A bill for an ordinance approving a proposed Intergovernmental Agreement between the City and County of Denver and the Colorado Department of Transportation regarding the CDOT Central 70 Environmental Mitigation and Denver Home Improvement Project. Approves an intergovernmental agreement with the Colorado Department of Transportation in the amount of $2.3 million through 12-31-18 to implement home improvements for residents in Elyria and Swansea to mitigate for noise and dust during the Central 70 construction project in Council District 9. The last regularly scheduled Council meeting within the 30-day review period is on 10-16-17. The Committee approved filing this bill at its meeting on 9-13-17.
11 eyes, one abstention. 1018 has been adopted. Madame Secretary, can you please put on the next. Um, item, which is should be 1013. Councilman Ortega, would you please put 1013 on the floor for passage? Mr. President, I move that accountable. 1013 be placed on final consideration and do pass. All right. It has been moved. And second, it comments by members of council. Councilman Cashman. Thank you, Mr.. Thank you, Mr. President. So since I've been on council, I've been very clear that I'm not a fan of the Central 70 project. And this is a much longer discussion than I care to engage in this evening. But what I've been very clear on is my dissatisfaction with the fact that the Colorado Department of Transportation continues to fall short of adequately funding mitigation measures for the homeowners within 500 feet of the Central 70 project. This bill said it sets up a new agreement whereby the Senate offers up $2.3 million for mitigation for these 270 some homes, I believe it is. And the city of Denver is asked to put up, I believe it's about 1,000,003. Now, I'm going to choose to vote in favor of this, not because I've suddenly become enamored with this project, but because these mitigations are critical to preserving the health of the homeowners. I've asked the city attorney to help me to look at the original iwga and the annual allocations that will go along with that to see if there's any opportunity to recoup our money there. Whether or not I'm successful in that, I think these mitigations are important, and I continue to wonder why we can't get seed out to fully honor their obligation in this project. I'm aware that they're doing a lot in other areas, but this is one area where they're definitely meeting a shortfall. So thank you, Mr. President. All right. Thank you, Councilman Casper and Councilwoman Ortega. Thank you, Mr. President. This is a project that I've been very involved in from the very beginning, going back to when this was part of Council District nine that I represented. Councilman Cashman is absolutely right. These costs are costs that should be incurred by court. But the record of decision that was issued back in December basically only committed the $2.3 million that court is going to spend on the homes. And it's a minuscule number when you look at the overall cost of the I-70 project. But the fact that Denver is stepping up and helping augment what is needed for those homes and this really is still not enough. Some of us are still trying to find more money so that we can address HVAC systems for the homes. What Siedah is covering is all the windows and portable air conditioners, none of the doors. So if you have a door and you live in the neighborhood where there's a gap, once they start doing the construction, the heavy metals that are in the soils have the potential of coming into those homes. And the portable portable air conditioners are going to do nothing more than circulate bad air in these homes. So the work that Denver will do with our contractor that will go into the homes and meet with the families and be able to talk to them about what is available to them and what their needs are is critically important. And so I will be supporting this tonight because it is important that we do the right thing by these 278 homes that will be left within the 500 feet of the the highway project. Thank you. Thank you. Councilman Ortega. Councilman Espinosa. Yeah. I just want to be able to explain my vote. And the reason why I called this out tonight is I will be voting against this, not because I don't believe that the mitigation will be done earnestly or appropriately, but simply because I believe that the only true mitigation for I-70 is the removal of I-70 and the cleanup of those communities, not air conditioners, not sealing homes, and then putting them next to six additional lanes of traffic. So that is a belief that I is based on the fact based on science, based on sound transportation information. And so, you know, this is this is so I just wanted everyone to understand that my vote against this is simply because the only appropriate mitigation in this regard would be the removal of I-70. That said, the the you know, I do I appreciate the city coming in and sort of bolstering the sort of meager offerings by CDOT and the federal government. But you guys paying taxes and paying a large penalty for 50 years in those communities when this was installed in the first place. And so there is a correct mitigation approach for the last 56 years of that highway. This is not it. Thanks. All right. Thank you, Councilman Espinosa, Councilor Lopez. Okay. Thank you. President Brooks. I see Miriam Pena in the audience. Miriam, can you answer how many homes are we looking out for, for this particular area in question that we can potentially help out? I know that we're kind of piloting some, but how many how many can we potentially. To 68. To 60 to 60. I'm trying to figure out the right number. So I defer to you, the expert. To 78 to the first phase ten that we're modeling so that we understand how long it takes to work on the homes, how long it takes for us to get the supplies for the homes, and that should be done before calendar year. Thank you so much. President. Brooks, if I just may add one thing. Look, I want to just to get that number because I am going to vote for this. In the meantime, I know that you know, the best the best thing would that do not have a highway there. But I'm not voting for this doesn't bring it back. In the meantime, I know that, you know, Denver's going to step up and try to mitigate it and try to really, at least from our end, help our residents. Those are still Denver residents. I. I'm under the. But the strong belief that we shouldn't have to do this. Absolutely not. She not knew that this was going to be an issue long before. And as somebody who keeps saying this, I keep saying this. I was one of those folks on the doors and knocked on all those doors. A $2 billion project. With $2 billion and only 278 homes. That's a drop in the bucket to put windows, doors, air conditioners in an area that has been subjected to the worst pollution in the city. $2 billion. That's a lot of money to be able to do the right thing at the very least, and it's not being done. And instead, you know, and God bless, you know, our our departments and you, Miriam, and your team for stepping it up. But I think see that you need to come. You need to come bigger. You need to come back to the table with a little bit more commitment. So. All right. Thank you, Councilman Lopez. Councilman Espinosa, you back up? Yeah, I forgot. I had a question. A question for Tim actually just came up. This popped up in my mind when I was watching the the how I mean, the committee, the state transportation committee meeting when they talked about this mitigation. I'm trying to call it my notes. Well, it wasn't clear to me is how it was clear was they were doing the installation in the House ceiling, but they were talking about the duration of the project being five years. Are these you know, most of these air conditioners are warranted for like a year. Is all of the work coming with some extended warranties as well? I believe, Councilman, that yes, they are. I might ask her. Rebecca just got here. But. If you can come up for just a moment, this is the gentleman who's doing the work from EOC and all of the homes that we're doing right now. And the question was on how long were warranting both the equipment and the work, if that was going to be five years as opposed to two years for the equipment itself. I think with the air conditioning specifically, it. Was excuse me, just introduce yourself for the record. Luke Alderton, I'm director of energy efficiency programs at Energy. Outreach, Colorado. Typically for a room or a portable air. Conditioner, it will be a one. Year manufacturer warranty and a one year installation or labor warranty. Okay. I'm going to push that the city push on because the clear response from CDOT, because one of the one of the senator in the house of the state reps had asked the question, I believe is Representative Pavone actually had asked the question if they were doing this mitigation for the construction or doing it because of the pollution that is both there or being generated from the highway. And the response from the DOD was that it was simply for the construction and not, you know, sort of trying to turn its back on the fact that there is extended pollution. But they were very clear that there's a five year construction period. So I do think it would be selling this community short if we're putting in mitigations that actually don't extend at least for the construction duration and let alone the long term health effects that are associated with being next to the highway. So I would really expect the city to sort of follow through and make sure that these commitments are at least through the construction period, since that is what CDOT is saying there for things. They don't work for CAIR. So thank you, Councilman. And yes, we'll follow up with Seedat about the five year period. I do know that the testing of our mitigations extends one year beyond the five year construction period. So we'll continue to test the air quality and make sure that we're maintaining the appropriate quality of their past, the construction. And I do want to want to make this very clear to everybody here, my colleagues. Mr. Santos is the absolute right person to be leading this on behalf of the community. And so I have every bit of faith that we will be following through. And I do have the luxury. I want you to be cognizant. I do have the luxury of the fact that this council will be putting probably voting for these mitigations to take this take my stance firmly. And so my criticism isn't of an DCC or Mr. Santos, it's actually of of Sudan. So thank. You. Thank you very much, Councilman. All right. I represent this district, District nine. And, you know, I'm glad, Councilman Lopez, you talked about going door to door. And we can talk about this project. We can talk about how we disagree with this project. But the and I have my concerns, but the fact remains, as I go door to door and talk with the residents of Globeville or Swansea, especially the residents that are immediately impacted in this 500 foot radius. They want mitigation from cedar mitigation in their home. Mitigation and air mitigation in schools. And this is why I'll be voting for this. I am highly disappointed that this is so late. We should we should have been working on this six months ago. And I've stated that disappointment, because the one thing that the city can come through on for the community is mitigation, especially on the homes. And so this is something that we should have came a long time ago. There are there are a cacophony of errors to why we couldn't do that. But we're doing it now, and I'm voting in favor of it. But I also want to say that there are millions of dollars being invested in the Swansea Elementary School, which I think is important to say as well. And it's under construction. Much of the school is under construction right now, which is something I think is incredibly important, because I don't know during other freeway projects what other schools have been done. And so but I am disappointed this has taken so long. But I'll be supporting this. Madam Secretary, roll call. Espinosa, Nei Flynn, i Gilmore, Herndon, I Cashman High Carnage Lopez. I knew. Ortega I Black clerk. Right. Mr. President. I Please close, please close voting not the results. 11 eyes one nay. 11 eyes, one nay. Let's see. 1013 passes. Okay, we are. Let me just make sure no other items need to be called out. Okay, we're moving right on. All of the bills for introductions are order published? We're now ready for the block. Votes on resolutions and bills for final consideration. Except for bills 1005 and 1006 series of 1217. They are companion bills to 1004 scheduled for public hearing this evening after the recess, after the public hearing and after consideration of Council Bill 1004 Series of 1217, Council will vote on the companion bills 1005 and 1006 Council members. Remember, this is a consent or block vote and you will need to vote I otherwise this your last call it on first have a vote. Councilwoman Ortega, will you please put the resolution for adoption and the bills on final consideration for final passes on the floor? Happy to do so. Mr. President, move that resolution. 1036. 1035 1016. Ten, 1910, 2010, 23. 1026. Ten. We just voted on ten, 12. 10,000 needs. That was not okay. Ten, 12, ten, 15. That's not the one we called out, was it? No. Okay. Um. 1024. And then you want the bills for introduction as well. Bills on final. Final. Okay. Find those. Okay. And then the following bills on final consideration are 999. Um 1007 978 981. Um. 1013. No, not. Not ten, 13. So that's the one we just voted on. Yep. Yep. Okay. And that should do it. Uh, Madam Secretary, do we get all of them? Yes. All right. Okay. It has been moved and seconded. Madam Secretary, Raquel Black. High Clerk Espinosa, i. Flynn, I Gilmore, i Herndon. I Cashman. I can ege Lopez. I knew Ortega. I Mr. President. I please close voting announce results. 12 Eyes. 12 Eyes. A resolution have been adopted and bills have been placed upon final consideration and do pass. I'm going to take a little bit of personal privilege here and I see former Speaker of the House Marc Farentino here, now CFO for a DPS.