over the bridges which creates longer response times. And so ultimately we were not able to get these bridge replacements on the list for the bond as there were a number of complicated negotiations that had to be done first with the railroads and other partners. And so the good news is that we are working on this item here tonight and will be used to acquire the necessary land for construction as the work to replace the bridges commence. So very excited about this.

Thank you. Thank you. That concludes items to be called out. All bills for introduction are ordered published. Councilmembers, remember that this is a consent or block vote, and you will need to vote aye. Otherwise, this is your last chance to call out an item for a separate vote. Councilmember Hines, will you please put the resolutions for adoption and the bills on final consideration for the 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 in a block for the following items. 26-1091, 26-1089, 26-1090, 26-1063, 26-1079, 26-1080, 26-1081, 26-1082, 26-1083, 26-1101, 26-1084, 26-1086, 26-1064 26-1065 26-1075 26-1076 26-1077 26-1078 26-0992 26-1041 26-1042 26-1043 26-1040 26-1048, 26-1055, 26-1044, 26-1045.

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

Council Members Alvidrez? Aye. Sandoval? Aye. Sawyer?

Aye.

Aye. Gilmour? Aye. Gonzalez-Gutierrez? Aye. Hines? Aye. Cashman? Aye. Lewis? Aye. Torres? Aye. Watson? Aye. Madam President Romero-Campbell? Aye.

Madam Secretary, close the voting and announce the results. 12 eyes, 12 eyes. The resolutions have been adopted and the bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. 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. There being no further business before this body, this meeting is adjourned.

magical menagerie of brightly colored lanterns.