The city’s nightlife offerings — including everything from concert venues and nightclubs to some wine bars and restaurants — are set to see a major overhaul this year as the to its regulatory framework for them.

The last time these policies were updated, songs like Olivia Newton-John’s “Physical” and Survivor’s “Eye of the Tiger” were Billboard Hot 100 Hits. It was the 1980s.

Now, as the city tries to find ways to bounce back from the pandemic-era economic downturn, it’s turning to modernizing nightlife rules.

shows that officials are proposing the elimination of licensing requirements for some businesses and simplifying them for others. The new framework would also include new rules intended to make nightclubs safer for visitors and neighbors.

“We want to keep the party going, which means making sure we aren’t the reason it doesn’t get started in the first place,” said Jon Ewing, a spokesman for Mayor Mike Johnston. “We’re excited to work with the entertainment industry to ensure businesses aren’t getting tangled in red tape and that Denver is as safe, fun and vibrant at 2 a.m. as it is at 2 p.m.”

The city now has 14 different licenses for entertainment businesses. Under the new proposal, there would be just three. The city would also separate liquor licenses and entertainment licenses for the first time.

The draft proposal is still in its early stages. The city is on the changes before it brings the concept to a City Council committee meeting set for June 9. Then council members may tweak the rules further before voting.

So far, nightclub advocates and neighborhood organizations that sometimes deal with noise and safety impacts from the businesses say they’re supportive of the effort but aren’t yet satisfied with the specific language.

Three kinds of entertainment licenses

The Department of Licensing and Consumer Protection, which is leading the efforts, released its proposed draft earlier this month.

“Denver is striving to be more business friendly,” said Molly Duplechian, the executive director of the department. “We are overregulating in some areas and underregulating in others.”

The new rules would create three licenses:

• Limited entertainment licenses would be for any establishment that offers live entertainment, a dance floor or target sports like axe throwing. It would exempt any performance that isn’t amplified.
• Nightclub entertainment licenses would go to businesses that offer live music, DJ performances or dancing, have a capacity of at least 100 people and operate after 10 p.m. Examples would include music venues, clubs and dance halls
• Adult entertainment licenses would be for adult businesses like strip clubs

The ordinance would exempt several businesses that currently need a license from needing one in the future. That means an entertainment license wouldn’t be necessary anymore for bars that want to host trivia nights, for bowling alleys and for coffee shops that have an unamplified live performer.

Under current law, every business seeking a cabaret license, which includes any that sell liquor and offer live entertainment or dancing, must automatically have a “needs and desires” public hearing to gauge community response. The new proposal would require them only if there were a request for one from the surrounding neighbors.

That could save time and money for businesses, most of which choose to hire a lawyer to help them with those hearings, Duplechian said.

Nightclubs could also stay open past the 2 a.m. liquor cut-off time set by the state, offering music or dancing until 4 a.m.

That would mean crowds exiting clubs could disperse over a longer period of time, rather than all at once. For years, neighborhoods including LoDo and Ballpark have seen occasional violent incidents in the hours after nightclubs and bars close.

The new regulations would also require added safety measures for adult entertainment businesses and nightclubs, such as video surveillance, weapons screening, security guards and the employment of a night manager. They would also be required to help safely disperse crowds after closing, including taking “reasonable steps to ensure the orderly dispersal of patrons and to prevent disorderly conduct and unlawful activity” on their properties and those immediately adjacent.

“Other than modernizing and updating and enhancing entertainment options, we also think this proposal will really help us address some neighborhood and safety concerns that these types of businesses can present,” Duplechian said.

More feedback needed

Even if the council approves the proposed ordinance, it will set in motion additional rulemaking to flesh out more specific details, with a separate feedback process.

Some of the most interested parties — including nightlife advocates and neighborhood organizations — say they support the effort but aren’t yet happy with the draft proposal.

Don Ku with the said his group mostly experiences safety and noise problems from nearby clubs. Its goal is to help bars, businesses and residents peacefully coexist.

“I think simplifying the code makes sense. However, I’m not sure (the department) has hit the mark,” he said, “and I’m hoping there will be room for another draft and round of feedback.”

He would support the city adopting more safety rules for nightclubs to follow, he said.

The nightlife advocacy organization — an acronym for Office of Nighttime Economy — has .

“This needs to happen so badly because our current cabaret laws are ridiculous,” executive director Stephen Brackett said. “We love the direction of this.”

He’s concerned that as written, the ordinance could do the opposite of its intention in some instances by requiring new regulations for some businesses that may not need them. But Brackett, who is also the frontman for the band The Flobots, praised the city’s process so far.

“The hope is to make cultural events more accessible without regulation,” he said. “The changing of this ordinance will make it more possible for there to be more events at smaller venues so that people will be able to participate at lower-entry events.”

Baker resident Jonathon Skavroneck said he’s had increasing concerns with noise and chaos connected to clubs on Broadway near his home. He hopes the new regulations will address those, while simplifying licensing.

“I think Denver would be better off if people could open more entertainment venues,” he said. “It����ap nice to know the city is working on bettering nightlife and increasing the availability of it, while also trying to solve some of the problems that really impact it.”

The licensing department has hosted two business and community feedback meetings over the past month. It also has for the public . The June 9 council committee meeting will include a public comment period.

Kirkmeyer, of Brighton, will face off against state Rep. Scott Bottoms and political newcomer Victor Marx in the June 30 Republican primary. Bottoms and Marx, both pastors who live in Colorado Springs, qualified for the ballot through the GOP state assembly on Saturday.

Bottoms, who led a wide assembly field and won support from 45% of attendees, will get the top spot in the race.

Kirkmeyer took the petition route to the ballot. She submitted more than 15,000 valid signatures, including more than 1,500 from each of Colorado’s eight congressional districts, according to the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office, which certified the signatures.

“This campaign has been built by thousands of real people, in real communities, all across Colorado,” Kirkmeyer said in a statement about her ballot qualification. “I’m incredibly grateful to everyone who took the time to sign our petition, share our message, and be part of something bigger. This is your campaign.”

The Democratic slate was mostly set at the end of March with that party’s state assembly. Attorney General Phil Weiser, who won support from more than 90% of that event����ap voting members, will face U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, who petitioned onto the primary ballot.

Also on Wednesday, the Secretary of State’s office certified University of Colorado Regent Wanda James’s spot in a primary challenge to incumbent U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, a Denver Democrat. Melat Kiros, a Denver lawyer who stunned DeGette by outpolling her during the county assembly in March, has also qualified for that primary race. Republicans have nominated Christy Peterson, who is unopposed.

Earlier in the week, the Secretary of State’s Office certified Hetal Doshi and Boulder County District Attorney Michael Dougherty for the Democratic primary ballot for attorney general. They will face Secretary of State Jena Griswold and attorney David Seligman in that party’s nominating contest.

Democratic and Republican primary ballots

Here are the candidates who qualified for the major-party ballots in the June 30 primary in statewide races. Voters affiliated with a party will receive its ballot in the mail in June. Unaffiliated voters can participate in primaries and will receive both parties’ ballots in the mail, but they can return only one of them.

The four state offices are all open races this year, with the incumbents term-limited.

Governor

• Democratic primary: U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet, Attorney General Phil Weiser
• Republican primary: state Rep. Scott Bottoms, state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, Victor Marx

Attorney general

• Republican primary: El Paso County District Attorney Michael Allen, David Willson
• Democratic primary: Hetal Doshi, Boulder County District Attorney Michael Dougherty, Secretary of State Jena Griswold, David Seligman

Secretary of state

• Democratic primary: state Sen. Jessie Danielson, Jefferson County Clerk Amanda Gonzalez
• Republican primary: James Wiley (a former Colorado Libertarian Party official), unopposed

Treasurer

• Republican primary: Fremont County Commissioner Kevin Grantham, unopposed
• Democratic primary: state Sen. Jeff Bridges, unopposed

U.S. Senate

• Democratic primary: state Sen. Julie Gonzales, U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper (incumbent)
• Republican primary: state Sen. Mark Baisley, unopposed

Melat Kiros — who’s also a lawyer and a Ph.D student when she isn’t behind the counter at the Whittier Cafe — is picking up momentum in her first-ever political campaign. She’s running against longtime U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette in the Democratic primary for Colorado’s 1st Congressional District in Denver.

DeGette, who was sworn into office the year Kiros was born, has .

But Kiros, a Democratic socialist, rose to prominence after she demolished DeGette in the Democrats’ Denver County assembly last month. And while political observers, including Kiros herself, say the assembly process isn’t actually representative of who will vote in the June primary, the win still marked a surprising development in a race that many considered to be predetermined.

“This has nothing to do with me and everything to do with the fact that Denver Democrats want a fighter — somebody who is actually committed to transformative change,” Kiros said in an interview this week with The Denver Post.

Kiros didn’t keep DeGette off the ballot, but she gave her a scare. Kiros won 646 votes, or the support of 63% of those present at the county assembly. DeGette won 336, or 32% of the votes.

It was the first time DeGette had lost a county assembly vote since she initially won her seat in Congress in the 1996 election.

Two weeks after the county assembly, DeGette, 68, narrowly won her place on the primary ballot at the 1st Congressional District party assembly, receiving 33% support — just above the 30% threshold to make the ballot. A third primary candidate, University of Colorado Regent Wanda James, , but her voter signatures are still under review by the state.

Denver-based state Rep. Javier Mabrey, who endorsed Kiros, said he saw her as part of a larger movement within the Democratic Party: voters who don’t want to see the same types of candidates elected.

Like New York City’s new Mayor Zohran Mamdani, Kiros is a more progressive Democrat than those who currently make up the majority of the party’s members in Congress, he said.

“I think there’s an energy for politics that says, ‘Our problems are more complicated than Donald Trump alone. We’ve got to confront the conditions that led to Donald Trump,” Mabrey said of the Republican president. “I think Melat has tapped into that.”

Kiros will still have a long way to go if she hopes to pull off a win of the June 30 primary, however. The assembly gathered only a tiny sliver of the 416,000 people eligible to vote in the June Democratic primary — 230,000 unaffiliated voters and 186,000 registered Democrats, as of March 1, according to the secretary of state’s office.

A spokesperson for DeGette’s campaign said the congresswoman was proud to have made the ballot through the assembly process.

“This is ultimately only a small first step with a small group of people,” Jennie Peek-Dunstone wrote in an email. “Now, we are talking with hundreds of thousands of Democrats and unaffiliated voters across the District. Diana has deep support across Denver because she’s always fought for us. She’ll keep championing our progressive values by standing up to Trump, fighting for universal health care, and defending our democracy — just as she always has.”

Denver is a Democratic stronghold, meaning that whoever wins the primary is all but guaranteed to win the general election. In 2024, DeGette defeated her Republican challenger with 77% of the vote.

Kiros’ background

A child of immigrants, Kiros was born in Ethiopia but moved to Denver with her family as a baby. She left the city to attend Washington College in Maryland and went on to attend law school at the University of Notre Dame. After passing the bar exam, she began work as a securities regulation attorney at , one of the biggest law firms in the country.

Kiros said that two years in, firm leaders fired her for a by Hamas in Israel, which responded by launching a war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. In the post, she questioned Israel’s legitimacy as a state and disavowed about the rise in antisemitism.

“This letter rightfully rebukes the anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, and bigotry of all kinds that has spiked in recent weeks, but then goes on (to my confusion) to cite ‘calls for the elimination of the Israeli state’ as anti-Semitism,” she wrote. “… To conflate such bigotry with the geo-political question of Israel’s legitimacy is one of the greatest travesties in this conflict.”

More recently, Kiros has been criticized for sharing last month with a video that said Democrats “fellate Israel” and “suck (expletive).” The video was promoting an online rally for progressive candidates and speakers.

Kiros said she didn’t write that phrasing and doesn’t endorse that language.

After her firing from the law firm, Kiros says she decided to get more involved in politics. Now, she’s pursuing a doctorate in public policy with a focus on “democracy reform” at .

In 2024, she volunteered as the communications director for Democrat John Padora’s campaign in Colorado’s 4th Congressional District — one of the most conservative seats in the state and now represented by U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert.

‘Our party isn’t fighting back’

Kiros’ online ads , calling out not only DeGette but also former U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. One shows large Xs over photos of former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton and former President Joe Biden while Kiros says: “We hear politicians say over and over that we need bold leadership, progress and change. We’ve heard this for years. Decades. But they never deliver.”

“Our party isn’t fighting back like they should,” she goes on to say.

Kiros is endorsed by the Denver chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America and the Justice Democrats. She says that if elected, she sees herself aligning with members of Congress like U.S. Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Summer Lee of Pennsylvania and Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

She would use her position, she said, to “call out the Democrats who are not actually fighting for our values” and pressure them to change the votes she disagrees with. That could include civil protests and threatening quorum.

Her top three policy priorities would be passing “Medicare for All” and universal child care and creating a publicly financed election system similar to the one that Denver uses in city elections, which includes public matching for smaller-dollar donations.

DeGette supporters emphasize that the congresswoman is also a co-sponsor of Medicare for All legislation. Angie Anderson, a Platt Park resident and mother of 2 young children, said she’s heard DeGette talk about it.

“I consider myself pretty progressive, and I think that she represents me very well,” said Anderson, who said she has voted for DeGette in every election since she’s lived in Denver.

Ocasio-Cortez even gave DeGette a shout-out for her support of the policy .

“She is one of the most powerful people in Congress on health care,” Ocasio-Cortez said to the crowd of 30,000 people. “And Diana DeGette is a co-sponsor of Medicare for All. She believes in the guaranteed right to health care for every American. Thank you for electing her.”

Anderson said she thinks Kiros and DeGette are actually pretty similar politically.

“I just think the real difference is that Rep. DeGette has many years of experience and is actually a very skilled policymaker and legislator,” she said. “I take issue with the idea that youth and inexperience is fundamentally required to effect change.”

What did assembly win mean?

After Kiros’ assembly win, a wide swath of political observers jumped in to say that while the event’s outcome was surprising, it wasn’t particularly meaningful for the upcoming primary.

Doug Friednash, a former Denver city attorney and chief of staff to then-Gov. John Hickenlooper, wrote in a Post opinion piece recently that assemblies exclude the vast majority of voters, resulting in a “tiny, highly motivated slice of activists” to determine results.

“More and more extreme candidates in both parties have effectively used these caucuses to fly under the radar and effectively organized a small cadre of activists, like the Democratic Socialists, to show up at the caucus, leading to stunning results that make most voters shake their heads in extreme disbelief,” wrote Friednash, now a partner with Denver-based law firm Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber and Schreck.

At the very least, the win showed that Kiros’ team found a way to out-organize DeGette’s team. But it remains to be seen if that will continue through the primary election.

Kiros and her supporters agree that her assembly win doesn’t mean she’s a shoo-in to win the primary.

“I don’t think that folks who talk about the assembly not being reflective of the general electorate are wrong,” Kiros said. But she noted it was unusual for an incumbent to lose an assembly vote.

“DeGette has been challenged before,” Kiros said. “This is a different kind of campaign.”

Mabrey said finding ways to raise money for her campaign will be one of the keys for Kiros in the remaining months before the primary.

“Melat����ap going to need an injection of grassroots campaign cash to keep up,” he said.

Through the end of 2025, she had raised about $204,000 and spent nearly $138,000. DeGette had raised about $729,000 and spent $507,000 through then, while James had raised about $179,000 and spent $86,600.

Despite having lower cash reserves than DeGette, Kiros is getting recognized more often when in public, she said. During a recent hourlong interview with The Post at a Capitol Hill coffee shop, two people stopped by the table to introduce themselves and voice their support for her.

“I’m totally voting for you, dude,” one said. “Your campaign is (expletive) awesome.”

Between now and June, Kiros plans to knock on doors, call voters, work with businesses and use digital advertising to get her message out. Nearly 200 people volunteered at a recent weekend canvassing event, she said.

“The thing that we need to do to win,” she said, “is to give people enough faith that getting involved will make a difference.”

Staff writer Seth Klamann contributed to this story.

The Denver Sheriff FOP Lodge 27, part of the Fraternal Order of Police, negotiated the agreement with city officials. The new raises are retroactive to Jan. 1.

The new contract has several smaller changes, including allowing the horseback-mounted patrol unit (the human members) to receive specialty pay and increasing funeral leave from three to five days, according to an .

The council approved the contract as part of a block vote, with no members calling it out for discussion.

In September, the council also approved raises for Denver police officers, who will receive staggered pay bumps, adding a cumulative 16% to their salaries over the next three years. The first step, a 2% raise, began in January.

Those decisions come after the city laid off 169 employees and eliminated 600 vacant positions in August in an effort to address a $200 million budget shortfall. Most city employees didn’t receive raises in the 2026 budget.

The to move the vote to a meeting two weeks away after council members raised questions about the contract’s details. The proposed new company, Veo, would replace both Lime and Bird and says it will offer lower prices for riders and more scooter options beginning in May.

But some council members raised concerns about whether the company would be able to take on a free program for low-income residents.

“I would motion to (request) two weeks so I can read the contract and get me the answers to the questions that I’m asking,” Council President Amanda Sandoval said, adding that she wasn’t given the contract early enough to fully analyze it.

Councilman Chris Hinds said he believes the contract was delayed in part because of other recent Department of Transportation and Infrastructure decisions that the council has been frustrated with, including changes to a road diet along Alameda Avenue.

“I don’t know if it’s that people have concerns on Veo or whether it’s ready for the floor, I think we want to make sure that our work is checked and that we can trust but verify,” he said.

Veo plans to offer a free-access program for low income riders similar to the one available to Lime riders, but it will first need to transition those users to the new platform. The city would offer an incentive for Veo to expand the access program by giving a $2.50 rebate for each access trip that is beyond 25% of all rides — up to $1 million.

There are about 8,000 riders using that free access program currently, according to DOTI officials.

Veo would offer standing scooters, seated scooters, two-person scooters, trikes and cargo bikes. Income-qualified riders would be able to have up to 60 minutes of free riding every day. Veo would also place about a third of its fleet in “equity-focused neighborhoods,” according to a presentation from the company.

The current rate for riding scooters is $1 to unlock and then 44 cents per minute of riding. The new deal would still have the $1 unlock fee, but Denver residents would pay 25 cents per minute while other riders would pay 39 cents per minute.

Last year, the council passed an ordinance that requires detection technology in all scooters to prevent people from riding on sidewalks beginning July 1. The ordinance also requires some parking restrictions. Veo’s vehicles would have a built-in audio system telling riders when they’re breaking those safety rules.

Denver’s agreement with Veo would last a minimum of three years, with the company paying $245 per scooter device to the city each year for up to 9,000 scooters, generating about $2.3 million per year.

The committee will reconsider the contract April 15.

The $150,000 contract with Axon Enterprise is for a year, allowing 50 cameras. The deal replaces the city’s contract with the controversial company Flock Safety, which expired Tuesday.

Seven of the 13 council members voted in favor of the deal, siding with Mayor Mike Johnston and citing the benefits to public safety. Councilwoman Flor Alvidrez cast one of the consequential swing votes, ultimately supporting the contract despite her concerns over possible misuse of the data.

“If we start to see subpoenas or other concerns come up, then I’m happy to address those,” she said. “But I’m not going to not use this technology (just) because that might happen.”

Alvidrez voted in favor of the contract with council members Darrell Watson, Kevin Flynn, Chris Hinds, Diana Romero-Campbell, Amanda Sawyer and President Amanda Sandoval. Council members Sarah Parady, Shontel Lewis, Serena Gonzales-Gutierrez, Stacie Gilmore, Paul Kashmann and Jamie Torres voted no.

Those opposed to the contract said they were concerned about ways the system could be exploited.

“The possible misuse of this system cannot be ignored,” Kashmann said. Axon and companies providing similar technology “are only a few clicks away from being one giant surveillance system.

“If that doesn’t terrify us, I wonder why?”

Johnston, whose administration proposed the Axon contract, has been an ardent supporter of the license plate-reading technology, saying it����ap a vital tool to help solve crime in the city.

Last year, the technology played a significant role in 16 homicide investigations, according to the mayor’s office. The cameras also helped in the recovery of more than 400 stolen cars and the removal of more than 60 firearms from the streets, the office said.

Car thefts decreased in Denver during the Flock pilot program, a drop that officials attribute to multiple factors beyond just the cameras. In 2023, more than 12,000 cars were stolen in the city. In 2024, thefts declined to about 8,500.

“Keeping Denver safe means giving our officers effective tools to combat crime while ensuring our rights are protected. This contract does both,” Johnston said of the Axon deal in a statement following the vote. “We’re proud to have Council’s support to move forward with this common-sense technology. … And with these strengthened privacy and data protections, we are ensuring that no federal agency or federal agent can access this data — now or ever.”

Denver has used fixed license plate-reading cameras since the first one was installed at the intersection of Federal Boulevard and West Sixth Avenue in 2018. The Denver Police Department also has license plate reading cameras mounted to some of its vehicles.

Some council members asked that the mayor’s office and the council continue to work on developing a citywide ordinance that would set some surveillance safeguards even as the new contract rolls out.

Johnston’s office convened a Surveillance Task Force last year that is in the process of developing that policy. Parady, one of the task force members, said she couldn’t say how long that would take, but said a draft was being developed.

“There will be an ordinance coming forward at some point,” Flynn said. “But I think it����ap appropriate to do the contract ahead because, again, I believe the contract has stronger safeguards and recourse than an ordinance will have.”

The council had been scheduled to vote on the Axon contract last week, but Flynn, a supporter, used a council rule that allowed him to unilaterally postpone it by a week. Ahead of Tuesday’s vote, three former Denver mayors — Michael Hancock, Federico Peña and Wellington Webb — penned an opinion article in The Denver Post encouraging the council to adopt the contract.

A change from Flock

Denver started a pilot program with Flock’s license plate readers at Denver International Airport, which had been struggling with high vehicle thefts, in 2023. The next year, officials expanded the program to other parts of the city, placing 111 cameras at 70 intersections.

In April 2025, Johnston’s administration attempted to extend the contract for two more years, but the council rejected the proposal, citing concerns about the company creating a mass-surveillance network.

The company also faced national scrutiny after to help carry out President Donald Trump’s mass-deportation efforts.

In August, nearly 1,400 times in 2024 and 2025, before the city asked last April to be removed from Flock’s national database.

After the council’s initial rejection, Johnston’s office extended Flock’s contract twice without council approval by signing agreements below the $500,000 cost threshold that requires a council vote.

The cameras snap photos of passing cars, capturing images of license plates and any identifiable features — say, a scratch or a dent — and using the information to help investigate crimes, such as car thefts, hit-and-runs, kidnappings and homicides.

Flock’s cameras were taken down Tuesday, said Tim Hoffman, the director of policy for the mayor’s office.

Axon has other city contracts

Johnston’s team announced the contract with Axon in February, saying that it would provide a more secure option compared to Flock. Unlike Flock, the company doesn’t have a nationwide database system. Denver also wouldn’t share its data with other jurisdictions unless they have agreed to certain restrictions. Axon will have a shorter retention period for photos — 21 days, instead of 30 under Flock.

The mayor’s office opted to bring the contract to the council despite it being well below the council-approval threshold. The council also hosted a one-hour courtesy public hearing last week to hear feedback from residents about the contract.

Axon already contracts with the city for some other police equipment, including body-worn cameras, Tasers and a livestream camera system called Fusus that uses hundreds of cameras throughout the city. The new license plate cameras have livestreaming capabilities as well.

Sandoval cast the deciding vote on the new contract Tuesday, saying she had wrestled with which way to go.

“I’ve made a lot of hard decisions,” Sandoval said. “And I can’t remember making a harder one.”

After the original contract vote was delayed last week, several council members have seemed hesitant to approve the deal, leaving its chances unclear amid continuing concerns about the risks of surveillance technology.

“I don’t know that we need this tool,” Councilwoman Flor Alvidrez said Friday. “I don’t know that it����ap actually helping.”

A contract with the city’s current provider for the license plate cameras, a controversial company called Flock Safety, will expire Tuesday. Mayor Mike Johnston’s administration proposed that the city begin a new contract for the service with Axon Enterprise.

If the council rejects the one-year contract — which would cost $150,000 and provide 50 cameras at a maximum of 20 intersections — Johnston’s administration has said the program will shut down. Axon’s network would have roughly half as many cameras as Flock’s.

“Losing this technology would weaken our police department����ap ability to investigate homicides, sexual assaults, hit-and-runs and auto thefts,” said city spokesman Jon Ewing in an email. “In short, it would make our city less safe and would leave Denver as one of the only large cities in the country without a license plate reader system.”

Johnston’s office and the council have been at odds over the cameras for months after in its efforts to carry out mass deportations. After the council rejected a contract with Flock over concerns about the company last year, Johnston’s administration extended the city’s relationship with the company twice more, calling it a vital crime-fighting tool.

Denver District Attorney John Walsh recently sent a letter to council members in support of the contract, calling the automatic license plate recognition, or ALPR, technology “uniquely powerful and effective.”

“In case after case, ALPR has been the key initial tool to identify suspect vehicles and suspects – often providing the only initial avenue for investigation,” he wrote.

The technology played a significant role in solving 16 homicide investigations in 2025, he said. The mayor’s office also credits the cameras for the recovery of more than 400 stolen cars and the removal of more than 60 firearms from the streets.

During a public hearing last week, the council heard an , with 55 people signing up to speak. Forty-two of them were opposed, 12 were in favor and one person was neutral.

Councilman Kevin Flynn triggered an option that delayed the vote by one week. Now, the council will take its sole vote on the contract on Tuesday. The council is meeting a day later than usual because Monday is “Sí, Se Puede Day,” a city holiday renamed recently after a New York Times investigation reported sexual abuse allegations against César Chávez, the holiday’s former namesake.

Though the council normally votes only on contracts valued at over $500,000, Johnston’s office opted to bring the Axon deal through that process in an effort to be more collaborative.

Last week, the council asked some questions of Axon, the mayor’s office and the Denver Police Department. Several of them signaled they had major concerns about the contract.

“With the current person who is occupying the White House … I don’t have faith that if we expand this, what happens (as a result). That’s why I’m concerned about a security breach,” council President Amanda Sandoval said.

Tim Hoffman, the director of policy for the mayor’s office, acknowledged those concerns during the meeting.

“We aren’t in the world that we were in a year ago. We aren’t even in the world we were in a couple of months ago, in terms of what we have seen out of this federal government,” he said of President Donald Trump’s administration. “What we have done with this contract is try to balance the very real benefit to public safety that it provides with the very legitimate privacy and civil liberty considerations.”

The cameras work by snapping photos of passing cars, capturing their license plates and any identifiable features — such as a scratch or a dent — and using that data to help investigate crimes like car thefts, hit-and-runs, kidnappings and homicides. The city now has 111 Flock-operated cameras doing that work.

In February, Johnston announced that the city would end its relationship with Flock because of the concerns raised by council members and residents. Johnston said Axon was chosen as a replacement because it doesn’t have a national database and has a high degree of data security.

Axon already contracts with the city for police officers’ body-worn cameras, Tasers and a livestream camera system called Fusus that uses hundreds of cameras throughout the city. The new license-plate cameras would have livestreaming capabilities as well.

Councilwoman Sarah Parady, one of the most vocal council opponents of Flock, cited the Fusus network as one of the reasons she still had concerns about the technology.

“They are integrated into so many other systems,” she said. “We are sort of trading what was basically a national ALPR company for a company that is not primarily focused on ALPRs, but is layering all of these different forms of surveillance — and we do not have all the information on that yet.”

Parady is one of the members of the city’s Surveillance Task Force, which Johnston’s office convened last year in response to the concerns over Flock. Some council members have said they want to see that task force develop an overall city ordinance related to surveillance before they approve a new contract for license plate readers.

“Even if the contract has some good provisions, those are not laws,” Alvidrez said. “Remedies are different when you’re talking about a contract, versus city ordinance.”

Alvidrez, who is one of a few key undecided votes on the contract on the 13-member council, said she was leaning toward “no” on Friday. Councilwoman Jamie Torres, another undecided member, said she was also more likely to vote against it.

“I’ve heard evenly from folks who want (Denver Police Department) to be able to solve crimes … and others who frankly just can’t get over the apprehension that was developed during this whole Flock era. That’s going to leave a bad taste in people’s mouth,” she said.

If the contract doesn’t pass, Torres said she would be interested in seeing the city try again after developing more protections.

Alvidrez said she would want to see whether not having the tool made much of a difference in crime solving in the city.

The council’s meeting is set to begin at 3:30 p.m. Tuesday.

Because of that experience, I pay close attention when political moments reveal something deeper about the mood of a district. Recently, it has become clear that many residents feel a growing disconnect from their long-standing representative in Washington.

Congresswoman Diana DeGette has served this district for decades. Longevity in office can bring valuable experience, but it can also create distance from the community’s current realities. An increasing number of voters feel that their needs and concerns are no longer adequately represented. This frustration is not just anecdotal; a small poll conducted by SearchLight Research for Wanda James’ campaign shows that only about 27% of likely Democratic primary voters would support DeGette if the election were held today. That poll is a stark indicator of shifting attitudes.

Given DeGette’s recent performance at the Democrats’ Denver County assembly, where she barely garnered enough votes to make it onto the ballot for the June primary, it would seem the poll was a stark indicator of shifting attitudes.

The message is loud and clear: many in the district believe their representative is out of touch with the energy, diversity, and urgency of Denver today. DeGette’s focus on federal issues has come at the expense of addressing the specific needs and concerns of Denver residents. Issues like housing affordability, economic opportunity, and federal investments in local communities are more pressing than ever — yet many feel these concerns are not being prioritized or addressed effectively at the federal level.

Amid this landscape, a new leadership voice is emerging — someone who is actively engaged with the community and truly understands the district����ap evolving needs. That person is Wanda James. Instead of engaging in political spectacle or internal party battles, she has focused on building a broad coalition of support across Denver’s diverse communities. Business leaders, women, Black and Latino community members, LGBTQ advocates, veterans, small business owners, and community organizers are rallying around her.

Support for Wanda James isn’t accidental. People have seen her consistently show up for years — advocating for fairness, opportunity, and economic growth. They’ve watched her participate in conversations that matter to their lives and work tirelessly to bring people together to find solutions.

For example, as a Regent for the University of Colorado, James led efforts to reform the procurement system, making it more accessible and equitable so that local, women-, and minority-owned businesses can achieve meaningful growth and equal opportunities in the procurement process. She has also fought to allow state university workers to collectively bargain. Wanda James is not someone who sits quietly on the sidelines. When issues affecting Denver communities arise, she steps forward — speaking out, working with others, and pushing for meaningful change.

Denver itself has changed dramatically over the last decade. It����ap more diverse, more entrepreneurial, and more outspoken about its challenges. The city’s residents want a leader in Congress who reflects that vitality — someone active, visible, and deeply connected to the people they serve.

The disconnect between Washington and Denver’s communities is no longer sustainable. People are hungry for representation that understands their daily struggles and offers real solutions. From where I sit, Wanda James embodies that kind of leadership. She brings credibility, a broad coalition of support, and a willingness to engage directly with the district����ap diverse voices.

The message is clear: Denver is ready for a representative who shows up — not just when seeking office, but every day, in every community. It����ap time for new leadership to emerge that truly reflects the energy and urgency of Denver today.

Roger Sherman is a former partner at CRL Associates, a leading government relations, public affairs, and strategic communications firm in Denver. Over the past 20 years, he has played leadership roles in numerous local ballot measure campaigns that have transformed the metro area. He served on the board of SafeHouse Denver for nine years, including two years as board chair, supporting victims of domestic violence and their children.

To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.

The restrictions, which were put in place immediately, limit residents to using water outside their homes, such as for their lawns, to twice per week. Restaurants will also only serve water when customers request it. The last time implemented these restrictions was in 2013.

Residents will need to follow schedules based on their addresses. Those with addresses ending with an even number will be permitted to water on Sundays and Thursdays, and those whose addresses ending with odd numbers will be assigned Wednesdays and Saturdays.

Denver Water’s typical rules for the summer months will also still be in place, including limiting outdoor watering to the cooler hours between 6 p.m. and 10 a.m.

“We are asking customers to not turn on their irrigation systems until mid-May,” said spokesperson Travis Thompson. “They may need to hand water trees and shrubs until then. Once they begin irrigating their lawns, they must follow their assigned watering days and water no more than two days per week.”

The Colorado River basin’s snowpack is at 53% of normal, making it the lowest coverage on record for this date, said Nathan Elder, Denver Water’s manager of water supply. There’s a low probability that reservoirs will fill up this year, he said.

“Current conditions indicate that this is going to be an exceptionally challenging year for our water supply,” Elder said. “The recent heat wave has exacerbated an already poor situation from a water manager standpoint.”

Denver Water staff plans to return to the board on April 8 to recommend the implementation of higher drought pricing as well. After the utility takes those measures, officials will watch how conditions change and how customers respond before deciding whether to take further action later this summer.

“We’re dealing with conditions we’ve never seen before,” board President Tyrone Gant said during the meeting.

The goal of Stage 1 drought restrictions will be to reduce average customer usage by 20%. Beyond limiting outdoor watering to two days per week, Denver Water will establish water budgets for its large customers.

Denver Water serves 1.5 million people — or about a quarter of the state’s population — with covering Denver and some of its surrounding suburbs, including Lakewood, Littleton, Centennial and Lone Tree.

Denver isn’t the only city implementing water restrictions. Officials in Erie told residents and businesses on March 20 that they must shut off all their sprinkler systems through the end of the month. They said they will turn off water service at any properties that don’t comply with the request. The town switches to its summer water distribution system, which provides more water, on April 1.

Thornton was the first city in the metro Denver area to enact Stage 1 drought declaration earlier this month. That includes a mandatory twice-weekly limit on outdoor watering.

Earlier this month, Gov. Jared Polis activated the state Drought Task Force for the first time since 2020 to monitor the conditions and recommend mitigation efforts.

Nearly three-quarters of the state is experiencing some level of drought, according to a . The worst drought conditions are on the Western Slope, in areas including Summit, Eagle and Pitkin counties. Much of that area is considered to be in “extreme drought,” with some sections in the worst possible “exceptional drought.”

About 3.6 million people live in the areas experiencing some level of drought, which also includes most of the Front Range.

“They needed to have, really, a better plan in place before they started executing,” O’Brien said in an interview with The Denver Post.

In a response to , Johnston’s office sent out its own news release to take issue with several of its findings.

“The city’s review of this report finds it misstates key facts and is in some instances willfully misleading,” Johnston’s office wrote.

The two sides were disagreeing publicly — and not for the first time — over an audit report that analyzed the All in Mile High homelessness program between July 2023, when Johnston took office, and June 2025. Johnston had promised to end street homelessness while running for office, and he launched the initiative in the second half of 2023 by opening a network of temporary shelters in former hotels and new micro-communities that used tiny homes and other structures.

One of the key disagreements Thursday was over whether the mayor’s office underreported the cost of the program to the City Council by about $20 million. According to the auditor’s office, the mayor’s office told the council late last year that the initative’s total cost in its first two years was about $158 million.

But the auditor’s office said expenses in the city’s “system of record” were estimated at $178 million in the same period.

Johnston’s office said the discrepancy came from auditors including costs for some homelessness services that city officials didn’t consider part of All in Mile High — like cold weather shelters and noncongregate shelters that had opened under previous administrations.

“It����ap just inaccurate, unfortunately,” Johnston said in an interview with The Post. “Not a single dollar was overspent, not a single dollar is not accounted for.”

Johnston met an initial goal of moving 1,000 people indoors from street encampments by the end of 2023. As of Thursday, the city’s counted 3,530 moves of people into All In Mile High’s noncongregate shelters since July 2023, with some of those involving the same people more than once. A broader measure that includes other programs says the city has moved about 7,300 people into more permanent housing during Johnston’s administration.

Annual point-in-time counts have found that the number of people sleeping on Denver’s streets went down by 45% between early 2023 and early 2025, but advocates for homeless people dispute the reliability of those single-day counts, saying weather and other factors can influence the results.

Besides questions about cost reporting, raised concerns about how the city reported outcomes for people in the program, how and where it selected locations for shelter sites, and how it awarded some contracts.

On Thursday, both sides discussed the report during an Audit Committee meeting.

After audit staffers began the meeting by acknowledging what the homelessness program had accomplished, the two sides went back and forth over whether the mayor’s office was doing enough to track its expenses, inform the public on the program’s progress and create strategic plans.

“I think that shows there’s a systematic problem with how you guys track the expenditure amount,” he said. “I think there is a problem.”

Such assertions drew pushback from the mayor’s administration. The report, the committee meeting and Johnston’s response also amounted to a parade of comments from both sides as they made and rebuffed criticisms about how the other side had behaved during the audit process.

According to the auditor’s office, the mayor’s office failed to provide documents showing overall spending and refused to give access to expense-tracking spreadsheets.

“The Mayor’s Office also said the $20.1 million in underreporting was unintentional,” according to a news release from the auditor’s office.

Johnston’s office said officials did provide those documents and added about the underreporting characterization: “The Auditor’s Office said this, not the Mayor’s Office. We did not say that, as we do not believe we underreported any figures.”

Tensions between O’Brien’s and Johnston’s offices intensified last year during the budget process, as they fought publicly over the mayor’s attempt to cut O’Brien’s budget during a citywide budget crisis. At the time, O’Brien said Johnston was interfering with his work as a separately elected official.

The mayor’s office agreed with seven of the 12 recommendations made in the All In Mile High audit report.

Amid the back and forth at Thursday’s meeting, Schafer at one point expressed a wish that there had been more dialogue on some issues during the audit process.

Cole Chandler, a senior adviser to Johnston on homelessness,  responded plainly: “Our relationship just doesn’t lend itself to that kind of conversation. That����ap not the way those meetings are set up, and not the outcome they’re seeking. So I would encourage you to go back and look at the way you’re structuring that and structuring that partnership moving forward.”

The auditor’s office has announced plans to investigate several other city initiatives this year, including the 16th Street mall reconstruction, Vision Zero efforts to reduce pedestrian deaths and the city budget process.