A resolution approving a proposed Revocable License between the City and County of Denver and Colorado Village Collaborative for a tiny home village site located at 4400 Pearl Street. Approves a revocable license agreement with Colorado Village Collaborative for $10 and for one year with two additional one-year extensions at the City’s sole option, for use of city-owned property for the use of a tiny home village, located at 4400 Pearl street in Council District 9 (FINAN-201947500-00). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 5-20-19. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 4-16-19.
I am secretary. Please close the voting. Announce the results. 13 813. Council Bill 344 has passed. Councilman Cashman, will you please put Council Resolution 367 on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move the council resolution 19 0367 be adopted. It has been moved and seconded. The courtesy public hearing for Council Bill 367 is open. May we have the staff report? Lisa. Lonely in the building. Now Joe is here. Yeah. All right. Sorry. Bear with me 1/2 while I pull up the presentation. It's okay. Okay. Wonderful. Thank you so much for bearing with me there. Good evening. Council President Clark and members of Denver City Council. My name is Jill Jennings Gorelick, interim executive director of community planning and development here tonight to provide the staff presentation on the request for use of city owned land addressed as 4400 North Pearl Street in the Globeville neighborhood. Let me start off by saying that this has been really, in the words of Evan Dreyer, described as an imperfect process, and that's accurate. There's nothing about this that any of us are pleased with, including that when we started that committee, we hadn't yet really had an engagement process with the community. In all fairness, there still hasn't been the kind of engagement process we'd like. That said, we've taken a lot of time over the last couple of months to engage with the neighborhood, to learn to ask questions, to allow people to express opposition and to share information. As a result, we've learned more about what is important to the Globeville neighbors, and we made important changes to the license agreement to accommodate that feedback, feedback and input of current residents. And I'll get to that in just a minute. But the heart of the matter right now is that the village is in danger of being forced to shut down, pushing people out of stable housing, away from a support network and back into homelessness. We do not want to see that happen, especially when there is a viable city property available for its use. So quick history. So we're here today to lease property, as I noted to the Colorado Village Collaborative for Use of the Beloved Community Village. Today they have 11 sleeping units with no bath kitchen facility, with 12 residents to port a potties, and then one common bathhouse with two showers fire. They have been at two sites, both essentially in the 30th and Blake area over the last 18 months and have successfully provided safe temporary housing and a unique support network for residents of the village. Five residents to date have transitioned to permanent housing and 11 of the 12 current residents are employed or in school and one is on disability. I will note that neighbors at 38th and Blake, who were originally concerned when the Village First Mervin, have reported positive experiences from having the village located near them. Additionally, as part of this effort, as it was a pilot program, the city undertook a monitoring program. So that was a program by which an inspector from Zoning and Neighborhood Inspection Services, as well as the Department of Public Health and Environment, would schedule visits at least 24 hours in advance with the village, go out to the site and to determine if it was still in compliance with permits that were issued and to make sure that there were no outstanding concerns or issues at the site. We have done that at both sites that the village has existed on today, and we will continue that here. We also used a survey at the previous site to gather feedback from the community, and we also we also plan to do that here to ensure that we are hearing from the community. If the village does move forward on this piece of property. In terms of site selection, and it's just a little bit back here. So as mentioned, the village has been on two sites to date, both at 30th and Blake. They had to secured a third site to move the village to. Last October rings be caught site owned by Zeppelin properties and unfortunately it was determined in late October by public works that that site was not a viable site to relocate to due to significant concerns of a spill from the river at that location and the velocity that the water would be traveling. So we had a time crunch on our hands and that is how we found ourselves in the situation. The village originally needed to be off their current site by mid-January. We were able to put forth a building code amendment to give an additional 60 days if they had not yet received a temporary certificate of occupancy at a new site. And that is when we, the city, stepped in to search dozens of properties and try to find a good fit. So that leads us to the site selection criteria. So in collaboration with the Village Collaborative and once that original site was deemed not viable, we work to prepare a list of criteria which you see here to help determine the best site. Following neighborhood feedback regarding the Pearl Street site, the City and Colorado Village Collaborative, we reviewed our original list of properties and other potential sites and reached out again to groups like Volunteers of America, Urban Land Conservancy and other private properties in the area to see if there were any other viable locations . But unfortunately, no sites became known to the City or Colorado Village Collaborative that met this criteria could be permitted within the timeframe of being off their current site by May 15th, due to the granting of a Denver Building Code Board of Appeals request for more time and allowed appropriate time to do public outreach and could be used for more than one year. So a little bit about the site. Our intent is to relocate the existing tiny home village to approximately 20,000 square feet of this site. The site itself is approximately 35,000 square feet. This allows the village to expand up to 20 sleeping units and provide a community kitchen and bathroom building connected to utilities . The site is currently zoned you annex three again located in the global neighborhood in Council District nine. Excuse me. I will also note that we have encouraged Clara, Colorado Village Collaborative, to work on a good neighbor agreement with the registered neighborhood organizations and communities in the area. Unfortunately, we do not yet have anyone willing to sign that. However, Colorado Village Collaborative will live by the terms of that good neighbor agreement, most of which was feedback we heard from a number of the community meetings, which I'll go into next. And I should note that, you know, that type of agreement takes time to put together and we'll continue to advocate if there's anyone willing to partner on that agreement. But we've also incorporated certain provisions we heard were important for the community and solutions we heard to some of those concerns into the license agreement. So in terms of community engagement, the city as well as Colorado Village Collaborative have held a number of neighborhood meetings to discuss this project and answer questions. The first community meeting was held on February 7th, and I want to note that it was hosted by Globeville Cares in partnership with the City, and I thank them for all their outreach to get people to that meeting. We've tried to incorporate feedback from the neighborhood, both in the Draft Good Neighbor Agreement the Colorado Village Collaborative has been working on, as well as the license agreement itself. And we've continue to listen to concerns of the neighborhoods. So I'm not going to read through all of the meetings there, but we've had a number of meetings over the last two months, including a community cleanup barbecue and community community meeting hosted on the site on April 8th, April 13th. So in terms of the license agreement itself, this is for a one year term with the allowance of two one year renewals at a cost of $10. That can be renewed administratively. The use of the property is tied specifically to the beloved community village with a maximum limit of 21 structures, so 20 sleeping units and one community building that can occupy the site. And renewal of the license agreement is at the city's sole discretion. And that is really because in order to stay longer than 360 days at one site, there are certain provisions they need to meet in terms of providing that community building and connecting to utilities. Otherwise, our code does not allow for more than 360 days at this time. So in terms of modifications to the license agreement. So Councilman Ortega and thank you for the suggestion, suggested that we look at incorporating certain elements from the proposed good neighbor agreement into the license agreement. And we have done so to the extent possible. We've done everything in our power to ensure that beloved community village will be a good neighbor in Globeville, like it has been only a half mile away in the Rido Arts District and whole neighborhoods and five points. These are the items we heard were important to Globeville neighbors. So again, we're including them in the license agreement. So just to quickly summarize, we reduced the term originally we were looking at a total of four years. We've reduced it down to three. The license agreement allows city authorities to enter the property with 24 hours notice to conduct that monitoring inspection program I mentioned earlier. The license agreement also requires bi annual check ins with the City and Colorado Village Collaborative and requires the city to attend a bi annual public meeting with the Colorado Village Collaborative. We've added language to be very specific that outdoor camping is not an allowed use and that this was quite a concern from the community. It's something called a village collaborative was certainly willing to do. Was that to the extent permitted by law, they will perform background checks, including criminal background checks to screen for sex offenders or potentially dangerous individuals. So we the city, will be ensuring that they do that. It requires of Village Collaborative to install any fences should they want to modify the fence that exists around the property silly along Pearl Street and also clarifies that the village is responsible for any snow removal, removal and maintenance on the property. You go back. So again, these provisions will allow the city to hold Colorado Village Collaborative accountable to certain standards and requirements that have come up as being important to the neighborhood. If this is move forward tonight, the village expects to begin relocation on or about May 13th. As I noted, their current property owner and lease has them allowed at the current site through May 15th. And with that, I'm more than happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much for your time tonight. I know this is a challenging conversation and I appreciate your time and attention. Thank you very much. All right. We have 33 individuals signed up to speak this evening in our one hour courtesy hearing. So we'll ask that you, if you can, get to what you want to say in less than 3 minutes and save that time, that's an extra person that we can get to. So please be as concise as you can. I also normally would ask you in the front bench to move somewhere else so that we could get through people quicker. But there's nowhere else for you to move to. So I'm going to have you stay put and we will try something different. I will call five names at a time. And if you could just line up in this aisle over here in the order that I called you to come right up to the microphone, as soon as the person in front of you is done so that we can get through as many people in the time as possible. I will also ask, I know that this is an item, as we often have here, that people feel very passionately about. But I ask you to hold your applause and anything else that will slow us down through this process. This is a safe place that people have different opinions. And it's important for us to hear from you on whatever side of this issue that you came here from. And so if you could please keep that there is another room at 432. If you really feel compelled that you want to go cheer and clap whenever a speaker is done, you're more than welcome to watch on TV in there. But in here we want to get through people as quickly as possible and also create a safe space for everyone to share how they feel. So I'm going to call the first five. If Elizabeth Garfield, you can come right up to the microphone. And then in this aisle, if we can get Kevin Conroy, Derek Martinez and Elizabeth and Amanda MC Douglas and Gail Lareau, if you can line up right here in this aisle and be ready to go. And Elizabeth Garfield, the microphone is yours. Good evening. I'm Reverend Elizabeth Garfield. I am one of the members of the clergy, staff of St Andrew's Episcopal Church at 20th and Glenarm in Council District nine. I am also a 20 plus year resident of Sunnyside in Council District one and a member of the Sunnyside neighbor, United Neighbors. I stand before you tonight to speak in favor of Resolution 0367. This temporary housing is desperately needed in our city. As all of us are aware, we are experiencing a devastating crisis with regard to attainable housing in our city. And while much effort is being directed to this crisis, these efforts have not been able to keep pace with the magnitude of the deficiency in attainable housing. This is especially true with regard to individuals whose income is in the 0 to 30% AMI range. Too many of our neighbors are going without sufficient shelter and oftentimes lack even the merest resources to shield themselves from the dangers of violence and the ravages of the Colorado climate. This lack of safe, adequate and secure shelter is resulting in enormous adverse health and environmental conditions for everyone in our city. These conditions are inhumane and dangerous and have resulted in significant loss of life. Last year alone, as we know, at least 233 people died as a result of lack of safe and secure shelter. This fact should outrage each of us and move us to positive action. As a person who's a leader in a faith community and a person of faith, we are committed to using our voices and our abilities to live into the commandment, to love our neighbors, and to care for those who go without access to basic necessities. This is not just a slogan to the faith community. It is a mandate to take action. You may be aware that St Andrew's worked diligently for over two years to gain the necessary approvals to locate a tiny house village on our property, to no avail. It has now been almost a year since the denial of our application by the Landmark Commission. I would like to say we no longer have the luxury as citizens of this city to claim this problem is too overwhelming, too complex or too large. Lives depend on all of us engaging in new and creative ways to resolve this crisis. We need to pull together, to lean in and come up with as many diverse shelter options as we can to stem the runaway growth of this epidemic. You, as the governing body of this city, have the ability to institute changes that can begin to turn the tide of suffering and despair. You can help those of us in the community who are working tirelessly to provide shelter. I'm sorry, but your time is up. Next up, Kevin Conroy. Oh, thank you. I've been a resident of Global for five years before that, and I was in my twenties. I was homeless for quite a few years. I empathize with the people who are residents of the village at this time. That being said, I think you realistically look at the piece of land. This is not a viable solution. If you look at it on this side, it was basically a dead end street with eight houses on it. Down here, you have a railroad. The freight trains go over and on this side, you have a very tall chain link fence top with razor wire. On the other end of that, there is a sloping five plus foot drop to the street. Our neighborhood is now homeless resources. Our neighborhood does not have resources, period. We have no grocery store, no nothing. And order for these people to go anywhere, do anything, live their lives. They're going have to go a block up north to the bus stop on 45th and Washington Street. And the only way to go there is to walk up that 500 foot stretch of Pearl Street with eight houses on it. Now, you want to expand this to 20 sleeping. You ask the two people in this unit, you're talking about adding 40 people to this dead end street, you know, more than double the population. Okay. This is just a total failure of planning. This is not realistic. Even if everybody in the neighborhood was 100% on board, this ready to go, this is just a recipe for unnecessary friction. This is not good for the beloved community village. This is not good for Globeville. This is not good. Period. We need something much better. Thank you. Could you state your name for the record? Kevin Conroy. Thank you very much. Next up, Derek Martinez. Yeah. My name is Derek Martinez. I grew up in Globeville, lived there 31 years, just like Councilman Espinosa was talking about I-70 being that project, being forced upon that neighborhood. This tiny home village is being forced upon Globeville. We've been talking. We've been talking with a lot of different residents there. And now what I wanted to point out here is that. If you look around the room, how many people here are from Globeville? The rest. I've been all right here, forcing this upon Globeville. And I've grown up in Globeville. And my parents have worked hard their whole life to give me and my brother two small, little pleasures, only to have those stolen from us. I've grown up in Globeville and watched the SWAT teams go down my alley. I've grown up in Globeville and helped ramp neighbors from being shot. And what Globeville doesn't need is a tiny home village where Globeville doesn't need. Was our rec center taken away? What Globeville was given was a playground for Stapleton Rec Center and. What the island's Ashland's Global Rec Center was given was a brand new indoor swimming pool. Global was given sidewalks on Washington Street, we're told. But was that for Globeville or for the National Western stock? So when they brought these tiny homes to us, they said, Well, what do what is Globeville want? What are you guys need? Now you want to ask us what we want because you want to force something upon upon us. Tim Santos talked about a neighborhood plan. He said, well, we've got this in your neighborhood plan. We got this in your neighborhood plan. I said, What do you know? He said, the people global asking for for this and that. I said, Did they ask for a tiny home? He said, no. I asked if he they asked for porta potties placed in front of their street. He said no. Now, I spoke with the tiny home village resident and he told me a story. I'm not going to get into too many details for his privacy, but he was telling me that he was a felon. He was telling me that he got caught up in drugs, alcohol and pimping. Would you want that in front of your house? In front of your children? That's all. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, an Elizabeth. First of all, I would like to thank the neighborhood of Globeville for everyone who has participated in this. And I hope that the city and the city council will thank the neighborhood of Globeville, which, regardless of which way this folk goes tonight, should be honored, because this challenge has been visited upon this neighborhood, precipitating a conversation that should be citywide. And just like Globeville in their neighborhood plan being the first to respond to the deployed neighborhood planners created something that benefited in in template the entire push to get neighborhood plans. The conversation about how should a project be sensitive to a neighborhood coming into a neighborhood is being challenged by Globeville stepping up and saying , Hey, there is a 360 degree sensitivity here. Everyone who knows me here in the Housing First Movement knows I would stand at your shoulders for your dignity, no matter what your situations. And the same needs to be true for Globeville. One of the letters that was in here talked about how when the support talked about how when they moved into the neighborhood approximately 14 years ago, there were foreclosures and vacancies and they were waiting for it to blossom. And I say to those that have stood up to try and challenge this to greater sensitivity in the neighborhood, most of these folks that have stood up with Globeville first and Globeville cares are third and fourth generation families. And this is something that should be brought to the table. The animosities are part of the stress. We have the the debris. Right. And the 2040 plan. Now, that should create a framework for evaluating this as a citywide problem. We should not romanticize any one solution, and we should hold accountable the full relationships of how projects enter into a neighborhood, whether they're mission driven, full hearted, nonprofit services or return on investment developments. The the establishment of the relationship in the neighborhood depends upon how the possibilities of relating to one another are brought. This lot was a Asper and Ashbury aspirational lot for the residents of Globeville. There were many ideas about things that would enrich the neighborhood. I won't list them now, but we have to have a conversation about the impact of this. It is heartbreaking to be put in a position where where a person feels that the aspirations of the neighborhood, if we protect them, could mean that people could lose their housing. Nobody wants to be in that position. Denver has brought upon itself a problem that where we are, in a sense, fighting over scraps. We have to have things like tiny home villages, in my belief. We have to have many solutions and we have to find a way not to pressure a neighborhood that is just reaching a threshold. After serving and serving and serving the many diverse needs of finally reaching the benefits of what should arrive from all the changes that are coming in, it's not. Your time is up. Could you state your name quickly for the record. For me and. Elizabeth, thank you very much. Next up, Amanda make Douglas. Douglas. Hi. My name is Amanda McDougall. Thank you for hearing us. I work for Bad Enterprises as a site supervisor for a Denver Day Works crew, and I also used to live at Beloved Community Village. When I came here, I had just gotten out of a very abusive relationship with which left me broken and with nothing. Through the people. Of Beloved Community, Interfaith Alliance, Bayard and countless others, I found love acceptance guidance so much more than just help. I found a community of people who helped to build me up. I've lived on the streets. I know how it. Feels to be invisible or even scorned simply because you have nowhere to go. The shelters were no better. But the community village is different. It's a real chance for us to do something that matters and to help ourselves at the same time. It's a place of love and healing. I personally have come so. Far because of my involvement with this community. As I said, I was destitute and alone in a. New place when I ran for my abuser. Thankfully, God had a plan. Four months or so after I arrived to Denver Streets, I was told of this tiny. House village that was soon to. Be finished. What's more, there were still open houses. I, of course. Applied and went to the interview. Finalists were told to be at the village on the. 21st of July 2017. That, for those unaware, was opening day. If you weren't there, you missed something special. That morning I had been awakened by police and and told I was trespassing. There were no. Signs and the land appeared vacant. But I made no trouble and moved along. This really. Dampened my spirits, though it isn't fun being. Awakened by police and treated like a criminal simply for having no place of your own to sleep. But then there I was at this big celebration here where all these people. Dressed in all different manners and. From all different walks of life, all in solidarity around these issues of houses. Helplessness and lack of community. It was so. Beautiful. I was in tears for half the day. The first tears were of despair. Hopelessness, pleading with God to help me. The rest, though. Were filled with joy and hope. I was then pleading God just to let me be part of it all. I remember thinking, I don't even care if I got a house. I just want to be part of this. Got heard me and I did get a house that day. I got a place to lay my head, lock my door, rest and feel safe, a place to leave my things and get cleaned up so I could go out and get documentation, get work, be productive again. But beyond that, and far more important than that is the community of amazing people who. Sprung up around me and built me up, the people who. Supported me and allowed me to support. Them. This community means so much to so many. Please vote yes. Thank you. Next up is Gail LaRue, and I'm gonna call the next five if you could come up to the aisle here. Amanda Henderson, Rose Reilly, Jennifer Wilson, Jaz Leroux and Sue Gomez. Go ahead. Hi. I am Gael Leroux, 30 year member of the original. Tiny home community. That community is Globeville neighborhood, northeast Denver. I'm here. Representing the 150. Home owners, renters, business. Owners, long term. Family. Visitors, as. Well as our displaced Globeville. Neighbors. I have met. These through neighborhood meetings. Basketball games at Stapleton Rec Center and at the front doors. It's been a pleasure. Meeting new faces as. Well as meeting old faces. Community members that have been in the neighborhood for over 50 years who paid $8,000 for their homes. These 150 residents are not in support of the tiny home village. Moved to Globeville. We did meet seven residents that do support the move. More importantly of the question, do you support or not support the tiny home moved to the Globeville neighborhood? Was the question If you could have anything you wanted at 44th and Pearl, what would it be? Immediately, faces lit up. Our neighbors thought, Wow, I've never been asked, What do I want? I would like to share with you what could have been at 44th and Pearl if the city had asked. After all, the city has been sitting on that piece of land for 19 years. A park, a place for swap meets Farmer's Market, Mobile Library, Food Co-op Cafe. Open Space Coffee Shop. Senior Building Flower Shop Open Community Space Community Garden A Park Educational Outdoor Space. A place where we could learn how to build our credit. A small pocket park, a place for activities with families. Outdoor Market Dog Park, Dairy Queen Pharmacy. Tres Park. Taco Bell Rego Spa Ninos Smile. Whole Foods Gym. Childcare Mini. Shopping Center. Retention Pond. We know that was you, Dave. Walgreen's, permanent housing, a park, maybe. Sound barriers from the trains, a small post office grass. And did I say a pocket park? We take care of our homeless community in Globeville. We take care of each other. I have a very similar story as the prior person who spoke, and I was welcomed in Globeville. I made myself to the rec center with my two young boys, and I introduced myself and I made a home in Globeville for over 30 years. And it's not easy, especially the dangers of the neighborhood. And I think Jill failed to mention that this piece of land is directly across the street from eight families with very small children. We've gotten to know those children. We've gotten to know. I'm very sorry, but your time is up. Thank you. Next up, Amanda Henderson. Good evening. My name is Reverend Amanda Henderson, and I'm the executive director of the Interfaith Alliance of Colorado. And we were one of the founding groups who came together three years ago to start imagining a different way, a different way in the face of the criminalization of homelessness and a different way in the face of the time that it takes to build housing. And so we brought people together from all different backgrounds and have pushed forward to this day. And it's been an incredible gift to be a part of and to see as we initially sort out, we weren't just seeking to build housing or. Shelter or safety. We were seeking to build community, which is far. Harder than building housing. And we sought to receive people together and into community while walking alongside one another. So these letters that I have here that you should have received are from residents of the village who were not able to be here, or it's too difficult to be here and hear these things after each meeting. So this is a letter from Luna Rain. Beloved community village for me has been my only chance. Chance at any sort of life worth living. A chance to get a job. A chance to heal. A chance to focus. A chance to be able to have the mental space. To think about my life and where it's going. And what I need to do to stand on my own. I came to Denver with nothing but a suitcase, a backpack, and the clothes I had on my back. I am not someone who has family or strong connections to help me when I need it. I was a domestic violence survivor on the run, and Denver was the only chance I had at survival. Beloved Community Village is my chance to make that survival happen. While this is far from luxury, I am afforded the space to be able to think seriously about my options in life. Because of my financial situation, there's still no way I can afford rent or sign a lease. The village is giving me the serious chance to work on all of this without family to lean on. There is no other option for me to survive. Aside from these tiny houses, there is no way I could keep a job, even retail, and stay long term in any shelter. I tried and I was saved by the village opening before. At the end of that week I was going to have to choose between having a job and sleeping inside. The village isn't a ticket to an easy life. The village isn't a luxury. It's a chance to be responsible for myself, to create a life. The community in Beloved Community Village is very much a true title to me. As stated, without family, the village brings me a sense of belonging and my neighbors have on multiple occasions been the difference to me between life and death. We create a chosen family. I'm sorry, but your time is. Up, then the. Community. Next up, Rose Riley. Thank you. Hi. My name's Rosemary Reilly, and this is my first chance or my first. Time speaking in front of you guys, so it might be kind of jittery. I would like to introduce myself. I am a member of Globeville first, also a member of Globeville. Care's a 50 year plus resident of Globeville. Globeville, homeowner. My children, my grandchildren and great grandchildren live in Globeville. They own their own homes there as well. When this was presented to us, the way it was presented to us was not the right way. We didn't know this was coming until it was there. There was no community input. There was nothing for us. Here we are today. For 20 years, 20 years, Globeville has been looking for something, someone to take note and to pay attention to the struggles that we have. Our rates are at least. 28%, if not more. Poverty. Below poverty, we have 1700 homes. And each one of those homes, most of those homes have children. Two or three or four or five children are people. The people that are here with us today are the people that took off from work. Most of the people in Globeville work two or three jobs just to survive. So when they came in CBC, it was a slap in the face to our neighborhood. How dare you? We struggle. Yes. We have nothing against the tiny homes, just not where you want to put it. Not across the street. From families, not in a neighborhood. Of course it did very well downtown. The only people downtown are the apartment dwellers. They don't have kids that play in the street. We do. We take care of ourselves. Am I angry? You bet I am angry. But I'm not angry for the reasons that you might think. I'm angry because we've done without for 20 years. And what do we get? A tiny home village that gets everything, just like the commercial. Free, free, free. We have to pay for everything we get. Even the rec center that was given back to the community, we have to pay for it. We don't get it for free. I heard that council here wants to throw another hundred and $50,000 at the CBC. What do we get? Nothing like usual. Thank you. Next up, Jennifer Wilson. Good evening. I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak here today. My name is Jennifer Wilson. I lead research at the Burn Center on Poverty and Homelessness, which is housed at the University of Denver. The Burn Center was hired in 2017 to conduct an evaluation of the beloved community village in its first year of operation. We're the ones who produce the report brief that you have on your desks, and the full report is available through the Barton Institute. The evaluation assessed villager outcomes and experiences, neighborhood perceptions and neighborhood crime. During my brief time with you, I would like to focus on our neighborhood findings. Our team deliberately chose to survey a random sample of 20 residential households within a half mile radius of the beloved community village. The significance of this is that according to fundamental research principles, by serving a random selection of people, the results can then be generalized to the population at large. So in this case, theoretically, findings among a random sample of neighbors can be generalized to the rest of the non surveyed residents of that neighborhood. Our research found that neighbors reported few, if any, challenges with beloved community village. When asked about the impact of the village in four distinct areas which were traffic flow, safety, noise and an overall sense of community, the vast majority of surveyed neighbors nearly 80 to 90% in each case reported that the presence of the village had either no impact or a positive impact on all four distinct areas. Reported perceptions of the village were largely neutral to positive as well. One neighbor said, I like it more than an empty lot across from the RTD having something there. Another observed, I haven't felt unsafe walking as a woman. I feel safer because there are people in it who want to improve themselves and do more. And yet another stated, they're good neighbors. They keep the weeds down. I see them coming in, going to work. Neutral perceptions included comments like, I've never heard anything. Even walking past, I never see anyone. Additionally, the burn center looked at eight categories of crime data from the Denver Police Department in the areas immediately surrounding beloved community village. Comparing the period from July to December 2017, which was the first six months of village operations to the same time period, one year prior visual inspection of map data illustrating the exact location type and frequency of reported offenses before and after construction of the village suggests that there were no increases in crime immediately surrounding the village. Rather, the number of reported offenses appears to decrease within a quarter mile of the village. Thus, we concluded and reported that there do not appear to be associate associations between increases in crime and the presence of the beloved community village. Together, the results of the random neighborhood sample as well as the local crime data demonstrate the beloved community village had either no impact or positive impact on the neighborhood. These results directly contradict the NIMBY sentiment that often precedes the development of residents for people experiencing homelessness in a given neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Jazz LaRue. Hello, everyone. So my name is Charles LaRue. I'm a representative from Globeville. First, Globeville cares and tonight I'm also representing You Can three Globeville. R.A. So the first question I really want to pose is why do you suppose that no R.A. has signed to this good neighbor agreement? There has to be a reason for that. If this beloved village was as you know, as amazing as it's painted, then, you know, we should be chomping at the bit to have this in our neighborhood. Unfortunately, as an R.A., we represent our community, and the people that we've talked to do not want this in Globeville. And that's why I'm here tonight. Jill Jennings showed, you know, beautiful pictures. I'm sure those were taken when the village first opened. And during our due diligence as an R.A., that's not what those look like right now. There's tiny homes with spray paint on the side of them. There's tiny homes with what looks to be boarded up windows with a sign on the window that says toxic, you know, outside storage that's overflowing. As a father and a resident of Globeville for 28 years. This is what I don't want my daughter to grow up seeing. I want my daughter to grow up seeing a park. What she sees now. I-70. I-25. The homeless coming up from the Platte River. Those are conversations we have to have with her on a daily basis. And, you know, our expectation of Denver is to bring beauty and to bring something more to Globeville. And unfortunately, this project isn't that. As an R.A., we also want to point out that there is no support network for people in transition in Globeville. We're you know, there's no there's no support, you know, that forces us residents of Globeville to take care of each other. And that's what we've been doing for 50 years, 50 plus years. You know, we talked about the meetings with the neighborhood. What has that gotten us? Why are we here tonight? If three meetings where we've said, no, we don't want this, we won't sign a neighborhood agreement. Why are we still here fighting this? You know, April 13th, we've been asking the city to help us clean our neighborhood for years. And now all of a sudden, they want to come. You know, Denver swoops in with the CBC to clean that specific area and that specific block. That's more of a slap in the face to the residents of Globeville. That day, you know, the people I represent, they asked me Jazz, why did they bring a model tiny home? Is this a done deal? Why would you bring that to that land and place that there? You know, to to the residents of Globeville that looked like, you know, saying, we're bringing this here no matter what you want. You know, and with this much pushback, you know, we've heard here tonight one of the first speakers and they've offered Denver. I'm sorry, but your time is up next to Gomez and McCaul. The next five. If you could come up with Dial Kelly, Vanilla, Cole, Chandler, Brendan, Brenda Carrasco, Tobin Houser and David O. Let's see if you could come on up. Go ahead. Hi, I'm Sue Gomez, and I live at 35. Excuse me, 3554 North Mary. And that's two blocks south of the tiny house village. And having lived live there for almost nine years, I've seen a lot of growth in that area and also the growth of the beloved community village. I've been involved at the village since the construction began. In various smaller ways, you know, helping out with food to feed the workers during construction. And then I was also on the advisory committee and try to attend the potlucks that are held once a month. And. My involvement with the homeless individuals began back in 1986. And since that time I've been involved in various programs that were outreach or sheltering homeless people, and that included almost seven and a half years at the Catholic Worker House where we all lived together. The homeless didn't have workers. The beloved community. Villagers have not caused the problem in our neighborhood. They've always been very open and friendly when the village moves. Three of them lived in our house for a few a few weeks during that move. If they stop by to visit, then we we welcome them to our home and they welcome us to their home. I believe that we as a community and the city need to do all we can to respond to the needs of our homeless brothers and sisters. We cannot exclude them from their basic rights of adequate food and adequate, safe housing. They are people just like everybody else. My own son was homeless in Oregon just last year. So I've experienced homelessness in various ways. And I just wanted to say in closing, thank you for your time and for your concern in this situation. Thank you. Next up, Kelly Bonilla. Hi, I'm Kelly Connellan, and I'm a ten year resident of Globeville. I would like just to see how many people currently live in Globeville in this room and everybody else all the way. Did you make sure to talk into the microphone to everybody? Yes. All the c of white faces that I that I see that want to replace the minority population that we have. I want to be clear. If this was an asset to a community, the village claims you would all be fighting over who gets to have it in your neighborhood. You wouldn't have had to pay Michael Sapp with our tax dollars to whip up support rather than gauge it. The city sat on this land for 19 years and as for as per the blueprint is supposed to have a pocket park or similar benefit for Globeville. I just got my tax assessment the third time in recent years that it's gone up in for this. Now we get a village of homeless people. Elvis is fond of saying that billions are coming our way and we are the G in s. We are not geese. We are not getting stuck show money. We don't see that no one has ever had an answer. Denver isn't seeing the bigger picture on homeless villages. Seattle's most well-known village is now closing due to a 62% rise in crime, assaults and property damage and theft. Believe has had only five graduates in two years, two evicted with a police escort. The rest call it home and plan to stay. We've never heard from any of the men that reside in the village. Only the same two women that are put in the front. Over and over again, one of the residents has been collecting cats, rats and snakes. How will she can? How is she going to transition into conventional housing? And Section eight is a six year wait. So how is somebody who is allowed to just collect pets? I'm going to move into regular housing. I don't understand how they transition. And I'd love to have an answer to that. A real one. How many meetings do we have to insist that something positive rather than more indigent residents come into the neighborhood? We don't have the resources. Please don't put a fifth transient place in our neighborhood. There is a lot of stress and contention in an already strapped neighborhood, and if 300 passes, it will be a tent city from the village to I-25. Perfect for developers to swoop in and buy up the properties that will be sold. There are already three on the market just this past week that have been listed to the other three. On my own home is located between one transient facility and one mental health clinic. I tried to meet with each council person. Paul Lopez. Refused several requests. To meet with us. I suppose you have checked out now that you're running for another position and aren't worried about my safety or property values. I'm sorry, but your time is up. Next up, culture. Good evening, counsel. I'm Cole Chandler with the Carter Village Collaborative, and I'm a resident of District Nine. It's with gratitude and optimism that I address address you all tonight. For years, our organization has worked to create and operate a tiny home village in partnership with people experiencing homelessness. And for years, we have requested that the city and county of Denver play a significant role as a partner in that effort. Over the last several months, the city has taken a courageous step in this direction, and we are grateful for these efforts. Our partnership with the city has deepened in recent months, and we are optimistic that these are the next steps in a long and successful partnership. Tonight, I would like to remind everyone that we are here because the beloved community village has been a success. If it hadn't been a success, we wouldn't be standing here tonight. In 18 months of operation, the village is after safety, stability, community and transformational housing. Two nights in unique people. Five of those have now graduated from the village and moved into permanent housing. The do you study that was cited earlier showed that 11 of the 12 residents were employed or enrolled in school and that the village was supported by its surrounding neighborhood. In spite of the success that we now enjoy. This hasn't the way it's this hasn't been the way it's always been. We should remember that this pilot project wasn't wildly popular in our current neighborhood at its outset. We had hard conversations and Five Points Cole and Curtis Park to get where we are right now, to have several neighbors from those neighborhoods standing in the room with us tonight. I also want to express my gratitude and optimism for the global community. We recognize that this process has been imperfect in every way and has ultimately, ultimately place to marginalized communities in conflict with one another. We lament this reality, and we lament our role in that. The housing and homelessness crisis is a city wide issue, and it affects every neighborhood. Globeville residents did not ask to shoulder the weight of this public conversation around tiny home villages and how they fit into our spectrum of affordable housing. But over the last several months, these neighbors sitting right here without choosing to do so, have become fully engaged in this broader public dialog in the midst of this imperfect process. We're grateful and optimistic that we have found a way to work together to create some real improvements to our model that will lead to positive outcomes for village residents and for Globeville, neighbors alike. These improvements are included in the Good Neighbor Agreement that was created through considerable neighborhood initiative and leadership, thanks to input from Globeville neighbors. We made several important efforts to improve the process, which includes a formalized screening and intake process, clarification around the purpose and intent of the village, including the improving our transition plans for village residents. We've sought to make attainable housing available to those with connections to the global community and will be doing outreach for future houses for those folks. We want to share the resources that we have with village residents, and we want to work to bring a better lighting and vegetation plan, including community gardens and pocket parks on the site, which I think you have in the site plan. So we're grateful. I'm sorry. About your time. Tonight. Next up, Brenda Carrasco. Okay. So I'm nervous. I want to start by talking about on October 24th, 2015 at Sustainability Park, we put up seven tiny homes then that the city came in and. Destroyed. That night. We did it on vacant land, trying to show the city a way to deal with homelessness. Cole just pointed out how he's built a strong relationship with you. And that's very important because I want to point out right now how the idea. That the city hosting a. Homeless encampment in a community that we have no say, what's happening to our community is just really startling. It's not moving the homeless out of the affluent, new downtown, you know, new Denver. People don't want to see that. And then shoving them into other areas, criminalizing homelessness, that's not the way that's going to solve the way out of this problem. And I'm not even going to pretend 20 homes is a way to solve this problem either. But our community, we've dealt with the brunt of all the displacement we're going through. We've dealt with the brunt of dealing with this city's development. And we're tired. We're tired of it. We don't want this here. We need something that lifts our community. We don't need a glorified. Homeless camp sponsored. By the city. In our community, we have homelessness at the Platte River. We have homelessness in our neighborhoods. We need something that lifts us. We've I'm glad Cole has worked with you. If any of you would have bothered to come out, you would have seen 150 others showing up at this center, these meetings right here, placate, because let's not pretend those of us without social capital, those of us working two and three jobs, can't get here either. I'm traumatized. To. What is going on in our communities. All this gentrification, all this displacement, the hierarchy of needs, we come last over and over as poor people in the poor neighborhoods keep coming last. We have no say. We have there is no accountability to us. We were not asked about what we wanted on that land. Even for 20 years, we've been trying to get something. Give us a story. Give us child care. Give us something that lifts us. But we don't need. What you're what you are literally sweeping away. I'm watching right now. All along the Jesus says and Samaritan, you all got taped up. So nobody can even sit against it right now. But you all want to sweep it into our neighborhoods. And somebody said, we're just stabilizing. That's wrong. We have had 50, 60 years of strong, stable home ownership in that area. Homes that our grandparents have bought, homes that we built, a community built, we built when we had no place at your table. We had to set our own table. And now you're coming in and trying to force things onto us that we. I'm sorry, but your time is up. And we don't. Want. Next up, Tobin Hauser. Hi. My name is Tobin Houser, and I've lived in Globeville for 14 years. My property is about a block from the beloved community village property. Um, before I started looking for my house in 2005, I'd never even heard of the Globeville neighborhood. And nowadays, it is my sincere hope that I will never need to live anywhere but the Globeville neighborhood. I've studied the history of the area and know the hardship that people from North Side neighborhoods have gone through again and again. I can't join in with the Globeville first organization because I don't believe that stopping all projects in the area is a useful strategy for the future. Plus the fact that it would cause if we if we said no to the beloved village and causes people to go homeless, and that's just unacceptable as far as I'm concerned. I just want to go forward. I've always been acutely aware of the homeless in the area. About four years ago I had to stop working because my arms worsened. And so from a life that I routinely lived to 100 miles, stretches in my vehicle each night at work in the last four years has come down to about a two block area around my house. That's my whole world now. And even in this reduced area, the number of homeless is is just so high. It's astonishing. People are living in so many buildings that were not meant to be lived in. I always cross my fingers and hope that we would make it through winters without anyone dying of exposure or burning up in a fire that they started to keep warm. I have often wished that the city would do better by its homeless. They've been pushing them off Cherry Creek and on to the Platte River so you can dump them in the north end of the city out of the view of the rich. But then I got word that their beloved community village is coming to Globeville. Now, I had a completely different response than everybody else's. I thought, Oh my God, this is great. This is finally a humane solution to this problem. And, you know, it's only it's only a dozen or so people, but it's a start. And it's such a better solution than the sweep offs that you guys do a couple of times a year to get everybody out of the way. And, you know, it's actually helping. It's got this now. It's got a record with the neighborhood that it's been in and it actually improved that neighborhood. I've heard people talk about a lot of things like no more homeless shelters. This is not a homeless shelter. These are the same people going into the same house. We'll sleep in the same bed every night, not a homeless shelter. I don't want to live next to sex offenders. I've got bad news for you guys. I've been living next to sex offender since I lived in Globeville. That will just happen. We just live next to sex. I'm sorry, but your time is up now. Next up, David Walensky, if you could please hold your applause so we can keep getting through people. David Walensky, I will call the next five up to the aisle Janice Edinger, John Zalewski, Mike Kelvin, Kelvin, Scott Kerr and Marilyn Milligan. If you can come up and line up, good. Okay, let's start. My name is David Slutsky, longtime resident global. But first, I want to thank Paul Lopez for all of his years of service. And you're going to go on to great things, Paul. You know, you're a hardworking, honest man. Thank you for your service. You know, I've been in Globeville all of my life. My family's been there since 1870, and we never got involved in politics, but we all, all worked hard. And I finally threw my hat in the ring to run for city council for District nine because I've had enough. All these residents have had enough. Albence has been in city council for seven, eight years and he didn't have diligence telling these tiny homes all of a sudden they're just here. And that's when I said, enough is enough. You know, this has got to stop and there's no way to stop in years. Now, I'm going to ask you guys, did you do. Your due diligence to check. Out this tiny village organization? Have you looked at their books? Is this an honest organization or is this a big money scam in Seattle? They're doing the same thing with tiny homes and they've got 400 people working to write grants, get donors, call Brad, go. He had 600 donors already. How many you got now? Call thousand if you could please, please comments towards us. It's a lot of money. And they got 11 homes. You know, there's a many different ways you can do this. This is just an. Apple. They don't even know if this is going to work. Back during the Depression, they had work farms. If they've got this kind of money, why don't they put up a work farm, you know, and and do things that worked back then? Would work now. And this is this has just been too hard on all of us. It's too stressful. And what I'm going to ask you is if you if you're going to vote yes. You know, you're doing the wrong thing. You know, I know you're going to do it right. But if you decide maybe you ought to stop and do your due diligence and postpone this vote till after the election, I won't do that. You know, I don't believe this is completely about the tiny homes. I think this is about the election also. And I think if anything, you should postpone the vote. Thank you very. Much. Thank you. Next up, Janice Ed. It's Janice, Eddie girl. I apologize. I've lived in Globeville for 35 years, so I'm a newcomer. I live across the street from Dave. My mom died in Dave's uncle's rent house. My daughter was born in Globeville and went to Garden Place. I have a few prepared remarks. I support the beloved community relocation to 44th and Pearl Street. I feel Globeville is a pleasant and convenient neighborhood for people of all backgrounds. We have historically offered small impact housing possibilities for workers, retirees, families, immigrants, anyone who has a need and an eye to see what a hidden gem our community truly is. I love Globeville and I love all my neighbors. So it saddens me that so much negativity has surrounded the issue of relocating the tiny home community here. Pride of ownership sometimes bumps up against distrust of change and distrust of city decision making where Globeville is concerned. I understand that. I love Globeville is dead ends. I love its gritty mix of warehouses and rosebushes. For me, I much prefer dozens if that's what it comes to of tiny homes to high rise infill, which I can see across the tracks. I foresee these proposed residents as impacting us not only positively but minimally in the area of traffic, environmental footprint and gentrification. I would welcome the new tiny home community members as vibrant and worthy Globeville neighbors. But I'm glad that we're all here, and I'm glad that we each have a voice and none of us speaks for everyone . Thank you. Thank you. Next up, John Zaleski. Yeah. I'm Joe MALESKY. I'm a member of a family that's been in Globeville since the late 1800s. And that I've seen a lot coming in there, and I've seen a lot that the city has not done for us. And then they come and try to drop this in on us. They're unexpectedly and we're they're mad and they should be at this. We're trying to better ourselves. And then the city comes in and said, Here, you got that? This is not a global problem. This is a Denver problem. It should be shared with Denver. All communities split it up, put it in, all communities, give it to Cherry Creek Highlands, give it to everybody, split them up and you share it with this. Don't just dump it in one neighborhood. And that and one of the deals is and just recently I had to call the police department there, and that was on March 23rd about a car coming to tear down a barricade in front of my house, which is a dead end street. They call the police. They came, we put a file in there and the individual left their license plate in the barricade and all that we thought was great. I called 311 on night on the 27. They gave me a reference number and I didn't see any work done. I called again on 410 a reference number, still nothing as of 530 the night when I left that barricade still down. And that's a safety factor. City is ignoring us on the safety issues. And when it comes to death, they want to say, oh, here you take the small village there and we're going to sneak it in on you. That's not right. I think this council needs to talk to each other and decide and get a better plan and share with the city. Not just Globeville. We know them. Yeah. These individuals need help. Everybody needs help in one way or another. But you just don't dump Intel on a community that's been struggling and not getting any support from the city. And any time I call 311 during the summer to get some weeds cut on city property, it takes a month to get it there. And the. Multiple calls. The city has ignored Globeville in that aspect. But when it comes to these individuals coming to put tiny homes in. Oh, sure. Come on in and we'll sneak in. That's not right. That's what I want you all to think about it and consider that this needs more think and more places to find a better place. Situations just don't open on Globeville. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next up, Mike Kelton. Good evening. I'm Mike Yeltsin. So I'm a local high school Spanish teacher. That's a little different than my usual audience, so bear with me. So about a year over a year ago, when we chose to buy our home in Globeville and become local residents, I understood the neighborhood as a neglected, polluted, divided, literally divided with highways and a neighborhood that is now experiencing displacement. And I really wanted to understand that deeply and be a part of the solution. Apparently, we still remain divided in this issue. As a teacher, I come from a place of listening and in trying to have some empathy. So one of the first things I did as I became active in the conversation was I toured the village and I listened. I listened to the stories of a few of the people there and just humans that were fearful of losing something that they've gained. I've also done a fair share of listening to opposing voices who've expressed anger and distrust, rightfully so, because of the history of the neighborhood and also fear. But as you know, I talk to my students about listening to facts. We heard some of the facts before, so I won't repeat them. But there has been success here and there has been no major increase in crime nationally. With our social conversation, my heart kind of hurts with the conversation about who should be prioritized, who deserves it first, who comes first, who needs to be ranked. I fear this is fed by our national political climate, and I really feel like we should resist directing our anger in the wrong direction. I legitimized the anger in the in the neighborhood. I legitimizing it and I want to try to understand it. But for me, it's a false dichotomy to suggest that if we're compassionate and we welcome and we extend that it comes at the detriment of a neglected neighborhood, we must we should reject the binary choice of us versus them and endeavor not only to refuse and to refuse to accept the status quo. For Globeville, demand relief from displacement and new services, the parks and stores and the groceries that everybody's asked for, but also dare to listen and extend empathy and compassion to a worthy cause and a group of worthy individuals. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Scott Kerr. Hi. My name is Scott Kurt. I'm the director of the Employment and Opportunity Center at Baird Enterprises. And Baird has been doing economic development in the Denver metro area for over 50 years. And we've been involved with the tiny home village since its inception a number of years ago. We provide a number of services out at the village. We do benefit navigation. We help get folks hooked up to services like food assistance or Social Security, disability insurance and support, these sorts of things. We also do vocational development, we do job training, and we try to do we try to hire as many folks at the village as he can. And additionally, we offer a laundry truck services. We go there once a week and do folks laundry, including our neighbors in the community when we're out there. And we also service the shower shower room. I just give you this a context to say that I've been in and out of this village pretty regularly over the last two or three years, and I can say there are a lot easier ways to be homeless in Denver. We heard a lot about folks living along the river near Globeville. My experience with the residents at the tiny home village is folks are very motivated to make a difference in their lives and make a difference and in their community, as evidenced by the outcomes that Cole shared earlier. They're also tremendously accountable. These are folks who are really committed to making their neighborhood a better place. They're going to get to know their neighbors, and hopefully with the help of Bayard and others, they're going to work in their community. There's a lot of misconceptions about homelessness, and we heard a lot of them today about criminal histories and and sexual offenders and drug use, you know, about these are these are coworkers. These are low income workers that are low income students who have raised their hand and say, enough, I want to make things better in my life . And that's what the tiny home village is for and that's why they are enterprises is going to be there to support them. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next up, Marilyn Milligan and asks the next five to step up into the aisle here. Tom lures us, says our Olivia Olivas. Laura Rosberg, Chairman Sekou and John Hayden. Go ahead. Hi, my name is Brandon. Mulligan and I. Am a senior at Dance School High School. And one of my passions is actually architecture. I took an internship at architecture firm last year, but today and currently this year I am creating a project for the CVC program. I currently see the homelessness in my community. I live in the core community and I'm current. I constantly see the homeless population in Denver increase, and since call is right next to the Arena District, I constantly come into contact with the beloved community village and that is how I heard of the BBC. And right now, currently I am working on a. Project. Where I would design a more useful and. More motivating design for the. Tiny homes. I see that currently right now, the 11 formerly homeless individuals for the past two years have had at home and have not caused any trouble here. And I also see that in a flourishing area like the Reno district, they have only positive impacts onto the community. And as a student, I think the village is important because it become a bright place for achievement. I have seen villagers feel happier because of the village through my visitations with my mentor, Kyle Chandler. And for anyone that has fallen into homelessness, it is the best opportunity to have housing and create new beginnings for the bright future . This can also spark a great chain of tiny homes in our cities. Here in Denver. And it could also help across the nation. And I believe that is it is important for the city, the city council to vote yes. Keeping the tiny home village up and running the villages has brought more positivity into our community. And if we can continue this, we can help more homeless get off the streets and into a real home. To me, the village is our best solution. Thank you. Next up, Tom Lewis. My name is Tom Luers. I'm the executive director of Saint Francis Center. And over the past 28 years, I've gotten to know thousands of people who have experienced homelessness but have not lived their whole life as people who are homeless. And it's pretty tough living a label. But if somebody has been in a home for a year, I would not refer to them as homeless anymore. And that's what the people who are in the tiny home village are showing us or should be showing us that they're not homeless people anymore. There's no reason to be afraid of them anymore because they are different. They are different people now and fear to have that rule. Our lives is is tough. And we see that a lot in many people's decision making. But I would say that the people that are living in the tiny homes have proved to us, if they needed to, that they can be successful citizens of this community if given a chance. And probably most of us have looked for that opportunity in our lives to have a chance to succeed. None of us would be here today if the people who were looking at us decided that we weren't worthy, that we weren't acceptable, that there was something wrong with us. And I say what we're saying to the people of the tiny home villages, please, is that you are acceptable in our community. Thank you. Next up, Cesar Olivas. Main line. All right. Laura Rosberg. Good evening. I stand before you tonight in many of my roles as deputy director of the Delores Project, as a clergy woman in the United Methodist Church and as a citizen of Denver in favor of this resolution. I stand before you as the deputy director at the Dolores Project. We just last month opened up 35 units of permanent supportive housing with the help of this council. I sat there on the day our waitlist opened and saw the line down the block. We had 35 apartments that took years to make happen. Two years of writing service plans, designing. Them, getting approval for low income housing tax credits, a loan from the Department of Housing. And vouchers from the Denver Housing Authority. Then we watched it be built week by week digging dirt. Pouring concrete, putting up framing. It took millions of dollars to make that happen. And what a gorgeous. Building it is. However, in the span of 5 minutes, those apartments were all rented. With a wait list of over 100 people. Just hoping to get an apartment. I know how much time it takes to build housing, and that's why I'm here. We in Denver need all the housing we can get in all the forms it can be. I am very proud to have been a part of building the Dolores Apartments at Arroyo Village. But I also know that what we built isn't the right fit for everyone. And that's why Beloved Village is so crucial. It offers the. Housing that meets the needs of other individuals. Together in partnership, we can create solutions. I also stand before. You as a pastor. As someone who has a call to ensure that all of God's children have suitable housing. That meets their needs and offers them dignity. As seen in the story of the Good Samaritan, a stranger cares for another, ensuring they are clothed, fed and housed. It is one of the basic needs of all humanity. And as a clergy person, it is my call to ensure that people have access to meet their needs. We see that beautiful community and plan here. People coming together to find a dynamic. Solution to housing in our community. I also stand before you as a citizen of Denver. It is a responsibility of me as a woman who has privilege and owns a house in this town to ensure that all citizens of our city can meet their needs so that all can thrive. We know that the solution to homelessness. Is simple suitable. Housing that meets the needs of the. Diversity of people in our city. This housing must be built in every single one of our neighborhoods. I am thankful to the village for their creativity in seeking to meet their needs. And believe that we should all come together to support this incredible effort in our city to find solutions. To the affordable housing crisis in Denver. Thank you. Thank you very much. We are at the hour mark on our courtesy public hearing and we still do have about ten people in the queue. So what I'd like to do is just give you one minute. If you're so mind, I apologize that we don't have time to keep going, but just to come up, introduce yourself state whether you are in opposition or support so that we know who is here and that can councilmembers can direct their questions to anybody who didn't get through the line in the hour. So if you can do that in a minute, we'll change the timer for that. That would be appreciated. Next up is Chairman CQ John Davis. He's after so. Many. Oh. Man. Good job. This is exactly what I was waiting for. One minute. Here we go. I heard through. And I heard Joe Fuller. Now what we've got to do here is we got to blend both sides. So. Because no matter what. We cannot afford to have residents. Taxpayers. And people trying to come up. Fighting each other. So that I can get through whatever it is my agenda is because I'm not that important as a man. I'm not. This is all about you. Now you want to stay in the role. So we've got to come together in accommodation because it takes teamwork to make this dream work so we can stop all of this bullshit now and come together. Mr. Speaker, your time is over. That makes sense. Could you state your name for the record, please? Could you state your name for the record, please? Oh. My name is the Boogie Man. One minute. Next up, John Haden. Okay. Hi. My name is John Haden. I live at 2014 Champs Street in the Five Points neighborhood where we've had the current village for the last three years. And I would like to say that they have been fantastic neighbors, and I hope that you will support this resolution. I think that is important to understand that every neighborhood should have a tiny home village, that the tiny home village is a benefit, not a detriment to the communities. People do best when they live in community, not in warehouses and not in tents, on sidewalk. So please give these people community, give them homes in your communities. It is unfortunate that this has come the way it has, but I ask you each to vote yes. And when you vote yes, say that you will also support community support tiny home villages in your own districts. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Seth Sayegh. What society? Gwadar, imam. After that will be Brooke Klein, Julie Pitino, Jeff Baker, if you want to be ready. Good evening. My name is Cecil Rama and thank you for the opportunity to speak. I'm a housing organizer with 9 to 5 Colorado. 95 is a grassroots women's organization. We work on. Economic justice policies. Over the past four or five years, we've been working on housing issues as our members have been facing eviction and displacement. I'm here in support of the resolution and support of the beloved community village and ask that you please do the right thing tonight. We believe housing is a human right, not a commodity to be exploited for profit. We believe that communities most directly impacted should be at the forefront. And we also know that communities know the best solutions that work for them. Denver and Colorado is facing a housing crisis. And as we worked at the state legislation to address what we can on our side, I asked that city does the city does the right thing tonight. You cannot continue to just fix the housing crisis by giving developers tax breaks and incentives. Please do the right thing. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, Brookline Mayor Brooke. Klein. All right, Julie Pitino. Good evening, counsel. My name is Julie Patino and I work at the Denver Foundation. I'm the director of Basic Human Needs. I'm here tonight in support of this resolution. The Denver Foundation for many, many years has funded organizations in Globeville that are led by people of color. At the same time, we have also provided funding to the village community. The funding we have provided has been based on what Bayard described, as supportive services. I will note that these are supportive services that after due diligence by the village of looking at better models around the country, including Seattle, recognizing that Seattle had some issues and wanting to fill the gaps in providing services to the residents. I have experienced these residents as nothing but thoughtful, hardworking. Circumspect. Individuals who want to be members of community. The reason that I am here tonight in support of them is because they don't have a neighborhood to show up and support them. They don't have. A place to call home that's permanent. They don't have a neighborhood where they encounter people. Thank you. Bus stop, etc.. Thank you. Next up, Jeff Baker. And then we'll end with Jerry Burton, Jesse Pearson, Mark Marshall, Jeff Burton. Or Jeff Baker. I'm sorry. Jeff Baker. No. Jerry Burton. I have 5 minutes. Hey, a thank you. My name is Jerry Brennan with the Denver Broncos. Allow. I'm with you guys. Veteran Marine. I understand your plight. I do the same way the councilman and the council people have done to us in the homeless community, in the poor people community. Y'all have not done your job. You have not fulfill your job. You are you are taking people and you messing with their lives. You got people fighting against the police that the unhoused. Then you got the house. People fighting against the police. Because you are dividing us. You are taking each one of us and you take a city. Now you take a community and divide it with the poor. Among the poor. Do you have to stop y'all? Y'all have to account for this because this is not right what you are doing. And then on top of that, you're pushing people around in the middle of the night. We call a lady, a resident, ask for something very simple. Something we all do are porta potty. Porta potty for the homeless. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next up. Y'all. Next up, Jesse Paris goal. Jesse Parrish represented for Denver Homicide Lord Blessed Arsenal Moment for Self-defense, a positive action commitment for change. And I'm on top of the battle for at large. We are definitely in approval of this. We need more tiny home buildings, more tiny home structures, more attainable means of housing in the city. I do not like the way that Globeville has been treated, though we've experienced the same thing in Five Points, Col, Whittier, etc.. You are not exempt. You are not the exception. We've all been dealing with this are people of color in this town. We've been gentrified, displaced and pushed out of our neighborhoods. This is exactly why we need a new council. Sweep the council to sweep the homeless every night. Thank you. Next up, Marc Marshall right here. I got it. You got to vote. Good evening. My name is Mark Marshall with the Urban Land Conservancy. ULC has been involved with the Tiny Homes Village since the inception two years ago. We've hosted the tiny home village at our property at 38th and Blake and we are actually doing a groundbreaking now for 66 units of affordable, permanently affordable housing at that site. We are in strong support of this measure and stand by the city. And as well, we've partnered with the city on many occasions and asked that the city stand with us on this one as well. We've seen the positive results of housing, the group that is a beloved community, and there have been nothing but positive responses from the neighborhood and the whole neighborhood. We expect that to continue and we look forward to your continued support. So thank you. Thank you very much. That concludes our speakers are questions from members of Council Councilman Brooks. Yeah, thank you, Mr.. Mr. President, can I, can I get Cole and then I'll ask Jill a question and then I'll ask anybody. Do we have anybody from real estate? Wow. Oh, okay. No, no, no. The city agency. Real estate like I do. Real estate. No. No, that's. Lisa Lumley was supposed to be here tonight, and she unfortunately came down with an illness and was not able to be here. But Brad, back from the state attorney's office, worked on the license agreement with them. If that is helpful. For your great thanks, we'll start with call and just a quick shout out to Marilyn. Thank you for being here. You're the only high school student here repping. Good job, Colt. Real quick, can you just talk about the new elements and be very descriptive in specific about the new elements of this good neighbor agreement that. You've not put in these didn't have for the coal agreement. So thank you for the question. We actually didn't even have a good neighbor agreement with coal rhino Curtis Park five points. Neighborhood. We didn't get to that point. What we've done over the last several months is actually produce an extremely detailed good neighbor agreement, much more so than many permanent supportive housing projects would have produced for a project like this. What I was trying to point out in a rush earlier was that first and foremost, we've improved our screening and intake process. And so if you do have the good neighbor agreement in front of you, you can see from the from item one, the very first thing we're talking about, how we're going to do screening at the village. One of the very first things we heard from residents of the neighborhood was that there's, you know, mothers saying we don't want sex offenders coming into our neighborhood. Now, we had a little bit of trouble with that from a philosophical standpoint with Housing First, but we actually took that question to the village residents and we said, so they don't want sex offenders living in the village. What do you think about that? And village residents said, well, we don't want to live with sex offenders either. So that was a very quick and easy thing for us to put into that cold call. I'm going to stop you right there and go from a legal perspective or fair housing. Question with Beck. BECK Can you answer that from a fair housing perspective on sex offenders? There's a microphone for you over there. You don't have to. Brad Beck from the city attorney's office. Yeah. From a legal perspective. Can we do that? Around sexual offenders? We have. There are certain protections around fair housing. I just want to make sure that. The extent that they don't conflict with the Fair Housing Act. Then it's permissible. But that's that's how we have framed it with. With the license agreement. Okay. And so there's no we feel good about that. To the extent that they don't. Conflict. Okay. And what extent would they conflict? I'm I'm not prepared to answer that question. I'm happy to investigate it for you. Okay. That would be great if you would. All right. Cool. Can you there are a couple more items. Can you share what those items were that you didn't have a good neighbor agreement before, but what are some of the items that you added? So there's been one of the things I was trying to say was that this has improved the village, this process has improved the village. The reality is that residents of the Globeville neighborhood were saying, what are your transition plans like? And so we went back and clarified that and the Good Neighbor Agreement as well. And so that's taken up an item. Let's see here. It's taken up an item, but we've made a continue to make a strong commitment to ensuring transition plans. And this is an area that we want stronger partnership as well to help see the outcomes that we desire for village residents. But really clearly clarifying that the intent and purpose of this village is provide stability and community so that people can restore their lives, have that stability and then move on in terms of their income and employment into permanent housing. That's the ultimate goal. So that's one next item. You want more? No, that's good. I think you've covered. Let me ask you one last question. Did you go door to door in this neighborhood? We went door to door for a month on a weekly basis with Tanya Sally, who's my co-director, who didn't get the opportunity to speak earlier. Michael Sapp from the city's office, and Evangelina Flores, a mom from Garden Place Academy that we hired as a bilingual interpreter. Tanya speaks Spanish, as does Evangelina. We went door to door and we went primarily to provide information to residents to say, Hey, have you heard about this? What have you been hearing about it? And to explain to them that this is a transformational housing community where people have the opportunity to have safety, stability and healing. And how many how many people said, yeah, I'm in favor? Or so the count that we received was over 100 supportive signatures from the neighbors that we spoke with. Okay. Thank you. I'm actually going to call up Evan Dreier real quick from the mayor's office. Evan, this has come up several times, and I just want to have a conversation about how do we get here? Obviously, you know. We had a deal worked out. It seems like in the Rhino neighborhood, it seems like the analysis of that property should have been done. Much sooner. But we got a late analysis that scrambled, which messed up the process, got us in Globeville. Speak to that. Councilman Evan Dreyer, mayor's office. You're exactly right. The the beloved community on its current site had planned to relocate to a site on the taxi property. They submitted their permits when the review by public works came back. Public work said we can't approve this because of flood concerns. So that and that was late last year. And that set off a little bit of a scramble. Tell me tell me about that time that when they said they wanted to move until it went through the city process to public works, saying that they couldn't approve it. I don't know exactly what submitted their permits, but it was probably early ish in 2018. So I think it was April of last year that we in community planning and development started having conversations with Carter Village Collaborative on some possible sites for the third site. And I believe they we notified various agencies of the intention to select the taxi site. I want to say it was July and permits came in August or September. And then again, the public works decision came in October of last year. So they actually had permits to move. They had submitted for permits. They didn't have them yet. Okay. Okay. Okay. And and can we just talk about that analysis? Because that is why we're here today. I mean, what happened? Where do we go wrong on the city side and the public work side. Sorry, I'll say up here. Jill Jennings, go back again. Community planning and development. So, you know, this this was a pilot project, temporary, that we were looking at and we had done some analysis in terms of allowed land use is, you know, where could this go? It's not mapped as a floodplain. We had had some conversations with certain public works staff. Unfortunately, it was not the right public work staff. So certainly I think moving forward lesson learns that we will any future sites put them through our site development plan process which goes out to more people and more agencies. But that is unfortunately where the disconnect happened is that a study had been started in Globeville that identified the flooding concerns at the site, but it wasn't a mapped floodplain, so we were not aware of that fact. Okay. Thank you for the question. Thank you, Councilman Brooks. Councilman Lopez. If you could stay up there on the gentleman. So just a few questions. And I think, you know, I think Councilman Brooks asked, too, but I just wanted to kind of get the timeline straight. When was the site officially a site, a potential site? And were there other sites in the city that were also candidates for tiny homes? So if you're referencing the Pearl Street site. So that was something again, the public works decision was given in October. We within the city again came to the table to try to find other opportunities and other sites. I believe the Pearl Street site was identified sometime in November, but there were some environmental concerns related to that property and some further analysis and testing that needed to be done before we could determine whether it was a viable option or not. And then at that point, we also brought forward a couple of other city owned properties along Colfax that the DITO is currently working on redeveloping to provide affordable housing as well. What are those sites on Colfax? I mean, you know, you may not want to disclose, but I'm just trying to get an idea of where else in the city, because that's what we've been hearing. Why? Just this neighborhood. Sorry. Bear with me. I don't have the addresses anymore, but it's 7900 East Colfax, so it's further on East Colfax and then 83 something East Colfax. Okay. So I wanted to understand that park neighborhood and the Good Neighbor Agreement. When were folks in Globeville approached with that first to discuss. So we started conversations, some initial one on one outreach about the village and the Pearl Street site in January. The Good Neighbor Agreement, I don't think really came up until our first community meeting, which happened on February 7th. And so it's at that point and Cole could speak further about that, that there was starting to be terms put in place around what a good neighbor agreement might look like. And I did want to ask the question. I appreciate that, Joe Cole. Can you can you answer that question? So what? So what I want to what I want to figure out is one is this the only site know based on what the needs are? Right. Why would it be the only site if there if it is the only site. To talk to me about a little bit more about the process with the good neighbor agreement who was at the table and who wasn't. Yeah. And then what are the things that have been negotiated? What haven't. Totally. So the the city showed us two sites, 4400 Pearl and 7900 East Colfax. The village residents wanted. To sign me up. 100 Colfax. Where is that? It's basically like Colfax and or Quebec City or something like that. So nearly, nearly Aurora, it's very far away from our current site. And that was really the first and foremost the largest thing for village residents. Village residents have become at home and the site that they are at at 38th. And Blake, this site that we're looking at is literally one half mile down the exact same street. It's half a mile down Washington Street. And for them, that feels like it's close to home. Moving all the way across town would be displacing people. There was also the situation of the timeline, and the 7900 East Colfax site already has an RFP out for affordable housing development. So the timeline on that site was very short. This site would give us a longer term option. At first that was going to be four years. We lowered that to three years by listening to the community. In terms of the Good Neighbor Agreement, the first items for the Good Neighbor Agreement came directly from our notes from the first community meeting on February 7th. Steve now you're with community planning and development. Took notes at that meeting. We went back through those notes and said, okay, what are we hearing from the neighborhood and let's put those items out. The first item is for good neighbor agreement. It was very rough at that point. We sent it off to Globeville cares and Globeville cares really took leadership holding down a table at point of area and having conversations with people in the community. The next iteration of that document was a document that just incorporated every single comment that was received on the comments that we had . We went back that second community meeting, worked with that, brought it back to a third community meeting where we engaged about it. And since then we've worked individually with RINO's on that. So it's been developed very much in partnership and seriously. It's been led by neighbors who took that and said they wanted to at least ensure there was going to be a strong dialog. And so I can't take credit for that at all. Okay. Let me ask somebody from what I think you call it la la, la. So let me. Gentlemen, do you want to come to the microphone, please? I actually wanted to. Somebody from Globeville, I can speak to the organization. I was going to ask Tony, but if you want to. One of you. Yeah. Okay, I'll take it. So can the same kind of questions from when we all approached with the Good Neighbor Agreement. And why isn't it signed? Yeah. So we were first approached with a good neighbor agreement at the first community meeting. However, it was again, this is the whole imperfect process that was discussed. So it wasn't it? So basically the Good Neighbor Agreement was basically given to us almost as a contract, a sign that this is going in. And that's when we pushed back and said, We're not signing this at this moment. We don't want to work on this at this moment. And that that sentiment was echoed at all three meetings. It was it felt like, you know, the neighborhood is being held hostage, that, you know, in this neighborhood agreement, there was concessions that were , you know, you know, hey, this is coming in, so we'll give you this. And that's not something that we were open to at the time. Is there anything you wanted to add? No, I was just going to add and we had a second meeting at Learning Hall, and that's where they tried to separate the community and and discuss a good neighbor agreement and the concessions, saying, if you guys agree to the good name agreement, then we'll do this for your community. And which at that time, global cares was there, global affairs was there, and none of them agreed to the Good Neighbor Agreement. Or the bribe of concessions. So do you. If I may, Mr. President, just I'm trying to get at this because we. Sun Valley is very similar, but the good neighbor agreement came from the community and we were in this process here. So between the city and the community discussed at the city, I'm sorry, but the provider in the community discussed the labor agreement now, Bill, with hesitation. But let me ask you something. At what point do you see, if ever or and I say if ever, because I want to give you the benefit of the doubt. What would it take for the good neighbor agreement to be signed if it was to be signed? Is that a complete no or is a door open? And what are those things that that that would take it would take you to sign it. As of right now, no, we're not interested in good neighbor agreement right now. Okay? We have other things that we're trying to take care of in Globeville. And like we said earlier, we have a whole list of other things that that would benefit the community, that would help our community, and that would slow the process of gentrification in our neighborhood. Okay. Thank you. Paul, if I could just jump in there with that. And that has the the hesitation to sign a good neighbor agreement. It's both. You know, the fact that we feel that, you know, that the concessions that were being held over our head, but also we feel that Globeville right now doesn't have the resources to be a good neighbor. In terms of, you know, if, you know, we have, you know, these people who are truly in transition, you know, we don't have the resources for people in transition because the residents that are currently in transition are failing in Globeville. So that's the other hesitation to sign the Good Neighbor Agreement is that Globeville itself, as you know, lovely as our community is, and as much as we take care of our residents, as much as best we can, we feel we don't have the resources to be good neighbors. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Jim. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Lopez. Councilman Ortega. Thank you. Sorry if one of the council members calls on you, then you can address Councilman Lopez. That was your line of questioning. Sure. Ma'am, we're actually. Come up. Come on. My name is Sister on a coop. I'm on the CBC board. And I just want to say to you, Councilman Lopez, that at the second neighborhood meeting where the neighborhood neighborhood agreement was brought to be discussed, the neighborhood refused. They said, we do not want to discuss this. We only want to vote on whether or not we oppose the village. So that's my personal experience of the second neighborhood meeting related to the neighborhood agreement. Thank you. And I think Councilwoman Ortega was there as well. Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Thank you. I have a few questions. So let me first start with I want to go to the heart of the Good Neighbor Agreement, and I want to ask the city attorney a question. So if we have a good neighbor agreement that is not signed, how what is the probability that it is actually enforceable? The Good Neighbor Agreement is. Between the community. And the neighborhood agreements. The city is not a signatory to it. I understand that. I'm not sure I understand your question then. Well, I understand the city has no enforcement role, but there are some things that the city helped insert into the good neighbor agreement, or vice versa. There were some things that were part of the good neighbor agreement that ended up in the in the lease. Yes. We took the portions of the good neighborhood agreement that we felt as the landlord of the. Property we could enforce. Okay. But I guess. I. Maybe I'm asking you this from a legal perspective and you're probably not going to opine on this, but if there is no second party to sign an agreement, how do you how do you justify that? You have, I think, a legitimate agreement. If you don't have two parties to an agreement, you by definition don't have an agreement. Okay. Well, all right. So let me let me just move on with my next set of questions. And I wanted to get to if you could stay there, have another question for you. This this is specific to the lease, and this is on page two. And you were asked a question about this earlier. It's under section four and it's the background checks. So you heard some folks make reference to concern that there are kids that live across the street and the neighbors wanted to make sure that there were some kind of background checks. Assuming this moves forward, what does to the extent permitted by law mean? It means to the extent permitted by law, they can perform these background checks. Okay. But are they able to perform the background checks? Aren't those typically done by law enforcement? The actual the background checks. I'm unfamiliar with the exact process. Most organizations contract with law enforcement to do the background checks. That would be a question for. Someone from. County councilwoman or I might be able to help out here. You want me to try to take a stab at this? All right. So to the to the earlier question asked by Councilman Brooks, the city is very limited in how it can regulate sex offenders. There was a case in the city of Inglewood that was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, saying that the city couldn't essentially zone out sex offenders in its community. But there is not the same limitation on a private party that decides that it's going to run background checks for someone who's going to reside in a private residence. I would assume that the to it to the extent permitted by law. My interpretation of that is there are a lot of privacy protections associated with what sort of information can be, you know, culled on individuals. And so I think that that's just saying, you know, law enforcement may be able to do a deeper dove into certain data, but to check on, you know, sex offender status is is not uncommon in private property owners or in situations like this to make sure that there's not dangerous individuals that they're leasing to or allowing in the present private residences. So, Sokol, can you come forward and just explain what that process would entail in terms of how you all would do the screening? Do you contract with law enforcement to do that? What is that process? So to our knowledge and what we've looked into thus far through the Bureau of Investigation website, we can verify potential of a potential villager as a registered sex offender or not. And we'll also show whether this person is a sexually violent predator or whether they have failure to register or and if they have any felony charges. And so we've said that we will bar sex offenders from living in the village, that if anyone has felony charges, we will look into that further and we will devise safety plans around that accordingly. And so that's our expectation for the way we will conduct that process. And we will be doing that screening on everybody that's currently living in the village. And anyone that would be coming into the village as well. Knows that CBI record a matter of public information. Or is that. Yes, that's correct. Okay. All right. So call since I have you up here, let me ask a question about the previous site that you all looked at in Globeville off of 45th Avenue. What what happened there? Why did that site not work out? So we actually started work after the women's village was denied by the Landmark Preservation District in July, which was spoken of earlier. We went on a search for a new site for that village and a private site was offered to us at 45th and Broadway. And so we that was actually how we first engaged with Ms.. Flores from Garden Place Academy. We hired her to help us with door to door outreach. We did extensive door to door outreach at that time to hundreds of homes in the neighborhood providing information. And we during that time, knocked on the door of the Globeville Care's president. And we met with Bernadette, and we met with Globeville Care's leadership. And then together we co convened a community meeting in December. At the community meeting, there were approximately 20 neighbors that turned out, and we had a pretty intense discussion at that meeting about the concept. There was no resolution at the end of that meeting. This was the first time that that landowner had met anyone in the neighborhood. And so she came to that meeting and introduced herself. And there were a lot of questions about why she was offering that land to us and who she was and these kinds of things. At the end of the meeting, John's been a long time resident of Globeville, stood up and said, I think we need to take a break on this conversation. Let's slow things down. Let's have more conversation. During the midst of that time. Our site at the taxi was falling through and we were totally scrambling, doing everything we could to keep 12 people in housing. And so we had to say, we're taking a step back from this. We're taking a step back from this project. And at that time, we began to prioritize this site at 4400 Pearl for the beloved community village. So how did the decision come about that as opposed to looking at 11 tiny homes that it jumped to 21? Where did that come up in the process? Was that at the original site. Our. Plans, Globeville, or was that when it came to this site on. 4500 Broadway was going to be a. Homes for women. There was a copy and paste of the St Andrew's project that we had tried to permit at 44. Well, sorry. So at taxi we had planned to go the village. So that was already in our conversation and we were planning to grow the village, add more homes, improve upon this model, get more people in housing that fell through. And we didn't want to give up on that idea. So we prioritized sites that were around this 20,000 square foot size so that we could have around 20 units. That also gives us a better economy of scale in terms of full time employees from the service provider to help deliver the outcomes that we want to see. So that was how 20 kind of became the number that we were looking for when we were prioritizing sites. Okay. So let me just follow up with a couple of additional questions. Somebody raised the question about porta potties. Will they be are they anticipated to be on the site or on the street? Somebody raised a question about. Sure. Potentially having them face their, you know, their their house. Right. So our we are proposing to move the existing village as it is with 11 homes and two porta potties. We will then be submitting permits to get rid of porta potties altogether, to tap into water and sewer, to have a new community building that will be built by Whiting Turner, our contractor. In addition to these eight new homes that we want to build. That being said, we will have porta potties for a couple of months and our initial site plan, we showed those abutting Pearl Street after dialog with the neighbors, we quickly moved those to the back. So the current site plan that we've submitted, the porta potties are at the rear of the site, not even visible along the street. They'll be blocked by the houses. Okay. Thank you for addressing that. I have some other questions. We may have other members of council, if you want to put me in the queue to come back. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega, Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. Cole. Thank you, Carl. So the topic was brought up as to the your organization's finances. Would you talk about that as you feel comfortable? So we do not have audited financials. We're a brand new nonprofit. That's something that we're working on producing. We don't have a lot of money. I mean, we bootstrapped it to build the tiny home village as it was. So we raised $140,000 from 400 individual donors to build the build the first village, with support from several foundations that are represented in the room today. And we created some very tiny support to provide beds, resources, and some small support to provide a half time salary for me. We have grown the organization a bit over the last couple of years. We currently have about two and a half FTE on staff for the Colorado Village Collaborative. But I mean, we're not we're not raking it in here. This has been an effort that's mission driven, and we're doing everything we can to gather support to make this successful. Sure. And I believe I recall from a recent conversation when you built the original village, you had projected the homes would cost about 7000 a piece and they were ended up more in the 10 to 15 range. Correct. Correct. We'd never built a tiny home village and we had no idea how much it would actually cost. And it also depends on what was required from the permitting department. So where we ended up with our homes was really about 11, $12,000 in material costs. We value them around $15,000 per unit based upon donated labor and things like that. Okay. Now, there was a missed, I believe it was. Mr. LaRue talked about concerns with the maintenance of the buildings in the village. Yeah. You sound like graffiti and maybe busted windows. Can you talk about are there requirements? Right. Do you have on site maintenance? We do have two folks that work on maintenance with the village. And then the village, you know, has weekly chores and responsibilities and things like that. There is one house that does have graffiti on it right now, and that's something that we're working on fixing. That wasn't done by a village resident. That was done by somebody coming into the site. And so we're working on that. Another thing that Mr. LaRue addressed was that this house has the word toxic written on it. That is because that person, that woman really enjoys Halloween. And she decorated her house in October for Halloween. And she's, you know, that annoying neighbor that's down the street that still has their Halloween decorations up. The other thing that the house says above the door and word is the word sanctuary, because that's the way that woman has experienced this house in the time that she's lived there as a sanctuary space for her. So, you know, not everybody keeps their porches as clean as we would like. That's something that we work on as the provider. That's something that we work with the village to do on a daily basis. But not every porch is as messy as others. It's it's variety. Just like there's a variety in people. And remind me, is in the agreement. What are the requirements for maintenance and security? Yeah. So every first of all, every village resident is required to sign a tiny home village use agreement which lays out what the expectations are for them as a resident living in the village. But in terms of the Good Neighbor Agreement, basically it puts the expectation on the caller to Village Collaborative to maintain the site the way that any site in the city should be maintained. And so what it asks people to do is if they have problems with weeds, with trash, with noise, things like that, that they contact us, that this document be a way to produce a relationship. And so we've given a 24 hour contact number to the Globeville residents, and we will also post that on a sign outside of the village. So if there's any complaints that need to be addressed concerning trash, weeds, noise, things like that, that they can contact us and we can work on those. Okay. Thank you. That's all, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Councilwoman Black. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, everyone, for being here so late and for your passion call. I have a few questions for you. With only three years here, I'm wondering about your investment in landscaping and water and sewer. What's going to happen after three years? Sure. So the community building that we're designing is a mobile classroom structure. It can be moved. So everything we put into that, modifying that we'll be able to take with us with the exception of the taps for water and sewer. So those will be investments that we will not be able to take with us. And then the landscaping, obviously, that's something that we'll leave behind for the neighborhood we will work hopefully with. Local landscape architecture firms and and landscape companies to donate those kinds of materials that will ultimately be an investment in the community. The place that will lose the money is with the water and the sewer taps. That being said, Denver Water has volunteered to at least waive tap fees for us, but we'll still have to pay to run the pipes and that kind of thing. So we're budgeting around $150,000 for the community building and four additional units, and we'll be raising that from individuals throughout Denver. And have you. All considered some kind of. More permanent transitional housing that so you're not put in the position of having to relocate? And, you know, in three years, I'm guessing land where will be less land available and so you know could you foresee building that many units on a lot that size that are permanent? So definitely we would love to have permanent land. We would love to have permanent zoning. We think this is a both and we think that a site can be used on a longer term, temporary basis to get people into housing quickly that can then move on into permanent housing. And we think that this might be the right kind of thing for a long term community in some settings as well as it has been in Austin and other areas. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. And then I have one more question for I maybe Jill. So one of the neighbors read a long list of the things that people would like to see there. And part came up a lot. And so I'm wondering, in three years, would there ever be a path for the city to put a pocket park there? So I think the city, in partnership with the North Denver Cornerstone Collaborative, the real estate office, well, really wants to spend the next three years engaging in a conversation with the neighborhood. And it's great. They've already got a lot of good ideas in place to discuss the best use for the site and develop a plan for what the property may be used for once the tiny home village leaves. I will note the city does plan at least now to retain ownership of the property, given that it does have the wastewater lift station facility that's currently on it as well. Okay. That's good to hear. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Black, Councilman Espinosa. Jill. You may have to stick around for this. Is Tim Santos still here? Great. Tim, I'm going to need you. And I think he left. But John Hayden. Is John Hayden still here? Okay. Hold on. Sure. Yeah. Sorry. Maybe I'm not speaking into it, so. I heard. Well, one question. Since everyone was raising their hands for Globeville. Can I see that same show of hands of who lives in Globeville? Okay. Can you. Other of that group say of how many support the the tiny home village staying there? I mean, moving to Pearl. And how many oppose? Okay. Thank you. Because that was the optic I couldn't quite picture is how many of your neighborhood residents. So. Did you see the list that the Arnaud's talked about, this sort of bigger list of needs? And can you describe what was on it? Certainly, I might have Tim answer this question, I think, at the second public meeting. And then since then we've received a variety of crusts from the neighborhood and neighborhood organizations about things they would like to see happen sooner or be advanced quicker within the neighborhood. And so Tim can respond to that. But but I do want to be clear. It's not a in return for the tiny home village, it's a separate conversation as a result of the neighborhood plan and other impacts of Tim. Thing that I want you to be cognizant as Tim responds though, is we have made land use decisions in this community that have drastically affected them in ways that we don't want, I don't think. But we're so we can change that. And so meaning that, you know, on their main street 45th, they got the storage building right and used to have a lot of jobs available there. And now we're talking about Home Depot at their TOD and now this. So some of this is going to fall back on CPD on what sort of structural things that we can do so that we don't, that we start getting the outcomes that this community visualized rather than what we're getting. So, Tim, go ahead. Thanks. Good evening. I'm Tim Sanders, executive director of the North Denver Cornerstone Collaborative, which is mayor's initiative for clothier Larry Swanson. As Jill had mentioned earlier, the second meeting, we asked each of the runners to bring a list of recommendations, changes or things that they wanted to see worked on in the community. Jill pointed out, and I really want to stress that it was not meant to be lists of things that would be in offset of the tiny Homes village. Fact We really wanted to emphasize that these are things that we want to talk to the community about, that they wanted to do that were in the best interest of the community whether or not Tiny Homes Village was going to be created or not. And so a number of the things that were listed are already being worked on in the neighborhood plans or in other projects that are happening in Globeville right now. At that time, as you heard, Mr. Leroux, I believe it was, say that the neighbors chose not to want to discuss those in opposition of the overall Tiny Homes project. They didn't want to get into any kind of discussion that would suggest that the neighbors and the people who had voiced opinions over the last couple meetings were in support of the project at all. We have, again, three different lists of recommendations that were given by three different organizations. One of those organizations talked with us and asked for certain pieces to be put into the Good Neighbor Agreement. Those were included. Those notes that we took from the community with things that they had suggested they wanted in those community meetings were also considered for inclusion. I hope that addresses your question. That does because as you recall, the last committee meeting I had asked you for an update on the action plan that was established with the NBCC and the Globeville planning process. And I assume that you're going to be doing that. So I wanted to. One of the things that I'm worried about is we talked about many things in 2014 and 2015 and don't I don't have any real basis on how well that's going. And I think to the degree that we're being successful on, that probably plays into the sort of community's concerns about how much follow through . And, you know, when talking with Evan and Jill about this, that was the thing that I thought was a potential here, right? Which was, yeah, if we're going to recognize that that Globeville time is actually probably five years in the future because of all the impacts of all the different projects that are going on in there, that this might be a good interim use of this land while you actually make movement on these things. So is there a is that what you're contemplating? And is there any way to to speak? And I know you can't predict the future about what the administration will look like in a year's time. But, you know, if you if it were the same administration, couldn't you make commitments that we will you know, couldn't the mayor's office make commitments that this is a budget priority and we're going to move forward on X, Y and Z things and codify that in a way that this council and that community can, can, can fully grapple with. So a couple of things to your questions. One, we have had some really good conversations with the neighborhood organizations about what we might be able do to do for future planning. One of those things would be to go back and revisit the neighborhood plans because they the neighborhood in the area has changed and look to reprioritize what we would focus on in our neighborhood plans and our capital improvement project requests based on the direction that we get from the neighbors and what they're looking for in their neighborhood plans. Secondly, since we started this process, we're about to finish the Globeville drainage study that we've been working on for some time. In that study, there are some recommendations about needs to address drainage all around the global area. And so we would like to consider looking at that and the recommendations that come from that and start to explore if we might be able to use that property after tiny homes, villages, moves for a park that could be a detention holding area for the flooding and drainage that comes off of that area. So those are things that we would like to be. Discussing with the community and what the neighborhood organizations and the conversations I've had. And you heard someone testify to that effect. Those are the kinds of conversations that the neighborhood would really like to have to look towards the future and then what kinds of things we can be doing. In addition to that, we have agreed outside the Good Neighbor Agreement, the whole quarterly reviews in the community with the entire community similar to the mayor's community meetings that we have on cabinet in the community. We would ask the neighborhood organizations to identify three or four topics that they would want us to address. Each of these quarterly reviews and then have the rest of the city agencies, as appropriate, be there with tables to address what they're doing in Globeville, specifically what the last quarter data was, say , for police activity and what kinds of things they're looking for in the future and address any questions that people from the community participate would have. That can also then help us to understand things that we may not be seeing from the agencies, but the community living there can give us direction on so that we move to do things that are important to the community. Awesome. Great. One quick one then, Jill, was it was there any discussion about a waiver process if the other site, the rings be site were used? I mean, because, you know, the people there are there are literally hundreds, if not thousands of hundreds of homes and thousands of maybe lives that are already, you know, endangered of inundation to much deeper levels than the rings be site in a 100 year event. So we're talking about a very, very low probability event. Could we actually which might have some some forewarning. So we weren't really putting lives at jeopardy to say. We tried I suggested call suggested a couple of different alternatives to public works to consider. They came up with an emergency evacuation plan and some other ideas. But public works really felt that because of the velocity of the water, there really was no safe alternative and that while raising the site might be a possibility, they they estimated it would take probably a year of study in order to come up with a plan that could safely do that. All right. Thanks. Thank you. Councilman Espinosa. Councilman Flint wants to. Thank Mr. President coal to the extent that you can without violating any personal privacy, could you tell us why the two residents who were evicted were evicted? It was said that they were escorted off by police. So in both cases, those two residents were they made a threat of violence involving a weapon. And the village has a no tolerance policy for violence, weapons, illegal drugs. And so the village determined that a threat of violence involving a weapon was something that should be taken seriously enough that they should not be permitted to leave there . And so that was a really hard discussion that the village led and brought us in as a staff and as a supportive community to lead that process. We did also notify the police that that was going on because we wanted to take that threat seriously. And so we had the police there when we were talking with that, with those people. Okay. It sounds like this was one incident involving two people and not two separate incident. Two separate incidents. Both of them were that threat of that kind. And they were handled simultaneously. No different times. Oh, I misunderstood that. Okay. Can you tell me or tell the council and the public how are the support services going to be provided at the news site on Pearl? Are they the same as what we've heard described at 38th and Blake? Yeah. If Bayard is is involved in that, just briefly, maybe 30 seconds, describe that so bad. Brings the laundry truck to the village once a week as a point of contact with village residents. And then village residents have the opportunity to opt in to that resource navigation like Scott described. Mm hmm. Okay. Are there any other supportive services? So we have staff. We have village organizers that work with the village to facilitate village meetings, to work on accountability, to ensure that that village residents are following the community agreements. Okay. We've learned caseworkers will come in and offer any sort of counseling or job training or education or how to respond to the folks getting to get into school or get jobs. Residents can opt into that through Bayard, but that is something that we would like to expand as well. Sure. Okay. Jill, I had to bet there's not a seat up here for you to permanently occupy. Is it fair to say that this. Was a flawed process as far as public outreach. Yes. Because I understand the emergent nature of it. When we had a site and and what and I just want the community to understand that the emergent nature of this and and I don't know what could have been done differently. Maybe you could do a do an after, you know, after effect study or. I think, as I mentioned, you know, moving forward, we'll be moving sites through the site development plan process, which has 30 plus agencies looking at sites to make sure that any fatal flaws like this are known as early as possible. And then finally, I want to understand the legal basis and legal authority under zoning to to make this move. And this is a UMass three zone and temporary structures are not allowed there or I don't think anywhere. Actually, they're not addressed in the zoning code. They're in the building and fire code. So zoning does have allowance for temporary uses and temporary structures. But I didn't see this type in the UMass three though. So explain the authority for for doing this. Certainly. So the zoning administrator has the authority in the Denver zoning code to make unlisted use determinations, be that temporary use. That's why I don't see it in. Our primary sources. And so the way we have done this to date is through an unlisted temporary use determination. We have been working collaboratively through the group living process that is happening, a conversation right now with members of the community via task force and members of City Council to update our group living regulations and our zoning code , which are pretty out of date. And so the tiny home village is a component of that. And so we will be putting together actual regulations both temporary and eventually permanent to address this. And now temporary structures generally have been the way I've understood them in any zone district would be something like a construction trailer during construction. That's why we have them permitted for six months and we extended this to 360 days for temporary structures that are being used for residential purpose. And so after 360 days, this is a three year, this is a three year license. So do we have to do do we have to do an exception again each year to continue the license so come to us or does that. So we are proposing building code changes as well to the zoning code. The 360 day period really lives in the building code, not the zoning code today. And so we have worked with Cole and others to develop some language to really codify how we've been working this, working with the tiny home village from a code perspective and we'll be moving forward. Changes to our 2016 Denver Building and Fire Code as well as the 18, which is currently in drafting process that will codify what we're calling longer term temporary. And that's really based on a model from Denver water that they use. They have a two year water license that they will extend for a one additional two year term. And so that's the model which we are going with for the longer term temporary, which is how the site will be addressed and permitted. And is this a temporary use? Will this go away after three years? Yes. Okay. And we will retain ownership of the water and sewer utilities that are installed. In terms of the pipes, I don't know that the lease I'm looking to, Brad. I didn't that's why I didn't I didn't see it in the I didn't see it in the license agreement. So when, when Cole talked about it, I, I was going to raise that because I know we've been told in committee that they will be required to hook up to water and sewer. Yes, but of course, you can't take that with you. Right. So when it's gone we will have water and sewer to the site. Correct. That's, that's, that is correct. We'll owners permanent. Improvements would become a permanent fixture to the property and. Would remain with the property. Okay. I believe that is all the questions. I am a. Citizen. Thank you, congressman. Councilman knew your next up. I'm sorry if you're called upon to answer a question. The chance for comments was before this. This is a chance for councilmembers to call on who they select. Councilman, your next stop. Cold mass question, please. We've been talking about a three or four year agreement, lies of, I guess, a license. Right. And what is the intention of that time period? I mean, is this a temporary situation? And because I got the the impression of what Tim was saying is that really this is a more permanent situation and not something that would be used for some other benefit for the community. Has has this going to work? Is this truly temporary or are you going to be looking for a more permanent location? Like Councilwoman Black said. Our intention is to use this site for three years and then to look for a new site. Whether that's temporary or permanent, we don't know yet. We don't know the answer to that question at this point. But we do think that this is a good interim land use that can be that can be replicated on other sites throughout the city. So my answer is that we will be there for three years and then we will be looking for a new site, either temporary or permanent. Okay. Tim, can I ask you a question just to address a. So if Cole's correct and this is just temporary location and, you know, like Jill saying, it's all temporary approvals and and so this the permanent location is found, then it'll it will move and then this site will be used for something else for the benefit of the community. Is that correct? Yes, Councilman. And that's part of what we would like to engage the community in discussions of over the next couple of years. There are any kind of plan. As you know, generally it takes a little while to get set up. Let's say specifically a park use was going to be there. It takes a couple of years for the design, for the recommendations from parks and then funding for what it would take to do that. We think that we could be using this three years to try to efficiently identify what can be there so that we've got something ready. When Tiny Homes Village moves. And say, say we approve this this three year deal. And what assurances the community have that you'll be leaving in three years and they're going to have some of the benefit restored to that site. Can you give a quick in the city, give some kind of agreement that can it be put in the license or can it what? I mean, the the good neighbor agreement didn't have a legal authority in. So it's not going to matter to the residents. But what can sure is can the city give that? That is going to be a win win situation. We're going to have temporary housing for the tiny homes and we'll look for a more permanent location. And and in three years, the community is going to give this land back for their benefit. Okay. So right now, Councilman, I don't know that we've got a mechanism to make any kind of guarantees going forward. We have said that the NBCC would take responsibility for working with the communities and continuing with the work that we do now in the neighborhoods, both to look at the existing neighborhood plans and then see how this would fit in there. As we start to move down the road with Parks and Rec, with the drainage study and recommendations that come from that. We may have some better options than I can give tonight, but tonight I don't know of any mechanism that we could use to give a guarantee unless Joan knows something. She's stepping up. Well, I think just just to clarify, the license agreement is for one year a term with two renewals. So it's a three year license agreement. What you are voting on tonight. Right. Well, I'm just worried about what's going to happen after three years. And the main thing is I just want to I think if you tell me, if you could give your guarantee, the residents or the mayor's office could give some guarantee to these reserves that this is really a temporary situation and you're going to get some improvement back to this. I think maybe the residents would be more comfortable with that kind of. Yeah. Okay. Excuse me. If you're not called on, this is the part that the councilmember can call on. Otherwise, I'm going to have to ask you to watch. And. 432. That's part of our process. I know it can be frustrating is the councilman's prerogative. Who is asking the question to please don't shout things out. So what we had done in addition to the good neighbors agreement is shared with the neighborhood. Our commitment to work with them over the next three years on this and virtually every other project that we've got through the neighborhood plans, the neighborhood plans do have within them a goals and hopes opportunities that we want to drive for . We are committing to working with the neighborhood to refine those and then to be able to work from the recommendations that they give us. I hope you be able to do something more concrete than than that. Strategies. Again, I see actions in a in a letter. Be nice. Thank you. Happy to put that together. Thank you, councilman. New councilman giving. You the last question. You'd like to come up. And. Give your comment about the situation so. That land was black, topped without anybody knowing about it. It's got some contamination contamination issues and we're having it tested. That was blacktop without anybody knowing it, and it will never be able to be turned into a park because it was a former Superfund site. Okay. Yes, we have. We. We're having it tested. Okay. Okay. Thank you very much. Councilman, do anything further. Jill, let me just ask Jill about this. Yeah. What's the story on this site? Hi. I'm actually going to have Zack Clayton from Department of Public Health and Environment come up to talk about it. Thank you. Good evening. Council Members Clayton Manager, Environmental Management Planning for Department of Public Health and Environment for the City of Dover. We did a comprehensive we did a comprehensive soil investigation and groundwater investigation consisting of 15 submarines and three ground waters at the site. There was minimal contamination found in three of the points. So in order to alleviate or eliminate any exposure to that, we had public works bring in the recycled asphalt, which is a preapproved, beneficial reuse by the Colorado Department of Health and Environment. And why was that? Why was that so put in? Sorry. Over with. Why was that asphalt. The recycled asphalt? Yeah. It's just a minimum is to eliminate any exposure to any contamination within the soil. Can. Can that. Can that land be converted to a park later? Yes, sir. To safely that with no problems? Yes, sir. It's just recycled. It can easily come up, to be quite honest. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, President Clark. And Elizabeth, can I have. You come up to the microphone, please? I wondered if you might share with us a. Little bit about your perception of the process that's transpired. From the beginning until where. We're at. Right now. I appreciate the opportunity to do that. There are a couple gaps and spins that I think are very important to to address. I would like to say that from the very beginning, when Global Cares brought folks to the table, the statement coming from the neighborhood was And is that regardless that Globeville cares, that starting with Globeville cares and expanding out, is that a stress was being put on Globeville to enter into the conversation for the possibility of bringing in the tiny homes? And regardless of what happened with the tiny homes, the advancing of the improvements of the neighborhood should be on the agenda with the city. And it and it appeared that the city was receptive to that. And there were prepared documents that got very specific department by department one regarding projects and that those sorts of things. I think it should be made very clear we don't need to change the neighborhood plan. We don't need to have a three year conversation. There are things as simple as creating exporting a map of all the sidewalks that have already been provided for to so we can see what's on the timeline and see what else needs to be done. Can we consider immediately talking about things that can be dealt with that are clearly part of the neighborhood plan that certainly don't take three years? We have we had a situation here where there were two sites considered for tiny homes, the 4500 Broadway site, which which called didn't mention and gave the gave the impression that there was a certain type of outreach. But I'm going to stop myself from saying too much here because of time. But I really would ask the council to understand there's a there's a lot more going on here than we're able to represent. The I highly recommended to the city that they not divide into groups. At one of the meetings, the Laird and Holt, the Laird in hall meetings of the Laird and Hall Group, and we were divided into groups from the outset to discuss asked to discuss a good neighborhood agreement and a list of of benefits. And there were clearly people that justifiably felt any conversation about anything having to do with a GINA or benefits was an acquiescence to something that was not being had not been made clear in terms of how it was going to impact the neighborhood. And on the on that moment, Globeville took up the difficult mantle of saying, this has to be vetted and it is not a judgment of the individuals coming in. So so there are very specific things that can be dealt with and moved forward. Now, I trust the report that that land can be reclaimed because that was just given and I reported this to the neighborhood, to I talked to the project manager from from public works during during during the the somewhat embarrassing clean up that was done. And he he was very clear it could be the asphalt could be brought up and it could be reclaimed. And then one thing about this Gina conversation early on in the conversations, I want the council to know in the there was some conversation about what was in somebody's going to have to bring this forward from from the city or something about what would be called an advisory group. The GINA that has been drafted and I was I was the receptacle of a lot of it because I type well essentially of a lot of these things that ended up in the annotations that came from the minds of the neighbors in these discussions having to do with Gina Hayes and possibly accelerating the benefits to the neighborhood that was taking on the stress by land use being taken out of the larger revitalization of the aspirations of the neighborhood. There was conversation about an advisory committee that was very indigenous to the neighborhood. If this happened, that is disappeared. And the genie that was drafted has what appears to be is a list of of Arnaud's from Kingdom Come. And my assertion is this is a one year agreement, irrevocable license with possibly two years renewal at the discretion of the city. And if there is not if this passes and if there is not a very strong relationship between the the folks in proximity from Pearl Street to Lincoln between East 44th Avenue and East 45th and possibly East 46th Avenue, in conversation directly with the city on this, as their guardian, as landowners and with the enforcement on the as the operator, then the that can't be that is a license that can't be renewed because the relationship is not formed. And I just want to ask that this be recorded. Nice that there's the city has an obligation. There are specifics that have been named in particulars with DNA types of things. There have been some put into the lease. That is very the license that's being proposed. But let's not spin the process. The the the the the. We don't need to create inertia through overburdened conversations about these lists of things. Some of the some of our long term some of are could be dealt with immediately. They could be sequenced. So in sharing the stress of creating whatever is going on here and whether or not it ends up in Globeville, this has as Cole mentioned, the project has been improved. The the tiny home project has already gained insight, gained structure, gained wisdom for other neighborhoods, relationships gained momentum. And it has largely been because this neighborhood challenged for their own well-being. The the standards and practices of how the neighborhood was entered and what was going on here. So I hope that helps grounded a little bit more in understanding that we can get specific about a lot of things. And it doesn't have to be held up in in a three year conversation or modification of a neighborhood plan. There's a lot of things that are easily accessible and there's some that are long term. Perfect. Thank you. I have a final question for Cole. I'm assuming, Cole. That you were at that meeting at Laird and Hall. Was that meeting at Laird and Hall. Led by the. City in partnership with you or. Solely with as the city? So it was hosted by. Yeah, the City and Village Collaborative. Evan Dreyer and Tanya Saleh kicked off the meeting, invited us to split up into two groups, one to discuss the Good Neighbor Agreement, a second to discuss community benefits. The majority of people stayed in the middle and said, We don't want to have a discussion. Some people did come and sit down at the table with me and discuss the Good Neighbor Agreement. A few a handful of neighbors did so. Within the The Good Neighbor Agreement is the advisory group. Or would. You be open. To. Having an advisory. Group? Yes, I'd like to call your attention to item 14 and the Good Neighbor Agreement, which says CBC will hold monthly advisory council meetings for as long as necessary upon the opening of the village. The Advisory Council meetings will include Globeville, neighbors, village residents, staff and then less the group Ivory Every that has jurisdiction and community based organizations that have jurisdiction in this neighborhood that will be invited to attend those advisory council meetings. And even though. You know, the second party to the the Good Neighbor Agreement, maybe they're not interested in signing at this point in time. But you as a partner in that good neighbor agreement, you're ready to implement and uphold all of the parts. We believe that this document makes the village better and as it improves the neighborhood, if the village is to be there. And so we intend to live up to this document. And we also have every intent to continue working with neighbors to try to reach an agreement in the days ahead. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Councilwoman Gilmore, Councilwoman Cannick. Thank you. I just wanted to put a pin in a question that councilman you had asked regarding whether the city could promise that there wouldn't just be an extension of this site forever. And so, Kirsten Crawford, can you just clarify for us this lease one year with two renewals? Is there any legal way that the city could continue the site without coming back to this council beyond the three years? No. So it's within your purview. So you would have to approve the extension so there would be no way for them to just extend it. There would be a vote of this council through all the public processes if there was any discussion about this project not having the site. That's right. Okay. Thank you. That's all, Mr. President. Thank you. Councilwoman each. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I just have a few left, and some of them have been covered. Joe, would you mind coming back to the microphone? And those are you in the front as we keep calling them up. There's a bunch of seats open, if you wouldn't mind, maybe vacating a couple of seats so that we as we keep relying on our city folks, it might be helpful to just have them sit in the front row, if you don't mind. Thank you, Jill. One of the things that your agency has committed to doing is whenever we have any development that is adjacent to railroad tracks, a developer is asked to check the box and then they're asked to look at how they would address buffering. This site should be no different and this has not been part of the discussion at all. So I want to know how has that been addressed and if so, how? Because as we all know, the site is adjacent to a storage yard. And I can remember a time when this very yard actually had both Globeville, as well as lower highlands, evacuated because of an acid spill. And we have tanker cars that often sit on these tracks that carry flammable liquids and other hazardous materials. So help me understand if that was addressed with the tiny homes and I'll let them speak as well. So where we're at with that issue. Yes. So that is something we did look at. There is a 25 foot buffer between the essentially the edge of the tracks and then the start of where the tiny home village property would be. And that's, again, to provide a buffer between the railroad tracks and the village, as well as provide access for public works to access their wastewater facility that's closer to the Washington Street side. So we did consider that, and that's why we put that buffer sort of roadway in place. So did you look at the recommendations that were in the work product that came out of the six month process that was spearheaded by Chief Tade that spelled out buffering recommendations? Because it's my recollection that it's far in excess of that. If you're not doing some kind of burning or in cases where somebody is building a garage structure or the garage could be the buffer adjacent to the tracks. So again, outside of having sort of the general conversation and understanding the concerns about the proximity to the railroad track, know that that was as far as the conversation went. But again, we felt like because this was a temporary use of the property, we had done at least enough to help mitigate some of the possible concerns. Okay. So let's talk about drainage for a minute. Clearly, we know that both of these sites are in the inundation area, both the site on the taxi property, which city has allowed new construction and permanent structures to be built on that air in that area, knowing that it is still an indentation area? But this site also receives flooding not just from the South Platte River, but also from the Utah Junction outfall. So how is it that we think one site is more safe than the other, knowing that both of them received flooding issues from, you know, stormwater during flooding? So so we. Reviewed both sites at the Pearl Street site, in particular with the city's floodplain staff. And yes, you're right. While it is also in an inundation area, it is not have the velocity of water that the taxi site has. And that was really the concern. Public Works has required that finished floor elevation of the structures be I think a foot and a half above elevation, which they will be and they'll be meeting that requirement. So they shouldn't have flood waters inundating the residences. But that, for my understanding and foresight, there's no one from public works here. But it was the really the velocity of the water at the taxi sites that would have the most concern. That is not as big a concern at the site. Well, this site of Washington is we've we've been told there were other people that wanted to develop in this area on the east side, the west side of Washington, and have been told they had to build a four foot high foundation. The storage units that Councilman Espinosa talked about were required to build that because of the flooding issues. And so I guess I'm a little concerned about the safety of the residents who would be expected to be living in a flooded area. And so I just want. Share that. The last thing I'll mention is that I pleaded with our public works department when we were doing the plant to Park Hill Drainage Project that dumps all the water into Globeville landing outfall, which is just right at the edge of well within the center of the Globeville neighborhood. And there was nothing done to address the flooding in the Globeville neighborhood, which is an unfortunate situation when you consider the fact that we spent $300 million for that drainage project. One last question, and it is about. So I guess when when we look at the the process and Evan, are you still here? There you are in the back. I would like you to come forward, Evan. It's it's my recollection that before the very first meeting was held in the Globeville neighborhood, this lease was actually moved forward to the city council committee that moved it forward, I guess not having realized that there had not even been a first community meeting . I guess I'm trying to understand what the logic in that was, given the fact that we had a misstep in the Sun Valley neighborhood around not extending that same kind of courtesy to a low income community and and thought we would have learned from that process, but yet we encountered the same thing in this neighborhood. So help me help me understand. Why? Why we can't get this right, because this should not be happening. We should not be treating our low income communities any different than we would be treating any other neighborhood in this city. And and this is part of the the crux of what has us at this crossroads right now, because had we taken the step back, not move the least forward, I think we'd have a whole different conversation here tonight. But that that has created this situation where people who feel like they were totally disregarded have dug their heels in the sand to say, wait a minute, we're tired of not being considered. And when you consider the fact that this particular corner, just this property is is a very property the neighborhood had been asking to have cleaned up and whatnot and and yet, you know, couldn't get a response from the city. But yet, you know, we turned around and paved the site and, you know, the community saw the improvements go in. And that was a clear indication that it. So let me let me just let you answer the question. Sure. I mean, I wish I could tell you that any of what you just said was wrong, but it's not. And while we have apologized to the village and the village residents and to the neighborhood, I think we also, all of you and apologize as well for putting you in a difficult position where you're going to have to choose and make a decision. The the specific reason why we brought the proposed license agreement to council before there had actually been neighborhood engagement or neighborhood meeting is again, we were victimized by timing. We had a deadline that the village's landlord had placed. On the village at that time. We had a permit with the city that was about to expire and we felt like there was urgency and we needed to act. So we scheduled the committee meeting. We had also scheduled. The neighborhood meeting to. Happen just two days later. I think all of this combined is just it's another example of the immense imperfection of the process. But we did take six months at the previous site. Right. We did get some additional time. When when when it originally went in to the the site that it's at. Wasn't that a six month process? It was. It was a longer process. Okay. Yes. All right. Let me just see if I have one last question here. I think I've covered all of them. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. See no other question. The public hearing for Council Resolution 367 is closed. Comments by members of council. I'm going to make the cut. Councilman Brooks, this one is in your. Yeah. First of all. My goodness. It's 10 p.m. and you all are still here. So thank you for coming through security and sitting on those hard seats. And each of you really given an impassioned. Debate and conversation about this issue. So I'm coming I'm coming to you tonight as a city councilman, but also a father and a husband in this district and who's been on the front lines of all of these conversations on all of these issues. And it's not an easy one at all. This is this is a tough conversation. But I want to I want to just start by saying and acknowledging the folks from Globeville who are here and who have heard it all the meetings. It's been about 80 years of not just not acknowledging the racist oppression in this city. Our our our our. Our community in our city. Turning our backs on you. And that's real. And that's where a lot of your frustration comes from. A lot of your anger comes from and to people out in the community who've been upset at Globeville about this process. I think to understand that history, I think is really important. So I want to acknowledge that. I also want to acknowledge. Since about 2012, 13, 14, 15, there's been a radical shift where equity in my mind means that you right the wrongs by making an extreme investment in that community more of an investment than you do to the rest of the city. So what I'm about to say is you may see some shaken hands along here, because these folks on this council have been like, man, Globeville, getting Globeville again, Globeville again. And I'm read it. I'm just going to read it because I've been writing it down and I've been hearing that we haven't been making that investment. So I just want to be quite honest. Several councilmembers have told me that and around the city that we don't have small area plants in this city and this area we do. And we're actually we're actually activating those smaller plants faster than any other part of the city. And that's because there's a lot going on. A lot of folks talk about investment in the parks. Every park in this community has been invested in at the tune of $10 million since I've been on city council. Our goal here on platform, real sanguinary. I mean, all of them, right? Someone talked about Stapleton Rec Center, an investment of over $30,000 just to make sure it has new equipment and things like that. Someone talks about executing on the Globeville plan to make sure that the oversaturation of marijuana facilities are Stop this. This council right here actually brought legislation to start limiting the use of more marijuana facilities. Some of us want to do a little more. It didn't pass, but that happened. And my staff myself stayed to midnight, closing down one particular marijuana facility, the Denver Bond. This community is going to see over $30 million. And in the in the Denver bond and that Denver bond is this it's connecting all those sidewalks that he was talking about in this community at the tune of $17 million. Because it's a disconnected community. It should be connected. Washington Street was something that has been identified as something important in this community and to take trucks in a different direction. So let's make sure that it's a pedestrian, heavy bike, heavy activated place so that grocery stores will come. All of those things are happening. And then lastly, I got about ten more things, but I'm gonna stop because other people want to want to talk. Lastly, the National Western Center is seen as not a community project, but this actual community in these precincts voted for the national western sitting higher than anyone else in the city and a fund, a citizens community investment fund that Councilman Ortega is working on along with myself, along with the National Western Center, is being set up just for the neighbors. So when we say that there hasn't been an investment, that that's just not accurate. What's accurate is you've been overlooked. I've been at every meeting. I led a meeting and, you know. This pains me because our process was completely broken. The process wasn't right. And you heard that. I went so far as to say. Okay. Call team. Let's figure out where to put this in the coal community, because the coal community was the first community to set this actually this process went well. And those leaders wanted to go around the city and. Say. That this process went so well that we need to implement it other places. So we looked at this property that we took from Douglas Bruce and said, Let's put it here. Unfortunately, the time did not go right for us to do it, and it was late. I'm just going to say this and leave it at this. The process is wrong. But people's lives are important. And we can't build walls in our community. We can't at all. It's not acceptable. And we need to lead in this area of the city and have an example to say, yes, Globeville, Globeville first and the rest of the community, too. And so the entire city of Denver. This is not just Globeville. I'm just I'm take the words out of John Hayden's mouth tonight. The entire city of Denver has to be accepting. Of the continuum of housing plan for all or we are in trouble. We're in trouble as a city. Yes. Cherry Creek. So. So I'm voting yes because this is about our whole city and this is about our future in Denver. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Brooks, Councilman Kasich. Thank you, Mr. President. And I want to thank my colleague for his very moving comments. I wanted to pick up on a thread that Councilman Brooks mentioned, which is about the history of racial oppression in this neighborhood. And I think that actually I want to be more specific that part of the reason that Globeville was a community of mostly individuals of color and working class folks was because of a history of land use. That said, we go to certain communities and we ask them who they want to live near, and if they don't want to live near, someone else will put them somewhere else. And so the history of that with single family zoning, right, is that we're going to build big lots and only people can afford a house this big can live there. Right. Well, first, we actually did it explicitly by race and we said you can't live here because of your race. But then that got ruled unconstitutional. So then we came up with other ways to create it. And so we said, if you can't build your house this big, you can't live here and can't have multi-family housing, which is what most people rent. So you can't have that here. And so, in fact, we created areas of our city where decent powered communities were concentrated and so weird there was unsafe air or near industrial areas like Globeville. And so what we have learned is that we can't ask folks permission for who gets to live next door, right? Like, I'm out, I'm gay. And in the past, folks used to say, you can't live next door to us if you're gay because two unrelated people can't live together. And then there was an HIV crisis in the eighties, and we used to say, You can't have someone with AIDS because I'm afraid my kids might catch it and you can't live next door to me. And each era, whether it's about race, whether it was about sexual orientation or HIV status, you name it, we have this really challenging part of process. What is the process? And so the process cannot be do you white neighbors want to have folks who might be of different races next to you? I can't ask that question. I can't give one neighbor permission to keep out another neighbor. And that where we are now in that evolution is we're at that conversation about income. And I will share with you how it looks sometimes and we'll see what the vote is like on this council tonight. But sometimes that has been wealthy neighbors wanting to talk about why wealthy single family homeowners talking about why they don't want market rate apartments. I'm not talking about even affordable apartments, but we had a very prominent project in a neighborhood that was on the agenda earlier tonight on Monaco Boulevard, where there was a question about whether it was appropriate to have apartments of any kind because renters, renters, you know, were inferior. They brought crime. Some of the same comments that were made tonight about crime and these other issues. And so lower property values, all of that. And so the challenge this city faces, I think, is what does good process look like if what you're not doing is going to a community and saying, do you give permission for someone else who's different than you to live there? And that is really tough. What does authentic process look like if what I'm not asking is permission? And so I don't think we have a great answer to that. We made clear mistakes here in this in this case, no question. And we've made them in many processes. But I think what I want you to know is that your concerns and your tensions are not without ears hearing them. And so for me personally, what my last few years on this council, watching these conversations happen has led me to is that we need a process that has leaders in neighborhoods coming together with people who provide services, together with the people who fund them and make the rules to say, here's what authentic process looks like. It's not permission, but it is. How do you want this relationship to look? How is it that you want to be engaged? How is it that you want to learn about the residents of this site? And how can we have the conversation differently than how it happened? Because I do believe we can do better and we can do different. But it may not ever get to the point where some folks get to say, you can't live next door to me because your income's different. That's not a place I think we can go. Just like in the history when we went there, it was wrong so we can do better and I'm convening that process. So in May we're beginning with a stakeholder group to. Come up with a model for how we talk about supportive housing for those who are exiting homelessness and how we have an authentic conversation. And we are. John Sathyan is one of the participants. And so we have members of more affluent communities and members of communities that are more diverse so that we can talk about how to do it better in. And so you can teach us and we can teach each other. So that's one thing. I don't want this to happen again and this is an action item to prevent that. The second thing is, how is it that you have more choices for where these different pieces go? I will tell you, one of the things that's interesting being an At-Large councilperson is I can count on all my fingers and all my toes, the neighborhoods I've been in in the last year who've told me they're the only ones getting these services. So I get to move all around. So I hear Globeville tonight saying, Why us? Why always dumping on us? And again, that word dumping has been hard for me to listen to tonight. I got to tell you, to use that word around human beings in their housing is has been tough. And so I'm just going to acknowledge that it's been hard to be empathetic with that word being used. But I've been in Capitol Hill telling me they get all the services. I've been in Curtis Park telling me they have all services. Southwest Denver has recently been telling me they have too many services I go to. And so there are services going in in almost every corner of this city because each of those neighborhoods tells me there's too many of them in their area. So one of the things that I get the privilege of doing in this At-Large seat is seeing that bird's eye view. Does that mean that there's enough opportunity for services everywhere? Nope, because guess what? That history of zoning is still there. So we have areas that are exclusively single family. We're not going to be creating the same opportunity for racial diversity as where there is multifamily zoning. So there is work to be done in this case with tiny home villages. Part of the reason there weren't a dozen more sites for the city to look at was because the zoning is so ad hoc. You heard a little discussion about the fact that it has to be a decision with an administrative appeal of an unlisted use. Right. That's all gobbledygook for saying the zoning code doesn't allow this. So I want to credit the city staff and the community who've been working in this group living process to create a path. But it was going to take a really long time for that. So I want folks to know that I will be bringing forward a public process in June with the department doing the hard lifting for there to be more sites zoned or these I'm sorry, not more site zoned, more zoning districts where this use is allowed so that there are more diversity of neighborhoods. And it's not just a small group of industrial areas or a small group of multifamily areas that there has to be some broader range so that there so that instead of us saying to you, we're sorry, but there were only two sites in the whole city, we could go because that was true. It was true because we have a land use barrier. So we're going to fix that land use barrier, I hope with the support of this Council and we'll have a public process and everyone will get to engage with the proposals that have been through some vetting. So so those are two concrete steps to try to change that history of inequity, the history of inequity, of land use, decisions being based on permission and the history of inequity in terms of where certain uses can go. It's it's happening after this debate. And I understand that. But what we can't do is answer the historic inequity with exclusion. Adding exclusion to people based on income in this neighborhood doesn't correct the history of inequity. And I will continue to advocate, just as I have been an advocate for the platform, open space in Globeville, for the investments that are needed. And it's took us way too long. It took us eight years. We're going to break ground this year, but that park is in one of the quadrants. There are many Globeville, right? There's for Globeville. I will continue to champion those investments, but exclusion is not the answer to inequity. And so for those reasons, I will be supporting this tonight while I work to make sure that this system is not so flawed the next time around. Thank you. Thank you. Kathleen Kennedy, Councilman New. Yeah, thank you, Ms.. Chair, I think you've heard several times tonight this process was flawed. There's no question about it was flawed. You know, you were given the respect that you deserve when this kind of decisions are being made, and we hate these kind of decisions on council as well, we respect that process to go smoothly because we want it to go smoothly. We want to make sure neighborhoods have a voice in what decisions are made about their neighborhoods. And we also believe in what's going to happen with the tiny homes, too. We're just desperate for affordable housing, especially for the folks. So I feel badly for what happened to you. And I look back at it, the just the lack of planning and communication about this whole process and, you know, and maybe it should have occurred when they first. Moved to their second site. Not even before you even considered. Maybe we should have been planning. Then. Where's that permanent military home? Couple of years ago for tiny homes, you know. In hindsight is great to say these things, but I think we need to be thinking much further ahead in the future so we can avoid these kind of situations like we like we're having tonight. So, you know, I'm going to be making my decision on an understanding that that there probably will be no license extension. I'm hoping there'll be no license extension on these property and that this property is going to come back to Globeville and the city is going to make an investment to make sure it's an asset for your community. So that's my understanding, and that's how I'll be making my decision to make and also call. I'll be expecting to see progress reports on what's going on with the planning for a permanent home as well as the is what's going to happen with this this site as well. So we'll expect to see some progress reports in the future about that. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Councilman. New Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Madam President. So I'm going to start this by saying a few things. One, I appreciate folks being in the chambers and staying all the way to 1020 probably be a little while longer. So this neighborhood is is very near and dear to my heart. A lot of folks think I'll be West Sider, been in District three and represent District three for 12 years. West Side. I know this neighborhood very, very well. And I cut my teeth in this neighborhood. My mother was a teacher over at Swansea and I really younger years as a community organizer was under the mentorship of Lorraine Granado. I'm very familiar with the area. I before the idea of even doing anything 1970, we were knocking on doors and knocked on every single door in this whole corridor and got to know a lot of of priorities and needs. And these were this was years ago, almost 20 years ago. And one of those has been a grocery store. One of those has been a park. It's been so many different things. So I understand when people say, hey, look, this is a vacant parcel of piece of land. And as a neighborhood, we want to see something happen with these parts of land. But the truth is, is aside from a park, the city is not a developer, even though it owns the land doesn't mean it can just plop a grocery store down. I've tried that in my neighborhood for 12 years to try to get a big grocery store in the neighborhood. Cities. Not the fact. There are other factors that are beyond our control. We've created two new parks at a vacant land. So it is possible and it takes that leadership and that organization. So I'm going to say this and I'm sorry that we left because I wanted to address this as well to. You always have to have an open door. You always have to have an open door to communication, to negotiations. I am not happy with the way neighbors often pit against each other. I don't like this now, just like my my colleague, Councilman Ortega. We're here. Just. I'm here rubbing my forehead because it's frustrating. But it's not enough to say that this is flawed. We deserve better leadership and we deserve better a better approach of this. I hate when people come to council and say that. And and I get it. I get it. Say, hey, y'all, why did you do this? Y'all are making this up. Is not an initiative of the council's is brought in front of us to. For a vote. To consider Sun Valley is an excellent is an excellent example. Even though we knew that it was similar services for folks who don't have homes, we're going to be occupying a building that had been flattened, vacant. Homeless individuals with services living in the neighborhood. There was push back. Same arguments. We made sure that there was a neighborhood agreement. And folks in the neighborhood made sure that they were able to negotiate those terms. But the door has to remain open. And I have to and I have to say this, because these are other Globeville residents. These are other people who are no longer homeless. They have a home, albeit it's tiny. But I know some homes in Westwood that are tiny. I know folks who are living in converted garages in our neighborhood waiting for a two year designation so they can continue to live in the neighborhood that previously they could be homeless. I don't know. It's none of my business. All I know is they're my neighbors. I don't ask them where they get their income. I don't ask them how they get it. I just treat them with the same kind of respect. And I'm not putting the casting blame on anybody or anything else. But that's that's all we really have to take a look at now. I'm of the school of thought, though. I get it. Tiny homes were a solution because having people just outside isn't. Folks need a place so they can go home, iron their uniform for their job, and be able to go to work, to shower, to shave, to cook a meal, at least to get ready for the next day. Or else you cannot expect anybody to lift themself up from some kind of proverbial bootstrap. And yes, it is our responsibility in the public. It is a function of government to look after each other. Right? It is. And we have. And so what I wanted to say with that is that it's it's not necessarily I'm not slamming tiny homes when I say this because it is a viable solution. But the the best thing to happen is a home. What's better than a tiny home, a regular home? If there was affordable housing being built at this site, would there be the same kind of pushback? Because these are folks are often mostly homeless. I know in our in our neck of the woods, we've done everything possible to make sure that we create affordable housing where we have the opportunity to. As a matter of fact, that's going to come before us. Again, I have to say this, and I'm sorry to go on, but I just I got to really, really stress to community the importance of making sure when you're organizing to leave that door open or else you're not going to get anything out of it. You have to leave that door open. There has to it's it's not a zero sum game. The other thing is, I don't believe in burning scorched earth politics. I don't. That's not negotiation. That's not community organizing. And I want to put this out there because I got called out. When you organize and there's something you care passionately about, you give a best foot forward. My staff have been in my office for nine years. They have won. They are probably the most courteous not to take away from anybody else's time but their professional. They're really good people. They deal with a lot of phone calls on my behalf, a lot of mean stuff. A lot of a lot of just people coming in. They deserve the same kind of professional respect. They deserve the same kind of courtesy. They seem that they deserve to be treated with that respect and courtesy because when they're not, he ain't got no business in my office. I'm sorry. If you cannot come into the office and treat regular people who are just doing their job with respect, you ain't got no business with me. And I would do the same thing for anybody else. I come from the restaurant industry. I know when somebody's discourteous to me after serving them food, after taken a washing their plates, you can really judge a person by the the way they treat people who have nothing to offer them. I want to make sure and I wanted to say that with all love and respect. That's why. And I asked I love to meet with somebody else who can come in here and carry this flag in this cause and the importance of this voice in our neighborhood that can do it in a way that's respectful. It's courteous and we did. So I understand the issues. I just want to make sure that that that I wanted to put that out there. I'm not going to be a city councilman. Right. But for me, that that that's critical. I'm going to end by just saying this. I'm sorry. I went off on a tangent, Mr. President. I just. I really feel like I just had to put that out there. Mm hmm. The alternative is vacant land. Vacant land in a city that people are being priced out of. Vacant land in which some of your neighbors are being priced out of. Even some of our in our poorest neighborhoods are being priced out of vacant land and which somebody can call home. Let's call it home. Let's make sure it's not just in the poorer areas of this city. Let's make sure that it's in truly every corner of the city. And let's make sure that tiny homes aren't just the new standard, that they are regular homes. It is when I won't be on council. I hope to see this from another point of view, even if it's just as a citizen. But there is nothing to stop the city. From making these tiny homes bigger. And operating, and as such, nobody should be sitting, sleeping outside, being criminalized to do so, and then not an opportunity to live in a regular home. I'm not talking about single family. I'm just saying a regular home that is dignified. And that's what we all feel. Right. So I understand with all love and respect, I absolutely understand. But I'm telling you as your brother and as somebody who knows the neighborhood, somebody who was born and raised here, somebody who's been homeless, whose family had to move from places are all over the place. There's nothing like even if it's a two bedroom for six people, there's nothing like being able to come home to a shower and ironing. My poor messed up Dickie's to go to school the next day. It sure beats anything else. So with that, I'm going to be supportive of this. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Lopez, we've got Councilman Espinosa up next. A lot of people know that before I was on council I was an architect and I think I've said it before from the dais that that's one of the things I definitely said in the community, that I think I said it from the dais before that one of the biggest sort of struggles that I had is that when you're in the architecture profession, everyone is hired by the property owner or the project owner. And even though there might be some animus among them, you know, some disagreement among the team between the owner, the architect and the contractor and subcontractors and everyone involved and consultants. You're still trying to complete the same thing. And so the other thing, though, that is different than this job is that everyone's employed. Everyone's like either a professional or in a trade. I mean, either a professional in in a design profession or consulting profession. They are wealthy because they own a project or they're a contractor in a at the scale that I did projects, they were pretty well-off contractors. In this role, you deal with people at all levels. And there's this thing called Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, and it deals with personalities and people who are, you know, at the base and are like looking for food. They're operating different than somebody who's got all of those things taken care of. So when you come to me as a community at the lowest levels of Maslow's pyramid, I don't expect you to treat me respectfully. I recognize that because you heard it here tonight. You have been disregarded. Tim Regan in the back. In the back. Know when these things came before council, before I said be prepared because this is a conversation we're going to have to have in the future. You can't put a temporary permit. You can't extend it without thinking about what you just set up. The real problem here is DHS not even in this room. Right. They're the ones that cleared their housing site ten years ago. And this group found an opportunity to make a case. And then DHS kicked off. That land is still vacant where you were. Today. It just sold for $15 million. Remember, I sold it for seven. Sold on February 6th. Good. New York, right. Or New York Trust Real estate company, apartment developer for 256 units are being planned for that site. Market rate. Somewhere in there was the capacity to house people for the better part of ten years. In a format like this. Somewhere in there was the ability to to collateralize that land value into something on site. There is an affordable housing component, the Curtis Part group. I believe that site remains vacant that was supposed to be owner occupied affordable housing, but at $80 115%. Ami, again, you could be there right now. That's the question I was going to ask John Hayden if he was still here. He's from Curtis Park. He says this needs to be in everybody's neighborhood. What could we put 12 units of tiny homes on that site if there's no plan going forward right now to that manifest or funded? So why it's really a problem for me and Dapchi is we just gave them 100 plus million dollars of bonded money. To do what they do. And that includes this. You know, there should be I'm not going to be on this dance, but there should be a priority on this council that our nonprofit partners anybody who is sitting on vacant land you all season there among them. Sorry guys. Every one of your properties that are sitting there fallow, unused, should be subject to required licensure for tiny home use. The effort to Councilwoman Canisius Point, though we should have a better process, but it should meet you where you're at and not expect you to come in like people on lead still. You know, they can go and have that fight at the highest levels because they hire the best attorneys. They hire the best consultants. Good luck with that, Globeville. They party with the best people. Seen it. I was in. I'm Jefferson. I was Jefferson Park. I moved there 20 years ago. It was Globeville. It is not Globeville anymore. We tried to keep ourselves in there at the same time. Is allowing new newcomers in. Guess what? Developers, wealthy developers, they don't ask. They just do. They acquire. They move forward. They they come to the city and make everyone fend for themselves. And so what started all this is I want to acknowledge the stress that you, you two gentlemen and and Jerry Burton particularly clearly communicated, which is I believe it it happened in my neighborhood where we're operating at a high level. DHS wanted to do a project that was completely incompatible with the neighborhood. Neighborhood put up a fight for two years. You know, but what they did when they came in is said, look, we're going to build this affordable housing. Housing is a crisis in this city. We're going to end around you and your community because this council won't turn down an affordable housing project that D.J. puts forward, because our priority and what we're doing is too important to listen to you. So I don't know if this crisis was legitimate because of the whole bunch of things that went wrong or if this was manufactured. That's conjecture. I'm telling you right now, I don't know. But man, if you wanted to force somebody something down a community's throat, put it in crisis. Right. And we will respond because we care. So the good news is, is we did care. You guys cared, everyone cared. And you got to this point where all said it was the licensure was one year plus two plus one plus one go and some got some concessions. But yeah, um, needed more time to get it right. The thing that frustrates me is we keep talking tonight about it should be everywhere. I don't know if this is going to turn around, but I had already mentioned my concern when we approved. This land tonight. That's the Shangri la property. That is city of county of Denver. Why not put a bunch of tiny homes on that nice grassy park on Shangri-La? You could put the entire village right now right there and put it in the community. That's not Globeville. So. And I'm telling you right now, there's an XL site in my district, 3938 in Irving that is decommission, demolished sometime in the next two years. That probably will come up for sale and the city will have first right of refusal, bring it to Northwest Denver, a cottage, a cottage village. Make you guys part of the neighborhood. Unfortunately, I won't be there. But I think all my predecessors, I mean, all my all the people vying for my seat would probably feel the same way, you know. So I you know, I just you guys, I already mentioned it in my questioning. You guys have been getting shafted. And so it's the difference between what you want and what you're getting. Right. You've been promised a lot, but you've been enduring way more than what you've been promising. Been promised. And what you've been promised isn't actually the things that you're you're desiring or needing. And so been talking about that thing for four years. These are things we can see why with some of us can see eyes wide open. And I think people in the community see it better than anybody. And but we. Don't we keep going the way we feel we're handcuffed to, not the way we even though we know we could do better? I think you're seeing you've this effort, this occupation of that site, the subsequent removal and the village and its iterations, along with a whole bunch of other things in the city, have finally moved the conscience of this city. To a place where we will be more accepting. We will have to figure this one out. I'm rambling now. I do it. I've done it a lot, and I'm doing it again. My the thing that I'm just getting at is $1.5 million for together Denver. Right. To oppose your effort against to fight the campaign which we could have done something about but the votes were never there. The the. But this project was $140,000. So you could have done ten of them for the amount of money donated to fight that effort. Why don't we come together on a solution? If we're telling everybody that it should be everywhere? You know, I think if we allowed two tiny homes on every block, you could do this in 16 blocks. What we're doing here now, we don't have the central services and things like that. And so there's real benefit to what is being proposed here. So what you're hearing from me is very, very a very, very torn attitude. Because I want to be there 100% with Globeville residents who are in opposition, because I understand where that's coming from, and I think it's real genuine and it's valid. We did create this crisis. We are in crisis mode and we need a solution. And I do think that this solution is actually good in the in in the regards that I was talking about before, which is I think globally, I think what we've done as a city to Globeville is made you guys the future of Denver , not the now of Denver. And recognizing that, owning that and saying, okay, we're going to make Denver mean Globeville as complete and as healthy as we can right now. We're going to work with them to sort of actually come up with a plan. And I think Tim's always been capable of this and has proven it, come up with a plan on how we're going to get there in five years and get that commitment from the mayor's office that we're going to fund those efforts on a strategic way. So that and we're going to do it in a way that we're going to address displacement and gentrification so that we have mechanisms so that you don't lose the equity that you've put into your home and that you that you've endured, you know, throughout this time and that the windfall that will eventually come because of all the other investments in that area land on your lap because I have seen too many households in Jefferson Park not have their properties. They've had their properties sold out from underneath them. The opportunity comes after they leave. And somebody who's totally not interested in the city but only interested in turning to profit pulls money out of the community so we can do better. We can do different. And the conversations are happening. It's it's too slow for me, but it's happening and you're making that happen. So that said. You know if I vote for this. No. Then it's because there's an end in sight. We have Tim in the northeast, in the north, you know, working on this. And I have a separate commitment and I'd love it if you'd not nod your head in an affirmative. Evan Dryer in the corner. But we have commitment from the mayor's office that we're going to follow through on the things these action plans once they've once they've been fully articulated and worked out with the community. Thank you. And so that was the only thing. And so all we have is near there now is their word, which is less than an agreement. And it's a lot what you've had already, but. I you know, I will be I am somewhat empowered by having the bully pulpit, and I'm using it right now. And hopefully after I'm out of office, if you guys aren't getting that follow through, you will hear about it from me. And I will go into your community and work with you to help make sure that those outcomes are achieved. So thank you. Thank you. Councilman Espinosa, Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. Following this issue, when it first came up after the the other site fell through, I had the feeling all along that we were being presented with a real Hobson's choice, which is really no choice at all. Hobson's choice is take it or leave it. And I know that that's how the Globeville community feels. But in a broader sense, it's worse than a Hobson's choice, because it's not take it or leave it. If if we were to vote no on this license, then the status quo does not remain. It changes. It changes for a dozen people. Voting no on this doesn't leave it the way it is. Voting no on this means that the tiny home village at 38th and Blake goes away and 12 people who are working on putting their lives back together and some of whom already have and have been replaced by new tenants , go back on the street. So voting no is not something I can do on this. And so I'll be supporting it. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Flynn. Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you all for coming down. And as Councilman Brooks always reminds us, sitting on those hard chairs, hard views for so long. I want to thank the long time residents of Globeville. I want to thank you for loving your neighborhood and loving the city much more than the city. Loved you back for a long time. As as again, my colleague, Councilman Brooks pointed out Denver has awakened to the injustice and has begun trying to write some historic wrongs. If I was in your chair, I, I think you all are handling this issue and yourselves extremely well. And I appreciate that a great deal. You know, I spent a lot a lot of time in Globeville when I first came to Denver a lot of years ago. My friends Larry and Dean Moore lived up on 45th. And when I went back through the neighborhood recently to look at the property in question and drove down 45th, y'all had some great bones, some some wonderful older architecture that that I hope the city. Makes use of. And really turns this into something special. Not just another invisible community as far as the public process. You know, imperfect is such a lousy word for it. You know, it's terrible. It's just terrible. And it's it happens over and over that, you know, we all get so involved in in the projects that we're trying to create, that going out into the community doesn't happen at the first blush the way it should. And that needs to be changed. And along with Councilwoman Nature's efforts, Councilwoman Sussman and I are looking at formulating a stakeholder group to see what we can do in general in better supporting our neighborhood groups across the city and how we can do a better job of of that two pronged responsibility of having those neighborhood groups telling the neighbors what the city is doing and having those neighbors come back and and tell us what they think about what we're doing. We're also and as far as just looking at the tiny homes where a group of us will looks like be going down to Austin in in June to look at their community first project, their 51 acres that's looking at getting 500 people off the street now. Will we be able to replicate 51 acres? Maybe. I don't know where that plot of land is right now, but it's something that the Reverend Henderson said earlier that it's much more difficult to to build community than to build buildings. And it's something that we that we really need to do. I so appreciated some of my colleagues words about the demonizing of of not just the homeless, but of anyone in lower economic groups or race, color, creed, national origin, sexual orientation that still goes on. And we need to to do better at that. And I just want one thing that this just the whole discussion really frustrates me with is we're we're talking about 20 units. We all know the numbers that we need, not just for the homeless, but for our workforce, so on and so forth. And we need as a city to get way more in, way more focused and with with with more focused intent on where we're going to come up with the land to build this, because we need to find the land and we need to build. So I'm 110% behind a beloved community village. I'm 110% behind the Globeville neighbors, the the beginnings of what we're talking about, where the equity need to continue. And it can't just be a quid pro quo. Well, if we build this village here, we'll give you a 50 bucks or whatever. This needs to be a long term reparations. And again, I appreciate you all very, very much appreciate what you've done for decades and very much appreciate your handling of the situation. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Cashman. Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm just sort of piggybacking what Councilman Cashman was talking about. The city has decided to follow the work that Seattle is doing around race inequity, and we have well in excess of 100 employees in our city who have been trained. But it can't be lip service. It has to be genuine and has to be done on the front end. We cannot keep, you know, treating low income neighborhoods, including our tiny home village folks in a different way than what we treat other neighborhoods. We have voted down requests that have come in before this body from affluent neighborhoods where neighbors didn't want a project in their neighborhood. But in this case, we're talking about a community that has I have a list here. So we've got Laird and Hall in Globeville. We have Salvation Army, which is the facility on Broadway. It's not open right now, but we're not sure what they're going to do with the site. There is homeless housing in the Polish Catholic Church that was done with Denver's road home. Mile High behavioral health is in the neighborhood on the other side of I-25. And then we have the Crossroads shelter that is also one of the largest shelters in the city that houses upwards to 500 people a night. That's part of the Globeville neighborhood as well. So. To say Globeville is not doing their part. I would argue that that question. I've served on the group living ordinance with with Kohl, who I have a great amount of respect for. And I actually said from this dais, we should have tiny home villages across the city that are permanent locations. We have not yet completed the work of the group Living Ordinance. But if we have the flexibility for our zoning administrator to be able to flex the rules to allow a three year agreement on this site, we should have been able to do that at the church location or any church locations where we know there are. There's a large amount of land, and there are at least a couple of addresses that I provided to Cole to take a look at that are in southwest Denver. That could be ideal for other locations in the city to be able to have tiny homes in their neighborhoods. I'm not sure where we're at in that process, but in this case. Our administration has to learn that respect and process matters. In all of our neighborhoods. It can't be. We pick and choose where we apply the rules. Right. They're either consistent or they're not. And I'm frustrated. I mean, because I have the greatest amount of respect for the work that has taken place with ensuring that we have housing for people who are living in our tiny homes right now and and really making a difference for the lives of these individuals. But at the same time, you know, we ignored process with neighbor, a neighborhood that has struggled with trying to get the attention and priorities that they want. Solving the dam flooding problem should have been a priority for the city. But guess what? We spent $300 million on addressing flooding. That does not a damn thing for Globeville. Right. That's that in itself. And I said this to our public works manager at the time This is a crime. How do we justify that? So you're hearing some of my frustration just having tried to, you know, be in the middle and work on behalf of these neighborhoods that are dealing with the monstrosity of a new highway project coming through their neighborhood, where half the damn time you can't get in and out of the neighborhood. I've tried to go to meetings where I've had to literally go all the way around to Suncor just to get to the neighborhood. So I know the struggles these neighborhoods are dealing with. And I say these because, you know, Globeville, Larry and Swansea are struggling with some of the same challenges. So I guess where we can flex the rules in one place to say we can make it work here, we should have been able to do that at the church site. And the fact that we didn't frustrates me, and I'm hoping that with the changes that will be coming forward with the group Living Ordinance, it not only gives us more changes and more flexibility for our tiny homes, but with many of our other group living categories that will hopefully free up opportunities for people who are struggling across this city to find something they can afford to live in. And I'm committed to the work that that the group has been doing, along with my colleague, Councilwoman Canete, who who's been serving on that process as well. I am concerned about the safety of the individuals who will be living on this site because of the proximity to the railroad and the fact that we have hazardous materials that daily, multiple times throughout the day are are on that track right next to the site. The drainage issue is is one that we know that this side of of Washington experience is flooding. And it may not be at the same velocity as the taxi site, but I don't know what that will look like if we have a really bad rainstorm. So are we are we intentionally putting people in harm's way? I don't know. I don't know. But I am concerned about the safety of people who will be on that site. I appreciate the work that's being done around the other safety issues that we talked about. I think that will provide some some greater safeguards, if you will, not only for the residents of Globeville, but for the rest of the people who will be living on the site. I really want to support this. I'm frustrated with the process. I want to support the Globeville neighborhood in all of what they have struggled to achieve and to try to make sure that there is this solid community agreement. And I would say if this goes forward tonight, I heard a pretty clear commitment from Cole that regardless of you all signing it tonight, that there is a commitment to still have a community engagement effort ongoing. You called it a community advisory committee or whatever the appropriate name is. But that. The fact that there is no official group signing the agreement doesn't mean that there's no dialog back and forth. And I know Cole has that commitment, and I think the mayor's office is committed to ensuring that that process continue as well. So at this point, I just think that as a city, we need to do a better job in addressing just the the basic needs of folks in our community. I mean, we're still dealing with a community that has no curb, gutter and sidewalk, even at this very site we're talking about and throughout other parts of this neighborhood. And I've said to my colleagues, one of the things we should be doing is making sure that with our, you know, skip process, where we get to set priorities and have influence and input into the administration. Every neighborhood in this city should have a basic standard of living. We shouldn't still have neighborhoods without curb, gutter, sidewalk, where kids literally have to walk in the street to go to school because they don't want to walk in the mud. Right. So these are some things that that I think we have more work to do on. And yes, maybe Globeville and Illyria and Swansea are getting a lot of money spent in their neighborhoods, but it's on some of the infrastructure that has been needed, like the pedestrian overpass that we just had a groundbreaking for a couple of weeks ago where kids literally climb in between train cars that are stopped, unmanned train cars because they don't want to be late to school. So these are these are basic priorities for these neighborhoods. So I'm going to stop at that and I will probably vote for this, but I'm going to do it reluctantly because I'm I Evan , we have to do a better job. We cannot have another one of these brought before this body and and expect this council to just fall in line when we have not, you know, done the right job. So and I don't mean to single you out, but you're a point guy here from the mayor's office. So. Anyway, thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilwoman Ortega. See no other comments. I'll just end by saying thank you again for all of you, for coming down here, for spending your time and your passion, for being respectful of one another in a difficult room and in coming braving the weather in security. So thank you for that. I'll echo what a lot of people up here said and that this is a very difficult position to be put in between two communities, both of whom the city has not done a good enough job for and to have to try to try to come out of it with a yes or no vote is is not a situation that I think anybody up here wants to be in. These are not two communities who should be pitted against each other. These are two communities that we should be as a city, working to lift up and to support both of. And unfortunately, what we have here is a yes or no vote where there is a winner and there there's a loser. And I wish we were in that situation, but that's the vote that we have in front of us. So for that, I'm sorry. And I do hope that we have a better process. And I do hope that this council really does push back on some of the things that have been said tonight about about every part of the city doing their part and making sure that this conversation is city wide. So with that, I think Councilman Flynn probably said it best as a no vote on this. I mean, some people who are housed right now are homeless. And for me, it's a difficult decision. But I will be voting yes to make sure that those people stay housed. So, Madam Secretary, roll call. Brooks Black. Espinosa. All right. Flynn. All right. Gilmore, I. Herndon, I. Cashman. All right. Can each. I knew, huh? Ortega. A reluctant I. Sussman, I. Mr. President. I. I'm secretary. Please. Because the voting announced results 1313 as Council Resolution 367 has passed, saying no other business before this body. This meeting is adjourned.