All In The Family
Fairfax Park Was Once Touted As A Developer-Funded Project, But Taxpayers Are Now On The Hook For Half The Cost. In A New Twist, Parks Director Scott Gilmore’s Brother Landed The Contract To Build The Park
Story and photos by Cara DeGette
Editor, GPHN

The much-anticipated public park at 29th and Fairfax is nearing completion — a welcome development for surrounding residents and business owners who have endured construction noise and dust for much of the year.
The pocket-sized park — the result of a controversial land-swap deal negotiated by Denver’s deputy parks director Scott Gilmore — currently has a $1.2 million- plus pricetag. The amount far exceeds what Gilmore estimated would be the top end of the cost of building the park during his presentation seeking city council approval in August, 2018.
According to the deal, the developer of the Park Hill Commons project on Fairfax is paying $650,000 toward the park. City taxpayers are on the hook for the remainder — nearly half the overall cost of a park that was initially billed as a developer-funded project.
And, in the latest twist in the years-long saga, the park itself is being built by Gilmore Construction — which is owned by Scott Gilmore’s brother and other family members. Scott Gilmore’s wife is city Councilwoman Stacie Gilmore, who represents District 11 in the Far Northeast area of the city. Stacie Gilmore voted in favor of the land-swap deal negotiated by her husband.

The .4-acre park is slated for completion this month, with an opening ribbon-cutting and celebration scheduled Aug. 26. According to a flyer recently produced by the city’s Parks and Recreation department, the park will include a small playground and water play area, shaded areas for picnicking, seating and green space.
While there is relief the park will finally open this month, the latest details have left some incredulous.
“Fundamentally what this is about is that Scott Gilmore negotiated this deal and in the end, his brother and other family members are financially benefitting from the deal,” says Tracey MacDermott, chair of Greater Park Hill Community, Inc. “It just stinks.”
‘We could have gotten it all’
The park had its genesis in 2016, when the city paid Xcel Energy $50,000 for the abandoned substation on the west side of Fairfax Street between 28th and 29th avenues.
At the time, Scott Gilmore, who works directly under Parks and Recreation department Director Happy Haynes, said he envisioned a basic dog park at the site. The city, he said, didn’t have the money to build a park with more amenities.

Credit Denver Parks and Recreation
Developer Ben Maxwell, who had recently purchased the entire east side of the block, subsequently approached the city with a proposal: Maxwell would pay to build an identically-sized park on the east side of the street, in his Park Hill Commons residential and commercial project, if the city agreed to give him the Xcel parcel on the west side of the street.
“The concept was this was going to be built by the developer, and we’d get a nice park instead of just a dog park — that is what got us so excited,” said Leslie Twarogowski, who at the time was the chair of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board. “That was the whole hook of the land swap, and what made it so palatable — that the developer was going to pay for the whole park.”
In the final negotiations, however, Maxwell agreed to pay $650,000; Gilmore said the city would pay all costs beyond that to build the park. At the time of the land swap the former Xcel property, had an estimated market value of $1.5 million.
During the August, 2018, hearing to approve the deal, several members of the city council offered support, but also sharp criticism over what they called a failure by the city to negotiate a better deal.
“The math,” said then-Councilman Rafael Espinoza, “is in the developer’s favor.”
“Much was made of this being a gift, and it is … to the developer,” he continued. “The developer is not going to build this park, but [he] could have. We could have gotten it all.”
Council members also grilled Gilmore on the final cost of the park, which he estimated would range from $750,000 to $1 million. That would bring the final cost to taxpayers at $100,000 to $350,000 (an amount that has now jumped to nearly $600,000).
“As the parks department we have committed [city funds] to fill in the gap,” Gilmore said.
In the end, the council approved the land swap 12-0.
“Essentially in the end the developer will have paid just half of the total project,” Twarogowski recently said. “It’s not totally surprising that the costs have gone up over time, but it’s just not what was originally pitched to the public.”
Understanding the facts
The city’s initial land-swap deal with the developer was largely kept beyond public view. After controversy erupted, the Parks and Recreation department embarked on an extensive process to collect public opinions about the park’s preferred design and features.
According to the city, last December, Gilmore Construction submitted the lowest of three bids to build the park. The work order — totaling $693,000 — is part of a larger, $15 million contract that the company has with the City and County of Denver. The president of Gilmore Construction is Jake Gilmore, Scott Gilmore’s brother. Several other members of the Gilmore family are listed on the company’s website as part of the leadership team.
Construction began earlier this year. (Beyond construction, other costs include planning, design work and community outreach, which puts the current tally at slightly over $1.2 million.)
The city’s ethics code requires employees to avoid favoritism and not hire or supervise immediate family members because it is a conflict of interest. In addition, “as a general rule, you should avoid situations where your private interests – financial or non-financial – may affect or appear to affect your objectivity, independence, or honesty in performing your official duties.”
In the case of the Fairfax Park project, city officials say they do know that the Gilmore Construction company is owned by relatives of Scott Gilmore. They maintain that the ethics code doesn’t apply, however, because the city’s Department of Transportation and Infrastructure (DOTI) — not Parks and Recreation — is the department that actually hired Gilmore Construction for the job.
Gilmore Construction is one of 11 construction companies that currently have master on-call contracts with DOTI.
Cara Sequino, a manager with DOTI, described the planning of the park and the actual building of the park as “completely separate” from one another.
“Scott Gilmore is not involved in this construction project,” said Arthur Gilkison, the executive assistant for the Parks and Recreation department. “it is [DOTI’s] project.”
Sequino and Gilkison’s claims, however, are contradicted by the Parks and Recreation department’s own past claims.
In a May 9, 2018 public notice issued shortly before the city council vote, DPR underscored in no uncertain terms that they were responsible for all aspects of the park — including construction.
The update, which is published on the city’s website, noted the following, (bold is theirs) “We want to make sure all neighbors understand the following facts:
• This will be a public park that will be owned, designed, constructed and maintained by Denver Parks and Recreation [DPR].
• DPR will procure and complete the design and construction of the park.”
The way we want it
While the contract to Gilmore Construction was awarded through DOTI, other signs make it clear the new park is a Parks and Recreation project. A banner hanging on the fence at the construction site on Fairfax includes the Denver Parks and Recreation’s logo (not DOTI).
The project manager for the park is Chris Schooler — who works in the Parks and Recreation department — not DOTI. Schooler’s duties include coordinating between DOTI and the Parks and Recreation department, “to make sure [the park] is built the way we want it,” Gilkison says.
In effect, that means Schooler is overseeing the work being done by the company owned by his boss’s brother.
“That is a really compromising position to put an employee,” says Maria Flora, the parks and open space committee chair for GPHC, Inc. “This doesn’t even come close to passing the smell test.”
For past coverage about the Fairfax park and the city’s land-swap deal, go to
greaterparkhill.org/category/park-on-fairfax/