HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020-12-14 (Special) Meeting Agenda Packet
Please note: If you have a disability and need auxiliary aids or services, please notify the City of Englewood
(303-762-2405) at least 48 hours in advance of when services are needed.
Teleconference
Englewood, CO 80110
AGENDA
Teleconferenced City Council Special Meeting
Monday, December 14, 2020 ♦ 6:00 PM
This City Council Special Study Session will be held by teleconference.
To view the meeting please follow this link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flkw3budeTQ
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Bright Lights of Englewood Celebration - 6:00 to 6:35 p.m.
a. City Council will be recognizing citizens for being a bright light and bringing something
positive and good to the community in the past year.
Presentation: 35 minutes
IV. Approval of Ordinances on Second Reading - 6:35 to 6:45 p.m.
a. CB 60 - Adopt regulations regarding third party food delivery services
CB 60
Staff recommends City Council approve an Ordinance proposing regulations to be set
forth within Title 5, Chapter 31 of the Englewood Municipal Code regarding third-party
food delivery services. Staff: Director of Community Development Brad Power
V. Englewood Downtown Development Authority Next Step Options - Information/Direction - 6:45
to 7:30 p.m.
a. Redevelopment Manager Dan Poremba will be present with several members of the
Downtown Matters Steering Committee to provide an update on the outcome of the
November 3, 2020 Englewood DDA election and outline next step options for the DDA
now that the district voters have approved its formation.
Presentation: 15 minutes
Discussion: 30 minutes
Informational Update on Englewood Downtown Development Authority (DDA) - Pdf
VI. Break - 7:30 to 7:40 p.m.
VII. Off Leash Task Force Update - Information - 7:40 to 8:25 p.m.
a. Director of Parks, Recreation, Library and Golf Christina Underhill, Manager of Open
Space Dave Lee and Code Enforcement Supervisor Dave Lewis will be present with
facilitator Steve Charbonneau with Finding Solutions to discuss the consensus and
recommendations for the off leash program in Englewood parks.
Presentation: 15 minutes
Discussion: 30 minutes
Page 1 of 79
Englewood City Council Study Session Agenda
December 14, 2020
Please note: If you have a disability and need auxiliary aids or services, please notify the City of Englewood
(303-762-2405) at least 48 hours in advance of when services are needed.
Off Leash Dog Task Force Update - Pdf
VIII. Police Reform Task Force Discussion - Direction - 8:25 to 10:25 p.m.
a. The Police Reform Task Force will be present to discuss and seek direction from City
Council based on the recommendations from the task force.
Presentation: 30 minutes
Discussion: 90 minutes
Police Reform Task Force Discussion - Pdf
IX. Covid-19 Update
X. Reports from Board and Commission Council Liaisons
XI. Council Member’s Choice
XII. City Manager’s Choice
XIII. City Attorney’s Choice
Page 2 of 79
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Brad Power
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
DATE: December 14, 2020
SUBJECT:
Council Bill #60 - Adopt Regulations Regarding Third-Party Food
Delivery Services
DESCRIPTION:
CB 60 - Adopt regulations regarding third party food delivery services
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council review and approve an ordinance proposing regulations to
be set forth within Title 5, Chapter 31 of the Englewood Municipal Code regarding third-party
food delivery services, including a temporary 15% cap on the commission fee charged by such
services, and that due to the immediate nature of the harm arising out of the declared health
emergency, such action be taken pursuant to Charter 41, allowing for ordinances to be passed
as "emergency ordinances" when necessary for the immediate preservation of public property,
health, peace or safety. "Emergency ordinance" status serves to change the approval timelines
so that the emergency ordinance goes into effect immediately following second approval.
Emergency ordinances must be passed unanimously. If such ordinance passes without
unanimity the ordinance does not achieve "emergency ordinance" status, and continues as a
regular ordinance.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:
The City Council held a preliminary discussion regarding the topic of regulating third-party
delivery services during the term of the pandemic at their regular meeting of November 23,
2020.
SUMMARY:
The Colorado Restaurant Association and owners of a local restaurant contacted the City of
Englewood to request that the City regulate third-party delivery services. Staff subsequently
formulated and distributed a survey to Englewood restaurants to assess the level of local
support for the potential temporary regulation of delivery services. (See attached emails and the
documents provided.)
City staff determined that the most effective means of complying with the request of the local
restaurant setting ordinance emergency businesses develop to was an forth provisions
mandating business licensing, conditions and restrictions upon the license regarding notice to
clients of the delivery service of the costs of the service, and provisions for temporary
regulations including a 15% cap on commission fees, protection of compensation rates paid to
delivery service drivers, and a termination (sunset) clause.
Page 3 of 79
An emergency Ordinance, as permitted by Charter section 41, requires the City Council to
approve the Ordinance at two separate meetings at least twenty-four hours apart, with such
Ordinance taking effect immediately upon final passage. It must be published within seven days
of final passage.
ANALYSIS:
Englewood restaurants were sent a survey the week of November 30 which requested their
view on the potential temporary regulation of delivery fees. Fifteen restaurant owners
responded to the survey. The specific results from the survey, including more detailed
explanations of positions are attached, but the highlights from the survey include:
• 60% of respondents reported that they use third party delivery apps and 40% do not;
• The fees charged by the apps generally range from 18% to 30%. One responded that
their fee is 35%;
• 67% have not been able to negotiate their fees and 33% have negotiated fees;
• 80% use the apps for both delivery and carry out;
• 89% of the respondents have researched the various delivery apps;
• 80% of respondents indicated that they have not been charged fees without their
consents or permission;
• 87% indicated that they do not see potential negative impacts if the City were to impose
a temporary fee limit of 15% through March of 2021;; and
• 100% of the respondents indicated that they would support the City imposing a
temporary delivery fee limit.
The Greater Englewood Chamber of Commerce also conducted a virtual meeting on this issue
with members of the Englewood restaurant community. David Carroll, the Executive Director of
the Chamber provided the following summary of their outreach:
"On Monday we hosted a Zoom meeting with our restaurant members in an effort to better
understand their concerns. We heard many examples that put our restaurants at a
disadvantage with these delivery service companies. Understanding that all are required to
do their part in controlling this pandemic, the general consensus was that capping the fees
until March 2021 would create a shared responsibility for those businesses affected by the
current CDC restrictions."
Additionally, the Colorado Restaurant Association provided the following information to the City
of Englewood, along with a request for the City to temporarily cap the commission fees charged
by third-party food delivery service. The Restaurant Association said the following:
"We recently surveyed Denver restaurateurs now that the Denver fee cap has been in
place for several weeks. Here’s what they told us:
• 10% of respondents launched third-party delivery after the third-party delivery fee
cap went into effect - 75% of those respondents said that the fee cap was a factor in
their decision to do so.
• Average projected total savings over the course of the fee cap: $5,400
• 21% of respondents say they’ll save more than $10,000
• Of people who were offering delivery pre-fee cap, 18% have seen an increase in
third-party delivery orders, and 74% say they’re about the same.
• 84% of respondents say the fee cap helps their business -- 29% say it helps a lot."
Page 4 of 79
Denver provided within their Ordinance that third-party delivery services would temporarily
remit any sales taxes collected on the sale of food back to the restaurant. The City of
Englewood has been collecting sales taxes directly from third-party food delivery services
and staff is concerned that temporarily allowing any business operating within the City to
defer this responsibility to another party would be confusing for both the business charged
with collecting and remitting sales tax, and the city. For this reason, this type of provision
was not included in the council bill presented to the City Council of Englewood.
Having reviewed all of the above information, staff developed an Ordinance to regulate
third-party food delivery services in a manner that protects and informs restaurants,
customers, and employees, but limits the imposition or rate limitations upon the such third-
party food delivery services for the shortest possible time, as follows:
5-31-1: - Definitions.
5-31-2: - License Required.
5-31-3: - Application for License.
5-30-4: - Special Conditions and Restrictions of the License.
In addition to the requirements of Chapter 1 of this Title (business lic ensing for all businesses),
the following special conditions and restrictions apply:
A. A third-party food delivery platform shall not perform any service for or disclose any
information about a retail food establishment without their consent.
B. A third-party delivery food platform shall not charge any additional fee to a retail food
establishment that it has not voluntarily agreed to pay.
C. At the time a final price is disclosed to a customer for the intended purchase and delivery
of food from a retail food establishment through a third-party food delivery platform and
before that transaction is completed by the customer, the third-party food delivery
platform shall disclose to the customer, in plain language and in a conspicuous manner,
any commission, fee, or any other monetary payment charged to the customer by the
third-party food delivery platform.
D. After a transaction occurs for the purchase and delivery of food from a retail food
establishment through a third-party food delivery platform, the third-party food delivery
platform will provide an electronic or printed receipt to the customer. The receipt shall
disclose, in plain and simple language and in a conspicuous manner:
a. The menu price of the food;
b. Any sales or other tax applied to the transaction;
c. Any delivery charge or service fee, imposed on and collected from the customer
by the third-party food delivery platform and by the covered establishment, in
addition to the menu price of the food;
d. Any tip that will be paid to the person delivering the food, and not to the third-
party food delivery platform, that was added into the transaction when it
occurred, and
e. Any commission associated with the transaction.
E. No third-party food delivery platform may charge any fee from a retail food establishment
for a telephone order if a telephone call between such retail food establishment and a
customer does not result in an actual transaction during such telephone call.
F. No third-party food delivery platform may charge any fee from a retail food establishment
for a telephone or internet order if there is no actual transaction as a result of the
telephone call or internet order.
Page 5 of 79
5-30-5: - Special Conditions and Restrictions of the License that shall expire March 31,
2021.
A. No person shall cause a third-party food delivery platform to charge a retail food
establishment a commission fee for the use of the platform's services for delivery or pick-
up that exceeds 15% of the purchase price per online order.
B. The provisions of this section shall not limit the ability of any retail food establishment to
choose to pay a higher commission or supplemental fee to access additional advertising
or other products and services offered by any third-party food delivery platform.
C. No person shall cause a third-party food delivery platform to reduce the compensation
rate paid to a delivery service driver or garnish gratuities in order to comply with this
order.
D. The provisions of this section, E.M.C. 5-30-5, shall expire at 11:59 p.m. on March 31,
2021, unless further extended.
5-30-6: - Complaint; Violation; Enforcement.
• Any food establishment may submit a complaint of a violation of this Chapter to the
Licensing Officer of the City, and provide evidence in support of such complaint.
• Any violation of this chapter shall be addressed in accordance with E.M.C. 5-1-9,
authorizing both the revocation of a license to operate within the City and/or the
issuance of a citation.
• Penalties for violation(s) shall be in accordance with E.M.C. 1-4-1, et seq.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There is anticipated to be an unknown cost associated with enforcement of the temporary
provisions of these regulations.
ALTERNATIVES:
The City could choose not to adopt special regulations for third party food delivery businesses.
The City Council could direct the City Manager to use the authority delegated to him pursuant to
Ord. 10, series 2020 to effect an emergency order on this topic.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Emergency Ordinance: CB #60
2. Englewood Restaurant Survey Results
3. Email from owner of Chop Shop Casual Urban Eatery Restaurant
4. News article regarding City of Denver
5. News article regarding City of Aurora
6. Email from Colorado Restaurant Association
7. Third Party Delivery Fee Cap Survey compiled by Colo. Rest. Assoc.
8. Third Party Deliver Fact Sheet compiled by Colo. Rest. Assoc.
9: DRAFT emergency order placing a cap on third party food delivery fees pursuant to Ord. 10,
series 2020
Page 6 of 79
Page 1 of 5
BY AUTHORITY
ORDINANCE NO. COUNCIL BILL NO. 60
SERIES OF 2020 INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL
MEMBER SIERRA
AN ORDINANCE ADDING TITLE 5, CHAPTER 31, SECTIONS 1-6 TO THE
ENGLEWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE, REGARDING REGULATIONS FOR THIRD
PARTY FOOD DELIVERY SERVICES, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF
ENGLEWOOD HOME RULE CHARTER, SECTION 41, ALL WITHIN THE CITY
OF ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the City of Englewood, Colorado, (“City”), is a home rule municipality,
organized and existing under and by virtue of Article XX, Section 6 of the Colorado Constitution,
and as such the City has all legislative powers and functions of home rule municipal government
as reserved to it by the Colorado Constitution and the laws of the State of Colorado;
WHEREAS, Englewood Municipal Code Title 5 imposes licensing and special condition
requirements on certain categories of businesses within the City of Englewood;
WHEREAS, the ongoing public health crisis and the emergency orders issued by the State
of Colorado and the Tri-County Health Department to control and slow the spread of the SARS-
CoV-2 virus and to mitigate the effects of the disease resulting from the virus (“COVID-19”) have
restricted the movement and congregation of persons in the City and have restricted food
establishments from operating freely and at full on-premises capacity within the City;
WHEREAS, the restrictions from freely operating have had severe financial impacts on all
food service establishments within the City, and caused many such establishments to consider
permanent closure;
WHEREAS, the COVID-19 public health emergency has increased the need for take-out
and delivery meal services and increased the dependence of the City’s food-service
establishments on the business generated through take-out and delivery orders;
WHEREAS, some restaurants may receive take-out orders directly, other orders are taken
by third- party food delivery platforms and other services that operate through websites and/or
mobile phone applications used by consumers;
WHEREAS, third-party food delivery platforms and services, without the local restaurant’s
knowledge or consent, will purport to sell meals from the local restaurant to consumers, and
sometimes charge exorbitant fees to the already struggling local restaurants during the time of
and following the declared emergency that restricts on-premises dining;
WHEREAS, the Englewood City Council finds that when excessive fees are charged by
third-party food delivery platforms substantial harm is caused to the City’s food service
establishments and the City’s consumers, threaten the viability of the City’s food service
establishments during and after the public health emergency, and cause substantial harm to the
general public welfare; and
WHEREAS, based upon the above findings the City Council has determined that action on
this matter should be taken by emergency ordinance, for the immediate preservation of public
property, health, peace or safety, in accordance with the provisions of Englewood Home Rule
Charter, Section 41, specifically an action to temporarily limit third party food delivery service
Page 7 of 79
Page 2 of 5
commission fees to protect the health, safety, property and welfare of the City during the term of
the pandemic health emergency.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ENGLEWOOD, COLORADO, AS FOLLOWS:
In accordance with the provisions of Englewood Municipal Code and Section 41 of the
Home Rule Charter of the City of Englewood regarding passage of emergency ordinances, and
incorporating the recitals as set forth above, the following amendments to Title 5, Business and
License Regulations, are hereby approved:
Section 1: Title 5, Chapter 31, Sections 1- 6. Title 5 shall be amended by adding Chapter
31, sections 1- 6 as follows:
Chapter 31 – Third Party Food Delivery
Services 5-31-1: - Definitions.
For purposes of this chapter the following definitions apply:
"Online order" means an order placed by a customer through a platform provided by the third-
party food delivery platform for delivery or pickup.
"Purchase price" means the menu price of an online order, excluding taxes, gratuities, or any
other fees that may make up the total cost to the customer of an online order.
"Retail Food Establishment" or “Food Establishment” means any retail operation that
serves, stores, prepares, or packages food for sale for human consumption to consumers
directly, or indirectly through a delivery service.
“Telephone order” means an order placed by a customer to a restaurant through a telephone
call forwarded by a call system provided by a third-party food delivery platform for delivery or
pickup within the city.
"Third-party food delivery platform" means any person, website, mobile application, or other
internet service that offers or arranges for the sale of food and beverages prepared by, and
the same day delivery or same-day pickup of food and beverages from, retail food
establishments.
5-31-2: - License Required.
It shall be unlawful for any person or entity to act as a third-party food delivery platform in the
City of Englewood without having first obtained a license in accordance with E.M.C. 5-1-2 et seq.
License fees shall be determined by the City Council in accordance with E.M.C. 5 -1-6.
5-31-3: - Application for License.
Third Party Food Delivery Platform licenses shall be issued in accordance with Chapter 1 of this
Title.
5-31-4: - Special Conditions and Restrictions of the License.
In addition to the requirements of Chapter 1 of this Title, the following special conditions and
restrictions apply:
A. A third-party food delivery platform shall not perform any service for or disclose any
information about a retail food establishment without their consent.
B. A third-party delivery food platform shall not charge any additional fee to a retail food
Page 8 of 79
Page 3 of 5
establishment that it has not voluntarily agreed to pay.
C. At the time a final price is disclosed to a customer for the intended purchase and delivery
of food from a retail food establishment through a third-party food delivery platform and
before that transaction is completed by the customer, the third-party food delivery
platform shall disclose to the customer, in plain language and in a conspicuous manner,
any commission, fee, or any other monetary payment charged to the customer by the
third-party food delivery platform.
D. After a transaction occurs for the purchase and delivery of food from a retail food
establishment through a third-party food delivery platform, the third-party food delivery
platform will provide an electronic or printed receipt to the customer. The receipt shall
disclose, in plain and simple language and in a conspicuous manner:
1. The menu price of the food;
2. Any sales or other tax applied to the transaction;
3. Any delivery charge or service fee, imposed on and collected from the customer
by the third-party food delivery platform and by the covered establishment, in
addition to the menu price of the food;
4. Any tip that will be paid to the person delivering the food, and not to the third-party
food delivery platform, that was added into the transaction when it occurred, and
5. Any commission associated with the transaction.
E. No third-party food delivery platform may charge any fee from a retail food establishment
for a telephone or internet order if there is no actual transaction during or as a result of
the telephone call or internet order.
5-31-5: - Special Conditions and Restrictions of the License that shall expire March 31, 2021.
A. No person shall cause a third-party food delivery platform to charge a retail food
establishment a commission fee for the use of the platform's services for delivery or pick-
up that exceeds 15% of the purchase price per online order.
B. The provisions of this section shall not limit the ability of any retail food establishment to
choose to pay a higher commission or supplemental fee to access additional advertising
or other products and services offered by any third-party food delivery platform.
C. No person shall cause a third-party food delivery platform to reduce the compensation
rate paid to a delivery service driver or garnish gratuities in order to comply with this
order.
D. The provisions of this section, E.M.C. 5-30-5, shall expire at 11:59 p.m. on March 31,
2021, unless further extended.
5-31-6: - Complaint; Violation; Enforcement.
A. Any food establishment may submit a complaint of a violation of this Chapter to the
Licensing Officer of the City, and provide evidence in support of such complaint.
B. Any law enforcement officer, or other enforcement officer of the City, is hereby authorized
to investigate any complaint of a violation of this Chapter.
Page 9 of 79
Page 4 of 5
C. Third-party food delivery platforms shall maintain books and records available for the
Restaurant Delivery Fee Program Coordinator to investigate any complaints. Such books
and records shall be made available to the Restaurant Delivery Fee Program Coordinator
upon demand. Failure to provide the records as required in this section shall be prima
facie rebuttable evidence of a violation.
D. Any violation of this chapter shall be addressed in accordance with E.M.C. 5-1-9,
authorizing both the revocation of a license to operate within the City and/or the issuance
of a citation.
E. Each offense shall be deemed a separate violation of this Chapter.
F. Penalties for violation(s) shall be in accordance with E.M.C. 1-4-1, et seq.
Section 2. Notice of general provisions and findings applicable to interpretation and
application of this Ordinance:
Applicability of Title 1, Chapter 2, Savings Clause. The provisions of E.M.C. Title 1, Chapter
2, Savings Clause apply to the interpretation and application of this Ordinance, unless otherwise
set forth above, including, but not limited to, the provisions regarding severability, inconsistent
ordinances or code provisions, effect of repeal or modification, and legislation not affected by
repeal.
Enforcement. E.M.C. 1-4-1 mandates that except as otherwise provided within specific Titles,
Chapters or Sections of the E.M.C., the violation of any provision of the E.M.C. shall be punished
by a fine not exceeding two thousand six hundred and fifty dollars ($2650.00) or imprisonment
for a term not exceeding three hundred sixty (360) days or both.
Safety Clauses. The Englewood City Council hereby finds, determines, and declares that this
Ordinance is promulgated under the general police power of the City of Englewood, that it is
promulgated for the health, safety, and welfare of the public, and that this Ordinance is necessary
for the preservation of health and safety and for the protection of public convenience and welfare.
The Englewood City Council further determines that the Ordinance bears a rational relation to the
proper legislative object sought to be obtained.
Introduced, read in full, and passed as a Bill for an Ordinance on first reading on the 7th day
of December, 2020.
Published by Title as a Bill for an Ordinance in the City’s official newspaper on the 10th
day of December, 2020.
Title republished on the 8th of December, 2020 to provide notice that the action was taken
as a regular Ordinance.
Published as a Bill for an Ordinance on the City’s official website beginning on the 9th day
of December, 2020 for thirty (30) days.
Read by Title and passed on final reading on the 14th day of December, 2020.
Published by Title in the City’s official newspaper as Ordinance No. ___, Series of 2020, on
the 17th day of December, 2020
Page 10 of 79
Page 5 of 5
Published by title on the City’s official website beginning on the 16th day of December,
2020 for thirty (30) days.
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after publication following final passage.
Linda Olson, Mayor
ATTEST:
Stephanie Carlile, City Clerk
I, Stephanie Carlile, City Clerk of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby certify that the
above and foregoing is a true copy of the Ordinance passed on final reading and published by
Title as Ordinance No. ___, Series of 2020.
Stephanie Carlile
Page 11 of 79
12/3/2020 Polco
https://polco.us/n/admin/content/e984849c-6e7e-4170-9cd2-181bdfec20c5/report 1/6
Englewood Restaurant Survey
Survey Results
FINAL
12/03/2020
Page 12 of 79
12/3/2020 Polco
https://polco.us/n/admin/content/e984849c-6e7e-4170-9cd2-181bdfec20c5/report 2/6
Do you use a 3rd party application for food delivery services?
60% (9)
40% (6)
If Yes: What are the benefits to using these apps?
The benefit is they allow us to keep product moving, and staff busy, and generate revenue. The problem is they are not
regulated and they charge us generally 30% of all sales as well as charging the customer, which is double dipping. 30%
or our revenue is given to them, which most well executed restaurants profit in the 7-15% range, usually we can offset
some by having dine in customers, without that we are more than negative each month. By capping them at 15% we will
be able to actually keep our lights on.
Allows for customers to utilize delivery
Sales to people that may otherwise buy pizza or other delivered foods.
Gets our food out to regular and new customers
Increased sales
We get more customers ordering
Increase sales and marketing exposure
More potential business
It allows us to have delivery in place to help offset loss of sales due to Covid.
If Yes: What apps do you utilize?
Grub Hub, Postmates, Door Dash, Uber eats
DoorDash, Grubhub and UberEats
Postmates, doordash, grubhub, and ubereats
Door-dash, GrubHub
Uber, DoorDash, Postmates, Grubhub
Grubhub, doordash, chownow
DoorDash Grubhub ChowNow
Postmates Grubhub DoorDash Uber eats
DoorDash
A Yes
B No
Page 13 of 79
12/3/2020 Polco
https://polco.us/n/admin/content/e984849c-6e7e-4170-9cd2-181bdfec20c5/report 3/6
If Yes: What percentage does the app charge you for delivery services?
Each app is different and they charge each restaurant different . We pay between 25-32% of all sales back to them.
These fees are not negotiable but they are lowered with more stores you have.
Appropriate 35%
30%
Approximately 30%
20-30%
30%
30% DoorDash and Grubhub, ChowNow is a flat monthly fee
22%
18%
If Yes: Are you able to negotiate your fees?
33% (3)
67% (6)
If Yes: Are you using the apps both for delivery and carryout ?
80% (8)
10% (1)
0%
10% (1)
If No: Why do you choose not to use a delivery app?
Very high commission fees
We have used them in the past (doordash, postmates, uber eats, grubhub) - their fees are outrageous. They took control
of our google landing page and captured our take out sales without our knowledge or consent .
A Yes
B No
A Yes, both.
B Only delivery.
C Only carryout .
D No, neither.
Page 14 of 79
12/3/2020 Polco
https://polco.us/n/admin/content/e984849c-6e7e-4170-9cd2-181bdfec20c5/report 4/6
because of the cost
We have tried them in the past and the reliability was poor at best . The worst part of it was that the delivery companies
did not take responsibility for their mistakes and we would receive poor reviews based off of their poor service. We used
Grubhub in the past . We are currently looking to add both Postmates and Doordash.
To expensive, they still order from us anyway, no charge.
Our products don't lend themselves well to retail delivery. We just don't stock the full complement of our offerings daily
and people would be disappointed if they ordered and we don't have what they want .
If No: Have you researched all the delivery apps? (Doordash, UberEats, Postmates, Toast
Takeout , etc)
89% (8)
11% (1)
Do you see potential negative consequences for your business if the city imposed a
temporary (i.e. through March 2021) limit on the fee (i.e. 15%) that delivery services could
charge your business?
13% (2)
87% (13)
Would you support or oppose such a limit ?
100% (15)
0%
A Yes
B No
A Yes
B No
A Support
B Oppose
Page 15 of 79
12/3/2020 Polco
https://polco.us/n/admin/content/e984849c-6e7e-4170-9cd2-181bdfec20c5/report 5/6
Has your business ever been charged third party delivery fees without your
consent/permission?
20% (3)
80% (12)
A Yes
B No
Page 16 of 79
12/3/2020 Polco
https://polco.us/n/admin/content/e984849c-6e7e-4170-9cd2-181bdfec20c5/report 6/6Page 17 of 79
1
Alison McKenney Brown
Subject:FW: Call to Action on Delivery Service Fee Cap
Attachments:City of Denver Policy on 3rd Party Delivery Fees.pdf; City of Aurora Policy on 3rd Party Delivery
Fees.pdf
From: Clint Wangsnes <cwchopshop@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 18, 2020 10:05 AM
Subject: Call to Action on Delivery Service Fee Cap
To: Linda Olson <LOlson@Englewoodco.gov>,Othoniel Sierra <OSierra@englewoodco.gov>,Joe Anderson
<JAnderson@englewoodco.gov>,Dave Cuesta <dcuesta@englewoodco.gov>,Rita Russell
<RRussell@Englewoodco.gov>,John Stone <JStone@englewoodco.gov>,Cheryl Wink
<cwink@englewoodco.gov>,Christian Anderson <christianpeteranderson@gmail.com>
Cc:
USE CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. DO NOT CLICK LINKS or OPEN ATTACHMENTS unless you have
verified the sender and know that the content is legitimate.
Mayor Olson and Council of Englewood,
I am writing to you representing the entire restaurant community in Englewood, and asking for a call of action. In these
times of struggle, we all need to come together and fight to make it thru, and with us going into Red shut down, we
need your help more than ever. As most of you know, Denver called to action in October and placed a cap on third party
delivery companies, and it has been a saving grace for our restaurant community there. We are asking that you follow
suit and place the same action in place in Englewood to help us get thru these challenging times and beyond.
These companies have been squeezing all of our profit for years, and with our current restrictions most of us will not be
able to survive if something is not done. They currently charge most restaurants 30% of the entire sale, on top of
charging the customer a delivery fee. Most restaurants in full capacity are lucky to profit 8‐12% of Net sales, so coupling
this with the fees from these companies we are automatically in the negative red zone and giving every penny we have
to them and more. This is something that is not regulated, and you are the only ones that can help! Denver has placed
a restriction until February and capping them at 15% which to us is just enough for us to survive and pay our bills,
without this cap our Denver restaurants would be closing.
Please we are begging for your help in these challenging times and asking that you follow suit of Mayor Hancock and the
Denver City Council and place a temporary (and hopefully permanent in future) cap on these third party delivery
companies.
I appreciate you taking the time to read this, and hope to hear from each of you. Thank you and stay safe!
Clint Wangsnes
Chef / Owner
Chop Shop Casual Urban Eatery
Park Hill • Lowry • SOBO
303‐525‐3475
www.Coloradochopshop.com
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram
Page 18 of 79
Denver considers limits on third-party-delivery company fees to restaurants - Denver Business Journal
https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2020/09/11/denver-third-party-delivery-fees-cap-kendra-black.html 1/15
FOOD & LIFESTYLE
Denver considers limits on third-party-
delivery company fees to restaurants
Denver could join the growing list o cities
tht re cpping
compnies like GrubHub nd DoorDsh.
7KHXQHDV\UHODWLRQVKLSWKDWKDVH[LVWHGEHWZHHQORFDOO\RZQHGHDWHULHVLQ
SDUWLFXODUDQGWKHWHFKFRPSDQLHVWKDWSRVWWKHPHQXVSLFNXSIRRGIURP
WKHUHVWDXUDQWVDQGGHOLYHULWWRFXVWRPHUVKDVEHHQH[DFHUEDWHGGXULQJWKH
FRURQDYLUXVSDQGHPLF5HVWDXUDQWVQHHGDGHOLYHU\DVSHFWWRWKHLURIIHULQJV
PRUHWKDQHYHUWRPHHWFXVWRPHUGHPDQGEXWDUHOHHU\RISD\LQJW\SLFDO
FRPPLVVLRQVRIDERXWWKDWWXUQWKHWKLUGSDUW\GHOLYHU\RSWLRQLQWRD
PRQH\ORVHULQVRPHFDVHV
&LWLHVIURP1HZ<RUNWR/RV$QJHOHVWR(YDQVWRQ,OOLQRLVKDYHUHVSRQGHG
WRWKHSOHDVRIORFDOUHVWDXUDQWLQGXVWULHVRYHUWKHSDVW\HDUE\
LPSOHPHQWLQJVRPHVRUWRIFDSLQGHOLYHU\IHHV0DQ\DOVRKDYHSXWUXOHV
LQWRSODFHWRVWRSWKRVHVDPHFRPSDQLHVIURPUHGXFLQJWKHSD\RIGULYHUV
RIWHQKLUHGDVLQGHSHQGHQWFRQWUDFWRUVLQRUGHUWRRIIVHWWKDWORVWUHYHQXH
8QGHUDSURSRVDOIURP&LW\&RXQFLOZRPDQ.HQGUD%ODFNWKHFLW\ZRXOG
FDSFRPPLVVLRQVSDLGE\WKHUHVWDXUDQWVWRWKHVHGHOLYHU\SODWIRUPVDW
EDUWKHDGGLWLRQRIQHZSURFHVVLQJRUVHUYLFHIHHVDQGHQVXUHWKDW
GULYHUSD\FDQ¶WEHGHFUHDVHGGXHWRWKHFDSV7KHSURSRVHGODZDOVRZRXOG
UHTXLUHUHVWDXUDQWVWRRSWLQWREHOLVWHGRQDQ\WKLUGSDUW\GHOLYHU\
SODWIRUPDGGUHVVLQJWKHFRPSODLQWVRIVRPHHDWHULHVWKDWKDYHVDLGWKH\
VKRZXSRQDWKHPHQXOLVWVRIVRPHRIWKHVHFRPSDQLHVZLWKRXWKDYLQJ
DJUHHGWRZRUNZLWKWKHP²DQGVRPHWLPHVZLWKSULFHVDQGHYHQPHQX
LWHPVWKDWDUHGLIIHUHQWIURPZKDWLVRQWKHLUDFWXDOPHQXV
ees on third-prty delivery services, s
citycouncilwomn hs submitted propos
l tht could cut inIBMG existing commissions
pid by struggling resturnts to
Page 19 of 79
11/18/2020
#MBDLTBJETIFTCFFOXPSLJOHPOUIFJTTVFTJODF+VMZBOETQFBLJOHOPUKVTUXJUIMPDBM
JOEVTUSZHSPVQTTVDIBTUIF$PMPSBEP3FTUBVSBOU"TTPDJBUJPOBOEJOEFQFOEFOUSFTUBVSBOU
PSHBOJ[BUJPO&BU%FOWFSCVUXJUINBKPSEFMJWFSZQMBUGPSNT
JODMVEJOHUIFMJLFTPG6CFS
&BUTBOE1PTUNBUFT4IFTBJE'SJEBZUIBUBMUIPVHIUIFQSPQPTBMXJMMJODPSQPSBUFNPTUPG
UIFGFFECBDLTIFSFDFJWFEGSPNUIPTFOBUJPOXJEFDPNQBOJFTBOETIFCFMJFWFTUIFZ
BQQSFDJBUFEIFSMJTUFOJOH
TIFDBOUTBZZFUUIBUUIFZBSFPOCPBSEPSQBSUJDVMBSMZ
FOUIVTJBTUJDXJUIUIFQMBO
“Denver’s resturnts re prt o the culturl bric o our neighborhoods.
They provide jobs nd contribute to the tx bse. It benets us ll to help
resturnts survive this crisis,” Blck sys in the PowerPoint presenttion
she plns to give Tuesdy to the city’s nnce nd government committee.
“Third-prty delivery pltorms chrge customers nd
resturnts ees nd commissions tht my result in
resturnt losing money on orders.”
The councilwomn is positioning the proposl s
temporry one to help resturnts survive period where they lredy hve
lost signicnt mounts o business nd employees nd will continue to h
ve to limit in-cility dining to 50% cpcity or less or the oreseeble
uture. It could go into eect s erly s Oct. 9 i nl council vote goes o
on Oct. 5, s is now scheduled, nd it would expireter our months unless
the council moved proctively to continue it, she sid.
She lredy hs received flood o support rom locl
resturteurs. In testimonils she sent to Denver Business Journl, some st
ted tht they eel they re t the mercy othe outside compnies’ high prices
becuse o their inbility to serve enough customers inside their businesses.
Others sy they re getting ed up with declining level ocustomer service
rom the drivers o these compnies nd hve been retlited ginst when
drivers re unhppy t not getting specil tretment rom them.
Giles Flnign, coounder o Blue Pn Pizz o Denver, sid he’s hd
multiple instnces where drivers hve demnded to go to the ront o the
line in customer orders, been
reused nd gone onto prominent socil-medi sites to post
g
Page 20 of 79
https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2020/09/11/denver-third-party-delivery-fees-cap-kendra-black.html
one-str reviews o the resturnts. He’s hd trouble getting hold o
these third-prty delivery compnies nd even demnded to hve his
menu tken o one o their sites — request tht’s gone unullled
or roughly month now.
Flnign sid in n interview tht he supports the eort to limit
commissions.
“The business side o me sys ‘In competitive mrket, people re
going to chrge wht they cn chrge,’” he sid. “But the commissions
re so unir. And on the resturnt side, you don’t hve ny control.”
The committee hering is scheduled or 1:30 p.m. Tuesdy.
Page 21 of 79
11/18/2020
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/coronavirus/aurora-looks-to-cap-third-party-food-delivery-fees-next 1/7
AURORA, Colo.-- An Aurora City council member has introduced a bill that
would temporarily cap delivery fees from third-party vendors like Grubhub and
Uber Eats until the end of March to help businesses already hit hard by the
coronavirus pandemic survive during the harsh winter months.
“Over the next several months our restaurants are really going to be facing a
challenging time,” Aurora City Council member Curtis Gardner said.
Page 22 of 79
It's already been a tough year for the restaurant industry. Now, the colder
weather is about to add another challenging layer to the mix. Much of that
outdoor dining will have to move inside at drastically reduced capacities.
Some of those fees can reach 30%.
“Restaurants have such a small margin to begin with,” Armatas said.
At Sam's No. 3 in Aurora they went five years without doing delivery services,
until the pandemic hit.
“It’s a needed important part and not just needed for us, but needed for the
people who are at home,” Armatas said.
His restaurant does well enough to negotiate to 15%. Others have been forced to
pay what they have to.
“It’s better for everybody. Is that tide that’s going to raise all ships,” he added.
“Really just allows them to enter into that market and make some money
because they can really only sit in some parts of the state's 25% capacity,”
Colorado Restaurant Association Manager of Local Government Affairs Mollie
Steinemann said.
“I think we’re all hoping and wishing we get to stay at that, but the real issue
that could come down is that we all get shut down again and we’re in just carry
out mode. That’s not a far cry from reality,” Armatas said.
Limiting the damage by limiting what delivery services can charge could mean
the difference between staying open, and closing for good.
Page 23 of 79
1
Alison McKenney Brown
Subject:FW: Third party delivery fee caps
Attachments:Third party delivery fact sheet.pdf; CRA Third Party Delivery Fee Cap Survey.pdf
From: Darren Hollingsworth
Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2020 9:11 AM
To: Shawn Lewis <SLewis@englewoodco.gov>; Brad Power <bpower@Englewoodco.gov>
Cc: Nancy Fenton <nfenton@Englewoodco.gov>; Tim Dodd <TDodd@englewoodco.gov>
Subject: FW: Third party delivery fee caps
Hello Shawn and Brad,
Please see note below and attached files from Mollie Steinemann from the Colorado Restaurant Association.
Thank you,
Darren Hollingsworth, Economic Development Manager
City of Englewood | Community Development Department
1000 Englewood Parkway Englewood, CO 80110
englewoodco.gov | o: 303.762.2599 | c: 303.908.0358
From: Mollie Steinemann <MSteinemann@corestaurant.org>
Sent: Friday, November 20, 2020 4:23 PM
To: Darren Hollingsworth <dhollingsworth@Englewoodco.gov>
Subject: Third party delivery fee caps
USE CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. DO NOT CLICK LINKS or OPEN ATTACHMENTS unless you have
verified the sender and know that the content is legitimate.
Hi Darren – I hope you’ve been well, all things considered. I noticed that the Englewood Council will be discussing third
party delivery fee caps this coming week and wanted to share some information. Please see the attached fact sheet and
restaurant survey.
We worked closely with Denver, Aurora, Broomfield, and Commerce City on their fee cap ordinances. We strongly
support these proposals as a way to offer local relief to restaurants in a time when every little bit helps.
We recently surveyed Denver restaurateurs now their the Denver fee cap has been in place for several weeks. Here’s
what they told us:
10% of respondents launched third‐party delivery after the third‐party delivery fee cap went into effect ‐ 75% of
those respondents said that the fee cap was a factor in their decision to do so.
Average projected total savings over the course of the fee cap: $5,400
21% of respondents say they’ll save more than $10,000
Page 24 of 79
2
Of people who were offering delivery pre‐fee cap, 18% have seen an increase in third‐party delivery orders, and
74% say they’re about the same.
84% of respondents say the fee cap helps their business ‐‐ 29% say it helps a lot.
Thanks for your consideration. Let me know if I can answer any questions.
Mollie Steinemann | Manager of Local Government Affairs
Colorado Restaurant Association
430 E. 7th Ave. | Denver, CO 80203
P: 303.830.2972 x 115
C: 303.350.0296
E: msteinemann@corestaurant.org
Winter Outdoor Design Concepts are now LIVE!
Learn more HERE.
Page 25 of 79
Colorado Restaurant Association Third Party Delivery Fee Cap Survey
Results Compiled from Colorado Restaurant Association Survey Conducted October 1 – 16
Restaurants have made it clear – they need temporary third party delivery fee caps.
82 percent of restaurants that conduct takeout and delivery services say that temporarily capping the fees that
they pay to third party delivery companies at 15 percent would help their restaurant in the months ahead.
Restaurants are doing more takeout and delivery now than they ever were before.
46 percent of restaurants say that less than 10 percent of their total sales were from takeout and delivery pre-
COVID. 13 percent of restaurants were not offering takeout and delivery at all.
Today, 25 percent of restaurants say that more than 40 percent of their total sales come from takeout and
delivery. 74 percent of restaurants say more than 10 percent of their total sales come from takeout and delivery.
Due to COVID-19 related public health and executive orders, restaurants need to expand their takeout and delivery
operations if they want to survive the winter.
Restaurants will be heavily restricted and limited to a maximum of 50 percent capacity until there is a vaccine or
cure widely available, and many will lose their patios due to cold weather. They need new, profitable revenue
streams to stand a chance of surviving the winter.
76 percent of restaurants say they hope to grow their takeout and delivery operations this winter.
50 percent of restaurants are saying they will have to consider closing within 6 months if nothing changes.
Temporary fee caps are reasonable policy decisions local governments can enact to give their neighborhood
restaurants a fighting chance.
Locally owned, independent restaurants have the hardest time negotiating reasonable fees with third party delivery
companies.
65 percent of restaurants are single-unit independent restaurants. They are the restaurants that are consistently
assessed the highest third party fees, and they are also the businesses that need the most assistance to survive
this crisis.
Restaurants are struggling due to restrictions, through no fault of their own. Here’s what they are saying in support of
temporary third party delivery fee caps:
“Fee caps will allow us to utilize third party companies without taking a loss.” “We are down 70% in sales and unable to
open our dining room, every little bit we can keep helps.” “Currently, we are losing money with our delivery business.”
“A fee cap would make it worth it to grow this revenue stream.” “Currently we pay a 20% delivery fee. If we capped at
15% it would put back into business as a net profit of $2,000 per week.” “This would increase our bottom line profits by
$1,500 per week.” “We would possibly partner with a third party delivery service if it was this cheap.” “This would
give us a financial opportunity that did not exist before.” “Lower fees free up money to go toward labor and fixed
expenses.” “This would allow us to avoid layoffs.” “Currently the third party delivery service has our menu posted with
higher/incorrect prices.” “Anything above 15% and we are just working for the third party company.”
Page 26 of 79
Please SUPPORT Third Party Delivery Fee Caps – Help Local Restaurants
Local governments across Colorado are considering proposals that would temporarily cap third party
delivery fees on restaurants at 15% of the purchase price of the food items. This temporary fee cap will
lower cost barriers for restaurants and may provide restaurants that are not currently able to afford
third party delivery services the opportunity to enter the market.
Third party delivery fees at a glance:
● Under the current system, restaurants that wish to work with a third party delivery company are
assessed a delivery fee rate. Across the board, these fees range from 15% of the purchase price
of the meal up to 35% of the purchase price of the meal.
● Restaurateurs report that at roughly 25% of the purchase price of the meal, the fees are so high
that the takeout or delivery meal sold by the restaurant loses all profitability.
● Locally owned, independent restaurants have the hardest time negotiating a favorable fee rate
for themselves.
Third party delivery fee caps represent an opportunity for local governments to throw restaurants a
lifeline.
● Due to the nature of the pandemic, certain industries (like national third party delivery
companies) have seen significant increases in profits while others (like restaurants) are
struggling to survive.
● Restaurants across the state have been devastated by customer capacity limits and other public
health mandates. These problems will only increase in the cooler fall and winter months when
many will be unable to use their outdoor patios and dining areas.
● State and local public health agencies continue to promote takeout and delivery as safe options,
and we anticipate that these services will become even more important in the coming weeks
and months as weather turns cooler and patio seating becomes less desirable. By capping the
fees associated with these services at a reasonable rate, local governments can provide financial
relief to restaurants during a time when every little bit helps.
Restaurateurs often feel they have no choice but to work with third party delivery companies.
● There is tremendous consumer awareness and convenience associated with third party delivery
companies. Many consumers immediately default to the use of these companies without
considering ordering from restaurants directly.
● Restaurants have the ability to conduct their own internal delivery services, but there are
tremendous costs associated with it. Restaurants would need to hire additional staff, conduct
lengthy and expensive training, and supplement their insurance coverage to protect themselves
and their employees against liability.
Page 27 of 79
● Third party delivery companies are national tech companies – they have the ability to launch
and streamline apps, websites, and other consumer platforms, and local restaurants simply
cannot compete.
Third party delivery fee caps have been successful in other parts of the country.
● To date, we’ve seen temporary fee caps passed in Denver, Aurora, Commerce City, and
Broomfield. Nationwide, we have seen New York City; Seattle; San Francisco; Clark County, NV;
Philadelphia; Fresno, CA; Santa Clara, CA; Evanston, IL; Los Angeles City and County;
Washington, DC; and Portland – among others.
● There is a statewide cap in New Jersey and a bill that passed the Massachusetts state house and
is awaiting action in the senate.
● New Zealand’s Restaurant Association has called on its government to cap fees, and
restaurateurs in the United Arab Emirates have asked for relief, too.
● Third party delivery fee caps are gaining momentum, and restaurateurs are benefitting from
these policies.
If you have questions about third party delivery fee caps, please contact Mollie Steinemann, Manager of
Local Government Affairs at (303) 350-0296 or msteinemann@corestaurant.org.
Page 28 of 79
EMERGENCY ORDER
DECLARING the creation of a temporary restriction on third-party delivery services regarding the commission
fee charged to retail food establishments, such temporary restriction expiring March 31, 2021.
On March 10, 2020, the Governor of the State of Colorado issued an Executive Or der (“EO”) declaring a state of
disaster emergency for the State of Colorado due to the risk of the spread of the novel coronavirus, designated as
COVID-19.
On March 18, 2020 the City of Englewood City Council passed Emergency Ordinance #10, Series of 2020
declaring that a public health emergency existed due to the spread of COVID-19 within the City of Englewood, and
that Ordinance granted the City Manager of the City of Englewood full power and authority to take certain actions
and issue orders necessary for the protection of life and property in response to COVID-19, including, but not limited
to:
• Any action necessary for the protection of life and property, including, but not limited to, establishing
regulations governing conduct related to the cause of the public health emergency.
• An order controlling, restricting, allocating or regulating the use, sale, production or distribution of food,
water, clothing, and other commodities materials, goods, services and resources.
• Any and all other orders or undertake such other functions and activities as the City Manager reasonably
believes is required under the circumstances to protect the health, safety, welfare of persons or property
within the City of Englewood, or to otherwise preserve the public peace or abate, clean up, or mitigate the
effects of the public health emergency.
Pursuant to Ordinance 10, Series of 2020, Section 9, [i]f any provision of this Emergency Order conflicts with the
City Charter, the City Charter shall control. If any provision of this Order conflicts with any provision of the City of
Englewood Municipal Code, or any provision of the City Council’s Procedures and Rules of Order, this Emergency
Order shall control.
NOW THEREFORE, I, J. Shawn Lewis, City Manager of the City of Englewood, Colorado, hereby order:
The following regulations shall apply to third party food delivery services collecting orders from any location
within the City of Englewood.
1. No person shall cause a third-party food delivery platform to charge a retail food establishment a
commission fee for the use of the platform's services for delivery or pick-up that exceeds 15% of the
purchase price per online order.
2. The provisions of this section shall not limit the ability of any retail food establishment to choose to pay
a higher commission or supplemental fee to access additional advertising or other products and services
offered by any third-party food delivery platform.
3. Violation of this order shall be subject to the penalties as set forth in Section 1-4-1 of the Englewood
Municipal Code, in accordance with the provisions of Section 6(b)(3), of Ordinance 10, Series 2020.
Each offense shall constitute a separate violation.
This Emergency Order shall expire at 11:59 p.m. on March 31st, 2021, unless otherwise rescinded or extended
before that date.
AUTHORITY. This Emergency Order is issued pursuant to Ordinance 10, Series of 2020.
________________________________________________
J. Shawn Lewis, City Manager
Page 29 of 79
STUDY SESSION
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Dan Poremba
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
DATE: December 14, 2020
SUBJECT:
Informational Update on the results of the November 3, 2020
Election to Form and Fund an Englewood Downtown
Development Authority (DDA) and Next Step Options for City
Council Consideration
DESCRIPTION:
Englewood Downtown Development Authority - Next Step Options
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff will provide an update on the outcome of the November 3, 2020 Englewood DDA election
and outline next step options for the DDA now that the district voters have approved its
formation. Several members of the Downtown Matters Steering Committee will be present to
provide Council with their feedback. Based on input from the Downtown Englewood business
community and the Downtown Matters consultant team, staff recommends that Council respond
to the vote to form the DDA by appointing the DDA Board and requesting recommendations
from the Board regarding funding for DDA operations and other next steps. It is also
recommended that Council authorize a City-directed investigation of potential future tax
increment financing by the DDA including initial discussions with Englewood Schools and
Arapahoe County about tax increment sharing agreements (Council Option #3 below). The
overarching goal of this recommendation is to initiate DDA operations to provide needed
support to Englewood’s Downtown business and property owners, including pandemic related
local economic recovery.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:
On July 6, 2020, Council approved CB #25, an ordinance authorizing an election relating to the
formation and organization of the Englewood DDA, plus three TABOR-required ballot questions
required to fund the DDA operations and investment in future public improvements (ballot
language attached). The recommendation to form an Englewood DDA emanated from the
Downtown Matters initiative as funded under a $200,000 Next Step Study Grant from DRCOG
secured by Community Development staff in 2019. A comprehensive Downtown Plan was
formulated, and reviewed with Council on June 16, 2020, as the basic long-term DDA business
plan (englewoodco.gov/home/showdocument?id=27183). This DRCOG grant has been utilized
to address several strategic community planning goals with the top priority being DDA
investigation and formation tasks (as also recommended in numerous prior City-sponsored and
independent studies).
Page 30 of 79
SUMMARY:
The official results of the November 3, 2020 special election were as follows:
Ballot Question A – Formation of a Downtown Development Authority (DDA)
• Passed: 91 Yes to 62 No
Ballot Question B – Collection and Expenditure of Revenues
• Passed: 77 Yes to 76 No
Ballot Question C – Debt Authorization
• Failed: 74 Yes to 83 No
Ballot Question D – Mill levy for DDA operations (2 mills in first year)
• Failed: 67 Yes to 92 No
Based on the passage of Ballot Questions A & B, the Englewood DDA has now been
established in accordance with the State DDA Statute and the referenced Council ordinance
and it is authorized to seek and utilize funding from a variety of sources to support DDA
operations. Because Ballot Questions C & D did not pass, tax increment DDA bonds cannot
currently be issued to fund catalytic projects and public improvements. Also, new Downtown
property taxes cannot be imposed to fund DDA operations (proposed 2 mills in the first year with
a maximum of 5 mills over time).
Sources of funding for DDA operations could include various grants available to Colorado
special districts (including potential CARES Act or subsequent COVID-recovery federal or state
funding), interim grant and loan funds from Englewood based businesses, or a potential working
capital loan or contribution from the City. Subject to specific Council approval, the DDA is also
authorized to collect and expend sales and property tax increment revenues to fund DDA
operating costs and help fund catalytic public improvements needed to move specific
developments forward (without issuing debt). Discussion of the latter investment decisions
would take place subsequent to the Board being seated and remain subject to Council’s
approval of specific investment recommendations.
Based on post-election discussions between staff and the Downtown Matters consultant team,
the following options for Council’s consideration have been identified.
Option 1
• Take no further action on implementing the activities of the DDA
• Consider putting Questions C & D on a ballot in the future
Option 2
• Establish the DDA Board of Directors by accepting applications and appointing the
board
• Request and consider recommendations from the DDA Board regarding interim
funding for DDA operations and other next steps
Option 3
Page 31 of 79
• Establish the DDA Board
• Request and consider recommendations from the DDA Board regarding interim
funding for DDA operations and other next steps
• Implement a city-directed investigation of potential future tax increment financing by
the DDA including initial increment financing by the DDA including initial discussions
with Englewood Schools and Arapahoe County about possible sharing of the tax
increment sharing agreements.
ANALYSIS:
Due in large part to how the TABOR Amendment to the State Constitution required the ballot
questions to be worded (generally from a maximum possible cost, legal and technical
perspective), obtaining a majority vote in favor of the DDA formation, and all three of the
supporting ballot questions was a significant challenge. The fact that the DDA was authorized
indicates that there is support within the Downtown community for a coordinated approach to
downtown Englewood’s future development and sustainability.
Based on the election outcome and the positive interactions with Downtown property and
business owners throughout the Downtown Matters initiative, the consultant team, Steering
Committee and staff recommend that Council proceed to appoint the DDA Board. It is also
recommended that City Council request that the appointed Board provide specific
recommendations to Council regarding potential interim funding for operations and other next
steps, including possible approaches to secure long-term funding.
These steps, which are included in both Options 2 and 3, would reflect the preference
expressed by the majority of the DDA district voters to proceed with the formation and
operational activation of the DDA. They would also leverage the extensive work completed by
the Downtown Matters Steering Committee and consulting team as represented in the creation
of new Downtown Plan and associated public outreach (funded primarily by the DRCOG grant)
The recommended Option 3 would also include the implementation of a city-directed
investigation of potential future tax increment financing by the DDA including initial discussions
with Englewood Schools and Arapahoe County about possible tax increment sharing
agreements. This investigation would be expected to examine how tax revenues, which the
DDA is now authorized to collect (subject to Council approval), could be utilized for direct
funding of DDA operating expenses and/or some level of investment in catalytic public
improvements. Based on the outcome of Ballot Questions C and D, these direct TIF
expenditures would occur without the issuance of DDA bonds secured by the incremental tax
revenues (tax increment financing or TIF).
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The DRCOG Next Step Study Grant which funded the 2020 Downtown Matters initiative,
including DDA tasks, is now being completed with the full expenditure of the $200,000 in grant
funds and the $41,575 local match funding from the approved 2020 Community Development
budget.
If Council elects to proceed with the appointment of the DDA Board and request that the Board
provide specific next steps for Council’s review and approval, it would be appropriate for the City
to provide or assist in funding consultant resources to assist the Board to competently comply
with Council’s request and to provide initial leadership of the DDA. Depending on whether the
DDA is able to access any immediate sources of interim funding from grants, federal or state
Page 32 of 79
programs, the Community Development Department could support some level of 2021
consultant expenses, in combination with other available City funds that may be dedicated to
the DDA. This possible financial support would be in addition to providing Community
Development staff time to support and facilitate the work of the DDA.
An initial operating budget of $200,000 was identified in the Downtown Plan which was
anticipated to be funded by the proposed mill levy (Question D). In the absence of that, the DDA
Board will be tasked with applying for and securing the majority of this early funding from a
variety of sources.
ALTERNATIVES:
Options 1, 2 and 3 above are all alternatives for Council to consider.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that City Council proceed to appoint the DDA Board and direct the Board to
return to Council with recommendations for initial and longer-term funding of DDA operations
and other DDA next steps. Under the recommended Option 3, staff also recommends that
Council authorize a city-directed investigation of potential future tax increment financing by the
DDA including initial discussions with Englewood Schools and Arapahoe County about possible
tax increment sharing agreements.
ATTACHMENTS:
November 3, 2020 Englewood DDA Election Ballot (4 separate ballot questions)
Page 33 of 79
OFFICIAL BALLOT FOR
CITY OF ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
SPECIAL ELECTION, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 2020
/s/
Facsimile of Signature of the Designated Election Official of the District
WARNING
ANY PERSON WHO, BY USE OF FORCE OR OTHER MEANS, UNDULY INFLUENCES AN ELIGIBLE ELECTOR TO
VOTE IN ANY PARTICULAR MANNER OR TO REFRAIN FROM VOTING, OR WHO FALSELY MAKES, ALTERS,
FORGES, OR COUNTERFEITS ANY MAIL BALLOT BEFORE OR AFTER IT HAS BEEN CAST, OR WHO DESTROYS,
DEFACES, MUTILATES, OR TAMPERS WITH A BALLOT IS SUBJECT, UPON CONVICTION, TO IMPRISONMENT,
OR TO A FINE, OR BOTH. (§1-7.5-107(3)(b), C.R.S.)
To vote, place crossmark (X) to the right of your choice after each ballot question / issue.
BALLOT QUESTION A
(Organization)
Shall the Englewood Downtown Development Authority
(the “Authority”) be organized pursuant to Part 8 of
Article 25 of Title 31 Colorado Revised Statutes to
exercise all powers authorized therein and any approved
plan of development within the boundaries of the area
described as follows:
The proposed Englewood Downtown Development
Authority is located within the City of Englewood,
Colorado, in the area including the following real
properties identified by the following Arapahoe County
Assessor AIN numbers and property addresses:
COUNTY AIN PROPERTY ADDRESS
1971-33-4-04-008 1000 ENGLEWOOD PKWY ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-35-3-25-012 1001 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-33-4-00-076 1001 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-02-2-05-002 1002 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-05-001 1008 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-16-003 101 ENGLEWOOD PKWY ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-025 101 W FLOYD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-10-027 105 E FLOYD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-04-1-40-002 1050 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-40-003 1070 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-40-001 1090 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-17-008 11 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-02-2-04-019 1190 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-04-019 1190 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-03-018 1200 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-010 1215 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-03-017 1220 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-24-007 125 E GIRARD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-00-016 125 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-29-007 126 E GIRARD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-022 1277 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-24-008 129 E GIRARD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-28-008 1375 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-26-001 139 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-06-012 180 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
COUNTY AIN PROPERTY ADDRESS
2077-03-1-05-029 201 E JEFFERSON AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-28-010 221 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-029 23 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-05-012 300 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-27-029 303 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-030 31 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-15-007 3200 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-09-001 3200 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-011 3201 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-011 3201 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-15-006 3211 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-15-005 3215 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-15-011 3215 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-15-012 3220 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-14-010 3221 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-14-010 3221 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-09-010 3225 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-010 3225 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-009 3229 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-009 3229 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-14-009 3231 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-14-009 3231 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-09-002 3232 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-008 3235 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-008 3235 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-14-008 3241 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-14-008 3241 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-15-009 3242 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-09-003 3242 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-15-010 3247 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-013 3247 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-004 3250 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-14-007 3255 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-037 3263 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-059 3269 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-059 3269 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-031 3270 S BANNOCK ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-086 3273 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-086 3273 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-060 3275 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-087 3277 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-087 3277 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
Page 34 of 79
2
COUNTY AIN PROPERTY ADDRESS
1971-34-4-09-014 3277 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-030 3281 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-030 3281 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-029 3285 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-026 3290 S BANNOCK ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-089 3294 S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-090 3295 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-09-012 3298 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-22-001 3300 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-054 3301 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-023 3305 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-092 333 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-00-006 3330 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-085 3333 S BANNOCK ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-22-004 3334 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-22-005 3336 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-007 3342 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-23-001 3356 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-22-006 3356 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-22-007 3358 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-23-002 3360 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-23-003 3364 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-23-004 3372 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-22-008 3376 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-23-005 3378 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-22-024 3380 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-24-010 3380 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-23-006 3384 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-18-014 3385 S WASHINGTON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-31-002 3390 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-31-003 3390 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-31-004 3390 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-31-005 3390 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-31-006 3390 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-31-001 3390 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-019 3395 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-22-009 3396 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-23-007 3398 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-18-012 3398 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-30-001 3400 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-29-002 3400 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-36-001 3401 S BROADWAY 1A ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-36-002 3401 S BROADWAY 1B ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-017 3401 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-30-006 3401 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-025 3401 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-002 3410 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-30-005 3411 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-002 3418 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-033 3419 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-030 3419 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-030 3419 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-003 3420 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-019 3421 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-30-004 3421 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-30-002 3422 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-30-003 3424 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-004 3424 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
COUNTY AIN PROPERTY ADDRESS
1971-34-3-17-018 3425 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-055 3425 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-024 3425 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-23-040 3426 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-003 3428 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-25-002 3430 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-25-002 3430 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-17-017 3431 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-029 3431 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-011 3434 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-005 3434 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-021 3434 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-33-4-04-018 3435 S INCA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-26-028 3435 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-17-016 3437 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-018 3440 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-015 3441 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-015 3441 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-022 3442 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-033 3443 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-012 3444 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-006 3444 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-24-015 3444 S EMERSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-28-014 3444 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-17-015 3445 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-014 3445 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-24-017 3446 S EMERSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-037 3448 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-17-014 3449 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-013 3451 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-038 3454 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-036 3454 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-023 3455 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-020 3456 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-007 3456 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-17-013 3457 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-014 3458 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-014 3458 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-28-012 3459 S LAFAYETTE ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-021 3460 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-28-021 3460 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-17-012 3467 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-28-011 3467 S LAFAYETTE ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-022 3470 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-008 3470 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-009 3470 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-28-005 3470 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-28-025 3470 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-28-023 3470 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-28-024 3470 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-17-011 3473 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-23-033 3475 S EMERSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-28-010 3475 S LAFAYETTE ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-28-009 3475 S LAFAYETTE ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-014 3475 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-023 3476 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-009 3476 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-27-010 3476 S GRANT ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
Page 35 of 79
3
COUNTY AIN PROPERTY ADDRESS
1971-34-4-27-015 3477 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-013 3477 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-010 3480 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-27-011 3482 S GRANT ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-17-010 3483 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-024 3484 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-27-009 3484 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-23-041 3488 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-23-042 3488 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-23-043 3488 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-23-044 3488 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-23-045 3488 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-020 3489 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-025 3490 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-28-009 3490 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-021 3493 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-17-009 3495 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-25-011 3495 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-25-003 3495 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-26-012 3495 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-027 3498 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-28-007 3498 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-031 35 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-07-001 3500 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-07-022 3500 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-04-020 3500 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-04-020 3500 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-06-016 3500 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-04-001 3500 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-36-002 3501 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-01-020 3501 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-05-025 3501 S CORONA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-06-012 3501 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-07-020 3501 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-05-013 3501 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-02-001 3502 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-05-022 3507 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-02-002 3510 S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-05-003 3510 S OGDEN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-04-018 3511 S DOWNING ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-04-1-01-005 3511 S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-05-023 3511 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-04-1-01-004 3515 S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-05-019 3517 S ELATI ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-06-011 3517 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-07-024 3517 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-07-031 3518 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-01-003 3520 S WASHINGTON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-05-015 3521 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-07-026 3524 S BROADWAY ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-05-010 3529 S ELATI ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-04-012 3530 S ELATI ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-05-026 3531 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-06-021 3534 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-01-016 3535 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-05-015 3535 S ELATI ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-06-010 3535 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-01-003 3535 S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
COUNTY AIN PROPERTY ADDRESS
2077-02-2-02-012 3535 S LAFAYETTE ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-03-023 3535 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-24-003 3535 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-03-005 3538 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-05-018 3540 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-04-028 3540 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-02-019 3540 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-01-015 3540 S WASHINGTON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-05-016 3542 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-06-013 3545 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-04-014 3545 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-04-1-01-012 3550 S INCA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-02-018 3550 S JASON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-03-021 3550 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-24-002 3551 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-28-001 3555 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-07-029 3555 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-04-013 3555 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-02-013 3557 S LAFAYETTE ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-02-013 3557 S LAFAYETTE ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-07-016 3560 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-06-007 3560 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-02-004 3560 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-07-010 3565 S EMERSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-04-1-01-002 3565 S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-02-005 3568 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-04-012 3569 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-04-006 3570 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-06-007 3575 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-03-022 3575 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-24-001 3575 S SHERMAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-02-010 3575 S WASHINGTON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-04-007 3576 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-02-006 3576 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-04-011 3577 S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-06-008 3580 S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-07-009 3585 S EMERSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-07-017 3590 S CLARKSON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-04-008 3594 S LOGAN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-02-009 3595 S WASHINGTON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-02-007 3596 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-23-006 3597 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-23-005 3597 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-23-004 3597 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-23-003 3597 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-23-002 3597 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-23-001 3597 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-02-008 3598 S PEARL ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-09-019 3600 S GALAPAGO ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-08-008 3600 S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-05-001 3600 S JASON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-09-014 3601 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-08-007 3601 S GALAPAGO ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-06-014 3601 S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-05-007 3601 S INCA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-05-002 3602 S JASON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-09-012 3609 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-09-011 3611 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
Page 36 of 79
4
COUNTY AIN PROPERTY ADDRESS
2077-04-1-06-010 3615 S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-08-003 3620 S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-09-021 3621 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-09-020 3629 S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-05-008 3636 S JASON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-05-009 3640 S JASON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-09-005 3650 S GALAPAGO ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-05-006 3653 S INCA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-09-006 3654 S GALAPAGO ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-17-027 3667 S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-06-012 3690 S JASON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-23-003 401 ENGLEWOOD PKWY ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-29-001 401 W HAMPDEN PL ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-26-020 410 E GIRARD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-04-019 442 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-031 475 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-23-002 490 W FLOYD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-04-001 490 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-26-032 499 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-05-013 500 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-00-056 501 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-25-005 501 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-083 501 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-31-001 506 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-05-001 540 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-00-024 55 W FLOYD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-27-008 551 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-02-018 600 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-27-001 601 ENGLEWOOD PKWY ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-00-051 601 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-06-014 630 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-18-013 665 E GIRARD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-18-013 665 E GIRARD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-004 697 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-01-001 700 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-052 701 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-28-002 707 E JEFFERSON AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-01-002 714 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-17-012 725 E GIRARD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-17-012 725 E GIRARD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-07-011 730 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-07-012 750 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-07-021 76 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-2-07-010 770 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-17-013 777 E GIRARD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-057 799 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-04-1-01-006 800 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-01-011 840 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-33-4-04-019 850 ENGLEWOOD PKWY ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-35-3-23-032 851 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-07-021 880 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-04-1-06-013 888 W ITHACA AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-33-4-04-020 895 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-02-2-06-001 900 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-04-1-02-010 900 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-33-4-06-002 901 ENGLEWOOD PKWY ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-33-4-04-017 901 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-04-1-05-005 945 W JEFFERSON AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
COUNTY AIN PROPERTY ADDRESS
2077-04-1-17-028 945 W KENYON AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-02-2-20-001 960 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-02-2-06-020 980 E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-04-1-02-017 990 W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-33-4-04-009 NA ENGLEWOOD PKWY ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-20-028 NA ENGLEWOOD PKWY ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-20-027 NA ENGLEWOOD PKWY ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-1-04-024 NA E HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-034 NA S ACOMA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-05-017 NA S FOX ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
2077-03-2-08-004 NA S HURON ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-33-4-04-003 NA S INCA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-00-048 NA S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-00-028 NA S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-4-23-016 NA S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-034 NA S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-26-035 NA S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-4-00-017 NA S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-07-028 NA S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-06-009 NA S LINCOLN ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-35-3-28-006 NA S MARION ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
2077-03-1-04-025 NA S PENNSYLVANIA ST ENGLEWOOD CO 80113
1971-34-3-00-084 NA W FLOYD AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-22-008 NA W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-27-003 NA W HAMPDEN AVE ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
1971-34-3-30-001 NA W HAMPDEN PL ENGLEWOOD CO 80110
YES:______ NO:______
Page 37 of 79
5
BALLOT ISSUE B
(TABOR)
SHALL THE ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (THE “AUTHORITY”),
OR THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD (THE “CITY”) ON
BEHALF OF AND FOR USE BY THE AUTHORITY, AND
AS A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE, BE
AUTHORIZED TO COLLECT, RETAIN, AND EXPEND
THE FULL AMOUNT OF REVENUES RECEIVED BY
THE AUTHORITY OR BY THE CITY ON BEHALF OF
AND FOR USE BY THE AUTHORITY IN 2020 AND
EACH YEAR THEREAFTER, INCLUDING, WITHOUT
LIMITATION, TAX REVENUES, FEES, RATES, TOLLS,
CHARGES, GRANTS, RENTS, LOANS,
CONTRIBUTIONS, AND ANY OTHER REVENUES,
WITHOUT REGARD TO ANY EXPENDITURE,
REVENUE-RAISING, OR OTHER LIMITATION
INCLUDING THOSE CONTAINED WITHIN ARTICLE X,
SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION,
AND WITHOUT LIMITING IN ANY YEAR THE AMOUNT
OF OTHER REVENUES THAT MAY BE COLLECTED,
RETAINED AND EXPENDED BY THE AUTHORITY
AND THE CITY ON BEHALF OF THE AUTHORITY?
YES:______ NO:______
BALLOT ISSUE C
(Shall the City of Englewood debt be increased
$80,000,000 (maximum principal amount) with a
repayment cost of $216,500,000 (maximum total
principal and interest costs), all for the purpose of
financing the objectives and purposes contained in any
Englewood Downtown Development Authority Plan of
Development, as such plan or plans may be adopted and
amended from time to time, and constituting a voter-
approved revenue change)
SHALL THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD (THE “CITY”)
DEBT BE INCREASED $80,000,000 (MAXIMUM
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT) WITH A REPAYMENT COST OF
$216,500,000 (MAXIMUM TOTAL PRINCIPAL AND
INTEREST COSTS), ALL FOR THE PURPOSE OF
FINANCING THE OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSES
CONTAINED IN ANY ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN
DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AS SUCH PLAN OR PLANS
MAY BE ADOPTED AND AMENDED FROM TIME TO
TIME, WITH SUCH OBLIGATIONS BEING INCURRED
BY THE CITY ON BEHALF OF THE ENGLEWOOD
DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (THE
“AUTHORITY) AND NOT CONSTITUTING
INDEBTEDNESS OF THE CITY WITHIN THE
MEANING OF ANY CONSTITUTIONAL OR
STATUTORY LIMITATIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF
PAYING THE COSTS OF CREATING AND
IMPLEMENTING ANY PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT,
INCLUDING OPERATING, MAINTAINING OR
OTHERWISE PROVIDING SYSTEMS, OPERATIONS
AND ADMINISTRATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF
CARRYING OUT THE OBJECTIVES AND PURPOSES
FOR WHICH THE AUTHORITY WAS ORGANIZED,
TOGETHER WITH ACQUISITION OR PROVISION OF
ALL NECESSARY, INCIDENTAL AND APPURTENANT
PROPERTIES, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS,
FACILITIES, EQUIPMENT, PERSONNEL,
CONTRACTORS, CONSULTANTS, AND COSTS AND
ACQUISITION OF ALL LAND, EASEMENTS AND
APPURTENANCES NECESSARY OR APPROPRIATE
IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, SUCH OBLIGATIONS
TO BEAR INTEREST AT A NET EFFECTIVE
INTEREST RATE NOT IN EXCESS OF NINE PERCENT
(9%) PER ANNUM, SUCH INTEREST TO BE PAYABLE
AT SUCH TIME OR TIMES AND WHICH MAY
COMPOUND PERIODICALLY AS MAY BE
DETERMINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, SUCH
OBLIGATIONS TO BE INCURRED OR DELIVERED IN
ONE SERIES OR MORE AT A PRICE ABOVE, BELOW
OR EQUAL TO THE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF SUCH
OBLIGATIONS AND ON SUCH TERMS AND
CONDITIONS AS THE CITY COUNCIL MAY
DETERMINE, INCLUDING PROVISIONS FOR
REDEMPTION OF THE OBLIGATIONS PRIOR TO
Page 38 of 79
6
MATURITY WITH OR WITHOUT PAYMENT OF
PREMIUM, AND WHICH OBLIGATIONS MAY BE
REFINANCED WITHOUT ADDITIONAL VOTER
APPROVAL, PROVIDED THAT AFTER THE ISSUANCE
OF SUCH REFINANCING OBLIGATIONS THE TOTAL
OUTSTANDING PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF ALL
OBLIGATIONS ISSUED PURSUANT TO THIS
QUESTION DOES NOT EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
AMOUNT SET FORTH ABOVE, AND PROVIDED
FURTHER THAT ALL OBLIGATIONS ISSUED
PURSUANT TO THIS QUESTION ARE ISSUED ON
TERMS THAT DO NOT EXCEED THE REPAYMENT
COSTS AUTHORIZED IN THIS QUESTION; SUCH
OBLIGATIONS SHALL BE PAID ONLY FROM ANY
LEGALLY AVAILABLE MONEYS OF THE AUTHORITY
OR FROM REVENUES OF THE CITY LEGALLY
AVAILABLE ONLY FOR THE AUTHORITY, INCLUDING
THE REVENUES PLEDGED OR FROM TAXES
PLEDGED PURSUANT TO SECTION 31-25-807(3)(B),
COLORADO REVISED STATUTES, OR BOTH SUCH
REVENUES AND TAXES WITH SUCH LIMITATIONS
AS MAY BE DETERMINED BY THE BOARD OF THE
AUTHORITY AND THE CITY COUNCIL, AND SHALL
THE PROCEEDS OF ANY SUCH OBLIGATIONS AND
THE PROCEEDS OF SUCH TAXES OR ANY OTHER
REVENUE BE USED TO PAY SUCH OBLIGATIONS,
AND INVESTMENT INCOME THEREON BE
COLLECTED AND EXPENDED AS A VOTER-
APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE?
YES:______ NO:______
BALLOT ISSUE D
(Taxes)
SHALL THE CITY OF ENGLEWOOD (THE “CITY”)
TAXES BE INCREASED $250,000 IN THE FIRST
FISCAL YEAR (2020) AND ANNUALLY THEREAFTER
IN SUCH AMOUNTS AS ARE RECEIVED EACH YEAR
BY THE IMPOSITION OF AN AD VALOREM
PROPERTY TAX RATE OF NOT MORE THAN 2.000
MILLS IN THE YEAR 2020 AND NOT MORE THAN
5.000 MILLS ANY YEAR THEREAFTER UPON
TAXABLE REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY WITHIN
THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPOSED
ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY (THE “AUTHORITY”), FOR THE
PURPOSES SET FORTH IN PART 8 OF ARTICLE 25
OF TITLE 31 COLORADO REVISED STATUTES; AND
SHALL THE CITY AND THE AUTHORITY BE
AUTHORIZED TO COLLECT, RETAIN AND EXPEND
THE REVENUES COLLECTED FROM SUCH TOTAL
PROPERTY TAX RATE, AND INVESTMENT INCOME
THEREON, AS A VOTER-APPROVED REVENUE
CHANGE?
YES:______ NO:______
BALLOTS MUST BE RECEIVED BY 7:00 P.M. ON
ELECTION DAY, November 3, 2020
ENGLEWOOD DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
c/o Spencer Fane LLP
1700 Lincoln Street, Suite 2000
Denver, CO 80203-4554
Page 39 of 79
STUDY SESSION
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Christina Underhill, Dave Lee
DEPARTMENT: Parks, Recreation & Library
DATE: December 14, 2020
SUBJECT: Off Leash Dog Task Force Update
DESCRIPTION:
Finding Solutions Moderator, Steve Charbonneau will provide council with the proposed
consensus of the off leash task force.
RECOMMENDATION:
Steve Charbonneau with Finding Solutions will present the Off-Leash Task Force consensus for
the off-leash program. Director of Parks, Recreation, Library and Golf Christina Underhill,
Manager of Open Space Dave Lee and Code Enforcement Supervisor, Dave Lewis, will be
present to discuss the consensus and recommendations for the off leash program in Englewood
parks.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:
2001
• City Council approved Council Bill No.36, Ordinance No. 3, Series of 2001 an Ordinance
amending the Title 7, Chapter 1A of the Englewood Municipal Code 2000, pertaining to
dogs and cats. This Bill made it unlawful for a dog to be off-leash running at large.
2002
• City Council approved Resolution No. 4, Series of 2002 establishing a Pilot Park
Program for off-leash dogs.
• On December 30, 2002, staff recommended the pilot program be retained on a
permanent basis for the 5 off-leash parks (Jason, Northwest, Bates Logan Duncan,
Centennial).
2003
• Off-leash privileges revoked by City Council for Bates Logan Park
2017
• Master Plan review including off leash dogs in parks and on-going conflicts.
2020
• March 30--Council hears staff presentation regarding public education and enforcement
of off-leash dogs rules. Council asks Parks & Recreation Board for recommendation
regarding the off-leash program.
• June 22--City Council directs staff to postpone further discussion on the
recommendations until Council can meet in person and COVID restrictions are lifted.
• July 6--Due to many emails and City Council meeting public comment. City Council
asks staff to bring the Parks and Recreation Commission Sub Committee
recommendations before Council at the next available date.
Page 40 of 79
• July 20-- The Parks and Recreation Off-Leash Sub Committee presented their
recommendations for the new off-leash program. Council did not approve the
recommendations and ask the commission to engage other residents on the topic.
SUMMARY:
On March 30, 2020 staff presented information regarding the off-leash program to Council. The
staff’s presentation was in response to a number of residents requesting Emerson Park become
part of the off-leash dog program along with numerous complaints regarding enforcement of the
off-leash program. Council gave direction to staff to take this topic back to the Parks and
Recreation Commission to find solutions for the off-leash program. Some of the responses from
Council at the March 30th meeting included adding a licensing program, adding Emerson Park
as an off-leash park and adding a park on the north side of the City (Cushing). In addition to
continuing the “Take the Lead” off-leash educational campaign.
The Parks and Recreation Commission made the determination to reinstate the 2018- 2019 Off-
Leash Dog Sub Committee. The 2020 Off-Leash Sub Committee consists of 3 Parks and
Recreation Board Members; Mark Husbands, Kate Truesdale and Stephen Young and a staff
liaison Dave Lee, Open Space Manager. On May 26, 2020 the Off-Leash Sub Committee met to
review and discuss findings from stakeholder meetings and determine a recommendation to
resolve the off-leash dog program issues.
On Thursday, June 11, 2020 the Sub Committee presented their recommendations to the Parks
and Recreation Commission to modify the off-leash program. The Commission approved the
recommendations unanimously. Then on July 20, 2020 the recommendations were presented
to City Council. At the July 20 meeting City Council did not approve the subcommittee
recommendations and asked the committee to reevaluate the task force.
After the July 20, 2020 council meeting a new Task Force was developed and additional
members were added to the original Sub Committee. The subcommittee expanded their reach
to include four members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, Englewood Unleashed
members, two residents opposed to allowing off-leash and the current president of Pirate Youth
Sports. The new Task Force held a total of five meetings, September 22, October 6, October
20, October 29 and December 1 with a contracted moderator from Finding Solutions, Steve
Charbonneau. The goal of the new task force was to find a consensus on how the off-leash
program should move forward.
ANALYSIS:
The Off-Leash Task Force has had lengthy discussions on the current off-leash program and
how the program could be modified to reduce conflict among the different park uses.
The task force consensus is as follows:
To best meet the needs of the residents as a whole, all quadrants of the City contain parks with
on-leash and off-leash areas. Two new parks will be added to the off-leash program, Cushing
and Emerson. Centennial will be removed and become an on leash only park.
The off-leash parks are:
• Canine Corral- fenced
• Jason Park- fenced
• Cushing Park- fenced
Page 41 of 79
• Emerson Park- no fence
• Northwest Greenbelt- no fence
• Duncan Park- fenced
The remaining Englewood parks will require dogs to be on a leash:
• Baker Park
• Barde Park
• Bates/ Logan Park
• Belleview Park
• Centennial Park
• Clarkson Amherst Park
• Miller Fields
• Romans Park
• Rotolo Park
• River Run Trailhead
• Southwest Greenbelt
In the off-leash parks, fenced areas will be installed to divide the off-leash area from other park
uses. Emerson park and Northwest Greenbelt are the only parks without a fence proposed.
Emerson parks location and lack of other park amenities like picnic shelters and playgrounds
allows for off-leash to exist without a fence.
The proposed fence will not be chain link but a shorter 3-4’ fence that is more decorative in
nature and will be aesthetically pleasing within the parks. Off-leash fenced areas will include
benches, picnic tables, trees for shade and in some parks water fountains for the dogs.
Off-leash hours will be annually 6am-11pm, 7 days a week. There will be temporary closures
(1-2 hours) for weekly maintenance like mowing and longer-term closures (4-6 weeks) for turf
maintenance and restoration.
The task force believed a designated small dog park and one designated large dog park would
be welcomed. Cushing park is proposed for the small dog park and Jason would be considered
for the large dog park. The large dog park designation does not necessarily deter small dogs
from participating but it gives dog owners options on where to take their dog.
Dog licensing was also discussed. Currently, Englewood does not require dogs to be licensed.
The task force agreed licensing was important. The license would be for the dog not the owner
and the task force proposed a resident and non-resident fee along with an educational
component to obtaining the license. The park ranger will oversee the selection and
implementation of the licensing program.
Next steps- POLCO and National Research Center will be administering a statistically valid
survey to assist in additional data collection of off-leash uses. The survey will be offered in
both English and Spanish and five thousand randomly selected Englewood homes will receive
the survey. Each survey will be geocoded to identify the location of the completed survey. An
access code will be provided to each home selected. This access code will be unique to the
home and cannot be duplicated. Postcards will be sent out with a URL link to complete the
survey; printed surveys can be requested. A reminder postcard will be sent out a week after
the initial postcard was sent if the survey has not been completed.
After February 10th an open participation survey will be available for any Englewood residents to
complete. The open participation survey will allow Polco to collect additional responses but
Page 42 of 79
these responses to the open survey will be presented separately from the statistically valid
survey.
The survey timeline is as follows:
• Develop and finalize questionnaire by Dec. 21, 2020
• Translate survey into Spanish by Dec. 28
• Mail initial postcard Jan 6
• Mail reminder postcard Jan 13
• Data collection and data entry (random sample survey) through Feb 10
• Open participation survey opens Feb 10-Mar 3
• Data analysis and report preparation through March 24
• Draft report emailed March 24
• Review by client, revisions by National Research Center through March 26
• Presentation to City Council April 2021
ATTACHMENTS:
Off Leash Task Force Consensus Power Point
Survey proposal- Polco -NRC
Original Parks and Recreation Commission sub committee recommendations
Page 43 of 79
Off Leash Task Force Consensus
Presenter: Steve Charbonneau, Find Solutions
Staff Liaisons: Christina Underhill, Dave Lee and Dave Lewis Page 44 of 79
Off Leash Task Force Overview
➢City Council asked this taskforce to work together to reach a consensus on the best (safest, equitable
and achievable) way to address the needs and desires of the community with respect to designation of
off-leash dog areas within Englewood parks.
➢Our taskforce is comprised of;
▪Dog owners
▪Park users
▪Pirate Youth Sport
▪Englewood Unleashed
▪Non-dog owners
▪City Staff, Park and Recreation and Code Enforcement
➢Consensus is…Page 45 of 79
Overview of Recommendations
➢Distribution
➢Off-leash parks –6
➢On-leash parks –11
➢All quadrants of the City
containing on/off-leash areas
➢Hours of operation or use will be 6am-11pm
➢Park maintenance
➢Regular
➢Long-term
➢Licensing program
Page 46 of 79
Off –Leash Parks
(Specifics in next slides)
➢Parks with off-leash areas
➢Canine Corral
➢Jason Park
➢Cushing Park
➢Emerson Park
➢Northwest Greenbelt
➢Duncan
➢Off-leash park considerations
➢Regular and long-term maintenance program.
➢Open from 6am –11pm.
➢Designs will take advantage of state of the art and creativity; and will include amenities such as picnic
tables, benches, shade, and water.
➢Fencing will not be chain link, we will include samples in the final recommendations
➢At least one small dog or large dog, active or passive area.Page 47 of 79
On –Leash Parks
➢All other Englewood parks will allow dog on-leash.
➢Hours will be 6am –11pm.
▪Baker
▪Barde
▪Bates/Logan
▪Belleview
▪Centennial
▪Clarkson Amherst
▪Miller Fields
▪Romans
▪Rotolo
▪River Run trailhead
▪Southwest Greenbelt
Page 48 of 79
Canine Corral
Page 49 of 79
Cushing Park
•Size: .6 acres fenced
area added in the north
west portion of the park.
•Location: west of Inca
south of Dartmouth.
•Under utilized portion of
the park. Page 50 of 79
Duncan Park
With fenced, off-leash area
•No athletic field available
moving forward.
•Could install one fence vs four
sided fence.
•Path around park and all other
areas will require dogs to be on
leash.
•Keeps activated portion of park
separate from dog park portion
Page 51 of 79
Emerson Park
•No fence is proposed at
Emerson.
•Emerson does not have
picnic shelters or
playgrounds to produce
conflict between dogs and
other uses. Page 52 of 79
▪Fenced area for off leash dogs.
▪Sports field will be available for
organized sport and non-dog
use. This preserves the turf,
avoids conflict, and addressed
safety and cleanliness issues.
▪All areas of the park except
designated off leash area will
require a dog to be on leash.
Jason Park
Page 53 of 79
Northwest Greenbelt
Page 54 of 79
Polco Survey
•Online survey developed in partnership with POLCO and National Research Center
•English and Spanish
•5,000 home randomly selected
•GeoCode invitations to identify the location of the completed survey
•Specific access code send via postcard –unique to specific home
•Postcard invitations
•Announcement with URL link
•Reminder card sent if survey has not been completed
•Paper copy could be made available if requested by resident
•Open participation survey for anyone to fill out to add to responses but would not be
included in the statistically valid survey. Available Feb 10-March 3.Page 55 of 79
Survey Timeline
•Develop survey with input from City Council, Off Leash Task Force and Parks &Recreation
Commission
•Develop and finalize questionnaire by Dec. 21, 2020
•Translate survey into Spanish by Dec. 28
•Print survey materials through Jan 8
•Mail initial postcard Jan 6
•Mail reminder postcard Jan 13
•Data collection and data entry (random sample survey) through Feb 10
•Open participation survey opens Feb 10-Mar 3
•Data analysis and report preparation through March 24
•Draft report emailed March 24
•Review by client, revisions by National Research Center through March 26
•Presentation to City Council April 2021Page 56 of 79
Next Steps
➢Survey over next couple of weeks –Draft completed by Dec 23.
➢Council, Parks and Recreation Commission and Task Force will have
opportunity to review and provide input on the draft survey.
➢Survey goes out –January 2021 and results compiled by end of March 2021
Reviewed, assessed, incorporated into recommendations to Council
➢Presentation to Council -April 2021
Page 57 of 79
Questions/ Comments
Page 58 of 79
POICO
National Research Center
Proposal for EmglewoodgCG
Dog Park Policy Survey
November 17,2020
Page 59 of 79
Proposal for Englewood Dog Park Survey
Project tlnrlerstanding
Polco/NRC understands that the City of Englewood,CO wishes to conduct a survey of residents to
gather feedback on preferences for off—leashdog areas versus fenced-in dog parks,which parks
should allow dogs off—leashareas or have fenced—indog parks,where the dogs should be allowed in
speci?c parks,how many dogs households have,among other topics.The survey would be
developed in collaboration with City staff and the Task Force created to deal with City issues
around dog parks.
Choosing a $nrvey Mode of Aolministration
A first step in conducting a survey is to choose the mode of survey administration.Polco/NRC
regularly conducts web-based surveys using mailed invitations,which is what we recommend for
this survey.Given that the City wants to include images of the various parks and possible locations
for off—leashand/or fenced-in dog areas on the survey,an online survey will be much more
compatible and economical compared to a mailed,paper survey.We will be able to geocode the
mailed invitations,they will have instructions in English and Spanish (optional),and will have
accesscodes in order to ensure that each household that receives the mailed innovations responds
to the survey only once.
However,if a resident calls the City to request a paper copy or says they cannot take the survey
online,the City can choose to print and mail a paper copy to that resident.This would require the
City enter any completed surveys into the online form on Polco.(Alternatively,Polco can provide
costs for survey printing,mailing and data entry for a small number of surveys (~50)once the
survey length has been solidi?ed.)
In addition to the random selection survey,we recommend the City distribute via its various
communication channels an online open participation survey for all residents to provide their
feedback if desired.
Creating the Questionnaire and Survey Materials
We will work with the City staff and the Task Force to craft a questionnaire that covers the
objectives of the study.The survey creation process is generally an iterative one,starting with the
topics or questions that have been developed by the City.We also can review questions or topics
covered on any previous surveys conducted on the topic (e.g.the survey the City conducted on
Polco in April 2020 —“Off Leash Dog Privileges”),and will provide a draft survey for your review.
(Due to COVID—19,we assume all meetings and discussions about survey development will occur
via email and phone,with virtual meetings as needed.)We will continue to review and modify the
survey until it covers the desired topics and the questions are unbiased and easy to understand.
A shorter survey is always preferred by survey recipients,but sometimes the amount of information
to be collected requires a longer survey.We have provided a cost estimate for a 5-page paper
equivalent survey (assuming at least a half page of demographic questions to be able to compare
respondent demographics to the Census/AmericanCommunity Survey data and weight the
responses)and the option to add on additional pages (e.g.,one 8.5 X 11 page in Word)as needed.
The postcard invitations should be signed by a visible elected official or staff member.If desired,
we recommend that the City conduct a pilot test of the survey by asking family members or friends
not involved with the topics covered on the questionnaire to take the survey and provide feedback
Proposal from Polco/National Research Centerl
Page 60 of 79
Proposal for Efnglewood Dog Park 5.;urvey
on anything they find confusing or hard to understand.We can make final modifications to the
survey based on that feedback.
We also have provided costs for translating the survey into Spanish.We will translate the survey
into Spanish and program it on Polco.All mailed invitations would include a Spanish paragraph
explaining the survey purpose and letting respondents know that they can go on Polco to take the
survey in Spanish online.
.£\tlr‘r'nirais‘ter':'m{.§the RamchnnSelectiori Survey
For a mailed invitation to the online Polco survey,we will have two contacts with each household,
as multiple contacts increases response rates:
1.An initial postcard announcement,explaining the survey’s purpose and containing a URL
where respondents can go online'to complete it.
2.A reminder postcard,requesting that if the online survey has not already been completed,to
please do so.The second postcard also asks those who have already done so to refrain from
completing it a second time.
We will include a URL to the survey on Polco on each mailing.All survey materials will include the
City’slogo or letterhead and be signed by a high ranking official (typically the City Manager or
Mayor)to add legitimacy to the effort and make the materials more recognizable by residents.
Preventing Duplicate Responses
While our years of survey research have shown that duplicate responses are rarely cause for
concern,they can occur for more topical or hot button issues such as this.If the City staff or
Council have concerns about "ballot stuffing”,we can include an “access code”that a respondent
would need to enter into the online survey.During analysis,we would look for duplicate access
codes and remove any duplicate responses.An access code also will allow for easier tracking of the
location of the household as it relates to the parks in question and whether they are 1/4or 1/2a mile
from each park.
However,the downside of including an identifying code on the survey is that we would need to
change our promise of anonymity to con?dentiality.As a result,some respondents could worry
they are being tracked and will choose to not complete the survey.Given the geographic precision
a11dlevel of detail the City requires,we feel the benefits of including an access code outweigh the
potential drawbacks.
seiazztinsqg Ftertzieiyaantsa
For the random sample survey (the probability-based survey where a
random sample of recipients is chosen),all City householdswould be
eligible to receive a survey.All research is a balance between availability
and efficient use of resources and an ideal plan.A random selection of
addresses from the sampling frame (the USPS Delivery Sequence File,in
this case)is one way to make efficient use of resources.An example of
sampling that may be familiar from a math or statistics class is the jar or
bowl of marbles of various colors.If the jar l1astwo-thirds red marbles and one~third blue marbles,
a random selection of marbles should result in a similar proportion of red and blue marbles as in
the original jar -i.e.,that sample should come close to representing the larger jar.
The 95%confidence interval (or “margin of error”)quantifies the “sampling error”or precision of
the estimates made from the survey results.A 95%con?dence interval indicates that for every 100
random samples of this many residents,95 of the con?dence intervals created will include the
“true”population response.This theory is applied in practice to mean that the “true”perspective of
Probes-atfrom Polco/National Research Center
Page 61 of 79
Proposal for Englewood Dog Park Survey
the target population lies within the con?dence interval created for a single survey.For example,if
75%of residents rated the quality of City parks as “excellent”or “good,”then the 4%margin of
error (for the 95%confidence interval)indicates that the range of
likely responses for all residents is between 71%and 79%.This source
of uncertainty is called sampling error.In addition to sampling error,Numf-9'of Margin
other sources of error may affect any survey,including the °—1%°'“'°“"[——~‘L—5”"""5 Ef?cf"
non-response of residents with opinions different from survey Egg ;:‘§,§
responders.The chart shows the associatedmargins of error for 309 gm
various numbers of completed surveys.As can be seen,400 completed 400 i4.9%
surveys corresponds to a margin of error about plus or minus 5 son €4,095
percentage points,which is often considered a sufficient level of 1810000
precision for survey results for local governments making policy 1:330 §2:7.,,
decisions.However,a larger number of completed surveys may be
desirable if subgroup comparisons are needed.
The city’s response rate to The National Community Survey conducted in 2020 by NRC was 24%.
We expect a lower response rate would be garnered for this survey,given its specific topic and that
not all residents will feel it applies to them (though we will be thoughtful about crafting messaging
for all residents).Additionally,mailed invites to web-only surveys tend to have response rates that
are about half that of a mailed,paper survey.For the mailed invitation to online survey,we have
seen response rates as lowas 6%and as high as 18%.
To be able to make subgroup comparisons,we recommend at least 5,000 households receive the
two postcard invitations to complete the web survey on Polco.We would estimate between
300-700 responses.We are happy to modify the number of surveys and invitations mailed to meet
your needs.
Adrninistering the Organ Participation Survey
While the random sample helps ensure representativeness,you may have residents who were not
chosen for the mailedsurvey who want to participate.We will host your survey on Polco,and once
the main survey data collectionwindow is closed,we recommend that you open a new window to
wider public participation (non—probabilitysurvey).Because the City hosted other surveys this year
on Polco,you will have access to over 700 subscribers with
whom you can share the dog park survey.Via the City’s
l
,,
current profile on Polco,you also can share a survey
invitation on your social media accounts to send email
invitations for more people to provide input.We also have '
resources to guide you in sharing your survey through a
variety of other communication channels such as
newsletters,email blasts,community partners,etc.We have
included in our costs assistance with outreach methods to
help maximize response and representativeness for the open
participation survey.
This will continue building on the City’sexisting panel of
resident respondents on the Englewood profile on Polco.
This pro?le can also be used for additional quick polls of
residents to dive deeper into any questions that come out of
the dog park survey or polls on other hot topics (e.g.,a follow
up survey about pet licensing).As your panel grows any new
surveys would be automatically surfaced to all residents who have signed up.Results of these
efforts,including the dog park survey,will be reported in real-time in attractive easy-to-share
Proposal from Poleo/NationalResearch Center I f
Page 62 of 79
Proposal for EmglewciodDog Park Survey
charts on your Polco profile,and include comparisons by demographic subgroups and geographic
areas when available.
While all mail—sampledsurvey efforts generally are kept separate to ensure statistically valid
results,in future years,if a robust panel is built we may be able to further reduce mailed out efforts
and the attendant hard costs by partly sampling from your panel,but rest assured we would never
guide you to use deficient methods.
Survey Publicity
NRC strongly encourages our clients to conduct public outreach in advance of the random sample
survey to boost response among selected households,with the added bene?t of boosting residents’
trust in local officials.This trust will accrue by conveying community leaders’interest in listening
to residents.Outreach and communication about the open participation survey will be paramount
in garnering a large number of responses that are as representative as possible.For both the
random sample and open participation surveys,we have sample communications we can share as
examples.
Survey Prucessirig
Data from those respondents who received a mailed—outsurvey or invitation and answered on
Polco (using the unique URL on the cover letter or postcard invitation)are automatically entered
into an electronic dataset,downloaded,cleaned as necessary to create one complete dataset.
Data Auaiyssiaand Report Preparation '
Often,our first step in preparing the data (probability and non-probability samples)for analysis is
to compare the demographic pro?le of the respondents Census data,to see if there was a
differential in response among certain demographic groups.If there was under—or over-response
from demographic subgroups,we will “weight”(statistically adjust)the responses,to give more
weight to those from groups that responded at a lower rate,and less weight to those who responded
at a higher rate.Weighting is an important method to adjust for potential non~response bias.In
general,residents with certain characteristics (for example:those who are younger)are less likely
to participate in surveying,whatever the data collection mode.Weighting can help ensure their
responses are correctly accounted for when generalizing the results to all residents.
For quantitative analysis of surveys,we use several analytics tools as appropriate (R,Python and
IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS)).We believe that analysis must be replicable
and leave a clear path.To this end,we keep every label and command run in our syntax files
available for audit and re-running,as necessary.We can code any open-ended responses using both
an emergent approach,where themes are revealed through the analysis,combined with a deductive
approach,where a scheme or codes are predetermined and applied to the data (current costs do not
include additional analysis of open-ended responses,but we have included it as an add-on service).
We use various analysis techniques,suited to the project and question.
In addition to providing a full set of responses to each survey question,analysis may include
crosstabulation by geographic area and respondent characteristics.
The data and reports will undergo a thorough quality assurance review.We will audit the original
data files and our statistical syntax/analysis ?les,compare automatically generated output to the
formatted output in the report and data check all numbers and text prior to submitting the reports.Thislwillensurethedata analyses are correct and staff,the media and the public will trust the
resu ts.
Proposal from Polco/National Research Center I I
Page 63 of 79
Proposal for Englewood Dog Park Survey
The body of the report will include graphs and charts to illustrate the survey findings.The body of
the report will be based on the probability (random)sample results.Tables of the complete
frequency of responses to each survey question will be provided in an appendix,as will tables of
crosstabulations of selected survey responses by respondent demographics and geographic location
(depending on the number of survey recipients,we recommend 3-4 areas at most).We will also
provide appendices with the complete responses to the online open participation survey and tables
that compare the open participation to the probability sample results.An appendix with the
technical details on the survey methodology will also be included.As a cost savings measure,we
can provide a report with an “extended”executive summary (including a couple graphs),but no
report body (graphs and interpretive text for every question);cost savings available upon request.
All the appendices will still be included in this summary report.Drafts of the report will be
provided to the City for review and the final report will incorporate any comments we receive.
Polco t...iva
With the City’scurrent subscription,you will have access to all features available on Polco,
including the soon—to—be~releasedPolco Live.This feature will allow Polco to be used in real-time
for remote (and later,live)council meetings,town halls,and conferences.Results will be available
in real-time in the meeting.Polco Live would be a great assessment tool to use during any focus
groups or meetings the City may have with residents once the survey results are in,or as a
supplement to collect additional data outside of the larger survey.
Proposal from Polco/NationalResearch Center!~
Page 64 of 79
Proposal for Englewood Dog Park Survey
The timeline below serves as an example.Due to the holidays,we would recommend getting the
survey,mailing materials and mailing list ready to go and waiting until January 2021 to avoid the
survey getting lost in the business of the holidays.However,we are ?exible and can work to get the
survey invitations mailed sooner,although this will require some quick work on the front end of the
project.Generally we find survey development can take anywhere from 3 to 12 weeks depending
how refined the survey objectives are and the type of review procedures needed.When larger
groups of stakeholders are involved,and survey development has to happen around the holidays,
we generally ?nd that ?nalizing the survey takes signi?cantly longer.We recommend preserving
the 5 week data collection window,and keep in mind that data collection might need to be
extended if responses are still being collected or if more targeted outreach is needed to garner a
higher response.
ES_k Dam
Develop and finalize questionnaire by Dec.21,2020
Translate survey into Spanish (optional)by Dec.28
Print survey materials through Jan 8
Mail initial postcard Jan 6
Mail reminder postcard Jan 13
Data collection and data entry (random sample survey)through Feb 10
Open participation survey opens Feb 1o—Mar3
Data analysis and report preparation through March 24
Draft report emailed March 24
Review by client,revisions by NRC through March 26
Proposal from Polco/National Researcli Center I :
Page 65 of 79
Pro ossal for En if-ll/\l()O(JlDoc Park i~‘.urveP(J J V
Polco is an award~winningcivic engagement platform and
suite of public input services that uses online surveys and
polls to bring the voice of everyday residents,business
owners and other community stakeholders to leaders.
Polco adds reliability to results and fosters civility through
unique verification capabilities and key design features.
The platform produces organized data,dashboards,and
maps in real-time.
Polco is especially useful for clients with immediate
decision-making needs,including local and state
governments,special districts,schools and universities,and nonprofit organizations.
The Polco suite provides one convenient place to find a range of additional engagement tools and
services,scientific surveys (conducted by its research branch,National Research Center),tips on
best practices,and access to Polco’s expert team.
1 it?l:*’eiic;yLiiecyzzisa
0 Real-Time Feedback 0 Strategic Planning
0 Representative Samples 0 Performance Measurement
0 Panel Research (tracking impacts)0 Topic and Project Prioritization
0 Annual Surveys 0 High Profile issues
0 Quick Polls 0 Crowdsourcing Ideas
0 Stakeholder engagement
o Needs Assessment
:*;$.:_»si .
post Share Discover
pun {mm uuf 1i|;.-my()f§(_'i(jn[i?(;We identify a i'cpi'csciit2itivc random AlllT_|l“1tl’UP“l«'m3§imlillk‘will ?lm‘
1,em.hmm.1(;nggu,~\,(.y5 Wm-kwith sample lll1(lSl)i\I‘C'l1l‘()i|lllyl.lI!‘()llgll "‘“'1l'L"l“ml "1?-“"”'~'d"csull-“
‘>i ..’,..lwhli 'd.:l‘-1"--1.U11]-Sulqxey Ex],m_.;[0 Craft Smm.1h,ng multiple modes and comi111iiii<:ati<iii{u:;Ch$:“_1:’iug'“]‘]Lfi]‘
li|“01'£‘d.-01'lmllllsliNW1‘"“'“-chmmdg to nlcetI-cllileillswhere coiitextiizilizcresults against othertheyare.Acui Lie 2:digital panel.mganizminm like ymlm
Pi‘oposal from Polco/National Research Center]
Page 66 of 79
i‘~’roposa|for linglewoocl Dog Park Survey
Voice {kill-..,ili'"t"’“
Smarter,more connected communities.Po|co’s online civic engagement platform
provides the tools you need to bring community members and leaders together.
(‘tt’JC«iil Gt{}i!E.itl\ii‘ti€il\il'
1%53 Q Better transparency and structured
‘“"">‘‘communicationimproves community
1N O NE P LA C E connection,buy in.and resiliency.
Polcds online engagement tool improves
how decision-makersand communities t“"s':Zl¥l"-iii‘-’Ell1lAtiiii1i.>Iliiifsiiiiifrii‘"‘
"Quentify success and progress on strategic
comect‘We dam/er meease and goals by tracking resident satisfaction.
“°Ce55“’m‘V0f ‘’”“”e 5‘’“’‘‘'V5°°mm“ed Understand overall cornrnunity level metrics
with veri?cation as reliable as in-person as wet]as census l'r3C{]prec]n{;{lever
engagement.Poico was designed from sentiments.
inception for civicenvironments by former
public servants who,after spending time at §;,£«.\_.;g'mg:§v ‘§‘l§‘:f§5
some of the country's best tech companies.Consolidate your communication channels.
wanted to bring world class communication You can provide social media.email.anti
tectmology to meCM‘;pmceSS_any other outreach information on a
Polco survey or poll.Collect resident input
together in one place with automated
tabulation and reporting.
§‘t’i(.l"2'ii7i‘i‘if.;iWt"i‘lt3t\t
Make it possible for busy and thoughtful
reeiclents,who struggle to attend
in-person events,to provide meaningful
input through easier accessibility.
i
K/‘iii :1.l'*Qi.§.f\Zi‘.t“t.r‘5iii
The more you use Polco,the more your
following grows.Build a digital panel of
for it-,_;gg;Rgtogg residents who can quickly respond to future
Each survey,question,and policy poll can SWVWS3"“e“Q3Qeme“t3ff°”5-
carry relevant links and images to inform
|’95D0fid9i‘|‘I5‘i‘*‘s’.it,.i..~‘»lZ”/‘£3E£»i.J%'i’i£Ct?..
7 'Discovera range of additional community
Egitt 1"i{1l:I "i engagement products and services in
YOUalready KNOW“OWthey feel.use Pol<:o‘sonline marl<etplece.Find everything
citable data from a broader majority to from premium surveys to eclvanceci
end steiemates and keep moving forward.analytics and upgraded reporting.
Proposal from Polco/National Research Certterl
Page 67 of 79
Proposal for Englewood Dog Park Survey
‘The Fm,§i’iiiilaiil('Jii
Verified responses with confidentiality assured and privacy protected
0 We have official voter lists for all of the US integrated and regularly updated
o You can also provide your own list for us to use for verification
Option to invoke anonymity,when appropriate for your research
Dedicated profile -your branding,your content,your results,your audience
0 Your audience is individuallyanonymous to you,but you can track their demographic and
geographic profile in real time
Many channels out —one place for results aggregated and summarized in real time
Your audience grows over time and is retained to receive all the future content you post
Participants can respond via multiple Polco technologies -a mobile app,a web experience,and ability to
embed on your website
Prebuilt surveys,created by our expert researchers,vetted by content experts
Participant iifixperiericae
Responses are stored securely with guaranteed privacy,confidentiality and with an absolute promise
not to sell or share individually identifiable data
Published content (surveys and polls)can include simple or robust background information (text,images
and/orvideo)when the subject is new or complex
Publishers can share the outcomes of decisions with the respondents,to close the loop and let
respondents know how their input impacted policies,programs,strategic plans,etc.
Demographic data is imputed from verification databases,or asked once,and stored separately from
surveys;survey responses can be linked to the stored demographics,so they do not need to be asked
each time
Asaalysis;and insigilts
Rich demographic analytics from registered respondents -in real time see your results broken down by
area,gender,and age
Benchmarking to your cohorts —when local,regional,and state entities share the same survey with their
respective constituents,responses can accrue to multiple profiles (e.g.,one resident's response will be
included on their City's,County's,and State's profile)
Benchmarking to NRC'ssuite of National Surveys
Real time and automated reports
Civilcommenting -limit of one comment per person and the opportunity to upvote (like)other people's
comments,but not to dislike or comment on them
Weighting the data —when the demographic balance is skewed,we can use advanced statistical
weighting procedures to be sure your respondents better match population norms
Sample size calculation
Mapping of resultsl Ourfoundation is as small as a census block,so maps can be built for
neighborhoods,precincts,special districts,wards,zip codes,cities,counties,regions,etc.
Proposal from Polco/National Research Center I
Page 68 of 79
Page 69 of 79
City of Englewood Parks & Recreation Commission Off-Leash Dog Sub Committee
Recommendation
June 2020
The Off-Leash Dog Sub Committee was formed in October 2018 as a result of increased complaints from
citizens about off-leash dog park program. The sub committee met with three stakeholder groups from
November 2018 to April 2019, including Englewood Code Enforcement, Englewood Unleashed and Pirate
Youth Sports (see Appendix for meeting notes.)
Sub committee members included Parks & Recreation Commissioners Kate Truesdale, Mark Husbands and
Kathy Christie. Dave Lee represented the Parks & Recreation Department. Member Kathy Christie moved
away from Englewood in September 2019 and Parks & Recreation Commission member Steve Young
replaced her in May 2020.
On May 26, 2020 the Off-Leash sub committee met to review and discuss findings from stakeholder
meetings and determine a recommendation to resolve the off-leash dog program issues that have been
troubling Englewood for years.
The Off-Leash Dog Sub Committee recommends the following:
• Off-leash dog privileges will be revoked at Centennial, Jason and Duncan Parks. The Englewood
Parks & Recreation Department and Code Enforcement have received multiple complaints about
dangerous, at-large dogs at these parks and there are genuine concerns for the health and safety
of Englewood’s children and families. These parks have athletic fields, rental shelters and
playgrounds. Athletic fields and rental shelters generate revenue for the Parks & Recreation
Department, however due to at-large dogs Pirate Youth Sports has considered relocating to
South Suburban Parks, and shelters have seen a decline in rentals. Revoking off-leash privileges
at these three parks will ensure all Englewood’s citizens can safely enjoy the parks, and that the
Parks & Recreation Department maximize potential revenue. Furthermore, turfs at these parks
have been damaged as a result of excessive dog use, and the Parks & Recreation Department has
had endured unanticipated costs to reseed and fence the turfs for recovery. Revoking off-leash
privileges at these parks will reduce turf use and damage, as well.
• The Northwest Greenbelt will remain an off-leash dog park, and Emerson Park will transition to
an off-leash dog park. It is recommended off-leash dogs be allowed 24 hours during park hours
(6am-11pm) , 7 days of the week, 12 months of the year at the Northwest Greenbelt and
Emerson Park. These parks do not have athletic fields or rental shelters, and therefore at-large
dogs are less likely to interfere with other activities. The playground at the Northwest Greenbelt
is to be fenced-in to address safety concerns for children and families. Citizens that live around
Emerson Park have requested it to become an off-leash dog park for years and this
recommendation also satisfies their requests. By permitting off-leash privileges at these two
parks, it means both the north and south side of Englewood (Hampden Boulevard as the divider)
will have off off-leash dog privileges, which is something citizens have also been requesting for
years. Canine Corral will remain an enclosed off-leash dog park.
• The Parks & Recreation Department will develop a comprehensive plan and secure funding for
a new enclosed off-leash dog park at Cushing Park. The concept for a dog park at Cushing Park
was first introduced in the 2017 Parks & Recreation Master Plan. A second enclosed off-leash dog
park in northern Englewood will help disperse off-leash dog activity across the city and allow
Code Enforcement to better manage at-large dogs. The Cushing Park off-leash dog park should
Page 70 of 79
potentially be for small dogs only, which may also help diffuse issues between dogs within
Canine Corral. In the remaining months of 2020, The Parks & Recreation Department will develop
a comprehensive plan for an enclosed off-leash dog park at Cushing Park, including all necessary
environmental study requirements, infrastructure needs, a projected budget and a timeline for
completion (2021). The estimated total project cost is $300,000. The Parks & Recreation
Department will write a grant to secure funding in 2021.
• The Parks & Recreation Department will continue it’s “Take the Lead” campaign and create
content around the off-leash dog park changes. The Off-Leash Sub Committee believes if
Englewood’s citizens are primed about the holistic plan for off-leash dog parks, they will be more
likely to show support. These changes will make the parks safer and more enjoyable for all of
Englewood’s citizens, and while some off-leash dog park privileges are being revoked, new
opportunities for off-leash dogs are also being created. Communicating these changes through
the “Taking the Lead” campaign will ensure citizens are aware of the changes, yield a smooth
transition and mitigate potential for at-large dog issues.
• The Parks & Recreation Department will create new opportunities for Englewood residents to
socialize. Multiple citizens have commented that the off-leash dog parks create an opportunity
for socializing and build sense of community among neighbors; revoking off-leash privileges may
minimize this. Community park events and adult sports leagues will provide different
opportunities for neighbors to interact. The Parks & Recreation Department will work this with
the Parks & Recreation Commission to create these opportunities.
The Off-Leash Sub Committee believes these recommendations will resolve the off-leash dog program
issue within Englewood. As our city continues to grow and develop, the existing off-leash dog program is
not sustainable. At-large dogs are a health and safety concern and a financial burden for the city of
Englewood. It is crucial to implement changes to the program and create a second dog park. We, the Off-
Leash Sub Committee, look forward to the future of off-leash dogs within our city.
Page 71 of 79
STUDY SESSION
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM: Chad Read
DEPARTMENT: Police
DATE: December 14, 2020
SUBJECT: Police Reform Task Force Discussion
DESCRIPTION:
Police Reform Task Force Discussion
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff desires Council feedback on recommendations from the Police Reform Task Force. As
police and city leadership stands ready to implement all recommendations with Council
approval, staff specifically specifically requests Council identify any items that Council wishes to
see removed or modified from the list.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:
August 3: City Council requested a list or outline of task force options from staff.
August 10: City Council reviewed and discussed a draft list of topics for the task force to review.
August 17: City Council finalized topics for the task force to cover and agreed upon members of
the group.
November 2: City Council gave feedback on recommendations and asked for staff analysis on
each.
SUMMARY:
The Police Reform Task Force recommendations are the final step (prior to implementation) in
Council's review and analysis of police operations. The recommendations fall into four
categories: 1.) hiring, training and discipline; 2.) use of force; 3.) alternate policing; 4.) factors
impacting police department operations.
ANALYSIS:
The Police Reform Task Force meetings and recommendations were the fourth step in a
process launched in June by Council to review police policies and operations. Previous steps
included:
1.) A written report to the community of policing operations covering topics of the Council's
choosing (https://www.flipsnack.com/englewood/police-report.html)
2.) Policing expert panel discussion with Council
(https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/document/92482)
3.) A telephone town hall meeting on 21st century policing (https://www.englewoodco.gov/city-
services/city-departments/police-department/policing-town-hall).
Page 72 of 79
City Council approved membership and topics for the Police Reform Task Force on August 17.
The group met once per week over the course of six weeks. As a result of those meetings,
recommendations to Council in the following categories were made.
• Hiring, Training, & Discipline
• Use of Force
• Alternative Policing
• Factors impacting Police Department Operations
See attached recommendations along with staff's analysis of each.
For information on the process and minutes from the Police Reform Task Force, please see
agenda background materials from the November 2 City Council meeting found at
https://englewoodgov.civicweb.net/document/100014/Police%20Reform%20Task%20Force%20
Recommendations.pdf?handle=463387940E9A4FCF9B4B4D1DB4D57E94.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Five of the recommendations have direct financial impacts. To implement recommendations in
the first three categories, costs would range from $250,000 to $400,000.
ALTERNATIVES:
Reject, modify or approve all or some recommendations of the Police Reform Task Force
ATTACHMENTS:
Staff analysis spreadsheet of all task force recommendations
Page 73 of 79
Deliverable Implementation StepsCurrent Policy/Policy to CreatePartner AgenciesDeliverable DateEstimated Cost Police Notes Legal Notes1Make a formal policy of not accepting candidates that have been in trouble with other agenciesDevelop a formal policy of reviewing the disciplinary records of candidates from their employment with public safety agenciesWrite/approve a formal policy that excludes candidates with sustained allegations of untruthfulness or excessive force; i.e.: "Sustained allegations of untruthfulness or excessive force are an automatic disqualifier for employment".Lexipol policy 1000.6 but POST may revoke certification for civil/criminal finding of untruthfulness or excessive forceCity Attorney's Office 2020 No anticipated costThis is part of the background investigation process. Add wording about sustained allegations of untruthfullness or excessive force being a disquailifierThere are no current legal barriers to a policy of disqualifying any applicant with a prior sustained allegation of excessive force or untruthfulness2Find ways of reaching out to diverse candidates. Would like to see the candidates involved in process to be asked if they have suggestions for the process. EPD has relied on IACP and other associations, but it’s not solving the problem.Work closely with Human resources and attend career fairs. If we are able to recruit non‐POST certified candidiates to hire them and send them to a POST academy, we will be able to diversify our recruiting efforts. 1.) Enhance recruiting efforts at targeted locations. 2.) Work closely with HR in recruiting. 3.) Consider local and national channels to increase recruiting. 4.) Create survey for candidates that have been in the process to ask for suggestions/imkprovements.Lexipol 1000Human Resources Department2021 and ongoingcontinue to explore best practices for recruitment and retentionWork with HR to avoid any potential legal issues concerning hiring practices 3Programs in EPD like Impact Team that make EPD a standout among agencies. We should market these assets.Develop a marketing plan to highlight stand‐out programs provided by the Englewood Police Dpeartment, such as the Impact Team and Co‐Responders. 1.) Incorporate Police Marketing Plan into Communications Team goals for 2021. 2.) Work closely with citizen and business groups to identify opportunities for spreading the message. 3.) Hire full time Community Relations person assigned exclusively to PD to market assets through social media, internal and external communications and volunteer groupsLexipol 1000 Communications 2021 and ongoingIf one full time FTE is approved, salary and benefits = $95,000Work closely with Communications There is no recognized legal issue with marketing successes4Develop a program to financially support non‐POST certified candidates in the certification processDevelop a program to financially support non‐POST certified candidates in the certification process Program already in place1.) Develop the policy that will guide this program; 2.) Hire two FTE's annually (even if at maximum staffing) who are sent through the police academy and FTO training. 3.) Include the costs of the academy and a living stipend in the FTE's salary; 4.) Include cost of program in the annula police budget No existing policy, could be implimented by PD/HRFinance and HRCan implement in 2021 if financing is available1.) POST Academy Tuition‐‐$8,3802.) Salary/Benefits while in the Academy (19‐Weeks)‐$33,1613.) Salary/Benefits while in FTO Training ‐ $29,6704.) Equipment and Uniforms‐$4,962____________Total for one FTE‐$76,173Total for two FTEs‐$152,346Rough estimate: $152,346 for two FTE's/yearIn general, there is no legal issue. However, there may be legal issues depending on the specific policy/implimentation5Incorporate training on bias and diversity; something where police officers are with non‐police participants.Develop a strategy, modeled on the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE), for training on bias and diversity; make trainings interdepartmental between police and staff from other City departments1.) Develop diversity and bias training modules in partnership with the Government Alliance on Race; 2.) Work with HR to ensure at least 50% of trainings are interdepartmental among City departments No existing policy HR 2020 and ongoingPartner with Community businesses for joint training (SMC?). Perhaps with CIRSA as well.There is no recognized legal issue with additional training of this nature6Provide CIT training to all officers ‐ incorporate into Policy, including refresher trainings as neededProvide Crisis Intervention Training to all officers; include referesher trainings in annual in‐service training program1.) Identify training opportunities for CIT; 2.) Build CIT into annual training requirements; 3.) Incorporate CIT refresher courses as part of annual in‐service trainingNo existing policyHuman Resources Department2020 and ongoingContinue to strive for 100% make this a goalThere is no recognized legal issue with additional training of this natureHiring, Training & DisciplinePolice Reform Task Force Recommendations‐‐Staff AnalysisPage 74 of 79
7Bring external trainers in to supplement internal efforts, annuallyHave external trainers identified and utilized as part of annual training1.) Work with the Professional Standards Bureau identify a list of external training sources. 2.) Contract with external trainers and incorporate into annual in‐service training.Not ApplicableHuman Resources Department2020 and ongoingAlready working with DPD on diversity training for 2021 inserviceThere is no recognized legal issue with additional training of this nature8Create a Training Policy & supporting components (Annual training ‐‐POST mandated, plus EPD defined training policy and supporting components, reviewed annually by council)Develop and implement a Training Policy1.) Develop a 3‐tiered training process: 1‐‐POST Mandates, 2‐‐Agency recertifications, 3‐‐Training identified by the needs of the organization. 2.) Evaluate all tiers on an annual basis. 3.) Work with CMO to have training policy on City Council agenda each JanuaryNo existing policyHuman Resources Department2021maintain an inclusive data base for all trainingThere is no recognized legal issue with maintaining a training data base9Create a micro website dedicated to the recruitment of police officers (requirements, timeline, training, etc.) Launch a website dedicated to the recruitment of police officers1.) Work with IT to design this portal. 2.) Work with HR to input information that will keep the candidate properly informed of the process. Not ApplicableCommunications; Human Resources Department, IT2021Workwith IT on develpment of a portal for candidates/applicants to access there info.Work with HR to avoid any potential legal issues concerning hiring practices Deliverable Implementation StepsDoes Policy/Procedure Already Exist? Partner AgenciesDeliverable DateEstimated Cost Police Notes Legal Notes1The City Attorney will review changes to the Use of Force policy and if significant will refer it to the city council for review and approval.Review changes to the Use of Force Policy and, if significant, present to Council. 1.) Have CAO review all changes to the use of ofrce policy annually; 2.) Add CAO to Lexipol update list; 3.) Make review of use of force policy an annual agenda item for City Council each JanuaryNo existing policy City Attorney's Office 2020 and ongoingLexipol policy is already aligned with SB 217There are no legal barriers to a procedure of informing the City Council of changes to use of force policy2Present data on Use of Force incidents per population ethnicity segments. Share with community members and get their feedback. We want to look at data from SB217 forward. Desire for a page on the Englewood Website that citizens can access ongoing and that is also reported quarterly to council and accompanied by a public outreach campaign.We’ll start in a month with the new RMS system moving forward. Compare with external third party who cross‐validates the Englewood data.Compile annual report on use of force for internal and external communication that includes use of force statistics from AG's office tied to race and ethnicity. Work with Communications Dept. to create a new page on the Police website that includes this information. 1.) Coordinate with AG's office on information gathered in accordance with SB20‐217. 2.) Determine what information AG will release relitive to date that has been collected. 3.) Determine if data collected by RMS will fill any gaps of info not collected by AG's Office. 4.) Work with Communications to add new webpage to EPD site containing this information 5.) Make use of force statistics report to Council annually in January (but available year round via webpage)Not Applicable State AG's Office 2021 and ongoingConsider using data from State mandated data gathered from EPD Officers. Also identify the areas in the new RMS system that would be able to get us this information along with using our existing use of force reporting databaseThe CAO will work with the EPD to ensure that there are no ongoing legal issues with such data collection3Create a system enabling us to track and leverage data insights around use of force in the city on an ongoing basis. As an accountability measure for long term evaluation of potential discrimination. This should include identifying individuals who have a mental health and/or substance use condition. (coming online end of Oct 2020)Compile annual report on use of force for internal and external communication that includes use of force statistics from AG's office or Police RMS tied to mental health or substance abuse diagnoses. Include information in annual City Council use of force report1.) Coordinate with AG's office on information gathered in accordance with SB20‐217 including mental health or substance abuse concerns. 2.) Determine what information AG will release relitive to date that has been collected. 3.) Determine if data collected by RMS will fill any gaps of info not collected by AG's Office. 4.) Work with Communications to add new webpage to EPD site containing this information 5.) Make use of force statistics report to Council annually in January (but available year round via webpage)Not Applicable 2021 and ongoingAnalyze our reporting system for Use of Force Reports to determine if data can be entered and then captured more effectively.The CAO will work with the EPD to ensure that there are no ongoing legal issues with such data collectionUse of ForcePage 75 of 79
4Have the EPD legal team consider removing identification of Excited Delirium as a “serious medical condition.” Ensure the definition of excited delirium is accurate. (The AMA recognizes it in 401 A‐08 ‐ widely accepted entity in pathology...in custody death…)Consider the removal of identification of Excited Delirium as a "serious medical condition".CAO/EPD recommends against any change in policy Lexipol 300.6.1 City Attorney's Office No need for changeThe Englewood police department policy ‐ 300.6.1 states only that police officers should treat excited delirium as a serious medical condition. The perceived issues with excited delirium (that it is used as a justification for in‐custody deaths when they are actually the result of inappropriate force) are ones that lie in the coroner's office/ district attorney's office over which we have no control/authority.The CAO agrees with the position of the EPD. There is very little to no positive to getting rid of "excited delirium" in Lexipol, but there is potential liability to not treating excited delirium as a serious medical condition.5The 40mm rubber bullets should be 1.) disallowed as crowd control / crowd dispersal tool but 2.) allowed as officer protection or 3.) allowed to control individual humans.Lexipol 445 has been modified to explicitly meet the requirements of SB217CompleteLexipol 445/CRS 24‐31‐905City Attorney's Office CompleteWas updated to make more clear in lexipol post SB 217Changes meet all Legal requirements 6Consider combining the first amendment activities policy into the use of force consideration for council to vote if PD wants to change the resolution.Use of Force could be deleted out of 445 (as it already exists in 304). CAO/EPD recommends against any change in policy Lexipol 445.6/445.7 CA's Office No need for changeAll complies with 18‐1‐707 and SB 217. Use of Force under policy 445 (first amendment activities) has the same standards/requirements of 300 (use of force) but provides topical reminders to law enforcement.CAO agrees with the position of the EPD. The policy is placed in multiple places in Lexipol to ensure that an officer reviewing policy on First Amendment activities is also reminded of the use of force restrictions.7Chief’s Recommendation: Identify all de‐escalation training needs and foci and implement training on them. Review We have to look at each discipline and keep hammering away at the education side of it so PD and community continues along the right path.Identify all de‐escalation training needs and integrate them into training programs. 1.) Develop de‐escalation training goals and objectives including skills training and verbal de‐escalation; 2.) Create a training module on this topic that exceeds POST requirements; 3.) Ensure de‐escalation training is a requirement for all officers.Not ApplicableHuman Resources Department2020 and ongoingDetail in the training outlines of each skill exactly how much time was spent focused on de‐escalation techniquesThere is no recognized legal issue with detailing training of this nature8Verbal de‐escalation should be a primary tactic when possible in attempting to non‐violently de‐escalateVerbal de‐escalation is covered as a tactic in Lexipol and SB217; incorporate into training as noted aboveSame as Use of Force #7: 1.) Develop de‐escalation training goals and objectives including skills training and verbal de‐escalation; 2.) Create a training module on this topic that exceeds POST requirements; 3.) Ensure de‐escalation training is a requirement for all officers.Lexipol policy 300.3.1/300.3.5; CRS 18‐1‐707CompleteSB 217 and Lexipol are already aligned with this requestThere is no legal issue with maintaining the current policyPage 76 of 79
9Implement a Community Engagement Plan that addresses the following: 1) Educate constituents such that they understand what we are actually talking about and how defensive tactics are wound into these de‐escalation tactics. 2) How do we make the community whole experiencing a bad outcome as a result of EPD actions. We have to find a way to restore that relationship with the community and Police after a bad outcome. 3) Define and educate public on our crisis response practices.Create and implement Community Engagement Plan1.) Work closely with Communications Team to develop an engagement plan; contract with Slate Communications or other provider as needed. 2.) Consult with our local media partners on their perceptions and consider best practices. 3.) Implement Table top scenarios with PD, Communications, City Managers office, City Attorney's office for this type of situation.Not Applicable CommunicationsCan implement in 2021 if financing is available. salary and benefits of full time Community Relations Specialist, assigned strictly to the Police= $95,000. Enhancement of our Community Relations and Crime Prevention Programs is critical. And then participation by EPD Personnel will be directed appropriatly.CAO will work with EPD and Communications should any legal issues arise.10Re: "Verbal Warning Before Shooting" in EPD Use of Force Policy Refer this section to attorneys to simplify with a request to change “reasonable” to “feasible.” Also, clarify the points that differentiate between warning shots versus any type of shots.Modify Lexipol 300.4 to explicitly meet the requirements/language of SB 217 and this recommendation. Change the word feasible to reasonable in 300.4Complete Lexipol 300.4.1 City Attorney's Office CompleteSee below on warning shots. See 18‐1‐707 for verbiage. Change 300.4 to use 'reasonable' to comply with SB 217 and remain internally consistentChanges meet all Legal requirements 11Re: "Warning Shots" in EPD Use of Force Policy Change wording to say, “Under no circumstances shall a City of Englewood officer discharge a warning shot.”Modify wording in Use of Force Policy related to Warning Shots to state "Under no circumstances shall a City of Englewood officer discharge a warning shot"Complete Lexipol 300.4.2 City Attorney's Office Complete Review Lexipol to make that change Changes meet all Legal requirements 12Codify the Chief’s policy of investigating all use of force complaints.Develop a change to the Lexipol policy, codifying the Chief's policy of investigating all use of force complaintsComplete Lexipol 1014 City Attorney's Office 2020 Place in policy if applicable Changes meet all Legal requirements 13Shots fired from a moving vehicle are rarely effective and should be avoided in almost all cases (incorporate into training and clarify policy with attorney approval)This topic was addressed in SB 217. Policy cannot be changed without conflicting with existing state law (under SB 217).N/A Lexipol 300.4.1 City Attorney's Office No need for changeCRS 18‐1‐707(4.5) Police officers can use deadly force when they have an objectively reasonable belief that lesser degrees of force are inadequate. EPD 300.4.1 discourages firing at/from vehiclesPolicy cannot be changed without conflicting with existing state law (under SB 217)14Revise EPD policy regarding fleeing subjects which aligns with SB 217 (SB217.1707 Section 3 has language which should replace EPD policy 300.4—Deadly Force Application)Modify Lexipol 300.4 to explicitly meet the requirements/language of SB 217 and this recommendation. Remove the word immediate in 300.4Complete Lexipol 300.4.1 City Attorney's Office CompleteThere is one small change (remove the word immediate from 300.4) needed to comply with SB 217 ‐ Imminent does not mean immediate or instantaneousChanges meet all Legal requirements 15Have EPD begin tracking and collating fleeing subject pursuitsThis is in essence the same question as Use of Force #14 above. This is an existing practiceAll Vehicle pursuits will continue to be documented, tracked and reviewed per Lexipol Policy 307.9.Lexipol 301 CA's Office No need for changeEPD is already aligned with SB217 on Fleeing felons and the use of deadly physical forceThere are no legal implications to a policy of tracking/collating suspect pursuits16Possible Recommendation: John S. noted he wants to 1.) expand Crisis Intervention Training, 2.) Expand co‐responder program and 3.) expand the pilot program to do 911 diversion to legal/medical health respondersExpand CIT, Co‐Responder and undertake 911 diversion to legal/medical health responders1.) Expansion of CIT Training covered in Alternate Policing Section #6 below; 2.) The possible expansion of the co‐responder program is being considered and RFP's are currently being analyzed; 3.) Bring associated costs to City Manager and Council for consideration; 4.) Consider one or more models for 911 diversion; 5.) Implement selected model.No existing policy City Manager's office 2021Relatively large cost. Similar to alternative policing #6#1 is the same as #6 in previous section. #2 is same as items in following section. #3 to be considered.CAO will work with EPD/City Manager should any legal issues arise with these potential programsPage 77 of 79
Deliverable Implementation StepsDoes Policy/Procedure Already Exist? Partner AgenciesDeliverable DateEstimated Cost Police Notes Legal Notes1Modify co‐responder job description to include case management and proactive outreach to individuals with repeat CIT contact with EPD (based on access to CIT referrals with new RMS)Ensure Co‐Responder program includes case management by adding staff/resources; ensure proactive outreach to repeat CIT contacts1.) Expand Co‐Responder program with case management as outlined in other action items herein; 2.) use RMS to identify repeat CIT contacts; 3.) Train and develop system to proactively reach out to and case‐manage repeat CIT contacts Not Applicable 2021The cost for one Case Manager at 40 hours per week is approximately $75,000All Health and EPD to evaluate JD.There is no immediate legal implication to adding another position, more hours 2Retain 80 hours licensed co‐responder time Retain 80 hours per week of licensed co‐responder time Complete Not Applicable No need for change Status Quo? RFP for 2021 covers itThere is no immediate legal implication to keeping this position3Modify co‐responder job description to include case managementModify co‐responder job description to include case management1.) Current co‐responder job description for AllHealth Network reads: "Provide linkage to case management services and/or community‐based resources as needed"Currently in contract with All HealthHuman Resources 2021Evaluate with All Health and PD and HR ‐CM already in job description, see #32‐1 above. Can develop expectation of EPD cliniciansThere is no immediate legal implication to modifying this job description4Add pro‐active outreach based on access to CIT referrals with new records management systemSame as Alternate Policing #1 Same as Alternate Policing #1 Not Applicable All Health 2021 Included in Co‐Responder program.There is no immediate legal implication to modifying this job description5Re‐evaluate CIT work hours to best meet needs of EPDConduct a reevaluation of CIT work hours to best meet the needs of the department1.) Use current review of Co‐Responder RFP to ensure needs are met; 3.) Collaborate with selected provider to set goals and ensure acheivementNot Applicable All Health 2020 and ongoing Evaluate with All Health and PD.There is no immediate legal implication to modifying this job description6Expand care navigation/case mgmt to a new FTE at 40 hours/week to provide outreach to individuals with mental health, domestic violence, substance abuse and homelessness needs. Establish, recruit for, and hire a new outreach position to work with mental health, substance abuse and homelessness needs (Domestic Violence is covered by EVAC, which has intern and part‐time employee doing outreach)1.) Work with with Co‐Responders and police staff to establish a job description for new case manager; 2.) Work with HR to recruit and hire new position to work with mental health, substance abuse and homelessness needs Not ApplicableCity Manager's Office; Municipal Court; City Attorney's OfficeFor implementatin in 2021 if funding is approved(Repeated cost from #1 above) $75,000 per year depending on the Case Manager addition noted in #1 aboveSame as #1 aboveThere is no legal implication to adding another position, more hours 7Enhance connection/use of SAFY (Specialized Alternatives for Familes and Youth)Develop a process to enhance the use of SAFYSAFY = "Specialized Alternatives for Families and Youth." SAFY is the mobile crisis contractor for the Colorado Crisis Hotline and is a part of the 911 call diversion program. See the 911 call diversion line #9.No existing policy 2021911 Call diversion as part of Colorado Crisis ServicesCAO will work with EPD should any legal issues arise.8Ensure quantitative and qualitative review and evaluation of Co‐Responder programIniate the use of metrics to review and evaluate the success of the Co‐Responder program1. Develop performance metrics for Co‐Responder program; 2.) Review metrics monthly; 3.) Include perforamance metrics into annual report to Council. Not ApplicableCity Manager's Office, All Health2020 and ongoingEnsure proper data is gathered for this evaluation.There is no immediate legal implication to gathering this data9Determine how to intervene at 911 level to divert mental health calls to crisis systemCreate protocols to work with the dispatch center to divert mental health calls to crisis system1) Train dispatchers in the use of the Colorado Crisis Hotline. 3) Train police officers in the use of the Colorado Crisis Hotline. 3)impliment at the 911 communications level.No existing policy All Health 2021See #7. Can be implemented as soon as guidleines are established and training completed. Also see #10.CAO will work with EPD to address any legal issues with diverting 911 calls. At present, there is no absolute legal bar to such a policy.Alternate PolicingPage 78 of 79
10Investigate ways to reduce the number of calls officers have to respond, considering other resources available to address the needs identified by the caller (e.g., could there be a non‐officer response such as this (mediation) for certain non‐criminal offenses. Steve noted that when residents call 911, they expect an officer, but when officers respond, they can often determine that another resource such as this could be deployed.)Create and implement a strategy to reduce the number of calls officers have to respond to and consider additional resources available to address the needs identified by the caller1.) See Alternate Policing #9 for 911 diversion implementation plan; 2.) Inventory existing calls and assess what other resources may be needed to handle certain non‐violent calls; 3.) Identify existing resources (i.e.: Code, Neighborhood Resouces Program, Mediation Program, Park Ranger); 4.) Establish protocols for both dispatch and officers to divert calls where possible No existing policy Communications 2021Evaluate best practices this area to ensure that officers are only contacting those in need and that require police contact.CAO will work with EPD to address any ongoing legal issues with changing responses to calls for service/911 calls Deliverable Implementation StepsDoes Policy/Procedure Already Exist? Partner AgenciesDeliverable DateEstimated Cost Police Notes Legal Notes1Recommended the City secure grants for emergency and/or short‐term residential detox and addiction servicesCreate a process to routinely monitor and apply for grants for emergency and/or short‐term residential detox and addiction services1.) Conduct needs assessment; 2.) Create a process to routinely monitor and apply for grants for emergency and/or short‐term residential detox and addiction services Develop related talking points; Not ApplicableFinance City Manager's Office2021 Research if this is approvedContract with Denver Cares? Options available after detox for substance abuse treatmentCAO will work with City Manager's Office to address any legal issues with a treatment center/detox services2Explore housing options for homeless individuals and those with substance abuse needs, both short term and transitional housing with wrap around services. Tri‐Cities Homelessness Policy Committee capabilities should be leveraged.Ensure that the Police Department continues to participate in the Tri‐Cities Homelessness Initiative, and relay pertinant programs back to the departmentAction plan will be developed by Tri‐Cities Homelessness Policy CommitteeNot Applicable City Manager's Office2021 Research if this is approvedAssociated cost TBDDenver Springs and other programs are options for substance abuse treatment, may not be immediate detox; Tri‐Cities and EPD have met with Bridge House/Ready to Work to explore programming and housing Arapahoe County exploring transitional housing options CAO will work with City Manager's Office to address any legal issues with any homeless programFactors Impacting Police Dept OperationPage 79 of 79