The regular meeting of the Aurora City Council for Monday,
August 10th, 2026 is called to order with a clear please call
the roll.
Mayor Kaufman.
Here.
Council member.
Andrews.
Council member.
Bergin.
Council member.
Combs.
Council member.
Gardiner.
Here.
Council member.
Hancock. Here.
Council member.
Horton. Here.
Council member.
Jackson. Council member.
Lawson. Here.
Council member.
Medina. Here.
Council member.
Wallace. Council member.
Wiles.
Here. There's a quorum.
Council member Jackson is excused.
Please join me in an invocation.
Uh, our Lord, our God and our father.
We come to you and we ask that you look upon this particular
gathering tonight to keep us
safe and guide us in our decisions.
Bless our city with honorable citizens, industry, sound
education and good government.
Unite our community together.
Even though we come from different backgrounds.
We pray that there will be justice and peace in our city.
Give the City Council and citizens the wisdom, direction
and sensitivity to the business
and proceedings before us tonight.
Hear us, therefore, as we commit this meeting to the help
of our entire community.
Amen. Land acknowledgement.
I'm sorry.
Um. Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America.
And to the Republic for which it stands.
One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
A land acknowledgement.
The city of Aurora acknowledges that we gather on the
territories and ancestral homelands of the Cheyenne and
Arapaho and Lakota peoples, past and present.
We also recognize the 48 contemporary tribal nations
that are historically tied to the lands that make up the
state of Colorado indigenous peoples, and remain committed
to the stewardship of this land over many centuries, as these
words of acknowledgement are spoken and heard.
The ties that these nations have to their traditional
homelands and to their vital place in the ecosystem are
renewed and reaffirmed, and we are called upon to be better
stewards of the land we inhabit as we continue to work to meet
the needs of our entire community.
Our motion is in order for approval of the minutes for
July 27th, 2026.
So moved.
Moved by Councilmember Hancock.
Second by
second by Councilmember Lawson to approve the minutes for July
27th seventh, 2026 discussion and seeing no discussion.
Call for the question on approval of the minutes for
July 27th, 2026.
Mayor Kaufman.
Votes yes.
What did you say?
Mayor Pro Tem.
13 a but let's see who's going to make the motion.
Council member.
Horton.
Yes. Council member.
Hancock. Yes.
The motion passes unanimously to adopt the July 27th, 2026
meeting minutes.
Adoption of the agenda.
Motion is in order.
Mayor.
Mayor Pro tem.
So moved.
Councilmember Wiles or Mayor pro tem?
Was there something that was
going to be removed from the agenda?
So we have a motion to approve the agenda.
Is there a
second Councilmember?
Mayor. I'll or sorry, City attorney Schultz.
I'll make that as a friendly amendment.
Um, so that would be sorry.
Scroll down.
So, yeah.
Um, move to approve the agenda with item 13 A removed.
Is there a second?
Okay. Um, second.
Move by Mayor Pro tem, seconded by Councilmember Wiles to, um.
Is it?
Item is that.
I approve the agenda of removing item 13.
A.
Uh, approval of the agenda.
Uh, minus item 13.
Aye. Item number 13.
A of discussion.
Uh, I'm sorry, Mayor pro Tem.
So just to clarify, the removal of 13 a, um, I have some
amendments to the resolution
regarding the data center moratorium.
Um, that will would require significant modifications to
the ordinance.
So we're removing the ordinance and, um, going to vote on the
resolution, as amended.
Very well.
Further discussion.
Seeing none, call for the question on the adoption of the
agenda, as amended.
Mayor Kaufman.
Yes.
The motion passes unanimously to adopt the agenda with item
13 A removed.
All right.
Thank you, Mayor Pete Schultz and the city attorney.
A couple of things.
The council has asked me, is the parliamentarian for City
council to read the the decorum statement?
I know we don't like calling it that, but the public comment
announcement, if you guys have signed up to speak during
public comment, please make sure that it's on items that
are not on the agenda.
So, for example, if you're here to talk on the data center
resolutions, please don't talk about that during public
comment because it won't be part of the record to be used
on those items.
So if anything does end up getting appealed or later, your
comments will not be included.
And so if you do start doing that, either the city clerk and
myself may remind you that this is not the appropriate time to
make comments on agenda items.
So City Council has established this public forum to receive
input from the community.
The public invited to be heard portion of the meeting is
limited by council rules for a total of one hour, with each
speaker allotted three minutes.
Speakers signed up to comment on agenda items are also
limited to three minutes, and comments must be related
directly to that item on the
agenda that is being considered.
All participants are expected to observe the same standards
of decorum as the City Council.
Personal attacks, disruptive behavior, and demonstrations
such as clapping, snapping, cheering, booing or similar
actions are not permitted.
Please show respect to all speakers, regardless of whether
you agree with their comments, and allow everyone the
opportunity to be heard.
Speakers who exceed the three minute time limit reduce the
opportunity for others to speak.
Please be considerate of your fellow residents when preparing
your comments, and we do ask
that you refrain from using profanity.
As you know, there may be children watching or others
that are sensitive to profanity.
So mayor public invited to be heard.
And Schaffner followed by Agent Anderson.
On July 31st, 2026, Rajan Belt Stubblefield would have been
celebrating his 38th birthday instead of him being here to
celebrate that with his family
due to him being slain by the Aurora police.
Another chapter of this tragedy opened itself up because on
July 31st, 2026.
Instead of there being a birthday celebration, that
family received the news that the officer that killed Rajan
in the street was indicted for
murder two and reckless manslaughter.
What I find interesting is that when the system seemingly
affirms the narrative that the police do no wrong, or that
when they shoot us in the
street, somehow, someway it is justified.
We don't see hesitation
from a chief of police and some of the leaders on this dais to
boldly speak up and affirm that narrative.
But when something shifts and now there is a sense of
accountability coming down through that same system that
you affirm when they justify killing us.
Interestingly enough, we don't see the same pattern
of acknowledging that something is different.
There is seemingly a protocol of the Aurora police to post a
mugshot of someone that commits a crime in your city, along
with a very descriptive
narrative on your social media platforms.
I've been scrolling since July 31st, and I have not seen
Matthew Neely's mugshot or details about the charges of
the crime that he has been
accused of committing in your city.
So I just want to say that some of you will likely rationalize
in your head of why that's the case.
But I'm here to remind you that history will not be kind to the
A contradiction.
You have a police chief.
That is a walking contradiction,
which simply means that he is not competent to serve in the
position that he is in.
So, as we have said before, and we will continue to say it
again and again.
Fire Chief Chamberlain,
this is a live example of how this chief pretends to care
about everyone, but clearly only cares about some.
Anti Anderson, followed by Della Jordan.
Tonight I have brought something that Mayor Kaufman is
too familiar with a gavel because this chamber is going
to be a courtroom for the next three minutes.
And the matter before us will be the people of Aurora versus
the City council of Aurora.
Tonight, you are being charged with being complicit in the
murders of your own citizens at the hands of the Aurora Police
Department, and with operating and continuing a political
protection system that shields
police power from accountability.
Let the record reflect that the people are ready to proceed.
Our first witnesses are the families, the families who have
walked into this chamber carrying photographs of their
loved ones murdered by APD, the families who have come here
with questions this government still refuses to answer.
The families who have begged this city and this city council
for accountability.
And Mayor Kaufman.
Those families know the sound of your gavel.
Your time is up.
Please conclude.
Sit down.
Order!
Look at that.
Government does work.
Just apparently, when it is, a government does work.
Just not when black families need it to work for them.
So tonight, the roles are reversed.
The families are not on trial.
But you are.
Todd Chamberlain is.
The Aurora Police Department.
Is the grief of families entered into evidence.
Their testimony entered into evidence.
The names of their loved ones entered into evidence.
The videos of their loved ones
being killed entered into evidence.
The protests are entered into evidence and council members.
Your record is entered into evidence.
The people have presented their case.
The city has had years to present its defense and
frankly, the excuses continue to be repetitive.
So now it is time for the verdict on the charge.
On the charge of choosing
police unions over accountability.
We charge the city Council guilty on the charge of calling
yourselves law and order while becoming allergic to the law.
The second accountable accountability reaches someone
wearing a badge.
We charge the City Council guilty on the charge of
treating black grief like disruption to municipal
business, instead of recognizing that black grief is
evidence of municipal failure.
We charge the council guilty on the charge of having all of the
titles, lawyers, staff, security, the entire machinery
of the city government at your disposal, and somehow
repeatedly proving the people that you are most comfortable
exercising power against are the people who possess the
least power in the room.
We charge you guilty.
No further questions.
No motion to reconsider.
No appeal to political convenience.
The verdict stands.
And with that, the people of Aurora rest their case.
You want to do it together?
Mayor.
Della Jordan, followed by Jeffrey McFarland.
This place was in compliance.
Aurora Regional Navigation Center.
Aurora Police Department.
Dominant security.
Mayor. Chief of police.
Um. The uh Navigation Center CEO.
Security chief.
Don't want to meet with me.
What about a press conference?
Advanced pathways, male and female.
Who refused to tell me their names but know mine.
Melissa Aguila green Marlin.
Single. I know your names and half your pictures.
Mayor Kaufman, I have your picture.
Also, it says you are a board member of Advanced Pathways,
whose mission is to provide pathways to recovery that
creates self-esteem, dignity, and independence for people
experiencing homelessness.
AP has missed and is missing their mark.
Because AP is nonprofit doesn't mean that there are no stocks
or bonds exchanging hands.
Or has things changed since I studied law?
Aurora residents use the use of internet research.
This company.
There is corruption in that
company in that navigation center.
Okay. Leave.
Alicia. My African son.
Kofi. Christian.
And essay alone.
If you want to attack me, go ahead and attack me.
Because I'm at the age where I'm 70 years old and I can
fight back.
There is so much corruption
going on in that building and there.
I'm beginning to think that you are part of it because you are
a board member.
But when I studied law, you could not be a public official
and then be a part of a private company.
And you think that Feingold is a good guy?
Not in that building.
He's a little snip.
He's a little snip that walk around.
Um, manhandling females, old females like myself, chasing me
around the building and asking me about my financial, uh,
business and stuff like that.
Why is that?
Even any of his business?
Then he had the nerve to say something stupid.
Like, if I can't afford to buy an egg for 30 people, I can
afford to get out and pay for transitional housing.
I had to school the little fool because he didn't understand
the difference between taking food stamps and spending $4.50
for 30 people for one aid.
And then he's talking about, well, if you can afford to do
that, then you can afford to pay for transitional housing.
Then he's going to tell me I cannot take my personal profit
out there.
I've been on my medication for over 30 days.
My body is shutting down.
My doctors have tried every which way they can to get my
medication back.
Then when it comes to my thyroid, a personal thyroid is
between 2.5 to 4.0 9.1 every 100.
I'm in the process right now to where I could have a stroke or
a heart attack.
Oh, and I have a package that's coming for each and every one
of you, plus the police department key and the city
attorney and the whatever, the attorney and the lawyers and
whatever, whatever.
But they have messed with the wrong person and they are about
to find out.
Jeffrey McFarland, followed by Cassandra Hill.
She did?
Oh, no.
Good evening, Mayor and city council.
My name is Jeffrey McFarland.
As you know, I'm a resident of Ward one.
I speak for no one but myself this evening, but I do.
I would like to pass a message along from the AFSC of
Colorado, Casa de Paz.
Shut down Geo and pulse.
They've put together a public health order they call the
People's Public Health Order.
Colorado state agencies, the governor and our city council
have yet to use every tool available at their disposal to
protect the best interest of the public health and
Coloradans detained within the Aurora Health Facility.
The inaction and lack of urgency from the governor's
office and the CDF have lost our trust for the
well-documented medical neglect inside the Aurora facility, it
is clear that the for profit detention model will not keep
people safe at the Aurora or the Bighorn facilities.
We, the people of Colorado, are issuing a public health order
to compel the Geo Group to allow a proper public health
investigation of potential tuberculosis infection and
disease spread within the Geo Aurora Ice Processing Center.
A third party laboratory confirmed an active
tuberculosis case on the June 22nd, 2026.
This public health order is necessary as the Geo Group,
under contract with the Department of Homeland
Security, has denied entry since June 25th, 2026, to the
Adams County Health Department.
The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
requested Geo comply with the order by July 17th.
Jio has yet to grant access.
On the 22nd, an active case of tuberculosis was confirmed at
the Aurora Ice Processing Center.
The Geo Group defied the Public Health Order of Adams County
Health Department issued on June 25th, blocked the
tuberculosis investigation, and has since confirmed another
active case and noted up to 61 people who have potentially
been exposed to date.
The Geo Group and the Department of Homeland Security
and Ice have not provided any contract tracing location data
or access to the people who have potentially been exposed.
I'm going to take the last minute here to kind of tie the
threads together.
If we can't call the cops to let us into the health facility
where there's a there's a tuberculosis outbreak like a
steamship era disease, uh, the type of disease that used to
have a past tense Wikipedia entry.
And now there's an outbreak of it and we can't get in.
Why? Because they're feds.
Because we need to comply with federal law.
And make sure you think about that when you hit that
dispensary on your way home.
Uh,
I really don't understand the the notion that the good guys
want to put people in cages and keep them sick.
The good guys keep you out of a
facility so that nobody can be treated.
Nobody can be quarantined.
Nobody could be isolated.
Symptoms can't be recorded.
Uh, they had a press conference where they read that public
health order down at the Capitol here this evening,
about an hour or so ago.
And I would like to reiterate the messages of shut down Geo
fired Todd Chamberlain, and no
new concentration camps in Colorado.
That sounds like a good one to me.
Thank you.
Cassandra Hill, followed by Hashim Coates.
Hello city.
Council. My name is Cassandra and I am here with the Denver
Community Action Committee, otherwise known as the CAG.
We recognize the charging of former Aurora police officer
Matthew Neely is a victory for the people.
But the fight is far from over.
This indictment of this killer cop was won not by the goodwill
of anyone in the government, but by the relentless
organizing, protesting, and
demand for justice from the community.
While the formal charges against Matthew Neely are a
necessary step towards accountability, true justice
requires more than a single court proceeding.
It requires complete dismantling of the narrative
and structural protection
provided to violent officers by APD.
We must address the role of Aurora police leadership,
played in the attempt to cover up Rajan Rajan's death at the
hands of Neely, Particularly the words and actions of Chief
Todd Chamberlain.
Chamberlain unconstitutionally led a campaign to smear Rajan's
character immediately following his murder.
In press conferences, he presented unverified claims as
facts, attempting to justify Neely's needless violence by
asserting that Neely's sucker punch was a de-escalating
maneuver and recklessly speculating about Rajan's
intent when he disarmed himself.
Chamberlain's attempt to twist the facts, craft a protective
narrative for his officers, and slander an unarmed victim
before a full investigation was conducted is unacceptable.
This behavior is consistent with Chief Chamberlain's long
track record of controversy stretching back to his tenure
with the LAPD, which includes high profile anti-Black
discrimination lawsuits and systematic biases.
Under his leadership, APD continues to violate the spirit
of the state consent decree and demonstrate why public trust in
this department remains broken.
The Denver Award Community Action Committee demands
justice for Jon's family and loved ones.
Our charge is only the start,
conviction and empowering the community.
Control their police must follow so that wave after wave
of police killings and crime
can finally be stopped in Aurora.
We demand you fire Todd Chamberlain, the next police
chief selection.
Be open to the community and democratic and give the
community control over the police.
Thank you.
Hashem Coates, followed by Kristen Mallory.
Before I begin, I want to recognize something bigger than
any single one of us.
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act is one of
the founding civil rights protections for people with
disabilities, and those protections are once again
under attack.
Nine states currently are challenging the update five
section 504 protections, and the integration mandate that
helps guarantee that people with disabilities have the
right to live and participate in their communities, rather
than being unnecessarily
segregated or institutionalized.
That should matter here in Aurora, because we've discussed
disability access repeatedly in this very room.
We saw an issue of that happening today, and in
shameful truth, is that this chamber itself does not meet
current Ada accessibility standards.
Aurora's own consultant confirmed that civil rights
can't be something that we celebrate nationally, or when
we decide to give a proclamation.
It has to be something that we recognize while people are
struggling and provide them with the bare minimum.
I don't want to.
I do want to recognize that Aurora is finally moving
forward with accessibility improvement process, including
a public meeting that will be this Wednesday.
Um, the power of voting and
elections has caused this to happen.
Um, and this work is necessary.
That meeting will be this Wednesday, August 12th, 6 to
7:30 p.m..
Right here.
Um, but I also want to give a shout out to encourage people
to go see the movie, the play 504, um, to the Family Theater
company 500 for the musical is playing right now down at the
Denver Center Performing Arts, and it's going from now until
August 23rd.
And it tells the story of disabled, excuse me, of
disabled activists who are supported by the Black Panther
Party and how they occupied a building in San Francisco for
25 days, and you all complain about us holding you here till
1 a.m..
I encourage people to utilize their First Amendment rights to
the fullest extent that they are granted to you, while we
still have them, before some of your leaders erode away the
14th amendment.
I encourage you all to stand up and let your voices be heard.
Additionally, I want to echo what was said as it relates to
the Aurora police officer being charged with murder.
About damn time.
And I want to give a big shout out to the 18th Judicial
District D.A., Amy Patton, because that is what leadership
looks like when we ask for these changes.
And the people get out and they vote in their representation,
this is what we get.
I encourage people who are listening right now understand
that elections are coming up for 2027.
There is some trash that needs to be cleared out.
There is a better way that needs to be made.
I encourage you all to do so.
Kristin Mallory followed by Aaron Futrell.
Hello, Kristen.
Mallory Ward three.
Good to see you all.
Um, I actually don't have anything written.
I agree with everything that everyone has said so far.
Um, but the reason I wanted to talk in open comment was about
the Great Lawn and the fact that we took out all the turf.
And now to replace the turf with a water wise solution, it
will require us to use more water than we had to to get
grass re-established.
And I just find it really ironic that our mayor is
driving around the city pointing the fingers at APS
while we had a big, healthy lawn out front here, and
instead of just letting it die naturally and then replacing it
with a water wise grass, you did the most extreme thing
possible and then posted videos about it.
And so instead of a great lawn, we now have a great dirt pit.
And I understand that the plan is to be a water wise solution,
but there was just like a better way to go about it.
And it's super irresponsible in the middle of the drought.
Like, I went up to the mountains a couple weeks ago to
where the reservoirs are supposed to be, and they're dry
like, and now we're going to spend how many thousands of
gallons to get our great lawn re-established, when we could
have just let what was out there live until it couldn't
live with water anymore.
So that was a very extreme choice.
And I don't know if it was the mayor or the city departments,
but I'm very unhappy about that also.
Yeah, Geo shouldn't exist.
We need to hold our cops accountable, all the things,
but we also need to be more responsible with water.
And that will come up again Uh,
here very shortly, so thank you.
Aaron Futrell.
Aaron Futrell, followed by Juan Marcano.
All right.
Good morning.
Or evening Council.
Mayor, thank you for the opportunity to speak.
Probably going to sound like a parrot because it's been a
week, especially with the news regarding John Bell
Stubblefield and the officer being charged with second
degree murder and reckless manslaughter.
Uh, that development is significant.
But tonight, I want to address something that has been
consistently, conspicuously absent.
An apology from chief Josh or Chief Todd, whatever you like
to call him, if you know, you know, um,
to the to the community activists who witnessed this
incident recognized that something was wrong and had the
courage to livestream what they were seeing.
Let's be clear the community
activists did not create this situation.
They did not cause the confrontation.
They did not pull the trigger.
They simply documented what they witnessed.
And yet, instead of acknowledging their role as a
witness and treating them with dignity, A-p-d and its
leadership spent far too much time attempting to undermine
their credibility.
And yet, instead of not now, I understand that the police
chief has an obligation to stand behind our officers,
especially when officers are doing their jobs professionally
and honorably.
And I have no problem giving APD credit where credit is due.
When officers remove illegal guns, drugs, counterfeit money,
find hit and run cars.
They deserve recognition.
But leadership cannot mean unconditional loyalty.
Where is that same unwavering defense when a police vehicle
was stolen during a burglary, and APD became the subject of
national and local ridicule ridicule.
Where was it when a school resource officer was accused of
using his his space as a
personal dating environment for years?
In those situations, the chief appropriately condemned the
conduct that was embarrassing and unacceptable.
So why was this community activists treated differently?
The grand jury report ultimately corroborated the one
account there, the account that the activists had been publicly
reporting that it is all paused for two years.
We have heard community leaders, organizers, residents
and yes, myself included, call for chief Josh Chief Chad
Chamberlain to step down.
Frankly, that conversation is becoming stale.
Tonight, I'm asking for something far simpler and far
more consequential.
Todd Chamberlain needs to apologize publicly.
Apologize to the community
activists who attempted to discredit.
apologized for the rhetoric that contributed to the
mistrust, and acknowledge that community members should not
have to choose between speaking up and being publicly vilified
when they witness something going wrong.
Chief, you cannot rebuild trust while simultaneously dismissing
the very people who stress you need.
If APD wants a fresh start with this community, then let's
begin with accountability, humility, and transparency.
You can stand with your officers when they are right,
but when an officer crosses the line, when their conduct
becomes reckless, excessive, and indefensible, you have an
obligation to the community and the truth.
Thank you.
Juan Marcano, followed by Zachary Cotton.
Good evening.
My name is Juan Marcano, and I'm a resident of Fort Ford.
I'm here to speak with you all tonight about the rules changes
that y'all were discussing during study session.
I want to begin by thanking you all for taking the time to
review the council rules in their entirety.
I know that there's been a lot of damage done to how this body
conducts this business since 2021, and I'm really grateful
that y'all are taking the time to repair that damage.
I just wanted to highlight a couple of things that I think
would make the people's House a little more inviting for all of
our community members.
For starters, I'd like to see the one hour limit on public
invited to be heard removed.
Listening to members of the public about items that are not
on the agenda is an important part of your roles.
If you're concerned about the length of public testimony, I
encourage you all to address
the items that you're hearing repeatedly.
We've had, for example, families, grieving families who
have been coming up through public invited to be heard for
the better part of, what, three years now?
If you want to get that to stop, I recommend that you
actually address the grievances.
That means take time to formulate a plan, add it to the
agenda, and address those issues.
That solves the problem.
Number two, I'd appreciate, uh, I appreciate that y'all are
trying to require council members to, and I quote,
endeavour to appear in person, unquote, at council meetings
while still allowing for remote participation.
I think that's fair.
Although I really want to see council members required to be
on camera while they are participating remotely,
especially when they are voting.
And I would also ask that you extend that same courtesy to
members of the public who wish to speak on agenda items, or
for public invited to be heard, let them join remotely.
We already have the technology to do that, and three, I would
love to see y'all get rid of the stanchions and the security
theater outside.
Y'all should take a look at how much that contract is costing
the city, and consider what message it sends to the public.
None of this existed until after 2023, and I haven't come
in to city Council meetings since 2015.
None of that existed before.
I have never felt unsafe in this chamber.
You guys are about two feet higher behind a bullet
resistant dais than anyone else out here.
Y'all have nothing to be afraid of.
Please get rid of the security theater.
Save this a little bit.
Save the city.
A little bit of money.
The only use I've seen come out of that is to selectively
harass members of the community over water bottles.
That's unacceptable.
We can do better than that.
And I want to end with a separate topic here.
I encourage you all to check out the Denver Post today.
They wrote a pretty scathing op ed about the repeated
humiliation that APD brings upon the city, our reputation,
the amount of money that they
have cost us out of our general fund.
There are better solutions out there.
I have already spoken at nauseam, and I will continue to
about looking at contracting with the Arapahoe County
Sheriff's Department.
They have a fantastic record.
It would save you all money and allow us to make community
investments while delivering a better public safety service to
the city.
Thank you.
Zachary cotton, Zachary Cotton, followed by Jeff Brown.
This is he getting asked for any station, Jeff Brown.
No,
he's after this guy.
All right.
Good evening.
I'm asking you all, especially council members Andrews,
Hancock and Medina on the Public Safety committee to join
the public, state and county level bodies in providing
pressure against the Geo Group, denying health investigators
from looking into the tuberculosis cases in the
Aurora Ice Processing Center.
The fact that the Adams County Health Department is being
prevented from prevented from knowing the full extent of this
issue should be concerning for you all.
We cannot trust the Geo Group
to take care of this internally.
People in this chamber have brought up the medical neglect
that happens in this facility, and I personally have spoken
with two people that have told me about the inadequate care
that they receive or their door mates have received.
I keep coming back to the Shut Down Geo coalition's report
from this spring in particular that reports people receiving
ibuprofen for serious conditions, especially the the
physician who was sued for the same kind of neglect that he
committed in 2024.
The same physician is still working at this facility.
So how can we trust this medical director to treat this
current infectious disease with
the speed and care that is required?
I know that some of you will say that this is not your lane,
and that there is not anything that you can do here, but I
need you to speak up.
Were you at the town hall meeting that the Adams County
Health Department hosted on Friday?
Have you shown any support for the House bill 261276 that
would expand state authority in these investigations?
Have you outlined any memorandums of understanding,
establishing your place in this process between yourselves and
other impacted bodies?
Right now, all I see is that you're willing to be silent as
as you, as you usually are.
Uh, while the potential public health crisis is brewing.
Um,
so that's about the geo.
I do also want to mention, uh,
the contract with Integra Shore.
That $4 million contract over four years for like 24 people
working on that staff.
Um, a lot of them were working with LAPD as well to kind of
around the same time as Todd Chamberlain.
So I would love for you all to ask the, uh, what is it, the
city auditor, to actually look into that?
She is able to look into that
because it has passed a $10,000 contract.
And when I when I emailed her about this, she mentioned that
she really isn't going to look into it unless someone finds a
conflict of interest.
So I encourage everybody in this chamber, including all of
the citizens, to look for those, uh, conflicts of
interest, because I'm sure they're there.
Uh, we know that the blue line is masculine and.
Uh, so I really do encourage everybody to look into this.
I will continue to look into this as well.
But for the meantime, please shut down Jill.
Please help prevent tuberculosis from spreading it
within that facility and out to the community.
Thank you.
Jeff Brown, followed by Adam Shepard and Jeff Brown, has
made an accommodation request that was approved by an Ada
coordinator, and he will have four minutes to speak.
Additional. Additional.
She said.
Four.
Minutes.
You said.
I thought you said one minute.
You said one minute of four minutes.
Yeah.
Katie.
Yes.
Thank you.
Gentleman. Is information for.
Me? Yes, thanks.
Thank you.
And good evening, mayor.
City council.
I'm here to talk about something different, something
that you don't really talk about much recently.
And I just wanted to kind of overlay a a pertinent fact at
this point in time.
A few months ago, a few weeks ago, you approved three
increases to the sales tax or at least approved ballot
measures to increase the sales tax.
You did that after this.
This body not doing anything in the past decade, the past
decade, the past decade to improve the retail tax base.
CIBC, where I served for over two years, repeatedly,
repeatedly, repeatedly begged this body to take the lagging
retail tax base seriously.
And this body ignored ignored us.
I've personally begged this body to take the lack of
entertainment and the impact to to retail and dining
seriously, and I've been laughed at.
I've been defamed Enough!
Enough! I submitted two resolutions to you on Saturday
via email.
Anyone want to look at it?
Right here?
I have hard copies.
If anyone in the audience wants to see them, the first one is
pretty simple.
The retail
activity per resident should be reported regularly to the
people of Aurora and to you all every week.
You guys are making decisions that are hostile to the retail
tax base and use tax base as well.
We can't afford it.
This city can't punch its way, fund its way out of a wet paper
bag and you're chasing business away every week.
I'm not.
Sure if you really, really.
Realize that.
Do you stop and ask yourselves, what is this doing to our
retail tax base which is in the toilet?
So again, the first resolution puts that metrics in the budget
book every year with a full analysis every five years.
It also states that tourism and then use our strategic tools to
improve the retail tax base.
The second resolution
articulates City Council's desire and intent and direction
to city staff, to both communicate to the governor and
the legislature that the city of Aurora wants out of the
Denver CFD.
We're going to recreate it as a home rule city, which I believe
we can do, And focus on what we need to fix our retail, our
entertainment and our dining.
So two resolutions.
I have hard copies if you want to see
electronic
copies. Here you go.
But right now, this group right now is more interested in
having you pay higher sales tax than trying to get anything
to attract visitors from around the region.
Please address the council.
Coming to d.A.
To spend your taxing.
You have us paying higher taxes
then than actually encourage people.
To get them.
Entice people to come to our ward to spend here.
And enough.
Enough. You're caught.
We're not.
We're not voting for three taxable cases.
Not going to.
Adelina Shepard followed by Robert.
Louis.
Robert. Louis.
Followed by Louis.
I'm. Robert.
Louis. Louis.
Father. The one that y'all murdered.
Well, your little officer murdered.
And you didn't get no justice
for my son, but he will get justice.
Um, I think I don't really to much have anything to say to
y'all, because there's nothing that you're going to listen to
anyway, to y'all burning in hell.
But, um.
I'd be ashamed to live in Aurora.
I was ashamed when I was
little, when I used to live in Aurora.
Because y'all some racists, no good, prejudiced bastards.
And now I see all the other
stuff that y'all are not doing right.
You poor little helpless elderly lady.
Y'all not even going to help her.
But it's just a shame to see
y'all sit up there like you're high and mighty and don't do a
damn thing, but sit there and get paid by the state or city
or whatever you work for.
It's just a shame
that none of y'all seemed to do the right thing, but you keep
wanting to do the wrong things.
But one day it's going to clash on you.
And I just wish that I could do.
Be the one to clash it on you.
Because I'd make you pay.
I make you pay real deeply.
And not just for the mess y'all doing, Aurora, but just for the
murder of my son.
Because you backed this little murder and ass cop that should
be dead or in prison.
You know, and every other week I come down here and express my
little emotions to y'all, which you don't even understand,
because I wish I could get a clan of people together and
just take your ass out
and start all over again,
you know, with somebody that would give a damn about their
community and what's really going on and how you let these
murdering ass cops have their jobs and still do what they
supposed to not be doing.
But I just wanted to let y'all
know that a little bit about it.
And the rest of y'all, the ones that don't have nothing to do
with it, I understand, but y'all just really irked me and
I really hate coming down here every other week, but I will.
Because it's standing up for my son.
And like I said, he didn't deserve to die like that no
matter what the hell was going on.
You don't shoot an unarmed man and the punk ass cop.
Like I said, if I ever come across him, I killing myself.
That's just a shame that I have to live my life like that and
wonder why I have to deal with the little murder and ass cop
that runs around here.
Free as a bird
and ain't paying nothing.
Why y'all sit there and laugh?
I'm not laughing.
Sure. Dina Lewis.
Sir Dina Lewis, followed by Paul Nelson.
My name is Dina Lewis, and I'm the grandmother of Aaron Lewis.
And Aaron Lewis was a calm, cool and collected person, and
he was human when he said pledge allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America, to the republic for
which it stands.
One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
They need to take the liberty and justice for all off that.
Yes, they've been killing black, unarmed black men and
women, and they're getting away with it.
Some of them are.
So I
graduated from Metropolitan State College with a degree in
law enforcement and criminology.
And I'm
the professor that taught
a class.
And, um, her name was Joyce Stevens.
And she said that there are a lot of gangsters
Applying for the police force and getting a badge and hiding
behind that badge and doing evil, and that they used to
have boards a long time ago to check out the police force,
what they were doing.
And so there are racist police
officers hiding behind the badge.
And the thing is, you got to be careful around them because
they're not to be trusted.
And especially with black people, they don't.
They can't be trusted.
So I, I just say, um.
They said they wanted to talk
to him about attempted homicide.
So we asked.
I asked, what's the attempted homicide?
Were you threatening to kill somebody or you killed somebody
and they missed that.
And Kylan was not that way.
But how?
Why would you kill them?
You want to question why?
Why would you
talk about.
You want to question him, and
you kill him before you can question.
What kind of questioning are
you going to do with a dead man?
He has no no defense for himself or what's going on.
But they just killed him.
Another thing.
He was six foot two, very handsome, tall young man.
And when they asked them, we saw the police cam, they asked
them to get out of the car.
And he got out of the car and his hands were up in the air.
Up in the air like that one hand had a cell phone, so they
wanted to say that might be a gun.
A gun would be down here when you have a gun.
Not way up in the sky.
So the guy that shot me had other police officers there?
Notice of the police officers being shot with just this, one
officer thinks that it fits at the same time.
Then when there's hands up in the air and they shot him in
the stomach and he went down.
He kept saying to them.
Then he had his hands up in the air.
I don't have anything, I don't have anything.
I don't have anything in this.
That one shot him when he went to the ground.
It's just terrible.
It's horrific.
And I'll never forget that.
So we have some good police officers, but there are quite a
few police officers out there that's hiding behind the badge
races and doing their dirty work.
So I pray I will of God that they get those type of police
officers off the street, and don't let them be a police
officer any anymore, no matter where they come from.
Thank you.
Paul Nelson.
Paul Nelson, followed by Tristan Hirst.
Hello, Council.
Thank you for the time.
My name is Paul Nelson.
My friends and associates call me Nels.
I want to first address the fact that it's a damn good
thing that this killer cop was indicted.
And it wasn't because any of you did anything.
It was actually because of the brave people in this room who
have showed up for three years
and have continued to demand justice.
Justice has never been handed to people.
It has to be one in struggle.
And the people have struggled
real hard for this small step forward.
But it is an important one and it needs to be continued.
Use. The Council should offer support towards the indictment
of this criminal cop, and should call for the indictment
of the other killer cops in the community.
Um, it's plain and simple.
You know, the Aurora Police Department is killing many
black fathers.
They're killing many children in our community.
And it.
And, you know, Todd Chamberlain is running rampant, destroying
due process for people where they don't have innocent until
proven guilty.
Um, like we would all want under the accusation of any
sort of crime.
Right. That's that's supposed to be the rule of law.
He has trampled upon that.
He has abused his position to slander these people who have
been murdered by the police department, using the media,
using his his position as a
police officer, as the chief of police.
He has done this.
It's irresponsible.
And now the winds are changing and they're blowing in the
other direction.
He's been indicted.
What are you going to do?
The political winds are changing.
A lot of you careerists up here ought to see that and recognize
that it's time to call for his resignation.
At the very least, you should
call for Todd Chamberlain's resignation.
He has no business being in this.
Being in this community.
You should do that.
You're free individuals.
You can make statements.
You should at least be brave enough to do that.
Add a little spine to this council because he was
complicit in what is a cover up.
These are cover ups that he he's engaging in after the cops
kill, and he gets on the screen and begins to slander the
people, slander the children.
You know, he called it trans confusion as the basis of why
that child was shot.
The Mason child.
And that's shameful enough to warrant a resignation.
But there's been a dozen more cases.
You should take this very seriously.
And to reiterate some basic demands here.
Neely needs to be convicted, not just indicted.
We want to see this all the way to conviction and lock them up.
He needs to be put away where
he's not going to harm people anymore.
And the same thing needs to be happening to the people who
killed Kylen Lewis.
That's Officer Deke needs to happen to the two cops who
killed Corey Dillard.
Needs to be happening to the cops who killed Rashad Johnson
and the Mason child, as well as Cordell Richardson.
Um, the same motion should be happening there, and you should
call for it.
You should call for an apology, for an apology from the APD and
a resignation by this Tod Chamberlain individual who's
complicit in crime.
He's a criminal, and he's running a criminal organization
of murderers when he covers up for him.
Insofar as you allow that to persist in your community,
that's what's happening.
They talked about the op ed earlier, right?
Maybe you should read that and finally, give us a community
control over.
The police department.
It means.
To hire and.
Fire these crooked cops, give the community the power to hold
them accountable.
But currently, the power that nobody has, we're relying on
police to police.
Police? That's ridiculous.
And it's never going to work.
So we demand community control.
Tristan Hurst, followed by Kiowa Lewis.
Good evening, mayor and council members.
My name is Tristan Ward, one resident of five years.
I'm here with one request tonight, and I'll keep coming
back until you hear it clearly.
Fire! Todd Chamberlain.
Not next month, not after another review.
Now let's talk about who this man is again.
Before Aurora hired him, Todd Chamberlain was turned down by
at least three other police departments, rejected
specifically because he was considered too racially biased
to lead.
Not inexperienced, not unpopular to racist.
In fact, there was outrage in Chattanooga that he was even
considered to be a finalist for their police chief.
And yet our city manager, Jason
Batchelor, handpicked him anyway.
No community input, no town halls, no transparency in the
most diverse city in the state
one under a consent decree, no less.
We had zero say in who polices us.
That is not leadership.
That is contempt.
Since Chamberlain took over, what has changed?
Nothing. The names keep piling up.
Kylan. Lewis, Corey.
Dillard, Rajan.
Stubblefield, Rashad.
Johnson, Avi Bal.
Mason, Omar.
Garlington. This didn't even start with Elijah McClain and
the botched consent decree that arose out of it.
A vast majority murdered by APD.
Are our black and brown neighbors all unarmed?
All deeply loved.
Their families have shown up to every single one of these
meetings faithfully, painfully, while you sit behind the dais
and talk about decorum.
Let me be blunt.
You care more about procedure
than about dead robins in the streets.
And that is not an accusation.
That is a fact proven by your refusal to act.
We are asking for more than a liaison.
We are not asking for a study.
We are not asking for another committee.
We are asking for his job because the single most
powerful thing this council can do to restore trust, to show
that black and brown lives actually matter here is to
remove the man at the top who should never have been hired in
the first place.
You have the votes.
You have the authority.
You have the moral obligation.
So I'll end this where I started fire Todd Chamberlain.
Or explain to the people of Aurora and to Kaitlyn Lewis
family why you chose to protect Chamberlain instead of, oh, I
don't know your actual constituents.
Kiowa. Lewis.
Kiowa Lewis.
Followed by Laura McLaughlin.
So tonight, I'm gonna speak to all y'all in parables
What that means is this is not a threat, but it is something
to pay close attention for.
Sorry. Pay close attention to simply because these are the
things you need to heed.
So I want to ask y'all who is ready to die tonight?
Who is ready to die to their flesh and pick up your cross?
When I tell you the curse that I had bestowed upon y'all.
It doesn't come without consequences.
You ask for forgiveness.
Probably you may pay to some praise to some fictitious, you
know, quote unquote God,
but none of them is the Most High.
Number one is Elohim or Yahweh or
none of that.
Right. So I want y'all to understand that as y'all sit
here and continue to still let
people get killed and families hurt.
God sees all.
Yahweh sees all of this, right?
He ain't playing no games with it.
So I ask y'all, who's going to pick up their flesh?
Or pick up their cross and lay down their flesh?
Die to your flesh.
Um. Mike Kaufman, I feel so sorry for you, bro.
I do, I do.
Um, I hear the prayers that you actually is repetitive.
And actually the scripture speak against that.
Nothing that you say is is for the people.
It's not, it's not, but you may feel it is.
Um, but what I will say is,
right now, so much is happening.
People are getting turned into Peters.
Y'all are safe right now.
God allows y'all to navigate life on a day to day basis,
because he's trying to give you all a chance.
Like I told y'all before, on that day when there's no more
chances, I'll be there.
I'll be there for the sinner.
All this is spiritual.
I'm speaking of parables, and I need y'all to understand this
is something that you don't want to mess around with.
Because when that day comes and we don't know when it's going
to happen, but just know when it does happen.
I'll be there.
And a lot of us who actually represent the Most High.
So.
With that being said, I want to sit here and
tell people who have gone
through this, please do not fret.
Do not worry.
You got people who represent and say that they're leaders,
but yet they pray to people and worship with Joel saying, you
know, and there's nothing against him.
But the thing is, you always work goes deeper than just some
scripture that people come on TV and talk about.
So I want y'all to know it's not a game.
Get deep into your word because it's coming closer.
Closer. You know, neither one of y'all know what your
spirit's a spiritual time clock expires, but when it expires,
none of this is going to matter.
Laura McLaughlin.
Jordan Richardson.
Colin. Lewis.
Jaylen. See bronze and a list of others.
Jordan was 14 years old.
He was an eighth grader.
I just want that to sit for just a second because I there
was a news article and I read some really horrible stuff in
the comments.
But at the end of the day,
Jordan was a 14 year old eighth grader.
Um, I also want to speak about
how I'm against the Save program.
If you already have a community that fears your police
Department, and you're sending police to speak to people who
you are profiling
that they're doing illegal activities.
Well, you're not going to reach them with a police officer.
The community fears the police out in Aurora.
When they call the police, they're calling CDot to get
some backup because the police don't know how to act until
somebody has them on camera.
So trying to reach youth through the police isn't going
to work because you're youth.
Are George Elwes friends that watched him murdered.
It's on camera.
They're all about to be seniors
this year.
George l should have been a
senior starting his senior year.
So the children that you're trying to reach or supposedly
are trying to reach with the save program.
Is it not going to work using your police officers?
You're not going to reach these kids?
Not with the police officers.
And I have another question.
As the city leaders,
how can we measure the way the community feels about your
police department?
How can we move forward in fixing what is broken?
Because you keep hearing family members, and you might not like
the way they come about it or the words they say, but they're
in pain because of what's happened.
How can we fix what is broken?
Because the police department's known around the nation for
killing black folks.
How can we fix it?
Is my question to the city leaders.
Because it's obviously I mean, the Denver Post just said five
homicides is the way that it was listed.
How do you fix Aurora's name?
That was the last individual.
Mayor. Can I request a brief recess?
Very well.
The time is now 705.
We will stand in recess.
Tell us we 15 minutes.
Is that.
Okay?
Ten minutes.
Tell us.
Seven. 15.
The regular meeting of the Aurora City Council for Monday,
August 10th, 2026 is called and called back to order.
Um. Motion is in order for the adoption of the consent
calendar on motions item number ten C1 to ten C3.
Uh, I'm sorry, Councilmember Hager.
I might like to call 1185.
We're just doing.
We're just doing ten right now.
Ten?
Yeah. So ten a ten C one 310 C3.
Just need a motion on that.
Okay, fine.
Motion is in order.
A move that we adopt ten.
See one through ten.
C3 okay.
It's been moved by Councilmember Hancock to adopt
the consent calendar and motions.
Tennessee one to Tennessee three and seconded by mayor.
Second.
Second by Mayor Pro Tem.
Discussion.
Seeing no discussion over the question on the adoption of the
consent calendar on motions.
Item number Tennessee one to Tennessee three.
Mayor. Kaufman.
Mayor. Vote yes.
Katie, I'm a yes.
I'm logging back into East right now.
Okay. Thank you.
The motion passes unanimously to adopt the consent calendar
for motions.
A motion is in order on the adoption of the consent
calendar and resolutions and ordinances 11 A1 to 11 b two.
Mayor.
Um. Councilmember Hancock.
I'd like to pull 11, 1185 and 1186.
So we need a motion first to approve the consent agenda 1101
through 1132 and then you can pull the specific item.
So we need the motion first.
Okay.
So are you moving to approve the consent agenda from 1101 to
11 B2?
Yes. And we need a second.
First.
Mayor.
Second.
Second by Councilmember Lawson.
Okay. Now you can call Councilmember Hancock again.
Councilmember Hancock.
All right.
Now, once more, a feeling we will.
I'd like to pull 1185 and 1186.
Okay.
So now the consent agenda is 118, 11, eight, one through 11,
eight, four and 11.
B1 11 B2
further discussion.
We have individuals who would like to speak on items 11 A1
and 11 B2.
Oh very well.
First individual for item 11 A1 is Agent Anderson, followed by
Mahdi and Schaffner.
So do we not?
So we still have the motion.
Councilmember Burger now we're just hearing public comment on
those that signed up for the
items that are still on consent.
I believe that all I have to say is we just need to be able
to uplift the testimony of Miss Della Jordan.
I think that she has given you an insight to what she is
witnessing at the Aurora Navigation Center, and why
accountability metrics are important.
And so I don't need to belabor you all on what she has said.
Week after week after week, I would just ask that while you
make this decision and why you make this vote, that you take
into the words of what Miss Della Jordan has went through
consistently for the last few months, and ask yourselves if
you are comfortable with the current standards and the
conditions of which this facility is in.
So with the rest of that, I yield back.
And I want to just again make sure that you understand.
Miss Della Jordan is the reason why I am encouraging you to
support this resolution.
Thank you.
Madeline Schaffner.
Okay. And then for item 11 B2, we have Hashim Coates.
I just want to be clear.
I'm not against technology.
I'm not against good, ethical, compassionate, non murderous
law enforcement.
And I'm certainly not
advocating for a lawless society.
Again, I want to give a shout out to Amy Patton for using the
law for filing charges on the alleged murderer of the Aurora
Police Department, officer Matthew Neely, who took the
life of Rajan Belt Stubblefield.
But I am equally opposed to surveillance society.
Public safety and civil
liberties are not opposing values.
Good government has an obligation to protect both.
Colorado law already says automated traffic enforcement
systems should retain data only when a violation occurs.
That means that if a law abiding person drives past one
of these cameras.
We should not be quietly being recorded.
Colorado law assuming if that's Aurora's practice, then put
that in the ordinance, but
put it in the vendor's contract, audit it and make
violations enforceable.
And please do not tell
residents it's only license plates.
No, license plate is not a
facial recognition, Aurora says.
It's separate.
It separates license plate.
Readers do not capture faces, race, gender, ethnicity.
But when enough time stamp license plates observations are
connected together, they can reveal moment and identity.
Where did I go?
What should I attend to?
What doctor's office did I visit?
What protests did I visit?
Who did I visit?
Whose house did I leave from?
To end up leaving my wife and marrying somebody else?
What closet situation am I hiding out from it reveals all
that personal information that should remain personal, that
sensitive information.
And Colorado lawmakers raise these exact concerns this year
when considering statewide restrictions on license plate
reader databases.
Um, we don't have to.
We shouldn't have to imagine what could happen as it relates
to immigration enforcement in Denver.
License plate data was searched nearly 1400 times for Ice or
immigration related purposes by law enforcement agencies across
the country.
Ice didn't even need to direct access for the systems to
become useful for immigration searches.
I really implore you all to protect, expand upon, but no,
just protect the Fourth
Amendment at its very basic level.
We have no idea what technology can do unless you guys are
explicit with them as it relates to that and put firm
guidelines into place so that they can't be used for
nefarious purposes.
You have to treat this system as if our worst enemy will then
get Ahold of these systems, and then use it against us, no
matter what side of the aisle that you're on.
On that.
That was the last individual.
Okay. The question before us is the adoption of
the consent calendar on resolutions and ordinances,
with the exception of item number 1185 and 1186.
Discussion.
Mayor.
Mayor. Pro tem.
Just a question for the city manager or perhaps APD
regarding the contract for the speed cameras.
Um, do we have clarifications?
Or maybe this is a question for the city attorney.
I'm not sure Regarding kind of this state legislation,
compliance with this state legislation, and collection and
retention of data.
So, um, one of the, um, big changes in the state law, which
is what this ordinance does, is it brings us into conformance
with the recent changes in state law.
Um, within that and there was some discussion at the last
council meeting.
Um, prior automated vehicle identification systems included
a picture of the driver's
license or, excuse me, of the driver.
And then there was a, um, a defense that could be made that
I was not the driver.
This the person in the picture is not me.
Um, so because of that, the automated vehicle
identification systems included a requirement that you needed
to capture a picture of the driver.
With the changes in state law
that is actually no longer required.
Actually no longer allowed.
So we have already made that change.
We're no longer capturing the picture of the driver.
Um, and so this now removes that as an affirmative defense,
that this brings us into conformance of law.
And that's already our practice, given that the law
has been changed.
And real quick, this system is separate from the flock system
or anything else, the license plate readers.
It does not feed into that information.
It's completely separate, used by the vendor only for issuing
the citations.
So it is not being kept as part of trying to document who goes
by a certain area.
Okay. And just for clarification on that.
So once it's captured, you're in this place.
Your citation has been issued.
That data is only retained for the purposes of the citation
and not used in any AI data
systems or any other comparisons.
Deputy city attorney plot.
That is correct.
Right?
That's correct.
Councilmember. And also, just for for clarity, it will be
retained, obviously through the system throughout any personal
service and collection processes that occur that are
connected with the vendor, but it's not connected into any of
LPR, other tools or artificial intelligence tools that has
those capabilities.
Um, sorry.
And just and within the contract, because this is one
item that we've heard about with respect to the LPR is it's
also not permitted in the contract for them to use it for
any kind of machine learning systems or any other purposes
aside from the service of the citation.
That's correct.
Mayor Pro Tem, and we're updating all the business rules
to be in accordance with the current state laws currently
with varying mobility.
Okay.
And my understanding, you, Mayor Pro tem, is the police
don't even have access to search that data at all to see
who, what vehicles drive by or whatnot.
It's only what's on the FLoC system that they have.
Right. And APD is involvement even with the system, is going
to be pretty limited now that they're not going to be issuing
the, the, um, the overages for the six point tickets, because
that's going to be automated as well now.
Thank you.
Further discussion.
You can call for the question.
Councilmember Jackson.
Thank you.
The motion passes unanimously to adopt the consent calendar
for resolutions and ordinances
with items 1185 and 1186 removed.
Now, please read the title to item number 11 A5.
Item 11 A5 is resolution 2020 697, directing the City Manager
to implement data center regulations.
Mayor and mayor.
We do have individuals who
would like to speak on this item.
Very well, city Attorney.
I'm pretty sure council is very aware of this, but 1185 and
1186 are in conflict, obviously.
So this would not be a situation where both
resolutions should pass because they are in conflict.
I know you know that, but I'm just putting it on the record.
And city attorney.
Mayor. Point of order.
Um, our amendments in order prior to public comment or
subsequent to public comment.
So what I would do is let's go and hear public comment first,
and then we can have the motion and then amendments following
the motion.
Okay.
Okay. The first person is Anita
Kubrick, followed by Agent Anderson.
Anita.
Okay. Agent Anderson, followed by Medea and Schaffner.
Excuse my language, but
I'm so confused on how we should be given public comment
before we hear any amendments or adjustments y'all are going
to make.
Because if that is substantial to what
if you all are going to make substantial changes to this
resolution, then I would respectfully like to hear what
you all have to say and then be able to let you know if I'm
supportive of it or not supportive of it.
I just feel like this
disenfranchised is public participation.
So I mean, feel free to interrupt.
I mean, I'll give a point of order real quick.
So basically, because the agenda was published the way it
was, it's the comments should
be on all the agendas published.
And what council should hear from you is what you think you
should amend in the in the document after public comment
so they can take your comments to build their amendments.
I'm sure they have amendments that they already know that
they they want to present, but if they use public comment to
figure out what else they should, she should do.
So this is the appropriate time for public comment.
I understand your point, but
we've got to go off the open meetings.
All the agenda was published 24 hours ago, at least.
And listen, the package should be the one that's presented.
Well, great.
Well, I guess I can't really do too much about my opposition to
Curtis Gardner's A resolution
because he never shows up to work.
And so, I mean, I would say that I support what council
member Wales has put forward to the council because we need to
make sure that we are not having data centers just run
rampant through the city of Aurora, and you all need to be
coming up with some rules and regulations into which they are
supposed to be at the bounds
that they need to be operating in.
Um, and the fact that Curtis Council Member Gardner, who
again, doesn't show up to city council meetings, is offering a
resolution and at a city council meeting, and it still
is not here at said city council meeting, physically
present at a meeting.
It feels like he's trying to silence the voice of one of his
female colleagues.
But I, I'm I hope that wherever if he's listening from the home
of him and Amanda Sawyer, I hope that he is able to hear
the concerns that individuals have about his resolution being
in direct opposition and
competition with council Member Wiles.
So, Council Member Wiles Resolution, and I hope to
listen to more of your your
amendments through this process.
But this right here, this does not feel authentic just to just
to be from this side of the dais, knowing what it means to
be an elected official.
If I would have pulled a gotcha when we were when we were
debating on the Denver school board of like, we want to hear
your concerns, but now we're
going to pass a bunch of amendments.
Our parents would be pissed off because what you are about to
do is likely change one of these two proposals, and we
will not be able to respond or
give you our feedback in real time.
But we're just supposed to be like, okay, here's our here's
our opinion beforehand, and you actually might change
drastically one of the two of these issues.
So, Council Member Gardner, I
hope that you're listening from you.
And I saw your home show up.
Show up to work.
You forgot my gavel.
Madison Schaffner, followed by Aditi Desai.
Aditi Desai, followed by Verena Desai.
Good evening, mayor and members of city council.
My name is Aditi Desai and I reside in Aurora.
And I'm here in favor of 11.8.5.
I would like to comment on infrastructure considerations
associated with large scale data centers data centers,
particularly those supporting A.I.
applications can require substantial electrical capacity
and supporting utility infrastructure.
We need to evaluate these projects in regards to grid
capacity, transmission upgrades, long term energy
demand, and how infrastructure improvements would be planned
and funded.
In addition to electricity demand, City Council needs to
examine whether existing utility systems are prepared to
accommodate future growth while maintaining reliable services
for residents and businesses.
These considerations can be important for long range
planning and capital investment decisions
as future projects are evaluated.
I encourage consideration of independent infrastructure
studies and transparent communication regarding
anticipated utility needs well into the future.
We need to consider long term sustainability for our
communities, not just the
economic benefits for large companies.
Thank you for your time.
I support the six month moratorium as residential and
environmental impacts are further studied prior to
approval of additional large scale data centers in Aurora.
I have lived in Aurora for six years now and hope to continue
my life here.
Don't push residents like me out with quick decisions that
don't consider neighbors in our long term well-being.
Thank you.
For reading.
Desai.
Followed by Arvin Martinez.
Good evening, mayor and members of the city council.
My name is Byron Desai.
I'm a homeowner and resident of Aurora.
I'm here for resolution 11.8.5.
I would like to comment on neighborhood compatibility
consideration related to large scale data centers.
These facilities often operate continuously and may include
cooling equipment, transformers, backup
generators, and other infrastructure that can create
operational noise.
Some communities have raised questions about how such
facilities interact with nearby residents, area schools, and
community spaces.
Additional considerations can include construction, traffic,
visual impact building, scale lighting, and compatibility
with existing zoning standards.
Local governments sometimes review whether current
development regulations adequately address the unique
characteristics of modern data centers.
Careful review of seating standards.
Set back Landscaping, noise requirements and community
input process can help inform future land use decision.
Thank you for your consideration.
Thank you for your time.
I support a six month moratorium as residential and
environmental impact are
further studied prior to approval.
Additional large scale data centers in Aurora.
Thank you.
Arvin Martinez, followed by Hashim Coates.
Good evening, mayor and members of the city council.
My name is Arvin Martinez and I live in Aurora.
I would like to address environmental and resource
planning considerations
associated with data center development.
Depending on their design and cooling technology, some
facilities may have substantial water requirements.
Water consumption can vary significantly based on facility
size, climate conditions, and type of cooling systems use,
and considering the drastic effect that we have had of
record setting drought and lack of water and highest
temperatures recorded in the United States history.
We can't afford to spare water when there was an obviously big
lack of this resource.
Communities reviewing these facilities often examine
projected water demand, conservation practices, and
potential environmental impacts in areas where long term water
management is an important public concern.
Decision makers may seek additional information
regarding resource use and mitigation strategies.
And obviously, I think we should all take the time to
consider what what's going to happen in the near future.
Who's going to be blamed when there's even less water, and
neighbors are going to be asked to sacrifice even more than
they already are?
The laws that they're trying to keep green and everything they
need is a cut.
Considering how the lack of water is affecting people, very
little reviews can help provide greater understanding of how
proposed facility may interact with local resources, and what
measures may be available to reduce impacts.
Ultimately, there is no long term impact of a simple delay
in construction, but there are plenty of reasons to study the
effects of a data center and the ability of residents to
live in Aurora.
Money can't make more water, but is unrestrained pursuit of
money that could lead to a long
term suffering for our neighbors?
Thank you for my opportunity to speak.
Thank you for your time.
I support a six month moratorium as residential and
environmental impacts are further studied prior to
approval of additional large scale data centers in Aurora.
Thank you again.
Hashim Coates, followed by Juan Marcano.
I want to start with something
that shouldn't be controversial.
Clean air should not be partisan, nor should clean
water be partisan.
It's wild to me that we both need water on both sides of the
aisle for us to tell each other that the other one is wrong.
We need clean air to do that as well too.
So protecting the ability of future generations to live,
breathe, and survive should not be dependent upon whether you
are progressive, conservative,
Democrat, Republican or independent.
Those should be our basic non-negotiables.
Um, Aurora is currently under a stage one water drought.
Our residents are being asked to conserve water and our
watering system is maybe at 50% full.
We can add, if we ask families to change how they use water
because conservation is necessary, then surely we can
ask some of the wealthiest corporations in the world to
wait while the city determines how resource intensive
development should be regulated?
Um, a moratorium is not a ban.
Even though I would entertain a band.
Um, it's the government basically just saying we make
decisions that could affect generations that would possibly
be irreversible.
We're going to understand the consequences and write the
rules first.
Is that that elusive common sense out there?
Aurora is not alone in this.
Denver has stepped in and done this.
Texas has even stepped up and paused certain new data center
approvals while reviewing enormous demands that place on
the electric grid.
One thing that I agree with the mayor on is the water usage as
it relates to grass.
I hate grass, I think all golf course should be banned.
I think that it should be
illegal to water your front yard.
Um, one grass produces nothing and two, it's trauma from my
childhood of having an allergy and having to cut the yard.
Some things just go with me to the grave.
But we need to stop assuming that just because a corporation
announces billions of dollars in capital investment,
that, um.
Excuse me, a capital investment that somehow those billions are
going to trickle down and
benefit to the people who live here.
The research does not support that assumption.
Recent economic research has found that the typical
community receiving a major data center may gain only to
100, 100 to 200 jobs, with no measurable increase in wages.
Capital investment is not the same as community investment.
$1 billion building owned by $1 billion corporation does not
automatically mean $1 billion benefits to aurora families.
I believe that there should be economic growth, but one thing
that we don't need, or one thing that we do need.
We need a good environment.
We don't necessarily need the data center.
The harm that it's pulling to our intellectual value as
Americans who thought we could go any lower, keep coming up
with making things easier for
people not to think we'll have it.
And also, what's not spoken about is that these data
centers are actually mining information.
The observation centers.
Juan Marcano, followed by Chad Johnson.
Good evening again.
My name is Juan Marcano and I'm a resident of Ward four.
I want to begin by thanking Councilmember Wiles for the
hard work and thorough research that she's done on Llms data
centers and the socio economic impacts of this industry, and
for being very responsive to the needs of her constituency.
Since she's been elected to the Ward two seat.
Issues like these are a rarity
in our politics, especially today.
Concerns about the impacts of high powered data centers and
the impacts that they have on noise, emissions, water supply,
water quality, energy costs.
And I want to underline and italicize energy costs here in
Colorado, as the public utilities Corporation or the
PUC is not going to protect us from the impacts of these
facilities will have, but also the impacts on wildlife, on
employment and unemployment generated by people adopting
this nascent technology.
Sowing misinformation and more.
Despite all of these things, we have broad support amongst
cross-generational bipartisan lines on this issue.
I also appreciate the distinction that this
resolution draws between small scale facilities that serve as
the backbone of the internet, and high power facilities that
are used for llms to scrape and steal the collective output of
humanity for the purpose of creating, to quote, tech
oligarchy and likely sociopath Sam Altman.
A future where intelligence is a utility like electricity or
water, and people buy it from us on a meter.
Dystopian does not begin to describe the intent that he and
his contemporaries are espousing.
This body is charged with protecting life, health,
property, and the general welfare of Aurora.
And this resolution and the accompanying ordinance
ordinance does just that.
It provides the city with the time to thoroughly evaluate and
craft a set of protections for aurora and guidelines for
industry to follow as this bubble continues to inflate.
And it is a bubble, and when it eventually pops, I suspect it
will pop soon.
Because we're three years into this frenzy and there is still
no path to profitability for this industry.
Our city will be well served by the regulatory framework that
will follow, and it will not leave Ward two with the burden
of abandoned warehouses next to people's homes.
I want to thank you again, Council Member Wiles, for your
work, and I encourage the council to support this
resolution and her ordinance for the moratorium.
Thank you.
Chad Johnson, followed by Kristin Mallory.
Good evening.
My name is Chad Johnson.
I'm a resident of Ward four.
I want to be clear, the residents of Aurora do not want
data centers in our communities.
I don't want data centers in my community.
This sentiment transcends political ideology, background,
and neighborhood.
You will not find a single polled group that has a
majority support for data
centers in their neighborhoods nationwide.
A much less year in Aurora.
There are a few things that are as consequential to our
community as this one.
With record shortages of rain.
Our reservoirs are depleted and Xcel Energy already raising our
rates in route to roughly 1 billion in profits in 2025.
We do not want or need another thirsty and power hungry
technology competing with Aurora residents for basic
needs like water and electricity.
We don't want their massive amounts of pollution either.
The new Amazon data center in Texas is set to become the
single largest CO2 pollution emitter in the entire country,
at 33 million tons of CO2 a year.
We don't want even a tiny
fraction of that here in Aurora,
data centers have also been found to pollute nearby water
sources, pollute air surrounding the facility, and
creating a persistent noise disturbance 24 over seven to
those that live nearby in dozens of municipalities.
They are also a source of environmental racism.
Several studies have found that their construction and
operation disproportionately impacts people of color.
For those on this council that think a couple of token
standards would make it okay, or if the size of a data center
is limited, that it would in turn make it permissible, they
are sorely mistaken.
I want to remind you that the average medium sized data
center uses somewhere between 300,000 and 500,000 gallons of
water a day,
just one day.
That's that equates to almost 110 million, uh, between 110
million and 182 million gallons a year, an amount we cannot
spare, especially for a bubble like AI.
Once again, I want to be clear.
Data centers are a menace.
The residents of Aurora do not
want data centers here in our community.
I urge you to put a moratorium in place immediately.
Thank you.
Sir.
Kristen Mallory, followed by Kathleen Peterson.
Hello, Council.
Kristen Mallory, Ward three.
First of all, everyone here said all the things that I was
going to say.
So I'm not going to repeat those, but this is probably the
most important issue that you guys are taking up right now.
Like this will determine the future generation.
I don't many of you know, I don't have kids, but many of
you do.
And their water access to water, their electricity cost
is going to depend partially on what you decide right now and
what you decide in these next six months.
Now, I'm so impressed by the work that Amy is doing because
she didn't just say no, never.
She said no, not for six months while we figure this out.
That's really good governance.
Let us put like take time to put policies in place that make
sure that the next generation is protected and the next
generation after that, and the next generation after that.
Because our reservoirs are dry, our air is dirty.
Our electricity, our
electricity is already expensive.
It is too much.
And so it's really just part of me is really disappointing or
disappointed that we're going to have industry come up here
and tell you why they need this for business.
And then we have community always telling you like just
pause and make sure we're doing it the right way.
And this is what it always comes down to every single
time, and it would be really nice if industry for once
didn't think about the dollar in their pocket, but thought
about the dollar in their grandkids pocket and the earth
that they're going to inherit.
So I feel very strongly about
this, that six months is so reasonable.
And like Hashem, I wish that we would do a moratorium, but
that's like a ban forever.
But that's not the world we live in.
Um, so the moratorium does give council something an incredibly
important time, time to study the water impacts, time to
understand the electrical infrastructure demands, time to
establish meaningful environmental standards.
Time, time to determine who's going to pay for this, who's
going to pay for this infrastructure, and time to
ensure that our zoning and development policies reflect
the reality of this new industry.
With all that being said, my brother wanted me to leave you
with this quote.
Love is abundant like an ocean.
But you know what isn't?
Water that runs out.
Thank you.
Kathleen Peterson.
Followed by Christopher Fellows.
Hello.
I'm a resident of Aurora.
Um, I.
Live in Heather Ridge.
Um, I went outside my door, and, uh, my electrical box was
wrapped in artwork.
Well, they call it artwork.
I call it graffiti.
I think it's very ugly.
Uh, it looks like graffiti.
And, um, once, uh, somebody ran over the electrical boxes.
So these are brand new electrical boxes that I have,
and they were, you know, Very nice.
They were gray.
They matched the, uh, the, uh, sidewalks and the environment
around the plants, and and it even matched my house, which a
townhome which is right behind it.
And now I have to look at it looks like a big billboard.
And, I mean, they never showed up before, but they do now.
And, um, so I called Aurora, and, I mean, these guys were
out wrapping it up, and I asked him if they had permission and
they said yes, that they worked for Aurora.
So I ran in and then I, uh, they said no.
So I ran back out, and then they said, no, we really don't
work for Aurora.
Uh, but we do have this company.
And then later, uh, come to find out, they did have
permission, uh, that, uh, they're going to wrap all the
electrical boxes in Aurora.
Uh, I was I'm depressed.
I mean, I look out on my patio and I am very, very depressed.
It looks like a big billboard out there.
And, uh, if you want to look, uh, you know, drive by on Yale
and, uh, South Xanadu way right there at the golf course, there
is this big electrical box that are two big electrical boxes
that look like graffiti.
And I think it's going to encourage, uh, graffiti.
Um, and I since have learned that, uh, I guess Highlands
Ranch has done this.
Denver has done this.
And I guess is I'm not sure if this is going to be a new
policy, but I think it's going to make Aurora ugly.
I think if you want to beautify Aurora, I think you should, uh,
plant more trees or bushes or flowers.
But this.
It looks like kiddie land.
It belongs in the zoo.
Or it belongs maybe outside a library where there's a, um, a
little fountain or something like that for kids to play in.
Anyway, I hope you will consider taking that off the
plate and not doing that.
And I hope you'll take the wrappings off my my boxes.
Thank you.
Christopher Fellowes, followed by Nicholas Biden.
Okay. If you give me your contact information.
Yes.
Christopher, fellows.
Okay. Nicholas Biden.
Okay. That was the last individual.
Motions that were a presentation.
Brief presentation by staff.
Mayor.
Mayor. Councilmember.
Wiles.
Yeah. I just wanted to read something really quick.
Um, so when I announced I would be bringing this resolution
forward, I was quickly told by some business partners and
others who didn't ask me any questions, but rather made a
lot of assumptions that I must be anti-business.
This resolution is not anti-business.
It's pro responsible business,
and most importantly, it's pro community.
I want businesses to come to Aurora.
I want them to invest in Aurora, create jobs here, build
and succeed here.
But I also believe those businesses should be good
partners to our residents who raise families here, own homes
here, and who are building their futures here.
When we make decisions that fundamentally affect their
neighborhoods, we have a responsibility to ensure our
regulations keep up with the changing landscape of the
world, and that's what this resolution is about.
This is not a vote against development or growth.
It's a vote for getting our rules right.
We have areas of the city that could easily accommodate easily
accommodate these centers once
rules are established, a tech spaceport.
So why are we so determined to
put them in the middle of neighborhoods?
Some of the conversations I've
had since announcing this resolution.
So exactly why these changes matter.
Representatives from a large international company whose
projects won't even be affected by these changes reached out to
me to say, what can we do to be better partners to the
community and make them more comfortable with our center
being here?
We have a meeting next week to continue that conversation.
Developers whose projects won't be subject to these
requirements have told me we
still want to do the right thing.
How can we make our sites more community Friendly.
That's the kind of partnership that we should want in Aurora.
Responsible businesses should not be afraid of responsible
standards, and responsible government should not be afraid
to set those standards.
For months, city staff and I have been doing this work
meeting regularly, hosting town halls, conducting side visits,
researching best practices, talking with residents and
walking neighborhoods to understand the real impacts and
listen to concerns.
And through that work, we've discovered that our current
CDOs simply were not written with today's hyperscale data
centers in mind.
In fact, months into this work, we just learned this past week
that they can, in some instances, fall under the same
zoning framework as schools.
That wasn't intentional, but it shows how urgently our
regulations need to catch up.
Other communities are already learning from these lessons.
I spoke with leaders in Loudoun County, one of the world's
largest data center hubs, and they are now redesigning all of
their guidelines because they realized that what they have in
place does not work for a community.
They are changing regulations for every data center to be
considered special use and requiring public hearing.
Something that I didn't even consider adding.
They're changing neighborhood buffers and they're considering
a moratorium.
According to a 2026 study.
Homes within a quarter mile to a half mile of these hyperscale
centers have the potential to lose value by 6 to 7%.
I wouldn't want that to happen to my home that I worked so
hard to get, and we shouldn't accept it possibly happening to
our community members homes, especially when we have
available alternative sites.
A temporary pause allows us to learn from communities like
Loudon, Aurora, Illinois and others to make sure we don't
repeat their mistakes and we learn from their successes.
We have hundreds of acres out East land intended for tech
uses, far from homes, far from schools.
That is far more appropriate and responsible placement for
large data centers.
We're asked to be good partners.
We ask our community members to be good partners, even at a
potential detriment to their
own home value or taxes they pay.
And in turn, asking data centers to be good community
partners shouldn't be too much of an ask.
That being said, I'll call out a thank you to Danielle for
proactively reaching out to me
regarding the data center she represents.
She didn't assume what was in this resolution, and said she
sought to understand and then ask for feedback on how they
could be good community partners.
Also, to our development partners who reached out to ask
questions of me over the past few days, I appreciate your
engagement and your desire to do right by the neighborhoods
you're building, the desire to get correct information and not
make assumptions.
And to the hundreds of residents who outreach over the
weekend in various ways.
Thank you for your feedback and support.
To be clear, those who didn't reach out, what this resolution
is and what it isn't.
It's temporary.
It doesn't affect active development.
It's not anti-business or anti progress.
It's simply an act to get the things right before we're two
down the road.
I believe we can balance
community needs with business needs.
And this resolution gives us a chance to do exactly that.
Thanks.
Um representation by staff or do you think it's covered?
City manager, do you want to take this on or.
Councilman, I can give.
A brief presentation just for the audience.
And so folks understand how we currently regulate, um, videos.
I think that will be germane to
both the two resolutions coming up.
Uh, so currently, uh, data centers are defined use in the
city's zoning and land use codes.
Those allow the zoning districts where they are
allowed include I1 industrial one I.
Two. Industrial.
Two. Airport.
District or aid.
As well as the Airport Protection Zone or APC, also
known as the crash zone around Buckley.
And then finally they are allowed in mixed use, um, uh,
office institutional use.
And so those are the five zone districts where they are
allowed as a use by.
Right. Um, and so that is how they are governed from a land
use perspective, from a water use perspective.
We heard lots of concerns on water use.
The city's large water user guide governs these facilities.
And so we have effectively, uh, eliminated the use for
evaporative cooling.
We heard some significant concerns on that because of
the, um,
um, large water user guide.
Um, new data centers that have built in Aurora are using
closed loop systems.
So once they are charged with water in terms of that closed
loop system, they are not using
new water every day for cooling.
So that is after an initial charge.
They're only using water at that point for irrigation and
for, you know, hand-washing and things like that.
So there's there's not large scale water use for that.
Currently, of the approximately nine data centers that are in
Aurora, they account for approximately 0.3% of our total
water usage on an annual basis.
And so it is a it is a small water user.
We've heard those concerns.
With that said, um, the
um, 1185 does direct us to bring forward an ordinance to
explicitly outlaw evaporative cooling.
Uh, we've worked with the Aurora Water Department and are
prepared to bring that forward, um, and address that concern so
that it is explicitly not allowed in the code.
So we've done that, and we'll be prepared to bring that
forward in terms of noise that we have from the facility's
current development code does
allow for noise and has noise standards.
We're still looking at whether or not we think those are
effective, what that looks like.
Those noise limits within the code typically are set at
different levels.
There's a daytime standard and a nighttime standard, and then
that standard also varies by what the adjacent land use is.
And so it's going to be the lowest when that land use is
adjacent to residential, it's going to be higher if you're
adjacent land use or other
industrial uses or things like that.
So that's within the code.
That's one of the areas we're continuing to to look at, to
see the current
land use codes do not require setbacks from neighborhoods.
And the 1185 does direct staff to bring forward some
recommendations or considerations for council in
terms of potentially adding setbacks to those land uses.
And then finally, in terms of the power, um, the PUC and is
regulated by Excel.
And so we currently don't have anything in our code regulating
power usage because that is regulated at the state level.
And they go through an extensive process in terms of
determining what their power needs are and then what the
cost of infrastructure is going to be to provide that.
And the PUC and the Excel currently handle that through
their regulatory process.
So from a staff perspective, that's kind of the current, um,
lay of the land.
And we'll take any questions from council.
Questions of staff.
Mayor.
Council member.
Hancock.
Horton.
I'm sorry.
Councilmember Horton.
Sorry H.
Um, yeah.
City manager.
Uh, Jason Batchelor, can you talk about the, uh, what
benefit has this have they brought to the city job wise?
Uh, any economic contributions of the nine that I know, not
all nine are currently built, but of the nine, what do they
offer the city?
Yeah. So typically when these are coming in, they, uh, they
represent large, uh, capital investments.
And so there is significant, um, capital investment that's
going in the ground.
And so, uh, the property tax entities, of which the city's
one are primary source is not property tax, but the school
districts are funded by property taxes, and the
counties are funded by property taxes.
So they see significant, um, property tax revenue from those
in addition to the jobs created both during construction and,
um, during operations.
So sorry.
Clarification. So you just spoke about the property tax
benefit for, uh, apps and the counties.
What about for the city of Aurora?
The city also sees some of that property tax, but we are also
seeing, um, significant sales and use tax from these
facilities when they are built.
Um, they are often refreshing all of the equipment within
that, depending on the end user.
Refreshing that every few years.
And so we continue to get sales and use tax from those
equipment purchases for the facility.
Thank you.
Further further questions.
Council member Lawson.
Yeah, I'm for you, Jason.
So I know one of the data centers that has been here for
the longest, I think it's in Ward four.
Is it I think is or is it a different one?
It's flexible.
Okay. Um, how long have they brought in?
How long have they been here?
And I know the answer.
But how long have they been here?
And how much revenue have they brought to the city?
Um, they've been here decades.
I don't know the number off the top of my hand, off the top of
my head.
But they've brought in
significant revenue over the decades.
They've been here both from a property tax payment and then
use tax as they refresh those.
Okay. And then, um, Aurora has already with the current ones
that we have in the pipeline or ones that we've had from data
since 2021.
Um, we've already do, you know, and I'm bringing this up, that
Aurora has received $24.3 million in tax revenue.
Yeah, we had that request
coming last week in advance of this.
And so, yeah, we've we've received approximately $24
million from the data centers in Aurora directly or from
technology vendors associated that, again, are often, um,
outfitting the equipment within those.
Okay. And I bring up those two subject matters just for the
for for the city manager is because we've had a data center
that is in Ward four that has produced income and has we have
never heard of anything about this particular data center
since it's been in Ward four.
Um, so I wanted to bring that up.
And that's actually in a community, neighborhood area.
So I wanted to bring that up.
And then just how much tax revenue we do get from the data
centers that we have from 2001.
So I wanted to bring that up as questions for you.
And just to reiterate that I'll probably have more as we move
forward with the amendments.
Mayor, mayor.
I'm sorry, Councilor Hancock.
I just wanted to ask.
Um, and to your point about the Xcel Energy, it says I heard at
the last town hall that council member Wiles held at the
library, that Xcel Energy says that it can't serve large load
customers before 2031.
Can you?
Can you confirm that.
We've had communication with them, that, again, due to the
regulatory process that they're under going through the PUC in
terms of getting some major capital additions approved as
part of their service within the state of Colorado, that,
uh, given the current capital improvements that they have in
place and approved through the PUC, um, that large scale
hyperscale, um, improvement or power for data centers is not
likely till or is very unlikely until 2030 or 2031 or beyond.
Okay, with that said, I'm just I'm curious as to, um, I know
this says resolution, but it really is a moratorium.
It's just you just change the the name around.
And so what I would like to understand is what specifically
is the staff going to be able to accomplish in 60 days?
What deficiency is there that the Udo isn't already
addressing, and why can't we work these things alongside
while the Udo remains in effect?
And what do we expect to happen?
What's going to happen in 60 days after you're done doing
whatever it is you're going to do?
I'm not sure where the 60 days come from.
The moratorium refers to a six month.
Six months, excuse me, six months.
What are you going to do in six months?
So at that time, um, per section one of the ordinance or
excuse me, of the resolution we're going to bring forward
ordinance is for council's consideration first, again
around evaporative cooling.
Um, explicitly outlawing that.
Second would be to look at the land use regulations, um,
including the zone districts that are currently allowed at
as well as setbacks, buffers and potential conditional use.
And then finally, if there's anything else that council or
others identify, we would look at those matters.
And so that is the direction in the resolution.
So if it passes that's what we'll bring forward.
So didn't Aurora water already determined that they would not
approve any new data center developments unless they had
closed loop systems?
Didn't that essentially solve the problem?
So so basically, we would just be codifying that by going
through this other process, because they already indicated
that they weren't going to
approve any evaporative cooling systems.
So again, right now the code is
not specific to the cooling methodology.
So the the Large User's Guide refers to the amount of water
used per acre per day for for for large users.
And so then it then looks at whether that use is consumptive
or non consumptive and depending on um, the majority
of that use whether it's consumptive or non consumptive,
that gives us different capacities that kind of run
afoul of the large user guide.
But there could be somebody could try and thread the needle
and still use evaporative cooling because we don't speak
to that.
So the explicit outlaw of evaporative cooling would um, I
think something that I'll look at Marshall out there that, you
know, staff thinks would be, um, supportive and a companion
to the larger water user guide.
What we've talked about is we think we've effectively
outlawed, um, evaporative cooling just through the large
water user guide.
But an ordinance to come forward to explicitly, um, ban
it is, you know, we're we're supportive of that from just,
you know, making sure that we're being the best stewards
we can.
So then that's a yes.
Yes.
Mayor.
Can I.
Sorry, mayor.
Let me let me correct one thing.
So sorry.
Jason. There's no timeline for the for the more the moratorium
I'm using.
Because that word is not used in the actual resolution that
was in the ordinance that was pulled tonight.
So it's not being considered.
So I want to be clear that all this resolution does is it
states that the city manager is directed to not accept new
development applications that propose to establish a primary
use, expand or otherwise increase the gross floor area
of existing or new data centers.
The effective date of this resolution.
So again, what City Manager Batchelor has talked about.
We've been in a lot of conversations.
Obviously you know Jason and I talk all the time.
We've been talking to Xcel Energy.
We've been talking to Marshall with the water department.
The fact of the matter is it takes about six months, right,
for one of these applications to even get close to being
ready to file with the city.
And this resolution also Uh, it does say that it should not be
applied retroactively.
Development applications currently pending, or other
contractual negotiations that were initiated prior to the
effective date of this resolution, and again,
including incentive agreements pursuant to City Code section
13298, shall be expressly exempted from this resolution.
So what this would do, if passed, would direct Jason and
the rest of city staff to have these ordinances that you're
requesting through your stakeholder and everything else
to come forward, to be evaluated by council so they
can go into effect.
But again, I with with what's going on with Excel, what's
going on with the water, there will not be the ability for the
city manager to accept an application well beyond this
resolution's effective date, just because of those
limitations that aren't bound by the city.
So I just want to be clear that
that's that's why this is the resolution.
This is why I recommended that this is the way we do this,
because it makes it clear, hey, we're just calling an elephant
an elephant or a sheep or sheep, right?
We're just dealing with, uh, what?
What is going around us with power and water.
And that's what the limitations are, not necessarily the city
holding anything up.
And that's what this resolution does.
I want to be clear that there's no timetable.
Mayor.
I just want to clarify something as well.
Was the difference between the data center and Ward four and
the data centers that are being built now is size.
So the newer ones are hyperscale.
They are far larger.
They use a lot more energy.
They take up a lot more land space.
Um, so to compare, a small data center that existed for ten
years or 20 years even isn't really comparable to the big
ones that are being built now.
They're just very different in terms of needs uses.
ET cetera.
And then also the water ordinance is already done.
Um, it should come forward soon.
Uh, probably next meeting to
study session or the meeting after.
And then in terms of, um, the neighborhood buffer, we Jason
and I have been working on that.
We've been out on field trips, actually walking neighborhoods
to see how long is appropriate.
So that we're making decisions based on data and not just, um,
external influence.
Uh, further questions of staff.
Mayor. Gardner.
Councilor Gardner.
Thank you.
Yeah. This is a question for Marshall, GM of Aurora water,
because we keep talking about water usage.
And so I'm curious.
Um, and I'm going to use the example because that's our
largest data center that keeps being referenced.
Does that data center use more water itself or does the
landscaping requirements around it use more water?
Yeah. Thank you.
Councilmember Gardner.
This is Marshall Brown, general manager of Aurora water.
Um,
Ice uses significantly more water for outdoor landscaping
than they do for indoor process.
Um, and pretty much any new data center that comes to us
right now under the large water user guide that Jason talked
about, is regulated pretty
tightly on water use for process.
And then they also have the landscaping standards, uh, from
the water conservation ordinance that council passed
in 2022.
So the outdoor water use is
pretty efficient, um, per our requirements.
And the indoor water use is
even more efficient than the landscaping.
The landscaping is using more water.
Thanks, Marshall.
And, yeah, that's relevant.
Obviously, I'm working on an ordinance to limit and or
restrict any landscaping that utilizes water in industrial
zoned areas, so that'll obviously take care of that.
Um, and then a follow up for
the city manager, can you clarify?
Just to make sure we do not currently allow use by right
data centers in residential zone districts.
Correct?
We do not.
All right.
That's all my questions.
Thank you.
Mayor.
I just have a couple of questions.
One is for the city manager.
Do we have any information about our current data centers
with respect to ambient heat impacts?
I think we've all experienced some a very hot summer.
So just wondering if that's information we've collected.
We do not.
Not that I'm aware of.
Okay. So that would be
something we could be looking at.
And then my other question is, um, kind of as a follow up to
Councilmember Gardner's question, we don't allow
data centers in residential zone districts, but are any of
the districts that they are permitted in adjacent to
residential zone districts with current or future planned
residential development.
Yes, there are several areas of the use by right districts that
do abut residentially zoned properties.
Thank you.
Further questions of staff.
Seeing none.
Motion is in order.
Mayor.
Mayor Pro tem.
Motion to adopt.
11. Eight.
Five. And then I'll have
amendments with this on the floor.
Move by Mayor Pro Tem, seconded by
second. Second by Councilmember
Wallace to adopt item number 1185.
Discussion.
Mayor.
Mayor Pro tem, thank you.
So first I want to be clear that I absolutely support the
work that Councilmember Walz has done and this ordinance as
it is written.
However, in conversations that Councilmember Wills and I have
had together, conversations I've had with stakeholders,
conversations I've had with colleagues, and things I've
heard from Council member Wiles about concerns she's heard.
I did want to bring forward some amendments to section two
and section three.
Um, so I'll start with section two.
So on section two, the amendment would read, um, the
city manager is directed to accept new development
applications that proposed to establish as a primary use,
expand or otherwise increase the gross floor area of an
existing or new data centre as of the effective date of this
resolution, only if it meets
the following requirements and requirement.
A is that, um, it be, uh, there be a half mile buffer from any
current or planned residential development?
Um, and requirement B is that we've heard everyone's already
doing anyway, but that it uses closed loop cooling because we
don't yet have that officially in code.
So that's the First Amendment.
I'd like us to take them, um,
each individually, if that's okay.
Mayor. So that's my First Amendment.
Okay.
Um, second move by Mayor Pro tem, seconded by somebody,
Councilmember Walz.
Um, discussion.
Uh, then call for the question
on the first mayor pro tem amendment.
Councilmember Andrews.
Thank you.
Councilmember Jackson.
Is she on?
Councilmember Jackson, are you online?
Councilmember Jackson is.
Excused.
No, she.
Was.
She.
She's been online.
Yes.
I'm online.
Thank you.
Um, the vote has a tie.
So, mayor, you can break the tie vote.
Yeah.
We're we're.
I have no idea what the the limit should be because.
Or because we've not asked staff to come back and been
able to to have a debate,
knowledgeable debate about this.
And so, um, whether it should be a mile or a half mile or a
quarter mile, I don't know.
And nor do I think
anybody on this council knows.
And so, Mayor Royce.
No.
You know.
The motion does not pass to adopt the amendment.
Okay.
So we're back to the original motion on the floor with the
resolution as written in the packet.
Okay. Um, I would like to make the Second Amendment.
Um, second proposed amendment, um, which is just to add into
section three development applications currently pending,
and just add the language, including those that have had a
pre-application meeting, um,
before and other contractual negotiations.
Is there a second.
Move by Mayor pro tem?
Second by.
Second.
By Councilmember Wiles?
Uh, discussion.
Seeing none.
Call for the question on the second.
Mayor pro tem amendment.
No, no.
I'm sorry, Katie, just for the record.
Those have had a pre-application meeting.
Meeting? Okay.
Thank you.
I'll update that.
Thank you.
This is so included in a pre process.
Councilmember Bergen.
I voted on Friday.
I'm sorry, I don't I'm not showing up on my end.
How would you like to.
Thank you.
It just came through, mayor.
Again? It's a tie.
Yes.
Mayor. Vote.
Yes.
The motion passes to adopt this amendment.
I have no further amendments.
So.
So currently members of council.
So we have section one and section two.
As written in the packet.
Section three is is currently pending.
And those that have had pre.
Application.
Meetings.
Pre-application meetings which again just to everybody's clear
that is that the process is on is started.
It's ongoing.
So it may allow other develop other projects to come forward
as the resolution is pending.
So that is the only change as
written in this particular resolution.
1185 that's what you're debating and we'll vote on.
Mayor.
Mayor pro Tem.
Um, so I want to say first, just thank you to Council
Member Wiles for being open to
the amendments to the stakeholder.
Um, to my colleagues who supported the amendments we
have heard from our community loud and clear that actually,
they want us to go further than what we've gone here.
That the people who live in our
city, who live in these neighborhoods,
actually would rather we just go ahead and permanently ban
data centers.
The amendments were intended to create a compromise to ensure
that business can continue,
to ensure that workers can continue to have their jobs
building data centers
with reasonable restrictions, right.
To ensure that we don't have data centers next to the homes
of our residents.
Across the street from our residents homes, which all of
us have heard people today and people contacting us online are
concerned about the fact that that is occurring.
This isn't coming forward in a vacuum.
And because nothing has
happened that impacts our community.
And so although my colleagues did not accept the amendment,
which was intended in good faith to address the concerns
that they raised, I do hope that the statements of our
community members, the statements of our neighbors
about what they want to see from us as the people elected
to represent them,
play a role in the decision that you now make.
I urge a yes vote.
Further discussion.
Mayor.
Council Member.
Andrews, I do want to thank.
Council Member Wiles on her effort here.
I've been with Council member Wiles, and she's done a lot of
work around data centers, doing a town hall.
And I spoke with her this morning and we had a very long
conversation about this.
I support the stronger setbacks.
I support water protections, noise limits, public review.
But what I don't support is the the public not having an honest
view of what we're doing.
I do not support that and I will not support that.
We talk about closed loop systems.
We talk about electricity.
We're talking about noise.
How many of us have toured a data center?
How many have heard the noise?
Closed loop systems.
This is not about for me and my vote.
This is not about whether or not we can push the ball along,
because we're going to push the ball further along to make sure
we meet the things that we need to meet.
This is a failure on our side of it to educate the public.
So I am a no vote.
Further discussion.
Mayor.
Um. Councilmember Horton.
Yeah. Um, I guess, uh, one I'm I'm I'm concerned.
Uh, what was shared.
Councilmember Andrews.
Uh, the premise of the argument of who I visited in the closed
loop systems.
Um, and also knowing and I know, you know, Councilmember
Gardner has his resolution also on the agenda.
And I haven't spoken to him and don't know the extent of the
research he's conducted, but I have seen Council Member Wiles
effort, uh, all the way from community engagement and and
working with developers, working with business partners.
Um, trying to thread a needle through a very sensitive topic
on an issue that is, um, it touches a lot of realms, from
our environment to residents
livelihood to economic development.
And I think based off of even what was shared earlier in the
in the questions with our city manager, there are obvious
economic benefits to data centers.
And I think city council, previous city council have has
invested tremendously in this particular area.
We have we have seen the benefits of it.
And at the same time, it is now five years later, where we have
an opportunity to review and reassess what is working, what
is not working, and do our due diligence like any good
experiments, right?
You do it for a while and you go back and you check the data.
And I think this is what this resolution, at least from my
interpretation, does, that it allows the city, allows the US
as leaders to make sure that we have good governance, that we
work alongside our business partners, our residents,
developers to do right.
And I really appreciate it.
I don't know who said it during the comment section that this
is not just a short term effort, right?
That this this is going to continuously have long impact.
And we know data centers are not going anywhere.
We're in the middle of an AI boom.
And so as a governing body we got to do right.
And so that is my $0.02.
And I just want to really thank Councilmember Wiles for all of
her effort and work in her due diligence of making sure she's
doing the research and and making sure that she has a
qualified argument in front of her colleagues, and that we see
that for what that is and that it is not about a it's not
about politics, that this is about good governance.
Further discussion.
Seeing none call for the question on.
1185, as amended.
Mayor. We have a tie vote.
What's that?
We have a tie vote.
Very well.
Um, I want to thank
Councilmember Wallace for for bringing this forward.
Um. It is.
We will have another one coming up afterwards that basically
when you take out the ordinance aren't really different because
both of them say that they can take on additional issues.
Uh, so that the difference between the two is procedural,
that in one set.
Well, now that the ordinance is out, there's really not a time
limit, uh, to there's not a moratorium.
It is how fast staff can get through these issues and get
back to council
on the.
On the other proposal.
I think what is different it says it provides a time limit
for staff to come back to council at 30 days.
And so if we come back and study session and we don't like
certain aspects of it, we can kick it back and say, you know,
you really need to look at this issue or you failed to look at
this issue.
I think at the end of the day, that will be a quicker process
and that will allow council to engage earlier in this debate
than we otherwise might.
But again, these are these are very similar that what is
different is simply procedural.
Mayor votes no.
The motion does not pass to approve item 11 a five.
With the clerk.
Now please read the title to 1186.
Item 1186 is resolution 2020 698, directing the City manager
to implement data center regulations and mayor.
We have individuals who would like to speak.
Very well.
Agent Anderson followed by Madison Schaffner.
The author of this resolution should be at work today.
That's to start this off.
If you are going to propose
competing ordinances and resolutions, you should at
least come and defend yourself in front of your constituents
and not hide behind a zoom screen.
That's the first point.
The second point is I told you so.
I think my commentary and others commentary would be
totally different if we were able to have heard this
fruitful discussion.
People's concerns.
They're walking through data center stories.
We would have had a little bit of a different public comment
than what we would than what we had prior to this vote.
When we think about the impacts of adverse.
Environmental when the when when we see.
The environment impact our communities.
What communities do you think they impact more.
What communities do we think they impact more?
I think we all know the answer to that.
So I'm a little disappointed in the three Negroes that just
voted to kill that resolution.
I hope you're proud of yourselves.
You too.
I'm not surprised you would live next to Satan if he
invited you.
Rob, I am disappointed.
Yeah I guess.
But our conversations will be
much more different than these two.
Mhm.
When the environment is under attack, it is impacting black
and brown people more so than it is the white neighbors that
live in Francois district.
Francois neighbors don't have to worry about this stuff.
The neighbors that look like us, that live near Gateway High
School in Stephanie Hancock's district do.
But again, the colored gals on the council don't talk about
black and brown people because their donors have told them to
do something else.
Shame on you both.
Midian. Schaffner.
Followed by Hashem.
Coates.
Good luck.
Hashem.
Hashem Coates, followed by Kristin Mallory.
I echo what was said.
That Curtis should be here when he's proposing this.
It blows my mind that you all have the audacity to ask the
people to have the same decorum as elected officials, but yet
the elected officials don't have to abide by the same
regulations that the people do in order to speak here.
Hypocrisy sucks.
I echo
the disappointment that I have that that was mentioned as it
relates to the black members of this council, ignoring history
of how environmental racism is
real, no matter how much those who.
Are.
Pulling strings or those who have rejected you, and only to
turn around to you and say yes.
If you promise not to spit, you can come be one of us.
I just don't understand why is it that people in the community
always have to be the one to suffer?
I don't get it.
Especially understanding our history as being human capital.
Also.
Yeah. The closed loop watering system.
That's cool.
I don't think any water should be given to it.
To hell with the grass.
To hell with the data centers.
But it was also given to us at in disingenuous manner,
something that it was 20 years old versus something that would
be newer and larger.
Additionally, ignoring the impact on the heat, the impact
on the electrical grid, the fact that the electrical grid,
this incestuous relationship with Excel and other entities
that thrive off of debt, that are joined in parasitic
behavior, that require the grid to be built off of the people.
But then the profits don't dwindle down to the people.
Blows my mind.
I understand that it's a cost to do business, but when you
have record breaking profit, I don't really give a damn about
the cost of your business because it's the people who are
suffering, and it is the people who will not forget, and it
will be the people who will be there in future endeavors that
one might have politically,
that we will remember the others.
The corporations will discard you for the next piece of
tissue that they can use, and you have the same value to them
after they're done using you as toilet tissue does after it's
been used.
I ask you all.
The environment is the thing that we never should have to
argue about.
What is what is the harm in waiting?
What is the harm in doing the right thing?
Kristen Mallory followed by Juan Marcano.
Hello, Council.
Kristen Mallory, Ward three.
Since we're doing this, raise your hand exercise, I have not
toured the data center, but raise your hand if you've hiked
up into the mountains to see the empty reservoirs.
And hear what they have to say.
Raise your hand if you've gone to a state park that's supposed
to have a lake and it is barren.
Oh, okay, so we can play that game.
Some of us didn't raise our
hands because it's that important.
Um, what frustrates me the most about this conversation?
You said that we're not honest.
You're not being honest.
Using zero gallons of water for new data centers is less than
whatever new is coming.
And what we had 20 years ago is not the data centers that
they're building today.
It's not the data centers the
AI is going to use in the future.
And what we need to do, what you guys need to do is come up
with parameters of good governance to make sure that
these things are protected.
A I believe our water manager talked about another large
water user.
Why are they a large water user?
Why in a drought are we adding any large water users?
Do those words not have meaning?
Because the option is we could have like we already have large
water users.
We're already dealing with a bottling company.
That blows my mind that they are taking our clean water,
bottling it, and then selling it back in plastic, and that's
something that you guys are already looking at.
But yet here we can afford
another large water user, a user.
This is like you claimed that we were dishonest.
I think you really need to hold a mirror up to yourself and ask
if you're being honest.
And like I said, I'm not having kids.
My line is ending.
This world runs out of water.
That's fine.
Me and mine.
We have solar panels.
We have a garden.
We're doing drip lines.
We're doing all the things to save the water.
Your line?
I don't know the next generation, I don't know.
The kids in APS, I don't know.
I don't know if they'll have water.
Do you?
Do you feel comfortable?
I mean, these are the choices that we're asking the
government to make for us right now.
These are.
This is the time.
This is the issue.
And really, we're running out of water.
It's no joke.
So I will take up the offer to go to our data center.
I challenge you to go to our reservoirs.
See how low they can go and when the tap doesn't turn on.
And that's already happening in
some places you can think of tonight.
Thank you.
Juan Marcano.
Followed by Christopher Fellows.
Good evening.
My name is still Juan Marcano and I am still a resident of
Ward four.
This resolution, to put it
plainly, misses the mark as drafted.
It is designed to put business interests, which for anyone
listening means potential campaign donors first, rather
than putting the life, health, property and general welfare of
Aurora first.
The purpose of a municipal government is not to roll over
and appease whatever fantasy wealthy speculators pumping a
massive bubble might have.
It is to plan for the next generation and the generation
after that, to ensure that our city grows and develops in a
way that is sustainable and equitable.
Councilmember Andrews, I'm going to address you directly
Your comments earlier reminded me of politicians drinking
fracking fluid to convince their constituents that that's
safe and good for us.
Those antics did not protect their constituents from the
health impacts of polluting industries.
And these antics are not going to protect your constituents in
Aurora, and especially where you live in Ward two.
You should know better.
I also couldn't help but laugh at one of the recitals about
the Public Utilities Commission and energy pricing.
The PUC has served as a rubber stamp for Xcel, which I will
remind everybody listening.
Everybody on this dais as well is a pyro is a privately owned,
publicly traded for profit corporation.
It is not a public utility by any stretch.
They are excited to have these kinds of facilities in their
service area, because that means more money for them at
the end of the day.
They don't give a damn about what happens to the rest of us.
They're going to be raking it in.
We're going to be paying more.
So you need to think long and hard, sir, about your
constituents, about your family, about the decisions
you're making tonight.
And I strongly encourage you at the next meeting at your
earliest convenience.
Reconsider your decision tonight and pass these
protections for our community.
You do not want this to be your legacy.
Have a good night.
Christopher. Fellows.
Okay. That was the last individual.
Thank you.
Very well.
Representation by staff.
Mayor. I'm sorry.
Jason.
Point of privilege.
Council member.
Horton, I would like to continue this resolution for
next city council meeting.
Okay.
Uh, the
it's been moved by
Councilmember Horton, seconded by.
I can provide my rationale to.
If that's helpful.
Okay. Yeah.
Second.
Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem to
continue this to the next, uh, council.
Meeting, 24th.
August.
24th.
Yeah. August 24th.
Mayor.
Gardner. Discussion.
Okay. Discussion.
Councilman. Gardner.
Yeah, I, I just I would definitely urge a no vote.
Um, you know, we had an item that was sprung on our agenda,
moratorium and resolution at the last minute.
And we were told that it was an emergency and we had to address
this issue right away.
And so the hypocrisy of of now delaying doing anything when
there's a strict timeline in the resolution I'm proposing to
bring forward regulations on data centers is is insanity.
Um, you know, there was a process.
We have a process policy committee study session to have
these conversations.
Unfortunately,
that wasn't done.
I shared my resolution with the sponsor of that item weeks ago
and offered to work together.
Uh, we could have worked together.
I want to work together.
I think we have a lot in common on this issue.
Um, but to go from being told this is an emergency and has to
be done right away to now we can delay.
It is the height of hypocrisy.
Councilmember Horton, thank you.
Uh, thank you mayor.
Uh.
I'm sorry.
Councilmember Horton, then, Councilmember Bergen.
But, Councilmember Horton, do you.
Have the.
Floor? Okay.
Um, so I appreciate the transparency and your comments,
Councilmember Gardner.
I know I felt confident in my vote with the previous
resolution, because Councilmember Wiles did share
it with all of council, uh, a number of times asking for
feedback through email.
And I was very surprised to see this resolution also on the
agenda today when we got the packets on Friday.
And so my request, regardless of what did or did not happen
between Councilmember Gardner and Councilmember Wiles
previously, is in order to vote, at least for For me as
the council member.
Someone who sits on this dais, is that that that your work.
Council member Gardner and council member Wiles compliment
each other so we can vote on a resolution that is robust and
that understands the complexity of this issue in real time.
There are a number of partners here in this very room that I
know attended the town hall a month ago.
Um, you know, we we got documents from the Pipefitters
EDC in the room.
I think there's a there's a lot of key partners that I'm sure
are have worked or will continue to work on this issue.
And having it come from both council member Gardner and
council member Wiles, I think, allows us to do our due
diligence by the residents of Aurora and not have this very
weird divide.
This was not I did not particularly like that.
We had two resolutions on the same topic it did.
That just did not make sense.
So my request is that we continue it until next day.
Counsel for Council member Gardner and Council member
Wiles to hopefully collaborate and and we can vote soundly.
Um, I recognize oh, I'm sorry, Councilmember Bergen, that I
recognize myself.
Thank you.
Mayor.
Um.
This is interesting.
Because.
There was.
Collaboration between council member Gardner and council.
Member Wiles.
So that's.
Not.
True. Um, you know, in terms of, I believe he did.
Reach out to council member.
Wiles to work.
Together.
To co-sponsor.
And it was not accepted.
So, um.
His resolution, why would.
We delay it?
It basically.
Addresses what was in the.
The prior resolution.
And the fact that the moratorium was just.
Pulled.
Today was, you know, that that we were getting things at the
11th hour in terms of the amendments on the floor, we
didn't get the amendments in writing.
I would urge my colleagues to vote no on the delay.
Mayor.
I too would urge a no vote that these two resolutions were
identical when it comes to water, and they're both open
ended on every other issue that
it's just the process is different.
Where one says is there's not a time limit on how long it would
take just to come back to council.
On the Gardner one, there is a time limit for which
staff has to come back to
council, and that's within 30 days.
And in 30 days we would have the ability to say,
um, to opine on it, to say no, we want to look at additional
things or this is insufficient, but it begins the process of
going back and forth with staff.
And I think that that is important.
And so I don't think it's a it's there's any reason to
delay this process for moving forward.
Mayor.
Point of inquiry.
Um, I already asked the point of inquiry.
Mayor.
Uh.
I'm sorry.
What's important then?
Mayor Pro tem?
And then.
Doesn't a.
Point.
Of.
Order.
Councilmember discussion.
Council.
Did you do a point of.
I did a point of inquiry.
Okay. Mayor pro.
Tem. Sorry.
Um, so, City Manager Batchelor, just a inquiry.
Has a back and forth with staff on this topic.
Already occurred with council members.
Yes. I've heard from I think just about everybody on the
dais at some point or the other in terms of, um, what's going
on with, um, this discussion.
Okay. And additional point of inquiry.
And did you indicate to Council Member Wiles that it would
likely take more than 30 days to complete the necessary steps
to bring forward the the
changes that are being requested.
Yes, and I guess that's a good point of clarification.
I am interpreting Council member, um, Gardner's, um,
resolution to direct us to initiate that process.
So, um, we will be to study session, um, in, um, the next
two meetings to sort of discuss those.
Uh, a couple of those items are more straightforward.
As we indicated, the evaporative cooling, I think,
can move forward pretty quickly.
We're planning that as a change to the code section that
governs water use.
So it can go straight from study session, if that's a
consensus of council to the floor.
Um, any Udo changes would need to, um, go to the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
Um, and then since these are all ordinance changes, there
has to be proper notification, uh, To publication dates.
We've got to make sure we're meeting all those.
They have.
They're all ordinance changes.
They require two readings.
Introduction and then final reading.
And then there's 30 days until they are effective.
30 days ish, 30 days ish.
Thanks. That's a legal term.
Thank you sir.
Well, it's based on publication.
Mayor.
Point of order.
Okay.
Mayor Pro.
Tem.
I have an amendment.
To the motion to continue.
Oh, no.
It's that it would be.
Councilmember Horton.
Yeah, this is the.
That's not a point of order, okay.
Councilmember Horton.
Was not member.
Horton.
Yeah.
Um, I would be.
Comfortable with my amendment, um,
amending that to moving it to study session.
Um, I think government is slow
because we have to do it with purpose.
And if we have two council members who are working on this
issue that haven't worked together or whatever dynamics
have occurred.
Uh, you I believe you owe the dais and residents to do your
due diligence.
And so I think coming to study session may give us a better
opportunity to really hash through the details and make
sure we're there's a there's a resolution that is more sound
coming to a regular city council meeting.
I'm sorry, sir.
So the amendment to her motion to continue to be to change it
to going to a regular council meeting and going to study
session on August 24th, and Mayor pro Tem will use a second
on that or who is the second?
Yeah. Do you accept that from the amendment?
Yes. Okay.
So that's the motion on the floor.
Now there is a motion to continue 1186 to a study
session on August 24th.
Well, doesn't have to.
Okay.
It's it's a motion that the council will vote on.
Now, once the question is called.
Okay.
Discussion.
Mayor. Council member.
So I guess my question is
to council member Wiles.
And I know we don't go to policy committees anymore or
whatever, but why didn't this go to a policy committee?
Because maybe we could have averted a lot of this, this
confusion and all of this?
Um, I really don't understand.
Councilmember Gardner's has.
I mean, it seems like he tried to work with you, and you were
like, no, you you were you were like, no, you didn't want you
didn't really want to work with
him because you wanted to be your.
Okay.
So am.
I not entirely.
True.
Can I can I just finish so.
So okay.
But it seems like Council Member Gardner's.
Excuse me.
Um, that's just unacceptable.
Really?
He's rude to me anyway, mayor, but it's just rude.
If it happens.
Again, you're going out.
You know.
Somebody's going to send.
You out.
City manager will.
I wouldn't love that.
I guess what I'm trying to ask is Councilmember Gardner's has
some of the same parameters,
um, that you set forth in yours.
Um, he put some safeguards in there.
I'm just trying to figure out from your perspective what is a
little bit different about yours compared to what we're
seeing on Council Member Gardner's mayor?
So it's this is not to the
question of continuing the motion.
Correct. Okay.
It's not germane.
The question is not germane
to further discussion.
Further discussion to the motion.
Mayor.
Um. Councilmember Bergen.
It didn't go to.
Study session to begin with.
So why are we going to have it go to the study session now
after we've had all this communication?
I'm a no.
Well. Mayor.
Mayor.
Mayor, I.
Believe.
A question.
Kurtis Gardner.
Did your resolution go to, um,
a policy committee or study session?
But this would go to this.
This would go to this.
This one will go to the study if this motion passes.
Right. Yeah.
Correct.
This did not go to a policy committee or study session.
Okay.
Thank you for that clarification.
I also believe it up to Council member Wiles.
Uh, there's a lot of accusations thrown, and we're
hearing, you know, very solidly from one side and perspective.
So I don't know, council member
Wiles, if you'd you want to say your.
Piece.
To the motion.
We're going to stay with the motion here.
Okay. Further discussion.
Seeing none call for the question.
Uh, on the motion to to send it to study session continue.
1186 to study session on August 24th, which is the next
regularly scheduled council meeting.
Okay.
Mayor Kaufman.
Um.
Um. Mayor.
Race. No.
Council member.
Jackson.
Council member.
Votes. Yes.
The motion does not pass with five yes votes.
Six no votes.
To continue the item to the August 24th study session.
About now or to the motion itself.
Original motion.
So there is no original motion.
Uh, mayor.
Uh, sorry.
Yeah. So, uh, the next step, if council wants to hear from it,
would be a brief presentation by Mr. Batchelor, because that
was what happened.
Okay.
And then we would go into a regular motion.
Presentation by staff.
Thank you.
So as I indicated in one of the earlier responses.
Staff is interpreting this, um, to be in terms of that timeline
that we would need to bring those items back to all of
council at study session.
Um, and so I do think I would request a slight amendment to
this, uh, from the sponsor, it says 30 days.
Um, I'd like to spread this out over two meetings.
Um, so if we could get to 35 days, that allows us to get to
the first meeting in September.
Um, given the breadth of topics here, I think we could bring
the evaporative cooling and some of the basic zoning
questions to the second meeting in August, and then we would
come back to the first meeting in September with a discussion
of setbacks screening the other items noted in here.
So I think that is staff's preference.
Um, if it if it stays at 30 days.
That gives us one meeting and we'd have to bring everything
to the to the next meeting in two weeks.
So that's a request from staff.
And then as I indicated
earlier, the water item can move.
Assuming there's consensus, it can move directly forward to
the council meeting.
Anything that as in the Udo per code Planning and Zoning
Commission needs to weigh in with the recommendation.
So we would get it scheduled in, um, with the planning and
Zoning Commission to make a recommendation, and we would
bring that forward with the first reading.
And then that would also give us time to do the appropriate
public notices for the
introduction of those ordinances.
Very well.
Um.
For the discussion.
Mayor.
Uh, Councilmember Wilson.
I just have a question.
For the city, for Pete, about section two.
I know that when we wrote mine, there were some specific
language we had to use.
So I'm just curious.
Is section two like
correct based on some of the discussions we had?
Is it like legally defensible I guess, or I don't know.
Just because based on discussions we had repeatedly
about mine.
Yeah.
We awarded a certain way.
That's a good question.
What I would tell you is I would recommend that if council
is is supposed to pass this resolution that we move, we
remove section two altogether because this is a resolution
and not an ordinance.
Any changes to the code that come before a data center
application is final?
There's a site plan.
Everything else will be affected by any code changes
council brings forward.
So unless otherwise addressed.
Unless otherwise addressed.
Right. But I just want to be clear.
I don't want that.
I don't want section two to as I'm reading it, and I don't
want it to send any false promises to anybody out there,
any developers that are looking to do a data center that they
that they shall apply if they have not filed a
pre-application meeting?
Filing a pre-application meeting doesn't doesn't mean
that there they put a stop gap into this is the code that I've
got to comply with today.
If it changes before they get their application in and
submitted and approved any future changes by the City
Council under the Udo.
And correct me if I'm wrong, Deputy City Attorney Alan, um,
would apply to the data centers that are that are forthcoming.
So I just want to make sure that's clear.
I would ask Council if you're going to pass a resolution to
remove section two.
Is that correct?
Rachel.
That's correct.
Mayor.
Mayor Pro.
Tem.
Well, there's no motion on the board.
Well, I do have just a question about the legal component then,
because my understanding was that section two was there to
kind of assure counsel that people can't just hop in line
to hold their spot for the current regulations.
So if someone were to file before we adopt all of the
regulations, then it would be
considered legislating retroactively.
If we tried to apply those regulations to an application
that was already in the process at that time.
If an application has been filed but a pre-application
meeting does not mean an application is filed, it is
meeting with staff to make sure that they have all the
requirements that they need to
plan to get their application done.
They do have their application submitted and they submitted it
into the current code before
those ordinances go into effect.
Yes. Then they would be subject to the code at the time that
they submitted the application.
But the way this is written with a pre-application meeting,
it would say that that doesn't give anybody any safeguards
because they don't have an application on file.
Okay. So just to clarify, if we pass this resolution
Anyone can still submit a data center application under our
current code, all the way up until we've actually passed the
subsequent codes.
Correct. There is no moratorium
language in this particular resolution.
There is no, um, halting of applications.
If somebody if a developer is able to get a completed
application submitted and accepted by the city.
And that's another key word that we're talking about under
1185 accepted by the city, which means water compliance,
electric, all those things that we require, um, if they're
required in the application
process, then yes, they would be.
They would rush to, to work
away from any changes in the code.
Again, we've heard from both discussions that these are not
just file a single sheet of paper and get your application.
And they're very you've got to make sure you have land that
you either own or have a, uh, have a right to build on.
You have to have a site plan.
You have to have, Um, you know,
meeting any master plan requirements.
So again, I think that's one of the reasons why I won't speak
for Council Member Gardner if he wants to speak up.
I think that's one of the reasons why he had put the 30
or 35 days into the resolution, as he wanted to get these
things put in place quickly, because the reality is, is,
under my understanding, from the legal side, the ability to
get a data center completed application to the city is
going to take a lot longer than 60 days, which would give
council time to do what they want to do with the Udo, which
is why I think Councilmember
Gardner put the 30 days in there.
Do we have a motion?
Um, Councilmember Berger,
um.
Make a motion.
You want to make the motion?
Yeah, we want to make a motion.
Okay. Um, I,
I think staff offered some amendments.
Um,
uh, let me offer one amendment
first and that by the city manager.
Well, let's get a motion first.
Okay. Um, motion is in order.
Mayor. Motion to approve 1186.
It's been moved by Councilmember Garner.
Second by second by
Councilmember Hancock to approve.
Um,
okay. All right.
Okay. Um.
So no.
Amendments. Approve 1186
amendments.
Wait, don't we need a motion?
It is.
Moved. Okay.
Um. Sorry.
Uh, yes.
So,
Councilmember Gardner, as friendly amendments, the 35
days requested by staff and the striking of section two.
I'll accept those as friendly amendments.
Okay. Very well.
Um, okay.
So now.
So now the resolution your mayor eliminated six is section
two is stricken.
And then it does give the city manager 35 days to bring the
ordinances forward.
Okay. And we don't have to vote on that.
It's friendly.
Yeah. Okay.
So. Okay.
Um. Further discussion.
Mayor.
I have.
A.
Council member.
I'm sorry.
And then Mayor pro tem.
Councilmember Burton.
Well, I just wanted to talk about the actual resolution,
but I'll wait until at 5
million other amendments are made.
To the resolution, as amended.
Mayor.
Mayor pro tem.
So I do have an additional amendment.
Um, and that is to section B.
Um, one of the items that Councilmember Wiles included in
her resolution that's not included here, that was
specifically requested by staff
as a topic that council should discuss.
And to be clear, that's what section one entails is not what
we're going to do, but what we need to discuss is special or
conditional use permits within the zoning.
So I would like to amend section B to include a special
or conditional use permits after a.
Um.
A p zone.
Districts.
Okay. If I could ask this.
Sorry.
No. I'm sorry.
It's a little bit weird.
These I did not plan, so I'm trying to figure out.
How to navigate on the fly, trying.
To establish a special or conditional use permit.
So that'll go before setbacks and landscape buffers.
Let me.
If I could just ask a quick question, the city attorney
about that and that section C says address any additional
issues as may be deemed necessary and appropriate by
the city manager that are not
inconsistent with the resolution.
Okay. That says by the city manager.
Sure.
Correct. So this could be if the city manager could state
that conditional use permits.
Jason, I would say that you would find that, uh, as a as an
interesting as a required thing to talk about.
Is that fair?
Yes, I think I think we've heard that.
I think there's a couple other things that we will bring
forward to study session for, um, discussion and direction.
Okay.
Is that accept your.
Okay. So that covers, I think, what Mayor Pro tem was going to
ask to be included.
Okay. So we're not going forward with an amendment.
Another amendment.
Okay. Um.
Further discussion.
Seeing none, call for the mayor.
I'm sorry, Councilmember Gardner.
Thanks, mayor.
Um, yeah.
So a couple of things I just want to follow up on.
Um, you know, I think I'm glad to see that there seems to be
general consensus on this council, uh, in terms of
addressing this issue.
Um, you know, I'm not going to
rehash the process issues, though.
I wish the process issues has been followed.
At this point.
I'd prefer to not have policy committees since we don't use
them anyways.
Um, you know, I do want to thank Council member Wiles for
her work on this because I know
she's done a lot of work on this.
Um, I, you know, and I will say I resent the implication from
some of my other colleagues that I didn't and I don't know
what I'm talking about and haven't done the work.
Um, because that was said a couple times tonight, which is
is rather offensive.
Um, but that's fine.
That's politics.
Um, you know, I think in general, I'm looking forward to
coming up with some appropriate safeguards to ensure that we
protect both our residents and also ensure that Aurora stays a
business friendly city.
We have consistently over the last several months, and with
more to come, done things to create uncertainty for
businesses that operate in our city.
And, you know, some people would say, well, those are just
businesses we don't want here.
But the thing businesses don't want is uncertainty.
They want to operate within a certain environment.
Uh, and they don't want they can handle regulation, but they
can't handle this uncertainty.
and at a certain point, we can run off all the businesses that
we don't want here, and we're going to be left finding that
no businesses want to come here because they realize that
Aurora changes the rules midstream.
And so, you know, I think we'll be able to come up with some
safeguards that both protect our residents and that the data
center community can live with.
I've had a lot of conversations with those folks, and I think
there's some reasonable things that we can come up with.
We are in a different situation than some of our neighboring
communities that have put moratoriums in place.
We don't allow data centers in residential areas, for example.
And so, um, you know, my hope is that going forward,
Councilmember Wildes and I can work together on some of these
issues because I think there is a lot of common ground, and I
hope the rest of this council can can agree with some of the
things we're able to come up with.
Mayor.
Councilmember Burger.
Yeah, I just want to say that really, we should be we should
ensure that any business that wants to locate in our city is
compatible with zoning, water use restrictions and other
environmental concerns.
But this started out as a moratorium, and a lot of these
businesses have already invested millions of dollars in
choosing to locate in our city.
So it's not.
It's a really poor business practice.
As Councilmember Gardner just
alluded to in terms of predictability.
And you don't have a business invest time and money, um,
after meeting our zoning and understanding of our
entitlement process and then change the rules also, um, you
know, there's other businesses that also, um, could impact
our, our different residential areas.
So not just data centers.
And we can change the Udo.
Obviously, we're going to do this with this with this
particular resolution.
It could have gone to PD with
those kind of changes to begin with.
Um, we could have setback setbacks, noise mitigation.
Um, as mentioned also earlier,
we have that large water user guide.
We're going to make it formal in terms of specifically to the
closing system, but we don't currently allow any of the data
centers to come into the city
that don't have a closed loop system.
Um, investments are not only to our city, but very significant
investments to our county and to our school districts.
And by the way, those do actually reduce our tax burden
and support our city for all the resources that we provide
to our to our, um, to our residents, um, investments
range from several million dollars to over $2 billion in
property taxes, city use taxes, construction jobs, and other
high paying permanent jobs and infrastructure.
And you can ask pipefitters local to 208.
Um, they actually wrote an email to us, a letter that was
provided that they were against a moratorium and that they, um,
actually were, um, touting how many high paying jobs with the
skilled labor that this, that these data centers provide.
Um, and just as an example, we already have one built data
center alone that is contributing $1.1 million to
Aurora Public School District.
Another one is paying $2 million to our public schools.
Others are in the planning stages and are projected to add
at least $86 million.
That's just to our city.
So this helps create a stable, long term tax base.
And reliance on retail sales, as we know, is unpredictable as
the economy fluctuates.
So this actually does help secure our future.
And we can mitigate all those
other concerns that are valid concerns.
Creating clear standards is desirable, and I certainly
support making those changes.
And so anyway I am in support of this resolution.
Thank you.
Further discussion.
Mayor.
Mayor pro tem.
So the work that's being directed by this resolution.
Absent a moratorium, is already happening.
It's the work that the city manager and council member
Wiles and city staff have already been doing.
This moratorium was presented as and ah.
This resolution was presented
as an alternative to a moratorium.
We don't actually need to do this to do the work.
The work is already happening.
Um, and so in my view, because this was proposed at the last
minute for the purpose of simply heading off a
moratorium, there's no need to support it.
Staff can just keep doing the work they've been doing.
I strongly disagree, I think that I mean, this brings it
before city council, this brings it before the public.
What you're talking about is individual discussions with
with staff.
I mean, I think the public needs to be involved in this,
and this is one way the way this is currently written is
that it brings it to a public hearing at the study session,
where we'll have a presentation by staff and where we'll be
able to have a debate about
what direction we're going to take.
I think that I think that the discussion seems to be that
that everybody's mind is
already made up and that it's done.
It's not done.
This is just the beginning of the process.
But I think it needs to be a public process.
And so this needs to pass.
Mayor.
Mayor Pro.
Tem.
We've already had the public comment.
And what they said is they
would like a moratorium or a ban.
And that's not what
Councilmember Wiles is bringing forward.
Um, what Councilmember Wiles is bringing forward is a set of
thoughtful regulations, which she's already put months into
working on, and which if staff can bring them forward in 30 to
35 days.
It's because they already did the work.
So I just.
Yeah, I don't think that this is necessary.
It exists for the purpose of giving people something to say.
They did.
That's not a moratorium.
It's an important deadline.
Councilmember Hancock,
uh, motion by Councilmember
Hancock to call for the question.
Mayor.
Second.
Second. By Councilmember Lawson.
Non debatable motion.
Call for the question.
Oh, we have to.
We have to wait to vote.
We have to vote on that two thirds.
Yep.
Call for the question on the
motion to call for the question.
Mayor. Kaufman.
Mayor.
Council member.
Jackson.
Council member.
Proudly votes no.
The motion passes with seven yes votes for no votes from
Mayor Pro Tem Coombs, Gardner, Jackson and Medina to end the
debate and vote on the motion.
Okay. Just to be clear for all council, what you're voting on
is to changing.
It's 1186 as in the packet with two amendments.
One is striking section two, and the other one is changing
the dates from the days from 30 days to 35 days for the city
manager to be able to bring ordinances forward.
Go over the question.
Councilmember Jackson.
Votes.
The motion passes with seven yes votes, three no votes from
mayor Pro Tem, Council Member Jackson and Council Member
Medina to adopt item 1186, as amended.
15 A for the clerk.
Now read the title of 14 a.
Item 14 a Finalizing of Ordinance 2020 641 submitting
to a vote of the registered electors of the city of Aurora,
Colorado, at a coordinated election on November 3rd, 2026.
A proposed amendment to section four of article two of the City
Charter concerning municipal elections to direct that
regular municipal election shall be held in even numbered
years, and proposed amendments to section five of article
three to provide for one time shortened terms of office to
facilitate the transition to regular elections occurring in
even numbered years.
And may or we do have individuals who would like to
speak on this item.
From the public.
First.
First person.
Anybody wish to be heard on this?
Yes.
The first person is Antti
Anderson, followed by Hashim Coates.
Rest of the council.
And I know you like to troll
people back, so my name is Antti.
So just a heads up when you want to troll me back.
Um, definitely support passing this, uh, and sending this to
the voters, because this is a prime example of why there
needs to be more participation in city government.
And having even your elections will make sure that we don't
have certain members on the city council anymore.
And I am so thrilled about that day.
Just remember the feeling in Aurora when we all woke up and
heard Daniel was sent home.
Not only was she sent home, she barely got into third place.
So so many voters of the city did not want her.
That was such a beautiful day for the city of Aurora.
Such a beautiful day.
And if you can only imagine the party we had when Danielle was
kicked out of office.
What type of party do you think we're going to have when y'all
Francois Lawson, uh, Curtis and Stephanie, when y'all when
y'all are gone, it's going to be Juneteenth level
celebrations, like in the street partying.
Actually, let me give this more to a black focus.
Can't you feel a brand new day when.
When the Wicked Witch of the West was finally melted in the
in that pot, when Dorothy threw that water and everybody came
about, they they costumes.
And then it was just a whole brand new day.
Brand new day.
That is going to be what it feels like when there's more
voter participation, because then we won't have to have
these conversations around.
Oh, I second this, and I want to call for the question here,
and I don't want to hear the debate, and I want to bring a
competing resolution with my colleagues, or even if I want
to vote in the minority, I am not going to have anybody else
with me to vote, because I don't have MAGA Republicans and
MAGA donors helping me out.
No, more like it's going to be
such a brand new day, I can't wait.
I can't wait.
It's going to feel like Obama getting elected in 2008.
It's going to feel like when Joe Biden dropped out of the
presidential race and they said Kamala Harris was taken on the
top of the ticket, it's going to feel, oh, it's going.
This is the day that the Lord has made.
Let us rejoice in the end and be glad in it.
That's the type of energy it's going to feel like Jesus came
back again in 2026.
It's like we're going to all
watch the stone roll away together.
I am so excited for this resolution, or this ordinance,
or this vote to the people so
that they can have this decision.
Because when the people
participate, they don't elect Republicans.
When the majority of your voters participate, you get to
go home.
You don't gotta sit here and listen to me talk to you for
three minutes on every single item on your agenda.
You get to be at home.
Watch your Tyler Perry soap operas.
I don't know, but I can't wait
for the brand new day, so vote yes!
Hashim Coats, followed by Kristen Mallory.
Vote yes on.
What?
No, it's.
Not your vote, but it does require hot.
Mike's hot.
My hot mix.
Oh.
Did you say.
Hot?
Hot mix.
Oh, listen.
There's.
There's a very simple democratic principle behind
this conversation.
More people voting is better than fewer people voting.
And on this question, the research is remarkably clear.
Peer reviewed studies A study published in the American
Political Science Review found that putting municipal
elections on the same cycle As state and federal elections can
roughly double local voter participation, it is also found
that the resulting electorate becomes more responsive or,
excuse me, more represented by race, age, and partnership.
That matters in Aurora because research consistently shows
that low turnout, off cycle municipal elections
disproportionately elevate
older, wealthier, whiter electorates.
Younger voters and communities of color are more likely to
disappear from the electorate when local elections are
isolated from major election cycles.
And we've seen the turnout difference right here in
Aurora, Arapahoe County, where our state representatives are
all Democrat.
Turns out about 39%
in the in the 2020.
Excuse me in 2003, odd year election in the 2024 general
election is appropriate.
Approximately 76%.
If moving the election allows 10,000 tens of thousands more
residents to participate in choosing the people who decide
policy, housing, transportation, development and
water and how their tax dollars
are spent and deserve serious consideration.
So be it.
And there's something here for progressives, conservatives,
Democrats, Republicans and unaffiliated voters.
Aurora races would definitely remain nonpartisan.
But also what this does is it allows Republicans to see who
their true candidates are, because they would line up with
the people that are Republican on the ticket with the
affiliated races.
That way, we won't have to worry about being lied to.
Who's progressive, who's not progressive, who's unaffiliated
when they were a Republican throughout the Obama years.
Um, to what they are now.
Um, so moving to municipal elections, to achieving your
election gives voters more opportunity, and it lets us be
able to distinguish the MAGA trash for what it really is,
for those that will sell out their own kind for what they
really are.
There are political benefits to this because it will also free
up some media time.
We don't have to worry about
seeing these election ads every year.
Um, I cannot get up here and say that it would drop the
reduce and spending and all that.
That happens because it would probably be more.
But if we get the turnout that is here, it will let them know
that this market is not up for sale anymore.
So I encourage a yes vote on this.
Kristen Mallory followed by Juan Marcano.
Hello, everyone.
Kristen Mallory Ward three.
I also serve on apps and I run on an off year election cycle.
So very selfishly, I would like you guys to move off of our
election cycle so that all you
can, all the voters vote on is apps.
Uh, on odd years.
Um, I also want to just say it's even though you hear from
the same group of us week after week, I would kill to have this
type of participation at APS meetings when we're talking
about reading and resources for our kids, because we don't have
people who show up and talk to us about the things that we're,
uh, we're voting on.
And so I find it kind of refreshing that you have so
much, uh, so much participation in your meetings.
And, uh, I don't think you should take that for granted,
but Hashem already laid out all the reasons why this makes good
sense And to increase the electorate
will probably change the election results.
Some of you shouldn't probably like that very much.
Um, but those of you who would benefit from a greater turnout
should think about that.
I also want to say congratulations to Ali, who was
very thoughtful in how she went about, uh, changing the term
limits and changing when you guys would get elected so that
it didn't extend but shortened your terms.
I thought that was very thoughtful.
And again, this is another situation where what is being
put in front of you is good governance.
I hope that matters.
After the last couple of things we've heard, I don't know that
it does.
But all that to say, uh, this is something that we've been
dreaming of for a long time, it would be great to see it come
to fruition.
So vote your conscience and hopefully our values align.
Thank you.
Juan Marcano.
Good evening again.
I'm still Juan Marcano.
I'm still award for resident.
I want to once again thank council member Ali Jackson for
sponsoring this ordinance.
In an era where our democracy
is under attack at the federal level.
Strengthening our local democracy is more important now
than ever.
Moving our elections to even years will greatly bolster
participation in our municipal elections.
It will finally put a spotlight on what I believe is the most
important level of government.
And that's something that all
of y'all should want to have happen.
Every municipality that has done this across the country
has seen a dramatic boost in voter turnout.
Not only that, the ballot drop off that I've heard some
concerns from y'all about, especially in the past when I
was on the other side of that dais does not happen.
In fact, Parker and Castle Rock, two of our neighbors to
the south.
They've actually had years where more people voted for
mayor and city council than voted for president.
So they left the top of that ballot blank, and then they
went to the next page and voted for their council.
I think that's really cool.
I want the whole ballot to be filled, to be clear.
But, you know, still and I want to give you all a couple of
other national examples too,
because this is not a local phenomenon.
Baltimore, they went from 13% turnout in mayor in 2011, which
is when their elections were at the top of the ballot.
They went to 55% in 2016, 2020 and 24 during presidential
years when they were on the back of the ballot.
San Francisco used to do about 36% turnout for mayor.
For example, in 2019 they went to 76% turnout in 2024, despite
the mayoral race going to the 10th slot on the ballot.
And that's below school board and they're on their ballot.
Right. And El Paso, Texas.
They went from 8%, 8% turnout in 2017 to 55% in 2020.
And one thing that's really interesting here, the last race
on their ballot is actually municipal judicial seat.
Those are elected positions.
They're here.
I know we all appoint them.
They received 660%
more votes.
By putting that on the even year ballot.
So the additional benefit of this change is that it's also
going to foster much better intergovernmental
collaboration, because we're going to have municipal,
county, state and federal races on the same ballot.
That means that folks, candidates who are running for
office, they're going to begin to develop relationships sooner
on the campaign trail.
They're going to probably knock doors together.
They're going to hear from voters, and they're going to be
able to work together to craft and prioritize policy in unison
to address the needs of their constituencies.
This should be a unanimous yes vote, y'all.
This is a capital G good governance reform.
Give us an opportunity to strengthen their democracy by
supporting this ordinance.
Thanks again.
That was the last individual motion.
Motion is in order.
Mayor. So moved.
Uh, mayor pro tem.
I'm sorry.
Uh, approve.
Move to approve.
Thank you.
14. Aye.
Right. 14.
Aye.
Okay. Okay.
Moved by Councilmember Horton.
And seconded by.
Combs.
Seconded by.
Blood. Jackson.
Yes. Second by Councilmember Jackson.
Discussion.
Mayor.
Councilmember. Hancock.
So, um.
The beauty of off year elections is that our cities,
our candidates, and our local issues receive the attention
they deserve.
Local government should not be buried beneath the noise, money
and partisan politics of a presidential election.
I'm deeply concerned about moving municipal elections into
a presidential election year.
It's like the canary in the
coal mine for something much larger.
The increasing nationalization
and participation of local government.
Some would argue that this change is about democracy
because presidential elected
elections produce higher voter turnout.
But democracy is more than about simply increasing the
number of ballots cast.
It's about an informed populace, competitive
elections, accountability, and ensuring that local voices are
actually heard.
Higher turnout should not automatically be treated as
justification for restructuring local elections.
Candidates running for municipal office have a
responsibility to engage their communities like we did in our
last elections.
Knock on doors, communicate ideas, inspire voters, build
consensus and work hard to get those voters to the polls.
That's what electioneering is.
That's what we do when we run for office.
And then the voters get to
decide whether they want us or not.
Either way, it is part of the process.
We should be very cautious about changes that could allow
national partisan politics or ideological agendas to
overwhelm our non-partisan municipal elections, regardless
of which party benefits today, concentrating political power
and diminishing meaningful competition is not healthy, and
it's not really part of representative government.
Local elections belong to local voters.
Let's keep the focus on our communities and our issues and
the people asking us to serve them.
Further discussion.
Mayor.
Mayor Pro tem.
Oh, sorry.
Um, I'll be quick.
Um. Competitive elections are
about more people voting, right?
If you get more votes than you've been more successful at
competing in an election.
If you get the votes of more people, um, then you've been
more competitive.
It's fairly simple.
And yes, greater participation is the hallmark of democracy
and improvements to democracy.
That's all.
Very well.
I don't think it has worked well for RTD directors being on
the general election ballot, and I find it ironic.
We had a school board member from Aurora Public Schools come
up here and testify for the proposal for moving Aurora City
Council to the general election ballot, but not the Aurora
School Board.
Um. Further discussion.
Mayor.
Uh.
Council member.
Bergen.
Council member.
Jackson.
Yes. Thank you.
I just wanted to continue to say, as the sponsor of this,
um, ballot initiative, that I just want to see a greater
democracy being born and raised in Aurora, Colorado.
I think that as we bloom into a beautiful majority,
metropolitan, um, pushing 400,000 citizens, we really
should see, you know, greater turnout in our elections.
And so it is nonpartisan and it
will allow for coalition building.
It will allow for voters to get a break from mailers every year
to every other year.
It will give people an opportunity to hyper focus on
politics every other year as opposed to one year.
And so this is really just an opportunity to make our
elections more effective, to run more smoothly and to give
everybody a break in between year, odd, odd years and off
years when it comes to elections.
Further discussion of seeing none.
Call for the question.
The motion passes with six yes votes for no votes from Council
member Bergen, Gardner, Hancock
and Lawson to approve item 14 A.
Let's see.
Okay. Reports Councilmember Andrews.
Yes, mayor.
I need to we add a resignation on the CBC.
Um,
From Vida Brown.
I need to appoint Matthias Amaru to the board.
And, Katie, I'll give you information later on.
Yes.
Thank you.
Okay. Um, Mayor Pro Tem Coombs.
Thank you.
Mayor. Um, so a few upcoming items for folks to keep in mind
is that this Wednesday, there's the city council chamber
accessibility meeting.
Uh, 530 to 7:30 p.m..
And that is in the Aurora room here in City Hall.
Um, this Saturday the 15th, um, there will be a town hall on
the renaming of the Central Library.
Um, at 10:30 a.m.
on Saturday.
And then on next Thursday, a housing strategy community
feedback session at 5:30 p.m.
at the Central Recreation Center
and the Central Library.
Renaming on Saturday is at Central Library.
Um, and then just in terms of recent events that I was able
to attend last Saturday, the proclaiming Colorado's Black
History Aurora exhibit opening, um, which had really wonderful
participation from many folks in our community.
Um, on Friday, I was able to attend a Purple Heart ceremony,
um, with the mayor.
Uh, here outside of City Hall, raising the purple purple heart
flag in celebration of Purple Heart Day.
Um, also on Friday, the Arapahoe County or sorry, Adams
County Health Department had a community briefing in town Hall
on the, uh, tuberculosis response at the Geo.
Aurora facility.
Um, and then finally on Saturday, I was able to spend
some time with SEIU local 105 and their committee on
Political Education, uh, advocating for working people,
including home care workers.
Airport workers and janitors in our community to have living
wages and be protected in their workplaces.
So that's.
My report.
Councilmember Gardner.
No report.
Councilmember Jackson.
Councilmember Horton.
Thank you.
Mayor. A few things from Ward one.
Updates. I've been having a number of conversations
regarding Fletcher Plaza and some proactive response,
working with multiple different city agencies
and with the mayor, who also attended that meeting last week
to address how we could best provide resources and make sure
that all can utilize the library.
The second piece is with the
Community Development Corporation.
The the official steering committee was launched.
So if folks would like to join that effort and want to see
revitalization in northwest Aurora and the prioritization
of community voices, small business owners and all and
non-profits, all that make up the area.
Please let me know.
Um, the also council, uh, Mayor Pro Tem Coombs, um, and I are,
uh, on the resolution to rename our central library, uh, or to
Atticus, uh, to honor Edna Wilson Mosley, who was the
first African American city council member.
Make sure it's on the screen.
Um, and there are public comment sessions that's
happening this Saturday, August 15th in person.
And then again, a virtual option on August 25th.
Uh, I do want to note, because it just does not sit well in my
soul, that last conversation, um, around data centers.
And this is something that I will hold myself to.
And what I ask my peers on this dais, that if you are
going to present an accusation that that person is allowed to
defend themselves, and particularly if it is male
leadership who is not presenting any facts, that that
is that is such an that was just unjust and rubs me the
wrong way as a as a woman, as a woman of color on this dais.
Um, that that there was not an opportunity for Council member
wiles, and I have no idea what she believes in this, but it
was just my feelings.
Um, and really, what we should hold ourselves to is do better.
Uh, Councilmember Wiles.
Um, so.
First of all, I wanted to honor the life.
Of Arthur Williams.
Who was hit and killed by.
A.
Hit and run.
Driver.
Earlier this month.
Um, police are still looking
for, Uh, the person who hit him.
And so all of the information is on the APD website and on
their their social media page.
Please, let's keep an eye out for this car.
This family deserves justice.
And they also deserve a sense of closure, knowing that the
person who left their family member on the side of the road
will be held accountable.
So if you saw anything, please say something.
There, I believe is an award a reward?
I don't think there should need to be a reward to do the right
thing, but hey, if it gets you to turn in the information you
need, please do so.
I also want to thank the reserve community who hosted me
for their town hall.
Ironically, they're right next to the data center that will be
built in their neighborhood.
So I.
I hear their concerns, and I hope they know that I intend to
honor my campaign promises to continue to advocate for them.
Um, also August 22nd, Nelson Holland is doing a Highland
Highline Canal cleanup.
I hope to see everybody out there.
It's a great time cleaning up our parks and our canal trails.
And then obviously I would be
me if I didn't mention Special Olympics.
They need volunteers.
The State Classic is also
August 22nd, softball is August 23rd.
And then there's the Plain pool on August 29th.
So please sign up to volunteer and help them out, especially
since now they are officially Aurora community members.
Thank you, Councilmember Medina.
Thank you sir.
I was at the Colorado Black History Exhibit traveling
exhibit over at the War History Museum, where I was able to get
a proclamation for Ruben Sims Junior, the first African
American firefighter for the city of Aurora.
I had my town hall as well.
We talked more about the Ada compliances around the city,
what they're trying to do to start to comply with that, and
also talked about what's happening here at council
chambers, also went to the Delmar Park Community picnic,
was able to talk to constituents about issues and
concerns and have a little reprieve from the heat.
Thank you.
Councilmember Hancock.
Thank you mayor.
It's been a busy two weeks.
Last week we attended the corium.
On the 27th, we attended the Korean War Memorial as
beautiful ceremony out at Generals Park.
And it was just great.
It was a beautiful ceremony.
You and I, mayor, were at the Aurora Fire and Rescue training
facility, and I got to tell you, your boss, mayor, you ran
up those four flights with that £40 hose.
I watched and took pictures, but I did other things with
with the firefighters.
And I think it's they have some of the toughest training that
I've ever seen.
And there was one lone gal that
was there hanging with those fellows.
It was really great to see these young people go through
their training to become
firefighters, to protect our city.
Also, I also attended the opening reception at the Aurora
History Museum.
And one thing to note, I did personally know Reuben Sims
back when, in our military days, my husband and myself, we
all were together back in the day and I.
It was great to see his son Jamie and his family attend
that and hear the proclamation by um Councilmember Medina.
Um, this Monday.
This past Monday, I attend the Armed Forces Treatment Court
and it was great to see Judge Day preside over this young man
who did the hard work that it was necessary in the Armed
Forces Treatment Court to, you know, you fall down sometimes,
but this gives you an opportunity to get back up.
And he was supported and helped and encouraged and he went
through the program, 18 month program, and he's well on his
way in recovery and success.
Um, that was a really great program as well.
Um, I also attended, along with Council member Andrews, the
interfaith gala, uh, at the in Centennial, where they raised
funds to provide meals for
homeless individuals across the city.
You can come in and they take really good care of you there.
And it was great seeing the commissioners there as well as
Council Member Andrews.
I had a meeting today with Tamiya and I hope I didn't
mispronounce your name, miss Tamiya Jackson of Aurora save.
And we had a really great discussion about what the
Aurora save does and what it doesn't do.
And as the director of this program, she is instrumental in
helping young people circumnavigate the stresses of
making choices that sometimes are not in their best interest,
but to help them make better choices.
It serves young people from the ages of 14 to 24, and to help
these young people to choose nonviolence.
Um, you know, activities.
And we talked a lot about resources as I went on a ride
along a couple of weeks ago.
You and I mayor, and talked to a young man, I think, uh, rode
called straight and the save
officers and the save coordinator.
Really? I think they kind of got through to this kid.
I could I could see his countenance change.
And he seemed willing to really engage in his own future,
because that's what these young people need to be able to be
trained to do.
Um, for the young woman who
talked about, did we go to the reservoir?
I don't know if she's still here, but we're actually going
on the water tour tomorrow, so we're going to go and look at
these reservoirs and see firsthand how water, um, water
deprivation, how the drought, how our one day of winter has
impacted our water resources here in this state.
There's a lot more going on with water than meets the eye.
The Colorado water compact and all of that that's going on.
We supply water to us Nebraska, New Mexico, California, Nevada.
Oh my goodness.
It's a huge deal.
But we want to be very good stewards of our resources as
representatives on this council.
And so the water tour, I expect, will be a great
opportunity for us to learn more about that.
Also this week we will be
having the public safety meeting.
And at what time is it 11 a.m.
here in the Aurora room.
So please tune in to that.
And that's my report, mayor.
Thank you, Council member.
Lawson. Thank you.
Mayor.
I'm going to be having my Ward five town hall on August 18th
at 630 at Mission Viejo.
We're going to have planning and development, And also I'm
going to have the one at Heather gardens.
That one will be at Mission Viejo.
The one on the 29th will be at Heather gardens.
And we will also be talking about planning and development
and retail, what's going on in Ward five.
And that's my report, mayor.
Thank you.
Um. Councilmember burger.
Mayor. No report.
Thank you.
Um,
I want to encourage people to go to my Facebook page that's
at, uh, Mike Kaufman Facebook.
And I'm hoping, um.
Um,
Mr. McConnell has signed up our, um, district three
transportation commissioner, I'd like an update on what
you're doing to help us on State Highway 30.
Uh, you're on that task force with, uh, uh, co-chaired by
Councilmember Wallace and Councilmember Bergen.
And so a great opportunity for you to update us.
Uh, with that public invited to be heard.
Auntie Anderson, followed by Hashim Coates.
Excuse me.
Um.
Mayor Kaufman.
You you threatened.
To have me removed.
You know, I don't like a challenge.
So now I double dog dare you to do it.
Because now, for the next three minutes, we're going to hear
what it sounds like to be Mike Kaufman.
This could have been avoided.
But you threatened me.
So now I have to double dog here.
You might.
Now is the Aurora City Council drumline.
Okay. Okay.
I'll see you at noon.
Stephanie. This the one time.
Stephanie I agree.
That's her solo.
Take it away.
Here we go.
We still got a minute and 30s.
Oh, no.
Y'all. Yep.
No, we still got time.
We set up a meeting this fall.
All you have to do is leave me alone.
But this is a consequence of the action.
This is called the First Amendment.
There's still 50s.
Left.
This could have been avoided if
he would have just left me alone.
No I wouldn't.
20s left still.
Mike.
You just have some fun with it now.
You should.
Be eating.
Mike. We're coming up on your solo.
Be ready.
It's almost there.
Mike.
Hashim Coates, followed by Mahdi and Schaffner.
Well.
I can't.
I just can't.
Do that.
That is interesting to follow.
In all my years I have not followed.
Anything like that.
Um, but I guess in the true spirit of everything, I do want
to say that Councilwoman Hancock, you did violate the
quorum when you participated with him.
So I'm just saying, um,
I understand I'm not a white man.
You're not going to respect me.
So I want to say that leadership is hard.
It is.
Um, when you make that decision to get up and run, you're there
for it all.
Whether either votes or
critiques or whatever it happens.
Um, there have been some that I have been friendships over and
depending on how they were attacked.
Then I have come back in to be hot as hell on their asses.
That's just what the job is of leadership, and I encourage
people to lean into it and deal with the growth.
But I do find it to be disrespectful and condescending
to be like, hey, me, I appreciate blah.
Blah blah blah, but.
You.
And that's exactly what happened.
So also, if we could just get back to the days of when Mayor
Hogan was here and how the building and things operated
back then, those were the glory years.
I am doing a part, a bipartisan type of acknowledgement on how
things are run.
There was more civility that was here, and the fact that he
did not treat the people's building like a prison.
I respect that the fact that when I come and other people
come to speak at a city council meeting, we have to wait at the
door to be let in.
Blows my mind.
The fact that the door can't be open for council hours and
council business.
I don't understand that.
Also, I want to call the.
There is a.
The security is a joke.
Honestly, if there was sincere intention about harm being
done, it would happen.
There are holes.
APD can even attest to this.
There are.
Holes.
In the security process that your safety, the stanchions,
all of that stuff.
It's a fraud.
But what it does speak to is that people do not come here
with the ill intent that is laid upon them to to create you
all harm.
Yes, your nerves and your feelings are in jeopardy, but
that is because the people want to have their voices heard.
If security was real, the screeners would not be down.
As I went out to the restroom and came back in.
They still would be up because you all are still here.
Unless you all were afraid of the
big oil people, the big money people, the the big center
people that left after the votes that happened on that.
So also I encourage people like get out and vote.
Stephanie's ChatGPT rant did everything.
Like supporting what.
Councilwoman.
Jackson.
Measure wanted.
More voter.
Participation.
Is the answer.
Madison Schaffner.
That was the last individual.
Um,
Council member McConnell.
Our former.
I would like that report next time.
Thank you.
Uh, seeing no further business before the Aurora City Council
meeting is adjourned.