A resolution approving a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Denver Great Hall LLC concerning the predevelopment phase that will include project planning and redesign concerning the Great Hall for Denver International Airport. Approves a proposed Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Denver Great Hall LLC concerning the predevelopment phase that will include project planning and redesign concerning the Great Hall for Denver International Airport. (201418237). The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 9-19-16. The Committee approved filing this resolution at its meeting on 8-17-16.
12 eyes, one abstention. Council Bill 608 has been adopted. Madam Secretary, please pull up Council Bill 610. And I assume this is going to be called out for vote. I'm going to. All right. We'll just go into commentary. Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to call out. Well, I called out 608, but then also 610. And I'm abstaining on both of these because my brother in law has an interest in this project. That's okay. Thank you. Councilman Herndon, will you just put this on the floor? Yes, Mr. President. I move that resolution 610 be adopted. Okay. It has been moved in seconds. It will go into comments by members of council. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Mr. President. I have some questions. If I if I might, and I don't know if they're going to tag team through this or not, but. One of the it seems to me one of the ways that you get most advantage from this full P3. Procurement is to keep multiple proposers as far along in the process as you can in order to keep the competitive tension going and get the best pricing as possible. And and here it seems to me that we have made a selection of our preferred concessionaire a little farther upstream than normal. So I'm wondering, Kim, what does the airport have in its processes that will keep sort of a competitive nature going as we negotiate with only one party for the final agreement? Hi, I'm Kim Dan, the CEO of Denver International Airport. Well, first off, let me just say, Councilman Flynn, our process has been 18 months so far. So we have spent some time looking at this competitively. You should know that all of the proposals that were submitted to us are still active for the next six months. So if we were to have an issue and wanted to go to one of the other proposers, we could do that. Oh, that's that's good to know. Thank you. And how was the six month term of this pre-development agreement determined? Because that seems like it's a very compressed time frame, especially when you have to coordinate with TSA and outside agencies who really don't care about our calendar as much as we do. Yeah, there's no question when you get the federal government involved, it seems to take longer. This was really a thoughtful balance of the fact that we want to get this done as quickly as possible and relocate TSA. And yet we wanted to have enough time to truly do due diligence with this partner. So if we had not had the pressure on the other end, I think we would have extended this a bit. But we have a great work planned for the next six months and I think we're all confident that we can achieve what we need to do. And Kim you can do have already some and my view with with the TSA memorandum of understanding. We're in the process of actually we're in the process of executing that. Okay. I did watch the committee meeting where this went through. I was on vacation in California. That's how I spent part of my vacation. And one of the things that I found interesting was one of the submittals is what I thought would be what I would think would be one of the most crucial ones. And that's the submission of the fixed construction. I know an m price and it's a type A submittal, which means you have to respond in the next business day. And that's the middle is due the day before Christmas Eve. And I'm wondering, maybe I've missed something, but that would seem the fixed price for construction and for own end would seem to be the very core of the agreement. How can you do that in one day or what am I not understanding here? So we're still finalizing what all that submittal schedule looks like. We just reviewed it this morning actually with Ferrovial and I we've actually, I think, moved that day up to December 21st as I have, as I recall. So we're making that a little more generous. The reality is this is a very aggressive six month schedule. I don't think we have many turnovers. That would be 24 hours. Most of them are about five days or seven working days. But we're all committed. My entire staff is committed to work with Ferrovial to make sure that we comply with all of those requirements. Did you tell them they're going to work over Christmas? I haven't told them that yet. You just did. It's a gift. What can I say? And have you determined and affordability limit, you know, annually through this construction process of your cash flow and how much you'll be able to carry from year to year. And ask Gisela to come up and talk to you that. Good evening. Shanahan Chief Financial Officer, Denver International Airport. Councilman Flynn, could you clarify just a bit on. What cash flow you're. Well, I know from the terms of the term sheet there, there's there's still a lot to be negotiated. But I'm wondering if you have examined going into the not the full 30 years, of course, but because that's going to be negotiated. Well, let me let me rephrase it. If the term is the full 30 years or even less, will we know and in six months exactly how much cash we might have to pay to the concessionaire and in what years, we'll have to pay that. And looking ahead, will we be able to meet those obligations? I'm just concerned about cost overrun. Absolutely, yes. During the next six months, we will get to the details of the financial deal, which will include all of the payments either way, whether from the concessionaire to the airport or vice versa. We will run those through our airport financial plan and make sure that that keeps us exactly where we want to be from a financial planning perspective. But yes, we will make sure that we are very comfortable with the cash flows involved. All right. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you, Councilman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. I do have a couple of questions. I have had several meetings with Kim and her staff asking a number of questions about this particular contract. The first question is on the $9 million. Is that in the 2016 budget? I don't remember when we adopted the budget that that money was built into the 2016 budget. The project is in our capital program. So the 9 million would come out of the airports capital fund and not its Operation and Maintenance Fund, which comes due annually for budget approval. Okay. It's my understanding that the this project sort of is a result of a couple of things. Number one, we know we need to address some security issues. But number two, there was a concession master plan that was done that kind of looks at overall the needs of the airport and where we might be able to generate more non airline revenues. And so part of my question is wondering where that at in terms of dialog with both the public at large as well as the other concessionaires. Because this involved, as I understood, having input from lots of different people. And I saw something that came across like last week about a meeting coming up to talk about the master plan. So help me understand how that fits into the big picture if we're just doing some of those meetings now. But part of this is based on the master plan. So let's separate that into a couple of different pots, if I may. The concessions master plan has begun socialization. We have had conversations with our concessions association. We have had conversations with our airlines, but it's not a complete study. So they have just been briefed on the the processes that's taking place in terms of the Great Hall. While yes, I think the concessions master plan validates the need for for more concessions. In fact, I think the number in there is 200,000 square feet. The Great Hall is a little separate from that. It is addressing a specific need. We, in fact have had the concessions in the terminal on month to month holdovers for a few years, knowing that we intended to revitalize that space. Okay. Kim, as you know, I've shared some concerns about what the impact might be to the folks on A, B and C who have made significant investment to go into the space. And if. This is as successful as it's anticipated to be by capturing people once they go through the TSA lines and stay on the the main concourse before they go over to Terminal AB or C. What impact this would have. And then on the flip side, if people go straight to their gates, as many do today, then there is a chance that this is not successful. And I'm concerned about the overall fiscal health of the airport. And so help me understand the thinking of kind of how you all anticipate that this is a win win for everybody and not just for the people who will be in the main terminal. So first off, the first part of your question, we know there are passengers that fly our airport today that do not buy anything because the lines are too long and they cannot get what they want by the time their flight takes off. We do not have enough concessions to satisfy all of today's passengers. The study that you referred to, the concessions master plan, tells us that just where we are today, we need to add concessions. Add to that, we are an airport that is growing very rapidly. And so over the next few years, we will be adding lots of concessions. That doesn't take away from the concessions on the concourses. In fact, I would say to you that gives them more opportunities to have even more concessions. So it's a for the concourse concessions. Adding the concessions does not take away from them. Your other question was the risk of will passengers stay in the Great Hall or will they get on the train and go to the concourse? And I think this is really one reason we have chosen Ferrovial, because they have shown in the way they developed their property in Heathrow that they know how to make a compelling concession that will keep people there. Plus, they know how to use technology to give the passengers the power to know how long to stay in the Great Hall and when their their flight will leave, whether it is giant flight information displays or information that we push to you on your smartphone, we are going to let you take control of your journey. And we think that will, in fact, encourage people to stay and spend time in what will be a fabulous Colorado experience there in the Great Hall. Mr. President, I'm only going to ask one more question, if I might. Other questions don't get asked through the folks that are waiting in the queue. Then I'll, I'll chime back in to be at the end. But my last question for now is to ask Kim. I'm not sure that you want to address this or you want somebody from Ferrovial to address it. But I think the issue of the reputation of the company is one that has been brought to the attention of all of us. And I think it's important to not gloss that over and have it addressed upfront in terms of how I guess initially I'd like to know how thoroughly that was vetted by our DIA team in terms of looking at some of the allegations of. Bankruptcies that have existed in some of the other cities. I know this is a very large company, but, you know, that's a reality that has existed in some of the cities where they have operated around the world. And then the allegations of improprieties that were shared with many of us as well, where apparently there is a pending court case. And so if you can just speak to the the thorough the thoroughness of of vetting them, I think that's important. And then maybe somebody from Ferrovial would want to speak to that as well. I think, yes, we will do that. Just in terms of our site in tort, in addition to the normal process we go through to vet any contractor who is proposing at the airport, we actually hired an independent third party, KPMG, who and we also had an outside counsel, Mulvaney, O'Melveny Myers, who really looked at all of the proposers and gave us a great report back on Ferrovial. So I would ask Chris Butler of Ferrovial to come up and address specifically your issues. My name, Chris Butler and I'm from Ferrovial. There have been a number of comments I know that have been raised with council folk about the reputation of approval. And I can say absolutely that from Vale's approach is it's it's an ethical management is the topmost quality. We are absolute we have no tolerance at all for bribery and corruption. Let's look at the scale of the company that that is ferrovial. Its market capitalization is something like $16.6 billion. It has an EBITDA of over $1 billion. It has an employee workforce of something like 100,000 staff. This is a large company. It operates with the highest of ethical approaches in its policies and its processes. Now, there are two particular cases that I'm conscious that have been raised with councilors. Let me address them one at a time. The first one relates, I think you refer to bankruptcy, and that was associated with a project that had been run by Cintra. And before I talk about a specific project, let me just again set the context of Cintra as an organization. It's invested some $21.7 billion. In its overall investments. It runs something like 27 toll roads in nine different countries. These toll roads cover something like 1166 miles. This is a large company. There has been one particular toll road where forecasts were made of passenger or sorry transport movements. Before the financial crash. The consequence of that is that the forecast number of movements did not materialize. But what I should say about that is that the less was in Texas, the the state of Texas received this, I think by now something like $142 million worth of revenue from that. It was Cintra as an organization. That was out of pocket as a consequence of that, not the state. So there was a loss. That loss has needed to be absorbed by the investor syndrome. So that that's that particular case that I think you were referring to. The second case relates to. Ay. Ay. Ay. Ay. Position in Catalonia where there is a cultural center where Ferrovial had made contributions to that cultural center running something between 1992, I think 2009. And the allegation and I should stress it is just an allegation. Is that the in making those contributions as a consequence of that, there were some favorable allocations of contracts. As a result, there are two members of Froebel staff who at the time afraid of staff who have now, it has been alleged, were involved in this wrongdoing rather than the company. But the company is very clear, ferrovial is very clear that the we firmly believe that those two individuals will not be found guilty when this goes to court. It has not been to court at all at this stage. So nobody has been found liable. And at this stage the details are private. So the information that people are reading is kind of based on secondhand reports. So that's the that's the backdrop to that. So, you know, we're in a position here and it's difficult for those individuals. They can't make their defense public. That's not part of the process at the moment. So we're in a position to try to defend something which is which is only half the story has been made public, which I think you'll recognize the difficulties. So just to repeat, we were very, very clear about zero tolerance for bribery. Corruption is a large organization, and we take our reputation extremely seriously. Thank you. Gentlemen. I appreciate you addressing these important issues because I think at the end of the day, none of us want to find the city in a situation where, you know, we might be in the middle of one of these situations. And that's why I asked how thoroughly did we that this to make sure that we are protecting this asset. It is a city facility and it's our responsibility to make sure we're doing our due diligence. And I fully understand credit. All right, Councilwoman Sussman. Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to speak a little bit about this. Pre-development agreement. And I. I think the last speaker said something very interesting to me. I just believe that public private partnerships are a very judicious way for us to manage and leverage the dollars that we have, and particularly in investments in infrastructure, not the least of which reason is that it sort of transfers risk. And just as in his description of how the private company had to had taken on more of the risk than the state of Texas, I think that's an excellent example of what a public private partnership can do for a government entity. But you can also get with the expertize that you have. With organizations like this that have such experience, you can get a shorter time to delivery and. And probably at a lower cost. And. It just makes a lot of sense. I know that a lot of governments are doing public private partnerships to make their money go farther. This, of course, is just a pre-development agreement. It's agreement to talk about how things are going to go forward from here. But what I also like about this project is that we are going to own all the assets that may come out of this pre-development agreement, even if the agreement doesn't go ahead. Although I believe. That it will. So I just wanted to comment that on so many fronts, an agreement like this makes a lot of sense for a city. And I'm really excited about the all the planning and the thoughts that have gone into the Great Hall and to kind of restore that beautiful architecture that we have there. And so I just wanted to commend you all for entering into what might be a wonderful private public partnership. Thanks. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President, I. All right, you, Mike, please. I wanted to make sure I ask a few questions. I was really intrigued if somebody can talk about the process now. You mentioned the RFP process and. It seemed really competitive. What did that RFP process look like? Who was there? Who were the other bidders? And how did Ferrovial and I do respect who has not. But in the U.S. market. But what made the difference there? Sure. The RFP process was quite robust. You've heard a bit about the interactive process that occurred before the RFP was issued that allowed us to make sure that we had a project that was well-suited for a public private partnership. Once the RFP was issued and we did receive the three proposals, we had an extremely well-qualified. Panel to review the proposals. And conduct the interviews. We had Westfield and Manchester Airport Group. Were the other two teams that you just asked about, along with Ferrovial. Of those three, generally, Ferrovial scored highest and at the outcome of the review. When you look at the RFP, which. Is now public and the particular areas that were reviewed by the panel, FERROVIAL being first and foremost an organization that has conducted itself in a in an operating airport, one of the largest in the world, the largest in Europe, and has taken that airport from a hub that was at one time considered the worst hub in Europe to now being an award winning installation that gave the panel and the airport a great deal of confidence that we were working with a team moving forward that did have a proven track record in an operational airport environment. That is key. Along with that, their understanding of what it takes to invest in and then maintain a facility long term that involves concessions as well as the airport core function was also very well received. And in addition, the customer experience, which is another key component of this project, the proven track record as well, that they have been able to elevate the customer experience portion of an airport to a new level. And that is exactly one of the goals of our project as well. So we wanted to make sure we could safely move security, elevate the customer experience, and move forward with a partner that had proven not just that wanted to be in an airport operating environment , but that had proven that they can do that very well. In the in the RFP. As you look at what was cost in terms of how much it would cost us as the city of the airport to implement this weighed versus projected profit. Right. What did that picture look like in the RFP process? I'm curious. Sure. So there were a number of ways that teams could propose. Kim mentioned earlier we had KPMG as the financial advisor with expertize in pieces. Each of the proposals was compared from an apples to apples comparison basis. So in other words, all of their proposals were brought together in a way where the panel could very. Efficiently. And clearly understand what the long term impact to the airport was from the financial proposal. So the revenues that were projected were reviewed. The costs of operating and maintaining and reinvesting in the facilities over the term of the lease were reviewed and then as well as how the airport and the team could potentially split not only the ongoing maintenance but also the revenues in the long term. So all of that was evaluated and compared among the three teams. Bid for overall score the highest when it came to revenue and. Cost. Can we? And it's your specific I'm just making sure that within our procurement process, I'm staying within the parameters of of what I. Yes, as a matter of fact, in the financial category, that is my understanding, was the highest ranking of the three teams. The other the other question I have. Well, I just wanted to understand what made the difference between the three. Right. I mean, I know I've heard of Westfield. I mean, in committee, we were told that the operate lacks we I wasn't too familiar with with. Manchester Airport. Group. They operated in the US. No, not at this point in time, not in airport. They do have several airports in the UK. Okay. I figured that part if I can, Mr. President. I mean, do committee work on the fly? Just want to make sure when we're looking at this, this is the opportunity to negotiate and negotiate. Look at what the proposal for any further proposal will be. And I do understand I mean, the airport will I mean, on the intellectual property that we gain from that, we are actually entitled to that if, you know, if things go south or not. My other question would be, you know, we've had a lot of change at the airport. We have a lot of growth at the airport. We have a lot of new things happening at the airport. The one thing I want to remain constant is that we have great labor at the airport, right? That the men and women that are maintaining our airport here, you know, we get this all the time. We get bragging rights for having the cleanest, coolest airport in the country. And I appreciate the saying, but what are we doing to make sure that in this process that those men and women that are maintaining our airport and providing the services that our airport are are at the table. And what I'd like to see us to continue the work with the folks that we have a commitment, do we have to that to avoid any kind of labor dispute or any any issues that arise from that? So I'm not as trivial to talk about that as the commitment. But let me just begin by saying the wonderful thing about this program is it means jobs, it means construction jobs, and it means new jobs at the airport, which is a great thing for all of us as we grow. That's a way to share the economic benefit we are. We are very lucky that we have this growth happening at the airport and we constantly are out there recruiting, trying to bring new people in to fill these jobs. We're also looking at ways that we can make it easier for people to understand the jobs that exist at the airport. So we're talking about some sort of a technological bulletin board, essentially that will show the jobs that are there. We are doing countless outreach events. In fact, we've gone to a couple of your districts in the recent months to do outreach for concession workers. I think the key here, and you mentioned it, we won't we don't want just we don't want to leave workers behind. And so Ferrovial is planning a thing called they they've done in Heathrow called Heathrow University, which I will let Chris talk to. I think the the one thing you need to know is what they want to do here is give amazing customer service. And in order to do that, they need amazing workers. And so they are going to provide some training and some ability for us actually to let the the concession workers benefit in ways more than just a salary. So do you want to talk about that? Thanks, Ken. Just a brief resumé that the of the Heathrow Academy. It's something which we've been undertaking now for some considerable time. And what it provides is, is one of these situations that is a win win. So we work with local providers and with colleges and with employers to provide an opportunity to give people an entry into work. So through this academy that we've created, we have had some 5000 people go through that academy. It has put over 3000 people into work, which has got a multiple benefit. It's clearly the people themselves have jobs. It has a benefit to the employers because those people, they work ready. So there's lower recruitment costs. It also has a benefit to the state in the sense that they're not paying unemployment benefit. Rather than that, they're actually receiving tax income. So everybody wins from that scenario and it provides some of the recruitment training, but also then some development developmental training as well. So we have over, I think it's 1500 apprentices that have gone on to get jobs as a consequence of this particular scheme as well. And we are very keen to work closely with the airport and develop a scheme of this nature for Denver, because we think it's a fantastic opportunity and it's particularly important. Whereas as Kym says, one of the things we're trying to do is we want to create a an airport which is second to none. We want Denver to be the benchmark and we will create that subject to the council approval and clearly the airport approval. So we have a great facility, will have a great concessions program in that, but we've got to staff it with great staff and we want to help develop staff as part of that as part of that process. So are there any. Sorry. Sorry. Have there been any kind of commitments or any anything anything that you've used at Heathrow or anything else that that really speaks as you move into and as you moved into Heathrow Airport, as you've seen the issue that was at hand, you went and you say your company turned it around. Did that happen using the workers that you had that happen using the talent that you had? Here's the thing with Diane. Right? And I wanted to I want to hear what your strategy is and what your vision is with that here in the council chambers, in DIA. And Dan, as as the airport is evolved. Right. What it's done is, is build. On and just in build that success. With those with the talent of the folks that were there with the talent. And it doesn't require that those folks leave right to become successful. Otherwise, the jazz model hasn't been over the last years to to create success on the backs of workers, but with them. Right. And really rewarding those workers and moving that forward and really rewarding that model. I want to know if you guys are committed to that philosophy. So if I may give you some examples that leads us to answer your question. And there are a number of examples. And so Kim was talking earlier on about the way in which since we either purchased Heathrow back in 2007, there have been some transformational performance, and indeed there has. So if we start off looking at things like baggage performance, where when Ferrovial purchased the company, there was something like 40 bags per thousand that were missed. They're now around 17 and that's a significant international connection. So the banks have to come in, be rescreened and then back out again to slightly significantly different from a local or domestically based airport. So they're the same. The same teams is just better organized and better processed with new investment in new equipment. So that's an example. Another example would be on security in the U.K., the airport is responsible for the resourcing, the provision of equipment, the the maintenance and the delivery of security performance. And we moved the number of people who were waiting less than 5 minutes moved from something in the order of 84% of passengers to the end of 2015 that have reached something in the order of 97.4%. So these are these are transformational percentage changes. We've also improved things like punctuality that's been significantly improved under the under current ownership. So almost every one of the metrics that you look at, it seems a significant improvement. And the level of retention at some of our major airports is very high. So you see a lot of the same people who want to deliver. That is the way in which it's organized, the way in which it's planned, the way in which it's been delivered, and the way in which the staff are then trained, which is important. I hope I've answered your question. Yes, Councilman Lopez, I have five other folks in here. Can I give them a shot? Absolute. I just wanted to. Make just one more statement. And that's I mean, it's a question I really appreciate the the questions you had. I just want to make sure that we are making sure that those workers in the area that have made it great, that we are rewarding them to stay, that it's benefit the benefits outweigh the risk of having this new contract. I mean, potentially this new change and making sure that the folks who are at the airport who have built their careers on the airport since they've been there, can continue to securely be able to say, I my job is still there. Right. Thank you. Councilman Herndon. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Chris, question for you. If you could come up here just for anyone. So if you're not familiar with Skytrax, Skytrax is the organization that ranks airlines. So if you get a SKYTRAX rating, good or bad, then they know what they're doing. And I bring this up just so that people can have some context around this. Correct me if I'm wrong, SKYTRAX rated terminal five and Heathrow, the best place to fly in Europe for the past five years. Is that correct? That information? Yes, it's got it is. It's got the best place to shop for many, many years. And it won the best airport in in Europe in the last year as well. And you all have been running that, I beg of you, Ferrovial has been running that during the fight. We're partners at Heathrow. We've been we bought the entire company, including six other airports, I think it was, and some international interests back in 2007 eight. Perfect. That's all I you know. Thank you. So I want to put some context. It's a good question to ask. You know, why are we these not familiar? You know, this is a global organization. We are a global airline. I'm from Kansas City and I love Kansas City. We're not competing with Kansas City. We're competing with these airports all over the world. So for us to to create this experience, a global experience, we need somebody that has the history and the experience of being successful. So I appreciate just you acknowledging that I have all the faith in the world of the airport team as they go through this RFP process. They hired independent consultant consultant to look at the financials. That is I am comfortable with. Councilwoman Sussman talked about the P three. I'm not going to go there. Let's talk about the concessions real quick, because I think that's an important avenue to talk about. 2015, our concessions made $340 million. 2015 Acdp is made 140 million. 54 million passengers went through DIA. About 60% of that is owned, originate and ending here in Denver. We can't create enough concessions for people to eat and have a great experience at DIA because I think that's a valid question. But we can't have enough. And of the conversation when we're talking about concessions, it's just the Jefferson terminal. And I say just from the whole big experience, the A, B and C terminal are not even impacted by what's going on. This conversation that we're having, so concessions will continue to thrive. And my vision of this project, we're going to have more concessions at the main terminal, so more job opportunities for people. So I am comfortable and confident that this pre-development agreement where it is right now should go forward. There are several questions that we as a council should have as we get a little closer. But as we get into the weeds right now, I think we're putting the cart before the horse. I am comfortable with all the work that the airport team has done moving forward. And my last point, which I honestly think is the most important, you know, our airport was not designed for a post-9-11 environment. Our airport is vulnerable. And we need to move forward to. We create a space where the people that come through and fly are safer. That cannot be understated. And for us to not move this agreement forward, I think would be wrong from just a safety perspective for all the work that the airport has done moving forward. So I am in full support of this and I certainly hope our colleagues will move this forward because I think once we get to the final answers down the road, everyone will be happy. Thank you, Mr. President. Yeah. Thank you. Councilman Herndon. Councilman Espinosa, you're up. I the. I'll get into the weeds. I have an actual problem with one of the particular articles in your agreement, and it is what it is. We're not going to ask you to change it, but 4.08 A on the ad services. That's the developer initiated services. It doesn't require actually any approval by then. You know, it reads if the developer desires to perform services in addition to the pre-development work, under this agreement, developer may advise the city of any such changes by written notification to the city. And then and it goes on into how that is now part of the agreement. I. I. I. I'm going to say I trust that you'll manage that. But that is that's letting ferrovial I mean, the state of Delaware. So. Right. This and maybe this maybe I'm looking at the wrong thing. But this is the great Hope P3 agreement that's on my screen. That said, the other important thing is, is that we keep talking about this is a pre-development agreement, but this is very much a developer agreement as well because that is one of the work products of this agreement. Correct. Yes. In addition or as part of all that. Sorry. Good evening. Dan Ramer, the city attorney's office, in addition, or as part of the submittals required under the pre-development agreement, will be the negotiation of the development agreement. And the intention is that that development agreement will be presented to the Council at the end of the six month period. Great. So the important thing there is that that is an agreement with the city, which is all of us. So what I'm getting at is that one of the nice one of my one of the as I've been developing a comfort level with this process, with this agreement. I mean, I having been in the airport as a young architect before, it was anybody was moving through there. I've seen that. I mean, I want to commend us having 20 years into this thing. We've actually done a pretty damn good job taking on the changes that came with 911 and whatnot. But I've been struggling with physically how we were going to improve this, given the the constraints that the building has, but maintain the sort of quality of that environment. I am getting more and more comfortable the more and more I learn about the approach that potentially the technology that's out there on how we might actually be able to adapt and move forward for the next 20 plus or 30 years. Is this case may be, but in and in one of the things that gets me excited about this is that I think we could be as innovative and ahead of the curve as we were, as when Pioneer first proposed this, that the concept of moving out there in the middle of nowhere seemed so forth, but it ended up being an incredible asset. So how do we take ourselves to the next level and be this international destination mid midway through this continent is by providing a level of service that we couldn't even predict back 20 years ago. And I think the potential is there if we get in the right partnership. But well, and I've made this very clear, and that's why I'm telling my colleagues that this is our agreement, is that while we're setting a new precedent and a new paradigm for airports in America or worldwide, we should be. I believe that you have the capability in your partnership to actually do that on the labor front, to bring something new to the air. And so that's what I'm asking as a member of the agreement, the developer agreement, because we're the city, the developer agreement that will be a work product of this process provided that it goes through and we're happy with the work product, is that we have something on par or, you know, to the Heathrow Academy that we're actually because this is a stable this is a this is this is a stable revenue generator for the city and for this state, really. I mean, for the city in general and for for the enterprise, I should say. And so these are it's got the potential to be a real stable job and a real for anybody that gets lucky enough to get employed out there. And I would like this culture to sort of permeate the sort of stability of the place, the beauty of the place and how it performs permanent permeate all the workers that go out there. And so that's going to be my expectation is while we're doing all this stuff on on security and concessions, we're doing it for the people, too. And I think we're going to benefit from having a potential partner that's actually sort of more familiar with sort of more pro-labor governments and things like that than than our own what we've got going on here. So I just I just want to say that that's when you guys come back. That's what I'm going to be looking at. So if I could just make one comment, I think we have heard loud and clear in our meetings with many of you that this is a clear priority for you. And in the next six months, we will develop a very specific and robust program with regard to workers and education and recruitment and all of those elements that will be part of our work during this pre-development agreement. So thank you. Thank you. Kim Yeah, so thank you. Kim Because I do think the things that I'm seen thus far, I've questioned at multiple, multiple levels. And I'm, I'm comfortable with this pre-development agreement. I'm comfortable with the terms both if we continue or choose not to, but if we choose to go forward as a city, I think that we all have that expectation that we're actually going to deliver the next 30 years comfortably and quality out at DIA. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Espinosa, Councilwoman Canete. Thank you, Mr. President. I have a few questions. Then you can decide whether you want me to give my comments. Sir. Put me back in the queue to do those. So I first wanted to say thank you both. The team, as well as the contractor team have spent a number of hours with me and trying to do my due diligence. So I appreciate that. But I do still have a few questions because the most recent large project at the airport was the Hotel Transit Center. I have to ask a few questions about that just for comparison purposes. So my first question is, is the hotel performing well? Yes, far above our expectations. And it's my understanding that there's an agreement related to how the workers and the hotel interacted at the at the DIA Hotel. Is that correct? Yet there is a legal agreement that determines the relationship between how workers in the airport and in the hotel will interact with each other. Is that correct? That that was a piece of it is not an agreement with the airport, but Starwood has an agreement with their workers. There was a there was a piece of the RFP when the airport was initially committing to build this hotel that the city had in its policies. Correct. I don't know if any of us know the exact words. I think there was something about neutrality. Yeah, that. That's the agreement, too. So have you had any issues with labor disputes at the hotel? Not that I'm aware of. And has that agreement impaired the performance of the hotel at all? Not that I'm aware of. Okay. That's helpful to know. And then we had a change in teams on the hotel design project at one point. We had. And was it when that change took place? It was my recollection that the following team could not just pick up exactly where the prior team left off, that there was a certain bit of reworking they had to do of the product they got from the prior architect that that it took some time to then get back up to speed. Is that correct? I would not clarify that way. We actually did indeed pay the the original architect and we owned all of the work that had been done to date. And we started from that point and went forward. Was it the same exact design carried forward or were there changes and adjustments made? It was early enough in the process that there were normal changes that would happen as just as design evolves. Okay. Thank you. My next question is, what is the status of the current concession contracts in the Great Hall that are operating today? They are on a month to month holdover. And what will happen at the point at which this contract and in the construction down the road takes place to those existing concessionaires? So just like any concession contract, when they expire, the concessionaire has an opportunity to bid on another location. But the current concessionaires will be closed. Correct. Any lease there? There actually. I mean, I will just say that their leases expired some time ago. We have actually extended them on month to month to get us to the point of this construction. Right. But at a certain point, they will terminate and this new P-3 will operate their spaces moving forward. No, this P3 does not operate any concessions. This P3 will this partner will go out and put together proposals to bring in concessionaires. And we hope that some of the existing concessionaires in the airport will apply and win spaces in the terminal. They also have the opportunity to apply for spaces in the concourses. But in the interim, the construction, all of these locations will be redesigned. There will be I mean, maybe Ferrovial wants to answer. Are any of the concession spaces that are there now going to continue to operate in perpetuity, or will you be rebidding each of the spaces? No, obviously what they're going to do is a massive construction. So all concessions in in the terminal will be closed while we renovate. Yeah. And I'm just trying to clarify because we've had a lot of questions about the workers. And so I just want to be really clear that every worker in that terminal will lose their job at some point during this process. I would say that, yes, in their current job, but they all have opportunities at the other concessions. Right. But they have no guarantee to those other jobs. That's correct. Okay. Thanks so much. That's really helpful. So I just want to move into my comments, Mr. President, or would you like me to go back into the queue? Go ahead. Okay. So I appreciate some of my colleagues mentioning that they're willing to kind of take this conversation about some of the pieces of this contract that are unknown and, you know, hold them over and see where things happen in six months. My recollection of the costs and some of the changes that occurred in the scope was not that if things didn't work out with the first team, it was really easy to switch to a new team. It was quite controversial and challenging to make that transition. I do believe there was additional costs that we incurred when we changed architectural firms. And, you know, we can, I guess, debate that a little bit. But having been at the table and having to approve some of those contracts for the new teams, it did not feel seamless to me as a city, and it certainly did not seem seamless to our auditor in terms of the costs that were incurred. So I don't think that it's the case that you should choose lightly the first time around. Right. And just say, well, if it doesn't work out, it's only $9 million and we can switch teams. I just that's a lot of money and I think it's important for us to treat it very seriously. I've been very impressed with the general concepts that the Ferrovial team has brought forward, and I agree with Councilman Espinosa that, you know, the potential for the hall to be reworked. But I see a very real chance for labor disruption in this in this situation. We have an entire terminal of people who will lose their jobs. And we've had a lot of emphasis on the fact that there are hundreds of jobs open at the airport, and it's really easy to get a different job. We have really low unemployment right now. This contract, if it goes to the final development agreement, could last for 30 years. We all know that unemployment rates change and it's not always the case that there's a ton of extra jobs. And I think that to the extent that this team has has has not been clear in committing to what their policy commitments are. It's great to do training and it is great to have a conversation about the kind of interaction you want to have with your employees overall or your concern. Engineers, employees. But I'm in the government business and in the government business contracts include policies or they include very clear terms that indicate what relationships might look like. And in this case, I often approve things from this dais that aren't all the way done, that are in the works. But I have not had one conversation to indicate to me that any of those policies are in the works. They've been open ended conversations. And there is I've asked several times, is there a conversation scheduled to work on a policy related to the things Councilman Lopez was asking about? And I have been told there is not a meeting scheduled which does not give me comfort to say, trust us, we'll work it out in the next six months. I think it's really important that intentions are clear up front, even if the work isn't all completed. So for me, I also have similar questions about the construction contracting. I really appreciate, you know, Sadr's team has been, you know, very responsive and trying to get me information about how much of this work will be competitively bid. But I don't have a clear answer on that. And again, this is a public private partnership, which means that I expect high standards for competitive contracting to keep costs down, to make sure there's fairness. You know, I can't speak to allegations in other countries from many years ago, but public competitive contracting is the best way to avoid those kinds of allegations. And so I just don't see the clear path of commitments that I would need to see to approve a relationship that has the potential to go this long. I don't believe the first six months. I don't take $9 million lightly as an early relationship. I want us to get this right. So I'm going to be a no vote tonight. I this very well may pass, in which case I hope that these conversations that are not scheduled today, these intentions that haven't been made clear in terms of how to avoid the economic risks both to workers and to our airports, operations from all of the we already have labor disputes occurring around this issue. And my fear for their economic impact on our airport and on passengers is real. So I will not be able to support it. But if you are successful tonight, I do hope that you will come back with a clear set of written policies about these relationships rather than just, you know, broad statements about training colleges. So with that, I will be voting no tonight. Mr. President, thank you. If you can hold your applause so we can get through this. Councilman. Mayor. Thank you, Mr. President. I think, you know, I think you and your staff are going to do a great job. I think it's a wonderful project. And I'm sort of surprised that this safety issue had come up before now. I mean, you know, yes, the recent incidents that we've had around the world, you know, just emphasize how important the safety of that Great Hall are. The lack of safety in that Great Hall really is. So I think the project's going to be good. Yes. I got a couple of questions. You know, financial monitoring of performance is going to be critical. Can you describe the process going to go through how you're going to monitor that, the financial performance of this country council? And who are you referring to post the development agreement or as measures. As you're building, going through the building and you're putting your financial monitoring process in place, what are the key things that you're going to be looking? Are you be concerned about and how is it going to work? Sure. We are going to have some very specific requirements will be negotiating over the next six months. That will be similar to what we've put in place with the hotel, for example. There will be monthly reports required on both revenues and the costs. We will monitor those very closely. We will have terms in the agreement that will spell out a range within which Ferrovial and its team would need to remain in order to meet the terms of the agreement. Along with that, we will have a cross-functional team within the airport that will monitor all of the facets of the operations , not just financially, but as you know, that does impact the financial bottom line as well. We do that currently. We have a cross-functional team that monitors all of our projects to make sure that they're staying within delivery, time, scope and of course, budget. And that will be something that we will also implement the minute that this project goes live, and that will also be reviewed within the context of our larger financial plan because as Councilman Hearn mentioned earlier, this is just one component of a very large operational airport. All right. Thank you. I would you I have great confidence in your ability to manage the finances. And will there be a member of the city finance department to be a part of the creative development process? Will that be somebody there to help you out? Absolutely. So I work very closely, almost on a daily basis with the city's chief financial officer. And we will have a member of his team, whoever he appoints, that will be part of that process. Will it be a role for the city auditor in this process down the road? Maybe not in the pre-development, but somewhere down the road. Are you thinking about using the city auditor as another safety check to help you? Yeah. Yes. Those conversations have actually begun. Great. Wow. And then the risk sharing part, that'll be part of this agreement. This pre-development is so. So we'll end up with a great deal like the state of Texas did. And so. So will we. But there will be a main issue that you'll be discussing, I'm sure. Absolutely. Okay. And then at the end of this pre-development phase, will you be sharing information with the city council about how this how it ended up? Yes. Okay. Move forward to. Right. Yes. So when the development agreement comes forth, at that point, there'll be quite a detailed discussion, as you can imagine. All right. Well, thank you very much. I wish you best of luck. I think you'll do well. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman new Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr. President. I couldn't be more excited about this project. The the Great Hall, as it exists today, has proven itself not nearly as timeless as the great roof above it. And so I think it's going to be a wonderful opportunity to really move DIA into a 21st and 22nd century product. But I as with a lot of my colleagues, I share concerns about labor retention. And I really I appreciate Councilwoman Canete so clearly stating the the problem of the potential for lost jobs in the Great Hall businesses themselves. And so I'll be looking at that closely. I share concerns about the the effect of the Great Hall concessions on the concessions in the terminals. But I also believe the opportunity exists that the existing concessionaires can share in what we hope will be bounty from this new project. I'm really concerned about security at DIA, and I think this is something that that we need to address now. And so I'm going to be supporting this tonight. I think I want to move forward now. However, there's going to be a whole different ballgame. And next time we meet about this project, I don't think anyone up here. I expect this will. My guess is this will move forward. But I don't think any of the votes tonight that may be moving this forward should be interpreted as in the bag. Six months down the road, when the when the real deal comes forward now, I expect there's going to be labor peace. I'm expecting that. I'm expecting the questions about all the city policies that we all hold dear, about how we deal with minority contractors and so on and so forth, will be part of what comes up to us down the road. But we will be reading it carefully. So cross the T's and dot the I's, please. Thank you, Mr. President. Councilman Cashman. Thank you. Councilwoman Ortega, back up. Yes. Two quick questions and then I'll make some comments. So, Chris, would you mind answering whether or not for a will is in in looking long term, would be providing transportation vouchers for the workers? You know, one of the challenges we have is that it is so far away and the cost to either park or to take the train or even the bus is is a little pricey. And with most people making minimum wage, it's. Frankly, a little more affordable for people to work elsewhere than the airport. And if we're going to have more concessions, we know that we still have jobs at the hotel that still need to be filled. So that is just one small tool, if you will, that could could help defray the costs for workers. So can you address that? Yes. I mean, I think I would put that in the context of wider work, which we are going to be doing to attract the employees that we will need for the airport. So making sure that there is affordable travel will be will be important. Quite the level of commitments and who that will be given by will it be by the individual concessionaires and by the work that we're going to be doing in conjunction with the airport as well on things like recruitment fairs as well, to make sure that we take all the opportunities that we can do to publicize the jobs and they will be good jobs that are available at the airports. When we multiply the number of concessions in the Great Hall, you know, potentially by some like 300%. So this is a great opportunity and I absolutely recognize that the cost of travel is an important factor in people's considerations. Okay. And then my next question is probably for Kim. And this is about just looking at how we keep the cost per employment down. So if. The Great Hall is so successful and it's capturing the majority of the spend. You know, people will come through TSA. Once it's reworked, they'll be able to spend there. Once they spend there, they're not going to go spend on A, B, or C. And one of my concerns is if. You know, this is capturing people coming in. And, you know, for for folks traveling through the airport, whether they're, you know, changing gates or just, you know, arriving. I think we have a greater opportunity to capture the spend of people who are, you know, changing. We're Denver's just a. The transfer facility for them. So so part of my question is how do we. How do we get it? Making sure that we keep that cost per employment down so that we continue to be a competitive airport? I mean, because at the end of the day, we're first and foremost an airport. Yes. It's important to have the kind of concessions that people want when they travel through our airport, whether they're international or local travelers. We also need to make sure that we keep the cost of the the goods and the serve the the the food and the goods affordable. So, you know, we may have a lot of people flying through that can afford some of the pricey things. But we still have a lot of families that travel through our airport. We have, you know, people that that travel for work, not all of whom have all their costs being covered. So a lot of them are doing it out of pocket. So having different price points, I guess, is is what's really important. But at the end of the day, how do we make sure that the money that's going to be generated in the main hall is not all captured by Ferrovial? We know that. You know, we need to figure out how to pay them back for the investment that they're going to make to do the improvements. But. I know you don't know what the share back cost is just yet, but knowing that we need to keep our airport competitive and keep that cost per employment down, I'm just asking you to look into that crystal ball and and tell me what that thinking has been about how we ensure that we don't compromise, again, the fiscal health of the airport by keeping that cost for employment down. So that was a very complex question. Let me just say this. I'll try and have a simple answer. In the next six months, we will be working out the specifics of the cost sharing with FERROVIAL. Every cent we make from this great hall we the airport make from this great hall agreement. Every cent we make off of the hotel, every cent we make off of our parking and anything bought in the terminal, we put into our overall model that allows us to reinvest that money to keep the cost to our partners down. And that is one of our primary goals. Every decision we make at the airport, we evaluate what is this going to do to the cost of our carriers. Because, as you know, Councilwoman Ortega, if we can keep their costs competitive, they add flights and that helps us to grow our airport. So this this initiative is just one more piece in that overall goal. And my hope is that we continue to have spend in both places so that we don't have the impact to A, B and C, which is where we're going to rely on really 100% of what's generated on A, B and C, whereas in the main terminal, it's going to be a percentage of what's generated there. And just remember that on the concourses, you have a lot of passengers who never take the train to the terminal. They are just connecting, as you mentioned. And so the entire spend by those passengers will be out on those concourses even after this program. That's right. Okay. So let me just make my comment that we don't need to do that. And so, first of all, I want to thank Kim and all of the folks who have met with me to answer my many, many questions. Apologize that I wasn't able to be at the committee meeting when this was brought forward. I was out of town, but I did send questions over to my colleagues in hopes that we would get to some of those. You missed magic. Pardon me? You missed. Magic. I was just saying. Anyway. I think it is important that we keep our airport fresh, compatible, competitive and affordable with the concessions that we have. And I think this new concept will will help do that on the main terminal. And I think how we put the language in the contract for the next phase becomes really important in terms of what that share back looks like. That absolutely ensures that we maintain control over the contract, but also that we keep it competitive in terms of the cost per employment. And yes, we are a worldwide airport, but at the same time, we still serve families and others that travel, you know, within the U.S.. And so I don't want us to just focus on being that international airport and lose sight of the, you know, the main focus of of serving local travelers as well. And. Yes. It's important to to attract what we have heard from the folks through the various surveys that have been done in terms of the kinds of goods , the kinds of meals, etc., etc., that they would like to see at the airport. But again, we need to keep those prices competitive. The fact that we do not have a worker retention policy built into our executive order, I think this is something city council needs to look at just adopting as an ordinance for contracts that come through this city where we know worker retention is a critically important issue. We've had to deal with this contract after contract after contract. We had one with the janitorial that does work in many of our city buildings where, you know, we had to address that very issue. And I think it's an important one. And particularly at DIA, where cost to get out there is so expensive. I think it's important to have routine updates to City Council. We still have not yet had close out information and I've requested this and brought this up several times. We have not had close out information on the hotel and transit center. And if we keep pushing these things down the road where we never get to them on our agenda and we're doing that with the main hall, that's going to be a problem. And I think we need to look at how we stay engaged in this conversation because the air is part of the city. We're all, you know, part of this decision making process and. DARPA is not autonomous from the rest of of the city. And so the process of keeping this body informed is vitally important to going to the next phase of of where this is all anticipated to move. I just have to say that I am not comfortable moving this forward. I have serious heartburn with a long term contract that has been talked about for this. I know that's still something that would be negotiated as part of the discussions in the next phase. But I think basically privatizing the operations of who selects the concessions that will be at DIA and ensuring that we have a level playing field with the folks that operate on A, B and C. As you guys know, there is a used to be a 20% limitation on ownership that was changed to 25%. And it's not absolutely clear that that same percentage of ownership will apply to any of the concessions that will be in the main the main concourse, the main terminal . So some of these details. Yes, the devil is always in the details and knowing that. This is the first step that really kind of knocks down the door to ensuring that the next piece, you know, just kind of moves forward. I'm not I haven't reached that comfort level and I have shared some of those concerns with with Kim and her staff. And again, I appreciate the time that you all have shared with me and trying to get me to that comfort level. But, you know, maybe at the end of the six months, when you all bring that package back and show us how we've addressed these issues, maybe I'll be there on that next phase. But right now I am not there. And so I'm going to be a no vote tonight. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Thank you, Mr. President. I first of all, thank you, everybody who has been working on this. And this is a big deal, right? I mean, this is worth the conversation that we have that we're having right now. It's a big deal because there's there's a lot of things that we have pride in in Denver. Right. There's a lot of things that there's some things we don't have pride in. I mean, we can. The food over at Kasarani does not a good thing about this. You know, Denver pretended it's not even Denver. We'll just say that. But there's a lot of things, right? We have championship football. We have great downtown, we have great neighborhoods. But we have this amazing airport that in the last 20 or 25 years of this airport, it is went from it has evolved from old Stapleton Airport to this world class facility. Right. And there are folks in this room that have made that possible. I look at Abby or from Councilwoman Stanton, manager of Parks and Rec, Debbie Ortega, who's who served before. There's a lot of things that have happened to make this airport great and. That's also in the same breath. That's also the workforce, because a lot of the folks that begin working at this airport are still there. And they have made this airport, the world class city, a world class airport and a world class city that it is right. They continue to do that every single day. So the reward for their work shouldn't be sorry your job is gone. Got to reapply for another low wage job somewhere else. The reward for their work. Should be. Thank you for making this airport. Great. Let us take you. Let us take you to the next level. Let us advance your opportunity. Let's create new jobs for the airport. Absolutely. Things change. Nobody's going to get in front of the jumbo jet and say, okay, sorry, you can't take off. Right. It's taking off. This airport's growing leaps and bounds. Change is happening. We can't get in the way and over to petty things. We just want to make sure that we have the insurance assurance that the people who are making this airport great reap that return on investment. Right. Yes. We expect this this this this agreement moving forward. Right. We expect this to have the the reflect the the the value of the world class airport. We want to see great businesses, new business come in. Right. We want to continue to reflect the flavor that Denver has to offer in this airport. Right. We want local businesses to thrive. We want new businesses to enter the airport and thrive. But at the end of the day, we want to make sure that the team that is at the table. Right. And, you know, I don't want you to take this as a as a sign of not being welcome to Denver. You are absolutely welcome to Denver. We have great football is a different football, but is good. The other the other football's not so great, sir. But here's the other thing. We we expect those values that we have in Denver to be reflected at your table. As you were negotiating. It is not a separate country with different values. It's not a separate state or a political entity with different values. We have those values. You know why? Because we are pressured. To find affordable housing. That's really not necessarily about housing. It's about the lack of quality jobs and well-paying jobs. And this is where that rubber meets the road. This is one of those ways that we can help. Address other issues in this city and continue to make the city great. Ross No one's going to want to visit. I. And here's the thing. As we move forward, I do have faith. You know, I know some people at the table. That are talented individuals and that understand these values. I, I have faith in that. I know we have a good team and I know they have the same values we do. And I think it's it's it's up to us in the diocese and in the city and the leadership to be able to say, you know what, here's the values that we back. Here is what we expect from our airport. That way, there's no question. What our values are as a city. Right. So as you go negotiate, as you go flesh this out. Please remember those values. Now we want to reward the people that make this city great. From mop to plate to service to greeting to the people that are designing the logo of our airport. Every single body, we want to make sure that they are rewarded in championship teams. Especially from the Broncos all the way to the Rockies. Right. Everybody gets a ring. Because everybody took part in that championship. Everybody gets a ring. And we want to make sure this airport, everybody knows we don't necessarily to pass out championship rings, but we want to make sure that that respect is there. That commitment is there. Right. Those are our Denver values. And that's what we're trying to really express at this table. So if that, you know, I am going to support this moving forward, I was teeter tottering about this for weeks. Everybody's not been getting phone calls from me because I'm just completely indecisive about it. Right. So but I do have faith. I have faith that that at this table is going to be broad. It's going to include the people that work in it. It's going to be amazing. So I want to see this move forward reflecting our values. Thank you, Mr. President. Yeah, thank you. I'm calling you, Mr. Commander. Councilman Lopez. Been a long night already. Okay. Councilwoman Gilmore. Thank you, Mr. President. I am happy to let my colleagues know that October will be at the busy committee, the close out for the hotel and transit project. So pay attention to your calendars and we hope you can join us in October for that close out report. Thank you, Mr. President. You know what? I'm glad you mentioned that. Thank you so much. Seeing no other comments. I'll say this. I have a picture, a new picture in my office. It is of Pena looking over a huge field. And it's the groundbreaking of the airport. And you know, I have so much respect for that man and that visionary leader today because of where we're going and what we're building on. And I'm so excited to make this a global airport. Now we know we're global. We know we're competing with Zurich and in and all these other global cities. But I say global because it has it has a intertwining with the local fabric. And so I think I share the values of my council folks here. However, we've been I've been on I've been at this for about five or six years. And we've we've had some issues that were resolved. And I have faith and I have to, because guess where I'm at? I wasn't hired by the airport, so I don't get to work out the negotiation. And I just voted up or down. I have faith that the airport is going to come back with a a deal that is good for all of us that we can support. And so that's why I will be supporting this. The presentation, if you didn't get a chance to see the committee, was excellent because we spent a large part of the time talking about neighborhoods. We spent time talking about neighborhoods in the community. No one's talked about that tonight. And that's the thing that I'm most excited about, that we had a commitment from an investor, which I have never seen before in the city of Denver, say. We're we're going to be about these neighborhoods. And so that's what I'm about and that's what I'm support. So I will be supporting this. Madam Secretary. Rocco. Gilmore. Abstain. Herndon. Cashman. Hi. Lopez. I knew Ortega. Sussman. Black. Clark. Espinosa. Hi, Flynn, i. Mr. President. I. Madam Secretary, close voting. Announce the results. Ten eyes, two nays, one abstention. Ten eyes, two nays. One two abstention. Council Bill 610 is adopted. OC Counsel Madam Secretary, can you pull up Resolution 591? Great. Councilman Espinosa, what would you like to do with this?