Motion from ZAP At the 2/27/2021 ZAP meeting after an update from Ean Tafoya on the Expanding AffordabilityAdvisory Committee — a CPD working group that is exploring what Denver could do to require more affordable housing in market rate projects if the State gives cities the ability to have affordable requirements in rental projects — the following motion was made … Continue reading →
The governance structure for a Denver P3 office hasn’t been determined. In fact, whether the office will in fact be created hasn’t been determined. Right now, city officials are $475,000 deep into a contract with Arup Advisory Inc. to develop the program, and they’ve asked City Council to approve an additional $480,000 in consulting work (for a total of $955,000) to get the program up and running by year’s end. The actual creation and staffing of the office would be part of the 2018 budget process.
But City Council members — even those that like the idea of the office — are concerned about the process that Arup has suggested for future deals. Instead of City Council getting an up or down vote on the final contract, as is the case now, council would approve a “parameters ordinance” or “framework ordinance” that lays out what they’d like to see in the deal. The city’s P3 office would then go out looking for a partner willing to work with the city under those conditions. As long as the final contract complied with the framework ordinance, it could be approved administratively.
On June 5, 2017, the Denver District Court heard arguments regarding the City’s assertion that 220 documents (7,400 pages) should be protected by the “deliberative process” privilege—which stems from the “executive privilege”.
The Court ruled that the 7400 pages should not be handed over to the Plaintiffs
(those suing the city to protect CPGC) in the CPGC lawsuit. The City has repeatedly claimed in public and under oath, that they are committed to transparency and have nothing to hide. However, in court, the Attorneys for the City claimed that disclosure of the 7400 pages of emails and documents would somehow chill future candid discussion among city leaders and staff.
Full response to motion is found here
