A resolution approving a proposed Multi-Year Festival Lease Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Denver Festivals LLC for the use of Overland Golf Course for a multi-day, multi-stage musical festival. Approves a lease agreement with Denver Festivals, LLC, for five years at an annual rate of $200,000 with additional monetary and non-monetary considerations to produce an annual three-day music festival at Overland Golf Course in Council District 7 (201735508). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 8-14-17. The Committee approved filing this resolution at its meeting on 6-20-17. Pursuant to Council Rule 3.7, Councilman Clark called out this resolution at the Monday, July 24, 2017, Council meeting for a postponement to the next regularly scheduled meeting of Monday, July 31, 2017.
Did I get that right, Councilwoman Sussman? Councilman Clark. Okay. Thank you. Madam Secretary, would you please put the first item on our screen? Councilman Herndon, will you please put the resolution 637 on the floor for adoption? Yes, Mr. President. I move the resolution 687 be adopted. All right. It has been moved. And second, it comes for members. Of the second. You need a second on the screen. Okay. It's been moved. And second it comes members of council. Councilman Clark. And then we'll go to Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I do have some comments. I but I didn't know if Councilwoman Ortega had mentioned maybe having some questions. I would defer to her if she has a few questions that she'd like answered. I didn't know if you enough. If you don't mind. Councilwoman Ortega. So as I read through the document, I didn't see anything in there that had protections, if you will, for Ruby Hill. And Councilman Clark and I were talking before this evening. About. What's going to stop people from going to Ruby Hill? Because I understand you won't have concerts during the same time that will have concerts at Overland. And as you all know, the Lovett Pavilion can now have somewhere in the ballpark of 17,000 people. Because what I've heard is the number. So that in itself could bring lots of traffic to the neighborhood. And how is that being addressed as part of the the overall traffic plan? I want to make sure that the park continues to be available to the neighborhood, the ball fields, the the bike program, you know, just being able to have picnics at the gazebo up on top. So I don't know if if you want to answer the questions about how we're making sure that Ruby Hill doesn't become the magnet for people who can't afford to pay the price for the tickets, but may be able to go listen to the music at that. Okay. Creates more impact to the neighborhood. Councilwoman Ortega, I'm going to call up Parks and Rec, and we probably want to call up some folks from Superfly as well. But go ahead, Fred. Fred Wise, director of finance for Parks and Recreation, Ruby Hill will be part of the plan in terms of parking and protection of the park during the festival. It will clearly be open to the public during all set up and tear down. And we believe it's far enough away from the actual venue that people won't be going to leave it to listen to the concert. But we will be stationing Denver police and Rangers and private security to. Take the park out of commission for being able to have the ball fields being used during this time frame. No, not at all. Not at all. But what part of the park is going to be used for staging that you just talked about? None of the park will be used for staging and for the music festival. You just said police and others will be. Too to ensure that that there's crowd control, that there is no issues or problems in the park, but none of them. There won't be using the park. You're saying they'll be staged at the park, too, for the park not to be utilized as a venue, if you will, for people to go listen to music? Yes. I mean, first of all, we don't know whether the music will carry. And you can actually even hear it from from Ruby Hill Park or not. So just help me understand, because I'm concerned about the impact to the the access people will have to the park to use it for just normal, you know, as as their neighborhood park and whatnot. So the the intention is clearly to leave it open for all of its normal uses during the entire time that the festival is occurring. Load in during the festival and load out. So if. People want to come and park there. Who's going to make sure, whether it's neighborhood people or people wanting to park there that aren't using the shuttle service that will be set up as part of the event. And walking over to Oberlin from there. Well, that would be part of the parking plan in terms of having officers and security stationed at the entrances to the park and to the best of their ability. Obviously, unless people are, you know, good at not deceiving them. They will be asked and they will be told that they can't. There is no festival parking in Ruby Hill. So I would suspect if it's neighbors that walk there as opposed to drive there. So I'm just concerned about the impact to the park. Right. And how we protect that. Yes. So that it doesn't become overtaken by people who want to come to the event, that don't want to utilize the shuttle service and. Absolutely an. Easy place to park. Yes, we are we we recognize that a concern and we will be sure to include that in the parking and security plans that need to be submitted. So do you have anything different you want to add? Yeah. Would I would just add two things to that. The first is we've had significant discussions with Levitt Pavilion in terms of how we work together. We've entered into a sort of mutual support and marketing agreement. Mr. Erlich, can you please introduce yourself? I'm sorry. David Erlich Working with Superfly. So the first issue is the operators at least of Leavitt Pavilion. We have a very significant agreement with and are going to be working with them in terms of both involvement in the community and operations. But the second thing I'd point out is, as Fred said, as we've gone through this process, we already have a very specific way to protect the southern neighborhood with both staffing and with police. And that's because it came up in the neighborhood discussions. This issue has come up as well. But later and so as Fred said, we're committed to both police and staffing so that it's very similar to how we'll protect the southern neighborhood. We'll have ingress and egress controlled by the plan. The city's going to have to sign off on that plan. And we feel very comfortable, given our relationship with Leavitt and the neighborhood groups, that we can protect the park and we can actually make it a benefit to the park. So I want to ask a question about traffic for a minute. So you all will be required to have a traffic plan that would be submitted to the Public Works Department and the manager of Parks and Recreation. And if our public works folks. Don't approve it within a certain designated timeframe. Your plan automatically goes into effect. One of my concerns is this is a five year contract. We're going to have lots of public works projects going on where our folks are going to be, you know, trying to move all these bond projects, assuming they all pass, you know, when they go to the voters in November. So I. I'm hopeful that our city staff will and that Councilman Clark will be shepherding this to ensure that we have that input and review, and particularly after the first year, if we find that there are nightmare traffic problems that the community is dealing with, which, you know, I appreciate the fact that it does spell out that if the community wants a parking plan with restricted parking similar to what Mile High Stadium neighborhoods have and whatnot, that they can they can get that. And that could be something that further protects the neighborhood. But if public works doesn't have the time to look at it, their plan automatically goes into effect within a certain time frame if we're not looking at it. So I'm just hopeful that we'll have the folks in the time to be able to look at that and address any issues that need to be worked out. Let me see. I had one other question. Councilwoman tell you? You want me to go to some other folks and come back? No, let me just go to this last question. Some of the others I've I've gotten my answers to. So will the service of alcohol shut down, as is the case in nightclubs before the music ends, before the end of the, you know, the night. And how much earlier is that? So your your music can play till ten. How much earlier does the alcohol service stop? So what would. So. So that will be also part of our operations agreement. But the answer to your question is yes, the serving of alcohol will stop earlier than the music at 10:00. Approximately a half hour, an hour, depending on mutually what we all decide is appropriate in terms of crowd control and everything else. Okay. That's it for right now. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman, I take it. Councilman Flynn. Yeah. Mr. President, did you want to go. With Councilman Clark first? You know, because I only had comments. I have no questions. Oh, great. Why don't we do this? Councilman Clark, if you're okay. Those with questions, we go to first, and then we can go to a comment section. Um, are there questions? For members of council Kathmandu. Councilman Clark and I were talking about the evaluation mechanism in the contract and how it seems to be very sketchy and not really clear. And I wonder if have counsel Clark Gooden clarify and describe a little bit about the evaluation post concert evaluation process, please. Thank you, Councilman. The administration also is very committed to this. After meeting with neighborhoods and I circulated a document around I think it was in the packet last week that outlines the accountability committee and who will be on it also had brought some great ideas of including others like police and fire in that. And so, you know, meeting with the attorneys. There is a provision in there that provides room for that. It doesn't specifically call that mechanism. But I think, you know, Superfly and the administration, you know, have been very committed to that. I'm sure we could commit to that. Now that that that accountability committee, as outlined in the paper, will definitely be a part of this process. Does that help? Yeah, very much. And there'll be a documented review as well as recommendations for improvement. Yeah. That group is designed to have neighbors that have stakeholders to all talk about all of the first of all, all of the impacts. What happened, what went wrong, what went right, and how do. We move forward? Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilman. I have a question for Councilman Clark and the promoters in the city. You know, something came up in our hearing last week and it talked about San Francisco and San Francisco having this event as well and making sure that we're getting the biggest bang for our buck in Denver as well. And so I know that you've done you've seen some of the financial analysis and maybe we can talk about that. But I want to make sure as a city that the city of Denver will be able to recoup a lot of these funds. And you know that we're not getting shortchanged as a city. Great. Thank you, Mr. President, for the question. You know, I think that that's been a part of this conversation all along, not just in how much what's the overall, but in specifically the golf course being made whole, being made better, and the neighborhood being whole and being made better and parks as this falls within the Parks Department . But I'll let David come up and just speak quickly to, you know, this as a what the market conditions for this kind of festival are, especially, first of all, starting out and the deal that we're getting as it compares to San Francisco. I think if it's okay, Councilman Clark, I'll defer initially to Fred Weiss of Parks, who has run an analysis of both the San Francisco contract and this contract and can point out at certain attendance numbers the true comparison. Happy to. We do have the contract, San Francisco's contract. So we know specifically what that is. And their attendance is 70,000 a day. So that's the easiest comparison to make. And San Francisco makes $2,676,000 at 78 70,000 a day. And Denver would make 2,635,000. So it's within $50,000 in terms of in total the net, and that's after the $200,000 waiver of expenses. So that's already accounted for. So we are right on par with the arrangement in San Francisco. And and not my major concern is this neighborhood in the park. How are you allocating some of those resources to make sure that we get the park revived in after the, you know, the event happens, that that money goes back into a park and not into the citywide system? This was an email exchange that I've been having with someone in the community. Sure. Well, the the renovation of the park is included in the contract. That's a requirement of Superfly to bring it back to as good the golf course, as good, if not better condition as when they took possession of it. So I'm all right in saying that that 2 million supersedes what's already embedded in the contracts. Over and above. That's correct. Over and above their responsibility to fully restore and renovate anything that's damaged in the like. Fred, last question. So that 2 million is is money that we've not talked about how we're going to use that money as a city. So is that still up for conversation about the community, not the community at large, but the specific impact at community? Sure. Well, a certain amount. Whether a certain amount is going to the Golf Enterprise Fund, and that is. 200,000. I need my glasses. So again, let's use the 70,000 a day because that's that's easier. The Golf Enterprise Fund will be netting $1.1 million out of that. The remainder is basically sea tax. And the commitment on the part of the comptroller's office is that the equivalent of one third of the sea tax will go to the neighborhood , one third will go to parks in general. And I'm sorry, I'm drawing a blank with the other third. One third will go to golf. So and those are all four improvements because the restoration of everything is included in the base contracts. So this is above and beyond and going to be a miss. What's the numerical value? The third? Well, the numerical value of a third at 70,000. Okay, got it. At 17,000. And that's what I missed. Okay, we're good. Thanks. Thanks for that. $700,000. Okay. Roughly. Thank you. And I think that's important for folks to hear. Sure. That the immediate neighborhood will receive a financial benefit as well. And that does not include the contribution to the community fund that's over and above these numbers. Yeah, that's right. Thank you. Councilman Clark, do you want to take away. Looks like everyone else has asked their question. Councilman Ortega has another question. One councilman, I should have known. You want to call a number? Okay. Councilman Espinosa. Yeah. So several questions for you guys. First off, thank you for the follow up on my concerns about traffic. I still have them, so that's probably where most of my questions are going. But based on some of this, what one of the comments at the public comment was that the $200,000 rent was too low. What is the rent for mean for Golden Gate Park and out in the outside lands? First of all. The structure is very different. There is no rent. There is a percentage. It's 11% of ticket sales and then a dollar 50 or a dollar 75 per ticket. So there is no base rent in the San Francisco contract. Do they then still have a seat tax that's applicable to that or no? We didn't talk about this, but I assume that you're going to have some sort of on site triage and EMS. Is there a route through the neighborhood? And will that be a silent route or will we have you know, because we're talking about a population roughly about most of the size of Boulder that will be on site for 10 hours. You know, what do you how do you handle emergencies on site? Well, there will be an emergency an emergency plan both on site and an emergency evacuation plan and will consult with. We will let Denver health and Denver fire and police really drive the the requirements of that plan because they're the experts. But will they be putting sirens like as they leave the facility or will they get out to, say, Evans or Santa Fe before they do that, if they're actually taking somebody to the hospital? I don't I don't know. That would be a sort of we would I would assume that we will follow their protocol. Okay. Is there a charge for the parking that will be offsite or if you're using the city owned facility or not? Part of the reason why I'm asking is so we just had the Dragon Boat Festival in my district this weekend. We're still waiting for our attendance. Usually draws about 100,000 over the course of two days where they constantly stream of busses going through the neighborhoods for two days for that 50,000, which is akin to what you have. Right. As a sort of constant flow. But they only charge five bucks for the parking, which I think encourages people to use that. Will that be will the I know you had been speaking to possibly including transit to the program possibly and ticket price. Would that also include parking at the parking ride's or downtown at the Mile High Stadium or something like that? So Rick Freeman from Superfly. Typically what we've done in the past is not charge for the parking, but charge for the shuttle pass. So and that can be anywhere from a 10 to $25 fee for the weekend, depending on various pricing levels and things like that. You know, the plan here is really to utilize all sorts of different transportation options. And so just to be, you know, direct about it, we do think public transport will be a big part of it. And that was to answer your question about the inclusion. We've used that method before. We have an event right now where we work to deal with the transit authority of that particular location, where the actual ticket is a ticket to get on a light rail or a public bus. So we will try and accomplish a similar thing here. We want to encourage as much public transportation as possible and use this as a vehicle to help get people to use the public transportation that is there more than maybe they normally do. Well, certainly one of the things we also love about the site is that it's on the Platte River bike path and we feel like that's a tremendous asset. We typically do see a lot of people using bike transit to events like this nationally, and we think with the biking culture here in Denver, it will be significant. We'll provide a free bike valet. So you just come leave your bike, you get a ticket and somebody will bring your bike to you as you leave. And of course, you know, with the popularity of ride sharing services, Lyft, Uber taxis, that will be a significant portion of the attendees utilizing that along with the shuttle service that we set up that that's, you know, kind of the holistic transportation plan options that we have to. I think you guys explain it that if there is no sort of agreement on this whole parking and transit plan, that the you know, when you guys you're doing this several months in advance, that that is actually that is grounds for termination. I mean, that is, you know, if we're not satisfied as a city that, you know, the community is properly protected. And in this in this regard or this situation in transit is not properly addressed, we can comfortably back out of this. Yes, that that's my understanding as well. And we say that from a producer standpoint, this is a, you know, one of our top issues that we have to get right for this to be a successful event. This is not something we think of. Secondarily, you know, our relationship with the customer, the event starts from the second they leave their door. If they don't have a comfortable, easy experience getting in and out of our venue, then they're not going to want to come back and spend the money it is to come to something like this. So it is imperative not only that we do a great job from the beginning, but that we make improvements on that plan, you know, continually and really examine in real time how it's happening. We're very good with utilizing data, really understanding how people are transporting when they're coming, when they're leaving, all of those things to make a plan that really creates a comfortable atmosphere. And we've been able to do that in our history. We also there's a lot of other events nationally that are great examples for us, that operate in parks, that are in similar, you know, locations like this that have access challenges that you have to overcome. And we believe that this is a site that can be done very well. We have a very experienced traffic engineer that is part of our team that does this nationally as well. They, too, have looked at the site, looked at the different logistics and feel that this can be accomplished really well here. So we feel confident that can happen. Okay. I think I'm going to have to at some point in the next year, I get Councilman Clark over to my house for a Broncos game to for him to see sort of the entirety of the the day and evening of what 76,000 people looks like. And then forced into a concert with me as well, one of these events so that he can also see that because this is this this will linger as one of my sort of concerns until I see that plan. And I want him to be cognizant because the explanation you provided, you know, speaks to upwards of 40% taking TNC in taxi, which would be, you know, 30 some odd thousand of the attendees. And that's a loss, even if. Carpooling. That's a lot of cars and anything you can do to use that TNC to get them to transit and then shuttle from the transit stops or bus service to the site you know, would go a long way because you're not going be able to queue up or store those shuttles, but you're going to have to figure all that out because this is a lot of people in an area that doesn't have a lot of free space even. One of the things that we see, if you don't mind me saying in San Francisco at the outside lands, is that people will typically take a taxi to an area that then funnels into whatever our walkable ingress plan is. So it's not like we expect all of the TNC to drop off right at the front door here. You know, they'll go frequent the businesses on Broadway, get a coffee, walk in to the event. And of course, we'll be controlling the different avenues of pedestrian access coming into the site, along with law enforcement. So when you think about it more broadly, you know, it's not just the location, it's getting people to the area or, as you said, getting people to some of the transit hubs that we're going to be supporting as well to then come in. So that's how we've seen it work in the past. Well, your transit plan also include, you know, some some of the on sort of led display signage, you know, miles and blocks out to sort of direct people as well as advertising. Yeah, absolutely. Well, advertising is a big part of it, right? That starts at the very beginning. And as I said, you know, the goal here would be to create something where your ticket is part of the transit plan. So you take public transportation, right. With that ticket. That's something we would advertise very aggressively to get people to take those modes of transportation in general. People come to our site, the event website and this ad looking for that type of information. And we find that people generally follow a lot of the recommendations that we put out. So be a huge part of it. You know, the second part of your question is, yes. I mean, we're working in a very detailed manner with law enforcement, everybody else in the community, to figure out exactly what messaging is needed, exactly what routes are most advantageous for ourselves, for the businesses in the area to get traffic to them. But yes, signage, variable signage is a big thing because you can, you know, change it up on the fly as you realize you want to make an adjustment. So we will utilize all those techniques. Okay, great. Thank you again. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa, I'm going to go to Councilman Cashman for a question and then Councilwoman or take. Turner. Your Turner, Mike? No, sir. You're. Mike's not on. Mike. There we go. So you said you don't generally charge for parking. Is that correct? We charge for the use of the shuttle service so we don't generally charge for parking. Okay. Help me understand. I was looking at the outside land site and what I thought I saw was 48 bucks for three day shuttle. That's right. And then 255 bucks for three days of parking. The that parking that you see on the outside land site is for a VIP parking pass where we do have some limited parking within the park itself that is accessible to people who are willing to pay for it. I don't think we have that at this location, so I don't think that would be applicable here. Great. Thank you. That's all. Thank you. All right, Councilman Ortega. Thank you. The question's generated a couple of additional. So first, why not look at something like Mile High Stadium or Dick's Sporting Goods as opposed to one of our parks and specifically a golf course. Sure. You know, nationally, there is a trend of these type of events being held in public spaces such as Eisler Park in Austin, such as Golden Gate Park and San Francisco, such as Grant Park in Chicago. And I think the reason is, is that people want more of a green sort of, you know, nature friendly environment. You're going to see a show in a stadium is much different than going to see a festival where you're experiencing lots of different types of activities from all sorts of music, but also food, crafts, art. And the way that these events really work well doesn't really lend to something that's a stadium environment that's built for a completely different purpose. And they just the configurations don't really work well. So we have extensively looked and worked with Parks and Rec at other locations. We all determined based on a variety of criteria that really Oberlin was the one that made the most sense for this particular location. So I want to ask a question about the clubhouse. So I see that you all will have access and use of the clubhouse. The revenue that will be paid back is for damages to the golf course. So what happens if the clubhouse is damaged is. I believe we. Can make this. An amount of money. Yet same. It covers the clubhouse, is my understanding. And so the amount of money that's been set aside for the park you're saying is sufficient to include the clubhouse, or is that in addition to. Well, we have to repair everything. Anything that stands. So there's not a limit of that, and we'll be insured to protect against that as well. So there's not a specific number. So, yes, the clubhouse is included in that. Okay. And then let's see. I had one last question. This is for Katie, if you wouldn't mind coming forward. It is stressing the Office of Special Events. So, Kitty, how many other parks do we have that are being looked at for various types of music venues? You know, we've got. Various sizes of parks in our city. I just saw something that came across today that looks at Zoo Night Park for a music festival. And, you know, I'm not sure the the size of the event, but I just saw that today. So do we have more and more of these that are being looked at for the use of our city parks? And I don't know if that one is a free one. I think that one is considered to be a free event as opposed to a private. So. Well, I think I can answer part of it and I can think and Fred perhaps can answer another part of it. We don't have any specific venues that we're guiding people towards for for music specifically. I think an event comes to us and they have a park in mind and then we consider it. It's sort of a case by case. There are certain parks that only allow alcohol, so most music festivals would probably go towards those as are larger regional parks. So I think that that's probably the only thing that comes to mind right now that a music festival would go towards is one of the venues that allow for alcohol . Does that answer your question? Yeah, it does. So what you're saying is, you know, I know some of our RINO's are registered neighborhood organizations, organize some of the various types of events in the parks, and oftentimes they include music, so they call them music festivals, but they're really fundraisers for the the neighborhood association. And I see that very different from this. But, you know, I know, for example, we have jazz at City Park that's much smaller scale than than this is proposed to be. And I guess what I'm trying to understand is if we're seeing more interest in people wanting to do something of this scale in any of our other parks, do we see this being like the only one that we're we're looking at so that, you know, the the public and we've heard from people on both sides, but that this doesn't end up being a slippery slope, where now it's like, okay, whose park is next for, you know, some major event that takes it off line from, you know, in this case, the golfers who who normally utilize this park to play golf. Well, I can assure you, at least on some level, that this level, this size and scope and event is is very rare to come to us and for us to look at it happening elsewhere. I can't foresee anything like that. I mean, this this is a massive event and it will be unique. And we don't we don't foresee. We're not looking for. I mean, if an event comes to us and wants to do this, I mean, we'd certainly consider it. But we've spent the last year considering this one. So for anything to come through again, it would it would be very consuming. And I don't I don't anticipate it. I mean, of course it's possible. And people will see it's successful potentially. But I don't anticipate as just, you know, going and starting other music festivals. Councilman Clark wanted to jump in and. I was going to just bring up Fred. Can you talk about the exclusivity clause in this contract specifically that. Would would prevent. Something of this note that. The city is agreeing in this contract to not engage in in any other contract of a similar nature in terms of a major music festival. So during this timeframe or at all. During the term of the contract, that's all the recovery during. The term of the contract. For the month of September or the five years. Of year. Of five years, yes. So there will not be another festival of this type of this size, of this nature, four or five years, it'll, you know, during the term of the agreement. Okay. Thank you. All right. So we are into comments. Pro tem president, pro tem clerk. Thank you, Mr. President. First, I just wanted to thank everyone who's been involved in this discussion for lending their voice to the process. I want to thank again and not a lot of them made it out for a second week after sticking around for 5 hours last week. But everybody who came out to the public hearing last week and for sticking around to have a chance to speak. And all my colleagues who asked great questions and pushed and prodded throughout this entire process. It's been a long process and one that didn't have a roadmap. There isn't a specific thing that we do or how we work to engage the public written down when someone asks to have an event on a golf course. This was new, and while the process that we landed on was certainly not perfect, it was robust with all of the meetings, the surveys, the opportunities for public comment and engagement. This contract looks the way that it does because people, the citizens of Denver, the citizens of Overland and Ruby Hill and all of the surrounding neighborhoods got involved with it. And because supervisors was willing to meet the concerns that the neighborhood had had on and not run away from them. I do believe that this is a good contract. It's a contract that protects the golf course, that protects the neighborhood, that brings revenue to the course to make improvements that would otherwise not be possible, brings revenue directly to the neighborhood for improvements that citizens have been asking for for years, and revenue to the Parks Improvement Program citywide . But most importantly, this is something that my constituents, the neighbors, the leaders in Overland Park are asking for. And I don't mean for a second to imply that this is unanimous by any means. There are constituents of mine and people throughout the city who don't want this, but there are so many that do. And we all saw last week during the hearing that those who do span all ages and represent the diversity of this entire neighborhood. They're also a very smart group of people. Some of them have been fighting for this neighborhood for more than 40 years. They stood toe to toe with the Shattuck Chemical plant and demanded that they clean up what was at the time the most polluted site in Denver. And that land is now clean enough that it's being developed into townhomes, places where people will live. And money from. The settlement that that neighborhood negotiated was a catalyst for the $30 million of investments that we now have along the South Platte River in the last five years. This is a group of people who knows how to defend their neighborhood, knows how to build community, and they have asked me and they're asking us to vote yes. Scott Rutledge And his crew from the golf course have met extensively with Superfly. They visited the festival in San Francisco and they have assured me that the course will be better, not worse, because of this festival. Happy Haynes stood up here. She negotiated. Fred negotiated this contract to team with Parks and she stood up last week and told this us that this is a good deal. I know that Scott and his entire team, I know that Happy and Fred and the entire Parks team, the board of the Overland Park Neighborhood Association, all the residents of Overland, Ruby Hill, Ardmore Park, Platte Park, Wash, Park and beyond will stand shoulder to shoulder with me to make sure that Superfly lives up to everything that they've promised and delivers an event that our entire city can be proud of. This vote isn't the end of that work. It's just another step as we continue to work to address all of the concerns that were raised throughout the public process, in the plans that will be forthcoming. So tonight, I will be voting yes on this contract, and I ask all of you, my colleagues, to put your trust in the work that's been done and in the people who have done it in our golf and parks team, in the leadership from overall and my constituents and the surrounding communities and join me in voting. Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Clark. Great words, Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to say to Councilman Clark and to. The Parks Department. And to Superfly that I respect all of the work that went into this. And I believe that there is actually probably the foundation. For a very good. Contract and an event here. But just in my gut, it just feels like the wrong location to me. And so I'm going to vote no tonight, and I ask my colleagues to consider voting no for the following reasons. I think we need to respect. Process. In the city here, especially when it comes to our parks, which are in Denver, fairly sacred to us. Right. And only seven years ago, we had. A very robust. Public process that said, these are the parks where we will have admission based events. And that policy went through a round of. Public outreach. And consensus building. And in the. End, golf courses. Were excluded. And we also have policies regarding amplification in parts in the code in Denver, revised code 3962. Only two parts were were granted by ordinance the right to use amplification at City Park and Civic Center. Park says the council may from time to time by resolution resolution designate other parks. I don't know if we're going to get another resolution that will go along with this when it comes time next year to grant the right of amplification in on this golf course. Ultimately, it just feels wrong to use a. Golf course for this. And I understand that this might be the best site that you mentioned. This was the best site you can find in Denver. But the the least bad. Best site for me isn't good enough. I think we need to respect the public process. That said, we don't do festivals and we don't do admission based events, special events on golf courses. And if we can waive that the first time an offer comes along and just say, okay, we'll do it anyway, I think that. Disrespects the public process. It disrespects the neighborhoods and I just don't think it's right. And so I will be voting no. Mr. President, and I hope everyone else considers whether would they want this to have happened in their neighborhood, to have gone through a lot of debate. And where should we have festivals? You know. We picked Ruby Hill. I got the list here. Mr. President, we have City Park, Civic Center. Confluence Park, Skyline. Park, Central Park, Stapleton Park, Field Park and Ruby Hill that are designated authorized for admission based events. And if somebody comes in the door and just says, well, I'd like to do one on your golf course also that we can just throw. Away all that public process. It just doesn't seem right to me. And so out of respect for the neighborhoods and out of respect for our process, I'd have to vote no on this. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Councilman Flynn. Councilman Sussman? Yes, thank you, Mr. President. I was actually going to talk about process two, but mainly it was to appraise all of the people that are engaged and how much process there was and how much engagement there was with the neighborhood. I know that our city people that have worked so hard care about our city and wouldn't want to be doing something that might, you know, harm it. I know that Councilman Clark is committed to the city and to his neighborhoods. I am pretty impressed with the deal that's been worked out to keep the golf course, to actually pay for all the lost revenue, to pay for any damage, to improve the golf course after you're finished. I'm not sure we've made such a good deal for any kind of festival ever before in the city. I also think that they I remember the process that Councilman Flynn's talking about, and I think they left out golf courses not for any particular reason. They just didn't discuss them. But of course, golf courses are the open spaces that we pay to use. I think a lot of that discussion was about paid festivals on park lands, but golf courses you have to pay to use know no matter what. And the reasoning that we've just never done this before. So why should we were? That's never been. An excellent reason for trying something new. The multiplier effect that I see from visit Denver economics is pretty outstanding, upwards of perhaps $10 million into our economy. I really appreciate what the and the all the communications we have had with the neighbors on both sides. But I do know that Councilman Clark worked very closely with the leadership of all of his neighborhoods. And I am pretty excited about the prospect and perhaps having a very famous Denver music festival that we've never had before. And so I will be voting for this project. Thank you, Dr. Sussman. Councilwoman Sussman. Councilman. No, I'm sorry, too. You had a question and I got cut off. I had a question to this. I do appreciate what Councilor Flynn saying. And also, I really appreciate what President Bruce brought up about the financial return on this I had, and I wasn't aware that the $2 million I was only seeing, all I was seeing was $200,000. And in that regard look, Fred, let me ask you a question, if I could, please. Only the $700,000, supposedly, whatever that split is for the neighborhood's neighborhood improvements. Will the neighborhood be involved with the decisions that what improvements will be made? That neighborhood? It's not something that Public Works is going to decide at a city department to decide we're going to pay streets or it's actually a decision making process that includes the neighborhood to make sure that they have a strong voice on how that money is being spent. Well, the the funds will be appropriated through CIP, through the capital improvement program. And Councilman Clark will have will represent, as you do, as all the council members do, how that money is spent in in the district. And so it's not there won't be a formal process for the neighborhoods to determine how to spend that city money . But through the normal process, which neighbors have a great voice in, through council members, they will influence that significantly. I guess I misunderstood. I thought it was the director neighborhoods involved. You're just talking about the entire district for for Councilman Clark, right. Maybe council clerk. Yeah. So again, there are two sources of revenue. One that will go to the neighborhoods through the community engagement nonprofit, and they will have board members from the neighborhood who will discuss those projects. And the other is the one that will be coming from the general fund. And I think this is a great opportunity to explore some of the participatory budgeting that we've been talking about, to say this is money that right now is just earmarked to come back to that community. There's not a specific boundary that it is only overland because the residents of Ruby Hill and of Platte Park are saying, hey , what about the impacts around us? And so I think it will be part of what are the impacts that are happening, what are the infrastructure that everyone's been wanting, and how does the how does the public engage in those decisions as part of our budgeting process? And how much money is in that foundation that the neighborhood will receive? That one is a dollar per ticket sold, I believe, for the neighborhood fund. And then there's. Also another contribution that we're determining where when we give a comp ticket, we ask for a contribution. So, for example, you could get a common ticket, but there's a 20, 30, $40 contribution. That money also goes into the nonprofit we're generally anticipating around the first year, $100,000, but that could grow depending on attendance. So when you start talking about 70,000 attendees, then you're talking about around 200, that 200,000 plus each year. So we think when you go directly to the neighborhood. So that goes directly to the neighborhood nonprofit as opposed to the the other money that comes through the city process. And the nonprofit is for that specific district. As Councilman Clark stated, the the board is essentially made up of representatives from Avatar Park, Ruby Hill and Overland Park. So, yes, the board is comprised of neighborhood members. With with more neighborhood members from Overland, which is the neighborhood that that's happening. Okay. I'm just going to make sure that, you know, I was really feel strongly about the evaluation committee and and having a fair and comprehensive evaluation of the program. And I'm sure that will occur. And I'm also to make sure that all those neighborhoods are benefiting strongly from this, first of all. So we need some assurance that that money will go back into community improvements there. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Councilman, new Councilman Castro. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I'm going to talk about a few things that concern me. A few things that I believe and a few things that I believe. I know. I know that there are good folks who live close by the Overland Golf Course that are excited by the possibility of a major rock festival on that site. And I know that there are good folks who live close by who are not. And I know that there is mixed opinion in the greater community as well. This is one of those where no matter which way this vote goes, some people are going to be happy and some people are going to be quite disappointed. I believe the process of informing the public while there have been blips along the way, I think as it has evolved, I think all parties have been heard. The fact that we might vote one way or another doesn't mean people have not had their opinions heard. It's just we agree with some and disagree with others. I believe the process has been about as transparent as any large profit making project is going to be. The possible benefits of welcoming 30 to 80000 people a day to two overland have been touted, and the possible downsides of that, I think, tend to tend to not get as much airing when a similar event was proposed for City Park a number of years ago. I was opposed from the start. I simply could not see any way that traffic and noise could be adequately mitigated in a park so completely surrounded by established residential neighborhoods without being an unfair burden. My first reaction to Overland was not that clear. The presence of Santa Fe Drive on the eastern edge and a less intense presence of immediate neighbors made me think that maybe this can work. Since the first time that I was told about the possibility of this this event, I have said, and I continued to say, to vote yes, I'll need to be convinced that the community is going to be better off for this event taking place than it would be if it never did. I personally want to thank David Erlich, who has served the Super Super Lives Point person for the event, for his openness, his candor, and his willingness to work with the community and attempt to get to. Yes. I laughed when I heard that super fly who was meeting strong resistance from the neighbors closest to the Gulf. Course, would be willing to offer them, quote, significantly discounted tickets. Mr. Erlich went to the promoters and who stand to make millions off the successful festival. They have agreed to make those tickets available to the people most most impacted when presented with concerns regarding those with health burdens that would not readily, readily tolerate the disruption of festival weekend. He began searching options to relocate them to comfortable environs during the event and to look at sound mitigation alternatives for those that would choose or need to stay put in their homes. He work to add detail to a provision that would bring a part of ticket proceeds back to the most affected community. I believe that if the event takes place at Overland, the golf course will be restored to playable conditions afterwards by nature. As Councilwoman Sussman pointed out. Golf courses are admission based events. A very small percentage of Denver sites have ever set foot on overland golf course because it takes a good penny to do so. Retail rate is 28 bucks during the week for 18 holes, 40 bucks on the weekend. If you want to ride around in one of those fancy little car, you should dump another 15 bucks on top of that. Now, let me add my concerns. I am clear that if this event takes place, it does set a precedent for use of golf courses for admission based events other than golf. This is something we haven't done before. It's something that's being proposed. So it would be wise to keep an open or an eagle eye on what we now do with our golf courses. While not a deal breaker in and of itself, the I need to take a little bit of issue that this is a family friendly event . By my calculations and all I have to go by are what I read as far as the prices of outside lands for a single day for a family of four is 670 780 for a three day family of four and 1650 980. And thank you for clarifying that. There's no apparently no parking and 48 bucks to take a shuttle. I'm concerned that the details about the management of this festival that will lead me to believe the nearby neighborhoods will be better for the event taking place than if it never was. Are not available to me in the contract being presented. The contract, as has been discussed, that we're being asked to approve calls for, as it certainly should security plans, trash plans, traffic plans and other plans. Unfortunately, those plans are not required to come before the city until 150 days before the event and don't have to be finalized until 60 days before the event. And they will be approved by city agencies and not city council. While I have great respect for our departments, public works, parks and the police department, environmental, health, all the people who might look at this and I have partnered on them effectively on other projects. There have been times where I've also disagreed with all of them about a variety of important issues with a contract that has such potential impact on the community. Reticent to cede council authority and operate on trust at a time when I'm hearing from from many folks thinking that council should be taking back increased control over our green spaces. I'm not inclined to give control away. Another concern for me is the five year length of the contract. While there are cancelation provisions, if terms are not met, none of those provisions equates to, you know, we appreciate your good efforts. We just don't think it's working for us. The decisions as far as breach of contract will be made by attorneys looking at strict details of the contract. Next to my family and friends. Music is the most important part of my life, and I can't believe that I'm sitting here and I'm going to have to vote no on this festival, as I say, because the information that I need to get to that point isn't available to me. I went to Coors Field the other night to see the Zac Brown Band. I think I didn't see the official estimate, but I'm guessing around 45,000 people. And when that event let out, that stadium had I'm guessing didn't count this exactly, but six, seven, eight different exit points for people to get out. As I look at Overland, I'm guessing they all dump out onto onto Florida. And now there may be an exit to the south along here on I don't know what the plan is. These people, I believe, know how to run festivals, but I don't have that information. And so. With that said, I'm afraid I'm going to have to vote no on this event. And that's why I have to say thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilman Cashman and Councilman Espinosa. Councilwoman Black was in the system. Do you mind if I go to her? Councilwoman Black? Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to thank Councilman Clark and Denver Parks and Rec and special events for their incredible community outreach and for learning so much about the festival in San Francisco. I know you all went there. You talk to neighbors, you talk to businesses. You learn the ins and outs of it and the impacts on the community. So I really appreciate that. I've heard from lots of people who are really excited about a world class music festival here in Denver. And I've heard from a lot of younger people who do not play golf and they don't get a go on golf courses. You can't walk your dog on a golf course. You cannot go on a golf course unless you golf. And they're super excited about being able to use a public greenspace for something that they like to do. I am confident that the golf course will be put back in better condition than when it was started. I am confident in the contract. I know you all have done an incredible job and also that you've responded to the neighbors and you've had a lot of meetings with them and you address their concerns. I also know if it doesn't work out that you won't be coming back. I've been thinking about it more in the lines of the Cherry Creek Arts Festival, which this year I think there were 351,000 participants and our attendees and the Cherry Creek Arts Festival takes over Cherry Creek. And if you live there, it's a bummer. But it's a world class event. It's incredible. Artists come from all over the world to come to our Cherry Creek Arts Festival and then the neighborhood is put back together again. And it's a fun event for people in Denver. I know all of you are committed to the success of this event. I know you're committed to. The people who live in Denver and to the people who live nearby. So I appreciate I appreciate all that. And I'm keeping my comments brief. And I implore my fellow council people who I've yet to speak to also be concise because I'm supposed to be at Red Rocks in 20 minutes. She's had. The. Bucket List concert for me, and I don't want to miss it. Thank you. Councilwoman Black, I can't believe you just said that, Councilman Espinosa. Yeah. Now I can't be. Go on and on the way I had intended. There are lots of measures. Both mean financially, physically operational, to to address the impact on the public and safeguard assets. And in those are those are key provisions. Those are the sorts of things that if this had come to my district, I would be looking to address and address robustly. And I'm glad to say that, you know, in large part, those those things have been met. But if you are just a warning, if you are predisposed to being bothered by noise of this type, just know for three days. For those three days, no. It's more likely to happen than not. What I ask is that you report real time so that they can be checked and informed decisions going forward. Well, I think the contract is fair for five weeks of loss of use. I do think that there was a harder bargain that could have been made. And so you're lucky you weren't in District one. However, there is a this is a slightly. More considerate contract on the community's terms than most that this city agrees to. I still think that this whole experiment is most vulnerable on the traffic. And impact of. The intends on the surrounding neighborhood, but at least there is a commitment to address these concerns and consequences for failure. I think that the points raised by Councilman Flynn and Cashman should be at the forefront of everyone's mind in the aftermath of year one and before moving forward into year two. Um, I do think this, this is a great way to, to everyone's point about the charge of greens fees to play this course. It's a beautiful place. And so I do think it's a great way to experience this public land. I would suggest because of the cost of entrance, it would be nice if there was a free, soft opening on the main stage so that people could be in that center space or one of the side stages so that people can sort of experience what it's like to be on that fairway. Having that sort of quasi country urban experience, you know. And so, you know, that is that is so it's giving access where it could be a tool to give access, where currently access is restricted. That said, the other thing is, is that I would be remiss not to mention this part of the reason all of these spaces are available for use of this sort of park use is because there are big, wide open fairways. And if we had ground up a portion of this property to create a stormwater detention pond, that would not be a place you could occupy. And so there is a very big distinction. I want to be clear and go on record saying that a, you know, converting a fairway into a picnic place, a hangout place, a concert venue is another public use that is viable for park use. But stormwater detention, if that was stormwater area, you could not go in and stand there for hours on it for three days. And that is not a park use and that. So with that said, I will be supporting this because it is just an extension of how we can utilize public lands in a way. But it's done the contracts are done in such a way that we're either going to get it right, we will tweak it to get it right or we will stop doing it. And I think you guys have acknowledged that from the get go. I have been tough in that regard. And so I appreciate the concessions that you have made to the community, to golf in particular and to Denver in deference to trying to get this through. So I'm looking forward to that experience once it comes forward. Thanks. All right. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa, Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. I, um, I definitely appreciate a lot of the conversation around it. I do you know, I do respect the the concerns of the folks that live adjacent to the, uh, and in the community of the golf course in high school. Was the only time I ever set foot on that golf golf course and was, you know, immediately kicked off the team. As Yogi Berra says, you know, when it when I hit the ball, I like somebody else to go chase it. So I have to I have to say this. I do I do understand the concerns with parking. Remember that it's very close to Santa Fe Drive. That is a very big access point. It's close to Evans as well. I mean, it's not just embedded in the neighborhood in the middle of of an urban center. It does have some some good access points. I do share the concern of Ruby Hill and want to make sure that folks are respecting not only just our I decent neighbors and neighborhoods, but the park. You know, there are some some places and I know one member of council will agree with me when I say this that are not public venues that are bars that empty out all the time. And as they empty out, people urinate in their front yards. They leave bottles, they leave garbage. It is a disaster. Amen. And so and so I want to make sure and you know, that that is being enforced. Right. We have to make sure that the community is respected. Having said that, in listening to some of the testimony, there real concerns. However, I don't I don't believe it's going to be Woodstock. Right. Woodstock was awesome, Paul. I know it's awesome and I'm not going to Woodstock. I think people are going to be setting up camp on Platte River and making permanent homes. I don't believe people are going to be bathing in the river and and carrying on or whatnot. I think, you know, the Platte River is there for people to enjoy, but it's kind of so we're a little bit removed that I don't think people are going to want to do that. One of the in music. You know, but I do understand those concerns. This is what I'm going to say. In 2010, I sat on this council. And we were thinking of doing a a mission based event and either civic center. Or City Park. And those are two of our primary parks. And you know what? To be honest, at that point in time, I really was sold on on the on the on the thought that, well, these are our public spaces. Nobody's going to be able to use those at that time. And should we charge for our public spaces? And. And I look over at Civic Center Park and I see how barren it is as your under-utilized it is. And because we don't use them, utilize it as much, a lot of bad things happen. We need to utilize our parks and we need to do them in a way that strikes a balance in the community. I voted no on that. And I feel that because of that, we have to go to golf courses and whatnot. And I'd much rather come right down here and enjoy it. We have other events here. They may not be an event where it's admission based, but it gets a lot of people and it's a good time. And when I go to other cities, I mean, I didn't get the chance to do this when I was in Austin because there wasn't anything going on at the time. But that's why I wanted to go to Austin for I mean, if I'm going to be in the heat. Sweating at least one, listen to some good music in a public space. And I was there in L.A. when when Jay-Z and Fox, when you saw that, I mean, it was it was actually pretty cool. And the use of these public spaces and I don't want a Denver to miss out on that. And also, here's the other reason why in my final reason. We are lucky. Because all this talk and all this worry about our open spaces. Well, yes, we have our parks and our beautiful open spaces, but. You drive 20 minutes. West on Sixth Avenue and new at the Gateway to buy one of the largest. Majestic. Most beautiful open. Spaces we. Have in Colorado. And that's our mountains. I don't see this as an attack on our open spaces. And our recreation and our ability to enjoy the fresh air without noise. It's all out there waiting for us. Right. And that's more of a challenge. So with that, I mean, I do look forward to having this to seeing it. It is it is something not too far away from not too far removed from us. And I really have to give Councilman Clark a lot of credit for the process. For the. Convening. He truly was and is somebody who I believe is is is super careful with his decisions and very, very inclusive in the what he did. And I think, you know, a lot of this is taken lead from his leadership and his assurance. So with that, I do vote I will vote yes on this. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Councilwoman Canete. Thank you, Mr. President. I am always, as always, impressed by the thoroughness and thoughtfulness of my colleagues. And so but as often happens, it's it's that we are looking at the same factors, but sometimes weighing them slightly differently. And I was listening to Councilman Cashman, who I deeply respect for his thoroughness. And I feel like he covered most of the things that I'm weighing, but he weighed them slightly differently. And so I will be supporting this contract tonight and wanted to identify a few of the reasons why for my constituents who have been asking and feel like they want to understand why and how we're making the decisions we make. So for me, I feel like as well, the fact that this is a fee based activity today that people pay for golf courses today. And actually, I'll come back to that point because golf courses are in trouble in in Denver. You know, we are looking at the potential closure well, the certain closure of the Park Hill golf course. So there's this tradeoff between this very expensive infrastructure to upkeep. And then the amount you're willing to charge, you're able to charge for an urban course without some of the amenities of private courses and trying to keep it affordable to the residents. You want to use it. And so it is no exaggeration to say that the financial stability of golf is in question. Our Golf Enterprise Fund has has struggled with those issues. And so the ability to earn resources that can help keep these fees low, not just the infrastructure costs, because I know there's improvement fees, but the solvency of golf generally is important to keep the fees low. So we're not in a position where we're trying to trade off the affordability for golfers. So so to me, I think that that's all connected on the financial side of this deal. Would that have been enough by itself? No way. Right. There are other things to weigh for me. The public hearing was really beneficial. I heard very sincerely the concerns of the immediate neighbors about their disruption, and there's no way to deny that. But I also balance that with the fact that those parks that are listed in the list Councilman Flynn mentioned, the neighbors from those parks bear so much burden from us having all of our events focused on those parks. And those neighbors have asked us repeatedly as a city to balance out some of the things happening in other areas. So when I can't and this is partially my At-Large seat, I can't think just about the residents next door to one park. I'll start to think about what is equitable and what are the other things in our neighbors of Civic Center and our neighbors of Civic City Park are deeply burdened. And so for me, this is a balance, right? It's not it's not perfect. And there's no denying the impact, but it's balancing rather than putting all of that burden on one neighborhood over and over again or eight neighborhoods. So for me, the other thing that was really persuasive is the depth and history of the leaders who supported this. You know, when I see a jack on row, when I see Ronnie, these are folks who I would not consider to be easy in terms of meeting their standards. I don't always meet I often don't meet their standards as a council member. So I know they're tough. And when they get to the point, there's a point at which my job as a representative is to say, who are the trusted community leaders? And if, if, if, if I'm going to represent the trusted community leaders in this neighborhood, the ones that I've worked with for years, the ones that I've seen in leadership for years are there and they supported it. So I have some faith in the fact that they feel enough a part of the process that they will be able to have a voice in those final plans that we don't yet have. Right. And so so they're they're the liaisons. And if they have that trust, that's that's a big leap because they're on the front lines of those discussions. So I think that there is always risk in a new venture, and I think this contract manages a lot of that risk. I too would like an easier non-renewal clause. I feel like the bar for non-renewal in, you know, years, two through five is is, is high. I would have liked it better if we had an easier decision to say, listen, you. Complied with everything, but it still was not good for the city. I would like that out, but we didn't we didn't get that. But weighing all those other factors, I'm going to vote in favor of those long term residents who who have told me that that this is what they would want. So, again, good points on all sides. Just I'm weighing on those for me tonight. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Councilwoman, can each Councilman Flynn and councilman knew you've given your comments? Okay. If I skip to Councilman Ortega for comment. Councilman, thank you for something. I have to get Councilman Lopez out to the golf course or to aqua golf to practices. I scheme to. So this one has been kind of challenging for me because I'm a huge music advocate and have have championed our creative industries that we have here in Denver. And, you know, folks who live here know that our music scene is way bigger than Austin's. We just don't always promote ourselves the same way that Austin does. But at the same time, I'm also, you know, a huge neighborhood advocate as well and want to make sure that we're always doing what we need to do to protect our neighborhoods. I can remember one of our very first fee based program was when we closed down the park across the street and we had our first Grand Prix downtown. Kevin You'll remember that very well. And I think after was it the first or second year they didn't come back? Yeah, they were here for two years, but they didn't make the kind of money they thought they were going to make on the event. I want to make sure we keep marijuana out of the facility, especially if we do have children. I agree with Councilman Cashman that, you know, these aren't affordable family prices where you probably going to see lots of kids in the in the park at the event. But for families who can't afford it, that will bring their children. I hope that that's something that know I know they can advertise, but you get to these big events and you smell it at every single venue where you have large music events. I want very careful attention paid to the impact to Ruby Hill, and I'll be looking at that very carefully. I know the neighbors there will as well. I appreciate the community investment fund that's been created. I think it's a creative way of looking at how to mitigate some of that impact to the neighborhood, how to compensate them, if you will, where they can put that money into some of the priorities they identify, working together with those for neighborhoods. It's something we've been talking about and working on trying to get National Western to do the same for the impacted neighborhoods of Globeville, Illyria and Swansea for what will be a year round place with lots of activity that will affect those neighbors. One of the things that I noticed and this was brought to my attention by the couple of the neighbors that live near Ruby Hill, where they had heard the ticket prices for the paid events at Levitt Pavilion, where we're going to be capped at $25. But when you add in all of the fees, it significantly adds to the price of the ticket. And I'm assuming that's going to be the case here as well. So what you think may be one price by the time you add in all the fees ends up being a significant more than that. There's only one road into this golf course. I've played it many times, and so the ingress and egress is going to be from that one road. You know, when somebody mentioned traffic that would let out onto Florida. I'm assuming you were talking about foot traffic because vehicle traffic for the you know, whether it's going to be Lyft and Uber or busses or whatever. And I heard Aqua Golf is going to be like a staging site for some of the busses. So people will have to walk because there really isn't an access point into the golf course from Florida right off a Santa Fe unless there's. Going to be cutting into the fence or doing something different to get traffic in there, and then we'll repair that later. But so how we deal with that traffic flow of people getting in and out of the site, whether it's busses turning around in the parking lot, which is, you know, if you're going have people parking in the parking lot, you need room for all of that traffic to maneuver in and out of there. Somebody mentioned the fact that not having some of the plans and I understand as you get closer to those details will be put together and we won't see those. But ensuring that the the details are paid attention to. We're dealing with this with a different contract where we're looking at those details now. And the devil is always in the details, making sure that the concerns of the neighborhoods are front and center in how those plans are put together. I'm still not sure how I'm gonna vote on this. I mean, I'm feeling very conflicted. You know, again, I'm an advocate for for, ah, music industry and, ah, creative sectors. And I think as as a whole, as a city, we do a really good job. We have smaller events all over the city. I understand that some of our local talent will be part of the entertainment. I don't know what that that split is of. It's 20% to 80% of the big name bands you guys are going to bring in. But I think that's a a. An interesting and good part of this project as it will move forward. And I'm pretty confident you have the votes for for this to move forward tonight. But those are those are some of my my concerns. You've heard my questions earlier, and I'll decide when it gets time to vote where I come down on this thing. Thank you. Okay. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. I'll try to be brief so that Councilwoman Black can make it to Red Rocks in time for the encore. I want to thank Councilman Lopez for bringing up Woodstock and risking the wrath of Harriet. When I get home by disclosing that she hitchhiked from Chicago to Woodstock back in the day, and she remembers it as one muddy mess. And so I certainly hope that it doesn't turn out that way. Just for clarification, Mr. President. The reason I wanted to comment again was to clarify that if when you pay a Greens fee at a city of Denver golf course, you're not making that an admission based event. Year round of golf is not an admissions based event. The policy defines an admissions based event as when the. City Parks and Rec. Permits out a park facility to a private party to conduct a private activity to make a profit off of our parks for an admissions fee. So a Greens fee does not make a golf course, an emissions based event. And I want to finally, I want to thank Councilwoman Ortega for reminding me of those three words that keep ringing in my mind ever since I heard this proposal. And that is Denver Grand Prix. In 1989, the city went into a five year contract. I know there are a lot of differences. The site is different. This is the Grand Prix that ran around Civic Center, not the later one that Cronkite ran the Pepsi Center. This was the original one that tied up downtown for two years and lost $5 million and declared bankruptcy and actually had to sue Mayor Webb to try to get out of of running the other the other three years. I keep hearing that in the back of my mind. I hope I'm wrong because I think this has enough votes to pass. But I do think that in light of. Of our. Policies. Well thought out. That we ought to stop and give pause and wonder whether we just ought to admit that we simply don't have the right place to hold an event of this sort. And that to to pick the least worst place is just not good enough. Thank you, Mr. President. All right. Thank you, Councilman Flint. I think they do have private parties on those golf courses, but Councilman do. Thank you, Ms.. For a brief comment. I came into this meeting ready to vote no on this project, and I felt my two big concerns were, again, about the neighborhood participation in the evaluation and whether they truly were going to have a be fairly representative and have a voice in whether this festival would continue, if it was detrimental, if it didn't work, would they really say that they would have a part in that decision or where this this contract would continue? Also, the economics here in economics discussion tonight, I want to make sure that the neighborhoods get their fair share of the improvements in this. And so what it boils down to me tonight, even though I have real concerns about this location and I'm an avid golfer and I'm really interested, I really wish I had asked Hale Irwin last week what he thought about this golf course improvement. But anyway, I'm going at the boils down to me is is I trust Councilman Clark who says the district I have great confidence in him and he'll make sure that the residents have a voice, a strong voice and make a good decision to be treated fairly. And he'll make sure those improvements will be made to that neighborhood. So I'll be voting yes tonight. Thank you, Councilman. New Councilman Herndon. Thank you, Mr. President. So I have a golf course in my district, and I wasn't going to chime up. But I just wanted to say, when Councilwoman Kenny. Made the comment, certain closure of Park Hill golf course, I just need to make. Sure. I echoed that my sentiment is different. To that. I am unaware of the certain closure. There are certainly conversations about the future of the. Park Golf course, but I certainly would not characterize it a certain. Closure. So I wanted to say. That before I get emails about it tomorrow. And I think about if this organization came to District eight and said, We're interested in doing this event, and I look at the process. And the conversations that Councilman Clark has had, would there be anything that I would do differently? And while if I thought really hard, I am. Sure that there would be something I have to applaud. Councilman Clark, the city, the organizers, because they. Took all the questions and challenges head on and they tried to reach a place that, hey, outside of not doing the festival, we are we hear you. And this is how we believe we can help mitigate some of your concerns. And so I do want to applaud you for that, because that is something that we do not always see. And so. This is something that I. Will be supporting today. Mr. President. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Hernan. Okay. Guzman Espinosa. Yeah, I sort of. I'm glad I'm dovetailing off of Wayne's being councilman new in Councilman Herndon's comments, because that's the only reason I chime back in. I just wanted to throw my support again around Councilman Clark and and do stress that, yes, he was he was always forthcoming hearing our concerns. And he no, I mean, he and I and I, I think the reason why you see so much support from his community is because of his his leadership in his in his in how he's handled himself and the community throughout this thing in such a positive way. And I would expect nothing less going forward. And I think everybody on that side of the table knows that Councilman Clark has earned the support from members of council. So if you know, if you're not agreeing with him, you're not agreeing with a bunch of us. So but that's this speaks to Councilman Clark's, the way he's handled it. And they just want to acknowledge that it is a very good contract because of his work. So thank you. You got a problem with Clark? You got a problem with all of that? All right. I'll put it down somewhere. Councilwoman Canete. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm sorry. I do need to thank Councilman Herndon. You heard me stumble over my words there, and I just want to apologize. I kind of was stumbling to get it out. Certain changes, right? With certain that something is going to change there. And I was struggling to get it right. And I apologize because I will now get the emails too. So I figured I should take credit and just say, yes, we know change is coming. We know it's in trouble, that we know. We know that it is under water to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. So that we know and I apologize for the misstatement. Long process ahead to figure out what's happening. Sorry. All right, Councilman Black, I'm the last one speaking so you can get ready. I'll just say this has been an incredible process. Thank you all from the city. Thank you for the community. Folks have been calling me, emailing me. Thank you, Councilman Clark. One year. I mean, I feel like we've been talking about this for about a year. And so this is a lot of work going in to make sure we got the right deal. And to me, the thorough process is what it's all about. And I won't repeat what a lot of my council members have said up here. The debate has been rich and great. But here's the problem in Denver and you're hearing it up here, you feel people feel in the city of Denver that the success that Denver is feeling is not reaching to neighborhoods, to neighbors, to the grassroots individuals. And this is the first deal that I've been a part of where I see how much money, specific neighborhoods, nonprofit organizations are getting. And, you know, for the next folks coming to make a deal with the city, you're in trouble because we really want to make sure that there's a significant investment in our neighborhoods. And I'll just talk about the music industry, the music scene here. We had we had artists in here from the Rhino neighborhood. Well, there's a whole community of of budding entrepreneurial musicians that want to be a part of the success. And if we just have this huge event and no connection to the success of these individuals, we can never be like Austin, even though we have more music venues than us. And so I am voting in favor of this because of that point that we really strike the balance of investing in the community. And I hope, Councilman Clark, you will report back to all of us how much money the community is getting, how much money the neighborhood is getting because of these ticket sales. So and Councilman Flynn, you asked the wrong question when you said how many of you you all want this in your neighborhood? Because I live in the five points, right on neighborhoods. So we have this all the time and we enjoy it. Protections are important, but some of us love the urban environment and want to be a part of an eclectic, diverse, dynamic community. And I believe this will bring it. So without further ado, Madam Secretary, Roll Call Clerk Hi. Espinosa. Hi, Flynn. Now. Gilmore, I. Herndon Cashman? No. Can each. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Pass assessment. I. Black I. Ortega. No. Mr. President, I. Close voting as a result. Ten eyes, three nays. Tonight, three nays. Resolution 687 is passed. Madam Secretary, will you please bring up the next deal on our screen? I believe it is. Council Bill 680. All right. So, Councilwoman Sussman.