TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2026
EYES ON ARVADA
A nonpartisan read on what your city council actually did this week.
LEAD STORY
Arvada Council votes 4-2 to open second ethics probe of Councilmember Davis
The Arvada City Council held a brief special meeting before its regular workshop on April 28, 2026. The special meeting addressed a second alleged ethics violation involving Councilmember Sharon Davis (who was excused from that portion). The council voted 4-2 to authorize hiring an outside investigator and outside counsel to pursue a second ethics investigation, with Councilmembers Griffith and Lovisone dissenting — both said they wanted to see the findings of the first investigation before opening a second one. City Attorney Hoffman recommended proceeding with both investigations together to protect due process.
The main workshop focused on the city's solid waste and recycling program. Staff presented proposed fee increases: a 5-cent-per-month increase to the city program fee (from $1.69 to $1.74), maintenance of the $1.06/month enterprise fee to build a reserve fund, and Republic Services' contractual 3.5% pass-through increase. Council appeared to reach a clear consensus supporting all three financial recommendations. Staff also announced that online bill access is now available to all customers and that autopay by credit card will launch the following week — a long-awaited upgrade.
The most debated topic was composting. Staff presented four options ranging from a subscription-based opt-in program (Option 1) to a citywide opt-out program (Option 2) to a near-term drop-off site pilot followed by including composting in the 2028 contract RFP (Option 3, staff recommendation) to taking no action (Option 4). Mayor Pro Tem Moorman and Councilmember Ambrose pushed hard for Option 2, arguing that incoming Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) recycling reimbursements could cover the cost of curbside composting at no net cost to residents. Most other members ultimately sided with staff's Option 3, citing concerns about city team capacity, community trust, billing complexity, and the need for public education before a major behavioral change.
THE MOTION
Excuse Councilmember Sharon Davis from the special meeting
YES · 6
Simpson · Moorman · Ambrose · Lovisone · Fifer · Griffith
EXCUSED
Davis
Davis was excused from the portion of the meeting that concerned allegations against her, consistent with standard conflict-of-interest practice.
“I would very much like to see the findings of the first investigation to be shared prior to the opening of a new investigation. So I would not be supporting this motion.”
— Michael Griffith
WORKSHOP · SOLID WASTE & RECYCLING FEE CHANGES
Council reached consensus to approve a 5-cent program fee increase, maintain the enterprise fee, and pass through Republic's contractual rate increase.
THE OPTIONS · AT A GLANCE
OPTION 1
Republic Services contract rate increase (pass-through)
Required by contract; not a council discretionary choice
Up to 3.5% increase per contract terms
Republic Services is contractually entitled to a 3.5% increase because the national waste index came in at 4.89%. This is not discretionary — staff noted it is a required pass-through.
OPTION 2
City program fee increase (+5 cents/month)
Consensus support from all members who spoke
$1.69 → $1.74/month
The fee that funds program administration, large-item drop-off events, and leaf recycling would increase by 5 cents per month to reflect more accurate cost accounting, billing modernization, and a part-time temp for EPR rollout.
OPTION 3
Maintain enterprise fee at $1.06/month
Consensus support from all members who spoke
$1.06/month (no change)
The enterprise fee was previously used to repay a water fund loan (now paid off). Staff recommends keeping it to build a 25% reserve fund balance consistent with other city enterprise funds.
“Similar to council member Griffith. I too would like to see them and will also be voting no.”
— Rebecka Lovisone, Lovisone joined Griffith in dissenting, also citing a desire to see first-investigation findings before authorizing a second.
WORKSHOP · COMPOSTING PROGRAM
Council reached informal consensus for Option 3 (drop-off pilot now, composting in 2028 RFP), though Moorman and Ambrose pushed for faster curbside rollout under Option 2.
THE OPTIONS · AT A GLANCE
OPTION 1
Opt-in subscription composting (contract amendment)
Not favored; Republic's own rep recommended against it
$15–$20/month per participating household
Amend Republic's contract to allow residents to subscribe individually to curbside composting pickup. Requires a minimum of 3,000 households to sign up. Higher cost, less efficient routes.
OPTION 2
Citywide opt-out composting (contract amendment)
Moorman's pick; also supported by Ambrose
$5–$7/month added per cart customer; potentially offset to $0 net by EPR reimbursements
Add curbside composting for all city program households. Residents could opt out of the cart but would still pay the fee. EPR recycling reimbursements are estimated to fully cover this cost, making it a net-zero change on bills. Earliest launch: spring 2027.
OPTION 3
Drop-off pilot now + composting in 2028 RFP (staff recommendation)
Staff recommendation; supported by Griffith, Davis, Lovisone, Fifer, and Mayor Simpson as a consensus landing point
Cost TBD (drop-off site); curbside composting pricing TBD via RFP
Set up one or more staffed drop-off composting sites (possibly managed by local company Scraps) in the near term to build community habits and gather data. Include composting as a bid requirement or alternate in the next hauler contract RFP (to be issued late 2026, effective July 2028).
OPTION 4
No action — rely on private composting services
Raised as a trade-off by Griffith; not formally endorsed by any member
Saves residents $5–$7/month vs. Option 2 (EPR reimbursement would appear as pure savings)
Take no city action; residents who want composting use private providers like Compost Colorado (~$20-25/month) or Scraps. EPR reimbursements would simply lower residents' bills.
“My recommendation would be to actually authorize the investigation into the second claim because frankly it could have the effect of — if the first investigation is released now — of impacting the overall process of council.”
— City Attorney Hoffman (paraphrased by Lovisone's question, Hoffman responding), Hoffman advised the council that releasing the first investigation's findings before completing the second could compromise due process.
WORKSHOP · EXTENDED PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY (EPR) PROGRAM UPDATE
City submitted its EPR application on time; reimbursements expected this fall pending master service agreement negotiations.
“We would be able to maintain that price and become a green bar, meaning that we would be able to add both the collection at curbside of our yard trimmings and our food scraps and maintain that price right there. And so we would be one of the lowest of the cities offering that service and still be able to add a service without adding a cost to our customers.”
— Randy Moorman, Moorman argued that EPR recycling reimbursements could fully fund curbside composting at no net cost increase, making Option 2 financially attractive.
WORKSHOP · BILLING SYSTEM MODERNIZATION
Autopay by credit card launching next week; full system replacement planned for late 2020s/early 2030s.
“What we're estimating currently is that what would pay for a curbside organics program would be totally covered by the EPR reimbursements. So literally on the bill, it would show — the curbside organics part — and on the bill it would be literally a wash.”
— Steve Gilmore (Republic Services), Republic's municipal relationship manager confirmed staff and Moorman's assertion that EPR credits could offset the cost of a composting program for in-program customers.
WHIP COUNT
Where each member landed
Reach out — they answer to constituents.
| COUNCILMEMBER |
VOTE |
SOLID WASTE & RECYCLING FEE CHANGES POSITION |
|
Lauren Simpson
Mayor
720-961-3779
|
Yes
|
—
|
|
Randy Moorman
Mayor Pro Tem · District 1
720-772-6651
|
Yes
|
Supportive of all three financial recommendations (1-3); questioned the jump in normal program expenses from $1K to $148K but accepted staff's explanation.
|
|
Shawna Ambrose
Councilmember · District 2
970-425-3060
|
Yes
|
Supportive of all three; asked for clearer customer communication explaining why costs are rising (billing modernization, accurate accounting).
|
|
Rebecka Lovisone
Councilmember · District 3
720-898-7000
|
Yes
|
Supportive of items 1-3 with no stated objections.
|
|
Bob Fifer
Councilmember · District 4
303-929-4278
|
Yes
|
Supportive of all four staff recommendations including the financial items.
|
|
Sharon Davis
Councilmember · At-Large
720-450-4825
|
Excused
|
Supportive; wanted clarity that the opt-out composting cost would not stack additively on top of the existing opt-out fee.
|
|
Michael Griffith
Councilmember · At-Large
720-898-7000
|
Yes
|
Supportive of all three financial recommendations.
|
MORE QUOTES
“This is a rare opportunity for government to provide the same service for a lower cost to our residents and we just don't get that opportunity very often.”
— Michael Griffith
Griffith highlighted that under Options 1 or 4 (no composting added), residents would simply see their bill drop by $5-7/month from EPR reimbursements — a point he felt was underweighted in the discussion.
“I I hate to see the bill drop and then pick up because I think it's a harder hill to climb.”
— Bob Fifer
Fifer expressed concern that introducing EPR credits and then adding a composting charge would confuse or frustrate residents, even if the net cost was the same.
“What you just articulated is exactly our concern around — while we agree this looks like the perfect time — it's the community trust aspect of this that we're really really concerned about. We have an amazing team. However, they are not going to be ready to implement this when the first credits come in.”
— City Manager (Sheek, paraphrased from context)
City leadership explained why staff recommended Option 3 over Option 2 despite the financial case for Option 2, citing operational capacity and community trust.
“Rome wasn't built in a day, and if you've ever planned a wedding, you know, you don't do that in six weeks. So I say let's give our peeps some time to breathe and to do it right and not rush into it and do it halfway when we can do it all the way the first time.”
— Sharon Davis
Davis supported Option 3 and the staff recommendation, urging the council not to overload city staff.
WHAT'S NEXT
On the calendar
The city is actively managing a Stage 1 drought, and staff mentioned returning to council in May to discuss potential surcharge fees as financial incentives for water conservation — a policy with potential rate implications for residents. The solid waste team expects to return in June for formal adoption of the new rate schedule (effective July 1), and will also bring back the EPR master service agreement and a Republic contract amendment for council authorization once negotiations are finalized this spring/summer. The 2028 solid waste contract RFP process is expected to begin by end of 2026, with composting now expected to be included as a bid component.
WORTH WATCHING
Rebecka Lovisone
Lovisone voted No on the second ethics investigation, saying she wanted to see the first investigation's findings first. However, she subsequently participated fully in the workshop with no further comment on the ethics matter. No inconsistency with prior votes is documented in this transcript alone, but her position implicitly conflicts with the city attorney's legal recommendation, which she acknowledged but rejected.
Michael Griffith
Griffith said he does not participate in the city's waste program (he composts privately and uses a private composting service), yet he sits on the council that sets policy for that program and its fees. He raised the point that Options 1 or 4 would save non-composting program participants $5-7/month via EPR, which could be seen as arguing for a personal financial benefit — though he did not explicitly advocate for those options and ultimately deferred to staff's recommendation.
Randy Moorman
Moorman stated he had communicated with Republic Services rep Steve Gilmore 'more than one occasion' outside the meeting to confirm EPR reimbursements would cover composting costs. This pre-meeting lobbying by a vendor representative to a council member is worth noting for transparency, as the council was voting on direction related to that same vendor's contract.
FROM THE EDITOR
Ethics Investigations!!??
• What are the specific allegations in the second ethics complaint against Councilmember Davis? The public record describes the allegation only as 'alleged facts received on April 8th' — a CORA request for the complaint or any related correspondence could shed light on what the council is investigating.
• Councilmember Moorman disclosed he had spoken with Republic Services representative Steve Gilmore 'more than one occasion' before this meeting about composting costs. Was this contact disclosed as part of any ex parte communication policy? Does Arvada have such a policy for vendor communications with council members?
• The first ethics investigation against Councilmember Davis was authorized February 3, 2026 — nearly three months ago. When will findings be released, and why haven't they been shared with the council yet? Griffith and Lovisone's dissent centers on this question.
• Staff confirmed that billing costs for the solid waste program were not accurately allocated to the fund in 2025 — normal program expenses jumped from $1,000 actual to $148,000 estimated. Residents were effectively subsidizing the fund through the water utility. What other enterprise funds may have similar accounting gaps?
• The EPR reimbursement is described as covering composting costs 'at current estimates' — but those estimates have not yet been negotiated or finalized with Circular Action Alliance. What happens to the composting plan if the reimbursement comes in lower than projected?
— RW
DELIVERED AFTER EVERY MEETING
Forward this to a neighbor who pays attention.
EYES ON ARVADA · TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 2026
Independent, AI-assisted civic journalism. Not affiliated with the City of Arvada.
