A bill for an ordinance making supplemental appropriations from the General Contingency Fund to the General Government Special Revenue Fund. Approves a $4 million supplemental appropriation from the City’s General Fund Contingency to the Office of Economic Development to support the Business Incentive Fund’s support of a general merchandise mass retail store on the 16th Street Mall at 1601 California Street in Council District 9. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 2-21-17. This bill was approved for late filing by Council President Brooks.
161 Bill for an ordinance of the Denver Zoning Code to revise parking exemptions for preexisting small zone lots to 77 bill for an ordinance providing for an extension of approximately two months of an existing moratorium enacted by Ordinance 20160498 series of 2016 prohibiting the use of the Denver zoning code. Preexisting small zone lot parking exemption for certain projects. All right, Councilwoman, can each. We need a motion to suspend the rules on council to allow for the introduction of a late filing. Thank you, Mr. President. I move that the rules of procedure be suspended to allow for the introduction of Council Bill 156 approving a $4 million supplemental appropriation to the Office of Economic Development to support the business incentive funds. Support of a general merchandise small retail store on the 16th Street Mall at 1601 California Street. All right, it has. It's been moving second it. Thank you. Councilwoman Denise, do you want to make comments? And I'm happy to make comments as well. Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. I am making this motion as chair of the Finance and Governance Committee, where this bill moved through with our intention that it be on the floor today. Due to staff miscommunication, it was not filed in time, but I believe it was the committee's intent that it be on the floor tonight. And so that is why I'm making this motion count. Very well done. Councilwoman Camille, I think, summarized it. This is just a mistake. And it was a council's full intention in the Finance Committee to make sure this was on the floor. And so we need a unanimous vote to suspend these rules and make sure that we can have the conversation on the floor right now. So it has been moved. And second, I say, Councilman Flynn, you're up. Thanks, Fred. Just a quickly, could you tell us what the mistake was or what occurred and how that can be avoided in the future? Because these these kinds of votes are very rare. Yeah. So I believe this is between OED and the Department of Finance. And one department didn't know when the other department was supposed to file and not file. So this is actually coming out of the Department of Finance. However, the bill is located in OED. So they they know they've apologized. And so we're moving forward with a thank you, Councilman Flynn. All right. It's been moved and segmented. Okay. So we put resolutions 163. It should be 156. Yes. Okay. This should be resolution 156, for the record. There was a mistake on a typo on this and it is correct on our screens. 156 So, Madam Secretary. Mr. President. Point Are we, we're voting on suspending the rules right now. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Yep. Okay. Council members, again, this is Council Bill 156 and we're voting on suspending these rules has been moved and seconded. Secretary Roll Call. Can each. LOPEZ All right, new black clerk. All right. Flynn I. Gillmor I heard in. Cashman. I Mr. President. I please close the voting, announce the results. Nine eyes. Nine eyes. That Resolutions 156 may be introduced. Madam Secretary, you will read the resolution title. From Finance and governance 156 Bill for an ordinance making supplemental appropriations from the General Contingency Fund to the General Government Special Revenue Fund. All right, councilmembers, this is your last opportunity to call it an item. Councilman Clark, will you please make the motions this evening? Yes, Mr. President. All right, I'll do a quick recap. Under resolutions. Councilman Flynn has called out Resolution 163 for a comment. Is that 163 or 156? Okay. All right. For comment under Bill for introduction, I've called out Council Bill 153 for a vote. I've called out Counsel Bill 161 to hold in committee for one week until March six under Bill's for final consideration. We have nothing under pending. We have nothing matter. Madam Secretary. Mr. President, I apologize. I would like to have 163 and 156 for a vote. They could be together in a block. And I because of making the late filing motion, I kind of forgot to do the link through them, and I apologize for that. If we need to vote on them separately, that's. Yeah. Madam Secretary, can we put 156 and 163 in a block, please? Yes. All right, great. We'll make a note of that. Okay. Madam Secretary, please put up the first one. 163. Councilman Flynn, go ahead and make your comment. Thank you, Mr. President. 163 is an agreement between the Office of Economic Development and a development entity on the 16th Street Mall to develop or redevelop the old California Mall property right at 16th in California. And I remember it as the old food court. You go up to the second floor, and when I saw this come across, it gave me a lot of heartburn, Mr. President, because it would bring a new a very good tenant to the mall, one that I think it would be great, wonderful addition catalytic to what I call upto our sort of answer to LoDo. This is up doe and but it was target and I have nothing against Target Corporation. Personally I shop there on occasion, but as some folks may recall, Target had a very wonderful outlet in my district at Sheridan and Evans. And when when Target opened in Belmar, in the Belmar redevelopment in Lakewood, they closed the Target in my district. That alone doesn't give me the heartburn because that's a business decision. But when they left and sold it to an operator who now operates a 99 cent store there, I say we don't even get a dollar store down in my district. We get $0.99 store. They put a deed restriction on the property that it could not be used for 20 years for a general merchandise retailer of 50,000 square feet or greater. And I know from my predecessor, Councilwoman Jeanie Fox, that on at least three occasions a national retailer has looked at that property and has walked away from redeveloping it because of the deed restriction. However, in the in the course of dealing with this, I was able to meet with guard properties, which is the owner of the California Mall and would be the actual entity with whom we're partnering here, not Target. And I'm very happy to say that they've genuinely outreach to us and they have helped us down in southwest Denver to do market research, to identify potential retailers and possibly even to look at the property as a potential redevelopment. So for the first time in the five or six years since Target left there, we have some we have some interest. I understand the property may also even be on the market now. So given the genuine promise to continue working with us. Mr. President, I will vote yes on this and and plan on that cooperation continuing. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Flynn. Councilman. Thank you, Mr. President. I have been very aware of how hard the downtown community has worked to attract retail to this location. It has been a conversation as long as I have been on the council. Not maybe not this particular location, but the vicinity of the 16th Street Mall. And so I don't take lightly the concerns about how to make downtown an attractive destination, to fulfill the needs of the residents and the workers who are downtown. And, you know, I have not, without some consternation, supported some types of redevelopment assistance in this city's history that have involved retail. And, you know, particularly with tax increment financing, it's never been easy. Each deal I take one by one. But overall, I have great concern when we are using city dollars to subsidize retail. It is a non economically sustainable job in our city. For the most part, the average jobs at this site will be 25 hours a week, which is not a full time salary. So even if the wage is slightly above the minimum wage, when you add up the hours, it will keep most families below the poverty line. And we as a city end up having to step in then with childcare assistance and health care assistance and other things. And that's not unique to this location and it's not unique to this retailer. But I do have concerns about using the Business Investment Fund for this purpose. The city has been very disciplined in using the business investment fund, almost with the exception of one other retail job, a retail investment for jobs that are higher than the median wage. And I've appreciated that discipline. It is what kept me supportive of this fund for the period of time. I really struggled with this one and really looked at each a piece of the deal. And I, you know, I would have maybe almost gotten there, but the fact that this agreement is not directly with the retailer and does not give us any privity of contract with them, we do have a history of retailers.