A bill for an ordinance approving a proposed Amendatory Project Funding Agreement between the City and County of Denver and Denver Urban Renewal Authority, for Downtown Denver Improvements. Amends the Downtown Denver Improvements Project Funding Agreement with the Denver Urban Renewal Authority to revise submittal and reimbursement dates to align with the 16th Street Mall reconstruction project schedule, as well as updates workforce requirements to support the Denver Construction Pilot program. The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 7-20-20. The Committee approved filing this item at its meeting on 6-16-20.
I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. 12 hours 12 ies council bill 538 has passed. All right. Thank you, everybody. Next up, Councilman Herndon, will you please put council Bill 562 on the floor? Yes, Madam President, I move that council bill 20-056 to be placed upon final consideration. Andrew pass. It has been moved. Can I get a second? Second? Thank you, Councilwoman. The courtesy public hearing for Council Bill 20 Dash 562 is open. Do we have a staff report? Yeah. We'll give it a moment here while staff. Gets the correct city staff in the queue. Okay. It's looking like we are not going to do a staff report and we have staff here for any questions. And so we're going to go ahead and with no staff report, we're going to have we have 14 individuals signed up to speak. I will go ahead and read through your names and each will have 3 minutes. We've designated 30 minutes for a courtesy public hearing. And so the first speaker is Paul Farren US. Hi. Good evening, City Council. My name is Paul Grannis. I live in District five and a parent of a two year old and five year old Denver public school student. Thank you for hearing me tonight. I'm here on behalf of the over 3000 fellow Denver citizens that signed my petition urging you to vote no on Bill 562 . A facelift for the 16th Street Mall might have been a good idea when the money was flowing. We've entered into a financial crisis due to COVID 19 that is crushing the finances of our city and Denver public schools. And you have the opportunity to return 30 million to DPS and 20 million to the city's general fund. There's two main reasons why you should consider voting no. First, the city has not proven their ability to deliver projects on budget. Second, this project is a bad deal for Denver Public Schools. First, regarding the city's big project budget failures, we all know the city has had a difficult time delivering projects on budget in recent years. Most recently, Denver's $650 million airport project reported a 350 million of cost overruns. I've heard many of your voices criticize the city for their inability to deliver the airport project and many other projects on budget. And now here we are during the worst economic downtime of our lives. And you have the choice and the power to decide whether to hand over a blank check to the city for this project or take a stand, defend our tax dollars and tell the administration. Know if this bill passes and there's a budget overrun. Denver will look at our votes tonight to determine who should be held accountable. Second, this is just a terrible deal for DPS. Some would argue that investing in the 16th Street Mall will increase the overall tax base of the city, thereby putting more future dollars into DPS pockets. It just doesn't add up though. The economic models that have been presented by DRA are reportedly built upon job growth and sales tax. Job growth and sales tax. Sounds great on the surface. But now tell me, how much money does DPS received directly from job growth and sales tax? Zero. DPS receives its local funding from property taxes, but this project will not directly create any new property tax revenue for our district. Let me say this again. DPS is the lead funder of this project. We're spending 30 million of our educational funds while the city is only spending 20 million. And that entire economic model is built upon job growth and sales tax revenue that directly benefits the city and doesn't provide any direct path for DPS to recoup its money on this project. Look, this actually sounds like a fantastic deal for the city, but do you think you can look out for a public education system as well? I know it isn't in your charter to advocate for Denver public schools, but theirs and walls that historically have been impossible or not possible. Look at how little effort and creativity is leading to the renaming of the Stapleton neighborhood. Look, I know it's a complicated issue, and the pavers do need to be repaired from a mobility perspective and a bathroom. There would be a welcome addition, but the city could accomplish that with a much more limited project scope, lower cost budget and without using our precious education dollars. Council is being asked tonight to take other people's money to fund a legacy project, something we understand the attraction, too. However, when you look at this project through the lens of our youth, the other people whom you may be taking money from are the children of Denver. Please vote no. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Creighton Ward. Hello. Hi. Hi. Thank you for having me this evening. My name is Creighton Ward, and I'm here as an advocate for downtown residences specifically. I represent the condo community, the Spire Condominiums in downtown Denver. We are the residents of Spire, 850 plus of them make up. A good portion of the 10,000 residents that live in the two blocks between the 16th Street Mall from upper downtown and lower downtown. And the mall is just a critical, critical artery of any downtown resident. It's key for commuters. Key for transportation, for dining, for shopping and any sort of business that's conducted there. Now. For residents who live there, it's a key amenity. It's something that has always been the topic of conversation for downtown residents. The health of. The Mall. The safety of the mall has always been very, very important to people there. All mall issues are essentially front and center for any residents. It's a key public space. It's. Basically a part that runs right through the middle of it and all residents treat it as such. I think that the city has a really important responsibility to invest in this part of the city. It's critical for the perception of value for people that live there. I think that anybody who's experience walking on the Mall, perhaps on the way to a business meeting and in formal dress shoes in the winter, would know that it's a pretty treacherous venture. It's a good way to sort of warm up on your way to the Skyline Mall rink, but really it's also a danger. Very, very slippery. And I think it's something that should be seriously considered the mall experience overall. Just it needs to be safe. It needs to be vibrant, inviting, and it really needs to be functional. And if you can't walk or you can't. Oh, look at this. 28 seconds. Okay. I just urge you to support Council Bill 562 and amend the borough contract. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Next up, we have melissa meglio la. All right. We've got Melissa in the queue. I think you're unmuted, Melissa. Am I good? Mm hmm. All right. Thank you. Hello. Members of City Council. My name is Melissa Meglio La. I live in District four and I'm a DPS parent. I am speaking here. I am speaking today to urge you to vote no for using moneys from the TIFF Fund for the 16th Street Mall Project. As a parent, I witnessed firsthand the cuts that our schools are asked to make each and every year. There's never a surplus. There is never money for anything extra. Each year, our principals and teachers are asked to do more with less. Yes, we can blame Taber and Gallagher for some of our funding woes. We can vote for bonds and mill levies to work as workarounds. However, at some point, the blame. Lies on the shoulders of the city. Our economy is booming. Our housing prices are out of control. Our teachers are so poorly paid that they cannot afford to live in the city where they work and are leaving in droves for lower rents and higher pay in the suburbs. 20% annual teacher turnover is nothing to be proud of, nor is some of the lowest per pupil funding in the country. When I and others have reached out to council members to urge them to take action and to help our schools from issues to a blessing to funding, we are met with the response that the city has no jurisdiction over DPS. This response is so common that has led so many of us to conclude that education simply isn't a priority for the city. When will you realize that this city and the education of its children are completely intertwined? To invest in our schools is to invest in the future of Denver. I am aware that the $33 million is a one shot deal and it will not fix all of the budget problems DPS faces. However, if projects should not come on the backs of our kids across the city and country, we hear cries for equity and Black Lives Matter marches and rallies for these very causes. I ask you to tell me how 33 million to fund a project that does not create any new property tax revenue creates equity. How does it support a district where a majority of our students are of color? This vote is an opportunity for you to fight for the education of our kids throughout Denver. Show this city and its children that education is a priority. Show us that by investing this money in education, not in commercial property values and tourism. So in closing, I am simply asking you to do what our schools have had to do year after year. Please just do more with less. Thank you. Thank you. We have carry an attitude. Next up. All right. We see you in the queue. Carrie, we're going to unmute you. You're unmuted. Good evening, members of Denver City Council. My name is Charioteer and I'm the director of Government and Community Affairs at Denver at the Convention and Visitors Bureau. On behalf of our nearly 1300 business partners, many of whom are small local businesses located downtown or who benefit from a vibrant, strong downtown to sustain their neighborhood businesses. I offer this testimony in support of Council Bill five six to. According to one with international, the 16th Street Mall is Denver's number one most visited shopping and entertainment area by non Colorado residents. During 2019, Denver visitors generated $7 billion in revenue for our local economy and saved each city and county of Denver households 1600 dollars in local and state taxes. While the pandemic has been devastating to our industry and placed enormous financial burdens on our residents and the city, we cannot go back on commitments to our project partners or take our eyes off important long term projects such as the 16th Street Mall that will provide benefits to residents and visitors for years to come. The future of the 16th Street Mall is an investment not just by the city and county of Denver, but by many local, regional and federal partners, including RTD, Denver, Water, Dr. Kogarah and more. Reconstruction of the 16th Street Mall is long overdue. Its current condition is unsafe and we have the opportunity to make it a real destination attraction. Restoration is needed now more than ever to help our city recover, sustain our businesses and uplift our residents by providing for 1500 new jobs. Thank you. Thank you, Carrie. Next up, we have Scott Eastman. Can you hear me? Yes. Hello, Scott. Hi. You have 2 seconds. There it is. My name is Scott Simon. I'm a resident in District eight. I am co-chair of the DPS District Accountability Committee and co-chair of the Manual Council. I have two children currently in DPS, a rising senior at Manual High School and a upcoming seventh grader at DST Montes. I don't need to tell you that we're living in a moment of crisis. I don't need to tell you about the dire funding circumstances impacting students in Denver public schools. Even in a time where these are not the circumstances, a DPS investment in a vanity project like the 16th Street Mall is highly problematic. Talking about projects that aid long term recovery at a moment that our children are suffering is offensive. This is a choice between schools and infrastructure, no matter what might be suggested otherwise, the 16th Street Mall might need improvement and it might be overdue. It shouldn't be done on the backs of our children. Let's consider the problematic argument that DPS will somehow benefit from this project. DPS is the lead funder of this project, and community believes that the consequently the district should see the biggest direct return from this project. Examine this project even a little bit and it becomes clear that any hope for DPS to recoup that $33 million back from spending on the project is a total longshot at best. DPS receives its minimal local funding exclusively through property taxes. Therefore, the smartest DPS project investment would be in a project that immediately creates more property taxes. Sprucing up the 16th Street Mall will not create any new property tax generation. A shiny, refurbished 16th Street mall could potentially lead to raising rents on the retail space there. Assuming recovery, which I'm not sure we can assume at this point, higher rents would lead to increased property values along the 16th Street Mall, which would potentially lead to increased property taxes, which would then fund DPS. This convoluted way of using DPS is a piggybank for a facelift is not one that I'm willing to accept. And yes, spending $100 million will create more jobs. But how about we spend 100 million on a project that is not mortgaging our students present for a highly uncertain future? Creating jobs today will not positively impact the students currently enrolled in DPS schools who will directly benefit from this project. Commercial property owners on the 16th Street Mall. And general contractors looking for a piece of $100 million pie. DPS is the lead funder in this project is going to benefit far less than the other private entities. Now is not the time for this. I implore you to vote to greatly lessen the impacts of the current economic crisis on our students. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Gary Vandoorne. Good evening. Are you able to hear me? Yes, sir. My name is Gary Van Doren. I live in District ten, the perfect ten. I'm speaking in support of the funding for the 16th Street Mall. We all recognize what a cultural and educational asset the 16th Street Mall is, as well as a commercial asset. Indeed, $33 million is a lot of money. However, the loss of this money would also cause the loss of federal revenue. Over time, the mall will deteriorate further and it will be more expensive to repair the mall, thus making it more expensive for our children to repair in the future. I encourage you to pass this legislation as this evening so we can begin construction on the 16th Street Mall and increase the property values. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Veronica Barela. All right. I believe we have you unmuted. Did you call my name? Because I didn't. Hear. Yes, ma'am. Okay, we. Got you on camera. I can hear you. Everything just went down on my computer. I'm sorry. Oh, no worries. Okay. Hello. My name is Veronica Barela. I reside at 151. South Stuart Street. In District three. I'm here tonight representing. And reading. A statement from the Colorado Latino Forum. The Colorado Latino Forum supports the efforts by Denver. Citizens to reapportion funds for the 60th Street Mall upgrade to help the Denver Public School meet its $26 million shortfall for this coming school year, as over 56% of Denver public school students are Latino. And Denver has the highest number of Latino students of any school district in Colorado. The Seattle AFT is deeply concerned that the Denver Public School Superintendent, Susana Cordova. And board treasurer Angela Colby on have. Failed to navigate solutions for the. 91,000 students in face of the COVID 19. Pandemic. In particular, CLF calls upon school board Treasurer Angela Colby on to declare her potential conflict of interest as a member of the Denver Urban Renewal Authority that has designated over. 100 million to the 16th Street Mall. Renovation during this. Pandemic. In addition to board, Treasurer Kobayashi should be removed as DPS board treasurer. Her involvement with her and her precarious election as treasurer to the school board call into question her commitment to serve. Those constituents. And find. A budgetary. Solution. Other than asking Denver teachers to take a pay cut and Denver's parents to pay more money out of pocket for our public school system that. Finds itself in. Precarious jeopardy. Colby on Tinder's decision to utilize taxpayer funds for tourist beautification project, particularly one that will effectively displace many of Denver's growing homeless individuals, must be reexamined. In particular, DPS serves the largest number of homeless students in the state. This population is expected to grow as Denver's families, including a larger percentage of Latin Latino households, going to growing poverty, lack of housing. And joblessness as a result of the pandemic. Effectively, less than half of this allocation for bus lanes. On a pedestrian mall can alleviate our school shortfall during this pandemic. Seattle at self advocates and hold. For bold action by Denver government leaders and intends to hold those leaders, particularly those who were elected to shepherd Latino students like Angela. Angela Colby on in strict accountability. I urge you to vote no on this tonight. Thank you very much. I should have. More than 14. Seconds left. I was going to read the board members. Well, thank you for for being here. And there might be questions for you later. Next up, we have Bachmann, Safra. All right. I see we have you up in the queue. We're going to go ahead and unmute your mike. Can everyone hear me? Yes, sir. Oh, go ahead. All right. Great. Thank you. Hello. And thank you for allowing me to speak this evening. My name is Bombing Shaffer, and I'm a 25 year resident of lower downtown, a downtown property owner and a 20 plus year retail business owner on the 16th Street Mall. I'm also board chair of the downtown Denver Business Improvement District. I believe that the 16th Street Mall is the lifeblood of our city, and I'm deeply committed to maintaining its economic vibrancy. The 16th Street Mall is the premier pedestrian environment in the Rocky Mountain region. It is the. Economic engine of downtown. Denver and it is the linchpin for RTD Regional Transit Network. As such, I am here today to urge you to move forward with key funding agreements that will allow for infrastructure repairs critical to the mall's basic function, which will help fuel the mall's economic recovery and prosperity for the next 30 years, just as it has for the last 30 years. Our downtown. Economy and. Our city's. Economy. Rely on the Sixth Street Mall to be the key economic driver. And the main. Street for the region. Over 100,000 people work within two blocks of 16th Street Mall, making up two thirds of the total downtown employee base. Nearly 200 retailers and restaurants, including more than 40 sidewalk cafes, call the 16th Street Mall home, generating nearly 25% of the total sales tax in downtown Denver for a total of 14 million each year. The mall generates $46 million. Annually in. Property tax, 65% of which goes to Denver Public Schools. In addition, with unemployment levels not seen since the Great Depression, the Mall project. Stands to support an estimated. 1500 new jobs. The impact is significant. This is a necessary project. It has already been delayed to a point of critical need. And especially when we're looking to create more outdoor spaces, the future of the mall and the additional pedestrian space it creates is more important now than ever. We stand at a critical juncture where our investment today will offer significant returns for decades to come. As a city, we must invest in ourselves to ensure long term economic health that will pay dividends city wide. I respectfully urge you to vote in favor of bills 2005 6020561 and 25 six to ensure the long term viability of Denver's most important economic driver. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Troy Hubbell. Hey. Can you hear me? Mm hmm. Yes. Perfect. Hi. First of all, thank you councilmembers for giving me the opportunity to address you. I am a District four resident, voter and activist, and tonight the city council will vote on whether to fund construction or not on the 16th Street Mall. I'm here to ask that you give that money to Denver Public Schools instead. I've worked in Denver public schools for a decade, and every year funding is an issue. That said, in most years I would respect the will of the council. There's always a tug of war over public funds, and there isn't enough to go around. This year is not a normal year. We are about to go back into school amidst two unprecedented crises. The first crisis is the public health crisis posed by COVID. The second is the record budget cuts to education. Together, these two crises are a recipe for a public health disaster. Returning to school with poor funding and no vaccine is to the pandemic, as gasoline is to a forest fire. Funding mall construction will do no good if our school resource crisis causes another outbreak, forcing parents to stay home and businesses to shut down and the economy to close again. I know that there are council members who will argue that a one time cash infusion won't save our schools. And they're right. School funding requires a long term solution. That said, God willing, this virus won't be around forever. Vaccine research is the one thing that's going well in the disjointed response our nation has provided to the pandemic. However, we do need to survive this year. This is an emergency. We need to treat it and fund it like an emergency. Teachers want to teach. Families want to return to school. It is within your power to ensure those things can happen by ensuring that we can have the funding that we need. We are in unprecedented times. Business as usual is not what our city is experiencing, and it is not what our council should be engaged in. With the voters entrusted you with the present and future of this city. Give us what we need to meet this moment to keep schools and businesses open, to not be the reason that our city must shut down again. Please don't fail us now. Don't fail our children. And please don't fail our public health. Do the right thing and put our city first. That is all we ask. And that's all. Okay. Thank you, sir. Next up, we have Stephen Smith. Love it. How are you? Hello. My name's Steve Smith. I moved to Denver 20 years ago to the north side and I was working for the National Conference of State Legislatures. And then I met my wife. We bought a business up on 32nd Avenue. I've been raising my three kids here, and I began to work at late middle school. Having been a former budget analyst for state legislators and governors, we are tapped out in DPS. We used our reserves this year. Next year there will be cuts to K through 12 education. That's the bottom line. So at this point in time, what the city council is looking at and voting on is a $400 million funded project for the 16th Street Mall versus a $67 million project for the 16th Street Mall and $33 million given to DPS so that we don't have to have a cut next year. I think all of you know, and the bottom is your hearts that if this was put out for a vote and I was to propose a $67 million facelift for the 16th Street Mall and $33 million to go through K through 12 education so that there would not be cuts versus a $100 million facelift to the 16th Street Mall. I think, you know that that's going to pull in at least 60%. My guess is on a two out of three easy. And I used to do a lot a lot of public polling for governors and state legislators. So we just to keep it real, where you can continue to do the project on the 16th Street Mall, there's $67 million to do it. And the way that this is being proposed and discussed seems like a false choice that we have to make at this point in time. You can all, of course, scale back the project in totality or just like people are calling K through 12 education that we can just wait for another mill levy to pass and hopefully you won't get cut. But rest assured, if you move forward with this proposal, even though you are not directly responsible for DPS, you will ensure that there will be cuts to K through 12 education next year without new revenue sources. I also asked you as far as like creating jobs, I'm sure we would be more than willing to engage in conversations with you about creating more of these jobs, because I don't know if any of you have to do it. There's 57 schools without air conditioning within DPS. I know I'm being provided one and 95 mask when I go back to school. So mean you're supposed to change those every three days. I could use a lot of them, but rest assured, you know that 60% of the people would vote for cutting K through 12 education. And you can still do a $67 million project on the 16th Street Mall. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Carol March. Wow. I don't. Okay. Can you hear me okay? Yes. All right. See, I think I'll let. You look at me even. How's that? Okay. Good evening. My name is Carol March. I am a Denver resident, a retired public school teacher and a public education advocate. I'm speaking to you this evening to share the truth about what's been happening to Denver Public Schools and to public school districts across the nation over the past 40 years. I'll start by saying that public education is a people business, not a for profit money trough for the business community. But this business mentality has taken over the administration of Denver Public Schools under the leadership of superintendents, Bennet, Roseburg and Cordova should not come as a surprise. This data driven business model is not working for Denver's kids, Denver teachers or Denver families. Marketing schools as failing teachers as the reason why has been a familiar refrain of those looking to privatize our public education system. Denver has been and continues to be targeted by so-called reform advocates. More than a third of Denver public schools are no longer overseen by the public elected Board of Education. These alternative tax funded schools play by a different set of rules. I'm here tonight not only to request that Denver City Council vote No on 20-056 to return the $33 million to Denver Public Schools, but also to ask that you work to reverse the business minded takeover of our public schools. The constant instability in DPS is intolerable. Schools are being forced to compete against each other for favorable ratings, quality teachers and extra funding is no way to run a school district. Focusing on collaborative learning model that supports educating the whole child is what we need. We need a real vision and we need new leadership. I have a few suggestions. Standardized testing is not beneficial to the education process. Wraparound services are essential to the health and well-being of every school. Choice is not necessary. Schools are well resourced and well funded. No excuse. School management programs have no place in our public schools. Alternative teaching licenses is an impediment to building a strong, qualified workforce. Finally, brick and mortar schools are the cornerstone of civil society. Nothing could benefit Denver's image more than having a public school system we can all be proud to support. We have to start saying no to corporate interests in public schools. We have to start putting our students above corporate profits. That will take investing not just $33 million today, but a continuing commitment by Denver's city council, Denver's government and community leaders to envision a school system that rejects the reformist privatization agenda that's taken over DPS, our communities and our kids future is worth the investment. Today would be a great time to start. Thank you. Thank you. Next up, we have Margaret Bob. Hi. Looks like you can see and hear me now. Yes. Mm hmm. Go ahead. Hello. My name is Margaret Bob, and I'm a lifelong resident of the city and county of Denver. I'm a retired Denver teacher who was educated in DPS and the DPS parents. I urge you to vote no on 562 and advocate for an amendment to the existing DURA Agreements to return 33 million to the Denver public schools this year. Other speakers tonight have and will express the strong rationale and values. Values for why to vote no. Tonight, I will respond to three concerns that have been communicated about a no vote and the return of this money to DPS. Number one. The concern that the return would impact DPS is local share of state money. Chief Operating Officer of DPS Mark Zandi now has stated DPS is position quote with our outside legal counsel. We have taken the approach that it is money that doesn't impact our local share and thus is not part of the school finance formula . I continue out of quotes. DPS has had to have money returned to them in the past and the state has not counted it towards local share. So there is a precedent set, albeit with smaller dollar amounts. If the state does want to go after the money, DPS is committed to fight for this money to not be counted towards local share. As the largest district in the state. DPS has significant influence in a matter like this. They have already demonstrated a strong hand in state policy in the past. One example being Senate Bill 191. Concern number two that DPS will not be able to receive the 33 million this year. A no vote on its own will require the return of the 33 million to DPS in two years. However, direct can make an amendment to the existing contract that would release the funds immediately. Tara has stated that this is a possibility. City Council on its own can't create the amendment to the contract. I am confident that with the encouragement of the DPS administration and community, the amendment would be made. Three The concern that the money is only one time money and investment in the mall would yield more money in the long run. DPS receives money from property taxes. The speculation that improvement to the mall would increase property taxes is exactly that speculation, and that is money far into the future. COVID is in the here and now. City leadership should be supporting children and families in the here and now. Even without DPS is 33 million, a $67 million improvement could substantially improve the mall for a future of anticipated property taxes. I grew up when the mall was renovated. I value the mall. I understand the value. It serves for our community. It's not an either or. We can do both. Finally, there's not an absolute need to vote yes or no tonight. If council needs more time to get answers, they can take it. The current contract does not expire until the end of 2022. Why not take the time to get answers? The Mayor, Dora and City Council can open up the contract at any time to release the funds sooner. Essentially, that is what you are doing tonight. You're opening up the contract. Thank you. That's your time. Great. Thank you. Tonight. Thank you. Next up, we have Carrie Joy. Everybody hear me? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Hi. My name is Kari Joy. I'm a resident of the District nine. And I just want to say, just like so many people have said so far in this hearing, I encourage you to vote no. The city council body is refusing to hold public in-person meetings because we are fully aware that a second wave is coming and honestly is here. And if we actually listen to the experts, this wave is already on the path of being much worse. We should not be worried about keeping businesses open during a pandemic. These business owners should not have to subsidize poor financial management of the city. You know? Do you know why people need jobs? And I'm sure that you do, but it's because they have to pay for housing. They have to take care of their kids. They have to take care of their bodies and their minds. Unfortunately, most people don't work because they actually enjoy their jobs, and that's not negating those that do because I love the work that I do, organizing young people to own their democracy, their education, their uninhibited access to healthy food and clean water. I'm grateful for that. But most people work because they have to. In order to meet just some of the needs mentioned during a pandemic. We should be doing everything we possibly can to keep people off of the streets and into safe shelter. And I don't mean homeless shelters, I mean housing. During a pandemic, we should be doing everything we can to minimize putting people at risk to, quote unquote, build our city. Building the city should always begin with building up the people, taking care of the people and supporting the people. The city is not comprised of just buildings, malls and roads. We the people are the city. Our students are the city and the future of our city. And if we are not working to protect the people of this city and their longevity, who are we actually building this mall for? So with that, we should be putting away as much money as we can to support the people of this city. We should save this money so that we can subsidize housing, expand Medicaid, and that benefits and expand expansion funds. Once the people are fully cared for and protected, then we can use whatever leftover funds to continue development. But until then, please use as little money as possible to make sure that the 16th Street Mall is not a liability and save the rest to make sure that the people can actually survive during the midst of a global health and safety crisis. Say no, bring this back to committee. Isolate the needs of the city from the wants and exploitation of capitalism, and give that money back to DPS and our general fund. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Next up, we have Jonathan protocol. Petco. Hello? Are you in a hurry? Mm hmm. Go ahead. Yes. I misidentified myself to start by accident during sign up as someone speaking against. But I am here to speak in favor of a rule. Okay. One there. I say this as someone who has concerns with the proposed designs for the mall project and as someone who believes that it is severely, shamefully underfunded and that lack of education funding is an issue that our council should address. I agree with earlier speakers regarding the state of the school system and some of the city financing, but the fact is the mall is 50 years old and all infrastructure requires maintenance and renewal to maintain safe operation. In this case, we're talking about one of the most heavily trafficked cultural assets of the city. So it is no surprise that half a century on, it's time for a renewal. There are real safety concerns walking on the mall flagstones in summer and winter, and the drainage below those flagstones is leading to a growing and growing structural issues underneath that aren't entirely visible to people above. This ask is being framed as taking money from DPS, and it is being framed as a new vanity project. But the funding we're talking about was designed 25 years ago for the purpose of supporting downtown revitalization and maintenance, and we've now just reached the time for that funding to be put to use. It's time to renew them all as the funding was designed for. Unlike many municipal, state and federal infrastructure projects that are built without a whisper of a plan for maintenance funding, this project actually has one, and we're considering tossing it out the window. Denying this funding would be short sighted for a number of reasons. I think there have been some false dichotomies presented by speakers tonight. Some of the funding would eventually be redirected to DPS if this is not approved, but not until 2022 at the earliest when the tip duration expires. So the appropriation would provide no new aid this year, as have as some have suggested, and it would only provide a one time infusion, which is a far cry from a real solution to DPS as funding problems and worse. With that appropriation comes the loss of many buckets of matching funding provided by outside entities, including the federal government, meaning that the opportunity cost of passing on this project is very real. Our city would quite literally be that much poorer because we would be denying, accepting outside funding. That's all. Thank you. All right. Thank you. That concludes our speakers tonight, questions from members of council. Councilwoman Sawyer. Next, Madam President. So I guess there's been a lot of a lot of our speakers talked about this. And I really would love some clarification from Josh, if you don't mind. Can you just go over and explain. If we give the. $30 million back to DPS, can we do this project without it? Is that is it possible? So this is Josh lately and the chief projects officer for the mayor's office. If there are agreements that go with the federal and state funding sources that are are called matches. So we said if you give us this money, we will match your money with these funds and those funds being the DRA funds. And so if we, if we give back, we deny the DURA funds, those will not meet the obligations of what we put in, in our requirements to obtain those federal transit funds and the state and federal funds that that came to Dr. Cobb. So we can't just shrink the project and say, we'll give away Dura. And what's left is what we use on all that will have to go back to the federal government and the state government because we have not met our funding match requirements. Okay. So no. Is the short answer. Yes or no? No is the accurate answer. No is the short answer. Okay. Awesome. And then so so. There's no way to do this project based on the way it's built right now. What about the idea that, like, there's been a bunch of emails that have come in to my office that have said from constituents that have said, like, we could do this project on a smaller scale. If we just gave. The didn't didn't approve this, gave all the dura money back to the taxing entities in the city. You walked away from the Dr. Hog money and figured out some way to do it. What do you think? Right. So. So I think to boil that down, can we do the project for less? Can we make somebody mentioned, you know, just go replace the papers and add restrooms? I think the problem with the papers are there's a foundational element to those papers. So you're going down not inches. You're going to have to fix all of the ground underneath those papers to stabilize them. So they start popping up and they start moving on you. And once you're a few feet down, one of the reasons we have additional funds on this project is we're then just within inches of an 1880s waterline. And so Denver Water said, hey, what? You're ripping up this whole stretch of the wall and you're going to go down that far to replace the pavers. We'll give you money to actually replace our 100 year old water line as well. So so trying to just do the pavers while it sounds like. Yeah, that makes sense. It's the foundational elements that live below that that really are the cost of them all. Okay. Thank you. I really appreciate that. And then so. So. We are leveraging. So in terms of the financial structure, then we are leveraging our 30. Sorry, our is it 56. Million of. The DURA funds? And we are taking those funds. And how much then are we getting in outside funds from other sources to. Do a total. To do this project. All the way around? Right. So we we've we're leveraging roughly $50 million in durov funds. We also have $40 million, $38.2 million in those regional, state, federal funds that we talked about, leveraging that we have that dollar match for. We also have money from Denver water. And I'm forgetting the number off the top of my head. I can help you with that. Yeah. Emily down the capital stack. No, no problem. So a fair simplistically, about 55% of our funding source for the project is the downtown TEF funds. Then we have a 16% that is local funding. So that includes a 30 million of Elevate Denver bond funds that were voter approved in 2017 and then a contribution from the IP and wastewater associated with Match. And then last, we have about 31%. That's that 38 million that Josh referenced of partnership funding and that includes the state funding, the Federal Transit Administration funds and the Denver water funds. Perfect. Okay. So I'm just trying to wrap my mind around all of the different funding sources and the different way we're leveraging the funds. So essentially, is it fair to say then that we that this is a good use of of the funds to take money, this tip money and leverage those. Assets to in to. Gather other assets and then invest that money wisely to. Invest in the future of Denver. So I believe that the current downtown TIF funds were identified in 2013 with this current project funding agreement for those public infrastructure projects related to the downtown urban renewal plan. And we have been able to use those funds then to leverage that additional 38, almost 40 million of partnership funds to be able to fund the project. Got it. Okay. Thank you. I've got no more questions for you. Thanks. All right. Thank you. Emily and Josh, would you please introduce yourself and say your agency for the public record, please? Yes, thank you. I always forget to do that. Okay. Emily Snyder, Department of Finance. That's Joshua Blakely, chief projects officer of the mayor's office. Great. Thank you. Next up, we have Councilwoman Black who has a question. Thank you. Some of my questions were already asked. I feel like there's a lot of confusion. Um, based on emails I've gotten and some of the comments we got tonight. Can someone talk about the amount of taxes that are collected downtown in this area that does go to DPS every year? I am happy to take that. So the 1.2 miles of properties and the 1.2 miles of stretch of the 16th Street Mile project. Generates 46 million of property tax. Annually. 29.2 of that goes back to Denver Public Schools, and then the remainder goes back to the city and urban drainage. And that breakdown is then 15.7 million to the city and 600 to mile high urban drainage. So every year. Even though this 56 million has been held by Dora every year. $29.9 million is still. Going to be from this area. From that 1.2 miles. Yes, a lot of the small if we talk about larger downtown property tax, I don't have that figure right off the top of my head. Right. I mean, would be more. Councilwoman Black? I think I think it's the fundamental definition of a tiff. When it's set up, it doesn't take money away from anyone. It says the new property, the new values as they increase. That's what we're going to do. So we're not taking money from anyone. We're using the growth to fund improvements. And so that's that's the context of what we were talking about. Yeah. So I'm glad you brought that up. Why don't you explain that in more detail? Because I think a lot of people don't understand that. I think people, like a lot of the speakers tonight said that we were taking money from DPS, and that's actually not exactly true. So can you explain what that literally means when we talk about tax increment? What is that increment and what does that mean exactly? I'm going to hand it off to Emily because she's Mitchell with on this so she can explain that. And and Tracey, let me know if you want to chime in. So there are four different taxing areas that represents the downtown test. And they were put into place in, I believe, 1992. And so one of them is the 15 block property area. And then there is three others that have both sales and lodgers tax related to them. So there's. A baseline. Set at that initial point in time. And then there is an increment that is then levied. So any growth increment on top of that base is then collected into as the TIFF. And that TIFF funding is used to first and foremost support redevelopment projects. And you know, example being the Pavilions or the Adams Mark or the Denver Dry Goods Building and they are first use for those obligations. Those projects were completed. It also spurred other investments in the downtown area that then created additional increments of additional growth from that base all being captured. When those original obligations were complete, there was a determination by the city, collectively and borough to then use the remaining increment to be collected till now. The increment expires in 2020 to go forward on other projects that support the urban renewal plan. So Durham led projects to support the downtown with the downtown stuff, the downtown school and a grocery store at 20th and Chestnut. The city managed projects that were part of this project funding agreement that. Is before you today. Included the two way conversion of 18th Street. It included the Lawrence Street Community Center and also included the 16th Street Mall, the 16th Street Mall being the last project sort of on that list to be completed with downtown to. Right. Tracy, can you talk a little bit more about that? Just a really basic explanation of what that what the word increment means and how that affects the collection of our property taxes. And we're happy to do that. One of the things that I think is really important in understanding this is that the use of tax increment is not a new tax and it is not an additional tax. I think in an earlier meeting it was stated that it is an additional tax and I want to clarify that is not the case. But again, whenever we said to a tax increment area that City Council approves. The. Base level of the amount of taxes that are at that point in time being collected, continue to be paid to the original taxing entities. And then it is just the new value that is created as a result of the redevelopment activity that then is paid over to Dora, as Emily said, to then make debt service, as was the case on on the downtown projects on bonds that Durham had. Issued to support those projects. Typically, when these those obligations are repaid, we terminate the tax increment areas and those monies then flow to the original taxing entities. As we've. Described before. In 2013, when we satisfied those obligations, it was right at the time that the city was evaluating. The need to reconstruct the mall as well as other projects. So collectively. We agreed to keep those tax increment areas open until their statutory term. I do also want to emphasize that. The biggest. Generator of the increment that we have been utilizing and hope to continue to utilize on the mall. Came. From a 15 block property tax increment area that generally was bounded by. Tampa court 16th to 14th. So that area, that tax increment area terminated in 2017. It is done. We are no longer collecting that increment. And Denver public schools and the city and county of Denver are now enjoying that newly created growth from those earlier projects and have been enjoying those revenues since 2018 to DPS. It's about $10 million a year to the city. It's about 5 million in property. Taxes. From that 15 block area, which I again just want to underscore is different than what you may hear, Emily, describe from property taxes along the mall. So different areas of downtown. But the real point is that that property tax increment area has already terminated and DPS and the city, as well as urban drainage, are now realizing that full benefit from those previously made investments. And just briefly, Tracy, can you just explain what your many years of experience at Dora? What generally happens when there are tax increment areas? What generally happens to the values of the property around there? And after the investment is made and the amount of property taxes that are collected that end up going to DPS, do they go up or down? Do they go up a lot? Explain that a little bit. Sure. And it really depends on the. Type of project. But the goal is for those those. Property tax and frequently sales tax. I think that's one of the things that Denver is really great about doing, is making sure that that burden of the use of tax increment is shared very equitably between the taxing entities when it comes to property. Tax, as well as committing your. Own sales tax increment. But the goal is that we will, in fact, by virtue of these investments, cause property values to increase, create more development. You take a surface parking lot. Denver Pavilions was to surface parking lots right in the heart of downtown. It is generating some amount of property tax, but certainly not nearly as much as a newly created two block mall is going to generate. And then in addition, you're going to see the sales tax increment generated. As a result of that. The amount of increment is going to depend on the type of development, the size and scale of the project. But certainly the. Anticipated. Expectation is that the those values will increase. And then again, once the obligations are repaid. The project is completed. The tax increment areas terminate in those revenues then that at that higher level flowback to the other taxing entities. Great. Thank you. I just have one more really quick question probably for you, Josh. And in we had a bond in 2007 and we just recently finished all of those projects and then we had a new bond in 2017. But in the midst of building the projects from the 2007 bond, we had a recession and Denver didn't suffer as much as many cities across the United States did. And we'd been told by the Department of Finance that one of the reasons why is because we were able to invest in those infrastructure projects. And so, yes, now we are having another economic crisis. So can one of you comment on that? I can comment. I think, you know, what everyone has stated here is the right conversation to have. Right. Investment in education in schools are important. Investment in affordable housing, investment in trying to get those experiencing homelessness, jobs and houses. Those are all important investments. Those social investments are made based on the taxes we collect and those the last minutes you want to get people into jobs. So you have to do a balanced portfolio of investments, right? You can't just invest in certain pieces. And it's your question about the 27 bond and those infrastructure investments create jobs. That's quite often a way that governments can stimulate the economy and create jobs. Back in the Depression, when the Works Progress Administration came about and they've created jobs to bring us out of the Depression. So it's a balance of those investments. It's not just all infrastructure projects and job creation, but it's a balance of those things. So that the discussion that's being had is is very logical and a very good discussion. This particular cluster leverage, $40 million of people's money to do this job creation and this infrastructure investment. I feel it's just a really good investment to do that and leg of the stool of how to keep our economy strong. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Thank you, Josh. Next up, we have Councilman Haines. Thank you, Madam President. I have three questions. The first. Are there any board members or DPS administration here? I do have an email from a DPS member that I intend to read into the record or a portion of it. But since I asked for comment from DHS last week, I do want to invite that comment because we're doing this virtual meeting. And just so if you if you are a board member, please do raise your hand. I do want to give you the opportunity to present, just as I as I requested it last week. And while we're sorting through that and I think the answer is no, because I look through the panel or the attendee list. But just in case. Well, the next question I have is, is there anyone here who could speak to whether TIFF funds will be recouped by the state? Assuming we know that that's not under consideration. Right. But if we were to consider all to returning the funds before 2022, I heard a public comment saying that there was a precedent that had been set. But I also heard from another school district that they would pursue litigation to attempt to recover part of those funds because their school district is ailing, too. So I wonder if anyone can can speak to whether the the state recouping process would would attempt to recover this windfall or whatever it might be. And so while we're looking at that, I'll ask my third question and just in case. So the last question is, how is DPS benefited from TIFF funds, specifically these two funds? I'm thinking about the Emily Griffith campus. I don't know the answer. I'm asking to learn. I'm not trying to ask. Leading question. All right. Thank you, Councilman. I think we're still checking in the attendees. I'm not seeing any DPS school board members on initial glance at it. So you had your other two questions and nice to see both Josh and Emily and Traci unmuted. So go ahead. How about it? The second question. Unfortunately, I cannot speak to this with. The state decisions around their school funding and the decisions they would make regarding funding DPS with a decision to return to source. With JBC staff this afternoon. I'm not certain that I got a definitive answer, but I'm trying to trying to do my job and and get as many perspective perspectives as. I can't help with the state funding. No, no, the state the state school funding students but and Tracey I know can speak to the the school infrastructure projects relate to the downtown tiff thank you it's that that when I can. Answer and that is the most easy one to answer. Yes when we were working with the city, we. Also consulted with DPS. In regard to the use of the of keeping these tax increment areas open to their statutory term back in 2013. As part of that, then DPS came to us and and said, gosh, we could sure use some assistance in converting our building at 1860 Grant into the Emily Griffith School. And so about $3 million was provided to DPS out of the downtown tax increment to help in the delivery of that first downtown school. Okay. Thank you. And thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Next up, we have Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Madam President. And my congratulations to you and our new pro tem as well. We're doing questions separate from comments right now. Yes, sir. For Josh. So if we vote this down tonight, which is voting down an extension, what would be the city's position? Would you then? Be inclined to begin the process of returning funds. Would you examine your other options? Tell me about that place. So I can't entirely speak on behalf of the administration, but we would have conversations with her. We have a commitment and an agreement together to do a number of projects. We have completed all of those projects, including the downtown Denver School. This is the one remaining project that we haven't done, so we're inclined to try to make this work. So we would go back and have discussions of how can we make this work? But I'm hard pressed to figure out another solution because we have leveraged so much state and federal money to get this project done and then to take away a chunk of that is going to put all that money at risk because our agreements to say those are required matched funds. Sure. So if we decide to vote this through this evening. When does dirt move on the 16th Street Mall? I believe we would be looking at next year for certainty. Okay. And we hear, or at least I've heard, the number 1500 jobs is what this project will generate. Is that 1500 construction jobs? And over what time period are these jobs appearing? Sure. I'm going to let Emily answer that. She ran the financial model. Well. The Department of Finance economist ran it. And I was learning right there with her. But it. Is it is 1500 jobs over. The course of the project duration. So for this purposes, we put in a three year project duration. Of those 1500 jobs, it looks like in the construction trades. We are. Give me just a minute and I will get that break down for you. I have a percentage of. Just give me just a minute, Councilman Cash. Well, Emily's doing that. Construction begins quarter three, 2021. The end of 21. Correct. Okay. Yeah. I don't. But they are they are construction related or project related jobs. Yes. So investors and rather than additional retail jobs that might come up if business return. You know, she where I'm going. Yes. So and and I got my graph. It is across all of those things. And it's both direct effect of the project and indirect effects of the project. So of the construction related jobs looking at almost 300, I believe, and majority of those are directly affected on the project that is, trade workers and then construction supervisors are another hundred direct to the project. And then we have a assortment of retail management, professional services. So the design. Teams. That are part of the, the, the work. So that's sort of the the business operations specialist classifications, but happy to follow up with that sort of exact breakdown. But they're all directly related to the project itself. Yes. So well, the way the model works is it's across three different breakdowns. It is they are all related to the direct. Investments. In the mall projects. There are those jobs that are working directly on the mall itself and then those that are either induced by those workers that are, you know, have the earnings putting that money into the economy. So maybe additional restaurant worker because. Of the demand. That a restaurants with the new workers on the mall. So but as a direct result of the project. Itself, it sounds like to me about 500 direct jobs humans needed to to fix up the mall. That I'm looking at my graph. And if we're talking about construction trades. Yes, whatever it takes. Design, people, management. But I love them all. Then I got to do a little bit more math for you. And we're then looking at. Well, more than half. 700. 800. I'm looking at a graph, but that's why I need to go back to the, like, my actual outputs. Okay. Thank you. That's all I've got. President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Sandoval. Thank you, Madam President. I had several questions. So it's been told it's been mentioned during public comments that tip money has been returned to DPS. Tracey, do you are you aware of when this happened? It happens with some regularity. When Derek collects the tax increment, we collect it until we are certain we have enough to be able to fully repay the obligation. It's impossible for us to know exactly when that point in time is going to happen. And so we may collect a property tax payment at some point in the year that covers that final amount, and then we do a reconciliation and send it back to the original taxing entity. So it is not unusual for for that to happen when we are at a point when a tax increment area is ready to be terminated. Okay. Thank you. And Josh, several comments we're talking about EIA and the overbudget andrea and that was a little different beast. That was a public private partnership and started as a public private partnership. And then we had to buy our way out of the public private partnership. Is this going to be a public private partnership? I think that's a big we need we need to talk about the elephant in the room with that. Sure. This is this is not a public private partnership. This is a design build. And in the cities, got quite a bit of experience with design build. Most recently, probably the Flats Park project, pretty significant size project. And that one is on schedule and on budget. And what happens if we go over budget? Where would the money come from? It's a good question. We would probably work with finance and we would we would look at what funding streams are available, and then we would have to bring that in front of council and get your approval on where that money would come from. But using best practices, we want to stay ahead of that and make sure we manage the project well and don't have a budget. Okay. And then is this a landmark area? Should be a landmark. I don't know the answer to that off the top of my head. But, you know. As Brian is on the call, he is very engaged in the historic process with me. I can not answer that one. Hi, I'm Brian Pinkerton with Department of Transportation and Infrastructure. I don't believe the mall was a landmark. What it is, is it's eligible as a historic resource. So right now, it does not have any formal designation as a historical monument, but it is eligible to be considered one. So when we went through the NEPA process, we went through all the typical clearances we needed to for a historic resource. So if it was designated, would we be able to use. Tax credits or tax credits? Yes. Yes. As long as we went through the is a very complex procedure and process to go through. When you're working on an historic resources. We went through all that as though it was designated. It's really no different requirement than, yes, we would be able to do this even if it was dealing. But we would be able to also get text. Read also. Give me a look at historic tax credits. Right. That's the difference, because it has to be it has to be designated. From what I learned that it has to be designated to get historic tax credits. I say I'm sorry. In terms of historic tax credits, what you're saying, I believe, is accurate. Okay. And then how much does it cost for the for the moth be maintained here? And who maintains it? Josh, do you want to talk about that one or I can. Go ahead, Brian. The maintenance costs of the mall have been going up significantly. It's kind of on an exponential rise at the moment. Currently, the city has an IGA with RTD for the maintenance of the transit way. I believe the last year that we helped reimburse RTD for some of those expenses, I believe it was a million and a half dollars ends that way. We also have an agreement with the Downtown Partnership for Maintenance of the Sidewalk areas, and that's a separate agreement. I don't have that figure off the top of my head in terms of what was extended there. And then, Tracy, back to you. One last question. So you talk about the urban renewal plan and you talk about the 20th and chestnut sets the King Soopers, their the downtown school, the Lawrence Street Center and the 16th Street conversion. Can you talk about what the urban center is? Because I think when we say the Lauren Street Community Center, many people who in the public might not even know what that is, because if you say a community center, you're going to think it's like a 20th street center, like rec center, and it's not 20th street rec center . So can someone talk about what that that program is and how much money from this project, from the Urban Renewal went into the Lauren Street Center? So I'm happy to take the first part of that. And then, Emily, I think I'll kick it over to you. For me, since it was one of the city managed projects, the amount for the Laurence Street Community Center out of the tax increment was $8.6 million. And it is a facility that was intended to help address some of the homeless issues that downtown were experiencing. And Emily, with that, I'll kick it over for a for a better description of what the the community center. Actually is, if that's okay. It's up. There we go. Okay. Sorry. My computer froze for a second. The Lawrence Street Community Center is a additional support from the Denver rescue mission at the intersection of 22 Lawrence. And Park Avenue. West to provide additional indoor space for individuals experiencing homelessness and can follow up with even more details on that program. I just don't have them right in front of me. Okay. And that's it. Thank you, Madam President. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Next up, we have Councilwoman CdeBaca. Thank you, Madam President. So real quick, before I get into my line of questioning, is the Emily Griffith Education Center or the new downtown campus, the only publicly owned beneficiary project of tip dollars? Because Rescue Mission owns the Lawrence Street Community Center and King Soopers is King Soopers. So are there any other publicly owned beneficiary project? I. Yes. Particularly when you think about the the investment that has already been made in the mall and some of the other infrastructure improvements. So from a building standpoint, that is the only one. But the tax increment. Has also been used to support. Planning and design for the mall project. I did not have a lot of questions here, so I'm going to just go through one right after got through. Let's keep them short. What are the itemized costs of the pavers that need to be fixed annually? The sewer. That's the larger problem. And the expansion remodeling. We can get you a full breakdown once we get our bids in. We have some high level estimates, but we try to not give those all completely out because we don't necessarily want our bidders to know what we think. It's going to cost. Sharing with the public, the itemized costs or pieces of this $100 million pie. Not if we don't want the contractors to know exactly what we think it will cost and it will be less of a competitive event. So when what this project can do. We can give you high level estimates, though. I mean, when you look at what Denver water is giving us, that's a high level estimate of what they think it will cost to replace the waterline once all of the papers are gone because they're not paying to rip up all the papers. They're only paying to replace their water line because they know we're already going to have the papers torn up. So what are the costs you're willing to share publicly tonight? I don't have those tonight. We we can put those together and share them at a later date. I've actually been asking for them for over a month now. But on to the next question. When would the construction on this project begin? Quarter three 2021. When would those new jobs become available? Would they be right when the project begins? Or because we're assuming they're indirect or the majority of them are indirect? When would we expect those jobs to come online? So from the modeling we did put in the construction period for the project. So after. Selection. Of the design build contractor, I don't does the model doesn't necessarily directly say, you know, quarter three of 2021 but that is the beginning assumption that we put into the model and from there where it projects over the three year period. And how many restaurants and retail businesses are we projecting to lose due to COVID? We don't have those numbers. Do we know of any on the 16th Street Mall that have already closed or are planning to close? I do not have that information. So no more. So you stated during committee, Tracy, that if this were denied, if this agreement amendment was denied tonight, the mayor would have to initiate a new amendment to the agreement to return the dollars before the 2022 expiration. Is that correct? Yes. And would a landmark designation prohibit the remodeling. Aspect of this project? Yeah. Yeah, yeah. This is Brian. That's a complicated question. I don't know for certain. I do not believe it would, because we went through a very extensive historic process that I am not certain of that I can get that answer back to. Got it. Those are my questions. Do we want to do comment now or do we? We'll go ahead and conclude the questions and then we'll close out of the courtesy hearing. So we've got one more. Person up. We've got Councilman Torres in the queue and then we'll go to comments. Councilwoman after that. Got it. Thank you. I'll wait for my comments. Mm hmm. Okay. Thanks. Councilwoman Torres. Thank you. My question is for Tracy. Have we I assume there have been a number of times where a tiff is ended and there's been remaining funds that then get redistributed back to their sources? Have we ever gone in and emptied or amended a fund to redistribute those before the expiration date? You know. The four tough areas for downtown. Can you just remind me? I'm sure you said it a number of times. Which one are we? Are we specifically talking about again? So again, I really, really want to make sure everybody understands that we are in. This in this. Action tonight. It has nothing to do with the tier four areas. They the 15 block property. Tax increment area and the sales tax increment area just for the Denver Dry Goods. Building. Those already terminated in 2017. So the remaining tax increment areas that will terminate at the end of 2020. Include. A sales tax increment area for the Denver Pavilions, a sales and lodgers tax increment area for the Adams Mark Hotel, now the Sheraton and a sales and property tax increment area for the Mercantile Square Project in lower downtown. Continuing Jackson. Income areas that will terminate at the end of this. Year. Thank you. I'm just looking at the list of 22 and just making sure I'm clear on that. Thank you. Those are all my questions. All right. Thank you, Councilwoman Torres. I am not seeing any other questions from members of council. So we're going to go ahead and close out the public hearing. The public hearing has been closed for Council Bill 20 dash 0562 comments by members of council. Councilman Flynn. Thank you, Madam President. I heard a lot of really good arguments for. Several courses of action. And I want to make it clear that as I've said many times with a lot of decisions we face, there's always a lot of options and there's pluses and minuses to all of them. But I want to make a couple of points that I think need to be made. First of all, the reconstruction of this 40 year old transit facility is not a facelift. It's not a it's not a vanity project. It's not a touch up. It's a reconstruction. Problems with the mall. We're all very familiar with them. Developed very quickly after it opened in 1982. Two years later, in 1984, as a reporter, I was writing stories about how the granite curb stones along the bus way already were pulling away from the sidewalk, granite down near the Taper Center. Secondly, the mall this mall is not a pedestrian mall. There were some comments about having busses on a pedestrian mall. This is a transit mall. It's not a pedestrian mall. It was built to be the distributor system to get all of the regional busses out of downtown Denver that were clogging all the streets with the commuters , mostly from the north and south suburbs. It was built with federal it was called MTA, Urban Mass Transportation Administration. Now it's the Federal Transit Administration. It was built with the money that our governor, Dick Lamm, at the time, rejected for Interstate 470 when he drove a silver stake through the Beltway and it came back to us as transit money to build them all. This is our most significant transit mobility investment in the city. It probably serves more suburban commuters than does people from Denver. It's converting the the major portion of the mall to center running bus lanes in order to significantly improve safety. God bless. I am a world renowned architect, but there are significant flaws with the design of the mall that this is going to fix. This was this was really the city's first mile and last mile connection, first to the regional busses at Civic Center and Market Street, but now Civic Center and Union Station and regional rail as well as busses. Our economic recovery has to be multifaceted. We have to be able to do more than one thing at once. The problems that we've had with projects that have gone over budget or been mishandled really don't give us a reason not to do more projects. This project will generate new property taxes for the school district, but also consider that while the money wouldn't go back to DPS or back to us for another two and a half years and not now, the fact is that this lump sum did come back to DPS. Now it very well could negatively impact, as was brought up in testimony and questioning the share of the state K-12 funding that goes to DPS. Overall, rejecting this, I believe, would be a net loss for everyone. The. Excuse me. The sources for the remaining funds. I think this was brought out very well in the questioning, in the answering the elevate Denver bonds, $20 million in federal funds that councilman Clark as my alternate on the Dr. cardboard the night that this was approved at doctor at Denver Regional Council of governments had to fight like crazy because the suburbs wanted this money for themselves. They didn't want us putting this these improvements into the 16th Street Mall. Turning this down now kills this project for at least another decade, possibly much longer than that, to put all this funding together. The federal money goes back to Washington. The RTD money, the federal transit money that RTD is programing for us goes back to Washington. And I don't know what would happen with the Elevate Denver Bonds. We could probably reprogram them on our own to something else. But rejecting this would be an obstacle at Dr. COG to bringing any future needed federal mobility funding, particularly for transit and non auto improvements into Denver from our suburban neighbors at a time when we're trying to invest in non automobile alternatives infrastructure projects. So with that, I just urge my colleagues to say, you know what? There's there's good and there's there's pro and con to any approach we take on almost any vote. But on this one, losing this project sets this 40 year old infrastructure back another at least another decade, decade and a half before we could even think about going to our neighbors again and asking for federal funds that we rejected in 2010, it would be a huge mistake to do that. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. We have Councilman Hines up. Thank you. Madam President, I. My response might be a little longer. It's. I'm. I'm really sad. There are people that I respect highly that kind of asked me to vote no on this, and I intend to vote yes. So I wanted to provide a little extra content or context. I learned yesterday that there would be an op ed in the Denver Post about the 16th Street Mall. And it yes, I certainly support anyone's right to share their views about any topic they feel is important to them. The timing of the op ed is unfortunate because it doesn't give us an opportunity to share additional context before tonight's vote for public discussion and scrutiny. We've received a lot of email today in favor of funding our children, so I'm here to share some additional perspectives. Yes, some of this is already covered in the press where I've already been quoted. Some of this is new in response to the op ed. First we can vote yes or no on this bill. We have no other option is as counsel. Yes means we extend the contract to the end of 2027. No means the contract stays until the end of 2022. To be clear, neither option funds course left. So if this were just a struggle between DPS parents and downtown Denver partnership today, that'd be one topic. But this is obviously a more complex topic. I could talk about those two sides, but it doesn't talk about the additional sides. Some perhaps same with many other of the people in comment, in public comment. They talked about their children and and not the the broader context. So I've already told the op ed writer and and everyone via committee and in the press that there were additional perspectives. So here are some of the extra ones that I know about equity. The mall isn't accessible for people with disabilities and it continues to degrade. I personally have fallen multiple times due to the deteriorating shape of the pavers, including as a councilperson. Also dubious itself has taken advantage of these funds, and we would definitely hear from those who felt it was inequitable that they benefit from the funds as it was normally terminated, unprecedented and abnormally terminated fiscal responsibility. We've been on record saying that the 16th Street Mall is in disrepair are plausible deniability. The lack of maintenance at the mall is gone. That means that Denver will be on the hook for any accessibility lawsuits. And I can only imagine we'll get the same content comments then about using taxpayer dollars to settle lawsuits as we receive today in earlier conversations and previously using taxpayer funds to for lawsuit settlements climate. I spoke a lot about the 20 million neighborhood before I was elected, and our 16th Street Mall is the epitome of that mission. Getting people out of cars will help us with our climate goals. It also help people with physical health as more people exercise instead of sit in cars. And it will help out with community as we speak with one another. Instead of being walled off or in a bubble of metal and glass, everything requires maintenance. And if we want to achieve climate goals, we must maintain them all. CPS Administration The op ed author request. I obtain that particular opinion of one gas board member. So I did. And and here is a quote from an email sent to me from board member Kodiak. In my experience it seemed that there would be and this is a quote from the, you know, in my. Experience. It seemed like there would be tremendous legal barriers in accessing the funds and potentially negatively impact our local share from the state of Colorado. This is why I focused my efforts on real money quotes in the email, like the economic bond and mill, which, if passed by Denver voters, would be reoccurring and permanent funds as opposed to one time funds. I'm meeting with campaign staff and she's talking about the the issue to the bonding bill next week to ensure successful packet passage. Furthermore, we know that City Council is best positioned to answer the question of the role of the redevelopment of the 63 Mall and of Denver's economic recovery recovery. Ultimately, if Denver's economic economy recovers steadily, deeps will reap the benefits of said recovery through local share in the long run. So we have a perspective of parents in public comment tonight and in the op ed. Now we have also the comment of DPR from the US administration and then there's the state budgeting question and I won't go into too much detail because I don't have a definitive answer. Ultimately, this is not a question about DPS parents versus the strong business lobby downtown. This is so much more than just that. I'm sorry the public has been led to believe that this is the topic at hand. Earlier tonight, I voted against businesses in favor of giving in to. Residuals, specifically our first responders. My job is to obtain as many perspectives as possible. And today, my vote is in favor of equity, financial responsibility and climate. Today, my vote includes the administration's input, saying that going to bat for funding is not the same as actually getting funding. If this were a clear choice between students and big businesses, I'd vote for future generations. This simply isn't the case with tonight's tonight's vote. And I'm sorry the public feels this discussion has been reduced to a binary choice. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. Councilman Cashman. I think, Madam President. Yes, I agree with much of what Councilman Hines just said. This is the strangest situation I've ever seen, where there's tens of millions of dollars on the table. If we had a check written for $33 million in the name of DPS. There's nobody here. To take it. There is nobody from the DPS board here. There's nobody from the DPS administration here. I as as with my colleague, I saw answers to the funding questions and and I received no response from the JBC. I received no response from the superintendent. I did hear from Mark Ferran. Dino is his insight to me was that the law is unclear or silent on if the state funding will be impacted. Now I understand that were DPS to receive money they would fight to retain it. But. The state budget is has decimated school districts all across the state. And I'm quite sure that areas that don't have the tax base surrounding them that we have that will never see this level of windfall. We'll fight with equal tenacity to get their hands on some of that money rather than just kind of go, Oh, how nice for Denver. They got a $33 million bump. The one thing that the 16th Street Mall does is more out of state. Money is spent on the 16th Street Mall than any other area of the city. So the taxes that are collected on the Mall come come from elsewhere. I know sales tax doesn't affect this particular test, but I also do believe that if we let downtown deteriorate, it's not going to have a positive impact on that tax base if we invest in it. I think it's a reasonable assumption that will at least preserve that tax base, if not actually increase it. But the main thing to me is we've got thousands of people signing petitions wanting this money. We've got newspaper articles galore talking about this money being argued about. And we've got nobody from DPS. That I can only assume that Denver Public Schools does not believe this is that the action of us voting down this project would be in their own best interest? So that's where I'm coming from. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Councilman. Councilwoman Sawyer. Thank you, Madam Chair. You know, we've heard a lot from DPS parents tonight in the in the comments, but we haven't heard a lot. We haven't heard from any DPS parents tonight who are council members. And so I don't want to speak for any of the other DPS parents who are council members, but I am I am a DPS parents and I am a council member. And I have a lot of skin in this game. I have three kids and I care. I care about $33 million going to my kids or not. And it matters to me about the fact that my kids teachers have to put their own money in for things like supplies . And it breaks my heart that our schools are so desperately underfunded. And I can't stand it. But that said, is it the right thing to do to, you know, give $33 million in a one time gift that is probably going to get taken away by the state, you know, and the local share will be reduced. DPS local share will be reduced by this windfall anyway, versus the potential of 1500 jobs that will be created that will help stabilize our economy. You know, and let's not forget that for over a decade, our our community has been asking for public restrooms on the 16th Street Mall that are a part of this project that are actually going in, and the mobility improvements that are coming in and the infrastructure improvements that are coming in and the job creation that is coming with the actual jobs that are being created for, you know, in the middle of a pandemic. I mean, there are so many benefits to this. And the fact, by the way, that we are being forced to pit our kids education dollars versus job creation dollars should just go to show us. All right now how messed up of a world we are living in right now. Right. I mean, that's pretty. Much sum it up right there. So I just I support this project. It's the right thing to do for our city in the long term. It breaks my heart to have to say that when what I want to do is give $33 million to DPS right now. And if I knew that that $33 million was going to go to DPS and it wasn't the state share wasn't going to get the local share wasn't going to get reduced by the state. And if I knew that that was a secure thing, and if I knew that all of these other answers were 100% certain, it would be a different story. But the truth is, we don't know. The truth is, no one is here from DPS to answer those questions because they don't know. No one is here from the state to answer those questions. We've all tried to reach out. They don't know. There is no law controlling this at the end of the day, which means that this will end up in an expensive legal battle. And the only people who are going to win here are the attorneys. So that's not great either. This is a good project for our city. This is a good project for the long term. I am a DPS parent. I have skin in this game. I care about our students and I still support this project for our city. And so I'm going to support it tonight. And I just felt like that needed to be said. So thanks so much. Thank you, Councilwoman. Councilwoman said. Thank you, Madam President. I just want to make it clear that this is not a conversation about multi-modal transportation versus single occupancy, or whether it's a good project in the long haul or not. It's not about the long haul in this moment where we're in a crisis and our city is crumbling. Additionally, we can all debate who to take money from and give money to, but that's also not the topic of the conversation. We're not talking about taking money from DPS. What we have of an opportunity right now to do is give money back to DPS, and we're failing to take that opportunity to give not only money back to DPS, but $23 million back to ourselves in a time when we're literally encouraging people to retire or furloughing people just to save $16 million here and a couple million there. This is about looking at the pots of money that we have stored up and doing something responsible with them. Additionally, the obligations or intentions of this tiff in the first place were already completed. Tracy spoke to that. The 16th Street Mall is an addition to the original intent of the TIFF. When we talk about tiffs, like I said earlier, that's a whole separate conversation and let's not get it twisted. TIFF is a gentrification mechanism. This is not a crisis that is similar to any other crisis we have faced. And so comparing it to the previous recession is not only inappropriate, but it's an indicator of complete disconnection from the consequences of a global pandemic. If the people of this city protesting in the streets haven't made themselves clear, let me make it clear for them the 16th Street Mall is not a priority right now. Every single agency in this state is in a budget crisis. We as a city have sacrificed our employees, employee paychecks, etc., etc. but we're foolishly missing this very large chunk of money sitting in a savings account and with the ability to do something with it. Right now, if our mayor would show some leadership. 1500 jobs are also not the priority right now. People are literally being told one day, go back to work, one day you don't have a job. We that is not the. Issue at hand. Prior to COVID, we had more jobs than we could even fill. And so I think that we have to understand that this moment demands something different from us. It demands creativity, flexibility and prioritization. Councilman Flynn mentioned Governor Lam rejecting federal dollars for one type of dominant idea of transportation and then the money eventually circling right back to us to be able to build what we now know as the 16th Street Mall. Let's have the courage to make a decision that in the short term may feel like we're sacrificing something, but could, in the long run, help us save our city. We keep going to our voters to pass bonds and taxes for all the things we need, but we never take the opportunity to spend their money wisely. We squander it like the taxpayers won't miss it. And kicking a couple of million dollars towards struggling small businesses via a hundred PPE masks and some hand sanitizer and telling them good luck and Godspeed is shameful. Thank you, Madam Chair. And I'll be voting no on extending the date of this agreement. And I hope that my colleagues will demonstrate some leadership and at least vote no for now as well. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Up next, we have Councilwoman Sandoval. Madam President. So first, I would like to thank all of my constituents who reached out to my office. I was elected to represent your voice, and I always appreciate hearing from people who identify themselves as Council District one. I think a lot of us got some form letters today, and when you put your address at the bottom, it helps me know who's and who is reaching out and how I can get back to them. First and foremost, I'd love to thank the people in Northwest Denver and to Councilwoman Sawyer's point. I'm not only have two kids in DPS, I'm also a DPS alumni. I graduated from North High School. I've never lived anywhere else other than North Denver, where I am lucky enough to be born and raised in serve right now. And this was a really challenging conversation. I've been sitting and thinking about this and going back and forth, and I think leadership comes in all different sides and forms. I don't think that voting in one certain way or another defined someone's leadership. I think that we're all leaders here and are we were elected to be leaders in our community. And so whether we agree tonight on this or not does not diminish whether anyone is a leader. And I would just like to thank all the leaders in DPS, because I have reached out as well and I have not gotten any answers from DPS is I've been hard pressed to get answers on any of these questions that I've been asking about DPS and the money and returning. It seems like we're in a situation again in 2020 where we have no answers. This is not the first time we've been in 2020 where we have no answers. We do not have answers about the pandemic. We did not have answers about how to go on virtual. We have been navigating and we have been without. We are on uncharted territory. And so that leads me to I have vacillated back and forth on this vote. And at one point I would say I was going to vote no. And I had a long conversation with a constituent of mine about their memories and downtown and what they thought of the mall. I was too young to remember all of those things, and I want to be able to have a downtown Denver. That is amazing. My mom's from Brainerd, Minnesota, and they would love to have it downtown Denver. They've been working on their downtown Denver in Minnesota for 20 years. And there is nobody in downtown Denver because they did not have the funding and the mechanisms to get it. So with that, I will be supporting this not for today. And yes, we are having to make a hard, hard decision tonight about investments. But I'm going to choose to invest in my future because right now, during this pandemic, a lot of times I feel like we are doing our best to get personal protective gear and be able to protect people. But I need to also protect the future and the next seven generations of Denver. So with that, I will be supporting this project. Thank you. Thank you, Councilwoman. Up next, we have Councilwoman Torres. Thanks, Madam Chair. One of the commenters, the two I think that I'm thinking most about were Margaret Bob and Jonathan Patoka, and both, I think, really were incredibly accurate in their assessment, even though on probably opposite ends of this vote. And I think that's that's the that's the definitive struggle here when we talk about what our response as a council is in in COVID, it is assessing everything deliberately and and looking at the long term impacts. And even for this one, when these areas open back up again and all of the tax revenues are assessed to their proper entities, this gets us a lot more money than a one time infusion of 33 million. When my district had a tiff along Federal Boulevard, we would have been pretty pissed if somebody had decided to intervene and redirect those funds before they were spent. We were doing in the last five years extensive outreach alongside Doura to make sure the business owners along Federal Boulevard knew what funding was available. There was still 20 million left in that and we wanted to make sure that it all got spent down because that those were there storefronts that utilized it, their rooftops, their parking lots and. And for them, this wasn't a gentrifying force, it was an improvement force because we had a lot of community involved. You know, the taxes were collected for a downtown improvement project. And and that's still got to be a consistent piece in order to sustain a lot of the funding that we've got to continue to see in the city. Jobs are jobs, and those are still important to it. It's really tough to see this. Issue around failures of DPS funding and state funding to Denver public schools and public schools across the state hinging on this one vote and not on its history of insufficiently funding school districts. So I will vote I'll be voting yes on this. Thank you, Councilwoman. We have Councilman Clark up. Thank you, Madam President. My wife is a DPS teacher. My brother is a DPS teacher. My mother is a retired DPS teacher. Both of my kids are DPS students. And like many others on this body, I'm also a yes graduate. I voted for every single million bond for DPS that's ever been for me since I turned 18. Growing up in Denver and I will again this November if they put in front of me, this vote is not a choice between funding schools and funding them all. That is a gross oversimplification that has created a false narrative on what is in front of us. My colleagues have covered all of this so eloquently. It took most of my talking points that I was going to say. And so I won't rehash what Jocelyn Flynn, Hines Cashman, Sawyer, Sandoval, Torres have already said. I'll echo all of what they've said, and I just want to add a few things. Many of our rural neighborhoods are rural neighbors in the state. Our education budgets are way worse than ours in Denver. They have had to reduce to four day school weeks and even three day a week school because of funding cuts that stem from a lack of a strong commercial property tax base. The mall funds nearly $30 million to DPS each and every year, in addition to all of the taxes that are generated for the city and for our core city services. We need to make investments necessary to protect those funds that we are already using and to expand them. This project does exactly that. As Councilman Flynn said, if we don't do this now, we will lose the matching funds from the federal and the state. We don't get to keep that. DPS doesn't get to keep that that goes away. And this project will cost much more and more and more every year that we continue to not make these repairs, taking more resources away from critical city services, education and flood control. When we do finally get to doing it, also, as Councilman Flynn said, if we don't move this project forward, I believe all of these taxing entities stand to lose in the short term and would certainly lose big in the long term. During public comment, one of the speakers talked about what citizens would vote for. And I think that we can't forget that Denver voters did vote for this project. They voted yes overwhelmingly in support during the last bond vote, and pulling these funds would be contrary to how our citizens actually did vote. Not on speculation of how they might vote. I believe it would be extremely short sighted. It would cost our kids, our schools and every piece of our city much more. If we kick this word down, they would kick this work down the road. So for all of the reasons that have been covered and those I will be voting yes tonight. And I and I hope that my colleagues will as well. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman Clark. Councilman Herndon. Thank you, Madam President, with all your colleagues. Say all your points, you will be you will give the shortest time. And I appreciate Councilman Sawyer going there out of there. Council members who are parents as well. I have a junior, incoming junior in high school and my son will be going into kindergarten. So he will this is an investment, obviously, that will impact him for a good period of time. Yet I am still supporting to move to not to not vote this down because I think it would be extremely short sighted. I do believe this is a false narrative and I'm disappointed that people have tried to make this an argument about kids versus investments, because that's not even I don't even think that's close to where we're having a conversation about. And I really appreciate that people keep emphasizing that part of making investments during these times so that when we get out of this recovery, we're doing the work now and we can recoup those benefits sooner. Also using other people's money, the leverage that we're using other dollars for that. So thank you to my colleagues who have all spoken in support of this. I'll be supporting this as well. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilman. And seen no one else in the in the queue. I'll go ahead and add my comments as well. I will echo. I appreciate the deep dove that everyone took in around asking questions of Josh, Emily, Brian and Tracy. And you know, really when I started looking at this, I looked at it from a short term solution and we could do that and split the money up. But like my colleagues have have mentioned numerous times, I'm trying to look at this from a long term lens and that we're really shoring up our downtown urban core. And in the long term, this investment, even if this project starts quarter three of 2021 in the long term, will generate both property tax and sales tax revenue that will support both the city and DPS. And it's not an easy trade off. All three of my kids have been students. My two older have graduated from it. Yes, my youngest is going to be a junior when she starts back to school. And so we are a DPS family and it's not an easy trade off, but we also need to look at the investments that we make today are going to shore us up as a city and a region to recover sooner than if we don't do this. And, you know, when really when you look at the number of construction jobs, apprenticeships, workforce development training, that's going to be what helps support our families. I it's unfortunate that we're we're pitting students against families when really the jobs that this creates that's going to support DPS households making sure that they can pay their mortgage, their rent, health care, food, everything else that they need during this pandemic. And the other piece that we haven't talked about is that real connection that we have between Denver International Airport and the 16th Street Mall. In the next year or two years or maybe even three years, we might not see the uptick that we'd like to see in air travel. At some point. It's going to come back. At some point, conventions are going to start even if they're smaller, our conventions are going to start to come back. Tourism is going to start to come back. And that is why we need to be prepared when we start the recovery, that it's not only going to shore up the city of Denver, but these are regional assets and we need to make sure we're supporting them. And so really, I look at this investment in the mall, also helping in a small way plant that seed for Denver International Airport to come back and for those jobs to be recouped at the same time because it really is a regional ecosystem. And so with that being said, I will be voting in favor of this as well and seeing no one else in the queue for any comments. Madam Secretary, roll. Call, please. Think about that? No. Clark. All right. When I. Herndon. I. And I. Cashman. I. Tonight, I. Sandoval. I Sawyer. I. Or is. I. Black eye. Madam President. I. Madam Secretary, please close the voting and announce the results. One May 11 eyes. 11 Eyes Council Bill. 562 has passed. They know their business. The pre adjournment announcement on Monday, July 27th Council will hold a required public hearing on Council Bill 648, designating the Howard Berkley Park Chapel as a structure for preservation.