| District | Name | 5.A. Are you familiar with Denver’s ordinance for Registered Neighborhood Organizations (RNOs)? Yes/No | 5.B. How would you propose revising this ordinance to improve the working relationship between RNOs and the city? |
| 1 | Amanda Sandoval | Yes | I am not sure how to update and modernize the RNO ordinance to get better outcomes but I do believe that working together with organizations such as INC and other models found in cities that are producing the outcomes we want to see in Denver would be a good place to start. |
| 1 | Sarah Truckey | Yes | Individuals that represent the most impacted communities in our neighborhoods should have the most pronounced voice in representation and power with the city. |
| 2 | Kevin Flynn | Yes | CPD should fund direct and comprehensive outreach within the RNOs’ boundaries on a regular basis to ensure broader participation — direct mail and leafleting to every household in each RNO boundary. I organized five new RNOs in my time in office, and we did door to door flyering in every instance, getting upward of 75 people out to meetings. |
| 3 | Jamie Torres | Yes | I believe RNOs should receive city funding for infrastructure, education, and outreach resources to build stronger engagement in their neighborhoods and communities but should remain autonomous and grassroots. They should also be true resident member organizations. |
| 4 | Tony Pigford | Yes | I am in favor of the recommendations that were put forth by the 12 member committee that was formed by INC, regarding the RNO position sheet checklists, outdoor bulletin boards, and giving RNO’s the flexibility to form at any time. |
| 5 | Amanda Sawyer | Yes | It was written in the 1970’s. It needs to be updated to reflect the way RNO’s function in our City today. I have tried to bridge the gap between RNO’s and City agencies by hosting a bimonthly community cabinet where District 5 RNO leaders can connect to the city, city partners, and to each other to share best practices and information. It has worked well, but the only reason it happens is because as Councilmember for the District, I run it and make it happen. Information sharing needs to be more automatic and City agencies need to take better advantage of RNO’s as a source of information and partnership. If we have to change the RNO ordinance to make that happen, then that’s part of what we need to do. |
| 5 | Michael Hughes | Yes | The council offices and city departments should see the RNOs as the first and most efficient way to connect with neighborhoods before something happens, not as it is happening; residents need education and training to stay up with changes in ordinances, new planning process and staff turnover. Neighborhoods needs clear and consistent points of contact and easy ways to access information and provide input. Finally, while some neighborhood organizations include members who are planners or lawyers or architects, those neighborhoods that don’t have members with that kind of training need technical assistance. |
| 6 | Paul Kashmann | Yes | It is my intention that the Office of Community Empowerment would lead that reassessment of the RNO ordinance. RNOs and other city non-profits doing community building work must be given assistance in the way of education and funding to enable their important role in city building. We must ensure our RNOs reach more deeply into their communities so all populations within their borders are represented. There are arguments in favor of eliminating overlapping boundaries, and arguments that support the organic growth that leads to those overlaps. That discussion must take place. |
| 7 | Nick Campion | Yes | I have read through the ordinance. I believe RNO are critical component for the city. Unfortunately, the current RNO system is sustainable. If elected, I would work with City Council and the mayor to create a Resident Neighborhood Organization Agency (RNO) to support all Denver RNOs with funding and centralize and standardize information. |
| 7 | Adam Estroff | Yes | I am familiar with the ordinance for Registered Neighborhood Organizations. I would make sure that the ordinance provides multiple paths for residents to both hear and provide feedback about city policies and issues. |
| 7 | Guy Padgett | Yes | I am familiar with Denver’s ordinance regarding RNOs. I serve as an elected at-large board member on the Baker Historic Neighborhood Association and am its liaison to the Broadway Merchants Association. I am am continually struck by the sheer number of processes, permits, and public participation campaigns that rely on the volunteer work of myself and my neighbors who serve on the board or participate in the monthly meetings. Given this vital role that RNOs play, I am in flavor of providing more direct support and resources to RNOs from the city. In my mind, this would be a staff person assigned to work with each RNO, or funds to enable them to hire a full- or part-time staff. This would also enable the RNOs to conduct greater direct public outreach themselves to ensure the input they are providing truly reflects the neighborhood residents. |
| 7 | Arthur May | Yes | The district offices should have a more solid connection to RNOs. We have campaigned on using office budget to support RNOs. |
| 8 | Shontel Lewis | Yes | Those who live within the community should have equity in decision-making in their neighborhoods regardless of home ownership. |
| 9 | Candi CdeBaca | Yes | I think there needs to be an entire re-vamp. I have been studying Neighborhood Councils of Los Angeles and their Neighborhood Empowerment Department as a model to build from. I think it needs to be limited to one representative RNO per statistical neighborhood. Every other interested entity or group would need to work TOGETHER with the RNO to be a member but could not have 5 RNOs representing the same exact area (as we have in my district). This would encourage collaboration vs segregation. Additionally, the RNOs would have to be certified as “representative” of their neighborhood in order to access city funding for support and capacity building |
| 10 | Margie Morris | Yes | applaud INCs work to review and revise the 1979 RNO ordinance, with a focus on equity, fairness, outreach, disclosure and transparency. I am a proponent of reviewing policies over time to ensure that current standards of practice are infused into decades old policies. Denver has evolved in the 40+ years since the ordinance was passed, and keeping the ordinance current with changes, from communication methods to neighborhood demographics, is critical to ensuring that RNOs are fully representative of their communities they represent, and effective in their practices. As a vital part of our democratic process, RNOs should have the technical and financial assistance from city government to ensure communications reach all residents and allow for remote communications to support broad participation from residents. I support these measures as a way to maintain healthy interactions between city government and RNOs. |
| 10 | Noah Kaplan | Yes | RNOs are essential for providing structure and opportunities for residents to understand and advocate for the needs of their neighborhoods. It also provides critical transparency mechanisms, offering residents an understanding of the varying forces at the place in decision-making on projects that impact district ten communities. The strength of these RNOs is dependent on the equitable representation of members. The city should do more to build strong membership and engaged community in RNOs with financial support, information disbursement, and expansion of roles as we consider stronger partnerships in addressing the specific concerns of each neighborhood. Things like snow removal and sidewalk repairs are real street-level challenges that RNOs can play a critical role in solving. RNOs should be able to voice concerns before planning approvals for land use, demolition, liquor license, and projects that impact economic hubs and residential streets. Transparency, accountability, input, and collaboration should be the focus of RNO reform. The stronger our connections to these organizations, the more trust between the city government and its residents, and the stronger our communities can be. |
| 10 | Shannon Hoffman | Yes | I am supportive of councilmembers Kashmann and CdeBaca’s proposals to consider a Los Angeles model which would consist of more neighborhood level leaders, which could be elected and receive small stipends. I believe we need opportunities for more participation from all citizens, which includes single family homeowners, and renters, unhoused folks, people of color, working class people working multiple jobs, children, disabled people, members of the LGBTQ community, etc. In order to support council to make decisions that are reflective of our communities, we need to maximize the public input process and create comfort and trust with that process. This should also look like strong neighborhood representation across the city, ensuring that all neighborhoods have RNOs. |
| At-Large | Sarah Parady | Yes | The city should be required under the ordinance to provide information and capacity to RNOs to help them reach more neighborhood residents or to help residents become active – for example the city should do periodic text or mail campaigns to all residents and assist with standardized websites and CMS software, translation and interpretation, video meeting software or other accessibility assistance, etc. I would be in favor of a requirement that an RNO have a certain percent of area residents as members in order to be recognized, and a requirement that dues be waived if a resident expresses inability to pay. |
| At-Large | Marty Zimmerman | Yes | I believe that we need to improve the relationship with RNOS with a new Mayor and City Council who care more about what the neighborhoods and community members believe and not just what they believe. With leadership that listens, RNO’s will have better and earlier awareness of proposed zoning amendments, landmark designation applications, planning board and board of adjustment hearings, etc. |
| At-Large | Penfield Tate III | Yes | Like any program that has been in effect for many years, after a time adjustments may be needed. I will not presume to know the needed changes and will rely instead on meeting with and hearing from RNO on changes they would like to see in the ordinance. |
| At-Large | Jeff Walker | Yes | I suggest that RNOs do not take positions on issues. My opinion comes from my experience with RNOs and Planning Board. I have sat on the board of two neighborhood organizations, one of which I helped establish. I also sat on the Planning Board. Most RNO meetings, according to my experience, are usually attended only by a small group of dedicated neighbors and a few other persons who might have a particular interest in a specific topic. Most of the meetings I’ve attended over the years have been attended by fewer than 20 persons. A few meetings have been attended by dozens, but they typically centered around major street projects, political elections, storm water or use of a recreation center as a temporary shelter for unhoused persons. At Planning Board meetings, RNO representatives would state that the opinion of the RNO was that of the neighborhood. I know first hand in many instances that only a handful of persons attended RNO meetings that concerned the agenda item although hundreds of residents lived within the RNO’s boundaries. I believe RNOs are vital to Denver, but I also believe their true value is as a conduit of information between the city administration and residents. RNOs have the social infrastructure to quickly send notices and obtain meeting locations when exigent matters arise. |
