At least we try Gotta live my truth today Why don't lose the day? Yeah, I try so insane Let it wash up Let it wash up I wanna be dry I'm alive Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on me Rain on The regular meeting of the Aurora City Council for the 2nd of November 2020 is called to order. Will the clerk please call the roll? Mr. Kaufman? Here. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. Here. Council Member Bergen. Here. Council Member Berzins. Here. Council Member Coombs. Present. Council Member Hiltz. Here. Council Member Gardner. Here. Council Member Lawson. Here. Council Member Marcano. Present. Council Member Murillo. Present. Okay. We are all here. Oh, Council Member Gruber's here, too. Oh, I'm sorry, Council Member Gruber. Okay. Will the clerk please restate the policy in terms of people wanting public invited to be heard? Yes. So for members of the public who wish to speak as a part of public invites be heard or for a specific agenda item on the regular agenda, they can do so by calling the live public comment line. That number is 855-695- That's 855-695-3475 and then press star three to reach the operator who will place you in the queue. If callers have called prior to 7:30 when we started, they would be placed in the public invited to be heard for non-agenda items at the first portion of public invited to be heard. Callers calling for public invited to be heard after 7:30 will be placed in the call public to be invited to be heard at the end of the meeting. Those callers wishing to speak on an agenda item may do so and only need to call in before the clerk reads the title of the item. Once the clerk reads the title, no additional calls for that item will be accepted. And Mayor and Council, we did identify the issue on the website. It's been corrected and we'll be sharing on social media sites the corrected phone number as well shortly. Okay. Would the members of City Council please join me in a moment of silence for those who have lost their lives from COVID-19? Please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. - I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. - A motion to approve the minutes. So moved. Johnson? I just made a move by Mayor Portem Johnson seconded by Mayor. We do not have minutes. There are no minutes. There are no minutes. Okay. There are no proclamations or ceremonies. Public invited to be heard. Give me just one second. Let's see if we have Mayor, may I ask a question? Council Member Berger. Yes, so since we did not have minutes, was that because of the new scribe system or we just didn't have them? We just had a delay in her production. So I actually got the minutes from October 5th today. So them for the next meeting. So the next meeting we'll do two minutes two different things? Yes I'm gonna check in with her about the second set but that's what I'm hoping. Okay thank you. Okay so Mayor we're on public invited to be heard. We do have a few people with Mr. Diego Lopez, plumbing. We might probably get some feedback. We'll work to see if we can get that corrected here. Just give us one minute. Right now, he is the only caller for public invited to be heard. Mr. Lopez? Sorry, give us just one second. Mayor, I have a question. Councilor Gardner. As it relates to the public call-in line, I know we addressed that earlier, but do we extend the time period under which people can call in? Because I have several constituents that have messaged me that wanted to make comments tonight, and I just want to make sure that they're still able to get in because they had gone to the public website where it was listed incorrectly. Let me ask you, clerk, can you adjust the time on that that callers are allowed to call in and be in the queue? Sure. We certainly can. I think at the council discretion, I would say at this moment, we only have one person and they just started this just started the screening process. So we are everyone else for a different item on the agenda. So this is the caller we have a public invite. I wasn't about the general public comment it was it was agenda specific items and I just be really disappointed from a transparency standpoint if we had listed incorrectly on our website and constituents that wanted to weigh in had to bail out because they couldn't get through. Is there any objection to extending that time on agenda items for public invited to be heard? Okay, seeing none, we will extend the time. Can I get some clarification as to what time you would like to extend it to? Normally we take it until that item title is called if it's an agenda item. Mayor? or Mayor Patel? - That's what I just wanted to clarify. So we're clear is that cutoff of that 7:30 was for non-agenda items, but to speak on an agenda item currently, we allow right up until that time of the agenda. So do we is the ask to do it like while the agenda item is being discussed? No, as long as we're as long as the comment goes until when the items called that's that's fine. Okay. For the discussion. Council Member Grover. I'm still receiving texts from business owners saying that they're having trouble getting in after many 10s of attempts. Again, not in public invited to be heard but on specific items. - Well, public invited be heard on a specific agenda item, right? - Correct. - Okay, yes, okay. Well, we can extend the time. Is there any objection to extending the time? Seeing none, we'll extend the time. - Are we extending the time on non-agenda? - I think just agenda items, if I'm correct. - So you're gonna allow comments after the agenda item is introduced? Well, it's the time that they, I don't know what that noise is. It's time that they could be in the queue. Mayor. Council Member Gerber. Yeah. Council Member Gardner, your keyboard is echoing. There we go. Mayor. Okay. Council Member McConnell. So just for clarification, since we know we have people trying to call in, are we able to determine what agenda items they're trying to call in about so that we can address items where no one is calling in and then just wait until we get the phone issues figured out? I can assume which ones people are probably calling about, but I just want to make sure that we're able to get that information. All the other callers are calling for 13D. Okay. So if... Sorry, this is taking me just a second. I'm trying to get that line unmuted here. Mayor, if you would like to move through consent calendar, that might give me just a minute to go ahead and do that. Is there objection to moving item number, oh wait, adoption of the agenda motion? Mayor move to approve. That's removed by Councilmember Gruber seconded by Councilmember Coombs to for the adoption of the agenda discussion. Seeing none is there any we need to call the roll for adoption of the agenda correct clerk? Okay hold on. Susan? Sorry. I'm sorry we need to call the roll for the adoption of agenda am I correct? Yes, we do. My apologies. Try to straighten that out. Mayor, Mayor Kaufman. Sorry. Councilmember Bergen. Councilmember Coombs. Yes. Councilmember Brugger. Yes. Okay. Patty there. Jenny. Councilmember Hiltz. Yes. Council member Lawson? Yes. Council member Marcano? Yes. Council member Morio? Council member Morio? We can't hear you, Crystal. Looks like maybe she's putting in headphones. No, we still can't hear you. Yes. Okay. Council member Gardner? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. That item passes unanimously. - Burson's votes, yes. - Sorry. - All right. Mayor, we're onto agenda item 8A. - You know what? Nothing comes up in my stream on 8A. Do we have anything for reconsideration? - None on the agenda that I have, Mayor. - Okay, I don't have anything. - You do, what do you have? - Yes, it's consideration for resolution to suspend certain council members. - I appreciate it, Jenny, thank you so much. - Second. - Okay, it's been moved by council. I'm sorry, who moved it first? Moved by council, Council Member Burrs, and seconded by Council Member Grover. To adopt item number 8A, - Will the clerk please call the roll? Discussion? Seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of item number 8A. - The clerk is muted. - Thank you. Council Member Morio? - Yes. - Council Member Marcano? - Yes. - Council Member Hiltz? - Yes. - Council Member Coombs? - Yes. - Yes. - I got you. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? - Yes. Council Member Bergen? Yes. Council Member Lawson? Yes. Council Member Berzins? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. And Council Member Gardner? Yes. I believe that item passes unanimously. Consent calendar items number 9A through D. Motion. Mayor moves to approve items 9A through D. Second. It's been moved by Councilmember Gruber, seconded by Councilmember Berzins to approve item number 9A through D discussion. Seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of item number 9A through D on the consent calendar. Councilmember Gardner? Yes. Councilmember Gruber? Yes. Councilmember Berzins? Yes. Councilmember Lawson? Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Councilmember Bergen? Yes. Councilmember Coombs? Yes. Councilmember Hiltz? Yes. Councilmember Marcano? Yes. Councilmember Murillo? Okay, that item passes unanimously. Will the clerk please read the title of item number 10A? Mayor, before we move into pass the consent calendar, I believe staff is ready to go back to the public invited to be heard caller. Okay. All right. Okay. So this is, again, Mr. Diego Lopez-Fleming. First, let me say I'm really excited to be calling today just because I personally know a lot of people who are going to be impacted by the minimum wage increase if it does pass. And these are people who are, you know, young people, fathers, mothers, grandmothers, grandfathers, and they're people who sacrifice time with their families to meet the cost of living in this city, whether it's working multiple jobs or, you know, putting in overtime hours and, you know, what's the point of having so many parks in Aurora if working families can't enjoy them? And a yes on the minimum wage to $17 an hour is going to change that. And, you know, There's so many different types of people that are going to be impacted by this. We have to think about young people who don't feel comfortable in their own homes and maybe toxic family situations. We need to think about women who are trying to escape domestic violence situations. And we need to think about parents that want to maybe spend a little more time with their kids And, you know, those are the type of people that are going to be impacted by this decision. So I think everyone on council has a huge responsibility tonight. You know, if a yes on this will impact tens of thousands of workers in the city. And, you know, our goal as citizens and your goal as council members should be for Aurora to be the best city in the country. And that starts with respecting the working class, And, you know, respecting the working class starts with raising the minimum wage. And so I'm really excited that this is being voted on. I want to thank Council Member Coombs for working so hard on this. I think she has an amazing vision for the city. And I really hope that all the council members who claim to represent the working class are going to vote yes on this tonight and are going to pass it into law because you can't claim to represent working class people or working class interests and vote against the minimum wage increase. So that's all I have to say. I hope everyone on council remains in good health and I hope that everyone on council realizes that they have a very awesome responsibility tonight and that they can change the lives of literally tens of thousands of O'Rourans and that's what we need to think about. So thank you for letting me call in and you know I hope council members realize the responsibility they have tonight. Thank you. - Is there further public invited that is not related to agenda item? - Mayor, no, all the other callers are for an agenda item. - Okay, very well. - Mayor. - Council Member Gardner. - I'm still getting messages. I just got a message from another constituent. They're calling the correct number. It loops them straight into the meeting. There's no screening and there's no option to press three. - They should be able to press star three And the call automatically play the meeting if you don't press star three. So I'll tell him again, but it's really frustrating that we're having to go through this because the number was wrong on the website. And I will tell him again. - Okay. - And also, may I say that I think people are pressing star three. - Yes, I do see we have a number of callers and we have a couple of folks who are screening them. So they may press star three and not speak to an operator instantaneously because they're screening other callers at this moment in time. So we have not had any calls with this volume of calls. And so we can look at our screening process and how many screeners we need. Certainly. So Matt, clarify, please. So if they're calling in, they hear the meeting as they're calling in, they press star three. If an operator can't get to them, they still hear the meeting and are assumed to be on hold, right? Yes. Yes, my understanding is they should hear the meeting and then they're in the queue for the operator. So I can see right now we have three screened callers who are waiting to be screened. How many did you say? They're screened in the third one, so now we're down to two unscreened callers. But we do have a number of people who have already been screened. Okay, so with that Mayor, I think we are ready to move on to the next item, which is item 10A. Would you like me to go ahead? I will take that as a yes. - You're on mute. Will the clerk please read the Title I of Number 10-A? Yes. This is Resolution 2020-115, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Aurora, Colorado, expressing the Aurora City Council's strong support for the Aurora-Denver Youth Empowerment Compact. Mayor? Motion. Mayor? Council Member Lawson? Mayor, I move to approve 10-A. Moved by Council Member Lawson, seconded by... Second. Council Member Marcano to approve item number 10A, discussion. Seeing none, would the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of item number 10A? Yes. Council Member Marcano? Yes. Council Member Hiltz? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Yes. Council Member Gardner? Yes. Council Member Coombs? Yes. Council Member Murillo? Yes. Council Member Bergen? Yes. Council Member Lawson? Council Member Berzins? Yes. That item passes unanimously. We're going now please read the title to item number 10B. 10B, this is a resolution 2020-116, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Aurora, Colorado, approving an intergovernmental agreement for the City of Aurora acting by and through its utility enterprise and the Pitkin County Board of Commissioners for storage in Riuti Reservoir. Motion. Mayor. Council Member Bersons. Move to approve 10B. Second. Moved by Council Member Berzins, seconded by Council Member Coombs to approve item number 10B, presentation. Are there questions for staff? Mayor, it looks like Alex Davis is ready to present and I think this is important to understand. Please proceed. Thank you Councilwoman Coombs and Mayor Kaufman. For the record, my name is Alexandra Davis. I am the Deputy Director for Water Resources in the Water Department. This agreement has to do with the Bust-Ivanhoe water system, which is a system that brings water from the West Slope, originating in the Colorado River Basin and bringing water into the Arkansas River Basin. The city of Aurora had acquired many moons ago a water right, a portion of the bus Ivanhoe system. We changed those water rights in Water Court and during that time, and we won the Water Court case, but opposers appealed it to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court disagreed and remanded it to the Water Court. Posers were willing to enter into negotiations and this council approved a settlement agreement in 2018. As part of that settlement agreement, we agreed to leave up to 900 acre feet of water in the Roaring Fork River for Peking County. Pekin County and the other opposers agreed to help us retrieve that water through an exchange process once it ran through Pekin County down to the confluence of the Roaring Fork and the Frying Pan Rivers. The agreement in front of you today is twofold, or the resolution for the agreements are twofold. One part is Pitkin County's agreement to assist the City of Aurora with the Bureau of Reclamation to obtain a storage contract in Rudai Reservoir, which will allow us to exchange water up to Rudai and then back into the Ivanhoe, the Bosque Ivanhoe system from there. The other relevant agreement is with the Bureau of Reclamation to start the process of getting a contract with the Bureau in order to store in Rudai Reservoir. That was a very simple summary and I'm very happy to answer any questions or go into more detail if that's helpful. Mayor, you're muted. Questions of staff? Further discussion? Seeing none, with third please call the roll on item number 10B. - Yes. Council Member Berzins. - Yes. - Council Member Gardner. - Yes. - Council Member Bergen. - Yes. - That was a yes. - Yes. - Thank you, you just came across a little soft, so I wanted to make sure. Council Member Hilts. - Yes. Council Member Muller? Yes. Council Member Gruber? You're muted. Yes. Mayor Johnson? Yes. Council Member Coombs? Yes. Council Member Lawson? And Council Member Marcano? Yes. Item passes unanimously. Thank you. With the court now please read the title of item number 10C. 10C is resolution 2020-117, a resolution of the City Council of the City of Aurora, Colorado, approving the continuation of the increase in the contributions by the city and the employees into the Aurora Police Pension Plan. Discussion? I'm sorry, motion? Mayor? - Council Member Berzins. - Thank you. Move to approve 10C. - Second. - Move by Council Member Berzins, seconded by Council Member Gruber to approve item number 10C, discussion. - Mayor, can we just get just brief presentation from staff for the benefit of the public on this? - Absolutely. Michelle Radcliffe. - It's Terry Velasquez, Finance Director. And this item came before our city council, and we've been discussing this for some time. We did discuss it at the winter workshop to continue the contribution rate, 12% for the city and 12% for the employee for the police money purchase pension plan. And this resolution just continues that contribution rate that has been in place in 2020. And this would be ongoing. It was built into the 2020 budget and is considered an ongoing cost. - Okay, further discussion or questions of staff? Seeing none, would the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of item number 10C. - Council Member Coombs. - Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Council Member Gardner? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Council Member Hiltz? Yes. Council Member Bergen? Yes. Council Member Lawson? Yes. Council Member Marcano? Yes. Council Member Morio? Yes. And Council Member Bergen? Yes. I thought I said yes. Sorry, Council Member Berzins. Yes. My card got a little mixed up there. Mayor, before we, sorry, that item passes unanimously. Before we move to the next item, I do have an announcement about the call-in system. Please go ahead. Okay, so once again, that number is 855- 695-3475 and then press star three. You will hear a prompt that says an operator has been notified and then they will be able to, the caller will be able to continue to listen to the conversation until they are screened. We will have a delay. We can only have so many people in the queue and we have exceeded that capacity. So folks who are calling in and have pressed star three, they will we will allow them to go into the queue to speak on an item they will just as people as people speak someone else will get into the queue so there will be a delay at this point unfortunately but they they can call in they can press star 3 and they go into the queue to be wait wait to be screened Mayor Pertem. Can we, I know it'll take a little time, but can we regularly, since folks are listening to the meeting, make that announcement so they are aware? Very well. Thank you. Okay. With the clerk now, please read the title. Can I get clarification again? Because I'm sorry, I'm getting text messages as well. So if they're in the queue, I thought you said there was a limited number that could be in the queue. Yes. - Yes. - This is Roberto. Let me just clarify for Susan. - Okay. - If they call in, they are in and press star three and they hear the recording and hear the conversation, the meeting going, that means they are in the queue. They will not be screened until 30 of those calls have been rotated out, but they are in the queue. They don't need to be hang up. If they hear the meeting going on in the audio, That means they've pressed start three and they're in the queue. So the only reason why they haven't been gotten to is they have to, the screeners have to get through 30 calls. And as soon as those calls drop up, then they'll be screened in. So don't worry. They'll be in the queue if they hear the audio from the meeting. Okay. So they just hang on. Hang on. And they'll get to them and just be patient. All right. Thank you, Roberto. Okay. With that, now please read the title to item number 10D. Yes. Okay. Item 10D. This is a resolution of the City Council of the City of Aurora, Colorado, approving an intergovernmental agreement between the City of Aurora and the Regional Transportation District Wayfinding System local agency contribution. Motion. Motion. Mayor. Council Member McConnell. Move to approve 10D. Second. Move by Council Member McConnell, seconded by Lawson. Council Member Lawson to approve item number 10D. Discussion? Seeing none, then the question before us is the adoption of item number 10D. Would the clerk please call the roll? Council Member Hiltz. Yes. Council Member Bergen. Council Member Bergen. Yes. You're fine. Council Member Marcano? Yes. Council Member Lawson? Yes. Council Member Coombs? Yes. Council Member Morillo? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Council Member Berzins? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Council Member Gardner? Yes. That item passes unanimously. - With code please read the title to item number 10E. - Yes. - Mayor, this is, we have a number of resolutions as you can see on the agenda for the rest of the-- - I'm gonna combine them, yeah. - They may, my understanding is from the attorneys is they may be combined into one resolution. And I believe Jessica is available if you guys have any questions. - Okay, Mayor, put your hand up. - I move to approve all the resolutions 10E, one to 24, unless someone, would like to pull an item to discuss it specifically. Second. Council Member Hiltz. Okay. It's been moved by Mayor Tim Johnson, seconded by Council Member Hiltz to adopt item number, let's see, what is it? 10E-124, unless the council wants to pull it. 10E-124. Is there any objection, first of all? I see no objection. No. - So I have some questions. Do I just have to pull them all out or can I just do a question now? Is it to a specific item? I guess I'll just throw it all together because I won't waste time going through each one. But okay, I just have a generic question to just... Sure. Okay. It's been moved, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem, seconded by Councilmember Hiltz to approve item number 10E1 through 24. Is there discussion? So my question is as I'm going through these I'm I'm missing budgets and I just you know, we're spending a lot of money like 3.8 million dollars so I'm just wondering if the budgets had been previously given to Council. For example, on Aurora Warms the Night, there's a budget and it has X's all the way through. So it has staff salaries, X, cold water activation expenses, X, meals, X. I have no numbers, and yet we're allocating these grant funds. So that's my question is, do we have budgets for each of these organizations? Staff. Staff. - Council Member Bergen, this is Jessica. We do, the Xs indicate that those are eligible items for them to spend funds on and areas where they intend to spend funds. Some of the budgets are not specific to the exact type of activity, but there is a total amount that would be allowable for that organization that should be on that budget and then also in that not to exceed amount. And so they may not be specifying exactly how much for the specific activity, but there is a total amount with the type of activities that are allowable pertaining to those different funding types. Right. But I just don't feel that this is due diligence because you give them a total amount. Of course, you're going to ask for the whole amount. There's no backup to say I'm spending X on these salaries, X on these different uses. It's just a blank. It's like a blank check. I just, I mean, I'm fine. I'm going to vote to approve these, but I just don't think it was a very good process in terms of due diligence on these are taxpayer monies, whether they come from whatever funds, CARES Act or HUD or whatever. And it's just, I mean, operating a business, you couldn't do it this way. Mayor? - Mayor Patel. - Just a question to Jessica is in the RFP, I know there was like a rating system and backup was required. Is this a case where that was provided as part of the scoring? We just have the overview in this packet? Correct. Detailed budgets and narratives were provided as part of the application package. Those application packages were used to go through the evaluation criteria and score the different agencies that applied. So the application and the, you know, we had copies of, you know, their board makeup and, you know, minutes and lots of different other pieces of documentation that go along with the application. That was not included as part of the backup for these items. We are simply, you know, bringing forth the agreements. We do have all of that, you know, information available. And, you know, as we work through this process, it was, you know, a new process to go through this evaluation process. We can take that feedback and certainly provide more details the next time we go through this. And may I just add something, Mayor? Mayor, can I say something? Jessica, I appreciate that. But in one of the horns committees that I sat in on, I did ask for those backup of, you know, that you had those budgets with the applications. And I actually said, can I have that the copies of the budgets and I was not given them. So I don't mean to come across, you know, I'm just trying to really do my due diligence and I didn't see those budgets. So just want to make that statement. Further discussion. Mayor Dave Gruber. Council Member Gruber. Jessica, if you don't mind, could you just give an overview? As Council Member Bergen had mentioned, what we're in the process of doing is approving many millions of dollars in funds that will go to charities that are supporting the homeless populations. The request for that money far exceeded the amount of money that we had available. So you went through a process to identify and break that money down. And I can tell you, as I mentioned before, my concern are the metrics as to how do we tell we're being successful. Because, again, we're not providing enough money now based on what the needs are. And if we had provided enough money, would that have made a difference from the amount of money that we're providing today? Or if we had provided half the amount of money that we're going to provide today? So could you give a little bit of an overview? Absolutely. Absolutely. So, you know, before you in these 24-some agreements are the different types of agencies that apply, the different funding sources that we had available. This year, the intent was to leverage our funding sources, make sure there was not duplication of funding, and make sure that the money was going really to where the needs were the most. So that goes to the evaluation process of this. We then identified different funding sources to go towards different activities and aligned those to make sure that agencies that are used to spending federal money and qualify for those can be used for those more flexible funding sources could be used for others. The other thing that I'd like to add is based on the feedback during the August 24th study session, we did incorporate performance measures into those agreements. Previously, we only had them in our federal HUD-funded agreements. We added those to our more flexible marijuana fund agreements as well. We do have, you know, a monitoring and compliance folks that work. In our department that will be overseeing these, we've asked for quarterly reports as well as annual reports and that performance would be dependent upon further funding as well. So we did incorporate those pieces as well. And so tonight is just the compilation of those different agreements. We started this process in June. And again, these funding agreements will be for the next year for 2021. Thank you. Further questions or comments? Seeing none, then the question before us is the adoption of item number 10E1 through 24. Will the clerk please call the roll? Council Member Gardner? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Council Member Berzins? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Yes. Council Member Morio? Was that a yes? Okay. Yes, it was. Thank you. You just kind of clipped a little short there. Council Member Coombs? Yes. Council Member Lawson? Council Member Marcano? Yes. Council Member Hiltz? Yes. And Council Member Bergen? Yes. That item passes unanimously. Next on the agenda, I have public hearing with related ordinance. I mean, we do not have any on that item or public hearings without a related ordinance. So we are on to introduction of ordinances. Please read the title to item number 13A. Yes. This is an ordinance 2020-60 for an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Aurora, Colorado, amending section 50-37 of the City Code of the City of Aurora, Colorado, relating to municipal court surcharges and providing funds for community service agencies and programs and other related matters. Mayor? Council Member Lawson. Mayor, I move to approve 13A. - To move by Council Member Lawson to approve item number 13A and seconded by Council Member Coombs. Discussion? - Mayor? Council Member Bergen. Yes, and we had a presentation of this during the study session, but if we could have staff just give a brief, brief presentation on why we had to make the changes in the surcharge programs. I mean, some of them we were not able to get ticket revenue and some other reasons. I'd like to just hear from staff. This is Jason Batchelor. Can you hear me, Mayor? Yes. So briefly, as was noted, this is a change to the surcharge programs, and the total surcharge is staying the same. What this surcharge... ordinance is doing is reallocating how that surcharge is distributed amongst the different surcharge programs. The purpose for that was to allow for the 1% marijuana increase that council approved earlier this year to be set aside entirely for youth violence prevention. And then there were some corresponding changes within the surcharge programs to include moving the current youth funding through the police department back to the general fund, making sure that we are fully funding the remaining programs. They had been facing shortfalls due to the loss of photo red light and also falling ticket revenue. So this using our best estimates for where we take our ticket revenues going in the future, reallocate those so those programs are sustainable moving forward. And I can answer any specifics you have on those programs. Questions? No, thank you for the, I just wanted the public to have that information on why we were doing it. So thank you. Yes, ma'am. Further questions or discussion? Seeing none, the question before us is the adoption of item number 13A. Will the clerk please call the roll? You're muted, Susan. Thank you. Council Member Bergen. Yes. Councilmember Hiltz? Yes. Councilmember Marcano? Yes. Councilmember Lawson? Yes. Councilmember Coombs? Yes. Councilmember Morio? Yes. Councilmember Gruber? Yes. Councilmember Berzins? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. And Councilmember Gardner? Yes. The item passes unanimously. Will the clerk now please read the title to item number 13B. 13B. This is an ordinance 2020-61, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Aurora, Colorado, amending the Chapter 102 of the City Code of the City of Aurora, Colorado, relating to the Money Purchase Plan for Executive Personnel. Motion. Mayor moved to approve 13B. Moved by Council Member Grubel. Seconded by? Second, Johnston. Mayor, I'm proud to have Johnston to approve item number 13B, discussion. Seeing none, could the clerk please read the roll on the adoption of item 13B? Council Member Coombs. Yes. Council Member Hiltz. Yes. Councilmember Bergen? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Councilmember Berzins? Yes. Councilmember Lawson? Yes. Councilmember Gruber? Yes. Councilmember Morio? Yes. Councilmember Marcano? Yes. And Councilmember Gardner? Yes. Item passes unanimously. 13 C is right or sorry, it's an introduction, an ordinance, introduction of an ordinance of the city of council of the city of Aurora, Colorado, vacating three sections of public right away for East 56th Avenue located between the Tibet Road and Harvest Road alignment in the city of Aurora County of Adams State of Colorado. Otherwise known as the 56th Avenue right of way by it. Vacations. Mayor. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. Move to approve item 13C. So it's been moved by Mayor Pro Tem Johnson, seconded by Council Member Berger to approve item number 13C. Discussion? Seeing none, would clerk please read the role on the adoption of item number 13C? Yes. Yes. Councilmember Berzins? Yes. Councilmember Lawson? Yes. Councilmember Gruber? Yes. Councilmember Coombs? Yes. Councilmember Hiltz? Yes. Councilmember Bergen? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Councilmember Murillo? Yes. Councilmember Marcum? Yes. Councilmember Gardner? Yes. And Councilmember Lawson? Yes. That item passes unanimously. I would call now please read the title bottom or 13b 13 D is the This is the end by ordinance 2020 - 63 for an ordinance of the City Council of the city of Aurora, Colorado Enacting a new chapter of the city code pertaining to the established minimum wage in the Aurora in Aurora above state minimum wage and providing remedies for violations. And Mayor, we do have public callers. - I think I need a motion and then I think I'm gonna take a motion then I'll go to the public advisor. Council Member Coombs. - Point of order, I am getting messages that now people who were in the queue are being dropped off the call. So I'm not sure what's going on with that. But yes, I move to approve 13D. - I move by Council Member Coon seconded by. - Second. - Council Member McConaughey to approve item number 13D. - Mayor. - Mayor Pro Tem Johnson. - Could we repeat again the instructions for the public and let them know what's going on? - Yes. - Yeah. - Could the clerk please read the instructions? Yes, callers wishing to speak on an agenda item may call 855-695-3475. That's 855-695-3475 and press star 3 to reach the operator. Once a caller has pressed star three, they will hear the meeting as it continues on as well as the other callers. We have reached the 30-person capacity for the queue. So those callers who press star three are placed in a queue to go into the queue. And as calls are taken, additional calls will be screened. Mayor. Question. Councilor Gardner. Could we also have the clerk explain how a prior commenter during the non-agenda item section was able to comment on the site? And I have several constituents asking me why they had to wait, but that comment happened earlier. So can the clerk please explain the screening process? Yes, so the calls are screened by our partners to help run the call-in system. I don't have the exact answer. It was coded as public invited to be heard on our end and that's why we called on that caller since that's the way it was coded. That is typically how we would handle all calls that come in. We will call or we will based on how it's coded. So we will work with our partners to ensure correct coding in the future. But that's how that kind of happened. - Okay. - Council Member Berger. - Yeah, before we start taking calls, I just want to ensure that as the calls are being heard by council, that the other people in the queue are still moving forward in the queue as the other calls are being read, correct? - Yes. Very well, let's proceed with public invited to be heard. Lisa, are you able to call? Do you handle the calls now? Okay. We'll go ahead with the first caller, which is Danny Perea. Patty? Yes. Tended bar at night and baked bread for a sandwich shop at 5 a.m. every morning. That's three jobs. It was a... Mayor? Yes. And I guess, Susan, this is addressed to you as well. We heard the speaker very briefly, but then they dropped back off. I'm wondering if it's okay if we move on with the agenda and come back to this once the tech issues get figured out? Is there any objection? Yes. Mayor, I object. The idea of having our debate is to listen to the speakers for us to have a debate unless we bypass this. But if we have a debate without the speakers and we've missed a major part of the transparency of our job. Right. For clarification, I wasn't saying move on on this item. I'm saying come back to this item after we get the tech issue so that everyone can actually be heard. Susan, where do you think we are on this? I think we are ready to go. My apologies. We've got some staff changes and we're doing this all kind of remotely here. So I think we are ready to unmute that line. Patty, can you verify that that line is unmuted? Let's give it a try. Let's give it a try. Yes, it is. So Danny Perea. Hey, guys. Can you hear me this time? Yes. Thank you. Okay, I'm going to go for round two. Let's hope it works. As I was saying, I love living in Aurora. I think it's the greatest city in Colorado. And I urge you all to consider supporting the minimum wage raise in Aurora. I know what it's like to depend on the minimum wage salary to put food on my table and a roof over my head. My first job, my first real job out of college was teaching language arts to high schoolers in Anacostia, D.C. I worked full time for $19,000 and $90,500. It was not enough. I had to work three jobs. I attended bar at night and I baked bread for a sandwich shop at 5 a.m. every morning just to be a high school teacher in the city. It was a struggle. I cried every single month when I made my budget. At my night job, I would eat all of the garnishes, the orange wedges and limes and the bar top. And sometimes that was the only thing I ate that day. An extra $3,500 to $4,500 a year, which is the amount the average affected worker could earn by working year-round with the increased minimum wage, would have made a huge difference in my life. And $17 by 2025 is a baby step towards the great vision of Aurora that I know you all have. Imagine a vibrant, multicultural city where a working person can attain a modest living, a place to live, food on the table, money for bills, and a little leftover to thrive here, to take a vacation or send their kid to camp in the summer in this gorgeous part of Colorado that we call home. I know I'm talking to a bunch of politicians, and anytime you mention a minimum wage increase to a politician, they just say small businesses reflexively. And let me just say it's weird that you guys do this because the best, a.k.a. my favorite small businesses in Aurora, which are in no particular order, Wood Paddle Pizza and Tap, Presso T, and Nick's Garden Center, already pay their workers a living wage. So that's not an issue. It reminds me of a conflict I had in my marriage where my husband and I are both huge fans of the West Wing, and every time he'd bring up the show, I would say, Josh Molina ruined the West Wing. Now, my husband is a reasonable man, and after enduring years of this behavior, he snapped and told me it was weird how obsessed I was with hating Josh Molina. And then my point of view is flawed because obviously what ruined the West Wing was Storkin leaving the show. So please keep this anecdote in mind. Sometimes the thing you think will ruin everything, in this case, that minimum wage increase, is only there because a bigger thing is actually ruining everything, which in this case is the widening disparity of the wealth between the working class, the middle class, and the wealthy elite. As a city council, there's not much you can do about the greatest level of wealth disparity in America in a century. But one thing you can do to make a better life in Aurora for working Aurorans is is to increase the minimum wage. And I think that's why you all chose public service. I hope it is. If you're thinking about where to get this money, my life is really good right now. Please tax the heck out of me. Taxing people who make $100,000 or more in Aurora for this is fine. I'm fine with it. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Your next caller is Danny Kessel Odom. Hi, can you guys hear me all right? Yes. Hello. Hello. I wanted to call in in support of the minimum wage increase. I am a part of the LGBTQ and the disabled community here in Aurora and I have personally seen how these disenfranchised communities as well as the black and the indigenous communities are all suffering, working, you know, having higher rates of individuals working these minimum wage jobs, having to work multiple jobs just to keep a roof over their head. And I find it atrocious that somebody would have to work three jobs and never see their kids just to stay in a house with food on their table and never be able to help their kids with their homework or go walking out on a park. People... who are in minorities are increasingly suffering because of the low wages that we have as our minimum wage and the small increase, because this is not an immediate increase to $17. It's incremental. Just the small amount every year is, a big step for people who don't have the ability to keep themselves thriving. They're still on the surviving. They're barely doing that. They haven't even gotten to thriving at Aurora. And, um, I love this community. I personally have worked minimum wage jobs here and I want to stay in this community, but I've had to consider moving to other areas where it has higher minimum wage or higher paying jobs just to keep myself alive. So I think that a big step towards decreasing these big gaps between disenfranchised communities and communities that have more privilege and benefits is by taking this minimum wage step. So thank you very much. Our next caller is Carlos Valdez. Hi, y'all. So My name is Carlos Valdez. I'm an organizer with Colorado Jobs with Justice. So we're a coalition of labor, community, faith, and students fighting for workers' rights, racial justice, and immigrant rights in the workplace. So I am speaking to y'all as a longtime Aurora resident, right now living in Ward 4. and also as the son of uh um parents who own a small business in aurora in war in ward one um and really I'm here to speak to you through multiple lenses. And I feel like the workers and the people of Aurora really see our city through multiple lenses. They see a thriving community. They see a vibrant and multicultural, multi-ethnic community. And I I think it's imperative for us to take care of our workers and our people. And that's why I'm urging all of you to vote yes to support raising the minimum wage in Aurora to $17 by 2025. I know as a former teacher, I know this would greatly benefit a lot of my students, a lot of my former students who right now, you know, taking up these minimum wage jobs. And I know from their stories that they don't just work to sustain themselves, they work to sustain their families. We know that a lot of our children are bearing that brunt, and especially through this COVID-19 crisis, they're bearing the brunt of providing for their families. this ordinance would greatly benefit people that I have a deep connection with and are really a worthwhile investment in our community. I also know that my parents would, as owners of El Molino Bakery in Ward 1, they They would love to pay their workers a higher wage because they truly care about the people that work for them, the people that bake the bread, that bake the pan de muerto for Day of the Dead, who bake bread and make cakes for our Aurora community. I know they see them working hard and They deserve a living wage. And honestly, that's the bare minimum that we can give them. I think we should honestly start thinking about doing more. But this is a step. This is a step. It's a slam dunk. It's a win. Mr. Valdez, I'm sorry. I need you to wrap up your comments. Okay. I will just say that please support and please vote yes to raise the minimum wage in Aurora. Thank you. Thank you. Our next caller is Tish Gardner. Yes, I am a small business owner in the city of Aurora, and I will tell you that mandated minimum wage of this amount will put us out of business. This will not... allow us to pay our workers more. And we are the working class. We are a small business who is the working class. We are the president of the company and we are the janitor of the company. We do all kinds of work and we pay our workers more. as much as we can pay them. And they understand that. They do not want us to go out of business. They want a job. And I think mandating a wage like this is mandating something that is not sustainable for a business. That young man that just spoke about his parents wanting to pay people who bake bread more money, Well, they are certainly free to do that. They can pay their workers whatever they would like. And if they want to pay them more, they can. But if it is mandated, then whatever you want, you're not able to do because you will pay the janitor exactly the same wage that you will pay your best and hardest worker. Because we've now brought socialism into our minimum wage mandate. We want to pay our workers more. We are the working class. Small business owners are workers as well. And this is completely unreasonable and stifling to small businesses within Aurora. It will cause small businesses to look to other areas like Centennial, unincorporated Arapahoe County, other places that surround Aurora Parker that don't require this. It will hurt the city of Aurora. It will hurt our workers. It is disingenuous to mandate something like this thinking it will give workers more money because businesses don't want to pay them that. We do want to pay them as much as possible. It's simply economics. We cannot afford We can pay them what the business produces. And I just beg you not to kill small business in Aurora. We are the working class. And I thank you for listening to me. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Satima Estrada. Hello, can you hear me? Hi, my name is Satima Estrada. I think there's a feedback. Can you all hear me? Yes, please go ahead. Okay. So my name is Fatima. I called before when this proposal was voted against in study session, and I called to express my concern for families who have as a former teacher that taught many students who lived in Aurora. And now I'm calling as an economic justice organizer at Colorado People's Alliance. And it only continues to grow. At the time when I was teaching, this was before the pandemic. And with the pandemic, we know that families are only struggling more and more each day. And throughout the pandemic, I've talked with hundreds of Aurora residents who have are struggling right now. And I'm grateful for the ones that were able to call in today who are sacrificing time out of their families because I know that they are struggling. I've talked with people who are just fighting to get by. A lot of the times, I'm sure they're not able to sit through, you know, be patient with technical issues because they are struggling finding ways to get by when they don't have time to spend with their children. I myself right now, I'm a single mother and I am finding, having to find other ways to make sure my daughter has a bath time because as As working families, we deserve to thrive. And the current minimum wage doesn't allow families to do that. They are having to find ways to get by on their own, working two, three jobs. With this time, the pandemic, those jobs aren't available. People are losing jobs, as well as loved ones at this time. And the fact that there's not viable options for them to go to There's no options where they can feel that they can work in a way that allows them to live, which is what the minimum wage is intended to do. Where they're barely scraping by, that is not just. And I'm glad that there's being proposals brought forth to protect and to support small businesses through these times. I'm sure this has been hard on all of us, but that should not be on the back of their workers. minimum wage increases allows for the playing field to be level. And for those businesses that do want to pay their workers more and who understand the value of their own workers, for them to do so and not feel like they're going to be taken out by corporations that are able to just cycle out workers and not paying them at their full value. So I'm very happy that this proposal or that this ordinance is being brought back. I do urge council members to consider what this can mean for the tens of thousands of workers in Aurora. That number will continue to grow. We projected 30,000 workers will benefit from this ordinance in the year 2021, and they can't afford to wait until the next year. And so I thank the council members for working to bring this back. I thank the community members who are here who have also made their voice heard. And thank you all for listening. Thank you for your call. Our next call is Danielle. My apologies. I said that wrong, which I did. No problem. Good evening. I, uh, A couple of things. I thought I had it planned out what I wanted to say to you. And in these previous public callers, I've heard the words disgusted and disenfranchised. I want to say how disgusted and disenfranchised I feel right now that we are even having to discuss this again for the second time in two months. Allison Coons, I own two businesses in your ward. Juan Marcano, I live in yours. I'm an Aurora native. served in the Colorado Air National Guard stationed at Buckley. I was raised by a single father. I myself am currently a single mother. I own two businesses in Aurora, and I also heard the term privilege brought up. I want to tell you about my privilege as an employer in Aurora already. It's called the occupational privilege tax, something that other cities, nearing cities, neighboring cities, pay. As an employer, I already pay an occupational privilege tax just to employ workers in in the city of Colorado, in the city of Aurora. Something else I want to bring up. It's interesting to me right now that landlords, utility companies are scrambling, trying to make deals with us as business owners, trying to thwart rent payments and utility payments and offer their own internal grants, things like that. And the city of Aurora wants to smack us with this minimum wage increase. Again, I don't think there's any employer, any employer in the city of Aurora that does not want to pay their workers a fair wage. And I believe that we do. I mean, I have employees that have worked for me. My longest standing employee is 12 years. 12 years. If I didn't pay honest and fair wages to begin with, they wouldn't stay that long. They wouldn't be here. They won't be here with me. I can assure you that people will lose jobs. People will lose jobs. Moving into where we're going as far as the restaurant industry, which is the industry I am in, you know, that they're pushing and pushing and pushing table ordering systems on us, where you just come in and you sit down and there's a tablet at your table and you push. Everything's going to become a robot. If you guys do this, if you guys break our backs in this time and you vote for this, That is simply what will happen. Councilwoman Lawson, I spoke to you on the phone with a colleague of mine, the first go-round on this. I explained to you the tip credit. I explained to you everything that was going on. Thank you again for your time. Councilwoman Hiltz, you voted against this last time. You have a chance to be a two-time champion for small businesses in Aurora. I am asking you to please do that. Councilwoman Coombs, I challenge you. I don't do business... Danielle, please wrap up your comments. ... I'm sorry, what? Please wrap up your comments. Councilwoman Coombs, I challenge you to drive through your ward and look at the current vacancies that are already in your ward. I think the only one who is disenfranchised here is you. Have a good night, council. Please think this through. Thank you for your call. Our next call is Carolyn Pace. Hello. Can you hear me, Tess? Yes, hopefully. Yes. I am a business owner. Yes. Great. And I have two employees, and I am in full support. That's right, support as a business owner of this minimum wage increase. And I'm going to give you the economic reason first. I start my employees at a living wage, even though I would like to pay higher. I start them at $20 an hour, which is what we used to be reaching for with this minimum wage agreement. So when competitors come in and they can pay a minimum wage and and don't care to pay a living wage to the people around them and take advantage of the economic situation that we're in right now as compared to a full year ago when the labor market was tight and employees could get good wages in Colorado. I'm afraid for that future. I know that I can be undercut and underpriced by people who don't care about our community like I do. I really care about paying a living wage. The main argument that I hear from other businesses is that they can't raise their prices because if they do, customers won't come and they will go out of business. And I'd like to challenge that on the first part of customers won't pay higher prices. I I had to pause service during COVID for a month and a half when we didn't know if we were spreading COVID between our customers. When we came back and I returned, offered to return people's money for missed service, a full third of my customers said, no, don't even return the money. Keep it and sponsor people who've lost their jobs. And that's exactly what I did. I started giving out sponsorships and scholarships to people who couldn't afford our service anymore. from the other people in Aurora. And that perfectly describes the consumer in Aurora. They care. They want to support local businesses, and they will. They will pay higher prices. And plus, with more consumers, with... that have money in their pocket, there will be more money going around to be able to pay higher prices in Aurora. It really is a win-win for economics and for businesses, and it'll support the right kind of businesses, the local businesses that want to do right and are not getting forced down in a bidding war lower and lower from low minimum wage. The final thing I wanted to say about businesses going under is there is a lot of hope. I'm on the Business Advisory Council, and we've heard reports from the SBDC that there have been a ton of new entrepreneurs reaching out right now. like five times the amount as before COVID, and wanting to start businesses here in Aurora. So even if some hard hit businesses do go under, and I hope they don't, there's a lot of support right now that there's never been before from the federal government, from the state, from grants, from other for-profit organizations to try and get through hard economic times. I think that entrepreneurial Aurorans will step in and fill up that gap. We're not going to see a huge economic crisis because of a 28 cent increase next year in the minimum wage. And $17 an hour is not a living wage if you have kids in Aurora. So please vote yes. I hope I represent the silent majority of businesses out there that do support this. That was it. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Thank you. Sorry, we're trying to see if Lisa's headphones set is working, but it doesn't quite sound like it. So our next caller is Arnie Schultz. Mayor Coffman and members of City Council, my name is Arnie Schultz and I'm a longtime resident of Aurora. I'm requesting that you approve Agenda Item 13D, the minimum wage ordinance. Minimum wage earners in Aurora are struggling to survive. The cost of rent in Aurora has continued to increase even after the stimulus payments and other incentives have ended. From the Denver Post of October 7th of this year, Denver rents are down 5% according to the apartment list, which looks at actual rents. However, suburban rents are holding up better than they are in the Denver core. Aurora rents are up 0.4%. The medium rent on a two bedroom apartment in September in Aurora was $1,497. The Colorado Apartment Association reported that rent collection as of September 20th was running 95.1%, up from 94.7% on August 2nd. And these percentages indicate what landlords are charging in rent compared to what they would like to charge and indicate that rents are not going down. Another report indicates that over the past month, the average rent for a one-bedroom apartment in Aurora increased by 2% to $1,097. Many low-wage earners in Aurora are paying up to two-thirds of their earnings in rent, and this is with working multiple jobs. This is not sustainable, especially when you add the increased cost of food and medical care. In Increasing the minimum wage will result in small business owners in Aurora retaining their workers rather than having them leave for the higher wages in Denver, since Denver has already passed the minimum wage increase. Council Member Coombe's proposal details more benefits of increasing the minimum wage in Aurora, which I do not need to repeat here. My wife and I would be willing to pay more for the products and services that small business owners in Aurora might want to charge to offset their cost of increased minimum wages. We strongly doubt that many Aurora residents will travel to small businesses outside of the city, just to save a few cents. Increases to the minimum wage by large businesses in Aurora will contribute to increased spending by Aurora residents for goods and services offered by both large and small businesses in Aurora, adding to the income of all businesses in the city and increased sales tax revenues for Aurora. I urge you to vote in favor of this ordinance and to protect our people in Aurora so that they can get by without struggling and have some money possibly to save. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Schultz. Our next caller is Jeff Eaton. Mr. Eaton, are you there? Oh, it looks like he dropped off. So we'll go to the next caller and see if we can get him back on. Our next caller is Kaleeb Murab. And my apologies, I'm pretty sure I didn't say that right either. Hello? Hello? Can you guys hear me? We can. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. Hello, council members. I would like to start off by saying thank you to Council Member Coombs for helping get the minimum wage increase back on the table. Raising the minimum wage in Aurora will only benefit the workers as rent prices rise. The rent is rising quickly in Aurora, and it'll also benefit the community itself as a whole. If we look at the science, it shows that everyone will benefit from this, including small businesses, so the small business argument is invalid. If you ever bothered to look at the facts of the matter on the subject, you would see that even in America as a whole, 60% of small business owners tend to support higher minimum wage. It'll give give them more profits, and it'll increase tax revenues for the cities they're in. The proposal is also incremental, as people in opposition tend to negate this fact a lot. By next year, it'll only be $1,260. So how will the small business be hurting during the pandemic? There's no evidence to support this. So I urge the council members who are leaning no on this to vote yes, because if you vote no, it's a racist, anti-worker, and anti-family vote, and these are issues that you guys seem to be passionate about and preach about daily. The vote no would be hypocritical of your moral values and will show you that you do not serve your constituents, but rather the interests of businesses that do not support their workers. The people that benefit the most from this are minorities in our city, single mothers in our city, and all the struggling working class people. And also, I would like to attack the argument that this is socialism. You can't preach about capitalism in the free market and try and say that we—and if a business can't deal with a minimum wage increase, then as the free market goes, they should be able to adapt their business plans as to not go out of business. The facts have been given in a polite and civil matter, but some of the councils, specifically the mayor, have had inflammatory attacks on Councilmember Coombs for simply serving the people that she had promised to serve. Mayor Kaufman, next time you want to call one of your colleagues dumb, remember that you are the one who struggles to unmute his mic during a meeting and that you are the one who does not believe in science, and this is evident through your political discourse on the minimum wage increase. I wish you all good health, and I wish you all a good night. Thank you. Our next caller is Diane Murphy. I pass. Thank you. Okay. Our next caller, Jia Hagen? I did not say that right. Hi, can you guys hear me? We can. Okay, my name is Molly Gagin. It is a tough one, so don't worry. I'm an organizer as well at Colorado Jobs with Justice, which as my colleague Carlos spoke about earlier, is a formal coalition of labor, community, faith, and student organizations working to advance workers' rights and social justice efforts, which is why we're here tonight. I will be reading a testimony from an Aurora community member and a supporter of our organization, Ashley D. Ruggiero, and the following are their words. Everyone in the Aurora community deserves to be thriving and not just surviving. Our communities have had enough of living paycheck to paycheck, struggling just to provide for our basic human needs. The economic struggle of an unsustainable minimum wage already impacted marginalized communities at a disproportionate rate, but COVID-19 has intensified these economic disparities. Establishing a livable minimum wage is a step towards providing reparations for communities that have been economically disenfranchised and fighting for our right to a sustainable livelihood. Unlivable wages, the devaluation of black and brown workers, and ever-increasing rent prices threaten the opportunities and prosperity of our communities. It is clear that there are structural issues that prioritize profit for large corporations, which in turn threatens local businesses and weakens the community's buying power. Sharing our stories and raising our collective voice is vital for achieving structural economic change that benefits all. Ensuring a sustainable standard of living for all people is pertinent to the well-being of our whole community. We must fight to hold our elected representatives accountable to creating necessary change in the Aurora community. So please consider to vote and pass the increase in minimum wage to $17. Force corporations to pay. And I suppose I'd like to add and emphasize that in the face of COVID-19, where federal efforts to assist the working class have moved at too slow of a rate, increasing the minimum wage for your community would set a logical and responsible precedent as one step of many to ameliorate the implications COVID has presented. Thanks for your time. Thank you for your call. Mayor, can I request a five-minute recess just so we can make some technology changes in our setup real quick? Very well. The time is now 9.03. In fact, let's reconvene at 9.10. Is that enough time? Thank you. Okay. Thank you. ♪ If I won't find ♪ ♪ How am I so deep in love ♪ ♪ I'm off dark ♪ ♪ I feel so loved ♪ ♪ I've been having dreams ♪ ♪ Splashing in the summer stream ♪ ♪ Tripping, I've fallen ♪ ♪ My body turns to ice ♪ ♪ Question, where the paradise ♪ ♪ Solid block of gold ♪ ♪ Dying in the cold ♪ I never feel so loved. i've always been the one to say the first goodbye had to love and lose a hundred million times had to get it wrong to know just what now i'm falling you say my name like i have been i'm indecisive but this I hope I'm not the are you falling center of attention you know you get whenever you want it baby my reflection I'm afraid of all the things it could do to me if I would've known it baby I would've stayed cause I was doing better alone but when you said I knew that was the end of it all I should've stayed now there ain't no getting in my heart you said hello I should've stayed my heart ♪♪ Really quick, if you can hear me, will you unmute yourself and let's test your audio real quick? Can you hear me? Yes, now we can hear you just fine. When we resume, are you able to take over the calling the announcer or the callers? Yes. Perfect. Thank you. Okay. Regular meeting of the City Council is now resumed and we are at public invited to be heard. May our next caller is Adam Fung. I'm sorry? Susan? Yes, I'm sorry. Lisa and I started talking at the same time. My apologies. We are ready to resume for the public comment portion of item 13D. And Lisa is going to take over calling the names. So our first name is Adam Fung. Good evening, City Council. I'm Adam Fung. I've lived in Aurora for eight years. All my life, I have been a rank-and-file employee. I have put blood, sweat, and tears at all the work that I've done, from being a server, from being a mailman, to now being a broadband tech. We have to think in terms of a trickle-up economy instead of a trickle-down economy. We need to give purchasing power to the working class. During this pandemic, who is thriving right now? It's the wealthiest that's thriving. They're getting richer, and as the poor continue to get poorer. It's the same notion every single time. The rich get richer, the poor get poorer. And the only way we can solve this problem is if we raise the minimum wage for the working class. But then the working class can thrive and don't have to live paycheck to paycheck. I have seen many people who have to suffer because they have to work two to three jobs to pay for cable bills and other utilities that they need. And working these jobs, they become slaves to the system of being part of wage slavery, basically, where they're literally just a commodity now. They are human beings. Working class people are human beings and they need dignity, and respect. And having more purchasing power will make businesses thrive. It will be a cycle where we can put money back into our economy, especially during this time of COVID-19. When people aren't putting money into our economy, the economy has no value. So I strongly urge you to support this ordinance. We've already seen the disappointment of people the last time when this ordinance was voted down by city council. Now it's your chance to help the working class families. And that's my part for, that's my bit. And thank you very much, everyone. Have a good night. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Angela McCoy. And I'm sorry if I mispronounced it. Hi, thank you, counselors. My name is Angela Moke. I've been a registered nurse working in home care most of my entire adult life. Thank you. I'm currently in the middle of purchasing a home care agency in this area after losing my job in March due to COVID. I've done every job from a caregiver to RN to administrator of a statewide agency. After losing my job, I wanted to make an impact and create an agency where caregivers would be proud to work with me. caregivers will be proud to work for. I want you to understand how the proposed wage increase will affect the delivery of home care services to our most vulnerable populations. The people in Aurora who rely on home care services overwhelmingly have them paid for by Medicaid. The reimbursement for Medicaid to an agency is about $18 an hour. If you increase the minimum wage to $17 an hour, then home care agencies will stop providing services to Medicaid recipients in Aurora because we can't operate on a $2 margin. The cost of labor plus overhead will exceed the reimbursement rate. No home care provider can operate at a business at a loss when their overhead costs exceed their profits. Typical industry overhead costs are around $3 an hour. I want everyone listening to understand one thing. If you live in Aurora and you or your family need Medicaid home care, you will not get care. Aurora will become an island where sick people, veterans, and Medicaid recipients will not get care. I appreciate that you want to help one needy population, but it shouldn't come at the detriment of another. Please rethink this well-intentioned but very unworkable proposal. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Steve. Hi, guys. Appreciate you listening to everybody tonight. I'm a small business owner here in Aurora. I live and work in Ward 3. This minimum wage thing, I think everybody has good intentions. Yeah, we have people that struggle, and I get that. We've all been there. Everybody was at that age where things were tough, and I get that. But put yourself in a small business person's shoes just for a minute, okay? They raise minimum wage, and what can you do? You're already struggling, and So what are you going to do? You're going to raise your prices, right, to try to cover it. And we've heard that several times tonight. We're going to raise the prices. Okay, so in that situation, when the prices change, who benefits? Nobody benefits. The only person that even stays the same is the minimum wage worker. Maybe their paycheck every week will buy the same that it did last week. But everybody else gets a pay cut. Think about the person, that lady said that she was paying her people $20 an hour, right? Okay, well, you guys put this, the minimum wage up, all of a sudden the prices go up. You think they could spend the same amount of money? You think they could buy the same amount with their paycheck? No, everybody loses. All the people, all the people that have went to school to learn a skilled trade, the retired people, the people on Social Security, students, people that don't have a paycheck that are depending on other things, their buying power is less. So the only person that stays the same is the minimum wage person. And then think about this, okay? We just talked about we'd have to raise prices, okay? Well... Do you want all of Aurora to have higher prices? Because I don't know about you, but most of the customers out there are pretty worried about how much things cost, especially right now. So if... They can go to Denver if they can go to another city and get something for cheaper because that business didn't have to raise their prices. Well, what happens then? Well, then Aurora loses taxes, don't they? Think about that. We're going to lose. Not only are some businesses probably going to shut down like mine. I couldn't afford it. I'll tell you right now. There's just no way. I couldn't afford it. For what I sell, I'd have to, I'd be out of business. So you'd have businesses gone, and people are going to go and spend their money in other cities. This is a bad idea. I mean, a little restaurant makes about 5% profit, 5%. So if we do $350,000 in sales, that means we made $17,000 that year, and you're wanting me to pay people more. Thank you so much for your time, guys. Don't ruin it for everybody. Bye. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Molly Steinman. Thank you so much. Good evening. My name is Molly Steinem and I'm the manager of local government affairs of the Colorado Restaurant Association. We're asking this council to vote no on this proposal for the following reasons. First, if this proposal passes, more restaurants are likely to close and more restaurant employees are likely to lose their jobs. We're in the midst of a hundred year pandemic and already 50% of restaurants are telling us that they're in danger of closing in the next six months. Add a minimum wage hike of this magnitude and we're certain to see that number go up. Second, Second, because of the way the tip credit works, minimum wage raises give raises to the highest earners in the restaurant, the servers and the bartenders, at the expense of the lowest earners, the cooks and the dishwashers. Make no mistake, these wage hikes hurt the very people they're trying to help in the restaurant. And finally, the way this proposal has come to fruition is an egregious and unethical violation of the legislative process, the polar opposite of transparent governance, and a massive violation of the business community's trust. The business community was told that this discussion would be tabled until 2021 in order to give businesses more time to weigh in. Now the proposal is being forced through without giving businesses the opportunity to to analyze and provide comment on the $17 wage. This is effectively shortening the time that businesses will have to absorb the cost of any type of minimum wage increase. If you care about Aurora restaurants, I encourage you to vote no on this proposal. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Maxim Kleinstein, and I'm sorry I mispronounced your name. No worries at all. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Thank you very much. Good evening, members of the city of Aurora Council, and thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I understand that the council is voting today to increase the minimum wage to $17 an hour. With that, I hope that you agree that this is not the time to introduce a minimum wage increase when businesses are struggling to keep the doors open, let alone survive through the worst economic conditions in recent history due to COVID-19 and the quarantines. An increase in the minimum wage would drastically increase the cost of doing business in Aurora and would result in more closures, layoffs, reduced hours for employees, and an increased cost of products and services. I think that this mandate would not provide the additional income that the emotional argument for this measure depicts. If the businesses would be out of business, they would not be providing a higher wage. They simply wouldn't exist. and the local communities as indicated earlier would be the ones that benefit from our local wage increase. Any implication that this is tied to some bogus study that suggests resistance to this measure is racist or that this is for, from a risk or somehow tied to reparations. They're not sensible and just pandering. I specifically implore the at-large council members, the ones that are up for election in the near future, Some that ran on small business platforms that were discouraged. I just want you to know that we are discouraged to hear that you are likely to vote for this and support this increase to the minimum wage. I respectfully request your opposition to this measure for the good of this health of the Aurora. Again, as a business owner, I oppose an increase in the minimum wage as the minimum wage was recently increased already. And this would only cause additional unmanageable burden in small business throughout Aurora and in no way would increase the quality of life of the individuals living within it. Other things like reducing the cost of living, improving educational opportunities, anything besides putting the entire burden of all of this on small business would make far more sense than what we're doing here. I thank the City of Aurora Council, and I appreciate your time. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Rita Larson. Hello, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Hello. Okay. All right. Good evening, Councilman. All right. Good evening, Councilman. My name is Rita Larson. And I am an owner of a wine shop in Aurora, Colorado. At this time, I want to express my opposition to the proposed minimum wage increase. As I mentioned, we are a small business establishment with my direct competitors being Costco, Liquor Outlet, roughly about five miles away off of 470 and Parker. This being said, we already have a difficult time in competing with the stores in Parkinson's and Tenniel, and now with the proposal, if asked, I will have to raise my prices to cover the new wage. Meanwhile, these outlying stores, as noted in these various cities, will not have this devastating wage increase to deal with, while I will have to do everything I can to stay afloat. My only other option will be to lay off many of my employees, which means myself and my family will have to struggle in hopes to remain a profitable business. I am a Latina business woman hoping to retire in a few years and with this wage increase is not where I want to be at this point in my life and will devastate the businesses which we proudly have built as a family, not only for ourselves, but also for the customers and the community. and the community family within RARS, which we so love, which will now be destroyed if the wage increase is put through. I do want to express that I do carry a full-time job in addition to my ownership in order to pay for our family expenses. You say the ordinance will help minority women, minority businesses. However, if this passes, you are only making my business more difficult and will destroy my... any plans which as a Colorado native and an Aurora business owner may have in any future plans within this community. In closing, I do not support the 17 per hour minimum wage. And I thank you council members for your time and trust that this agenda item will not be passed for the city of Aurora. I want to thank you all for your time. - Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Sydney Hawkins. Hi, Council. My name is Sydney Hawkins. I live in Ward 3. I am a former employee of the City of Aurora. I used to work for the homelessness program. And I'd like to speak in my support of minimum wage increase. I'm really impressed in the city of Aurora as like a national leader in putting something like this forward. I believe that it'll be helpful to the working class, the youth, families, elders, and especially people experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness due to evictions. I heard some anxiety earlier today about the RFP money for homeless services, like not really knowing where it goes and what it's for. And I feel like, or I know that increasing the minimum wage would make that RFP money stretch a lot further because we'd have a lot less folks entering the homelessness population because they would be able to pay for their rent and other living expenses. I know especially council members Lawson and Hiltz, deeply care about people experiencing homelessness in Aurora. And I believe and I'm encouraging you to support a minimum wage increase because that'll help the people that I know you all care about so much. And I know the rest of the council people care too. So yeah, in conclusion, I support it and I hope you all will support a minimum wage increase as well. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Randy Webb. Hello, this is Mrs. Randy Webb from Aurora Ward 4. I support the minimum wage increase in Aurora. Unfortunately, it's possible that some people may believe what Mayor Mike Coffman tweeted, referring to the minimum wage proposal as simply $17 per hour. Mayor Coffman is making a habit of presenting this kind of misleading information. Sure, it does call for $17 per hour in 2025. But it is false to give people the impression that it calls for any minimum wage increase right now or that it calls for a large increase in 2021. It is true that the Coombs minimum wage proposal calls for a $0.60 per per hour increase as of 2021. So if a person is working full time at 40 hours per week, that's about $100 per month gross income increase. Currently the minimum wage is $12 an hour. And if a business can't pay a worker 1260 an hour, it will probably be behind on paying the city water bill, taxes and other expenses. That would be sad. As always, and especially in tough times, the business has to figure out how to make ends meet and how to best service and encourage customers. It is also true that this minimum wage increase proposal still puts Aurora behind Denver's minimum wage each and every year listed in the plan, most likely even including 2025. So we should be concerned about losing workers to Denver and other places. Looking at current cost of living and future estimates in the city of Aurora, this is not even a minimum family wage at all. Please remember that Mayor Kaufman is a longtime political figure with deep pockets. He doesn't have to worry about relying on a minimum wage. Thank you, Councilmember Coombs, for taking on the tough job of standing up for and respecting the working class. We should know that ethical capitalism comes with responsibility for others. Thank you, Council, for the opportunity to comment. I encourage all of you to vote for this minimum wage proposal. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Leon Bick. Hi, thank you for hearing me today. I'm calling in to echo the conviction for many others who spoke earlier in this call to voice my support of minimum wage increases in Aurora. I work for a racial justice organization, Colorado People's Alliance, and as a canvasser, I've been speaking with members of the Aurora community. I hear from them again and again every day, whether they're minimum wage workers or make higher wages, they support minimum wage increases. They believe, as I do, that a living wage is a human right. It's a tragedy that minimum wage workers are not being given this basic human right. This needs to change. Raising the minimum wage will be a stimulant to a war's economy, and I believe it will not, as many opponents to minimum wage increases claim, hurt small businesses. Increasing minimum wage will most immediately impact minimum wage workers, but it will go on to impact the community as a whole to help create a more vibrant Aurora, drawing in small businesses and entrepreneurs. I also wanted to quote an Aurora resident who I spoke with earlier today on this topic. She said, "If any businesses, big or small, are going to fail because of minimum wage increase that makes them give their employees a living wage, that business should not exist." In other words, we should never tolerate the exploitation of workers. I have sympathy and a lot of respect for small business owners. My parents are small business owners. So my parents and many other small businesses know that this is an urgent issue and they want to support their workers. They know that we all deserve a living wage. I also want to turn away from the concern around small businesses and look at an issue that is more central to this issue. The huge stores like Walmart, Kohl's, and Big Lots in Oresta. These companies are devastating our community by being allowed to wring everything out of their workers while depriving them of a living wage. This hurts the workers, it hurts small businesses, it hurts all of us. We all deserve better. I urge the city council members to vote yes for ordinance 13D and increase their minimum wage. Thank you to those who are working in support of this issue and thank you all for listening. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Elden Larson. Hello. My name is Eldon Larson. I own Wine Experience Cafe in the Southlands Mall here in Aurora. My entire 401k is tied up in this restaurant. Hundreds of thousands of dollars that I worked 30 years to earn. My goal is to retire in the next three to five years, and this business is my retirement income. It's very sad the way Ms. Combs introduces ordinance in such a shady way. I see in the back of papers that three of the town halls didn't even happen. They're still to be determined. Coombs says businesses support this wage, and then I see the businesses that say they support it, they have one employee, and they don't even have any expenses like rent. How can an ordinance not be out of the study session back in October? And then one month later, Ms. Coombs announced on Facebook that this is over. She already has the votes before we even get a chance to discuss it with counsel. In 2007, I stood with council, or in the council chamber, the city planners brought forth their 10 year plan and I spoke with the council and I voted 11 to zero in favor of my business, including Mayor Tower. 13 years later, if the city council is trying to stifle business, it makes it impossible for me to compete with places like Parker and Centennial that are five minutes away from my business. I'm gonna quote 2015 platform from council member Lawson's platform. We need a long-term strategy to promote our city so businesses will be encouraged to come and invest here. Our city should support small businesses so they are able to flourish. Recently, a developer asked me to go into the $40 million Aurora Town Center. I had to say I'm not interested because of the anti-business stance of the city council. The Aurora City workers during COVID have been fantastic. Last week, they called me. They said, what can we do to help you flourish? I had to say, look, what I need is a city council to get out of the way of my business. They're trying to destroy us. My servers currently make $25 to $40 an hour. That's at an $8.98 minimum wage. The national minimum wage for restaurants is $2.14. The state wage went from $521,000 to $898,000 over five years. I had to raise my prices every January to compensate. This proposed $14 per server, it's unsustainable. It's going to cost me $135,000 over the next five years and $360,000 over the next 10. I can't compete with that. This proposal will affect the servers because I'm going to have to eliminate their tips and pay them a minimum wage, and that's going to be a 50% pay cut. My kitchen staff already makes $17 to $20 an hour. Minimum wage is $12. But the wage for the market has driven the price of kitchen staff up. Now I'm going to pay a non-skilled dishwasher $17 an hour. So what do my skilled members have to make? $20, $25 an hour? That's going to be another $300,000 over 10 years. Please wrap up your comments. Okay, just real quickly. I made $4,000 in 2017. I lost $23,018, lost $75,019, and 2020 is a disaster. There's no reason for me to stay open or renew my lease if this passes. 18 people will be out of work, and I will lose my retirement. Please do not pass this minimum wage. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Kimberly Armitage. Armitage. Good evening, Council Members. Thank you for listening to everyone speak this evening. And I would just like to reiterate that I hope that Council chooses to vote no, and mainly for the reason of the time to really look at how things can be tiered. To Eldon's previous last comments of, you know, raising minimum wage affects everything as it goes up the ladder, especially to the fact that I work for the YMCA and we offer programs and services. And what this will do is also help us increase the cost of offering childcare to single parent families. Most of the individuals we employ in Aurora, we have about 200 employees and are between the ages of 15 and 21. And to pay a 15-year-old a minimum wage, living wage, as the same as what we would be paying our site directors at location makes things very difficult for us to be able to operate and not be able to... increasing the cost of what it is for people to bring children to these services. And if we have to continue to increase the cost of these services, what it's going to do is gonna end up leaving kids more at home as opposed to being to a safe place after school, as well as school out days. So I really would encourage council to really take a look at how this minimum wage is being introduced. And if there's any ways that it can be cared and looked at differently, based on how Seattle is a perfect example of ways that it did it to help affect minimum wage based on different types of positions. And so I do encourage city council to vote no this evening so that more thought can be made into how this really could happen and be beneficial to all. Thank you for your time this evening and have a great night. - Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Mary Ann Mayer. Good evening, everyone. I am calling to voice my concern about this proposal. I have lived in Aurora since the early 80s. I have been a single mother And I do find this legislation to be dangerous. Raising the minimum wage will discourage new businesses from coming to Aurora, and it will cause existing businesses to leave. This will result in a loss of revenue. Additionally, since this is only for Aurora and will be passed on to consumers, people will go elsewhere to shop, which again will result in a loss of tax revenue. For businesses that do not leave but increase their prices to consumers, it can mean that lower income or fixed income citizens in our community may not have access to inexpensive food. Some of our citizens are going to school like I did when I was working full time. I went back to school to get a better job. And many times I had to rely on fast food in order to survive. just get my child fed. Not the best thing, but, you know, if I had a test coming, a test the next morning, I needed to be prepared and I didn't have time to cook a meal. I'm afraid that this is going to leave some of our elderly people to have to decide between medicine and food. And I don't think we really want, you know, our elderly to go hungry. Also, this will raise unemployment and possibly loss in wages if employees' hours will be cut and some employees will be terminated. We've already seen this in stores and it will only be worse. For example, I know of a store where the manager is making $17 an hour and there's another manager on site there and two other people and they don't have enough people to cover doing what they need to do. That manager is making $17 an hour. His company is not going to be able to change his wages. And he has a four-year business degree from one of the best business schools. So you're going to have employees making, and we're talking about high school students, making the same amount as a person with a business degree. that's not going to work. You're going to find that people in the rural will decide, hey, why even take out debt and go to school? And we'll have an uneducated workforce. There's also been people have said, oh, well, I have, my parents have businesses and they would like to go ahead and pay these people a living wage. Nothing's stopping them. Minimum wage was never designed to be a living wage. It's for people with no skills It's an entry-level position for people with no skills to get their feet wet. Please wrap up your comment. Okay. Researchers at Harvard Business School did a study in April 2017 stating that a $1 increment in minimum wage leads to a 14% increase in the likelihood of exit for a 3.5-star restaurant, which is the median rating on Yelp. So... You're going to be killing businesses here. And someone also mentioned taxing Aurorans who make $100,000 or more. You don't penalize people for making more money. That's ridiculous. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Vita Brown. Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Yes. Hi. I want to say hi to Mayor Kaufman and to all the city council members. And I want to thank Allison Coombs for having the courage to care about people. I have listened to all of these people talk, and I'm really disgusted. We have people out here working two or three jobs. They don't have time to spend with their families. They don't have food. They don't have anything. The minimum wage has to be increased. Point blank, period. And thank you, Allison, Juan, and Crystal Murillo for having the guts to stand up and do what is morally right. You cannot put your foot on the neck of a poor person and pay them nothing. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. That's all I have to say. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Alok Sarwal, and I'm sorry if I mispronounced your name. Yes, good evening, Council Members, and thank you for allowing me a chance to speak. First of all, I think it is abundantly clear that the pandemic has created havoc for employees and business owners. All of us are suffering. So I happen to be a member of the Business Advisory Board and I find it my responsibility to at least express what I have observed in conversations with numerous business owners. It is our responsibility to listen in open public forum what the small businesses have been telling us. So that's where I am going to speak that message. These small businesses who came and spoke to us are minority owned small businesses, Hispanic, Black, immigrants. And these are people who have put their lifetime of sacrifice to keep their, you know, sweat and financial challenges to get the business going. So, yes, I think that it is fair to say that the devastation caused by the virus is really the reason why we're having this discussion. I think when the climate was good, I don't think we would have had such an emotional expression among all of us. But I do feel that at this time, because of the pandemic and from what message we've heard from the small businesses, the vulnerable business owners, that this would destroy or at least take to the edge many small businesses who could potentially close, have layoffs, And also, if nothing else, cut hours, cut the cost to their employees. What about the benefits, the health benefits? If they reduce the hours, employees would lose health benefits because they're not considered full-time employees. And I think you have to cross 30 or 32 hours to be able to give that. So I think there are many unintended consequences that we have to consider at this time because of the pandemic. Okay, we also have to also recognize how... how the other cost of living can be addressed. What about housing costs? What about healthcare costs? And also different opportunities we can give the employees or other citizens of Aurora, such that we do not destroy businesses, but we allow people to retrain and to get back into a higher quality of life. I just wanted to say that this is the wrong time to consider this proposal. Next year, I would personally wholeheartedly support this. Thank you. - Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Alan Weldon. - Good evening. Thank you for having me. I'm a business owner with two franchise locations, one in Douglas County, one in Arapahoe County in Aurora. I'm shocked, frustrated, and confused at this initiative situation. I'm shocked at the timing. Restaurants are struggling and fighting for survival. Countless restaurants will be closing, have already closed this year, more to come. The pandemic is still ongoing. We could be facing more lockdowns in the future as we are seeing more stringent restrictions go into place the last few days. We're not even through the pandemic. Restaurants are struggling, and this would be the final nail for my business in Aurora. That's for sure. There is no way I would be able to continue to operate my business. I employ mostly, and I encourage everyone to think about your local King Super shopping center or wherever you shop, things like that. Think about, not a lot of people think about the franchise locations, but Like I own Cold Stone Creamery. There's, you know, the franchises around us like Subway and Berry Blends, Jamba Juice, countless franchises, a large majority of whom employ high school kids that live at home that are not looking for a living wage. So over the past five years, we've moved to a $12 an hour minimum wage. Let me explain what that's done to our workforce. It hasn't been a good thing. It's caused us to have to cut our business hours. So we shortened the time that we're open in order to save. We're not, and I meant to say earlier, I'm not some wealthy elitist like one of the previous callers I worked for 20 years. and had money in a 401k and wanted to stop moving around the country, put down roots here and bought into a franchise system. So again, in order for me to retire, I have to maintain the value in my business and be able to sell that someday. So the things we did as we moved to 12 was shorten our open hours. So we had less time open. I worked more. I have three full-time employees counting myself. So we all worked more. They're compensated at a higher level than the minimum wage. I'll just put it at that, much higher. We had to shorten shifts. We hired less employees. And get this, employees who did come to work for us, we hire, like I said, high school kids with most of them have no experience and very little skills. So we invest in them and train them. But the kicker is here when they're making $12 an hour instead of $7 or $8, they don't want to work as much. Can you imagine a teenager not wanting to work as much? So I think this is a bad idea, shocked, frustrated, confused. One final point. $17 an hour to a business owner, there's payroll tax. We pay Social Security, Medicare, workers comp. So for me, it's about an 11% amount on top of $17 or whatever the minimum wage is, whatever the wage is, period. Works out to about 11%. So that's 1870. So you want to factor that in, your 11% on top of that. on average. It may be a little bit different across other businesses. Thank you. Vote no and save businesses in Aurora. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Mayor, I have a question for the court. Do we have a way to track people that have fallen out of the queue? I just received a message from someone. They haven't been screened yet. They heard three beeps and then the call was disconnected. Do we know if that's happened to anyone else or... Is there a way to track that or do we not have a way through our call taking system to track that? That is something we can certainly look into, but I don't have the answer for you at this particular moment. Okay, thank you. Okay, please proceed. Okay, our next caller is Anna Naya. I'm sorry if I mispronounced your name. Thank you, everybody, for taking time to be a part of this conversation. I just want to say I've been a resident of Aurora for a very long time. It's just 2001. And so I went to small K of high school. I went to college in San Pablo. And coming back, I was really looking forward to going back to my home city and being able to rent out a place, an apartment for myself. And I was just flabbergasted when I saw what the cost of an apartment, one bedroom was going to be in Aurora at the time. And this was back in 2014. And it's consistently gone up. I was able to find housing with my parents. I'm ashamed to say that, but I could not justifiably put myself in such a financial risk that I would be facing homelessness if anything was to happen. And I just imagine how many families are relying in the way jobs to be able to make ends meet, working multiple jobs and living The cost of living in Aurora, not minimum wage, but the cost of living for an adult, for the child, is $25. And we're talking about a $17 minimum wage increase by 2025. So I hope we're all grounded that we're waiting for people to struggle until we get to that point in the first place. So I would urge all council to be humane and to understand that we have a responsibility to one another. And I want to just finish this out by quoting our former president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. "No business which depends for its existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By living wages, I mean more than a bare subsistence level. I mean wages of decent living." Thank you very much. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Lisa Weinstein. Hello. Hi. Hi. Can you hear me? Yes, you can. Thank you, counsel. Thank you, counsel. We are small business owners in Aurora, and we obviously oppose this measure. Why the night before a contentious presidential election amidst an unprecedented pandemic when the country is circling the drain, are we talking about a mandated minimum wage increase. Timing is everything and the timing of this is poor to say the least. Mandating a minimum wage increase is not the answer. Small businesses have to compete for the best employees and the way they do that is with a competitive pay in the market. I'm a Hispanic female. I've worked multiple jobs simultaneously. I do not have a college degree. I've had two roommates. And the harder my husband and I have worked in our lives, the luckier we have gotten. We have never been given anything, especially from the government. There is a common sentiment from many of the callers in support of And that's home cost. Why is the cost of rent in Aurora the problem of small business owners who are already absorbing the cost of running a business, not the least of which is rent, payroll, taxes, and insurance, and all the risks that's associated with that? Aurora is not going to be known for high wages if this passes. It's going to be known for a mass exodus of small businesses and $20 burritos. Alison Coombs had mentioned on her Facebook post that passing this measure was necessary for Aurora workers to stay afloat. And this measure puts a hole in the flotation device you expect to help people survive. We adamantly and vehemently oppose this measure. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is James. Good evening, counsel. I've only lived in Aurora since 1968. I believe this country is still a capitalist country, not a socialist country. And it is something that Some of your speakers that have gotten on, I've felt that it's been a canned response and that it's been a setup. And I know that we have two radical individuals on the city council, and I respect people serving the government. I do not respect people who try to bring... their views to this great nation that our forefathers built and a lot of people today are trying to tear down. $17 an hour will just drive business away and it will drive me out of this city that I've lived most of my life in. And it is something that We will be voting the next go-round, and we will remove people from the city council that do not listen to we the people. And it's, Mike, appreciate what you're doing for us and having our back and respect you. And there was somebody earlier tonight that was calling people racist because they didn't agree with them. Well, guess what? We have the First Amendment, and we can disagree now. But we don't have to call names and all that bullshit because we are tired of having this stuff forced down our throat. Start spending our taxpayers' dollars responsibly and not wasting it. Thank you very much. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Ryan Braden. Greetings. I need to be very quick with this because I want to cover a succinct amount of information. I've been a resident of Aurora since 1985 and graduated as one of the first classes of Grandview and Denver Christian High School. Long story, let's just say bullying. And wow. Yeah, I'm Ryan Braden. We have totally heard a lot of emotional testimony so far. I just want to start by saying you can mandate different wages, but you cannot mandate work ethic, ambition, or purpose. I present to you from the true minority in opposition, from Ward 6, where Francois is doing an incredibly exceptional job. That being said, while it's true for all human beings that the only majority, the only minority that matters is the individual. Unfortunately, I'm speaking for the minority of the minority. I started my first business at 13, shut down my school system since I apparently stole from the commerce of my school at the time, Cherry Creek Academy. I succeeded, and I truly believe that the government wants us to succeed. But this minimum wage increase is an absolute affront to the desires of my population. personality, and free pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness. Entrepreneurs will always adapt, but there are only a few personalities intrinsic to creation. Robin Hood stole from creators to create a militia dependent on his activities. For a government to become Robin Hood is counterintuitive to capitalism. to create a demographic of constituents that are reliant on their local government will only destroy competition and afford progress from the personalities that create opportunity for the majority of humans that will never choose to step out and create something new. Minimum wage jobs are a platform to challenge you into the next level of success. They are imperative. My first actual job at 16 years old was lube tag for the big old tires off Smoky Hill and Buckley. But hey, my car got a shiny new rims at a substantial discount. And you are choosing to pander to the majority for votes while not realizing that you are taxing a system that is above your heads. We have a responsibility to God. Not men. Two of my current businesses will fail, or one of them will start speaking Spanish and hiring subcontractors. Throughout the centuries, there were men who first took steps down new roads armed with nothing but their own vision. Their goals differed, but they all had this in common, that the step was first. The road new, the vision unborrowed, and the response they received, hatred. The great creators, the thinkers, the artists, the scientists, the inventors stood alone against the men of their time. Do not hate your local creators and vote this through just to pander to the caucus. Otherwise, you take steps at comprehensively attacking a demographic that continues to assault the game you're feeling free to play. Like I did for the first six years of creating my sleep laboratory, even willing to make zero dollars, please do not change our ability to create as entrepreneurs. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Shobha Kanherka. And I'm so sorry, I mispronounced your name. No worries, you were close. Members of the Aurora City Council. I'm speaking against minimum wage increase to $17. I'm a small business owner in Aurora. I opened a restaurant just a few weeks before COVID, before the COVID shutdown. So I'm a first-time restaurant owner, and I come from a working-class background, and I've worked hard all my life to get a better life for my family, like many of the speakers today. Just opening a business does not make me the evil business owner ready to exploit my employees. I have collected my savings like the couple of other speakers have said and I've invested in a small business with the thought of helping my family getting to my retirement as well as creating jobs and helping others. At this time, we have barely survived. Both my husband and I don't take a paycheck from the business in order to keep the business afloat. I have a young workforce of 17 and 18-year-olds. They're not running households and looking after families. I have offered tuition reimbursement to anyone of my workforce who wants to pursue higher education because I think education is the way of progress for every individual. No one has to mandate this. I'm happy to make some sacrifice for a cause I believe in. The mandate of an increase of this amount is going to kill small businesses and as a result, jobs in the city of Aurora. When we talk about workers' rights, I'm all for it. I've been a worker myself. But it cannot be at the cost of closing down businesses. Businesses will close and people in Aurora will have to move to other cities and this will be a loss for all of us. When the minimum wage increase is state or federally mandated, all businesses in that area have to increase their prices, which will result in the advantages that the other speakers before me have been talking about. If it is an Aurora City mandate and I raise my prices at my restaurant, my customers will just drive a few miles to another city where they can afford the food. Please do not go the route of San Francisco and Seattle where the cost of living is so high, people earning six figure salaries cannot afford to live there. Council members, when we make decisions like this, I think it should be a thoughtful process of looking at other ways to help employees than running businesses aground, especially in this time of COVID. The restaurant business works on minimal margins. Please make a decision that is fair to all the workers as well as businesses. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Richard Barahona. Hi, counsel. I am a 25-year-old Aurora living in Ward 3, and I moved to Aurora when I was 10 years old. I've lived here for 15 years. I graduated from Snoop Dio High School in CU Boulder, and I love Aurora. It's my home. I've also worked minimum wage jobs as a tutor, as a cashier at the Burger King on Chambers and ILIF, and a library assistant. My dad is a small business owner, and my mom is a housekeeper. And despite that, the three of us worked diligently and tirelessly, and they still struggled to put me through college. My parents continue to be working class and only earn enough money to pay for their immediate expenses. And that's despite them living in Aurora since 2006. They continue to earn the same amount of money. They're one accident, medical disorder away from falling into debt. unable to save any money for retirement to send their children to college or to mitigate a significant financial loss. This is the story of most Algorans living in this city. And wages in this country have stagnated since the 60s. And meanwhile, the cost of housing has skyrocketed. I mean, if the minimum wage were adjusted for income growth and inflation, it'd be around $21 an hour. And instead, we're here having to fight for near $17. When Colorado raised the minimum wage, jobs didn't flee to Wyoming, Utah, Arizona. Businesses didn't shut down. The cost of goods didn't burst. We have one of the most thriving economies in the country. Like Colorado's increase, Aurora's will not be any different. Increasing wages for more people increases the velocity of money, which means more money in the economy and mitigating loss of jobs and increasing cost of living. Thankfully for my family, I'm soon to graduate law school and I'll be able to help them save money, but most Aurorans aren't so lucky. You and I both know that the average worker in Aurora struggles with housing prices. And just a note, for every small business owner that calls in, there are dozens of impoverished Aurora that cannot afford to take the time to call in. And the reason why is because unlike all the small business owners in opposition, they're working two to three jobs just to stay afloat. You have the power to change this. So please vote yes on the ordinance. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Kevin Patterson. Thank you. My name is Kevin Patterson. I work with Colorado People's Alliance. I'm here to speak in support of the minimum wage. I was born and raised in Colorado and am a new resident of Aurora, currently in Ward 6. I've worked a minimum wage job in Aurora, at Best Buy, 3511 North Salida Court, Aurora, for five years. This experience inspired me to work with working people across this country to raise the standards. Working folks deserve a fair share of the work that they put into these corporations. Let's stop the race to the bottom. We know minimum wage has life-saving components. As noted by the article, minimum wage raises could lower suicide rates, studies say, reported by the New York Times earlier this year. We know that this impact is greater in communities that look like mine that are BIPOC. In Aurora, one of the most diverse cities in the United States, the time is now to reinvest in our essential communities or frontline workers who have been putting their lives on the line during this pandemic. I want to thank Councilwoman Coombs for realizing that it's time for the minimum wage workers of Aurora to receive a raise for keeping our society afloat during this pandemic. Thank you for your support. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Merritt Kahn. Yes, my name is Merritt Kahn, and I moved to Aurora, Colorado, and I have lived in cities that have done things like this. like in California and Chicago, and this will not serve this city well. I've seen the consequences of this, but I think everyone else who's gone into this, what I want you to know is that The way that this city council has brought this up is wrong. The members, the constituents that you all represent, most of them don't even know this is happening. They are busy, focused on the national election. It is God knows what time right now, you know, pushing 10 o'clock at your city council meeting. So many people that I know at least know were dropped off of the call after they waited a very long time. When people call in, there's no prompt that tells you to push star three. So how would they know? They push three. They think they're in the queue. They're not. The phone number on your webpage is wrong. This is not getting... the input from the community. This is a late night push through. Nobody can speak. Calls get dropped. Oh, this one's muted. That one doesn't understand this. And these calls go on forever. And people do have jobs. So you're not getting input from your community. You're getting a late night push through. And No matter what party you're in, none of us like late night push throughs. It's not right. It shouldn't be voted on tonight. This whole thing. deal with the minimum wage has a lot of arguments back and forth that are simply not being heard on this venue at this time in this manner. And I'm very sorry, City Council. You just didn't handle it right. Updating the call-in number after the City Council meeting has already started is not right. And this should not be voted on tonight. Aside from the fact that I personally don't believe that a mandated minimum wage of this amount will serve Aurora well. - You can stop your comment. - My main purpose for this call is you're hearing public comment is not hearing public comment because you have not done it right and this is wrong. Thank you. - Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Chris Hines. Good evening, Mayor Kaufman and members of council. My name is Chris Hines. I'm a current Medicaid recipient and use home care. I use a wheelchair for mobility because I can't move my legs at all. And home care is critical to my success. I live in Denver, a city that has already passed a law to raise its minimum wage. 2020's increase was a large one, up to $12.85 an hour. Yet I still get attendant care that is necessary for my ability to survive and thrive. 2020's 2021 is around the corner, and Denver will have another strong raise in our minimum wage, up to $14.77 an hour. Still, I know that I will continue to have plenty of quality attendant care because each of my employees makes at least $20 an hour. It is important that attendant workers get a living wage, and the current minimum wage just doesn't cut it. $70 an hour still isn't there, but at least it's moving in the right direction. Legislators in Denver are already advocating for an increase to the state Medicaid reimbursement rates. And obviously, if Aurora comes on board too, it will be an even stronger case to be made for our state legislators to prioritize this issue. One final comment, restaurants continue to open in Denver despite our new minimum wage law that city council passed last year. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Dolan Knapp. Hello? Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Hello? Okay. First of all, I just want to thank all of the members of City Council for serving. You guys are way underpaid, and I just admire your work, all of you. I just wanted to say thank you to everyone Allison Coombs, Crystal Murillo, Juan Marcano, thank you for all the hard work that you're doing. Love you guys. Angela Lawson, Curtis Gardner, I want to thank both of you for thinking independently. I know at this time in the world, it's very hard to be independent. We're at arguably the most tribal time in our world's history or in our country's history. And it's really, it takes a lot of courage to think independently. So thank you, Angela Watson and Curtis Gardner. Well, I just want to start off by saying, yeah, I love the city of Aurora. It is the diversity, not just racially, but also thinking-wise, intellectually, so many different ideas. The fact that we're a third Republican, a third Democrat, a third Independent, it's just an amazing place to be in terms of innovation and exchange of ideas and just culture. The culture is so rich. And I'm worried that I'm going to be forced out of Aurora at some point because it is becoming so hard for me to just stay above water. Paying the rent, most importantly, that's been the toughest part. That's been the biggest part of my chunk of money that leaves me every month. But also we have to consider health care costs are going up. a lot faster than, I mean, wages and the cost of education, higher education. Like if you want to go to University of Denver, you're paying $50,000 a year. Like who can afford that these days? Especially if you're working in a restaurant, like in the back, in the kitchen, you're working your butt off and you're not even making a living wage. So you're paying these people to basically just survive so that they can go home, go to sleep, wake up, have some food and go to work the next day just so that they can make money for you. make money for you so that you can use that equity and put it in the stock market, I'm pretty sure only half of the country has access to the stock market. The stock market's shooting the stars while the rest of the normal economy, the real world, is going down. We're in a K-shaped recovery. And this has been happening since the late 1970s with Reaganomics and globalization and technology. I know that it's not one person's fault. It's globalization. It's technology. Those are the two things that are keeping wages down primarily. And I don't want to blame anyone. We all want everyone to be happy and live and not be displaced. But I don't think we're asking for much for $17 an hour by 2025. I think that's totally reasonable. And I just want to say thank you guys for... for serving because I know that you're underpaid and you have major incoming coming at you all the time. There's a lot of pressure for you to perform, but I just want to thank you for the passion that you do have for the city of Aurora. So let's get this thing on the right track and let's make this work for everyone. Thanks guys. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Linda Cervais. Hello. I'm calling tonight because I'm a former small... Can you hear me? Hello? Yes, we can hear you. We can hear you. My name is Linda Suri, and I am a former small business owner. As a matter of fact, I've had a few small businesses over my working lifetime. The situation that we're looking at now is really very... desperate for people who are at minimum wage or even below. And as a business owner, I couldn't in good conscience pay my people less than it took for them to live, have food on the table, have a roof over their heads, be able to clothe their children to go to school. It would be so far below the bar for me to exploit that. people who were giving their all for me and my businesses. I never had that situation. I would not have that situation. I would find ways to make it work. I also offered health insurance to my employees. I gave them sick leave. I gave them benefits. And I did not make a huge amount of money, but I could sleep well at night because I knew I was treating my workers well. I knew I was treating the people who followed my business, who gave me the opportunity to serve them. And I would really like for the people who sounded so angry to Take a minute, step back, and think about the fact that there are children who are hungry. There are people sleeping in their cars or couch surfing. There are people who simply are falling into destitution, and we need to keep them in mind. And the minimum wage is one way to force larger businesses to pay a better wage. And when that happens, it makes it much better for circulation of money in our local economy. So small business owners like me, I would urge you to think about ways to be a good ethical employer and to take the time to figure out ways to work and have your workers be having a living wage. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is James Engenberger. And I'm sorry if I mispronounced your name. The opportunity. My name is Jimmy Sangenberger. I'm in Ward 4. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Okay, thank you. So much to say in the face of so much economic ignorance yet so little time. Earlier, someone said that Councilwoman Coombs is courageous for bringing this ordinance forward tonight. And I have to ask Councilwoman Coombs, how is it courageous? to promise your business constituents one thing, that you'll wait until February 2021 to bring this up again, and then make backroom deals with your fellow socialists at the Colorado People's Alliance that cut against your word. Should we call this sham of a council meeting on the eve of a contentious election courageous corruption? Council members Hiltz, Johnston, and Murillo, do you serve the people of Aurora or the socialists of the Colorado People's Alliance? Do you care about ensuring that jobs are even available for your working class constituents? Do you care about ensuring that home care for the elderly and others covered by Medicaid and Medicare continues, especially as we face down this pandemic? Do you care about ensuring that teenagers can get their first jobs? Do you care about ensuring that small businesses run by new immigrants to this city, scraping to get by, can continue? You can wish for real-world economics to change all you want. But you can't actually wish it away. Many businesses already hanging by a COVID thread have high operating costs and other expenses that keep rising, even as their revenue is going down. For them, what you do now will have lasting repercussions as they recover. The minimum wage may not rise to $17 an hour for four years or so, but aren't most businesses looking ahead four or five years anyway right now amidst this pandemic? Councilmembers Hiltz, Johnston, and Morello in particular, if you ignore the cries of businesses that give jobs to working people in Aurora and approve this job-crushing, economically deceptive minimum wage increase, you will undoubtedly face consequences in November 2021. Thank God if you do this tonight in the sham council meeting, that this can be overdone, overturned after November 2021 because there will be a lot of people in this city of Aurora who will suffer because of your negligence. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Randy Webb. Really quick Lisa, that is a caller for item 14D, not for 13D. So that concludes our calls for 13D. Mayor, you're muted. - Further discussion on 13D. - Mayor. - Council Member Coombs. - So I wanted to just clarify a couple of items 'cause I heard some folks bring up some things that, yeah, I just wanna clarify and provide more information on. Some folks seem to be under the impression that this would go into effect as $17 an hour in 2021. That is not accurate. It will be a 60 cent increase in 2021, which is 28 cents over the amount that the statewide increase that has already been planned will go to. I also wanted to give some more information about the issues related to Medicaid reimbursement rates. Specifically, the bill does include, in addition to funds for nursing homes subject to appropriation, it also includes a requirement that the CDPHE director give a report every July based on how many municipalities have increased. their local wage and provide recommendations with respect to increasing those Medicaid provider rates. And that's part of why we did this gradual increase again, as I've said many times, because it gives time for those adjustments to happen and it gives time for businesses to adjust. And that's why we're doing 5% in the first two years is to create space for those changes. And then as far as businesses going to Denver, like Denver has a higher minimum wage than we do already and will continue to. I'm hearing somebody's keyboard right now. I don't know who that might be. So those are a couple of just kind of factual corrections I wanted to make. I also wanted to point out some of the other changes besides going down to 17 from 20. which is the cost of enforcement. We found a lower number for cost of enforcement based on additional conversations with folks in Denver that we can look at in the initial year, just a program manager and a part-time support staff for the purpose of figuring out what the structure is going to look like and what kinds of complaints we may receive. And then also directing the department to put small businesses in contact with resources. So I just wanted to make sure those points were clarified and then I look forward to the rest of the discussion. I'm sure folks have many points to make and I'm happy to respond to questions. Before we proceed, I just got a text message from Chance, the Executive Director of the Havana Bid who is on the call. She can't get through. She also has three businesses on Havana as well that have been waiting and they weren't called on. I also have one other resident that messaged me and they called in and were never called on to say their comment either. Mayor? Mayor Putem. Yes, with that, could we repeat the line number again and then maybe take a five-minute recess while folks have that chance? I think that's appropriate. Any objection? Okay. Susan, where are we at right now in the system? So we have completed all of the folks who made it into the queue for this particular item. So I can repeat the line again, but it will be up to you all if you would like to take additional public comment. Is there any objection to taking additional public comment? Seeing none, then we will take a, we will go into recess. The time is now 10:26. We will go, how much time do you need, Susan? Um, Mayor, if we can get probably at least five minutes, if not a little bit longer, maybe. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Go ahead. Okay. The number is 855-695-3475. That's 855-695-3475. three four seven five and then star three okay the time is now uh 10 27 uh we will be in recess until 10 35 is that enough time that's just folks a little more time to make the um the into the queue okay do you do you need more time or is that adequate mayor will they be able to be Council Member Berger? Sorry, I was just going to say, if we go at 10:35, that's when it starts. So when those other people are speaking for three minutes, three minutes, other people could still be in the queue, correct? Yes. So when they're speaking, we will continue to screen. Okay. The time is now 10:28. We will be in recess, stand in recess until 10:35. Is that your smile? I've been looking at you for a while, but I never saw you before. I'm pleased your hands wouldn't have been so blind. For the first time looking, for the first time seeing you. I can't believe how much I see when you're looking. Now I understand what love is for the first time. Can this be real? Can this be true? Am I the person I was this morning? And I hear the same. It's all so strange. Okay, all along this love was right. And for the first time, I have learned. For the first time, I can't do much else. When you're looking back now I understand. For the first time, such a low-vis emotion. You suffer, and I'm not so sure. For the first time I am looking out. For the first time much I see. Now I understand. A regular session of the Aurora City Council for November 2nd, 2020 is now called back to order. Further, okay, public invited to be heard that We do have a few additional calls that have come in and we'll continue to take additional calls here for a little bit. And the first one is Brooke Gabrielli. Hi, thank you. And I want to thank everyone for their service to the the city of Aurora. I am a homeowner in Ward 6 and I'm calling to urge you to vote against the minimum wage proposal tonight. I first of all want to point out the terrible timing of this occurring when businesses are already struggling due to the pandemic. It is not lost on the voters and citizens of Aurora that this was pushed through and made public only a few days prior to the council meeting as well as the general election. The statement we have the votes prior to the meeting and public address is a gross display way of corrupt politics and also shows a lack of integrity for supporting the democratic process, fellow council members, and most importantly, your constituents. I also want to urge council members to focus on only the voices of Aurora tonight, as those are the people who you were voted in to represent. When we look at their proposal, basic economics show that the market, not the government, must set the wage. I believe some council members are confused about the difference between low-wage workers and skilled labor. Some early callers spoke to achieving salary and bankers linking specialty breads. Both of these are skilled jobs that require specialized degrees or skills. It should not take the government setting a wage for these workers to earn a living wage. Their employers should obtain them what their skills are worth. Speaking specifically to the comment about teaching, I too worked two jobs when I started teaching. The low salary applied to educators is a perfect example of why we cannot raise the minimum wage. Please be a champion for your educators first. Can you imagine a 16 year old making the same wage as his teacher? If you pass this, economics tell us over and over that the following will occur. Businesses will have to re-release employees or move to another city. The cost increase will be passed on to the consumer, which includes those earning minimum wage, and consumers will take their business elsewhere to other cities. Businesses will close and the workers this is supposed to protect will be laid off, and other cities will outbid Aurora for large corporations and chains. I truly support the sentiment of wanting to help low wage workers. And I won't call in without supporting alternate ways to do this. So I encourage you to look for more innovative and successful ways to do so. Help minimum wage workers to increase their skill sets through career and technical education, certification and training, or degrees offered right here in Aurora. Focus on lowering the cost of education, particularly for working adults, and make it more accessible within their working schedules so they can begin to increase their skills to move into higher paid positions. As has already been mentioned, minimum wage is for unskilled entry-level labor. Help our adults and heads of household by giving them a hand up. I'm going to close by reminding you of the Havana bid. Council member Coombs was working with the Havana bid, then quickly and abruptly cut them out of the conversation. I admittedly remain in my little bubble of Southeast Aurora, and I'm concerned about the small businesses businesses in the Southlands area. As I learned more about the Havana bid, I began to research it to see who this proposal would hurt the most. The Havana bid website shows the faces of the small family owned businesses that are a foundation of a rural. Nowhere is more multicultural diversity so clearly represented than through the Havana bid. She's still there. It appears on our end as though she's still there, Brooke. She has exceeded her time so we can move on to the next caller. The next caller is Hannah Cho. Good evening, council members. My name is Hannah Cho. I'm a small business owner. I have a small family restaurant, and 80% of employees is my family members, my uncle, my aunt, myself, and my cousin, and we have a few other workers. Due to the coronavirus, we are really struggling. And the minimum wage, if they increase, I really need to shut down my restaurant. Because each month, we are survivor. People do that paycheck to paycheck, but we survive every day by day, you know? So, like, last month, when I pay my salary to my uncle and aunt, my uncle is a chef and aunt is preparing vegetable and meat, you know, end of month, They gave me $1,000, and I was asking, why you give me $1,000? And they told me, Hannah, we know that you are struggling, and you don't have enough money for the rent. So, you know, it was very touched. My uncle and aunt gave me money to supporting the restaurant. So if I shut down my restaurant, eight people lost the job, you know? So it is very crucial for us to make the good decision together. Like, it is not the time for us, but to be honest, I'd like to give more money to my uncle and aunt and my cousin who's going to the college, you know? So... if we can hold a little bit and go through this COVID-19 time and later on we can re-talk about this. So I would like to say no increased minimum wage at this time, you know? So thank you very much for listening my story and we appreciate all the supporting. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our caller is Chance Horichi. Hi, am I unmuted? Can you hear me? Yes. We can hear you. Sorry, I can't. Thank you. I couldn't tell. So, dear Mayor Kostman and the Aurora City Council members, the Havana Business Improvement District on Havana Street is one of the largest contributors to the city of Aurora's sales tax and the most diverse corridor in the country. The on Havana Street corridor contributes over $120 million in sales tax and represents small, local, and independently owned businesses. The businesses in our 4.3-mile corridor are concerned about the minimum wage increase at this time. We advocate... and represent almost a thousand businesses with many industries that are challenged right now due to COVID-19 global pandemic. We implore you all to consider delaying the proposed raising of minimum wage. Our community and businesses did not expect a pandemic and economic devastation and many are faced with permanently losing their livelihoods through no fault of their own. Increasing the minimum wage during uncertainties of the pandemic is unreasonable. 2020 has already presented so many challenges and restrictions on small businesses in our community. Businesses have to adapt to the pandemic's ever-changing demands, and we're forced to make incredibly difficult decisions to furlough their staff. Combine these elements with minimum wage hikes in this magnitude, and many of these businesses may never be able to rehire their staff back to the pre-pandemic levels. Many of our businesses have seen their sales severely declined 40 to 60% or eliminated for extended periods of time. On Havana Street, businesses have shared their uncertainty as remaining open and limited capacity businesses. limited relief funding, and the uncertainty of impacts of winter months and increased cases. Our businesses struggle daily to figure out how they will remain open during the... expected cold winter months with limited capacities, let alone afford a wage increase. On Avanis Street, businesses are desperately trying their best to support their existing employees and keep the doors open. Postponing this increase will enable our businesses to plan for and incorporate future wage increases into their business models. Labor and overhead costs have been strained by COVID-19, leaving many businesses with no additional revenue for payroll increases. Raising the minimum wage in the midst of the 100-year pandemic is not easing the burden, it's doubling down on it. As mandated occupancy limits increase, our businesses and restaurants hope to hire back or hire more employees. The minimum wage increase of less than two months would not allow this to happen. Not only will businesses be unable to bring back their staff, they may be forced to close. Please consider the challenges that these businesses face and provide the time they deserve. We urge you not to support this ordinance, although well-intentioned this minimum wage increase will devastate our business community on Havana Street. On behalf of the Business Improvement District, that has been severely impacted by this pandemic, we are respectfully asking you that you reconsider. On Havana Street, we'll not be on Havana Street without our businesses, but you can change that. You can help these crucial community members by voting to delay this proposal until the business community has had the chance to recover from this pandemic. Thank you so much for your time this evening. I know it's past many people's bedtime, so I appreciate the time. Thank you. - Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Steve Sunsberg. Hello, everyone. I'd like to point out that the city of Aurora is one of the larger employers in the city of Aurora. And the city of Aurora, which the city council oversees, is one of the biggest culprits of paying minimum wage. I have two kids that have worked for Parks and Recreation and have sought better jobs and found better jobs than the minimum wage paid by the city of Aurora. So I'd say shame on you for being hypocritical on this issue without making sure that your house is first in order before telling businesses what to do. whether you're a small business calling in tonight or a community organizer, we could all stand and look at city council and say, nobody likes a hypocrite. Yet you're being that way. Why don't you first table this for a period of time, put your house in order, pay nobody less than $15 an hour, and then come to us and tell us what to do. So I'd say shame on you, Nicole Johnson. I'd say shame on you, Alison Koontz, Ms. Lawson, for not having your own house in order before telling us what to do. Why pay people poorly? Why not first oversee that which you have the power to do? I think it's disingenuine and hypocritical. And that's all I have to say. Thank you very much. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Ryan Braden. Yes, greetings. I just want to remind everyone here that I agree, first of all, with Brooke. This not only should not go, but we as entrepreneurs are showing additional diligence that, first of all, we will not give up. You would lose my sleep laboratory, which medically serves, and I get to hire physicians. I get to hire doctors. I get to hire doctors. Now, is that a special thing? Possibly not. But more importantly, my financial vehicle moves forward by branching out. So I have a construction company as well. And that construction company, it does not hire skilled personnel. But if I have to hire skilled, unskilled personnel at higher than my normal skilled personnel rates... My dream dies. I am a dreamer. I am a dreamer that has grown up here. I have lived here. You don't get to tell me that my dream gets to die. You don't get to distinguish and extinguish my dream. You don't get to remove my dream. I've gone to our local schools. I've gone everywhere through this local system. And it is so imperative to me that I am able to hire folks and don't have to do it under the radar. I want to pay the taxes. I want to branch things out. My medical business can totally grow and flourish. And I have kids. This is my world. So you don't get to tell me no, but you hiring for me employees at $17 an hour is telling me no. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Ed Tynan. Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Oh, great. Thank you for taking the time. And I'm sorry, City Council, you all have to work so late. Seems like we're trying to jam a lot into a very short period of time. And I was very disappointed because we did have a chance to voice our opinions once on this and thought it was tabled and now it's popped back up with very short notice. A couple of things. I've heard a lot of different dialects, different people on, and I heard somebody mention racism for the people that want to vote against this. I heard a lot of people from a lot of different ethnicities that are against it. So I don't know how it could be racist. We own Tynan's Nissan, Tynan's Volkswagen, and Tynan's used car superstore. We do not hire anybody at minimum wage because we couldn't get anybody who we need to do the jobs right now. But we do like how the market decides that. Minimum wage jobs, for me, are entry-level jobs. Doing this mandate would only help big, big corporations. And I won't mention any names, but we've all gone to a store where it's a self-checkout line. And doing this, you will put more self-checkout lines and you will have more restaurants where you walk in and you order on your own kiosk so that they don't have to hire people. That's less jobs. I'm going to read you real quick some Let's see here. Yeah. 14 years ago, we hired a young Eastern European father of three. He approached us for a position, any position for which we'd hire him. Having just arrived in Colorado, he spoke broken English, but we quickly learned that this was no reflection of his great intellect or work ethic. In fact, he had obtained a master's degree in music, music, musical theory abroad, and we wanted to give him a shot at realizing the American dream. With no opening in other departments, we hired him into our lot tech crew, marveled at his diligence and precision in every task we asked him to execute. After a couple of years of becoming more proficient with the English language, The time came to put his skills set to better use. We transferred him to our Nissan sales department where he quickly rose to remain among our top performers. He excelled to such a degree that four years ago, we promoted him to the coveted floor manager position at our Nissan store where he remains dedicated to our company's success to this day. We think that the way to do The best way to help people is to help train them. The best way to help teachers is to vote for taxes that money goes to the teachers, not to build more schools or infrastructure. and get more training, help people become plumbers, technicians, carpenters, because those jobs, painters, are in need. And we have the workforce that could do it, and they get paid a lot more money than minimum wage. Thank you for taking my call. And by the way, this process is terrible. Very unfair to everyone, including the people that are for the minimum wage. I'd ask you to vote no on this. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Hemi Haynes. Hello? We can hear you. Caller, are you there? Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you, Hemi. Good evening. My name is Hemi Haynes. I'm here to represent my... who are in their late 80s, and they're the owners of the buildings, and we currently have four tenants on business along the East Colfax Avenue. And these buildings, they own since 1980s, and they have been diligently paying for property tax all these years, even though some of the building has been empty without tenants over 10 years at a time. And they've gone through a lot of ups and downs, and they've seen business come and go in East Colfax. My mom ran a sewing business for a long time there. And I feel I listened to a lot of people on this call tonight, and I feel really like my heart is broken because I've been there myself with with the people wanting to increase the minimum wage for the people. And I get that. I guess what I'm having trouble with is the timing of this because it's been all I... Except for one, three are tenants open... in February and March of 2020, and my parents didn't get their first rent until June of 2020. In their late 80s, they had to put so much money, and of course, City of Aurora did help us, and the tenants themselves had to put a huge amount of money, and it's by by no one's fault that COVID came. And in fact, Father and Paws Pierogi opened the day of National Shutdown Day. And they've been really trying their very best to make ends meet. And I really hold my breath until they're checked clear. That's where we are. And What I'm having trouble with is just the timing of it. I do believe people deserve to have their minimum wage go up sometime, but I'm really afraid that these tenants that... We haven't had tenants for so long. We finally got them, and I'm really afraid that they could not make it if the minimum wage goes up. And not, you know, Third Culture Bakery is doing well, and I believe that they actually pay their employees more than minimum wage. And Lady Justice Brewery is one of our tenants. And their whole goal is to take all their profit and give back to community. And I know they have done that, even though they're not taking home any money, they're giving it to the community in Aurora. - Please wrap up your comments. Okay. I just want to say that I, at this time, because of the timing, I please, I really request you to reject this proposal and really think about for the after this pandemic's over because this winter's going to be very hard. And I also like to see not just being City of Aurora at minimum wage increase, but more regionally because people can move their business out of Aurora so fast into just you know, just a few blocks from where we are. They can go to Denver or whatever. Anyway, thank you very much for all of your hardworking city council people, and I really appreciate all your work. Thank you. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Melissa McCallister. Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Okay. Hi. Thank you for having me. My name is Melissa McAllister. I am a representative of the United Food and Commercial Workers Union, local number seven. We represent approximately 2,000 workers in Aurora City, and most of those are workers at King Soopers and Safeway, although we do also represent Kaiser Nurses there. And statewide we represent 23,000 members. So we're the largest private sector union in the state. But I mean, we want to come out for the minimum wage increase. We've seen it happen in Denver, just down the street when people are referring to businesses leaving, it's just down the street. And these detriments have not happened in Denver that are being brought up in this meeting. And we... Our employers that our members work at are much bigger than a lot of the people on this call. So this is for those kinds of companies that can definitely pay and they definitely need to raise the minimum wage. We believe our members need a livable wage, especially while their employees are making record-breaking profits. Because of all their employees' hard work, especially during this unprecedented time. Currently, KCIPR is in Safeway. Their online sales have gone up 47%. And that is not coming down to the workers in those facilities. They're putting their lives on the line. They're putting their safety on the line to provide for the community, to put food on the table. And they're struggling. I do hear the concerns of small business. I don't think that 28 cents the first year in 2021, as Councilwoman Combs had brought up, is going to put people under business. And if a 28 cent increase per employee, which is about $11 a week, is really going to put your company under, I think you have much bigger problems than this minimum wage issue. And again, coming from Denver, going into other cities, businesses haven't rampantly left. So I don't think that that that's going to be a big, big issue. I do think, however, workers are going to be leaving. Denver's minimum wage is about to go up to nearly $15 an hour. And if you're going to pay your workers $3 almost less an hour just down the street, you're going to lose them anyway. So... I just want to encourage you all to vote in support of this. I think it's about time. We're way behind. And $17 by 2025, that's five years from now. That is not unreasonable. And by the time we get there, the cost of living is going to be up. All of our groceries are going to be up. All of our health care is going to be up. So it only makes sense that workers are paid enough to live on. Okay, that's all I have. Thank you so much. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Nancy Bensinger. Yes, I'm sorry. I think I was on mute. Can you hear me? We can hear you. Yes. Thank you. I am calling. I work for a large company who could certainly afford to pay this increased minimum wage. And in fact, I believe, I'm not certain, but I believe that I've heard some of their representatives or employees calling to support this. But as someone who knows and has a family member in small business, I can see that this would make the big business bigger and the small business either smaller or not existing. And so I feel that this increased minimum wage, while it might help some of the workers in the short term, it will hurt in the long term. For long-term wages, for people that work for companies, even larger companies, they will Their next level jobs over minimum wage will be less in the wage because of what they're paying for minimum wage, and they will have pushed out small businesses. that could not afford this cost. But I would also like to say that at this time, your timing is deplorable, is horrible, that this is being brought up again when it was once resolved and is being brought up on the eve of a national election when people are not focused on local matters and not... I feel it's intentional and it's wrong. And here we are at this moment That unreasonably late hour having to give our thoughts to city council on a system that simply does not work, that has dropped numerous callers that first had the wrong phone number and then was updated. And then even when you call in, you don't even know to push pound three. And who told you that? Where is it published on the system? city website, and if it is, it is extremely poorly published. This is the best we can do. Represent your constituents. Do a better job. This is not about party. It's not about politics. This is about doing something right. And it has not been done right by our city council. And I think our city council is a... council of good people who really have a good goal in mind, but you have not accomplished your goal with this. This is scary and it's wrong. And I would encourage you all to vote no, just if for no other reason than the way you have put it forward. And we can look at this issue at another time, but the way you've done it, And your timing of this is just wrong. Please wrap up your comments. Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Holly Ronquillo. Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Hi, my name is Holly Ronquillo and I'm an Aurora resident. I'm calling in support of the minimum wage ordinance. The increase is going to help the workers in Aurora as well as boost our economy. And that's much needed right now with COVID-19. A lot of people are struggling and we need our workers to be paid adequately. We need the solutions that will keep our Aurora residents in housing. We need people to be able to afford to live here. and this ordinance will help them do that. I have my full support and I'm asking you to please vote to increase the minimum wage. Thank you. - Thank you for your call. Our next caller is Amy Chastain. - It is so irresponsible to be pushing this agenda at this time. Increasing minimum wage for the next five years will not fix anything if you do not fix the real problems first. Education, affordable housing, and so on. Some of you council members act as if you are warriors of the people. But in actuality, your ill-thought-out heroics can cause more harm than good. The way you've gone about this is all wrong. I'm not for this increase at this time. Thank you. Thank you for your call. That is all the callers for 13B. Mayor? Further discussion. Mayor Pro Tem. I am still hearing of some folks who are trying to call in. Are we definite city clerk that no one else is in queue? I'm looking at the screen right now, and the only calls that we have in queue are for other agenda items. Okay. Mayor? Further discussion. Yes, Mayor? Council Member Bergeron. Thank you. And I just want to say thank you to everyone that called in. I know it's late. We're left after 11 p.m., And I also want to say for those that talked about the workers and wanting the minimum wage for the workers, I personally have worked minimum wage jobs in my life. My first job was at the age of 16, and I've worked ever since then. And in fact, when I was going to college, I worked three jobs. minimum wage jobs just to be able to pay my tuition. So I empathize, you know, with people that are at the minimum wage jobs. But again, that usually is, you know, a starting point. And I had to share, you know, roommates as well. So just wanted to say that I do empathize with you. But One thing that I need to point out is the minimum wage workers just got a state mandated raise of 90 cents less than a year ago. So in 2019, it was $11.10. And then the state raised it in 2020 or January of 2020 to the $12 an hour. And then, of course, there's a cost of living adjustment that goes with that. Every year, typical restaurants or small retail stores in Aurora operate on a margin of less than 5%. We heard some of the people say that tonight. So, you know, that really means that a $10 burger makes them 50 cents profit. And another thing to mention is beyond the just the wages that they pay, they also incur payroll costs. So they're paying for Social Security, they're paying for state and federal unemployment taxes, workers' compensation, and those that offer health benefits or other benefits have those incorporated as well. Then they're paying typically a lease. for the place that they have on top of utilities. So there's all those added costs And I, you know, there's been some comments about, you know, people, you know, it's just for the rich, the wealthy, they don't care about the poor. And that's really not the case. You've heard a lot of testimony tonight from many business owners that are struggling to make it during this pandemic. And even before the pandemic, we're already having to struggle with the state imposed minimum wage. and trying to find out how to be able to make their profits, whether they needed to lay off employees, cut hours, or raise prices. So I think we have to consider that, especially if you look at the restaurants, One of the things, it's not just the pandemic that has them struggling, but we are going into winter. So those restaurants that were operating at less capacity because of the restrictions that were put in place now don't even have the option to do outdoor patio seating. So that really is going to put them in a really difficult precarious situation where they are going to be in trouble. So I just, I also want to say that, that really businesses have two options. So they can either raise their revenue and they can do that by raising their prices or or they can cut costs. And when you cut costs, that means either firing employees, reducing hours, eliminating benefits, or moving to other jurisdictions. We're talking about a city minimum wage. And that means... that we are now going to have competition from other jurisdictions. Southeast Aurora, for example, borders Parker and Centennial. In fact, we're not that far from Lone Tree. And I have heard from businesses that said that they are looking at relocating as soon as their lease is up. This is not what we want. We want to help our workers, but this is not the right solution. I think what we need to do is look at... improving or working on economic development because we want to bring in good paying jobs for our workers and bring opportunity to them. We can work with our counties with their the job centers that they have and I think it's also our responsibility to not lose jobs. And so I am going to oppose this proposal. I want to make a motion to delay the vote. Until our residents can testify in person. And the precedent for this is, I call this the Lawson Rule. And I posted this on February 24th. I said, "Council Member Angela Lawson introduced an ordinance earlier this year to require Aurora restaurants to provide an alternative option to sugary drinks when offering a kids meal on their menus. The proposed ordinance was scheduled for its final vote in last Monday night's council meeting, and Council Member Lawson moved to postpone the vote until February of 2021. She chose that date to give residents an opportunity to testify for or against the proposed ordinance in person. I commended the move, and then stated that all council members should do the same when they are promoting ideas that are controversial and where the public would like to testify in person. Council Member Lawson's idea of postponing the vote to February 2021 was her belief that we would no longer be conducting virtual meetings by that time and that residents would then have an opportunity to testify. for and against the proposal before we cast a final vote. Mayor? Council Member Bergen. We have just heard from hundreds, I mean, not just tonight on the testimony, but... but in emails from the previous session, that this is going to be detrimental to their business. It doesn't matter if this comes back in early next year. They're still going to be suffering next year. The city is going to have a $31 million deficit. How are we going to make that up when the business is are still not operating at their full profit, let alone if they even make it till the spring, and then we're going to bring it back anyway. I'm not for that. I think we need to vote tonight. Is there a second to the motion? Seeing none, then the motion dies. Back to the original motion. Any further discussion? Mayor, I have a couple of questions. Council Member Gardner. So I have a couple of questions for staff as it relates to the cost for the city. First is on the enforcement piece. You know, when this was in front of council, I don't know, six or seven weeks ago, staff had put together an estimate needed for enforcement of about $330,000 a year. I believe it was 3FT. Apparently Councilmember Coombs decided that it only needs one and a half FTE. I don't know what the basis for that was because staff reached out to other cities to talk to their enforcement departments, including the City of Denver. And so I just want to confirm with staff that they still agree with their original estimate of three staff members, three FTE with an estimated cost of $330,000. This is Terry Velasquez, Finance Director. And yes, Trevor and I've had a few discussions regarding that matter. He was the one who reached out to Denver. And yes, we do believe that we need at a minimum the three FTE for the enforcement effort. I will say that may be short in the sense that it doesn't include review of any of the contracts for purchasing. And we would need maybe additional resources related to that. So going through the ordinance, it looks like there's the enforcement, there's the salary scales for other city employees that would need to be increased that aren't accounted for. This ordinance creates a mandate for the creation of posters that, according to city staff, would cost anywhere from $30,000 to $70,000 to create the posters. The Aurora Municipal Court would need to create a process or docketing system to deal with these new cases. There's going to be an impact to city contracts. I think it's pretty clear that the cost to the city would be pretty significant very quickly. Council of course has already approved the budget for 2021. And so essentially by passing this, we would be creating an immediate budget deficit And so I guess my question to staff is, have we done an analysis of how we would make up for that deficit? Would we cut costs? Would we have more furlough days for employees? What are some things that we would do to make up for that essentially immediate budget deficit? So we definitely need to go back to our list of options to consider. It would either have to be further expenditure reductions or increases in revenue because this would be ongoing costs, not one time in nature for the most part. So, you know, we haven't done that at this point, but that would be a process that we would need to undertake. Okay, thank you. I've got a question related to Medicaid, if somebody could answer this, and that is that nursing homes are treated differently than home health care agencies when it comes to Medicaid reimbursements in receiving this increase in the minimum wage. I wonder if somebody could answer that. Council Member Coombs? Oh, sorry, I thought you were asking for staff. Staff is not responding, so I'm going to ask you. Okay, yeah, so that is how the bill was written, is that there's a fund for nursing homes specifically, but there's also a separate section written that requires the CDPHE director to make recommendations for increased rates for the home health care providers. providers. So there are provisions for both within the bill. And those providers are just already treated differently by the state in terms of funding. So you're just, it's just a suggestion, right? Because you can, we can't mandate the Department of Public Health and the environment take action. They're mandated in the bill to take action. The state bill that allows this to happen mandates them to take action. Okay. Further questions, comments? Mayor. Council Member Gruber. Okay, I'm concerned the ordinance is already a done deal. It's already a done deal. What you're seeing here tonight is simply theater. Council Member Coombs talked with Colorado's People, or worked with Colorado's People Alliance on this ordinance and announced her intention to reintroduce it on her Facebook page. Not only that, she announced she had already had the votes needed for this to pass. I have no reason to take Council Member Coombs, or other than to take Council Member Coombs at her word. If she is right, all you who have joined us tonight and sent us emails have wasted your time. Your voices have not been heard. The ordinance could not have been approved in a less transparent manner. None of the arguments from the business community from the previous study session were included in the backup material on a council package. That's a shame. Those companies have a right to be included in our official documents. The city made a grave error in not representing Aurora's businesses in our read-ahead materials. Further, only some of the members on council knew this was coming back. As As a matter of fact, we were told at study session that it would not. Council Member Coombs sent this email to a business group. Quote, I want to be clear that we're not moving forward on a minimum wage for the city of Aurora. Then the email goes on. I do not want a proposal passed late in the year to go in effect January 1st. Throughout this process, I've been trying to set a timeline that would give businesses time to plan and prepare. Continuing to push at this time would not enable that. Best, Allison, unquote. Bringing it back in secret and having six votes before the Colorado's People Alliance posted her video is the opposite of transparent. Let me go into some details. First off, when the economy was doing well last February before COVID, many companies paid well above the minimum wage. They couldn't keep their employees otherwise. They also had funds available to pay more because their businesses were doing so well. It was an employee market, and workers could take their labor to the company that would pay them the most for it. That's called a free market. COVID changed everything and those thriving companies are now barely hanging on. Next, the ordinance is nearly identical to the $20 by 2027 ordinance that was shot down in study session. The primary difference between this ordinance and the ordinance that this council voted against was that this ordinance stops in 2025 at $15 instead of 2027 at $20. It's important to understand that the state minimum wage will go up in 2021 as well. So it'll go from 12 to 32, and then the city will raise it to 1260. So the total 2021 impact to the employers in Aurora will be 60 cents per hour. But the business costs, as was explained earlier, include the Social Security tax, Medicare, medical benefits, and additional bookkeeping, because this ordinance requires substantial bookkeeping to ensure that any inspector will be able to look back three years for every employee and check all of their pay records. So the actual impact of the small increase on business is much larger. Since many of the businesses are operating at a margin of less than 5%, these costs can be fatal. This ordinance will also affect city finances. Because we hire so many minimum wage workers ourselves, as was stated by one of the speakers, we're either going to have to come up with money to pay the ones, and we only hire because we need them, but now we're either going to have to hire less students or we're going to have to have additional money to pay for them. Wage compression is another major issue, and I'll talk about that in a second. The contracts with the city were also going to require modification to ensure that a company from Centennial that wins an Aurora contract is paying the Aurora wage to its workers while they're working in Aurora. And oh, by the way, the city is going to have to inspect that. So, and then as Council Member Gardner had mentioned before, we're going to need new employees to manage the program. And we won't have, and given the one and a half that this new ordinance includes, we won't have enough. So if you pay an experienced -- so let me talk about wage compression a little bit. If you pay an experienced employee $12.60 a day and then you hire a new employee and the new employee makes the same amount, the experienced employee will expect to make more. Once they are paid more, an even more experienced employee who's been working for the company even longer is also going to expect a raise. So this doesn't affect just the bottom, you know, the minimum wage worker. It affects that tier of workers. So it can be very expensive for the entire company. That's what wage compression, and it multiplies the impact of this on the businesses. There's another thing in here that I really don't like, and that's the idea of third-party lawsuits. So if you go into the ordinance, the ordinance is specifically designed to allow organizations like Colorado People's Alliance to find employers that are not complying. The Colorado People's Alliance and these third-party groups will have the authority to sue employees on behalf of the employee without the employee having to say one way or another. So if it turns out that a third party group, one of the activist groups that talked to us tonight, identify that an employer is not paying enough money, that organization can then bring that to the city. The city validates and then that organization, not the employee, that organization goes to court, to the Aurora Municipal Court, and file suit. So the fines, the penalties, and lawyer's fees are all paid to that organization, which of course I'm sure they would split with the company. But the fact that it's designed to allow these third-party organizations to participate Kind of smells bad. And what really smells bad is that if you read the ordinance itself, it says the fact that these companies are involved cannot be shared. So under the Colorado Open Records Act or any other law, the information that an organization is suing the city on behalf of employees is considered secret, confidential within the city. That smells bad on its face. Okay, finally, we've received many emails from the companies and we've heard a lot of them about the impact of doing this in the middle of a pandemic. Many have explained that they'll fire some employees, they're going to close or move to another town or city. And then as we talked about, the assisted living homes catering to our elderly Medicare systems will be particularly hurt because they can't raise their prices to increase their costs. We talked about just a minute ago the impact of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment advising that the costs are wrong. But as anybody who's worked in government understands, is that it's one thing to have somebody say, we need new money. It's another organization that's responsible for appropriating the money. And of course, the governor signs that. And just today, the governor introduced the 2021 budget, and he's cut the Medicaid rates for the state of Colorado. So for these organizations and companies that deal with Colorado's elderly, their only way forward will be to close and abandon our elderly citizens. So the net effect on employees will be less jobs and more employment. But I've got something else I want to bring up, too. The only encouraging news that I can provide is that this council, the council that was elected in 2019, cannot bind the council that's going to be elected in in 2021 or beyond. So even though we're talking about a five-year increase, This council can only put an increase in place for 2021. The council that's elected in November of 2021 can call this ordinance, not even call it up, create a new ordinance to overset this ordinance and eliminate it into the future. So, and whether or not that happens, that'll be up to the voters. So I do have to point out that later in the meeting, the majority, you know, this is only one thing that we're going to vote on tonight. The meeting is going to go on a lot longer. But when we get to the campaign finance reform bill, what we're going to do there is make it illegal for businesses to contribute to the campaigns of city council members. So it's almost like the majority of council wants to ensure they will not face the consequences from the businesses we're about to damage by this very poor decision. - Can I jump in before we-- - Council Member Gardner. - We have Mark Shaker from Stanley Marketplace. My understanding is he's waiting on a public line to comment and there may be others as well. - Very well. Can we open the line up, Susan? - Yes, we can. - Okay. - We have one additional caller for this item and that is Mark Shaker and he's live now. Mark, can you hear us? Can you hear me? She can't hear you. Thank you. I appreciate the time and I appreciate the discussion. I'm sorry, there's some technical difficulties earlier. Otherwise, I think I would have chimed in. But, you know, I would just state a couple things. One, I want to applaud those that are working diligently to find solutions living wages for those in the community and they're advocating for that. And whatever the forum is, I applaud those that say this is a priority of mine and I want to find a way that I can make sure people can achieve that wage. With that said, I want to speak about the challenges of the impact of increasing the minimum wage at this particular time. At Stanley, Stanley has 56 local independent businesses. Not one of them is making money right now. And we are doing better than most places in the region. But at best, businesses are doing 60% of what they normally do. So we have challenges that are only going to increase in the months to come. I would not be surprised if we are shut down by Thanksgiving when you start looking and predicting what's going to happen in the future. We are limited, food and beverage establishments right now are limited to 25% capacity. Restaurants do not operate at all at 25% capacity. They don't operate at 75% capacity. capacity. So there is challenges that are monumental and it's because of the cooperation of our landlords, our lenders, that we are able to even still be in existence. So the idea of adding a cost right now is just does not work with what the environment is that we are in. So I offer some kind of compromise. I'm a problem solver and a solution-based guy. But it comes down to it saying, listen, I agree with the intention, but in this particular climate, it's not palatable. It doesn't work for the businesses. It'll Delay this. Add it in January 2022 where it's inactive. Or find a way that we can make something work. But small business owners right now, I heard someone speak earlier about Kroger and all these people making all this. Small businesses are dying. And the last thing we can do is add a cost. I'm up for any kind of creative solutions. I'm up for the collective where we have all the stakeholders in the same room together saying, how do we solve some of these issues, which are not just revenue increases, but how do we get a hold of housing costs and other things like that? But the current sort of... The proposal does not fit that. Again, I applaud those that are trying to move that forward on behalf of those of the voiceless. But this is not the appropriate time. This is not the appropriate environment to start adding costs to all these small businesses, which are hanging by a thread. And I assure you they are hanging by a thread. So thank you for the time. And then again, I appreciate all of our city council members that are staying late into the night to discuss this important issue. Mayor? I got a text from someone out from Darlene Jones, and she's also waiting on the line, but has not been answered by anyone to get her onto the line to speak to us. Susan, can we accommodate that? I'll reach out to our folks, our partners at CRL and see how we can help. if they can find her and everything. May I suggest you all continue your discussion and then at the end, maybe we can wrap up any other calls before we do a vote. - Point of order. Council Member Bergen. I understand that people have not, I mean, it's been a mess and I understand that people haven't been able to get in, that we didn't have enough screeners, lots of problems, but we already started the council discussion and now we're going to take more calls. I just don't think it's the right process. We just did it. Okay. I realize that's what I'm saying. I'm just saying that we had, We had a mess and then we started taking, you know, having council members talk and now we're taking public comment again. Okay, further discussion. Council Member Lawson. I'd like to speak. Mayor, thank you for allowing me to speak. You know, I do think that we need a minimum wage, and I'm supportive of that. When I talked to Council in full disclosure, Council Member Coombs, about a week and a half ago, I didn't have this proposal in front of me. I also thought that some things that I found out through the week and also today about I didn't know that she did not actually talk to um, the business community about this. And that's where I'm having some problems with the process and how this was done. Um, you know, just kind of just some of the, you know, if we're going to have part of this process to me is the interaction with the business community. I definitely think we can come up with some type of collaboration. Um, You know, a person like myself who's promoted civic engagement, who has, that's been her thing. And the way that this proposal has went through and the information that I found out just from talking to the BAB, the BAB chair and also the executive director of the Havana bid, that this wasn't going to come forward. And then all of a sudden it does come forward and Based on the email that I saw, which I had contacted Councilmember Coons over the weekend about rumors that I heard about this, but I actually have the physical email in front of me. I just don't think this is right. You know, we had an actual business person that said, I was copied on this proposal. He had a proposal to kind of go lower on the wage. I mean, he had an amendment. He had something. But because of the timeframe, he couldn't present it. And so, you know, looking at the process, looking at and going even beyond what everyone else is saying, for me, You know, it's just how this kind of went through. And I know she got pressure from the community. Her people have the pressure on me from the community. But the thing is, is where is the collaboration with the business community and also with just try to see if there could be something that could be good for the worker and also good for the business owner? And so I just, for me right now, just because of the way this went through, there was information that I have found out about that I didn't know prior to this because I'm thinking that this happened, but it didn't. I just can't support this. at this time. And, you know, I want to also caveat there was a narrative that was stated by some people on the phone stating that people that are wealthy have businesses. Well, I disagree with that because I know people who have struggled to get a business in Aurora. I go to them and I know what their struggles were. And I also know they're not rich people. They started from, some people, nothing and they built their businesses. So for me, this particular issue and how this came around, this is not something how I like to roll with. And I really think that I know for the intention, I do support a minimum wage, but I really don't think for me this process and not allowing the business community to have some input on this proposal itself, even though I know Council Member Coombs said they weren't gonna go for it anyway, regardless of that, They still should have the process, the community process. So I will not be voting. I will be voting no on this proposal. Further discussion? Council Member Berzins. Thank you. One more three. Oh, you haven't said that in a while. Shows we're all awake, right? First of all, I want to thank all the people that gave their evening to this go through the terrible process that we have. We've got to do something about this. It makes, made us look really bad in the community's eyes. But I was moved by some of the people that spoke. And I'll tell you, when my husband came here as an immigrant, he did not expect to have it easy. He expected to work hard. working several jobs and he did he worked several jobs and of course they were low paying jobs because he had broken English almost no English at all but he he did it and he he was proud of himself for working hard and learning English and going to school, learning a trade. He joined the union. He's a union electrician, and he's proud of that. And, you know, he never said anything about being a victim, and he couldn't get a better paying job. He went out and did it. He worked hard as an immigrant. I mean, he worked and worked and joined the union. And say, sometimes we live paycheck to paycheck. I came from a family that lived paycheck to paycheck. I know what all that's about. You know, all this business of, of, of, of saying anybody that has a business is rich. That's not true. We heard from Shofa. We heard about 80-some-year-old parents. It's something that we need to think about. And I'm not sure who's behind all these ordinances, all this coming back, because from the video, the first part of the video said they asked me to bring it back. I'm not sure who they is, but I just want to thank... The people that need a higher wage, I understand that because I've worked low-paying jobs myself. My husband has, too, as an immigrant. But I see the business side, too. And I think Councilmember Coombs and Marcano and the folks that are going to vote for this need to realize that when you pass these things, there's unintended consequences. If people lose their jobs because the businesses go under or they have to cut down on employees, they also lose their health insurance. They lose more than just their jobs. They lose, like I said, the health insurance and insurance. It's a tough life. So I think we need to help the businesses any way we can now through this COVID to stay in business and help them employ as many people as they can. And when it comes time to go through the ordinance, if we're going to do that tonight, I don't know. I do have some questions about certain things in the ordinance, but I just wanted to say what was on my heart for tonight. It's a tough way to make a living by working minimum wage, and we know that that's not a lifetime job. It's a stepping stone into something else. Like my husband, he delivered soap. He delivered coffee, you know, but he knew that was a stepping stone to something different. So I think we have to think about those things. Thank you. Do we have the public invited to be heard? The last one ready? Mayor, we don't have anybody else that has made it into the queue. There is no one else. Okay. Further discussion? Mayor? Councilmember Gardner? No, that was me. Thank you. So I want to thank everyone who called in tonight and shared their thoughts and stories with us. I think that it is important as policymakers that we not just consider the data, which does support the measure before us, but but also the real lived experiences of folks who quite frankly are ignored, taken advantage of, dismissed and betrayed on a regular basis. So to our workers who organized hard, who called us up and kept the pressure even on those of us who were already in support of this, I appreciate all the time and energy you put in. I know you all work ridiculous hours and have a lot of other responsibilities. So I wanna thank you all for being as engaged as you can be given the economic circumstances. To my colleagues, I just wanna say empathy doesn't pay bills. We have an opportunity before us to help 30,000 people. It doesn't sound like that's gonna happen anymore. So it is what it is. And I guess I'll just echo Council Member Gruber's comments. There is an election next year where we can make sure that this doesn't happen again. So thank you. - Further discussion? - Mayor. Council member Hiltz. Mayor Pro Tem. I just want to go address some things that I feel have been lost. In some of this, while there's definitely strong opinions on timing, the fact is, as Council Member Coombs and I, you know, at study session, I had said I support minimum wage increase, was wondering if there was a a way to address this in a different way, talked to her after that. And she really worked to address a lot of the concerns. It's, you know, we got this, there was so much organizing that this was 17 an hour, January 1st, where, you know, she really, I felt was listening to some some of the business issues and workers issues and said, okay, we're going to have something in line with Denver, still less. It's going to be incremental. We don't know the enforcement piece right away. So let's start with this and then build to it. So I just have to say that, you know, it is, it is different than, um, a lot of the concerns that I had with the first proposal. And I felt that she, um, address that with this new one I know that it's it's not going to be what it takes to to put us over but I needed to acknowledge that because there was so much information about this huge increase starting January 1st that that wasn't the case thanks further discussion mayor council member Murillo Oh, Council Member Hiltz, I'm sorry. I think we may have both done. Yeah, I think there was some misinformation. When this first came up, I said I supported raising the minimum wage at the local level. I just didn't have time to really process what 17 would look like, given that it was a last-minute amendment. And of course, we ran out of time on that discussion. And so I think we can We all have some frustrations, I think, with the process just overall. And that's separate from needing to do what we need to do to help the workers. And so I am going to support this. I got the information that I needed. I reached out to some other people. Folks, I reached out to the Bell, well, Mayor Pro Tem Johnson reached out to the Bell Policy Institute and I got some additional information from them and just was able to really get the information that I think was missing with the $17 amendment the last time around. And that was my hesitation then. And so I will support this today. Further discussion. I'm sorry. Council Member Mourinho. Council Member Moreno. Sorry. Thank you. Actually, yeah, I'm feeling kind of a heavy heart right now. I'm disappointed to... I don't know. I guess it just feels like the direction is that this isn't going to pass. And actually, before I keep going, I do want to thank everyone who chimed in. Even if you weren't in support, you know, it is really important for us to hear testimony. And I think particularly when we don't agree. So the fact that we kept making exceptions to let folks speak directly. regardless, you know, I think is very meaningful. So thank you everyone for chiming in. And now we're almost at midnight. So, but back to my original point, I am disappointed because it feels like, you know, you know, we've gone through such a hard time during COVID and what I worry about and what I struggled with or what I struggle with is, you know, we see lots of relief and aid coming for, and even through the city, supporting our small businesses. And, you know, by no means am I saying that that's making this easy, but I guess I'm not seeing where workers are prioritized, where they get that same support investment and their ability to weather the storm. I often see that it's our minimum wage workers who bear the brunt of impacts when it comes to big changes like this. And what I guess I'm most disappointed to see that We have gotten away from that prioritization and that value of people and workers and deserving to have a livable wage. It wasn't a livable wage before COVID and COVID has certainly made that worse. You know, I am frustrated to hear I guess the posturing around supporting wages when half the time I think we hear comments around supporting our police and fire departments and how their wages aren't high enough compared to Denver. But when we try to do the same with working wages, somehow that's not a valid argument. That is disappointing and it seems a little lopsided. So, yeah, I'm disappointed. And, you know, it's interesting because I also haven't heard any amendments, any proposed amendments in this conversation. A lot of framing a narrative that is embedded with false information, misinformation around how quickly the minimum wage would be increased is what I've heard. And And this is a classic tactic we've seen on this council before. When there's something controversial, people spread misinformation to confuse people. And it didn't really give us an opportunity to give this a conversation around merit. Instead, people, you know, that it feels kind of like an out. So we didn't get to... discuss the merit in depth yet again. And it is disappointing because I think in the end, our community loses out. You know, I've known council member Coons to, to be a staunch advocate, but also not unreasonable. And so I know that she had been working with groups to try to find something that was palatable. I mean, she was able to get additional colleagues to support this because of that and process. So, you know, I would have loved to see this move forward. I still would love to see it move forward so that we could talk about other ways that we mitigate impacts to our small businesses. We have our third round of small business grants coming out, right? So I have to say that... this alone is the only way that we are supporting our economy. It's just narrow and it doesn't take into the full scope of all the other ways that we are supporting small businesses and trying to kind of give balanced relief to our community. Further discussion. Mayor. Council Member Combs. So, you know, I just want to express some disappointment that our working people are going to have to wait a full year before they get any relief. And I think that's what we have to be talking about here is our businesses are getting relief. We have a program that's opening this week. That's going to give our businesses yet more relief. We're looking at the likelihood of additional relief. Everybody is doing everything they can to provide relief for our businesses. And that same level of relief is not coming to our people. And so... It just—I think that we're going to see more homelessness, so we should probably expect more calls about encampments because people are going to have no choice, and about people living in their cars, and about people parking their RVs in front of people's homes, as we've discussed. when talking about homeless shelters and homeless services. We talk about wanting to give people a hand up, not a handout, and that's what wages, equal, real, meaningful wages are, is a hand up. And so it's just really disappointing that we don't think that our workers should have a hand up now, that they should wait until the whole pandemic is over. Meanwhile, we can address any other issue that we want, any other issue, police reform, campaign finance reform. You know, those aren't controversial at all, but we're going to address those now. But we have to wait a full year for our workers to get any relief. - Further discussion. - Mayor, I just have a comment about a group who's been waiting to speak. - Council Member Moria. - Yeah, I don't know if anyone can address if there's any other calls that have come in, but there's a contact constituent who's been waiting and just wanted me to let the group know that they would still like to speak and haven't had that chance. - Susan, is anybody in the system? We do not have any callers in the queue. Okay. Further discussion then? Yes, Mayor. Council Member Varga. Yeah, I just want to say that we are actually helping a lot of our vulnerable. We just passed a $3.8 million grant package earlier this evening for a lot of different organizations, Second Chance Center for Aurora Warms the Night, the, you Day Resource Center, all those organizations are being helped with those monies. We also did do grants earlier in the year, but certainly we try to help as much as we can. And I just wanna point out that it's not true that we haven't helped. - Further discussion? Seeing none, the question before us is the adoption of item number 13 with a clerk please call the roll. - Yeah. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson? Yes. Council Member Berzin? No. Council Member Berzin? I said no. Council Member Lawson? I'm sorry, can you repeat that? No. Sorry, one more time. I said no. No, okay. I have you as a no vote. Council Member Hill? Yes. Council Member Hill? Yes. Council Member Morio? Yes. Council Member Bergen? No. Council Member Gruber? No. Council Member Marcano? Yes. Council Member Marcano? Yes. Thank you. Council Member Gardner? No. Council Member Coombs? Yes. Did you get that? It was a yes. Yes. Okay, I have you down as a yes. Thank you. Just to repeat, since it sounds like we're having some, or at least I'm having some issues here. I have Mayor Pro Tem Johnston, Council Member Coombs, Council Member Hiltz, Council Member Marcano, and Council Member Morio voting yes. All others are voting no. Mayor, we have a tie of five to five. Mayor votes no. Mayor votes no and the item fails. Over the clock now, please read the title of item number 14A under finalizing of ordinances. Mayor votes yes. Item 13E. This is ordinance, another ordinance for introduction is 2020-64, ordinance of the City Council of the City of Aurora, Colorado, amending Chapter 26, adding Article 3, referred to as a temporary cap on food, or sorry, a temporary cap on fees for food delivery and other related matters. Motion. Motion. - Mayor. - Council Member Gardner. - Motion to approve item 13E. - Moved by Council Member Gardner, seconded by... Seconded by... I'm sorry. Moved by Council Member Gardner, seconded by... I'll second. Seconded by Council Member Lawson to approve item number 13E, discussion. Yes, Mayor. Before we move into discussion, we do have one caller who is here for item 13E. Okay. Molly Steinman. Yes. - Thank you so much. And for the sake of time tonight, council, my name is Molly, I'm the manager of local government affairs with the Colorado Restaurant Association. Council member Gardner gave a great overview of this in the study session, but I do wanna really reaffirm his points that restauranteurs are faced with so many unknowns going into the fall and winter months, capacities are already on their way towards being more and more reduced. We anticipate that takeout and delivery is going to play a huge role for restaurants in the fall and winter months. By temporarily capping those fees, it can allow restauranteurs to enter into that market at a profitable rate, and it gives this local government the opportunity to extend the lifeline to restauranteurs and offer them immediate relief. And I encourage a yes vote. Okay. Further discussion? Mayor? Council Member Bergen. - Yes, and I said this during study session, I just wanna say it again on the record for the council meeting that normally I would not be in favor of interfering with the free market. However, this has been a pandemic that caused restrictions from the tri-county health, as well as the governor orders that ended up restricting capacity. So I will be supporting this. and because it has a expiration timeframe. So just wanted to say that. Further discussion. Mayor. Council Member Marcado. Thank you. There's a lot of stuff I really like about this ordinance. I think that, you know, helping our, let's say, lower volume businesses kind of be on more equal footing with businesses that have much larger representation and already have relationships with with these delivery services is important. I do also wanna point out the abject hypocrisy of using the government to aid businesses, but not aid workers. That said, it's not gonna stop me from supporting this because I think that it's important for council to actually help businesses and workers. I'm disappointed the last vote went the way it did, but I just wanted to show you that we can actually do both in the city. Thank you. - Further discussion? Seeing none, the question before us is the adoption of item number 13E with clerk please call the roll. Council Member Coombs? Yes. Council Member Coombs? Yes. Council Member Gardner? Yes. Council Member Bergen? Council Member Bergen? Sorry, couldn't find my cursor. I'm a yes. Council Member Berzin? Yes. Council Member Berzin? Yes. Council Member Hiltz? Yes. Sorry, Council Member Hiltz, I didn't catch your vote. Yes. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem? Yes. Okay, she's giving me a thumbs up. So I think that will let the record reflect that was a yes with a thumbs up. Yes. Can anyone else hear me? Yes. Okay. I can hear you now. Okay. Yes, yes, yes. Council Member Morio? Yes. Okay. Council Member Marcano? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Council Member Lawson? Yes. Council Member Lawson? Okay. I have all yeses on that, so that passes unanimously. All right. Will the clerk now please read the title of item number 14A? - 14A, this is a finalizing of an ordinance 2020-55 for an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Aurora Colorado amending chapter 14 pertaining to the animals and the Aurora Animal Services Division. - Motion. Council Member Hiltz. - Motion to approve 14A. - Moved by Council Member Hiltz, seconded by Council Member McCoon to approve item number 14A. Discussion? Seeing none, the question before us. Oh, Council Member Gruber. I'm going to vote no on this. I think that it is far improved than what we had before. I talked at our last meeting. It includes what are called community cats, which are colonies of cats that are working in the wild. They compete with owls. They compete with falcons. They compete with wildcats. foxes and coyotes that we have. I don't think it's a good idea to have an external set of predators working in the Colorado environment. So because of that, I will not support this. Further discussion. Seeing none, the question before us is the adoption of item number 14A. Will the clerk please call the roll? Council Member Lawson? Yes. Council Member Lawson? Yes. Okay. Council Member Marcano? No. Yes. Did that work? Council Member Marcano? Yes. What's going on? I don't know what's going on, but if you guys can turn on your mics, give it a moment. Okay. That would be great. Council Member Gruber? No. I didn't hear you either. The answer was no. Okay. Okay. - Council member Murillo. - Yes. - Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. - Yes. - Thank you. Council member Hild. - Yes. - Council member Berzin. - Yes. - Thank you. Council member Bergen. - Yes. - Council member Bergen. Are you kidding? I said yes. Okay. I got you now. Council Member Gardner? Yes. Yes. Yes. Council Member Coombs? Yes. Okay. I have all of you voting yes with the exception of Council Member Gruber who voted no. The item passes. Item 14B. This is an ordinance, 2020-56, an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Aurora, Colorado, amending section 2-72 for the city code pertaining to the authority to request procurements from certain state and federal programs. Mayor, move to approve. Second, Bergen. Mayor, you're on mute. I move by Council Member Gruber, seconded by Council Member Bergen, to approve item number 14B, discussion. Seeing none, would the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of item number 14B. Council Member Marcano. Yes. Council Member Lawson. Council Member Lawson. Yes. Yes. Council Member Gruber. Yes. Yes. Gruber, come. Yes, again. Thank you. Council Member Bergen. I'm going to do sign language. Yes. Council Member Bergen. Yes. Council Member Bergen. Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. Yes. Thank you. Council Member Morio. Yes. Yes. Council Member Gardner? Yes. Yes. I like the sign. Pick that up a little bit, Curtis. And Council Member Coon? Yes. Yes. And Council Member Hill? Yes. Yes. Thank you. I have that item passing unanimously as well. Well, the clerk now please read the title of item number 14C. 14C. This is an item 2020-57. An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Aurora, Colorado amending section 2-667F of the City Code pertaining to disqualified vendors or contractors. Contractors. Motion. Motion to approve 14C. It's been moved by Council Member Bergen, seconded by... Seconded by... Council Member Berzins to approve item number 14C, discussion? Seeing none, the question before us is the adoption of item number 14C. Will the clerk please call the roll? Council Member Berzins? Yes. Yes. Thank you. Council Member John, sorry, Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Council Member Morio? Yes. Council Member Gardner? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Yes. Council Member Bergen? Yes. Thank you for the sign. Council Member Lawson? Yes. Thank you. Council Member Marcano? Yes. Thank you. Council Member Hilt? Yes. Council Member Hilt? Yes. And Council Member Coombs? Yes. That was a yes. Okay, thank you. I'm trying to find you on my Brady Bunch screen. The item passes unanimously. The clerk now please read the title of item number 14D. This is 2020-58, consideration for an ordinance for the finalization of the City of Aurora, Colorado, repealing and replacing section 54-2 and 54-101 and 54-110 of the city's code relating to the financing of electoral campaigns. Motion. Mayor. Council Member Marconi. Move to approve 14D. Second. Council Member Marconi and seconded by Mayor Pro Tem. Adjourned to approve item number 14D. I will pass the virtual gavel to Council Member Lawson during discussion and vote on item number 14D. Is there any discussion on 14D? Yes. Okay, Mayor Kaufman. Yes, first of all, Council Member Marconi, a question to you. You said during the study session that the disclosure provisions were consistent with that in federal law. And so I went to the Federal Elections Commission website, and that certainly is not the case. And I quote, a disclaimer notice must contain the full name of the individual group, political committee, corporation, or labor organization that paid for the communication along with any abbreviated name it uses to identify itself. The disclaimer notice must also provide the payer's permanent street address, telephone number, or website address and must further state that the communication was not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee. And so what you do go beyond that and you have a provision where five of the individual donors have to be listed in every single ad. Can you... Tell me again why you thought this would consist of a federal law. Sure. So I actually didn't speak. You're right. It's actually Bulger has that provision on their literature and digital ads, not federal law. So I apologize for getting that part wrong, but it is consistent with something that's already done in the state. And I think you said federal and state. And so state is consistent with federal. And so that was inaccurate. Yeah. I just would like to point out that compelling speech is just as much of a First Amendment problem as censoring it. It's one thing to require people to disclose their donors. It's another to compel them to broadcast their donor names in every single communication, every single ad. Another point is, I don't know who's doing the typing there. Can we stop the typing or mute? Yeah. So don't you have some concern, I don't know if you're familiar with NAACP versus Alabama, with the harassment that those five names may take? If, say, it was an issue concerning the protection of abortion clinics or something involving gun control, then, in fact, it may affect more liberal donors, and—versus, you know, a conservative issue, like we just had, a vote—just that deeply affected small businesses, but small businesses always have issues before the city. And so it isn't the intent to intimidate them. Wow, that's quite the loaded question. Sorry. Thank you, Chair Lothan. No, that's quite the loaded question. Again, if your concern is that someone might try to sue over this, they can certainly sue over whatever they would like to, but this is not something that is going above and beyond. what is already in place. As I mentioned earlier, the original drafter of this, as well as the partners that we brought in, did their best to pull best practices from the state and other localities throughout the country to help craft the finer details of this. So no, I reject that comparison. Also, I do want to point out that someone apparently is in queue to speak on this issue. - We have some speakers on this issue. - Go forward with the speakers and then I'd like to return to my discussion. - Okay, so let's go to the speakers for the public invited to speak on this issue. My apologies, council members. Can you all hear me okay? Yes. Okay. I got some feedback earlier that was a little hard to hear. Our speaker tonight for this item is Randy Webb. This is the only speaker we currently have in the queue, and my apologies, Randy. I didn't see you on the queue sheet there, so we can move ahead whenever they get her set up. Okay, this is Randy Webb in Ward 4 of Aurora. I support my Councilmember Juan Marcano's and Mayor Pro Tem Nicole Johnson's robust and detailed campaign finance plan. and ask that the council vote yes to adopt it. It is well known that who contributes money to an election campaign, especially if it is a lot, most often influences policy and voting by candidates once they're elected. It is very important to know which candidates have the backing of special interest groups and corporations, excuse me, and corporations, and to lessen that influence in the people's government here in Aurora. A task force dealing with judging and resolving issues of violators of a plan should not be in any situation where they might be or possibly appear to be beholding to council members. So thankfully among its many good points, this plan includes an oversight process that is separate from city government because the city clerk would refer matters to a third party hearing officer retained by the city. Also state and federal rules generally set a floor on ethics. So it's time that Aurora aligns with that as well as aligning with other cities that have similar stronger ethical campaign finance reforms. I'm grateful that this has been such an important issue for both Johnston and Marcano since even before your elections and recognize Mayor Pro Tem Johnston's earlier efforts along this path. Also appreciated is the inclusion of the public. And as a citizen of Aurora, support from other council members for this plan has been very encouraging and I'm grateful to them also. I ask that each of you do the right thing and vote yes in support of item 14D for the Johnson-Marcano plan of reforming financing of electoral campaigns. Thank you. - Susan, is there any more individuals that are on the line that wants to speak to this matter? Susan? Susan? - Sorry, I muted myself. We do have one more that has joined us, Pat Dunn. - Okay. - Good morning, Mayor and Council Members. I'm very pleased to support the campaign finance reform resolution introduced by Mayor Pro Tem Nicole Johnson and Council Member Juan Marcano. I would like to thank them as well as other council members who work together to make very important changes on how election campaigns are financed in the city of Aurora. Way to go. Much appreciation. Thank you so much. Nighty night. - Anyone else, Susan, on the line that wants to speak to this matter? We do not have anybody else in the queue to speak for this matter. Okay, so let's go back to the discussion. I think Council Member Pro Tem Johnston. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Chair Lawson. I echo the sentiment that Council Member Marcano shared, and I just want to address, because I've heard it a couple of times, about us not recognizing non-law, or corporations as people or donors. And just that, you know, we heard from a lot of business owners today who are also residents and voters, and they are, they, you know, in the political process today. They are welcome to donate or not donate. There is nothing to preclude them from that. So I'm still very proud that we have that component in there. So just to clear up any confusion, all of All of the business owners that we heard are welcome to still participate. They have to follow the limits like the rest of us individuals, but we don't have anything preventing them as individuals and contributing to campaigns. Thanks. Wait, wait. Council Member Gruber wanted to speak. Council Member Gruber. There's a few things. I think the overall bill has problems. We talked about it at length before, but I wanted to go over a few. One of them is I think we are violating Citizens United. I think what this bill does is clearly makes a violation of that. I think we're going to be sued on that. And frankly, I wish that we could eliminate qualified immunity for the sake of this bill so that those responsible for us being sued would have to pay the lawyers fees once that lawsuit occurs and once the city loses it. I want to bring up another point, too. This has been billed or advertised as an Aurora bill for Aurorans, and that's not true at all. It's a progressive bill sponsored by organizations outside of Aurora that aren't from here. We've got a couple of examples. This is a page from One of the pages advertising for it is from the group up here, which is CleanSlateNowAction.org, which is out of Denver. It's got, and I can show that here because under the Clean Slate address, you know, I've got their address showing that they're a Denver organization. There's another one here, Colorado Common Cause, which is another Denver organization. Again, not an Aurora organization. There's another one for Strengthening Democracy Campaign Finance in Aurora. This is from... Colorado People's Action and the meeting was hosted by Colorado's Working Families Party. Again, organizations that have nothing to do with Aurora. And I guess it's not really a secret that this is very similar to the bill that was passed by Boulder and Lakewood and Denver. Here's another one, Aurora Campaign Finance Reform. This one is by the Progressive Democrats of America. And their organization is out of, this could be hard to see because it's on blue, but out of Grand Rapids, Michigan. So the point is, is that this isn't a bill for Aurora, you know, by Aurorans. It's a heavily Democratic, heavily progressive. It was funded by an organization called ActBlue. That's an organization set up by Democrats only to support Democrat organizations. Arnie, in case you're listening, it identifies the people who contribute to this specific bill, but at the same time, ActBlue itself is funded by an outside organization. And ActBlue, like I said, is only a Democrat supported group. So again, just think that there's a bill, a nonpartisan bill for a nonpartisan council in a nonpartisan city. I think it's absurd to even say that. So there are other major issues. I know I'm going to lose. I'm not going to bring them up and argue about them again. But this is not a nonpartisan bill. Mayor. - Just a moment. So Council Member Mercado and then would you like to respond and then Mayor Potem Johnston. - Thank you. Yes, I probably shouldn't dignify that with a response, but I just want the folks who are listening at home to know that was another example of a gish gallop, which is again, a string of BS uninterrupted that makes it difficult to address every point by point. So PDA is probably based out of Grand Rapids, I suppose. They have chapters all over the country. Big surprise. ActBlue is like PayPal. They process payments. So to say that ActBlue is funding this is beyond preposterous. Dale Nichols wrote the damn bill. Like, I had this in my hands in my office in January. This actually came from here. He just worked for the Secretary of State. This is something that he is exceptionally well-versed in and is a passion of his. So I really need you to stop lying at some point, Dave. Honest to God, man. I'm being as polite as I can. Councilmember Gruber, let me hear a pro tem Johnston response, and then I'll have you do a rebuttal about it. Thank you. Thank you, Chair Lawson. I just want to say for the organizations that were listed, again, this was initiated by an Aurora constituent. And the organizations that we're supporting, they are statewide organizations. I mean, we regularly say Denver Metro that encompasses this whole area. So I just because they might, you know, be nearby. They definitely have members in Aurora. And I just want to say that this still is nonpartisan. This is not political. I have had members of the business community saying, thank goodness. They've had council members that just expect to be able to have this quid pro quo and that they have to pay to play. And I And I have conservative business members who have been welcoming that we actually are going to have some kind of standard so they just don't have to fork over thousands and thousands of dollars. So this is not a progressive thing. I find people from all different political outlooks wanting this reform. Thank you. Council Member Gruber, and then I want to give Council Member Gardner after this, and then Mayor, you'll come after him. Let's go. Council Member Gruber. Again, you've heard the words. You've heard the talk. You've heard the fact that our bill is going to be... nearly identical to Boulder and Denver and Lakewood. While at the same time hearing, "No, this is only an Aurora bill made for Aurora, written for Aurora, unique to Aurora, saving Aurora." I just showed you many of the pages of the organizations that have sponsored this. There have been emails going out. There's been a bunch of other information processed by the not by the Democratic Party, but by Democratic leaning organizations and progressive leaning organizations. This is certainly a partisan bill. And finally, as far as ActBlue, ActBlue is, in fact, a payment system. It's not similar to PayPal because PayPal, anybody can use it. ActBlue is only used and you have to go through an approval process where ActBlue has to approve that the thing you're bringing forward is, in fact, a democratic or a progressive initiative. And then based on it being an initiative, they will allow you to collect money. It is not for anything conservative. It is not for anything that is not other than progressive. Finally, ActBlue itself is funded by an outside organization. ActBlue will show you who's contributed to a particular system like this or a particular item like this, but ActBlue itself is using dark money. And again, it's purely democratic and progressive. It is not nonpartisan. - Let me let Council Member Gardner speak. He's been waiting and then you can go. Council Member Gardner. - Thanks. Yeah, I don't wanna get into the conversation about all the different outside groups. I will point out, you know, earlier in the year, there was a council member that used an Aurora logo and some communication with the public and these groups have done the same thing. So I think out of consistency sake, we should point out that that probably wasn't appropriate. You know, My biggest problem with this is the drafters decided to pick and choose what they liked at the state level, what they liked at the federal level. A Apparently now there's a requirement, not now, it's been there the whole time, but a requirement to list your top five donors on all your advertisements. And I think that's really my problem is we've created something much more complicated than the state level, than even the federal level that have fancy campaign finance attorneys. And I just, I don't understand that. You know, in the interest of transparency, I am going to support this, but I will say, you know, I'm sure as hell glad I don't have to run next year and figure out how on every single advertisement I have to fit the names of my top five donors because that's ridiculous. So I hope that in the future we have a new council where we can clean this up and make it something that fits Aurora a little bit better rather than what fits whatever. Councilmember Mercado, I'm going to let you respond and then I'm going to have Mayor Kaufman. We do have another speaker that's in the queue. So let's let you speak next. A clean slate, I'm sorry, not a clean slate, now action. Common Cause was actually founded by Republicans, if it matters at all. Thanks. Okay. Mayor Kaufman? Yes. First, I want to that the issue in independent expenditures of listing the five names on every ad plus all the other disclosure requirements on there is just an owner's requirement that eats into a 30-second ad to make it ineffectual. So I would like to remove that section from the bill. And unfortunately, I don't have my notes in front of me. But that section that has the five-person requirement, disclosure requirement on independent expenditures, I'd like to offer a motion to remove that, strike that from the bill. So we have a motion on the floor. Second. Okay. Can we have discussion on that amendment? Yes. Yeah, I just absolutely think that this is an owner's requirement, and it's done solely for the purpose of having a chilling effect on speech. Okay, do we have an amendment on the floor? Is there any discussion? Council Member Bergen? Yes, so, well, I have one on this one, but then I have another question. Okay. So on the amendment... This one. Yes. Listing the five top donors. Does that include listing unions? Mm-hmm. So if the unions were... Yes. Donating... Yes. Absolutely. Well, it's the five individuals. Council Member Mercado, Mayor Potem, do you want to respond to that? Yep. Hang on. I have to search through. Okay. I'm looking at, too. I thought it was donors, but... I thought it was this one. Okay. So while you're all looking, donors meaning individuals or donors meaning? Individuals. Organizations. Just individuals, okay. Individuals. Sorry, point of clarification, Council Member Lawson. Yes, Council Member Combs. So... Don't the small donor committees still, you have to have their list of all their donors? So wouldn't it still be with that individuals that you would have to list, not the small donor committees? I don't know. If I can respond to that. - Mayor Kaufman. - Yeah, this is a disclosure requirement that's on, has to be on, not simply the report that you would file with a clerk, but on every single communications. And that's different, that's unique by an independent expenditure. - Council Member Mercado? - Yeah, sorry, I'm still searching through. Do you have that section for me, Council Member Bergen? You would ask me that. I had it at study session. Yep. Sorry, I don't. Okay. Well, I will keep digging, but I just want to reiterate that that requirement is not new. In fact, I saw an ad that I somehow got out of Boulder that was a digital ad on Facebook that displayed the, I think, the candidate's name, what they were running for, and it had a little stamp where it just basically says paid for by the however many folks. It's not a difficult thing to do. Okay. - Let's see here. - Marpotem Johnston. - I just wanna add while we're doing this, looking this up, is, you know, we had one Aurora, one Aurora do a hit piece on Councilmember Lawson, I believe Coombs, Marcano, and the public deserves to know where that's coming from. including if it's, you know, other people who are running, what that's from. So the intent behind this, again, is that transparency that the public needs to know. And, you know, most of us, say nine out of 10 or 10 out of 11, don't have the privilege of knowing that it runs into a commercial because we weren't able to have a TV commercial. So, I mean, we are obviously evolving with these campaigns, but we don't want to lose sight. Even if there's TV commercials and more sophistication with some of those big donors, that voters don't get to know who's behind that. Council Member Bergen? Okay, so this is the five, so five individual donors have to be listed on whether it's a TV commercial or an actual direct mail piece. And radio too. And radio. So, I mean, I don't even know how that fits on a page. Like it's hard enough trying to get anything on a direct mail piece. So you're going to end up doing larger pieces that cost more money. And what is... I mean, you already disclosed your donors. So anybody can look up who has donated to your campaign. And we've added a million different reporting dates now. So I don't understand why you have to do it on that as well as disclose it in a report. I mean, if somebody wants to know who your top donors are, look up the report. Council Member Hiltz? Thank you. I mean, if we want to advertise where people can look up their top donors, maybe we should require to have every mail piece, radio piece, and TV piece give instructions on where to find all of the donors. I guess I just, I don't understand. AuroraGov.org. I just don't understand that. The controversy around disclosing where our money comes from when we're running. And that I just it baffles me that this is something that is supposed to be such a big, a big secret. And in the effort, not just transparency to the voters so that they know what's coming, but just as basic transparency. common sense, you know, providing that information just seems so easy. This is why people hate politics, because people lie and people make things up and go on streamings of rants of things and don't want to tell people where their money comes from. So this is why we have a campaign finance ordinance coming forward to begin with. So I just, it's inconvenient. It's not fun. It might mean we have to put something on a mailer. You know what? Medicines can put whole disclaimers of every single side effect on every piece of their stuff, but we can't put, you know, five. five things on a mailer. I'm just, it's late and I don't understand why this is such a controversy. I did find the page number. I did as well. Okay, let's have some order. Council Member Berthens had her hand up. So, Council Member Berthens. Thank you. Will this include yard signs too? It's going to be flyers, radio, TV, blah, blah, blah. It has to be yard signs too. I'd like to respond to that. Council Member Mercado, Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. But if you, but if you, if for me, I, well, for a ward, you only have $400. So I could have $100, $400 donations. So how do I choose five out of 100 people? - A bunch of folks who are maxed out, you're required to disclose five. So based off the language, you would disclose five. I did find the earlier section. It does say persons, I believe that was intended to say donors. So if that, I would consider that a friendly amendment, I think if, I'm here for Tim Johnson. - Yes, and I'm reading this. So I'm looking at page 980 of the backup, section 54-104.5, is that the five-person rule was connected to independent expenditures or electionary communication. Independent expenditures. Yeah, independent expenditures. Okay, Councilmember Bergen, you had a question, and then we're going to give that to Mayor Steele. Friendly of his amendment to vote on that and then it looks like we have another friend From councilmember Marcano so councilmember Bergen, okay, so I was actually gonna make the same point that councilmember persons made okay, we're since we're topped out at $400 where it used to be unlimited amounts of donations of contributions and I don't see how you do that either. So if you have a whole bunch of $400 donors put on your advertisements, like you got a single, so you're singling out five, but you could have had 20 people the same exact amount. So, but they're have their name out to the world on on a piece of advertisement. Council Member Mercado. Thank you, Chair Lawson. Yes, I do want to point out that that was actually just for IECs or other kinds of electioneering committees, not candidate committees specifically. So your signs could still say, you know, paid for by Bergen for or I think that was your committee name, if I'm not mistaken. So. It was last for Aurora, but yes. And then my other point was, you know, I'm good for campaign finance. The reason this one, I did support Mayor Kaufman's last time, and it failed. This one is so complicated. We just spent 15 minutes trying to look up what page it was on to clarify things, and I just think it's really too complicated. It's too many pages too complex for anyone that is going to be running for office to have to try to figure out what all the rules mean and what they're supposed to do and hopefully not get fined. But I want to make a statement that was something that was said earlier about quid pro quo and so forth when you get donations from corporations or businesses. I had a lot of donations from businesses because they saw me as a probably a pro-business person, you know, pro-small business person. And that was their right to give me money. It was all disclosed. It's all on my contribution reports. And I'll tell you what, I have never, ever gotten a favor for a donation. If someone wants to donate to me, good for them. I don't owe them a single thing. I don't owe them a vote. And I have never, ever sold my soul for a vote. Thank you, Council Member Bergen. Thank you, Council Member Bergen. Mayor Pro Tim Johnston. I think... I still maintain that these are some conservative business owners who have said that to me. I've accepted. I had some business owners gave me. I am not, and I know that you have integrity, Council Member Bergen, so I am not saying it to you. I'm just saying the comment that these folks made to me is they felt like they had to give a lot of money in the Aurora races to be relevant. I'm not saying... I'm just repeating what their sentiment was. I'm not saying what it meant at the other end. And certainly I am not saying that that applied to you. But those were more conservative-leaning business owners. And they're like, we would love to have some restrictions like other areas so we don't have to feel like we have to donate as much. And I do, I know, yes, it took us a few minutes to look this up. But we have the answer in here. It just applies to independent expenditure committees. where right now it's this dark area when these hit pieces come off and people cannot find out who is behind one Aurora or who is behind that. When we had a question, it may take us a few minutes, but the answer is in here. We have a question on our current ordinance. It's crickets because it doesn't even identify half of the questions that candidates or the public wants to know. Okay. Okay. We have a motion on the floor. We have an amendment on the floor. Mayor Kaufman, Mayor Kaufman, can you repeat it again? Sure. We had a discussion on it. It is to strike the provision that requires... in an independent expenditure that five of the top donors for that particular individual expenditure be listed by name in every particular ad. And I think that that is designed to have a chilling effect on speech. It is an onerous requirement. And so I moved and it's been seconded to strike that provision. Okay, we had a discussion. Is there any more discussion on this before we call for the vote? Okay, seeing none, Susan, can we call for the vote on Mayor Kaufman's amendment? Council Member Coombs? No. Council Member Coombs? No. No. No. Thank you. Council Member Bergen? Yes. Thank you. Council Member Morio? No. Council Member Morio? No. Thank you. Council Member Lawson? No. No. Council Member Marcano? No. Council Member Marcano? No. No, no, no, no, no. Thank you. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Thank you. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? No. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? No. Council Member Hilt? I'm going to count to three. Okay. That is not coming through for me. No. It did. Yes. Thank you for the headlock. Council Member Gardner. Yes. And Mayor, as an amendment, you are allowed to vote. Yes. Susan, can you read the vote count, please? Yes. So I have Mayor... So, Coffman, Councilmember Bergen, Councilmember Berthens, Councilmembers Gardner and Gruber all voting yes. So the item pass it, or sorry, it fails five to six. Thank you. We have another amendment on the floor. Council, Council Member Mercano, can you repeat that? So we can vote on that. So Mayor Pretend Johnston, I think that was, I just want to bring you in since we're co-sponsors. That was on Section B, changing five persons to five donors, basically, so that it would capture artificial persons as well. I think someone pointed that out for consistency. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. I am I'm good with that, but I just want to go back before, maybe I heard five, six and names off, but is the mayor allowed, I know the mayor can't vote on an ordinance, but can the mayor vote on amendments of the ordinance? I just want to make sure. On procedural motions, this is Dan Brasman, on procedural motions, such as an amendment, the mayor may vote. Okay, thank you. And yes, Council Member Marcano for consistency. Please. All right, great. Is there any further discussion on the Marcano and Johnston amendment? Do you get to explain that, what it does? I'm not clear. Marcano or Tim Johnston? Sure. So currently, the way it is worded, Mayor, it says persons. And we were, I believe you brought this up, so we suggested changing to donors, which I thought was what you had said, so that it would apply to both natural and artificial persons without any kind of opaqueness there. I mean, so explain. Oh, and that's with regards to the same section that we were just talking about, 54-104-5, I believe, where you have to disclose the top five donors now as opposed to persons, if that makes sense. So you're saying if it's SEIU as opposed to the individual? Yeah, if it's SEIU or you or me or whoever, yeah, sure. Okay. Is there any further discussion on the Marcano and Mayor Pro Tem Johnston amendment? Council Member Bersens. Thank you. I don't understand. I don't understand exactly the difference. What are we voting on? It's not The ad just wouldn't say paid for by one Aurora. It would say paid for by Comcast, Waste Management, and name five different, it could name five different companies. Sure. So your rule of only person doesn't, Doesn't hold for these. No, it's donors. So it could be you and I as well if we were also big donors to the same. Does that make sense? That's the importance of changing persons to donors because then it would capture whoever gave, whether it's an artificial person or a natural person. So, Marcia, the thing is that we can't prevent independent expenditure committees from taking money from companies. So that's why it could end up being companies in that case, because we have no ability to regulate that. Okay, but they would be the ones doing the printing. They would be the ones placing the ads, because we don't know what they do. Correct? No one knew who one Aurora was and they were they were mailing and printing. So how are we supposed to know that's on them to print it? Okay. Any response from Council Member McConnell, Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Okay. I wonder if I could offer a friendly amendment? Take. Mayor Kaufman. To reduce the number from five to three, which was the original draft. In fact, earlier in the day that this ordinance was introduced. Mayor Kaufman has a friendly amendment. Can we have discussion on, well, I guess we need to probably call the vote on that. Oh, it's a question of whether they accept. I'm sorry. It's getting late. Council Member Marcano and Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. There's a friendly amendment from Mayor Kaufman. - I'd prefer to keep it to five, honestly. I think that the more readily information we can make for folks, the better. That's the intent, right? So. - Okay. Council Member Bergen, did you have your hand up? Okay. Okay, so we have an amendment on the floor. So we're going to go with Councilmember Johnston, Mayor Pro Tem Johnson's and Councilmember Marcano's amendment. And to Councilmember Marcano, you might have to reread it for me. I'm sorry, I don't have it written down. No, that's okay. And I want to give props to Dave Lathers, who is... keeping track of all of this for us. So the amendments would be to change persons in 54, 104, 5 to donors and that would impact section B and then section 1 and 2. So can we call for the vote? Councilmember Marcano? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Councilmember Coombs? Yes. Councilmember Bergen? Councilmember Morio? Yes. Councilmember Lawson? Yes. Did you say Hiltz? Yes. Yes. Councilmember Berzins? No. Councilmember Gardner? No. Councilmember Gruber? No. And Mayor Kaufman? No. The amendment passes six to four. Okay. I have an amendment on the floor. Okay. Mayor Kaufman. I'd like to move that the five be reduced to three. Is there a second? Second. Is there a second? Second. Okay. Council Member Gruber. Discussion? Discussion? I think five is for the purposes of, again, having a chilling effect on the First Amendment. Is there any further discussion? Yes. Council Member Bergen. I'm falling asleep. What are we doing? - The mayor just proposed an amendment on the floor. Mayor Kaufman, can you repeat it for mayor? - Reducing the number of donors that have to be disclosed on every single ad from five to three. - Okay, is there any further discussion? - On the independent expenditures. - Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. - Thank you. Again, this is independent expenditures. And if there's a concern of transparency and there may be a chilling effect because some people don't want others to know that they're doing this, that's a problem. I want to err on the side of, hey, this is what we're doing. So again, this isn't every single type type of advertising that the candidate's doing. These are the, this is the independent expenditure. And a lot of times it isn't three, it is five groups or more that are pooling their resources together to try to make a big impact on a campaign. And I believe the public needs to know who that is. Further discussion. Okay. Seeing none, can we call the vote on Eric Kaufman's amendment? Okay. - Yes, some clarification we had, did the mayor make the motion and who was the second? - It was Council Member Gruber. - Thank you. Council Member Lawson? - No. - Council Member Helps? - No. - Council Member Coombs? - No. - Council Member Berzins? - Yes. - Council Member Bergen? Yes. Council member Gruber? Yes. Council member Marcano? No. Council member Gardner? No. Council member, sorry, Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? No. Mayor Kaufman? Yes. Member Morillo? No. amendment fails four to seven I'm sorry that I don't have my notes with me but there's the section that I call the we don't want mayor Kaufman involved in my race and so there is a provision in the bill it says that a candidate cannot have roles in other campaigns or even issue committees, and they define a candidate so broadly as having an active campaign committee, which I have all the time, because it has a balance in it, and I do have monthly expenditures out of it. even though I haven't announced in a long time away from making the decision about running again. But that precludes me from being involved in other campaigns and issue committees, and that is really a First Amendment violation. Council Member McConnell, Mayor Potem Johnson, would you like to respond, or anyone else? Yeah, again, the intent of that section is to avoid the appearance of impropriety and to make it more difficult to coordinate in violation of laws. So it's not a chilling effect on the First Amendment. Frankly, repeating that doesn't make it that. Again, we've used folks who are very experienced in this realm. They would absolutely flag that. So I feel confident that that's not the case. Council Member Gruber. I just point out those. Well, let me ask, were those the city attorneys that were so expert on that? Or are they the progressive attorneys with that are the underlying sponsors of this bill? Yeah, the attorneys hired by the conservative outfit that is trying to chase corruption out of our elections nationwide. I hear you say conservative, but simply because you say something does not make it true. No, no. May I respond? Okay. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. Yes, we used both our city attorney's office as well as Common Cause that had the subject matter expertise in this area. So we used both and consulted with both and they were both consistent. Mayor Kaufman. Where else? What other jurisdiction has this provision in it? Can somebody answer that? Mayor Potem, what other jurisdiction has this provision? At one in the morning. Yeah, I would not know offhand either. Yeah. I think it is unique to this particular campaign finance reform, and I believe that it targets me directly and it was written for that very purpose. Mayor Potem Johnston. This is a best practice. I don't think it is right. And I don't think our voters are gonna get right that we have our hands in many different areas with issue committees, potentially independent expenditure committees running races. So this again, we've said from the beginning, Council Member Marcano and I have said, this is the strongest in the state of Colorado. Probably one of the strongest in the country. And we're not shying away from that. So there are going to be some areas that we are really tightening down for that reason. Like the First Amendment. You're diving down on the First Amendment. We've talked about chilling effect on First Amendment. What's the real root of it is chilling effect on dark money. What you're saying is that I can't be involved even in an issue committee for something that is going to be before the voters, even in a year that I'm not really technically running simply because I have an active campaign account. I'm may I respond? Thank you. I'm saying it's inappropriate to be in the different. There should not be this coordination between campaigns. And we're trying to simplify for the voters so they know the candidates running what they're doing. And we put that rule in to address that. Yeah. Kaufman. Well, it's just so it's it's speech you don't like versus speech you like. I think that's a central issue. And that's where it's a it's a it's just a direct assault on the First Amendment. And I get that you don't care about that. I get that. OK. OK. So we have a motion on the floor. We have a motion on the floor. Mayor Kaufman, can I get a second for the motion? I don't think we get that. I apologize. Second. Okay, Council Member Gruber seconded Mayor Kaufman's motion. We had some discussion. Council Member Bergen. I think I found the part in the 29 pages. So you cannot be a treasurer on somebody else's political campaign if you are ever running or just in the same cycle. Mayor Pro Tem Johnson, Council Member Marcano. Would you care to respond? Same cycle. No. No, that's what I was wondering. Wait a minute. Mayor Kaufman, just a moment. Sure. Mayor Potem Johnston? Yes. Are you speaking? I'm looking at the page number. I apologize. I apologize. I'm tired. Okay. Council Member Gruber, did you have your hand up while they're looking at the page? I was agreeing with the mayor. The fact is that if you have a campaign account, and frankly, I think everybody who's run has a campaign account and we're responsible for our campaign account. We all just had to do our annual finance work. which would mean my interpretation of that law or of the new law would be that none of us can participate in any other issue campaigns ever as long as we have or managing our own campaign account. Okay, we have two things going. We have Mayor Kaufman's amendment and then we have a question from Council Member Bergen that we're trying to look up the information. So while you guys are looking at the information on that, do we have any other discussion on Mayor Kaufman's amendment? Council Member Bergeson. Thank you. I have a question so that I understand what this is. If you have a campaign account, which we all do sitting around here, is it if you have a campaign account or if you're a candidate that you cannot participate in... Anything else that's on the ballot, like 115 on this ballot, late-term abortion? Are you saying that I cannot vote? donate to 115 or I can't write an op-ed or how far does this go? I mean, is it the campaign account first or is it if I'm a candidate? Yeah, and the second part of my question is just how far does this go? - Council Member Marcano and Mayor Pro Tem Johnson, it looks like you have two questions here. - Yes, so you can't be playing into simultaneous municipal campaigns, 'cause I want to stress that this applies to the city of Aurora, not to the state and those kinds of things. If you wanna do that to the best of the intent and also my understanding of the ordinance, it does not preclude that. What was the second question? The second question was regarding Council Member Bergen's question about the treasurer, and I think you guys were looking that information up for her to address her question. Council Member Bergen, do you want to repeat it? If you could serve on two different campaign committees. No, again, I think that's prohibited actually under the same clause, if I'm not mistaken. But during the same exact election cycle or... For example, if I'm running, if when I ran in 2019, then, and I have my own campaign going, I could not serve as treasurer on someone else's at-large race, for example, right? But then in 2021, I'm not running. Am I able to be a treasurer for somebody? I'm just using that as an example. It's not. Sure. I'm going to tag Dave Lathers in here. Dave, can you address Council Member Bergen's question, please? Yes, to begin, let's get all the council members oriented. We would be looking, I believe, if I'm following the discussion correctly, at new section 54-103. That appears on the very bottom of page 12 of the ordinance or 975 of the backup and the top of page 13. The operative clause here is in subsection A. It says a candidate might not organize, maintain, or control the service of an officer or treasurer of a political committee or issue committee. Is that the provision that we're discussing? Yes. But it says at any time. It does say... more than one candidate committee at any time. That to me would read inclusive of all issues if you have a current candidate committee as well. Whether that is what was meant or whether you have identified an issue, I leave to the council member and the mayor pro tem to make that a point. It is potentially open to interpretation as I read it and could be clarified potentially. Council Member Gruber. So Dave, if I could go a little bit deeper, there was nothing in there about whether you're participating in a municipal or state or federal election. Did you, I didn't hear that. Did you see that? No, it does not go into that depth currently. That would imply, because it's an encompassing statement as opposed to a limiting statement, it would imply that it's not restricted to municipal because there's no restrictive language. So it says that a candidate cannot participate, period. So to go back to Council Member Bersin's question about while she has a candidate committee, can she participate in a state election issue? Based on what you read, the answer is no. It is broadly inclusive as it is currently written. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. However, in the beginning of the ordinance, we're saying that this is applying to municipal city of Aurora municipal elections. Indeed, and I think that presumption went throughout the drafting of this. So I think that presumption is in there, but does the language clarify that? It does not. Could it be more clear? Certainly it could. Funny to me that a 27-page ordinance can yet be more clear through additional language. May I respond? Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? My concern is if we put in that section municipal, then we're going to have to do that throughout. I would like the baseline to be, since it says in the beginning of the ordinance, that this is the city of Aurora municipal election code and that we don't have to go through each section. As a reminder, it's just municipal. This is, I mean, you know, this is, This is it. And we say it in the beginning and it applies throughout. Well, and one nice helpful matter of this is in interpreting any ordinance, one of the things we would do is we would look at the legislative history of this. And by having this discussion, that helps clarify that that was your intent. If we were to defend this in court and we pulled up a tape of this particular meeting, we could show that this was the discussion and that's what was voted on. So that does help clarify. Rarely do we get to the point of drilling down to legislative history on matters, but that is something that lawyers want to do because we have no lives. Council Member Bergens? Let's face it, it is one on nine in the morning. Thank you. Council Member Bergens? Thank you. To me, this just shows this is way too much stuff in here. If the two people that brought this forward don't even know the answers, and our wonderful Dave Lathers is... going, huh? That tells me that this is way too much in here. But I wanted to ask, since you can't help another campaign, that means that we can't help another candidate in their campaign either. Isn't that right? I mean, we can't go, we can't be a threat for them. We can't go give a campaign speech for them. We can't go put on our Facebook that Sally Smith is our candidate. We should vote for her. We can't go driving them around to get campaign donations. We just kind of have to sit on our hands since we have a campaign account. And it's a municipal thing now out here. No, the way this is written, it says specifically you cannot organize, maintain, control, or serve as an officer or treasurer for a political committee or issue committee. And then there's another section here that basically says anything in this section cannot be construed to limit the First Amendment activities of a candidate. So that is not the correct interpretation of that section. I'm hearing that it is. You're going to get a lot of business, Dave. Tim Johnston? My council member literally read about can't be a treasurer or officer, and he literally read that you still have the First Amendment rights and can communicate. So I... He answered the question. I feel like that's clearly in there. I didn't hear it that way, but, I mean, let's move on. Okay. Council Member Bergen, did you have an additional question? I saw your hand up. Yeah, I was just wondering about whether you could combine resources for, I guess, for distributing literature, walking, on different campaigns if you're running. Did you guys answer that? I'm like... Yeah, sorry. No, it's like Council Member Bergen. I got you. Yeah, that is, again, protected in part of the ordinance. It specifically states that nothing in here can be interpreted to basically chill our own speech or opinions or advocacy. It's mostly around the campaign finance portion of it, right? So... - Okay, sorry, two more. Mayor Kaufman. - I just renew my motion to strike that section. - Okay, so we have, is there a second on Mayor Kaufman's motion? - I think there was. - There was, I didn't. - Okay, Council Member Gruber, sorry. So we have a motion on the floor to strike that section. Is there any more discussion on this amendment? Okay, seeing none, can we call the vote? - Mayor Kaufman. - Yes. Council Member Marcano? No. Council Member Morillo? No. Council Member Berzins? Yes. Council Member Hiltz? No. Council Member Gardner? Yes. Council Member Bergen? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? No. Council Member Lawson? No. - And Council Member Coombs. - No. - Mayor Pro Tem Johnston, can you repeat your vote for me? - No. - Thank you. - And can you read the vote count please, Susan? - So I have the item failing with a vote of five to six and I have Council Members Murillo, Marcano, Lawson, Hiltz, Coombs, and Mayor Pro Tem Johnston all voting no. Is there any more amendments? Okay, if not, let's vote on 14. Or can I get a motion on 14? And I think we already did that, right? We did. My apologies. Okay, a vote. Can we get a vote on 14? Yes. Councilmember Mario? Yes. Councilmember Coombs? Yes. Councilmember Bergen? No. Councilmember Gruber? No. Chair Portem-Johnston? Yes. Councilmember Lawson? Yes. Councilmember Berzins? No. Councilmember Hiltz? Yes. Councilmember Marcano? Yes. Councilmember Gardner? Yes. That item passes with three no votes from Councilmember Gruber. Thank you, Chancellor. For the record, Lather says in the chat, for the record, the vote is on 14D as amended. Sorry, I should have stated that. So do we need to redo the vote then, since I didn't say as amended? Possibly. - You're fine. - Okay, thank you. - Okay. - Okay, I will hand the virtual gavel back over to you, Mayor Coffman. - Thank you, Council Member Lawson. - I see no planning members under planning matters under 15, no annexations under 16, 17 reconsiderations and call-ups. - Mayor Kaufman, this is Council Member Murillo. Can I just check with the city clerk on any public invited to be heard? We had tried to queue something up after the last item. We do have one who is wanting to speak item that we have already heard this evening. So it would be up to the mayor, if you are mayor and council, if you all wanted to hear that at this time, we could certainly hear it in public and be heard at the end as well. I'm just requesting that they speak now. They've been on the line for hours. They were on the public listen line that was posted erroneously online, but it was the comment line. So they've been waiting for hours trying to say something. I don't think they, I'm surprised they lasted this long. They probably won't until the public invited to be heard. So this is like a quick three minutes. Any objections? Very well. One last public invited to be heard. Well, there could be some at the end of the meeting. Go ahead. We will go ahead with this caller. It is... I'm still here. Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you. All right, that's great. Well... Well, I feel sorry for you all, first and foremost. It's 1.18 a.m. I'm sorry that you all have to wait this long to do the business that you all do. First and foremost, my name is Yoel Kiranigarumetka Reda. I am a resident of Aurora. Zip code 80010. I currently serve as an executive director at a nonprofit called Street Fraternity in the East Colfax neighborhood of Denver, which is a border of Aurora and Denver. And as I'm sure most of you are well aware of, it's the most violent and highest crime in the Rocky Mountain region. As you know, maybe you do know, I have met some of you all. I work with 14 to 25-year-olds for whom the main pathways of education to college and or career does not work out for. The reason for my call today is The minimum wage in Colorado does not work out for those in the lowest socioeconomic ladder trying their best to participate in this economy, this market, and democracy of Aurora, Colorado, and this nation. First, you know, there was a public comment from Mark Shaker over at Stanley. I would like to remind him of Stanley Manifesto. Many, many years have passed. What about that manifesto? This is a time, Mark. No need to wait. We all understand that we are going through coronavirus with many extreme measures that every business, small business, large business has to take. Now, our ask, and this is gradual. So data is what everybody loves right now. So here you go. Minimum wage in Colorado is about $12. Is it not? So if you make $12, you are making $24,960 a year. Now, let's take out the taxes. That's about $19,968 that you make in a year. Now, let's look at average rent in Colorado, the neighborhoods that you all represent. Okay. Looking at the neighborhoods that you all represent, if you look at North Aurora, it's about $1,067. That's the minimum. The most that you get, and that's for one bedroom. That's for one bedroom, mind you. And if you're in Village East, and if you represent Village East, whichever councilwoman or councilman, that's about $1,294. Please conclude your comments. But my comment is this, my comment is this, that we know that this is gradual. My comment is this, that I myself will hold you all accountable, that the community will hold you all accountable. As Councilwoman Coombs said earlier today, there will be more homelessness. As Councilman Mercana said earlier today and brought up, Councilwoman Marsha said earlier today, sharing about her husband who is an immigrant, that spoke English as a second language. Please conclude your comments. My comment is this. Let me get to my comments. I do have my three minutes. You've exceeded the three minutes. You're almost to four. Let me speak. Let me speak. I am a resident of Aurora. Let me speak my piece. Board of order. As Councilwoman Lawson said earlier today, and she's trying to balance between the two groups, she needs to be on the right side of history on the curve of history. Sir, please conclude your comments. All right, let me get to my comment then. Oh, come on. We are consistently told to meet the market. Now, this is about life and death for some of those that I work with, okay? Okay. My comment was exactly that and I keep getting interrupted. I won't even speak my piece in three minutes and I keep getting interrupted. Sir, you're almost to five minutes. So we need to conclude the comments. Thank you. Go ahead. Okay, Mayor, we are on to item 7A. Clerk, please read the title to item number 7A. I'm sorry, 17A. 17A. Okay. 17A. 17A. So this is a reconsideration call up of a resolution 2020-2020, sorry, 2020-22 to review the powers granted to the city manager under that resolution for under the disaster declaration. Motion. Mayor move to approve. - Moved by Council Member Gruber, seconded by... - Council Member Murillo. - Council Member Murillo to approve item number 17A, discussion. Seeing none, we'll please call the roll on the adoption of item number 17A. - Council Member Murillo. - Yes. - Council Member Gardner. - Yes. - Council Member Coombs. - Yes. - Council Member Marcano. - Yes. - Council Member Berzins. - Yes. Council Member Lawson. Council Member Bergen. Yes. Council Member Hiltz. Yes. Council Member Gruber. Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. Yes. The item passes unanimously. I will now please read the title of item number 18A. Item 18A, this is to appoint one member to the Aurora Fox Board. I motion. Motion. Mayor. Council Member O'Connor. Thank you. Move to approve Thomas Tarponing III to the Aurora Fox Center Board. Second. Second move by Council Member O'Connor, seconded by Council Member Coons to adopt item number 18A, Discussions. Seeing none, please call the roll on the adoption of item number 18A. Council Member Berzins. Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston. Yes. Yes. Councilmember Gruber? Yes. Councilmember Hiltz? Yes. Councilmember Bergen? Yes. Councilmember Lawson? Yes. Councilmember Marcano? Yes. Councilmember Coombs? Yes. Councilmember Gardner? Yes. And Councilmember Morio? Yes. The next step, we have another item to consider. This is a consideration to appoint one member and reappoint two members to the Public Defenders Commission. Motion. Mayor Bergen. Council Member Bergen. Yes, motion to approve Ms. Sarah Hildebrandt and then the reappointment of Tom Ashburn and Tom Tobiasen. Seconded by Council Member Bergens. Discussion? Seeing none, with a click, please call the roll on the adoption of item number 19B. Council Member Bergen? Yes. Council Member Coombs? Yes. Council Member Hiltz? Yes. Yes. Council Member Marcano? Yes. Council Member Lawson? Yes. Council Member Morio? Yes. Council Member Gruber? Yes. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes. Council Member Gardner? Yes. And Council Member Berzins? Yes. Thank you. That item passes unanimously as well. Reports. No report by the mayor. Council Member Lawson. No report, Mayor. Council Member Gruber. No report. Council Member Hiltz. No report. Council Member Gardner. No report. Council Member Mourinho. No report. It's election day. Remember that you can turn up to 10 ballots and we have same day voting as long as you are in line by 7 p.m. or have dropped off your ballot in a drop-off box, it will count. Thanks. Mayor Pro Tem Johnston? Yes, we have a Metro District Town Hall that the city is hosting this Thursday, I believe at 6.30 p.m., but I'm really tired. I know that wrong, but it's for sure Thursday. Council Member Parsons? No report. Council Member McConnell? No report. Council Member Coons? Remember to vote, and hopefully you can elect some people that will actually do something for the working poor. Council Member Bergen? Yes, I'd like to first say that I am appointing Danielle Durenski to the CABC. And then my town hall is November 18th from 6 to 8. And we'll have a presentation by Public Works on roads and how they come about. Public invited to be heard. Mayor, there is no one in the queue at this time. We are adjourned. Thank you. Sometimes more.