he [Music] ch [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] he [Music] he [Music] [Music] he [Music] [Music] [Music] d [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] e uh the um study session uh for uh January 4th 2021 uh is now called to order with the clerk please read the role yes mayor cman here mayor protim Bergen here council member bersin here council member kums present council member Gardner here council member guber here council member hilts here council member Lawson here council member Johnston here council member moono present council member Mario present executive session update uh the the there was no executive session uh there is no update mayor's update uh only to say that mayor Hancock reached out to me about um uh working with him uh on the issue of homelessness and so it would be myself mayor Hancock and the the mayor of uh of Lakewood uh Adam Paul and so would be the three of us and then the idea I think is once we set a a vision uh for the working group then other Mayors would be added in are there any issue updates mayor council member hilts H just a question is that going to include your camping ban as part of a metrowide homelessness uh address is that being sheld for now uh you know I am holding it back for now based on some new information uh but it's it's up to the group working group that's to what to decide okay thank you uh council member kums so are those priorities and plans going to be brought before Council for approval oh they have to be brought before the respective councils for ratification whatever came out of the working group if anything my hope is there would be something mayor uh council member car thank you I I think to follow up on that would we actually be included in any of those conversations before you all come up with uh something to present um I understand that Denver has a strong mayor you know he's a strong executive he can basically veto anything our structure is a little different and I think it makes sense if we're all able to be a little more engaged if that makes sense well the mayor's reached out to me so nothing will happen unless uh the city of Aurora ratifies whatever comes out but but I don't plan on going to you before I go to the meeting if that's the question all right further okay uh any issue updates uh seeing none uh question before is uh moving the consent calendar forward let me defer to the clerk on a change on on item number 2 C thank you mayor there's a correction to the title it's supposed to be consideration to appoint three terms not reappoint one term and appoint five terms so there's a correction there just going to be for three terms are up for appointment okay so um I'm sorry sorry may I pretend Bergen okay so it we're reappointing three and not appointing any new ones just want to get clarification sorry yes sorry no there are only three terms that are up for appointment there's no reappointment okay thank thank you okay then the question before us unless there other question before us ISS mayor I do have question yes I'm just because it's there are three terms up for appointment and five candidates listed so are we going to be choosing three from among those five I actually have here a list the list that they provided was everybody that they interview red and so they they actually only want Angie binder Brandy delain and David Wilman to be appointed and that came from um from Marshall Brown okay that's odd because the letter includes reasons for um considering for appointment other folks so I just I guess can we pull that off and have a little bit more conversation about this yes of course um I was just told this afternoon that those were the three that they strongly suggest to be appointed and they just included everybody that they had interviewed that okay I see that they have for a future opening for some of these I missed that um yeah I guess one of my concerns is you know as I have many times stated is the ward balance on our boards and commissions overall so we have two people from Ward three um which is an area where we have folks under represented on our boards and commissions overall um and so I would uh respect respectfully request that we um look at one of those folks from w three rather than appointing additional folks from w six and W four which both have pretty significant representation okay let's let's mayor may I make a suggestion yeah mayor prend um usually so it's on consent and I understand the confusion here but when it goes to the floor um out of all the the five that were considered you can nominate anybody so I I they'd all be in in for consideration I guess is what I'm saying Okay can have that discussion at that time then that's okay very well so then question before us is uh whether or not to move uh the consent calendar item number 2A um through 2f is there any opposition May appr yeah sorry I couldn't unmute um I I can either bring it up now or I guess when it goes to the floor but I had a question on the um the snow REM is that go ahead okay so um I understand it is um High planes Metropolitan District which is Blackstone area that has requested to do their own snow plowing within their Community which normally um we don't allow because of um potential damage to our public roads so it looks like it's a pilot program that we're going to re-evaluate in a year I just wanted to bring it up because I have a lot of other communities in southeast aora that are part of Metro districts and they have have also voiced that um desire so none of them it looks like have come forward other than high Plaines but just wanted to make that that um comment that a lot of them are interested in this so I'd be happy to see um if the pilot program is successful okay okay further discussion I have a question uh council member Garner um on that same item um does staff have an estimate as to what it's going to cost us to make sure that the Metro District complies with the IGA and there's not significant um work but there is some work um you know inspecting equipment and reading a end of year report and things like that so I'm just curious what what that's going to look like and more specifically to piggyback on what mayor proen Bergen said but if we were to have addition Metro districts that were to do this type of arrangement there obviously would be um increased cost for increase staff time staff so this is Cindy call it public works director and we have Lynn Center our deputy director of operations on as well as Tom mcmin so Lynn um I think you guys pulled some of that data together or Tom yeah uh Cindy we did and uh it's really uh the setup on the front end is is where really all the work is when you have to get with the Metropolitan District and go through their go through what we do to fight snow um I feel strongly that um the things that we do on the front end are going to protect our assets uh protect the curb gutter sidewalk and uh roadway um so I think the work is pretty minimal as far as um what councilman Gardner is asking further questions on uh the adoption of the consent calendar I have a question on the snow removal C thank you um I had the same thought that council member Bergen had that once once this goes if it's successful other HOAs will want to do it too the ones that can't afford it because it's going to be expensive um but Cindy are you thinking about maybe a damage deposit or like when you rent a car you know you walk around and you see no no chunks out of sidewalks but it's at the end of their first year you see chunks out of sidewalks you you will build them for it or is there something built G to be built into that contract yeah I think as part of this pilot project that's a great idea to look at options like that just to make sure that we are protected that is the idea of doing the initial walkth through with the um District's contractors at both the beginning before the snow season at the end but but that is a a great idea council member person thank you look into that other questions or comments on the adoption of the consent calendar uh seeing none the um the question is uh whether or not to move the consent calendar forward is there any opposition I seeing none the consent calendar will move forward uh it from the policy committee Rocky Mountain partnership proposal uh Mr bachelor mayored go ahead okay no I just wanted to make sure if if um Mr bachelor was having technical difficulties I could start but Jason if you don't mind um we'll we'll tag team with some of that if you wanted to begin I was yeah I was just going to note that obviously uh as noted in the backup that this item began um when uh you uh last year with um uh the NAACP hosted a meeting during the summer um with a number of different Community Representatives uh including um I think most if not all of our elected officials uh that were there uh in attendance to discuss the youth violence problem that was ongoing uh during that meeting uh the collective impact model was uh brought up and um particularly by Adams County uh as it's a model that they've used um and then after that meeting uh they brought forward uh the Rocky Mountain partnership which utilizes the collective impact model as a way to address problems particularly youth violence and and other youth issues focusing on Youth and so um we spent the fall learning more information about it uh you as well mayor protm at the time mayor PRM Johnson learned about that and then wanted to bring that forward for your colleagues to consider we have a backup uh in terms of what this proposal looks like what the collective impact model is and so I'll I'll let you take it from there thank you um yes that was that was a good summary um most of of council was at that um end of July meeting including mayor Kaufman and obviously um we want to be the most effective way to address violence and youth violence in our city we brought this forward to public safety policy committee um basically just wanted to get that support from Council I know it is an investment of $20,000 but the return on that to have actual out outcomes using evidence-based policy collaborating like we really have wanted to with the region including Adams County I think is just going to really be an effective way to address this and of course that includes being part of the governance structure and being on the board so I really hope that we can get all of of Council um on this I can you know we can go into more detail I I'm trying to be sensitive with time and and other issues that are going to be discussed um it is in backup but we can you know talk more about what Collective impact is um any questions on that but I hope that we can can get support I know many of my colleagues are are familiar with this strategy and and have been um wanting the city to pursue this for for quite a while further questions discussion mayor Dave guber council member grber so I guess my concern is how this interfaces with the Denver Regional Council of government CML uh the uh the rather large investment that we've made in and youth violence uh within the city uh because the structure here uh looking at the slides um leaves a little bit leaves it undefined as to you know when when this group gets together then then what happens as far as a group I mean it's not part of the Denver Denver Regional Council of governments it's not it it looks rather loose and the metrics and measurements seem yet to be defined so I'm just I'm just wondering who we are paying for the $20,000 and what we will receive for the $20,000 [Music] mayor um well let me go to council member Johnston first sure um and and Jason I may have you tag team it definitely is separate from Dr Cog and some of those um other areas and um my understanding is first this this group is going to get together with with the city of Aurora and talk about some of the different metrics and outcomes that we want so I I I concur that it isn't solidified right now because first we want to join as part of the the membership to decide what some of those outcomes were and we didn't want to um basically be prescriptive when one of the reasons we're joining this is we know we have the Denver compact we know we are working with Dr Cog we have a lot of things that are going on but we haven't really structured and committed saying we're going to do a collective impact with these different programs so I think maybe one of the first things that we do is list these are all the things that we're doing what are some of our partners doing then start from there to build build that Collective impact but if mayor if if Mr bachelor could could expand upon that since staff has been um talking to them more about it that would be great Mr bachelor so yes so for for the Denver piece uh this is actually something that we had told uh Denver um when we were discussing the compact that we were pursuing so they are now in discussions with Adams County as well uh to to sort of explore that uh one of the things that's become apparent um when we're talking to Denver is obviously they are a city and county so they bring County resources to the table that uh as a city even a home rule City we don't have we don't provide some of those Health and Human Services and so um we think bringing our County Partners to the table uh is a huge step forward we think it's something we've heard from you all as as Council and the mayor that we really need to have our County Partners at the table we think this uh Collective impact model and and the Rocky Mountain partnership allows us to do that allows us to bring Adams County uh to the table Denver's uh knows that is an inter interested in exploring that as well so that we have all of those Partners uh at the table and are talking about it and then specifically to your point about um you know making sure we're not duplicating efforts we have some money set aside for youth violence that is really the intent of the collective impact model is to identify who's doing what what resources are they bringing and making sure that we are not duplicating effort and that we are uh spending our dollars to achieve the outcomes that we are looking for so I think that is and as as council member Johnston said that is very early on in that we have to identify what it is we're trying to accomplish what are the outcomes we're SE seeking and then how do we measure them and then what are we going to do to you know get those outcomes further question oh uh Council yeah so I actually have participated with the Rocky Mountain partnership and Adams County in their response and Recovery teams particularly around aging adults during the pandemic and so part of how the process works is that you define you get everyone who is going to be a part of the process at the table to define the goals the process the resources so that's why there's not a list already created of those goals the process and the resources because they want everyone who is relevant to the conversation to be represented at the table as much as possible so the county the city and then then we would identify and we have this partnership with Denver and this is what they've committed to doing and we have this money and that's what we've committed to putting in so it's about really making sure that we're not just putting something out there that's abstract and isn't in consideration of what's already being done and what resources folks may know about that we don't necessarily um have at this time further discussion yes mayor uh mayor Pam um so we okay so I think I just understood sorry I was a little distracted but we are going to be um looking at arapo County Adams County as partners also for resources um then how does this work with um council member Lawson's youth violence program does it tie into that it it absolutely ties into that as we talk about um the um both moving that forward and working with our County Partners there uh this the the discussions we'll be having at the partnership and and with our County Partners all rolls into that those discussions about who's doing what what resources are they bringing to the table so this is all sort of part of that those same discussions okay and and definitely once this once we kind of get it going then we will definitely have measurable outcomes yes ma'am okay thank you further discussion uh seeing none is there any coun thank you now did I read in here that it's not just 20,000 to join it's 20,000 every year yes ma'am it's it's an annual membership yes and so what if can we back out of it if we see it's really not what we thought it was because like you said it's really not structured right now and you know what if we see it's we'd rather put into some other group some other organization can we back yes yeah so I would say I think it's it's a one-year commitment so certainly Beyond this year we're we're not committing to anything okay thank you further questions or comments seeing none is there any objection to moving item number 3A forward seeing none item number 3A will move forward item number 3B um an adding division five uh to article division five to Article Five of chapter 2 of the city code pertaining to the establishment of an um immigrant legal defense fund what I want to do on this is uh first um turn it over to um council member Mario uh for any presentations that she has and then um then what I'd like to do is turn it over to council member Gruber I think he's got a witness that he wants to ask some questions too but then but not have questions until both are done uh both sides are finished and then let's have uh questions and let's have a discussion and so because otherwise I think last time it's one of those things where um everybody everything was everything was said but not everybody said it I think and so uh just for the sake of time because we want to get this done in an hour uh let's do it that way so council member Mario uh thanks mayor and I just also want to make a note that um though you're just calling on me this is actually co-sponsored by me and council member kums that's right um and I don't know if uh she had any remarks she wanted to share um so and and also just for greater context I still don't know why we're doing this odd back and forth weird debate it's it's untraditional um council member grber has no involvement in the creation of this ordinance so to give him time to have a outside speaker as though um that is normal um you know I I just can't help but share that again my my frustration and opposition to the the change in process it seems to be um selective on certain items we certainly haven't had this debate um every single controversial item so uh I am disappointed that that we are moving forward in that fashion um but since I am not chair of the committee um and I don't run the meetings I guess that's the rules will have to play by so um I hope that the public can bear with us as we kind of uh stumble through this this meeting so uh again thanks um and Allison I don't know if you want to introduce um the the item or our speaker on the item as well um sure I mean I do want to make sure as well that we make time for our City attorney to talk because I know that this is an area that Mr Hernandez is pretty knowledgeable about and so we do want to get his kind of presentation on the item as well um but this is really an opportunity for us to make sure that people have the right to representation because know that the right to representation leads to people being more successful at staying here in our country contributing to our economy being together with their families um running small businesses and being workers who do a lot for our city and do a lot of the jobs that we've considered essential during this pandemic and so and I also want to make sure that we're really clear that this is an opportunity for us to put forth a very small City contribution in order to leverage a lot of private dollars and we can get some feedback um from Mr janian from the Hans Meyer law firm um about how that has operated in other places where it's in place um and so that's we have H Hernandez from the city attorney's office and Mr Arash janian who is um an attorney with the Hans Meyer law firm that works extensively with members of the Aurora Community and folks that are in the Geo Detention Facility um that are here to speak on this item as well mayor um yes um C Johnson yes thank you I just um I feel I feel the need um basically Tau from what um Council M morio said is that last time um there wasn't it didn't seem like there was death refence made to the sponsors or who they they set up and when questions were asked there were so much of the answers based on a speaker that was brought in toward the end and I understand you know you've said the both sides and it's it's always good to get both sides but if we could add more difference to the sponsors when a question is asked of their of their folks really making sure that they have that first opportunity I I think that's that's important and even if we have that other perspective I just ask that we TR if we if we can proceed now uh for the proponents uh what order do you want your speakers to go uh who is we'll have um Mr Hernandez first giving general information and then Mr janian um answer question Mr Mr ananis please proceed mayor if mayor if the sponsors will allow it can I ask a question you know I want to I want to yeah right after the when after both sides are done we're going to have time to ask questions but I you're putting in you're putting in speakers without their consent so I'd like to ask them for their permission if they want to say that's how we're gonna this is how we're gonna this is how we're gonna proceed okay Mr her this is a circus so Mr leader please proceed uh good evening mayor and members of the city council uh this ordinance uh establishes a fund within the city and let me open it real quick so I can uh guide myself as well as you could see uh all the Weare assets uh are already there explaining uh why this ordinance is uh put in place section number one talks about the responsible Department in this case going to be the office of international and immigrant Affairs this will be the uh Department of the city that will be overseeing this uh addition to the city code beginning in June 1 uh 2021 so you will be approving uh should this be approved uh this uh fund and the office will kick in the responsibility formally on June 1st 2021 this doesn't mean that they will not be uh doing preliminary work towards that date but that's when uh it would be legally effective uh section 2667 within that section one of the ordinance creates the executive committee and then it explains everything that um how that committee is going to work uh probably the most important one section 2668 talks about who are these non-citizens that are going to be eligible and then under section two a it specifies which sections of the United States code uh we talking about when the immigrants are under that particular sections proceedings that's when assistant will be able to be kicked in and it then describes you know the process of how that assistant uh has to be rendered it has a poverty level requirement and has a residency requirement has a few little details that ties That to the city of Aurora uh so section number three basically it's an exclusionary uh uh section that indicates well if the likelihood that somebody can win or lose the case is not going to be taken into consideration by the office in order to uh render assistant and then it goes through the three applicants and explains how that works then it goes to the reporting uh to the office that will be monitoring and then that will be the end of F uh you know the rest of the languag is the normal uh things that we have in our ordinances the uh important part here is that this is creating a fund the fund at this point is not funded yet you still have to appropriate Monies to fund it and then uh go from there so essentially the budget office will create a line item there that says um immigration fund or I sorry let me let me get this correct name legal defense fund and then once the money is appropriated at this what respect to C's money it will be deposited there and then that money could be used it is also open to receive donations and to receive uh things of that nature that could complement or supplement the fund as well so um that's in essence what we are doing here and uh I will yield to Mr Janan in casee he wants to precise something a little bit more here now please proceed uh thank you Mr Hernandez thank you council member kums for the introduction and thank you to the council for the opportunity to speak this evening it's a pleasure to be with you again um just uh that that was a really good overview by uh Mr Hernandez I will just add a couple details um in terms of the folks who are who this applies to who would be benefiting from the fund uh it is people who are in removal proceedings um who have essentially been uh presented with the document that initiates those removal proceedings so they are defending themselves against the removal the reason I highlight this is it it's it narrows it to the population of folks For Whom the consequences might be most dire in terms of the things they are facing uh the potential consequences they are uh facing in addition the uh poverty level or excuse me the income level that they must meet is essentially the same as what's required for qualifications to for a public defender in uh criminal proceedings uh so not exceeding 200% of the federal poverty level for the household income and then the residency requirement uh for Aurora is the same as it is for voting for being eligible to vote and one of the the um one of the things that Mr Hernandez um did highlight is that this is a universal representation model again similar to the public defender model the idea here is not to look at um what someone is facing the likelihood of success or failure but to be able to provide representation to those who meet a certain criteria and then the only other thing I will highlight is just with respect to the folks who are applying for the funds it would actually be the nonprofits or the attorneys who are representing these individuals in proceedings and they do have to meet certain uh requirements uh at least three years of experience in providing direct legal representation essentially being good standing and accredited with the courts um and then any additional uh criteria that the folks who are administrating the fund uh would determine so that would be um oia and the uh the nonprofit that they would uh eventually work with and I'm available for any questions that you all may have thank you let's go to uh um council member kums and council member morio for concluding statements and I'll go to uh council member Gruber and then we'll open it up Council council member kums oh I was gonna see if council member muo had anything for sure council member Mio yeah uh thanks council member uh yeah so you know just um thank you to our two presenters for kind of elaborating on how this would work who this would apply to um I mean really this was uh brought forward with the safeer our discussion and our our um our thought is um how do we best support our um immigrant community and and create a space where people feel safe um and people have the same access to resources um regardless um you know um of their nationality so um you know again we wanted to make sure that one of the core pillars of our legal system of having representation for everyone was afforded to that of of of of our immigrant Community who um are in this particular situation so um I guess Al that would be the only closing remarks uh council member yeah I mean I think that Universal representation model is incredibly important that we make sure that everybody have that access um and the impacts cannot be overstated in terms of preserving the rights of members of our community um to live to work to play to learn um undisturbed and I know that one area that this has become an issue um in some places both in our state and in our country is that when the um when local governments are potentially involved with ice or collaborating in any way with ice which is part of our other discussion that the racial profiling that people experience increases um because there is a question of their immigration status that is grounded in assumptions based on race and as a city the immigrants who live here are very diverse it's African immigrants it's um Central American and South American immigrants and these are folks that do potentially face that same risk of racial profiling and so when that occurs we want to make sure that folks do have access um to representation um and the ability to remain here again in our country providing everything that they do to our community that every person on this Council has said they value about our immigrant communities uh council member berer and then we'll open up to questions or comments thank you um first of off let me apologize for attempting to present a dissenting view of a topic that's important to all the residents of the City I realize my colleagues are upset that I'm attempting to have an informed discussion as opposed to only having their side presented especially mayor point of clarification okay um if I may mayor council member council member thank you I I just think in in can we stick to the the process that we talked about instead of um making false statements about the intent of these conversations mayor please council member grber okay council member grber proed so as I was saying uh the president or the president to bring in outside speakers was first done by council member medo when she brought in 9 to5 to speak during our discussions on uh mobile home parks so bringing in outside experts was done clarification okay um wait why don't we just council member grber please let's get to the issue all right so I i' like to uh introduce uh director John fra catori and uh director could you introduce yourself in your root yeah John faor again the field office director for immigration custom enforcement enforcement removal operations and my area of responsibility is Colorado and Wyoming okay as we discuss this ordin it's it's important we understand the language used by the federal government with respect to foreign Nationals in the United States to be clear an immigrant and we have many of them almost 20% of the population of Aurora an immigrant is a person or family who has entered the United States through a legal process with the intention of obtaining permanent residency and possibly citizenship a legal alien is a person of any race or nationality who has gained a Visa and legally entered the United States with the intention of staying for a defined length of time an illegal alien is a person who has entered the United States without legal Authority or has stayed in the United States after their legal authorization has expired or whose legal Authority was previously removed by the court Asylum and Refugee status are special circumstances that may lead to Temporary or permanent residence upon judicial review uh director could you do I understand these terms correctly and could you expand upon those yeah those those are you know basically right I mean you know immigration law is uh you know it's a huge process but the uh what you just mentioned is is basically the the process for for legality and and illegality okay so what we're talking about that now is not about legal immigrants it's about people being accused of being illegal aliens at our last meeting you described the difference between warrants issued for criminal cases and warrants issued for civil cases those people arrested for a criminal case go to a criminal court and based on our law are assigned a defense attorney if they cannot afford one that process is not under debate tonight what we are discussing tonight is the Immigration Court Administrator process for determining whether Aliens Must leave the C the country for violating immigration law I realize immigration and custom enforcement does not operate the Immigration Court so I don't intend to ask you questions about how it is run however since ice delivers people to the court I would like to ask about that so my understanding is there are three main groups of people who undergo Administrative Hearings in the Immigration Court and again these are these are uh uh not immigrants per se but uh folks accused to being in the country illegally the first group consists of those who are not US citizens and have been convicted or charged with a crime involving moral turpitude such as murder kidnapping drug dealing rape extortion larsy and others the second group consist of people whose home country has issued a warrant for their arrest and the third group are people who do not have a criminal conviction and will have their entry claim of Asylum or Refugee status adjudicated uh or have immigration violation such as overstaying their visa reviewed do I understand this correctly and would you please expand yes sir so you know basically right now we have uh you know about 240 in custody um 50 from 51 countries 90% of those cases uh have criminal convictions um you know 25 basically are are are non-criminal at at this point and and of the 25 that are non-criminal uh four were just recently arrested at at DIA coming into the country and had issues with uh admissibility um two were prior removals that had their charges dismissed but the charges were for sexual assault and DUI um and then 12 are are are border cases that were transferred up here to to Aurora so you know out of those 240 cases in which there's criminality in those cases 25 uh basically make up uh immigration violations and and and such as that okay okay so those other ones aren't presuppose or aren't supposed criminals or they aren't uh uh alleged criminals those are people that have gone through court and have been charged or uh or they are charged in in court or they have been convicted in court is that correct yeah actually the 215 were all all have convictions okay so they are in fact criminals yes all right so the purpose of the ordinance under discussion tonight is to create a fund and a new organization within the city's office of immigration and immigr immigrant affairs and provide and the number that I've heard is starting $50,000 of taxpayer money to assist aliens in defending Al or to assist in aliens in defending uh themselves in Immigration Court again I realize those courts are operated by the Department of Justice so the inner workers Court are not in your area's expertise however your organization has the responsibility to deliver aliens to the court is it true that as these aliens uh go into court they are given a list of char ities that provide pro bono or free lawyer assistance yes that's that's actually policy to give them a list of free legal assistance okay and then from those CH could you list a couple of those Charities by the way um right now I'm a Rocky Mountain uh immigrant advocacy Network um American Bar Association detention and Lop uh you know Catholic Charities Lutheran Services there there there's a myriad of organizations that that do uh give free legal services to uh to okay and then but but going a little bit further on that we talked about before that a majority of the people going for or at least being held in the det detention center now are convicted criminals or those with warrants from their uh home countries so do these charities does Catholic Charities provide legal assistance to uh convicted criminals and people with these warrants not not usually in fact on their their website they list that they won't represent criminal aliens but you know I I won't say that that you know none of the volunteer organizations won't won't do that it is up to those organizations but but many of the organizations uh do not represent criminal aliens all right thank you director those all the questions I have uh any concluding remarks U Council gur well yes the message we can take from this discussion is that aliens who face Court without a criminal background are typically provided an attorney by the various charities in fact I understand each person who is detained as we talked about earlier is given a list of uh organizations that will provide uh support to them pro bono or funded by a charity on the other hand the aliens convicted of a felony or those with a warrant from their home country are not provided an attorney uh through through the Charities so the ordinance also states that the auror citizens tax money could be used to defend an accused illegal alien in who came from another state and has resided in the ice Detention Center in Aurora for a minimum of 22 days and since that Center supports uh uh not just Colorado but Wyoming and and other states in the Mountain West uh it's possible that a person could be shipped into Aurora be there for 22 days and then would be eligible for the funds so the only thing we can conclude is that the $50,000 of taxpayer money that we're discussing won't be used for aliens without criminal backgrounds our money will be used to defend criminals who have been charged coni and convicted or charged or convicted of felonies and Aliens whose home countries have issued warrants for their arrest is that an appropriate use of Aurora taxpayer funds I contend it's not and I don't think we should move this for this ordinance forward mayor discussion council member marel thank you um I was wondering when we'd get to that um the end of that very well rehearsed back and forth uh between uh m Mr guber and Mr fabricator um you know again I I didn't quite follow it until the end and really what I'm hearing is first of all that wasn't a presentation that was a predetermined Q&A that the public had to listen to um a very excuse me I am not finished council members excuse me thank you um a very uh well rehearsed and elaborate and fear-mongering convers ation between um council member G Mr fabricator um as opposed to a an actual presentation so I'm this like back and forth you know well balanced conversation I really struggled to hear where we got any balance in that it it was it was literally a council member scheming up questions um to paint a really um elaborate um I don't know like unrealistic scen case scenario of events I guess um sequence of events excuse me um that may happen so I don't know it was just kind of hard to to feel like that was a productive use of time and um I I do I do there were some points um we weren't allowed to to kind of interrupt and correct the record real time um so I I I was hoping that we could defer um and I could defer to Mr Arash janian um to see if he had any comments um and clarifications on some of the points that were made because again we weren't able to clarify real time um Mr thank you uh council member thank you mayor um you know I I have a couple reactions to um director well a couple things director fabricator said um uh one thing he said that I absolutely agree with is he said immigration law is a huge process um this I heard uh someone actually was the director of an organization that he just referenced the Rocky Mount immigrant advocacy Network remain um when speaking about the fund that Denver has established uh similar to what uh is being proposed here she compared immigration law to tax law and she compared the consequences that folks in removal proceedings to those that folks in criminal proceedings face so I absolutely agree with the director that immigration law is a huge process it's incredibly complicated and that's why you see in the whereases that folks who have have uh Council who are represented are 10 and a half times as likely to succeed in proceedings and for that reason I'm frankly surprised why director fabricator is here uh in in essence uh speaking against this uh proposal um last time in the last study session in which both of us spoke he repeatedly stated how he wants people to be here legally how I is a is an agency that is in favor of legal immigration and when folks have Council it helps them Avail themselves of the defenses against removal that there may be now um he we heard a lot about criminal uh aliens in these proceedings and again one thing that both council member Gruber and director fabricator did were clear about is that these are folks who are only accused of being deportable or removable and there are number of defenses against that about convicted criminals okay let me Mr fabor I'll go to you next but go ahead please proceed finish um actually council member we're not always talking about uh convicted criminals okay um I um I I I appreciate and and the director um I I'd be curious as to how that very high number or high high proportion of folks in detention with convictions how that looks in Co times where ice is not faced and and the director fabricator hasn't been named as a defendant in a number of lawsuits seeking the release of people due to the uh terrible outbreak of covid within the Detention Facility and yes they have releas a number of people their capacity is currently low compared to what it is which is actually closer to 1500 but what I can tell you from my firm's uh experience is that um you know even folks who are asserting Asylum quite frequently start with a notice of appearance uh to go uh to initiate removal proceedings in Immigration Court uh they are in detention um and that is how that very available very valid defense gets asserted there are also a number of other defenses whether it's something like cancellation of removal um or or other uh rights that people have um that they can assert through their proceedings as valid defenses to their uh to their removal um in addition I would just note that um a lot of our clients a lot of folks in removal proceedings are frequently facing low-level uh offenses or yes sometimes convictions and those convictions don't always um result under federal law in a deportation and shouldn't yes might ice pick them up and arrest them based on a warrant that is reviewed by again another ice agent sure and as we and as I discussed at at a previous study session those are sometimes erroneous uh warrants and those low-level convictions again are defensible in terms of whether someone is deported whether someone who has you know uh committed a DUI for example um is allowed to remain with their family here um whether someone who is a victim of uh a domestic violence like one of our clients Claudia Valdez who then ice was seeking to deport for six years whether she should be um allowed to remain after she was charged even though she was the victim of domestic violence so sure uh director fabricator can can paint a picture and I'm sure he will find some the worst examples to highlight of the kinds of folks that are in removal proceedings but that's just not always the case and we can speak about that um and the last thing I will say for now and I'm happy to follow up and answer any other questions but um with respect to the organizations that do offer free legal services sure they are there their capacity is extremely limited I know those lawyers um I uh am personally a religious person so I would dare say they do God's work um they work tirelessly and uh an organization again that director fabricator highlighted Remain the Rocky Mountain immigrant advocacy network has benefit fed as have a number of other organizations from a a fund that neighboring Denver has and rain was able to hire two additional attorneys thanks to that fund now in Denver they are talking about much larger numbers than we are currently discussing and but the folks who are involved with the Denver fund who I've spoken with will say we're not doing nearly enough and we can use all the help we can get here because the the consequences as council member Kum said are dire and the impact here on human life uh would be great and very positive and benefit the or Community C grber oh thank you and I appreciate the fact that our friend the Denver lawyer didn't didn't identify that he would be one of the recipients from the city money that we're that we're talking about or his Law Firm will be I also want to point out that the positions or the points that I made that you can live in Aurora for 22 days or be in the Aurora detention center for 22 days and be eligible for this that most of the people that we're talking about we're not talking about immigrants we're talking about aliens and we're talking about the discussion as to whether or not uh an alien is an illegal alien or a legal alien and those people that are determined illegal aliens the the majority of them are criminals or convicted of being of being a felony uh uh or they have a warrant against them those issues haven't come up in the debate I understand how fun it is to beat beat up on me and and you know talk about me and talk about you know I mean that that's irrelevant what's relevant is that we're talking about taking taxpayer money from a city to use in court in in a federal court to defend people who most are been convicted of of a felony or have a warrant against them that's that's the fundamental question is this the appropriate use of City money discussion uh may I prend uh yes and I appreciate um both sides of this issue and I I want to say that I understand the need for def for legal defense my entire issue is using taxpayer dollars for someone that does not have legal status in the United States um for legal representation on a federal issue and and you know that's that's the Crux of it is using taxpayer dollars I I think it's fine for you know the nonprofits and the Charities and these attorneys um if they want to do pro bono work and and and provide that representation but a a legal immigrant who's legal in the United States or or myself or anybody any other constituent that is here in the United States legally they don't get that legal defense from us we don't pay for civil cases we don't provide a an attorney to represent you know someone on a traffic violation or any other civil matter and so for me it comes it all comes down to using taxpayer dollars um I understand the need for legal representation I personally think it should be done through nonprofits uh people can donate money to those nonprofits I think you know people you know we can have council members even do a a donation campaign fund to have have citizens donate to that fund if if they're lacking in in money to pay these attorneys or the attorneys can do it pro bono um so that that for me that's the bottom line is is using taxpayer dollars further discussion mayor I just wanted to address Council ber council member hilts please no council member Maro can finish and address that and I counc Council I don't know if you were done council member H but thank you uh council member and I just I know you and I have had convers ations about this I appreciate you returning my calls to to talk about this and you know like none none of your concerns are a surprise and I I do just want to share um kind of some of the thoughts that um me and council member kums had kind of thought through um though I think we disagree um on the you know obviously on like the fundamental premise of the fund I do agree that um this could be an Avenue to raise private uh funds um Denver does that um other cities that have other um immigrant legal defense funds have that as well um you know in kind of thinking through that that the thing is we have to have a fund in order to donate to the fund kind of a thing um at least as far as it's concerned with with the city and um there are groups um I believe remain or another organization if I'm not mistaken um does actually provide seed money for funds like this um however due to co just like everything else that's not an option this year so um you know this we're not actually talking about funding it at this point right now we're actually only talking about creating a fund um so I I want to just separate that as well this would be just creating the fund if we wanted to appropriate funds I've thrown out there in in Prior conversations I know that we have at least $50,000 available in unprogrammed funds um that um could be used towards us so that would be my intent however we're not voting on that today um but yeah I I do agree that I do think this could be a collaboration and I I don't think it should just be one from like a fiscal standpoint just having one source of funding doesn't sound very um sustainable to me so it would be you know my my interest to do that um you had also asked about um the spirit of Aurora which is an uh um I guess a fund set up through um and by the city of Aurora employees If This Were to be established as a fund um it would be an option for city employees to to donate of of their own free will so there other organizations and and funds that they could donate towards this could be one of them so if people wanted to do that with their own money um that would be a vehicle to do that mayor council member just further addressing and follow I know I'm sorry um council member hilts I just want to follow up on some of the questions that were asked from the being a sponsor perspective of this issue um so I think that what council member moodo highlighted is extremely important this could potentially be operated through the office of international and immigrant Affairs through donated dollars only from entities Like Rain the Vera Vera Institute and other organizations that exist as well as the spirit of Aurora so all we're talking about today is the establishment of the fund the city council may never choose to appropriate funds toward this end and having the fund in place would still be a benefit um but I also wanted to clarify some things that that um were said by council member Gruber um first of all I want to point out that Mr johanan has a name um and in general we try to respect people by calling them by their names instead of referring to them as just Denver lawyer and I don't know if it's because you can't pronounce the name or because you are trying to disrespect him but I think that it would be appropriate to say his name um and then in addition that there's an assumption that council member guber thre out there that the Meer law office would financially benefit in any way um they may not represent any of these clients or apply for any of the funds and so I think it's also really disrespectful to make that level of assum verify that will not take money from this fund is that your statement um I don't know my point is you don't know either well we can ask Mr johanan but you don't know either and so just to imply that they're doing this for their own personal benefit rather than to represent people that they fight for doing a lot of pro bono work is really unacceptable and the disrespect is unacceptable so that's all I have to say on that okay council member Hills yeah thank you I wanted to Circle back to earlier and just express my deep disappointment in you for your leadership on how these meetings are going now I understand having you know alternative perspectives but when those alternative perspectives are done without Council being given any notice that's just secretive and a little bit slimy so in the future if we could get that information ahead of time and I think that Isis participation in this sham of a process is a really good reason to recognize that we need to be doing more and be more diligent for our immigrant Community C gr okay again we aren't talking immigrant Community we are talking alien community and the issue is whether they're legal aliens or illegal aliens we keep I mean this whole facade that we keep talking about immigrants 20% of the people in the city are immigrants and that's wonderful we have we're represented across the world the issue here is alien and alien is not doesn't refer to a race it doesn't refer to a nationality it refers to a status of coming into the nation so we're not talking about an immigrant defense fund we're talking about an alien defense fund and this this gamesmanship that we're talking about creating a fund but we're not going to put any money into it once the city creates that the city is administering it the city is absorbing costs by running it uh there are a number of Charities that do this already that we could simply give money to that one of those Charities pick one and give money to it we don't have to use City money to do it and going back to the fundamental issue does it make sense to use Aurora tax payer money we $30 million underfunded this year we expect to be or with $30 million last year we expect to be $ 35 million unfund underfunded this year we have a huge deficit in taking care of our roads and and to say that we have $50,000 we can simply give away doesn't reflect all of the other priorities let finish need to be addressed the fundamental issue should we use City resources regardless of whether it's a city department where we're paying the person or paying for the costs or whether we're using dollars uh direct taxpayer dollars does that is that a responsibility of the of a city of the city of Aurora okay further discussion may I respond to that please uh counc goe thank you well I appreciate council member guber anointing himself Colonel of the resistance um I do I I do not ascribe a hierarchy of value to human beings we are all human beings and so we can use whatever legal term we want to use he has opinions too um we can use whatever you know legal terms we want but at the end of the day we're talking about people and we're talking about whether or not they have a right to have that access and for someone who won't even use the names of the people who were on this meeting I just find it pretty hypocritical that you're the one talking about you know status and the importance of that name so just this is just a circus the mayor's allowed it so I just this is council member CS mayor wait a minute be respond uh council member gr then council member CS so again there is no discussion as to whether or not legal uh uh people that are inside Immigration Court should have legal uh representation that's not under debate I agree 100% that they should have legal representation that not the issue the fundamental issue is should that legal representation come from taxpayer dollars from the people of Aurora further discussion mayor council mums um so again let's just point out once again that a very small amount of the money will likely be whatever we choose to seed that with as a city um there is a lot of other funding that we can leverage simply by esta Ling this and then additional funding that we can leverage by putting a small amount of seed money in and that's something that the city does all the time to the tune of a lot more than $50,000 um but I do have a couple of questions um for Mr fabricator and Mr janian that I would like to raise um for Mr fabricator when there are 1,500 um detainees in the Geo facility what percentage of those Det Tes are there solely um with convictions um and what percentage are folks that are there for immigration specific um offenses okay and then for Mr Johan and sorry and then I just want to throw the other one out there so we can hop back over to it um and then for Mr janian um just the question of um that the doe process issues that we talked about last time okay so would you like me to go first ma'am yes please okay so so to to answer your your question about when it's at 1500 we we target criminal aliens so so on on an average basis most of our cases would be those targeted who have committed crimes in the United States it it's very hard for me to say exactly what that number would be at our Detention Facility because we could have a situation at the border where we have you know a caravan coming through and they're sending um the people that are being detained at the border up here to Aurora and one thing that I want to make very clear is I'm not coming out negatively on this law um these these legal uh representation for for aliens everyone should have representation um if if these uh if these volunteer organizations would like to provide it if they can afford an attorney they should have that representation so I I I don't want to make it seem like this there's a negativity here I'm I'm here to answer facts for for for Council Members like you that have uh questions about about that but again something that counselor jianan had had said and I I do respect his knowledge on on immigration law but I just I wanted to make it clear that you know I I this is we're not coming out negatively on this I'm I'm only here you know to answer the question questions that you guys may have yeah so as a followup then would it be fair to say that it's often true that um much more than 10% of the people in the facility are non-criminal um immigrants who are facing removal proceedings for other reasons no I mean statistically to be honest I mean under President Obama for eight years we had priorities where we were only owed to go after criminal aliens so I mean if I were to take a statistical average of what we've had in there for eight years through um the Obama Administration we were only going after uh criminal aliens and and we and we continued that through the last four years so I mean statistically we would always be in the uh high 80s to 90% on that but again um there are situations that do occur and I'm not going to say that it doesn't happen where where there may be people that that come up from the board border because they're being transferred up here and and you know border crisis situation but but then again they're going through and they're seeing you know Asylum uh uh um U Asylum officer sorry they're seeing Asylum officers they're they're they're they're getting that part of the immigration process where they're able to go in front of an asylum officer and then they're released from from custody a lot of I mean we have right now in this state 23,000 cases that are outside of the custody of our Detention Facility that are on the non-detained docket of of of uh aliens that are going through the immigration process and many of them may may get a benefit at the end of the day and and be uh legally here after that process is over okay thank you and then can I get my question also to um Mr janian answered as well oh sorry mayor thank you mayor thank you council member kums um and I want to thank director fabricator for his his uh response to to my question to him um so to answer your question council member um about you asked about due process generally and you know I I analogize this to the the public defender system as you all have you know the the reason we provide uh folks who've been accused of crimes with with lawyers with appointed counsel is that the the stakes are so high for them and that they've only been accused of crimes and I am quite frankly confused by the distinction that um council member guber is attempting to draw by referring to people as aliens the you know I I don't like that term but uh the legal permanent resident card the the one my mother had for many years said said Resident alien on it so I'm quite familiar with what that looks like and what that that term is but um again folks are issued a notice to appear um they have many defenses against the removal um that might be Asylum uh the um uh I apologize um they have many defenses and all this does is it appoints Council because the consequences are so severe this is the only legal system we have in the United States where folks are subject to detention and are not appointed counsel and we're creating a a a number of limited requirements for folks who are eligible for those one is that residency requirement that we talked about a director fabricator uh discussed a number of non-detained individuals so people who live in Aurora who might be in those proceedings in the the Denver Immigration Court non detain they would be eligible and Council member grber brought up this 22-day residency requirement um you know the thing is we have this Detention Center here in Aurora in our backyards and a lot of those folks are from Aurora and council member guber is Right a lot of those folks are not um but we can't ignore them and one thing we know about the immigration system is that people get moved around frequently so yes they may be from Wyoming originally they may be from Utah um and they are moved around it makes it much harder for them to have access to their families to have access to lawyers um and are we just going to overlook that I mean there's there's a reason that we've created this residency requirement and it's the same as the voting requirement as I pointed out so um I I think it's important to to address that um one thing uh director Fabrica Tori said um about the ities under the Obama Administration as we all know they were done away under the Trump Administration in terms of trying to go after criminals so to speak and I will note that we recently created a few years ago actually created a statute in the state of Colorado because so many people were charged with crimes and then were deported by Ice while they're while they were still not convicted while their uh proceedings in the criminal justice system was ongoing we had to create a statute that allowed uh bondsmen uh bonds people and folks who family members who posted bond to be able to go to court and say look um my you know family member whoever got deported can I get my bond back because that was such a frequent occurrence that we had to do that I Point again I point that out just to say that we're not just talking about hardened convicted criminals we're talking about a variety of people and I one just very quick last point I just want to point out that uh I don't have an exact count but I believe about 42 other cities across the country have created These funds and uh Six States Ohio New York New Jersey California Illinois Oregon also have legal defense funds like this so we're not talking about some some radical program um this is something that has benefited folks across the country I just want to point mayor da guber may I respond council member grber so okay so Mr johanni and our friend Denver lawyer let me point out the reason that the uh terminology is so important is that we have such a high percentage of immigrants in the city and those immigrants have nothing to be afraid of uh with what we're talking about now I think that there's a an element of fear that people are bringing forward that because we have so many immigrants uh this is going to be used you know that they're at risk of being deported they aren't what we're talking about are those people who um are aliens like your mother and and again there's no though the point is is that that that was not a derogatory term it was on your mother carried it around it was it's simply a legal term and you know better than I do so so I think the implication that um that that using using the wrong word on this on purpose is good is never good in a legal sense the second thing I want to emphasize is the point that you made that the people that were talking about defending uh uh many to most of them won't be from Aurora these these aren't these aren't people from our city that we're protecting these are people from from Wyoming Utah other places in Colorado and and we're talking about using City taxpayer money again the fundamental point should we use City taxpayer money to defend aliens uh in federal court and I say no mayor uh council member Johnson thank you um I would love if we could have agreed on using term doc dou umented or undocumented but we're just not there um I want to go back to where Council Mario started where we are not talking about the actual tax dollar money right now we're talking about the funds and I'm just going to be honest about the the image the city of Aurora has do we want to be a leader in Criminal Justice Reform and also Embrace that we are one of the most diverse cities in the United States I also want to talk about um to Mr janian I actually had um a constituent of mine who teaches in W 6 and her middle schooler um student his mom passed away last year and then his father was um picked up by Ice a couple weeks ago and we're frantically um you know trying to to see where to go and can can Mr janian talk about we talk about these these Charities but with this experience can you talk about the difference between providing legal resources and then also providing an attorney to help through the legal process because um just because there might be an organization that says we provide some legal resources I know at least with this individual they they don't have an attorney who's assisting them so could you talk about that because it seems like there's this oh there's all these nonprofit that's providing this if you could give us a little more clarification on that I'd appreciate it uh thank you council member for that question um sure um I think I pointed out I I don't know this for sure but I think Catholic Charities for example has has one attorney uh rain is is the largest organization we know of and like I said a fund like this in Denver that was well funded allowed them to hire two additional lawyers which was huge for them but we're talking about I don't want to diminish it but we're talking about a handful of nonprofit lawyers who are able to buy provide services pro bono and when it comes to um this fund actually would as as has been pointed out allow private loyers to uh apply for funds and what that does it is increases the capacity of lawyers whether they work for private practice or work for a nonprofit um to be able to represent people who might not be able to for them because you know we immigration lawyers do not work on contingency fees there's no money that's going to be afforded at the end of the day they have to get paid but it would really be nice to increase the capacity of those lawyers to do to represent folks who may not otherwise be able to afford representation um you know I my heart goes out to to your constituent my immediate thought is my goodness what's happening to this family a lot of folks who end up in Aurora um and aren't able to find representation are just kind of like get me out of here and will go to the immigration judge and say please I will accept I will admit I will accept voluntary deportation or I will just you know concede deportability even if they do have that right to Legal defense sorry if I went a little off topic I hope I answered your question canc no I appreciate mayor may I have a followup please proceed please proceed you um so I just want to talk about I mean Ju Just less than an hour ago we talked about Collective impact and the investment of the city making the $20,000 and the leveraging of additional funding and resources um could could you talk Mr janian um just about the Denver foundation and what this could potentially I mean as council member Kum said first we need to establish the fund but at least just look at the the Denver model that um of additional funding that's been able to be generated um the in the current information I have and and Denver has been um successful because of the the resources and funding that they've been able to um obtain and I I know this is a question that came up uh in committee and I had difficulty answering and I may have even misspoken but um there the the numbers that I received about the Denver fund is that they had a total of $380,000 uh a combination of about half and half I think uh that commitment from Denver and then the other half came from uh private uh donations or the some some of the seed funny that seed money that was referenced um that $380,000 has been able to serve 250 people um and the question that I that I received in in committee that I was wasn't able to answer very well um that rough math comes out to about $1,500 per person so that should give you all a sense of how many folks could be served uh by a fund like this in Aurora thank you further questions comments May um is it mayor pretend ber mayor pretend Bergen sorry um it can we not just refer people to these nonprofits and Charities so that you know so that they have those resources again it's it's you know whether there's first of all there's no fund with zero monies in it it's a fun a fund has money in it or will have money in it so again my my objection is taxpayer monies but couldn't couldn't our immigration uh division couldn't they just refer people to these Charities maybe I don't know if Ricardo's the hear this Ricardo well we can try to do that but you know I want to be honest with you there is a big need for Legal Services across the city so er we can try to do it we'll happy to do it but I don't know that will be enough right and if you refer them to these nonprofits or Charities then you can also I mean people in in the city could donate their their private Monies to that fund correct uh well we can try I mean I that's free will anybody can donate to any pro any organization any church any charity I mean the I mean the bottom line is the taxpayer monies that's the bottom line of using it for legal defense for for federal issues I mean again we do not we we would not defend a legal citizen with we don't have a fund for them they have to get their own attorney pay for their own attorney um counc M council member HS thank you we we have a public defenders office um I just I I understand the concern with the taxpayer dollars so as the new mayor proem I know that you support you know the legal defense just not taxpayers dollars on it are you willing to commit to donating to one of those private organizations to provide that defense should this not move forward that would be my choice so no okay I I was just asking you because you you you keep no you keep you keep ask me that a personal question and expect me to answer you okay Council I mean are you gonna donate council member Hils are you donating sure yeah I will I'm just saying what are youing so I will put it in my fundraising report or wherever we do our donations so um so my my question is that you have just said many times about how you believe in the legal defense just not in the taxpayer dollars and mayor Pro or former mayor proam Johnson was talking about how we need to step up and be a leader in criminal justice in the city and so I was just asking you as a leader in our city now as mayor proem if you would be willing to step up and join that as well um I'm not too confident in that given that the responsiv is to try and turn it back on me I'm happy to also donate but I was just asking asking you as the new mayor Pro of our city if you would step up and help show that way but mayor may I respond uh Council I may I pretend Bergen yes I've actually had conversations with council member Mario and um she knows my position and I've been try I have tried to have a good you know discourse with her on this issue I don't appreciate being attacked okay uh further questions or comments uh council member mconnell I just say council member laston has been raising her hand many many of I was as well council member law council member Lawson next thank you um so this has been a conversation about othering and dehumanizing people by repeatedly using language that I think everyone here knows is dehumanizing that's why it was put into that law into law to begin with so regardless of whether or not it's actually written in the law I expect you all to know better and the fact that you keep counc point of order let me finish my statement first thank you the fact that you know that and you keep using that language sir speaks volumes about you more than I ever please to the issue to the issue yes to the issue absolutely so immigrants are taxpayers folks I don't see why we keep saying taxpayer dollars like yall need to Bandy this around like these folks don't pay taxes do you think immigrants don't spend any money in our city are you serious our jail is used to detain people who don't live in Aurora right that's taxpayer dollars that are being used on folks for criminal justice issues outside of our city I've never heard any of yall ever complain about that so anyway I just find it very interesting when these kinds of little nitpicky things come up ignoring the broader context of the society that we live in in the structures that we've created so doing this is going to lure additional funding I think that's something that has been well established already it's what's happened in Denver um it's important to not that in the recitals for the ordinance I hear some of yall saying well there's Charities that do this stuff five out of six people who appear before immigration judges do so without counsil that is a big part of what this is trying to address it is trying to lower that increase the likelihood that they will actually have Council which as y'all heard earlier doubles on average the chance that they will actually be able to get some kind of recourse that does not involve splitting up a family a family losing their primary bread winner having to depend on public assistance etc etc so this is actually a really big win for a minimal investment from my perspective and I would strongly suggest that if y'all actually want to live up to the words that I think again everyone on this Council has said that we support our immigrant community that we support and value and cherish the diversity of the city that we all represent in the we call home they all will get on board quit Grand standing I understand it's an election your council member gr but this is honestly beneath you thank you mayor let let me go to council member Lawson and then council member grber okay thank you for letting me finally speak um I'm getting back to the specifics of the ordinance um this this question is for Ricardo Ricardo I was reading the 10year Immigrant integration plan which I believe is the footprint um of issues that are adding our immigrant community so when you do any kind of strategic planning I mean you have you have what what's what's now what how we're going to accomplish these in the next five and 10 years I did not see anywhere in this plan and I could be wrong I saw something on page 32 of the Immigrant integration plan that says what was learned from the focus group and it states and people said the issue came up was lack of awareness about a lack of awareness about Legal Information and reserves so if this is the footprint for our city to address IM you know immigrant our immigrant population for the next 10 years how come this particular programming was not included in the plan specifically because you had goals from five years and 10 years but this particular thing saying well the city of rear may need to have a legal defense fund um it wasn't really mentioned and I'm looking at this as the footprint of how we're going to be addressing the issues now this came out in November this proposal was out next last year as well but it wasn't integrated in here specifically so can you tell me the reasons um maybe the reason for that um because I know you did focus groups you did uh surveys but only on page 32 did I really see something about legal services and then I have another question after that mayor please okay Mr gambet all right thank you well you know very interesting question and let me try to answer that ER yes it you need to remember that we start working the plan almost two years ago and you're right it we spent you know the summer and the fall 2019 and early 2020 doing a lot of community of reach focus groups we release different surveys we have different Community conversations and also we conduct different interviews with stakeholders across the city and we got a lot of data and information you know I wish we can put everything on the final report we try to highlight H those areas where actually the community identify as as a top priorities but let me tell you that in many occasions and during several focus groups people brought the issue of access to Legal Services ER but then you know at the end of the day when we start pulling together the final draft ER we decide to focus in the areas where actually at that time at that moment H we have influence on or actually we were in Char of those areas so for example city services ER focus on small business Economic Development international relations and things like that so there are other issues and actually you know after different Community conversations there are other issues that we identify as well but we have the time to include in the final draft okay um okay I guess that addresses kind of my question um can I go to my second question so on Section 2666 the respon ible Department I'm trying to get my head around we're going to have this 50k I thought it was going to go more towards serving the the people that are needing these services but then we have the office of international immigrant Affairs they're going to be overseeing the management Administration they're going to be overing getting the funding doing the fundraising and also probably kind of overseeing this executive committee so my question is is we are going to need an FTE you're either going to need an FTE a part-time FTE or put these particular responsibilities on a current person and if I was that current person I would want a raise because you're adding additional responsibilities to me so how is this really the 50k you're going to need more money because you're actually going to have to have someone to do this work that's actually in the responsible Department section so is that is that true or false well you know let me tell you this in for the last couple years we already add more responsibilities to our office and we increase the number of uh employees right now so for example in our portolio we manag you know the second language program translation interpretation services and also we were able to raise you know private funding through different grants in the last couple years for over 400 ,000 so this will be another responsibility for our office after an internal review I feel very confident that we can manage this if the city council decide to move forward with this proposal this is a policy decision and I am very confident that we can deliver you know at the end of the day everything what is on the proposal but again you're going to have to have more money another FTE or somebody to do this work so I understand you can manage it but I mean it's going to be more money either way somebody I mean so it's going to be more than this 50k that's going to have to be for this position well you know if you see the proposal actually we're going to hire a nonprofit who actually is going to hire a legal service provider so the only thing we are going to do is to provide you with oversight of the whole program so this that is something that we are very confident we can do it okay well that section really doesn't say that specifically like how you're interpreting it so I appreciate your response thank you thank you further questions a clarification on the section from council member Lawson just to follow council member council member marel uh council member Lon would you uh mind repeating the section one more time for me um it's section 2- 666 is the responsible Department okay perfect thank you further questions comments mayor uh council member Gardner thank you um so I I guess this political pissing match tonight is really embarrassing for this Council and really embarrassing for the city I think you know there's been a lot of Straw Men on both sides of this argument tonight and I'm just not sure why this group can't disagree on policy without burning everything to the ground it just this continues to happen over and over again you know when we talked about at the public safety meeting this this ordinance um you know I asked some questions in regards to to um public defenders and and the sixth amendment and things like that and um you know at the end of the day what the City attorney said is that this is really a policy decision and and I agree with that I think you know it was pointed out that there's 42 other cities or I think that was the number of 42 other cities in six states that have um similar programs and you know frankly that's not a um a strong argument to me in favor of of doing something I I think it's uh just because every other City does something doesn't mean it's a good good policy for Aurora um at the end of the day I you know I don't think this is um a function of local government I think we do a lot of stuff that we shouldn't do and um I'd be more than happy to go through our budget and um cut all kinds of things that I don't think we should be doing and this would be another example of them um but uh you know for that reason I won't support this but I it's you know I just again want to say it's really disappointing to me to see how this Council acts again on another controversial issue um we can agree while still being respectful thanks mayor further further discussion mayor uh council member bersin thank you see I waited until the end and I I have a I have a whole list of things here but I'll try to be fast but I you know I will totally agree with with council member um Gardner I have never experienced us acting this disrespectful to each other this is it is embarrassing we are we are being recorded and I I have seen people make comments that we need therapy this group is so disrespectful attacking each other there's no reason to do that we should all be professional you know yes we have differences of opinion there are 11 differences of opinion sitting here but to attack each other and cut each other down that is not adult professionalism and I I I I don't know we have to get better we just can't keep doing this I I don't know what's happened but we need to think about people in Aurora are watching us they look up to us but the way we're acting now I don't know why I don't know why they would but anyway let me get back let me get back to this um and I heard what what council member well several people have said about using taxpayer money and and I do agree with that we've all gotten emails like don't use my taxpayer money you know we have roads that need um to be repaired we have this when one one person even said today if the city has an extra $50,000 I want to refund send me a check okay so I think you get my drift with that but I another big problem I have with this is like council member Lawson said the department handling this I don't I don't think it is Ricardo's staff's job to go out and get money for this I think there other things that he can do I know when this department was set up yes I was here and yes saw his job description and raising money for a legal defense fund was not part of it this is morphing into something that I don't think his department needs to handle um which is not to say that he wouldn't he wouldn't do it and I'm sure he would uh gladly he would do it but I I don't think this this should be in his job description uh or his Department's job descript destion I I I was shocked when I read this to put our our city Department right in the middle of this I think money and this shouldn't shouldn't be matching up I I have a real issue with that um and I want to go back to um a conversation that was held earlier um I did see when I when I toured the ice facility I did see a list of attorneys next to the telephone and there are people sitting here um that were with me and you saw it too uh so all they had to do is pick up a phone and call uh an attorney um I wanted to ask one of my questions and if you'll let me ask it and then come back to me um is there any reason that a person in our ice facility can't call to Denver legal defense fund does anybody know the answer to that okay I I can respond Council I I believe that I apolog I I believe that's limited to Denver residents okay but they only have to be a resident for 22 days so so if they're detained in the Aurora facility for more than 22 days they're Aurora residents well what about if here from Utah in the Aurora facility does that mean that Aurora has to pay for them if if if they are um in the facility for more than 22 days they would meet The Residency requirement to apply for the fund even in a federal you know this we're talking a federal facility this is not an aurora facility I my mind was just thinking about that okay and for those of y'all at home a lot of this came from a big Lobby firm in Denver um I know because I'm met with them and we talked about this probably a year a year and a half ago and they've been pushing this and I know there's some people on Council that don't clarification are they in Aurora as well oh please let her finish uh council member I said in Denver but they have office let's be please proceed Council M thank you your word I'm sorry yeah can I talk now please proceed thank you yes this big Lobby firm in Denver that lobbies all of metro Denver they've been pushing this I met with them and um so this has been cooking for a long time this is not just our Aurora council members coming up with this this is a big Lobby firm and those of you at home need to know that um I I just you know it's we have to be good stewards of our taxpayer money we have a fiduciary responsibility to our taxpayers and this one is the one before was only 20,000 um this one's only 50,000 um we just did one few weeks ago was only 330,000 then we did another one that was only 260,000 you know this adds up this is taxpayer money we have so many needs that the city needs to meet um and I think we we forget about this we may find 30,000 and that's unfunded here or 50,000 that's unfunded there but my goodness we just can't keep giving it away giving it away um I know that we have lob I mean Miss wheeler is is working on the um judicial reform and she's a good one to do it I have nothing wrong with that but I think we need to step back and think how how do we keep spending this money um when we're $31 million short in 21 uh Westward even posted today on um uh Twitter do not do this in21 do not do this we don't have the money this is not the time to do this so I mean I I just wanted to get that out and like I said I I waited until the end so I could get it all said so thank you further discussion mayor mayor council member yeah so I had something actually clarifying that I wanted to ask a while ago um which is would Spirit of Aurora funds be permitted to be used if we didn't have um a a fund established like if we had a fund established with no funds allocated would Spirit of Aurora be able to contribute and if we don't have a fund can they contribute I think that's probably a hans's question uh excuse me mayor I I I do know the answer to that since I happen to be the lawyer of spirit of Aurora as well um Spirit of Aurora is authoriz to spend money for CD programs and for issues that affect the community so if we Str that second part a little bit Spirit of fora could theoretically contribute to a local organization that will provide you know immigr immigrants with uh legal defense um there are two ways that you can contribute to the spirit of aora one is with restriced funds which you can provide a check to them saying here's $10,000 I want you to spended in x uh recently and I'm talking about probably eight nine months ago there was such a a program for uh police dogs so um that's a possibility uh uh it will be something that you know the board of the spirit of Aurora will have to discuss if they would like to be in that position and they have full authority to reject it or accept it and it's theoretically possible uh if you want the funds to be a specific Ally spend on on immigration defense it will have to be restricted funds given it to them and it will have to be some form of local organization that will be the recipient of these funds uh from them may mayor okay uh mayor P wait just a just a followup sorry on on the spirit of Aurora I was on Spirit Aurora years ago and I mean I would say three years ago at least um we the board was literally just about to to change their bylaws so that they could add another component to Spirit of War which was um basically an a I think it was a 5013c so they would have you know the the city programs but then they were able they were forming a nonprofit that employees could donate to and I I'm astonished that three years later they have that board has not changed their bylaws and and gone I mean we had all the legal pap workor ready to go to do it so I I guess I'm asking was that not accomplished council member Bergen right before it was uh we did the uh exchange between Billy stigers and me that was accomplished and that's what I said that on that second prong you know Community programs is theoretically possible I mean I'm the guy that probably will get the legal question can we do this and I'm already saying it's theoretically possible uh I I think it's um I think it I think it's going to be okay so long as the funds are restricted so let's say that GMC comes and said here's $20,000 we want to spend it on uh defense for immigrants and they take that check they cash it they find the local organization here you go the the only legal issue could be if they want a specific organization and then they cannot contact that person or they cannot do a transfer or something like that which then would be the exception to the rules you know and then we will have to return the money but beyond that I think it's theoretically possible to use Spirit of Aurora as as the vehicle to donate to another nonprofit for uh legal defense but at this point the spirit OFA will be only sort of like a conduit it would be a a pass through entity between the the the person that donates or the organization that donates and the recipient further discussion mayor uh council member um yeah I just had a question for council member bins which was um what big lobbying firm are you talking about I I will text you I don't want to say it on on TV okay I mean if we're being transparent then why not I think it's their their personal business did you think I was lying okay further no I just don't know who I want to know okay let's not get into a discussion know who you're talking about to be clear okay council member B said she council member B said she would text it to you and that's what she will do Is there further discussion I'd like to get this wrapped up thank you uh seeing no further discussion then the question before us is whether or not to move item number 3B forward uh is there objection uh mayor objects mayor protim Bergen B auson Garder um seeing that um a majority are not in the affirmative uh item number 3B will not move forward uh we're still gonna bring that to the floor none okay I number three C residency requirements for RO boards and commissions so mayor I don't know if you want me to start or if you want council member yeah so this came up because I was contacted by a member of our community who has been trying to serve on our Aurora boards and commissions for years at this point who is an immigrant with legal status but is not a registered voter because he's not a citizen um and so um when I asked staff is the intent of having voter registration be our method of confirming residency to exclude immigrant members of our community from the boards and commissions they said no that was not the intent so I made the request that we make changes to those boards and commissions that are in ordinance rather than in the charter to use um other methods of verifying residency rather than just voter registration and so voter registration is still an option but then we're just adding other options to verify residency um and if Mr lathers has any additional comments he would like to make Mr LS yes good evening and thank you Council um I don't have any additional input here other than to say that this decision who qualifies to be on boards and commissions is something wholly within the purview of council according to our Charter you can set the limits the qualifications or the ramifications of this however you choose to do so this is your power they advise you so where you get your advice from since uh few of them act I mean we do have uh adjustments and appeals and Civil Service some that actually act but even when they act themselves you still review that so this is wholly within your perview um question Mr LS um and council member kums as well what is the uh the commission um that is housed I think in the in the the international Affairs division that that is for I think immigrant refugees yeah so there exists an immigrant and Refugee commission within the city um but I think understandably members of our community who are immigrants have an interest in participating in commissions on other subjects as well so the other that our boards and commissions address certainly impact them um and they would like to have a voice on those matters I guess my question is is but on that on that particular commission is there a citizenship requirement no and actually there's not a citizenship requirement on any of them um it's just the way that residency was verified was through uh through the voter registration and sorry Mr I probably should have yeah no the council member is wholly correct um our current provision has does not speak to citizenship whatsoever it was not a requirement um as a matter of proof of residency we chose an easy Avenue to prove that which was whether somebody is a registered elector and when we get to that point though we were looking for residency it gets comingled with the question of citizenship um but that was not the intent because we did not actually put citizenship as a requirement in our ordinance it was an unfortunate metric which was chosen years ago which um co-mingled the two concepts um so that that's where we are um mayor mayor ccil member Gardner um I have a question for the attorney do you need to be a citizen to be police officer firefighter work for the city you do not correct you do not okay thank you yes sir let me uh council member kums are we talking about and maybe this is for Mr lathers uh legal permanent residence outside of US citizens are we going beyond that um um no just anybody that can verify residency in the same way that you would to the DMV to receive a document there and I don't there's more clarification question mayor uh mayor p uh Bergen please uh just to follow up on council member Gardner's question about police and firefighters they don't have to be citizens but don't they have to have a legal um legal permanent res yeah legal residency that would be my that would be my understanding correct or at least an the application there pending so are we will we not differentiate between I I understand we don't want you know if you're a citizen but you're legally able to work in the United States that that they should be able to serve on committees is there any way to differentiate that we can try and differentiate this any way that Council chooses it it is entirely your purview to set these parameters I just want to clarify that being able to work legally in the US and being a legal permanent resident are not the same thing that's correct further questions or or comments mayor uh council member Gardner I have a question um about the section that if uh basically if documentation or evidence comes up that somebody isn't a resident that it will go to city council to determine um how to proceed do we currently have anything like that now and I guess what I'm concerned about is having it decided by city council um because as we have seen tonight this is a political body and I'm just not sure that that's the best way to proceed um you know because honestly what could happen is proof could come where evidence could come for that somebody's not a resident and for whatever reason um if one side or the other had the majority then nothing would ever happen um to answer your question this is a unique provision within our code it is however not a unique power Council has always had the power to review who has been appointed to these boards and commissions and to act to revoke that appointment so this has never been put in an ordinance before it is wholly unique as you have ascertained but the power probably has always existed as a general power of council to to have their appointments to boards and commissions uh reviewed by them Council yeah I'll just add council member Gardner sorry mayor um that this came up as a result of conversations that we were having in the um PR plus committee about this issue just that folks wanted to know that there would be some type of process if someone was found to not be a resident for any reason um and because it is um the purview of council to appoint we didn't want to leave that as something that staff just handled without Council input further uh questions or discussion mayor Dave grber council member grber so I was at those committees at that committee meeting or those committee meetings and that that was the point that actually that's what I thought we were really discussing was uh what type of information or what type of tool would be used by uh the person person to actually show that they were a resident and then we we had discussed um you know specifically about somebody trying to falsify that and what the impact of that would be because it'd be a false official statement when they fill it out as to The Residency requirement um we really didn't discuss that too much and what I would like to see um going back to uh council member Gardner's point about the police force we had talked at length about trying to encourage IM immigrants uh those with um um permanent or the intention of obtaining permanent residency uh and possibly citizenship about joining the police force that was something that that we discussed as Council and that we agreed on I would like to see that same uh uh language used here so as opposed to having someone who is a u you know here only on a uh temporary Visa I would like to see someone who is uh working to Immigrant immigrate into the United States and is a resident I feel that having um a again we can go into the discussions again about legal aliens and illegal aliens I think that that having them represent uh uh the citizens of Aurora uh is not the best way forward I would like to see immigrants with who are uh attempting to obtain permanent residency in the United States just a question clarification for staff and that is to be a first responder in aora police or fire you have to be at least a legal permanent resident correct yes okay yeah this is Jason Bachelor that is correct yeah you that was a change recently made at Civil Service uh this past summer um and you have to be a legal permanent res resident okay uh further questions or comments mayor may may counc council member Cs and council member kums yeah um so I just wanted to respond to the point about whether we're going to require all of this addition documentation in talking to Barb doll who I know is no longer here but who was responsible for verifying residency in the clerk's office part of the point that she made is to not make it extremely onerous for staff to do that verification so this is meant to simplify the process not further complicate the process while being more inclusive and so I wouldn't support requiring people to also provide immigration documents a that's a document that could be accepted as establishing residency but I don't think that on top of the other documents required that we should include that council member Mario it was hilts um council member hilts thank you yeah I think that when we did the police and fire we opted against having the requirement that you be pursuing citizenship because there's a fee associated with that and so you're you're throwing up a financial barrier to that access that is not Universal so I believe that's why that wasn't formalized just for background further discussion bers uh council member bin thank you um yeah I I I prefer to have somebody and this is a crazy phrase I use uh that has a little skin in the game you know that they they are are wanting to to work here wanting to be a part like like uh our Police Academy so I would pref for that also um I I guess I wanted to ask council member kums you kind of explained why you brought this forward but was staff complaining that they had too much work verifying is that is that part of it no so I brought this forward because there was a Community member who has been living here for years and trying to get on to boards and commissions but can't because of not being a registered voter because of being a citizen but when I talked to staff about it so specifically the only staff member at the time that was responsible for this Duty she did say that she was concerned that it would become too onerous if we were putting all kinds of different stuff in place and so part of her recommendation at that time was to keep it as simple as possible okay thank you mayor um mayor PM John I mean um council member Johnson thank you um I I'm even surprised that this even has to be that long of a discussion um I appreciate council member kum's bringing this forward having more of a pool of folks to be able to fill quite frankly a lot of vacancies that we have boards and commissions at the end of the day we still have the final say of who we want to appoint but we just spent over an hour talking about oh we're supportive of the Immigrant Community you know but we don't want to have taxpayer money on this this fund and now this is another opportunity to share our our support to say hey we're we're welcoming different perspectives and it doesn't cost a dime and I just I I would hope that with with a simple verification I don't know if there's going to be you know there's there's literally all of these different um requirements that are acceptable to participate or the the bill the things that um attorney um lathers had and is in our backup why don't we just open this up more I mean it's it's we we need more different perspective and voices on our boards and commissions this gives us other options if you don't like who's applying don't end up voting to appoint them but I I definitely support this and hope that our colleagues can see that at the end of the day more engagement um of our residents is makes our city a better place um further discussion if not council member kums for a wrapup mayor Dave gr real quick uh Council grber okay again I think that the part of the discussion let me let me be clear I am good with with citizens being members of these uh I am good with uh immigrants who are pursuing uh permanent residency in the United States they don't even have to go to towards citizenship but they are and and again like um our Denver lawyer friends Mr johanan said you know his his mother you know carried the card with her so it's not a a burden to have a card showing that that they're pursuing permanent residency I do have a problem with uh with uh uh aliens illegal aliens and legal aliens applying for uh memberships of our of our boards because we wouldn't even know if this came up there's not a block on there that says are you a citizen or are you trying to obtain um permanent residency that's not on there so we wouldn't be able to make that uh have that piece of information as we chose someone so if this ordinance was modified to include something showing that uh are you a citizen or are you a um obtaining permanent residency and you you click on that then then yeah I'm good with that but the way the bills right now or the ordinance is right now I can't support it uh council member kums for concluding remarks yeah so you know I'll sound like a broken record but we know that 20% of the people in our city are foreign born many of those are neither legal permanent residents nor citizens um and I think we know that our immigration process is pretty onerous and expensive and so putting in a requirement like that creates an additional burden on folks to be participating in our boards and commissions to be contributing on a volunteer basis in our city um so I don't support that I do support is us making sure that our citizens have more or our residents have more access to participating being engaged volunteering their time and that we have a more diverse representation of our community in the body of people who undertake those opportunities is hope you this is there any objection to moving 3C forward uh mayor objects any other objections any other objections Bergen B further objections um I'm seeing uh that I'm assuming that the majority uh are in support of moving item 3C forward that item 3C will move forward uh item number 3D Aurora Water Prairie water system expansion uh staff yeah good evening uh mayor and city council um if you can just give me a quick second to share um a presentation here and I'm sorry may ask the clerk to provide me the ability to share the my file yes one moment thanks okay um so are you able to see the presentation yes great um so we wanted to take an opportunity to talk about um the expansion of our Prairie water system um because there will be several um large awards that will be part of this and we thought it would be helpful to have context of the entire program um the Prairie water system is our um kind of second primary source for supply to the city um we talked about ramp part system last year um the prair water system was actually developed when we were in a severe drought in 2002 which the graph on the left shows uh we dip down to about one year of um water supply um and at that time we developed the Prairie water system um which basically allows for us to take um the mountain Waters that come in from the rampart system they go through our system they're treated and then put into the South Plat River and then because we have the ability to recapture those water rights we actually capture them in the prairie water system and bring them back to the bie water purification facility um this um system was always meant to be expanded um even when it was conceived um but this is a little um description of kind of the plan for us to get there uh the Prairie water system just really briefly um when you pull water out of the South clat River we do have some preliminary treatment um that's done through River Bank filtration through ASR um and then the rest of this diet basically shows the the kind of unique treatment capabilities at the Benny purification facility um which are are very forward thinking and do an excellent job of treating before um putting into the pable water system um in 2016 we did our first integrated water master plan which basically looks at everything from our sources and uh the treatment capacity we need all of the major pipelines and reclaimed water to uh provide water through 20 70 um the in that and and I don't anticipate that you can see that table but basically what I wanted to show you is those are all the water supply projects um that we need to put into place in order to um Supply water to the city through 2070 uh those three arrows basically show the expansions of the Prairie water system uh from 12 MGD where currently it is the 20 MGD 30 MGD and 40 MGD um the 20 MGD um by uh or I'm sorry the 30 MGD by um 2035 and then the 40 MGD by 2050 um and to give you a little bit of context our Peak day Demand right now as the city is about 100 MGD in the middle of the summer um so once we identified kind of those big goals um we developed what was called a North Campus master plan um so that's the area up North by Brighton where we pull water from the south clatt river and it basically helps us outline how we're going to achieve those um the goals of expanding the system which will happen in six major phases um which we'll go through here briefly um again this map I don't anticipate you be able to see the details on it but just basically shows you what the north campus area looks like uh the properties that are highlighted are properties um that we're hoping to acquire um there pipelines on there that show how we can get the water back to the city um and then the smaller dots are um either planned or existing Wells um that bring the water from the riverbank um into the system so the six major phases that will be coming um or that we're we're hoping to implement um is the first one is a horizontal well pilot project which is basically an effort to um to do a different style of well right now all the wells are vertical Wells which are very traditional and what you'd be used to seeing this is actually a well that runs horizontally and our hope is that um and what we anticipate happening is that um it will it will have more capacity for one well um so it'll it'll reduce the amount of cost over time for construction of the wells required to get up to that capacity um as well as uh help us with still being able to capture that amount of water if the river were to DEC in depth um the next phase is um 2021 2023 there's a river uh pipeline that will take us from the East side over to the west side where our existing infrastructure is um phase three are additional property Acquisitions with additional Wells um we actually just at the last council meeting um the lane construction well drilling was um on that council meeting for award um and then there will be an addition additional 3 and half million or $3.3 million for related infrastructure to get um those Wells tied into the system four uh is a little further out um as our f for phases five and six um but they're basically pipelines um additional properties um and additional related infrastructure um these costs though however do not include the land Acquisitions and this plan is contingent on um our successful um implementation of of those property Acquisitions but this is currently the plan and um and and the need for expanding the Prairie water system um to meet future growth and demands in the city oh I'm sorry there's a couple more slides so this um and this is I'll go over super briefly it's basically just a graph that shows you how um with these different phases of the project the water supply grows uh to meet our goals and then the one last thing that we did want to mention is the Benny water purification facility um that's at the end of the system um we have had to do several projects to that many of which are to increase efficiencies in that plant um and there are some additional projects that are coming up um for additional efficiencies um as well as uh to help with aspects of treatment at that facility so are there any I'm happy to answer any questions about this but it was for information only any questions uh seeing none the presentation was for information only so no action is required thank you very much you're welcome um item number threee crestone uh water supply agreement um so that that's me as well um so the crestone water supply agreement just to give a little bit of History uh kico Phillips um has developed oil and gas assets through um Aurora for the last several years um and entered into an agreement with Aurora water in 2017 uh per city code any water that's supplied within the city limits um has to come from Aurora Water unless otherwise approved by city council um crestone Peak Resources purchased the kico Assets in 2019 um at that time they assumed the water and other agreements that Kano had in place with the city um the original water agreement was set to expire next year and both parties were interested in uh renegotiating the terms of the previous water agreement um to allow some additional flexibility and address some things that were not addressed before um the term is similar it's a one fiveyear term with a one fiveyear term extension um that is um allowed for the um general manager to make if we are operating under normal water conditions um otherwise it would be brought back to city council and what that means is if we don't go into additional drought restrictions during that time um it was important for the water to be able to be stored outside the city limits because there are large storage um ponds in the county um that oil and gas operators were interested in using and we were fine with that as long as um the water was strictly accounted for so anything that was purchased from the city was um accounted for within the city um the there was a delivery point on the Prairie Waters pipeline that was paid for by kaco Phillips um and this would be the point uh location where um Prestone would be pulling water from um and uh there would need to be a strict operating plan associated with that this shows you the general location it's south of I70 and um east of of 470 um and that would be their primary location for water Supply however the new agreement also allows for the opportunity to pull water from our Sand Creek System um which we're very excited about this year having um developed or worked with the state closely to approve um oil and gas as a use under regulation 84 um which is important because that water um when not being used for irrigation was being discharged into um into Sand Creek um which we then can can reclaim but this will be able to use that water in the winter for oil and gas that's a really great and responsible use of that water um this is the Sand Creek System you can see here in purple they're we're in the process right now of um building a raw water tap here that will allow Supply from the Sand Creek system as well as from the ramp Park system in a really good water year um the um cost of the water um there's a change here as well um previously in the kico Phillips agreement it was $2,400 per acre foot um it is the location in the pre Waters pipeline is $3,600 per acre foot the reason for the difference is um we account have now accounted for um as we talked about in the last presentation actually our ability to reclaim and recapture water from our Prairie water system um the the kind of loss of water that's taken from that system and then goes into the oil and gas um process and then we're unable to reclaim that water um had not been accounted for so that is now accounted for in this new rate um and then a rate will be specific to the point from which the water is delivered um so uh so so it'll be a cost base on on the water cost um if we were to enact uh curtailment due to water shortage a crestone would be reduced by the same amount or percentage um in this agreement we also approved an alternate water uh source of Supply um because we have been able to confirm that it does not impact um the Aurora Water Supplies and we also added more strict language in this agreement about Alternate Source approvals um which similarly um we wouldn't allow them if they were going to negatively impact the City supplies in um this term is a little is a little confusing um but it's um but I'll try to explain it but when so when the Prairie Waters tap was being constructed kaco was in the middle of oil and gas development so at that time we allowed them to import water from a third party but they had to prepay for the water that was imported and then we would Supply them that amount of water that they prepaid for um the primary reason that is getting their water supply from um from a groundwater Source that's very close to the city um however kako didn't use the full amount of water that they had prepaid for and so that amount of water has um been transferred over to crestone for an ODed water volume and so that's included in this agreement um we're going to meet annually they're going to be providing us quarterly Drilling and completion plans for us to marry up what their demands are um compared to the supplies that we have available in the location um and the agreement replaces the kico uh filips agreement in full further questions sorry questions yes mayor uh council member Maro thank you so um I did have a question from a constituent who reached out about this uh and could you uh just uh explain for the Public's benefit again why we require City water to used for uh these kinds of activities uh within the city limits yeah so any water that's within the city limits we require to be provided by Aurora Water um so as to not um create the opportunity for competing systems um within the city and for our residents um and or I'm sorry for our uh customers and um and however the council does have the authority to approve um approve that if if they had wanted to do something different further question mayor yes Council moo and again this constituent also asks um are there any alternatives to using City water that would also protect non-rechargeable uh sources of water such as Wells or something like that um that's not something that um I guess I can answer for sure I know that they are looking at an alternate source that does not impact our um sources I do know that that's limited and it's rather far away um so is it in the realm of possibility yes is it um are those sources likely really far um to get back to the city uh likely yes further questions just just mayor pretend yeah I just want to uh commend the um the staff and the water department because I think they really worked hard to U make sure that we protect our water supply and um and obviously negotiated using the reclaim water at a higher rate so I just want to say thank you thank you mayor uh council member Johnson um Yes mine is just a comment I I also had some some questions from constituents so the backup um the questions asked from ped were were helpful to myself but also constituents to provide more information but um again you know with the operator agreement that was originally in place and that you know we weren't able to make any changes I know that this this is a better um proposal or system than we had and as mayor proam Bergen said um I really appreciate that staff you know we have we do have some additional safeguards in place especially you know if if our water is impacted um the the higher rates the you know the different um Provisions that have been put in from from staff I think have been really responsive at least to some of the questions and concerns I've gotten from the community in the past with with our water and and the oil and gas industry so um thank you Sarah for this presentation and and the work you did with this sure thank you further questions well thank you is U there's no action required on this correct this one um is um in agreement to um so there is a is there objection to moving item number threee forward seeing none then item number three e will move forward item number 3F uh resolution of the city of Aurora Colorado expressing uh the aora city council support of revisions to exhibit A and B of the Crone Peak Resources operator agreement Mr Moore thank you mayor and City Council Members I appreciate your time this evening uh and happy New Year to everyone as well uh just a point of order I want to make sure that we've been meeting for two and a half hours if anyone needs a break before we begin this next item which could be uh 25 or 30 minutes okay uh the time is now uh 8:54 uh we will reconvene at 9 9 900 pm [Music] I [Music] [Music] [Music] I [Music] [Music] C [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Council will come back to order please proceed with the presentation thank you very much mayor um I am waiting for access to share my slides I've got some here uh to share as a brief uh intro to creststone Peaks resources presentation um there we go very good so let me uh click on share and we'll get started all right very good um and this item this evening you're going to be hearing from creststone Peak Resources and their proposal to modify their field development plan I'm very excited about this presentation as I believe it represents an excellent opportunity uh to reduce the impact of oil and gas operations in the city while at the same time allowing full access to develop all mineral interest as I've said before the vision that I've established for the O and gas division here at the city is that we Steward access to the Natural Resources under our Authority with integrity and respect for our citizens businesses and the environment I take that uh Authority very seriously as the O gas manager and I know that each of you do as well I'm very happy to say that Crone's proposal this evening is very much in line with our vision and with our core values let me give you a brief background on crestone Peak Resources before I I turned over to crestone staff um they are the largest operator currently within Aurora they purchased these Wells about a year ago from kico Phillips they currently operate 58 Wells on 25 well sites and there's an additional 251 Wells and 19 additional well sites which were approved by the operator agreement and that operator agreement was of course assigned to crestone Peak from kico Phillips now um crestone made this presentation to ped on December 9th in the operator agreement it allows the operator to uh revise the uh list of wells and the well sites um and the way they do that is to uh revise or exhibits A and B which is a list and a map uh of those Wells uh in the operator agreement but typically you might expect that an operator would come and want to drill more Wells but uh creson is actually requesting to reduce the total number of wells and the total number of well sites to do that they will consolidate some of the well sites and three of those will have more Wells than we original presented to council when the operator agreement was presented and agreed upon um the only gas division is fully supportive of cestone's proposal as it will reduce surface impact within the city and also provide greater protection for public health safety welfare the environment and Wildlife Resources within the city limits now let me please introduce Miss Ashley Campbell from creststone uh and she will begin their presentation this is Cameron main can I have uh permission to share my [Applause] presentation yes one moment please thank you Mr Moore uh good evening mayor and council members my name is Ashley Campbell and I'm the government Affairs adviser for crestone Peak Resources and joining me this evening is Cameron Ming senior service landman and we also have several members of the crestone team available for any questions you may have we're grateful for the opportunity to be with you this evening so first I'll give you a very brief introdu ction to crestone and then Cameron will provide you an overview of the operator agreement revision so crestone is a Colorado based Oil and Gas Company formed in 2016 and backed by the Canadian pension plan investment board we are proud to call Colorado home and currently employ approximately 160 coloradans who are all experts in their field at crestone we pride ourselves on our best-in-class safety performance our demonstrated commitment to environmental stewardship and our engagement with local communities next slide please so demonstrated on this slide are our four planks our strategic approach in four planks the first plank is our unwavering commitment to health and safety most recently crestone received the gold leader award from cdph this award is for companies that have made significant progress toward improving the environment in Colorado we were previously at the bronze level and because of our performance we were able to bypass the the silver level and go straight to Gold the second plank is our industry-leading mitigation we utilize three mile laterals to move farther away from impacted communities and reduce our overall surface impacts we also understand that some nuisances do exist with our operations and we have sourced a virtually odorless high efficiency drilling fluid that's exclusive to the DJ Basin to help with odor mitigation third is working collaboratively with local governments cstone currently has four operator agre ments guiding our operations and municipalities along the Front Range we hope you will see this collaborative approach in our presentation this evening and lastly is a smart defined and transparent stakeholder engagement process that allows us to hear from potentially impacted communities we recently hosted a community meeting with Arapaho County and in this meeting we utilized it to let them know that we were withdrawing our application for a controversial wellpad in their area because we were able to find a better suited alternative location from the previous operator proposal next slide please this slide demonstrates um our pride for calling Colorado home and we are highly active in the communities where we live and operate with the closing of our acquisition from kico Phillips in March J was able to invest in our first Community Partnership in Aurora we were a sponsor of the 2020 Aurora Public Schools Foundation annual Gala which as you know was hosted virtually this year and we look forward to expanding our community giving in this new to us operating area our other Community Partners are highlighted on this slide as well and demonstrate our other areas of operation and with that I'll turn it over to Cameron to discuss the revision hi my name is Cameron Ming I work with christom PE resources I'm a surface landman and um wanted to thank the the council for the time tonight um as Mr Moore previously said we're trying to red reduce the impact that we are having on the city of aora we're asking for revision to the exhibits A and B of the operator agreement reason for this is that we've been able to identify areas where we can consolidate Wells and we can consolidate well sites by doing this we can reduce those number of well sites we can eliminate two specifically and where we can reduce the accumulative impact on the city of Aurora this map gives you an idea more or less of creststone Peak Resources leas hold position in relation to the city of aora you can see it we are east of the city uh south of the airport Denver International Airport more or less straddling I70 to the east you can see the gray boxes with inside the yellow and those are the well sites that are approved under the operating agreement what we are proposing to do is eliminate two of those which would take us from 45 well sites down to 43 and we would be able to eliminate four five Wells from the proposed Wells that we had initially planned for going to zoom in on one area this area you can see is south of the Denver Airport and north of I70 more or less along Monahan and this is what we call our King and beu well sites what we want to do is completely eliminate the beu South well padn and we can do that by adding a few Wells to the beu north Well site and we would also like to eliminate the the second phase of the king wellpad which would uh keep that at four Wells and move those additional four Wells north um the second area that we wanted to focus on is the the Lone Tree area and this is just a little bit north of juel um between juel and I70 and we want to eliminate the Lone Tree South pad that originally had six Wells PL and we want to move some of those to the laundry North pad which would take that to 15 now what we are hoping uh and what we know we've been able to evaluate that this will have a significant impact on uh land disturbance on water usage on uh emissions and different things so we took the Lone Tree area we did a an environmental impact study to to see more or less what we thought the the reductions would be and you can see from this slide that because of the elimination of the Lone Tree South wellpad and what you're not seeing is that we're also able to we're eliminating well sites outside of the city of this is helping show some of the that reduction as well but we're reducing that by 38% um total do emissions by 44% water use uh by 36% for drilling and completion operations and we are able to eliminate a significant impact to Wetland streams and flood planes uh there was a road that was planned to go to that South Lone Tree Well site that was going to U be approximate to uh some water area and we are able to eliminate that completely and not only that but we are able to reduce our time uh by an estimated 260 days for const construction Drilling and completion which helps us with the cumulative impact the the traffic concerns uh impact to neighborhoods impact to to the to the area in general and to remind you of a couple of things that that we included in the operator agreement uh that to highlight are the best management practices and C Peak Resources has a very high standard uh of our bmps already um but addressing these things are are noise mitigation dust suppression um we are sampling the air quality uh we are committed to Road repairs uh as Ashley mentioned earlier we are taking steps for the odor concerns and we are U monitoring the water quality near near our well sites so in summary uh we're trying to revise these exhibits A and B and wanted to make sure that the city council knew that we were changing the maps that we were that we were eliminating those well sites and eliminating Wells from from the operator agreement so again we're we're fully eliminating two wellsite locations um well sites and planned wells will be reduced low emissions lower traffic lower water usage lower impact to the environment and we're hoping that this is not the the only time that we're able to do this um as we continue our development plan this out we're hoping to find further efficiencies and further areas where we where we can consolidate and make additional changes similar to these are there any questions questions of uh presenters staff mayor uh mayor ptim yeah I just want to point out this was also presented to the planning and economic uh development committee um last month and so your um total acreage is being reduced and then you're also moving some of the the sites North to reduce some of the impacts um South where they might be closer to development and so forth um and and so I guess in in summary reducing the environmental impacts water uh like you said emissions traffic and so forth correct that's correct yes and you some you'll notice that some of these areas are are near developments that are coming up and that's why we wanted to uh try and you do our best to consolidate areas here where there may be some impact and yes uh by eliminating some of these well paths we're fully eliminating impact to repair areas thank you further questions mayor council member Maro thank you uh I've received a couple of comments from some of my constituents on this um even though these are outside of W 4 uh they are very environmentally focused and they pointed out that uh one of the pads here is still slated uh 1,90 ft away from the closest residence another one and a couple of others are actually described as over 1320 feet um and you know that's pretty far below the uh ccc's recent 2000 foot rule now I understand these predates that but I wanted to just see if there was a chance that uh there would be another site another potential for consolidation still that might be a little closer uh or even meet the ccc's current regulations sure we are we're fully aware of the new cgcc regulations and on top of that and continually looking on areas where we can improve and make those adjustments sure so uh but uh with this regard to this specifically are there any opportunities uh you know to do the consolidation while also getting a little closer to those setbacks that something that was really looked at when you'all were trying to consolidate redesign this a bit which one are you do you have specific sites in mind that you're referring to yeah I was just pulling the ones off of the backup that we had here so you'll forgive me I have to flip to the maps where they're called out uh those distances um so now you get to watch me flip through my iPad Mar I'm gonna come back to yous did you have something um no I was going to ask similar questions so I'll just let them uh pull that up okay are there are there any other questions mayor uh uh council member Johnson um yes I just want to to go back to I maybe this kind of connected with council member Marano's issues but um the the rules with the cogcc um even though the operator agreement was put in place um before the new setback rules um those still apply however to this operator agreement I just want to clear to the Public's um information yes very good point okay so thank you so on that uh the site that I'm looking at specifically are Lone Tree 4 65 15 16 North uh that one is 1290 from the closest residence uh let's see here then uh there's King 365 28 29 South King 365 28 29 North and Buu 365 1924 North uh all of those are listed at 13 greater than I'm sorry yeah greater than 1320 and uh I guess I'm also curious to know how exactly how much greater um I I'd have to go back and look um I don't have that number specifically uh at the time 1320 the quarter mile was what we were concerned with and so that was what we put as the distance in the operator agreement um I can assure you right now uh the the king and the beu are uh the beu are there there's nothing out there yet and we're we're mind very mindful of that um I'll note that the section 20 and section 19 um those are near the Aurora Highlands and we're working very very closely with the Aurora Highlands on making sure that uh we're in compliance and we are are working very closely they're very very aware of of our presence further questions uh seeing none um uh the question before us is whether or not to move item 3F forward is there any objection to moving item 3F forward I seeing none item 3F will move forward uh 3G federal and state priorities yes hi uh can you hear me mayor yes good evening mayor members of council I'm Luke palano intergovernmental relations manager with the city I'm presenting tonight on the state and federal legislative priorities I'll be asking for support for these items I'll give a brief overview of each individual priority and then we'll ask for Council support of that individual item the First State Legislative priority recognizes the affordable housing crisis and notes that local governments can be a key player in finding a solution by utilizing their local land use Authority CML has proposed legislation that would amend the Colorado revised statutes to clarify that local governments May regulate the development and use of land within their jurisdictions in order to promote the development of affordable housing units this legislation would confirm the rent control statute doesn't apply to land use regulations and requires local governments to provide amend of options for a developer to comply with any affordable housing requirements this priority calls for support of that CML initiated legislation does council support this priority is there any objection seeing none yes all right can I I have a question on that real quick mayor sorry um okay so we're if you own land we're not we're not changing we're not changing the rate regulations that they are currently under I mean everything would fall under our current Udo zoning correct correct it would what this would do would give each individual municipality the power to decide for their uh to set their land use regulations okay thank you sure all right the um police reform is our next uh State priority the fsir committee supported Senate Bill 217 enhance law enforcement integrity that the state legislature passed last session and the city has been proactive on reforms inside their own Department this priority calls for additional reforms and cleanups to Senate Bill 217 these include Clarity on definitions related to minor crimes and excessive or reasonable force a mechanism for due process before post certification is revoked clarification related to data collection and efforts to standardize data collection across jurisdictions does council support this priority any objection mayor may I have a council member gr just real quick the um we determined in an earlier meeting that uh State Bill 217 has uh uh increased the amount of money that the city has to uh pay for insurance as well as increasing the liability of the city in cases of uh lawsuits I would like to see an addition that would uh ask uh the uh legislature to address to to give us to give the city some additional protections okay is there any objection to that okay um is there any objection then to the proposal itself mayor I have a question council member CS council member CS yeah um so Luke I'm just wondering with respect to the um due process protections regarding post certification what does that mean exactly like what are we looking at there and what is currently in place in that regard yeah the um currently in place um and this was part of let's see find My Notes this was part of Senate Bill 27 and it would it would go if a if an officer um was found to have violated um um something and then was sent to lose their post certification there was no mechanism for them to um to have due process to go through a a process to challenge that or have evidence and so this is this is one of those uh proposals that would give them sort of a voice during that process to to challenge the findings okay and then just as a followup um what prevents that from being abused in the way that some of the existing appeal Provisions around disciplinary issues are currently abused um I I do not have an answer for that I can look into finding information um I I'm not sure that the the full mechanism has been fully created yet um so I I think I need to get some more information and get back to you okay I just yeah I want us to make sure we're not recreating the problems that we currently have so thank you so much I appreciate apprciate that sure uh objection uh saying none then um Council supports okay uh the next set of priorities relate to Professional Licensing currently Barber cosmetology aesthetician nail technician hair stylists and other related Professional Licensing in Colorado requires that an applicant provide a social security number to obtain a license Additionally the exams for many of these professional licenses are only provided in English this adds additional barriers for immigrants and refugees to successfully integrate into the community this priority requests State legislation to allow a lure for cosmetology and other related professions with a taxpayer identification number and to have these lens your tests in languages other than English this would be in alignment with the recently adopted city-wide immigrant integration plan passed by city council does council support this priority is there objection seeing none support okay the city Aurora has adopted massage business licensing requirements the city requests the state legislature create legislation to provide a statutory reference and Authority for local jurisdictions to access the Federal Criminal Justice information database for applicants and owners of massage pH facilities Federal Law requires a reference in state code similar Authority exists for liquor licensing and pawn shop licensing does council support this priority is there objection I see none support okay transportation is another issue of strong importance for the city this priority requests the state to increase transportation and Transit funding last session House Bill 1151 would have granted Transportation Planning organizations such as Dr Cog the authorization to exercise the powers of a regional trans portation Authority these powers include the authority to impose fees charges and with voter approval taxes this priority would specifically support passage of this bill as well as an increase in transportation and Transit funding more generally Additionally the city will monitor recommendations from the RTD accountability committee Council support this priority mayor uh mayor Pam um so we currently have uh Regional um transportation authorities Seria and then the one up North and then I think we're might be forming a third one so those areas are already being taxed for regional infrastructure so would this be I I don't want to double tax people so is this would this add another layer of Taxation for possibly similar projects uh yes potentially okay so I'm I'm not for that um um and then I'd like to we year after year when we when we go through the state priorities Gun Club Road is never addressed I've been saying it for five years and so I would like Gun Club Road to be to you know that we Advocate to actually um comp widen it complete it put some State funds towards uh that road U north of Quincy is a state highway okay I can uh if Council supports that I can add that thank you uh is there objection to Mayor Pro's proposal right is there objection to the overall proposal mayor I object I'm concerned about the lack of information on taxation I yeah I um as far as information about taxation I think once the bill would be passed this particular bill it would be up to the Transportation Planning organizations and they would have to go through a Taber vote um but the the bill would be carried over from it's a bill from last year so it's it's still in the drafting stage I I don't have much other information on it so L if I say if I stand correct correctly that um they cannot enact in this proposal they cannot enact a tax it has to go back to the vote of the people correct Council M grber and that was the point I wanted to make I guess it was twofold first uh the first one would be to create the authority and then the second one would be to create the tax that the authority supports so those are are added I'm good okay um further U questions comments uh seeing none is there any objection it's the position of support okay thank you uh the next priority relates to marijuana at the state level as in past sessions the city will monitor closely any changes the state considers regarding the regulation of recreational and medicinal marijuana consumption in addition the city will support local control and the authority to regulate businesses related to the processing extraction manufacturing and sale of consumable and Industrial Hemp Council support this priority discussion object um discussion questions is there any objection um seeing none then Council supports thank you the next set of priority concerns immigration Aurora is a welcoming is welcoming of immigrants and refugees and has created the Office of international and immigrant Affairs to facilitate their successful integration at the state level this priority calls for support for the workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act and use of title two funds from that act to serve people with barriers to employment including English language Learners lowincome people and immigrants the funds can also be used for CI citizenship and Civic engagement programs in addition the city will closely monitor State legislation related to improving oversight of and the conditions within private prisons that house individuals with pending immigration status issues does council support these priorities uh comments question uh mayor P yeah on the oversight of the private prisons so that would be state legisl uh legislation um how is it done now that's that's a good question I cannot answer that um this would this was a priority that we carried over from last year um it's one of those things where it's a statement of what we would be looking for uh but I do not have information on how um how that's monitored at this point okay because currently um for example the health department would have oversight over health related right issues right I guess I was trying to figure out what other oversight would would be in place and and that that's a good question I think um with that part of the priorities it's it's simply just stating that it's something that Council was interested in and that would go through uh the normal fsir process as far as each individual Bill okay but it says we'll close oh okay we'll closely monitor okay related to okay that's good um and then um on the public contracts for services with the um you know the term illegal alen replaced with unauthorized worker um do do we I if we have a public contract aren't there certain rules that they have to abide by I9 like their employees have to have checked all the I9 yeah yeah and and um as far as these priorities I had broken them into two categories that was a sort of a second one I deed there be some discussion so I I was going to ask for support of of these first two and then go to that specific one if that's okay okay okay sure okay uh is there objection seeing none then support okay and um as as Council mayor Pro Bergen was um speaking of the next one uh calls for City support of legislation concerning replacing the term illegal alien with unauthorized worker is it relates to public contracts for services there was a bill last session House Bill 1294 that would have made this change does council support this priority discussion well so my question about do do we have a requirement currently I mean I guess the term can be changed but I separate from that do we require documentation for when we contract out with a contractor when the city does uh do we um in terms of documentation you mean in terms of immigration do yeah do we require that their employees um have I9 documentation um it looks like Rachel is Rachel Allen um City attorney is posting in the chat yes it's in State Statute okay that's what I thought thank you sure further discussion mayor Dave grber you got yeah we we discussed this earlier and the point is is that these are federal terms that that if they're going to be changed it should be changed at the federal level and not the state level otherwise we just introduce confusion as to what word means what so if the word are going to be changed uh you know if we're going to have a vernacular argument they should be changed at the appropriate level and I don't think the state is the right level so I object to this further further discussion mayor uh council member Mario uh this is one of the things that I had um flagged uh in fizer for us to um change we have it in our language for our state lobbying contract and I think anyone who um I mean anyone can read the fine line and and and understand that that terminology is offensive um and is unnecessary I think it's more than just about um classification I think it's uh become a derogatory way of referring to people so um I think there's no harm in US um again to council member Bergen's question we still require certain documentation um it is literally supporting um the the the name change at the state level because it is a state um statute so we wouldn't be able to do that locally so um I support this and I think um it's a simple way to to be respectful to and humanizing a group of people so the Luke the current term is undocumented yes the the the no I'm sorry the current term is illegal alien and it would be changed with unauthorized worker for State at the state level okay I would certainly support undocumented worker but not okay uh further comments uh See n well I was just going to agree with you on the undocumented part okay what's the difference undocumented versus unauthorized the the differen is only in that the bill the specific bill that we're we would be supporting um called for the language unauthorized worker yeah and I I had originally asked for undocumented worker um in full transparency but um we haven't had a chance to work with the bill sponsor on changing the language but um I I figured unauthorized is better than a legal alien okay uh objection mayor uh council member bin thank you um and and honestly I looked up the word unauthorized worker and it could be you could be talking about a 15y old I me you could be talking about a lot of different things um not nothing even to do with an immigration status so unauthorized I think is the wrong word for this um so I mean can't support that because it's we're really talking about undocumented but the unauthorized just opens up a whole plethora of other things that could be so I I I think that is the wrong word and I can't support that word good point um further discussion uh council member Lawson so Luke my question is since can't we tell um our lobbyists that we're looking at undocumented and and maybe go towards in that direction I mean instead of authorized sure the um the draft of the priorities uses the phrase unauthorized we could we could use no language and just request that um the term illegal alien is changed and work with the bill sponsor um if if it's council's prerogative we could do undocumented worker instead of unauthorized worker it's it's totally up to council that would be my preference I would vote for that that go to the and have the lobbyist Lobby that at the state legislature with the bill sponsor is there objection to changing unauthorized to undocumented very well then that's the direction thank you okay all right um the next state priority concerns climate change the city of Aurora and City management have developed a vision for growth for the city that focuses on the principles of sustainability Energy Efficiency and renewable energy this priority calls for State legislation that supports this Vision this includes a re a repeal on the ban on local government regulation of plastics expanding production of alternative energy and renewable energy standards promotion and expansion of electric vehicles and EV infrastructure and pursuing Green Building standards Council support this priority what is the issue on Plastics it is a repeal on the ban of local government there's a ban on local government regulation and simply repeal that ban okay so that it's permissive then correct okay okay is there uh questions or comments question uh mayor Pon on uh pursuing Green Building standards um obviously there's a difference between um encouraging that and mandating it so my concern is we are looking at affordable housing and the more standards you add especially um something that would be more costly is going to add to the cost of home so we're we're not in support of mandating anything right no okay thank you further questions or comments mayor uh Council Mario thank you um uh when it comes to the conversation on sustainability um I know that the regulation of plastic I think part in part that conversation is on taxing um uh bags plastic bags um and that's something that I wanted to just flag um as a as as a if we consider that issue in in the future um the despair impacts that that could have on um communities of color lowincome communities of color so um just as like a as a side note that was a a part of the conversation we had in fiser um that that likely would lead to Future conversations on that and um I support local control don't necessarily support the taxation of uh plastic bags necessarily so just I guess being aware of where that conversation could lead us further discussion further discussion is there any objection uh to supporting uh that particular position assuming none then Council will support all right thank you the the final State priority concerns civil rights it is the policy of the city that no person shall on the grounds of race color national origin sex disability religion or age be excluded from participation in be denied the benefits of or be subjected to discrimination in any operation of the city the city Embraces efforts at the state legislature to uphold these principles and supports bills that expand protections for and oppose bills that seek to discriminate against the lgbtq plus Community do Council support this priority discussion uh is there any objection I seeing nine Council supports okay thank you now we'll move on to Federal priorities on December 27th 2020 president Trump signed a covid-19 relief bill allocating 900 billion in new funds among the provisions are additional funds for small business assistance housing assistance testing and tracing stimulus checks and an extension of unemployment assistance the city of Aurora recognizes these provis ISS as a good step forward but calls on Congress to pass additional relief as such there are a series of priorities that deal with covid-19 relief the first priority calls on Congress to allocate additional direct funds to State and municipalities through the Corona virus Relief Fund and to lower the threshold to access the funds does council support this priority discussion any objection Council supports second priority related related to covid-19 pandemic concerns additional resources to support small businesses and workers through additional funding to the small business stabilization fund National Health Emergency dislocated worker grants the paycheck Protection Program work share and unemployment programs and other federal grants that support businesses and workers does council support this priority a discussion uh objection n Council supports thank you the city also calls on Congress and FEMA to allow as much flexibility on how local governments utilize federal funds and that reimbursement for the use of funds be Broad and all-encompassing does council support this priority discussion objection see n Council supports thank you another priority concerning the covid-19 pandemic relates to tax credits for paid leave and paid sick leave that was included in the family's first Corona virus response act the ACT required businesses and public agencies to provide the leave but did not allow municipalities to receive the payroll tax credit that is available to businesses this priority calls on Congress to designate additional funds for municipalities to mitigate this financial cost Congress support this priority discussion uh mayor pend so businesses can do can uh deduct it for as a tax crit or have a tax credit that's correct it's part of the payroll tax credit but it didn't extend to to municipalities okay thank you further discussion objection see no objection Council supports thank you next up are a set of priorities that relate to housing and homelessness with the challenges of the pandemic the city has worked to provide non- congregant shelter to the city's homeless the first priority around housing and homelessness calls for additional cdb and emergency Solutions grant funding in the annual HUD Appropriations bill that can be used for the City by the city for programs to shelter the homeless and for increased flexibility for how the funds can be used does council support this priority discussion objection uh seeing none Council supports all right thank you housing and housing assistance are also important priorities for the city this set of priorities calls for an extension of the federal Housing Finance Authority uh the federal housing Administration and the CDC eviction moratoriums for the duration of the pandemic and for clarification of federal guidance surrounding the moratoriums all these moratoriums have been extended through January 31st of this year with a recently passed covid-19 relief bill this priority also calls for support for waivers for renters for federal Housing Programs suspension of rental and Utility payments if loss of income has occurred due to the pandemic and additional funds to help low income renters does council support this priority discussion objection question uh mayor Pam so um by supporting this and and supporting the moratorium on residential evictions what about the landlords yes that um is in terms of funding to help them well yeah because they're going to go out of business they're going to end up foreclosing on their properties yes they are eligible for some of the federal business programs that we advocated for before so they they hopefully uh presuming Congress passes additional funds would be covered through that is there any way to tie the two together um I mean I would hate to ca you know cause an effect like you do one which causes forclosures and then people don't even have a place to live so is there a way to tie that together somehow uh of course I I think these part of our federal priorities they're tied together and then once we as a a city have or Council as a city has supported these we can direct our lobbyists and we could certainly make a push with them to uh to support both of those hand inand further discussion mayor uh council member Marcell thank you this is more of a general question I guess Luke I don't see it anywhere uh in here um but in the state section uh there was I think one item that was kind of uh something that we were looking for just taking General position on uh and I was just wondering if you had heard about uh any traction to repeal the fair cloth Amendment with regards to housing at the federal level yes I've I've I think that's um that's definitely an item I've heard of um it's it's it's relatively new in terms of for me I know it's been talked about for quite a while um and it was not included as you know in this um it's certainly something we could include um I I probably want to write something up and bring it back to council um but I think um a lot of eyes were looking on how the Georgia Senate races which hopefully we'll know tomorrow or by the end of the week uh kind of see if that would be something I I think the house passed an amendment um earlier last year a repeal of that amendment was discussed at the very least but yeah so it's it's certainly something that is on our radar yes further discussion I seeing none is there any objection uh seeing none uh Council supports all right thank you um also among housing priorities our support for how many more do we have how many more we are we're we're getting close we're there what does close mean um there there's a few more in in housing police reform um I'd say maybe five five or six receed okay thank you um among housing priorities are support for an increase in cdbg in home funds support for the eviction crisis act that would improve data analysis on evictions uh support for the fighting homelessness through services and Housing Act which would authorize 750 million annually to support support of housing models uh programs that would preserve housing for low-income households and other changes to HUD programs that would provide housing assistance discussion discussion objection see no objection Council supports thank you the last priority related to housing and homelessness concerns homeless veterans the city requests an increase in the number of Hud Vash vouchers allocated for Aurora these vouchers are used to provide rental assistance case management and Clinical Services to homeless veterans Council support disc any OB ction Council supports thank you the next one is police reform in addition to state level priorities on police reform the city has priorities related to police reform at the federal level as well this past summer Council outlined and supported eight National priorities I'll give a quick rundown of those there was the justice for bana Taylor act which would end no knock warrants a national ban on chokeholds the EMT till anti anti- lynching act the creation of a national database to track officer wrongdoing creation of a creation of a National Standard to hold police officers accountable in a situation where they fail to intervene to prevent another officer from using excessive force legislation that would end mandatory minimum prison sentences L legislation that would end civil asset forfeiture by law enforcement and the ending qualified immunity act does council renew their support for these priorities for 2021 uh discussion question uh mayor P um couple on the eliminating mandatory minimum prison sentences how how are those set they're set so we're the federal government sets those correct the there was a um scroll down to my notes there was um a the anti-drug Abuse Act law of 1986 sent uh required minimum sentences for certain drug offenses um and so then it was um which was preceded by the sentencing Reform Act of 1984 both of those set the national standards um but they they were set at the national level okay and I get it on the on the drug um offenses but what about murder rape child you know uh molestation pornography whatever are those are we then eliminating those mandatory minimum sentences as well no I don't believe so okay so does that need clarification maybe um yes certain mandatory I can make a clarification to that okay and then my second question is on the um ending civil asset forfeiture yes um so if if police um I don't know red a a a drug house right we're well I don't even know if we're allowed to seize the equipment but we were allowed to seize whatever equipment then this would say we were no longer allowed to seize that correct um if if no because um civil forfeiture I believe um re involves things that were involved but uh involved in a a criminal activity um I'm sorry civil yeah civil forfeiture but unlike um criminal forfeiture the property owner doesn't have to be charged with a crime so if it's involved with the crime it would be as I understand it would be part of criminal forfeiture I gotcha thank you that that exactly clarified it thank you sure sure forther discussion May counc m Grover all right I I just want to hammer this down so we've had many grow houses in Aurora um if there is a raid on a grow house and the federal government is involved at Thea whatever uh I want to make sure that the grow equipment can be confiscated that this won't remove the ability to um confiscate all the equipment used in The Grow operation the illegal grow operation no be because the equipment equipment was used in a criminal manner it would be subject to the criminal forfeiture thank you further questions discussion I I don't support the no not provision I'm sorry who mayor PM I'm sorry uh I I just on the ending qualified immunity act at the federal level yes does that in any way um if there's a for our state obviously we we passed it with SB 217 but other states um that don't have this would they still be able to maintain qualified immunity in their state if against the federal I just wonder into those two if the federal government as I understand it and um I know I've got some City attorneys and so it's getting into an area area slightly outside of my expertise but as I understand that if the federal government removed qualified immunity it would involve all the states as well so no State Powers no State um this this specific bill um only refers to police officers um and it only refers to when constitutionally secured rights are violated so if there were other cases of qualified immunity for the city for example um it would not apply to that it's only for this specific act that Council would be supporting only involves police officers further discussion if the state if the state legislature ever in the future reversed the qualified immunity then we then it would be against that's correct that's correct okay okay is there further discussion are there any objections I object any other objection sorry okay Ember [Music] grber ber cman grber bin Bergen coffin anybody any other objections uh seeing no further objections the uh Council supports all right thank you uh um now we're on to infrastructure investment the first priority has been identified by Aurora Water and relates to the time it takes and the costs associated with obtaining permits for infrastructure per uh projects the US Forest Service Bureau of Land Management and the Army Corps of Engineers have all delayed analysis and decisions on Aurora's requests due to lack of Staff expertise and staff time this priority calls on Congress to adequately staff and fund these agencies so that they may process water supply project and Watershed Health permitting requests in a timely and efficient manner Council support this priority discussion bersin council member bersin yes I totally support it we've been doing this for 11 years and what's one more year let's let's give it our best shot okay U further discussion uh seeing none um objections uh seeing none Council supports all right in light of the devastating wildfires that ravaged the state this year healthy Forest legislation is especially critical Aurora's Water Supplies originate in the headwaters of three major basins that lie in the Arapaho San Isabel and White River national forests Aurora's Municipal Water Supplies suffer greatly as a result of previous forest fires in order to protect the drinking water supplies the city supports increases in fun for Forest programs including pre-fire mitigation postfire recovery and streamlining approval process for water ship projects does council support this priority uh discussion any objections Council supports thank you um Aurora water has a diverse water supply from three major river basins with at least one area of our system experiencing drought and reduced Water Supplies in any given year in order to protect water supplies this next priority calls for support for climate change subsidies planning and adaptation abilities along with improving accuracy of hydrological and weather system prediction tools and Technology this priority supports promotion promotion of an adequate funding for economic and efficient energy use increasing water storage capacity both surface and underground and evaluating reclaimed water projects to maintain a reliable drinking water supp apply Council support this priority discussion objections Council supports thank you um this next infrastructure priority concerns how drinking water standards are set the Safe Water drinking Act passed in 1974 created an administrative process through the EPA to set drinking water standards this process was put in place to help understand the science behind a given contaminant including understand the prevalence of a given contam contaminant within drinking water utilities throughout the United States understanding the health effects and rs risks associated with that contaminant and understanding the cost implications associated with treatment before setting a National Standard circumventing the sdwa processes with legislation has the potential to place undue burden on public drinking water utility customers this priority calls on Congress to amend the safe water drinking act to revise the administrative process and enable the EPA to more efficiently set national standards does council support this priority discussion objection I I just have a question about that council member Johnson um so I I like the fact of scientists instead of Congress setting the the standards is that what we're talking abouta okay yes exactly thank you well um aren't you aren't Luke isn't it about um that some of these standards have been unachievable and isn't the net result about trying to have more realistic standards I believe so yes mayor uh council member Johnson then I think I might need some clarification because if I mean the epa's gone through a lot of changes in the last four years and hopefully we'll have some other changes these next few years but if it's more realistic standards and the EPA is lessening the standards of what Congress has then I wouldn't support so I guess I don't know if I want to make a blanket of like EPA over Congress I'd BR like to see what those standards I will I will use one of my lifelines and and see if Marshall Brown wants to time in uh this this this could be we can get back I mean this might be a clarification later mayor well Congress can always override the EPA if the president signs it right I have a similar question so on I'm on the Cherry Creek Basin water quality Authority board um and one of the issues that always comes up is the um there's a reg 72 that requires um you know it's it's for basically quality of water but it's it's a um for phosphorus um determination and it's such a unreasonable standard that nobody is ever able to meet it so you they just spend all this money over and over on mitigation and and it's it's almost impossible to to meet that standard so would this be similar where you can't meet that standard is that what they're trying to achieve balance on so if I could this is Marshall oh will it way in briefly this is more about using the science to set the standards and in using the science to set the standards there's a few different factors that come into play one is the public health risk and that's the the primary driver then there are secondary drivers like is it realistic to for example uh set a phosphorus standard that is unachievable um due to mitigating circumstances or or uncontrollable controllable circumstances so public health and safety is the first driver then other things come into play but this is really about prioritizing the science behind setting the standards so that we have reasonable standards that are not just arbitrarily further discussion questions uh seeing none any objection uh seeing and then Council supports all right thank you uh the next priority concerns the Colorado outdoor recreation economy or core act Camp historic National Historic landscape and Wilderness adjustment Aurora water is developing a joint use water project in the Eagle River Basin that minimizes environmental impact and is cost effective as currently written the core act includes a new Camp Hill historic landscape uh designation cre in conflicts with water supply projects Aurora and its partners are working with sponsors to develop neutral language for Camp Hill designations this priority requests uh opposition to the core act as written and requests support for revised language allowing for needed water rights development Aurora is also in conversations for a conceptual Wilderness boundary adjustment that would allow necessary analysis and permitting for the least environmentally damaging and practicable alternative for future Water Supplies the city of Aurora requests support for adjustments to the Holy Cross Wilderness boundary allowing for achievement of the Eagle River memorandum of understanding goals and objectives Council support these priorities a discussion objection I see n Council supports all right thank you the next priority relates to Transportation infrastructure the fixing America's surface transportation or fast Act is set to expire in September of this year this priority calls on Congress and the usdot to address funding shortages and adjust program regulations these requests include additional direct funding to cities and an increase in local decision making Authority as well as increases in funding for the fhwa railway Highway Crossings program the surface Transportation block grant program and for Transit oriented development does council support these priorities discussion objections see none Council supports okay the next set of priorities concerns The Immigrant and Refugee Community this first priority calls for Congress to remove restrictions that prevent Medicaid coverage of covid-19 testing for green card holders and for DACA recipients does council support this priority discussion objection Council support all right the next priority concerns Colorado's uh request support for the New Deal for new Americans act this act would establish the national office of new Americans that would administer a number of programs these programs include provision of legal services for those in need of applying for citizenship assistance to organizations that teach English means to reduce barriers and help for individuals preparing for naturalization supp support for Workforce Development program and will provide other social economic and Civic support to refugees and immigrants Council support this priority discussion objections Council supports um our immigrant and refuge priorities also include support for the DACA program Council support this priority discussion objections Council supports the final Federal priority on immigrants and refugees calls for support of the temporary protected status program which allows Nationals from other countries affected by armed conflict or national disaster natural disaster excuse me to live and work in the US for a limited period of time under the current Administration DHS has ended protections for immigrants from six countries this priority calls on DHS to renew and extend the program in 2021 discussion yes question uh mayor pm what are those six countries um I I do not know I'm not sure if um Ricardo is still on the line if not I can get an answer to that and um get back to you yes I would not support unless I knew what those six countries were okay is there a um further discussion is there objection I think May well I mean do we have to decide right now because can we just find out what the six countries are if it's a terrorist country I I would I think none of us should support him I don't think there's I think um that's what I mean well I think see yeah there are some there are some Middle Eastern countries that that are involved but the individuals Tred I'm sorry would we be suppor call countries terrorist countries could we not okay so North Korea is not is North Korea like a friendly Ally that we want to support I mean I think we probably want to support their people coming here to seek protection um I I just I think that we can say we may not want to support something without calling whole countries terrorist countries okay the the the basis of the sorry the basis of the program temporary protected status is that um whatever the country is if it's if it's engaged in a uh civil conflict if it's if there's a natural disaster then individuals from that country can apply uh if in fact there the the federal government grants them that status and I think it's the I can't remember if it's the state department or DHS that makes well I guess my concern was do we vet so if there's conflict in a country and there is people are individually vetted even under TPS yes mayor Pam I can I I looked it up I can give you the six countries it's El Salvador Nicaragua Sudan Haiti Honduras and Ne Nepal okay Jam okay uh is there an objection I see9 Council supports all right right our next set of priorities concerns the military and Veterans and recognizes the importance of Buckley Air Force Base to the economic Vitality of the city these priorities call for continued support for the Readiness and Environmental Protection integration program and defense Community infrastructure program which provides critical funding for off-base but adjacent Community infrastructure project this set of priorities also supports the ongoing mission of the base including support for the base and the fiscal year 2022 defense Appropriations bill and the Colorado Air National Guards request for Buckley to be an F35 bed down base does council support these priorities discussion uh objection oh count um I was going to say colonel Council MC grber just real quick the uh the backup material includes the efforts for Buckley to become space command headquarters that decision has already been made so is that removed you didn't say that so was that removed it was unfortunately it's in the backup but it will be removed I I did know that and I will be removed in the final copy thanks Luke sure uh further discussion any objection I see none Council supports okay our next priority relates to marijuana at the federal level this priority recognizes State legalization of recreational and medicinal use of marijuana and city council approval of the licensure of retail marijuana establishments throughout the city of Aurora with the use possession and sale of cannabis remaining a federal crime the city calls on Congress to support lifting the illegality of banking services to the Cannabis industry through support of the secure and fair enforc discussion objections I seeing none Council supports all right our final Federal priority concerns climate change recognizing the city's vision for growth that focuses on the principles of sustainability Energy Efficiency and renewable energy this priority calls for Congress to support legislation and funding that incentivizes carbon capture use and storage advances alternative fuels advances energy storage technology improves Energy Efficiency modernizes infrastructure builds and supports Community resilience and seeks to lower carbon dioxide emissions dis Council support this priority discussion I seeing none is your objection yeah I'll support this as long as it does not make housing more expensive you know we're all for low lower U housing costs so as long as this doesn't raise it out on for it uh this I think this um this priority is is vague it doesn't support any specific legislation uh so I I can't guarantee that um something that we support in this General priority would would raise housing costs but it I think it's it's just more of a general statement of principles yeah and that's that's why I said that because it is so General it's I mean it's just a big umbrella who knows what's in it okay further discussion concern further discussion objections I see none Council supports all right thank you may mayor members of council that was our final Federal priority may excuse MEC thank you while Luke is here I want to thank you so much for helping us the five of us get the letter out to Governor polus to stand with our workers and our small businesses so I want to thank you and Roberto for your work on that a of course happy to help thank you uh 13 3 resolution by the city council of aora Colorado authorizing the city manager temporarily suspend enforcement of city code section 146 -4 63 B4 at uh 3293 Oakland Street Aurora Colorado uh is there staff presentation Mr Joyce is there is there any staff to speak on 3 mayor this is J proxer director of Housing Community Services um this is to allow for safe parking and camping at the emergency shelter that has been established um on Oakland Street this would only allow for this at during the emergency ordinance um and the length of the lease um and so if we wanted to allow for safe parking and camping in another area in the city we would need to um you know amend the uh ordinance to allow for that so this is for a temporary allowance at the emergency shelter discussion is there any objection uh then we'll move 3 forward um items from the city manager uh review outside agency appointments uh Susan bman good evening mayor and Council um this uh agenda item this evening is for the um intergovernmental organizations appointments that we do this is an annual review um we have a number of appointments that expire about this time of year and so if you guys are okay what I'd like to do this evening is just to go through the organizations um I'll tell you who the current person is if there's a term limit um and um unless otherwise stated I'd like to just assume that the the term would expire at the end of 2021 if that works for everybody objection is there objection but seeing none wait wait wait sorry time is this is this our warehouse I'm sorry what are you on are we 3 we just finished 3 we just finished oh sorry okay never mind I'm behind Okay uh please sus bargman please proceed okay um I'm gonna give you a fair warning my computer seems to be freezing so hang in there with me if um accelerate Colorado I have a council member bersin is our current person and there is a one-year term limit um so I think we are looking at replacing um council member bersin as the representative or council member bersin could s serve another term should Council decide I'd be willing to put my name in the Hat again any objection okay then then council member bers will serve another year thank you um the Adams County aging network is up next we have Renee Keener and council member Allison kums are the Representatives I was not able to track down contact information for Renee Keener so I'm not sure if they're still interested in serving another term or not and I actually never received any information whatsoever I even tried to like look it up and figure out who to contact and I couldn't so I'm going to go ahead and withdraw my name from that because I wasn't able to ever figure out how to serve on that committee can we is it can you have to um council members does it require a council member and someone else to Ser the city has an allotment of two Representatives um it does not state that they have to be council members okay council member Hils do you wish to continue to serve it was council member Kum oh I'm sorry say it wasn't okay it was council member kums uh do you wish to serve on that no mayor uh this I was just clarifying before that I was was never able to find the information necessary about how to serve or who to contact so I'm going to withdraw from that um because I looked extensively last year and couldn't figure it out okay do we have a member that wishes to serve on this so say we don't have a member May that's okay okay per do we lose you Susan did we lose you um I think Susan we may come back to you then let's see that's really the last item mayor uh council member Johnston could we just I know we do this usually the first meeting of the year and I know we have a different study um session agenda but is is it okay if we just move that to the next I think we'll have to I think we'll have to okay um that mayor I only have one question about that yes um and that is we were going to switch our Dr Cog position well let me do let's do that right before oh wait you know what we'll we'll be able to because it's the next me next meeting is the um 20th I think and so we'll have a study session before that so we should be fine the 20th of January yeah is the next meeting no I don't think we have a study session until one right we don't because of yeah let's go ahead and do it let's do it um okay so we'll just contact Mac and figure out what we need to tell uh well let me ask let's do this right now who desires to continue serving on their let me go down the members and see who desires to continue serving on their existing um Water Commission and so on Dr Cog uh I was the the principal and council member K was the alternate we're gonna switch and she'll be the the the principal delegate and I'll be the alternate mayor mayor cman yes oh Susan you're back okay I'm back Susan's back no okay okay so uh we're up to Dr Cog so I've gathered uh mayor Kaufman is going to be the alternate council member whs will be primary yes yes may real quick you had a really good idea could we do that first and then if people want to change as opposed to for each one yeah um Susan why don't we do this just call off the names of the members and see who wants to continue okay U with what they're doing let's just do that first okay so when I uh bounced off I was looking at the Adams County Airport and Coordinating Committee which had council members Johnston and Gruber oh sorry Susan I think I think we're gonna we're gonna just go by council members okay and see who wants to and no offense to you I think it's just it's so late yeah let okay um okay so okay so we did the mayor um and let I'm just going to go down um the uh member Lawson what would you like to continue doing I'm on the Dr Cog for Adams County so I would like to stay on that okay and I'm on the uh Canal Highland Canal I'll stay on that as well okay thank you and may is there another opening on that because I am interested in that as well which one I'm sorry the Highline Canal is there another um Susan is there another opening on Highland Canal um give me just one second um there we [Music] have the mayor is an honorary chair um council member Lawson is our representative uh no there is not okay okay that's okay I was just wondering no worries okay uh so councilman Lawson we've gone over your stuff and I well that's not on here but I like to stay on RTD imagine as well which will be coming back sometime in January right I think that's all I have okay council member hilts I am on the aedc and the F and I'd like to stay on both and I don't think I'm on anything else oh and there's mik off and I'm uh would like to stay on F okay uh council member grber I'm good with all the assignments I have now okay uh council member Gardner I'm fine with what I have now okay let's see um council member Mario yeah I'm I'm okay with my assignments as well okay um council member Johnston I'm good with mine thank you uh council member bin uh yes I'm good with mine except uh we already talked about accelerate Colorado and I don't know if you heard that Susan I'm gonna stay another year um we need back up to ex hang on Aurora Economic Development um council member Bergen and I need to switch um I need to because I'm chair of peed I have an ex officio and she had it last year so I will have it in 21 and then she if she wants it she can have my term in 21 I would I would like that okay okay okay um Council Maro I am happy with both of my assignments Council mums um yeah I mean just making sure we note the switch on Dr Cog and then I also did notice in the backup that visit Aurora wasn't on there um but I do want to continue May Tam oh uh yes I would like to stay on E470 um so and then aedc we just mentioned and then I'm on the Cherry Creek Basin water quality Authority um should we have an alternate on that Susan um it doesn't say that you can't have an alternate I'd be wait when are the meetings again they're the third Thursday of the month at from 9 to about 11 okay yeah I'd be happy to service an alter um hang on hang on uh mayor protim you have to serve at Urban drainage and flood control oh that's right that's what the mayor protim does and that is the third Thursday in the morning no 12:30 to 3 330 wow okay it's well council member would you want to just go ahead and take Cherry Creek uh Bas and water quality Authority yep I'm happy to do that probably what I will need to do is work with you to because it's a very complicated committee but maybe on the first meeting get together yeah we can do that beforehand I'm just okay great right great um Susan I think we got it covered uh mayor and Council what I'd like to do um uh is update the list review it and then if you all are okay I'd like to just add it to the consent calendar there are several appointments um I just want to make sure that our there are several appointments that are not council members um and I want to make sure that if we have um if we need to fill those that we have a plan to fill those um as we move forward okay great great um uh items from the city council uh call-ups of council policy committee items uh miscellaneous items honors removed from the agenda if any uh policy committee minutes I'm not sure why we always have that on there um uh thank you very much everybody meeting adjourn [Music] words I'm screaming now can you hear me you hear me [Music] now can you me [Music] [Music] [Music] now e e e e