Recall effort scrutinizes Englewood council member Cheryl Wink’s attendance

Englewood City Council member Cheryl Wink is being brought to task for missing public meetings as part of a citizen-led recall effort. 

The recall petition claims that, beginning Jan. 18, 2022, Wink, “missed excessive city council meetings, study sessions, executive sessions, and committee meetings as assigned.”

When asked about the recall, Wink pushed back in a June 2 phone call with the Englewood Herald, calling it “stupid” and saying, “These little citizens were angry about everything.”

Wink later tried to back away from the remarks to an Englewood Herald reporter, who had recorded them.

While a debate over housing density issues has been at the forefront of the recall efforts for four council members, only Wink's recall is marked by the additional claims about attendance.

A look at the attendance numbers

Between Jan. 18, 2022, and June 2, 2023, there have been 34 regular city council meetings. Wink was present for 23 of those 34 meetings — or 67.6% — as shown through recordings of the meetings published on the city’s website and YouTube channel. 

However, of the 23 meetings for which Wink was counted as present, she attended 12 of them in person and 11 virtually. This means that out of the 34 regular city council meetings, Wink was physically present for about 35% of them. 

Virtual attendance to city council meetings is allowed but in-person attendance is preferred, according to the City of Englewood City Council Policies manual. 

It states, in part, “Electronic participation is intended to be an infrequent or occasional substitution for physical attendance by members of the city council.”

Englewood Director of Communications Chris Harguth said via email that there is no policy regarding how many regular city council meetings council members have to attend — virtually or in person — nor how many meetings members can miss in a given time period. 

Attendance record of members of the Englewood City Council to regular city council meetings between Jan. 18, 2022, and June 2, 2023.

How does Wink’s attendance compare to others?

The Englewood City Council is made up of seven members, four of whom are facing recall: Mayor Othoniel Sierra and Councilmembers Joe Anderson, Chelsea Nunnenkamp and Wink.

Of the 34 regular city council meetings that have occurred between Jan. 18, 2022, and June 2, 2023, Wink has the highest number of absences — 11 meetings — and virtual attendance — also 11 meetings. 

No other member comes close to those totals for absences or virtual attendance.

Sierra has the second highest number of absences,as he missed three of the 34 regular council meetings. He attended one meeting virtually and attended the other 30 in person.

Out of the same 34 regular council meetings, Nunnenkamp was absent for one meeting and attended two meetings virtually. The other 31 meetings she attended in person. 

Anderson missed one meeting and attended one meeting virtually, and he attended the other 32 meetings in person. 

Councilmember Rita Russell missed one of the 34 meetings but attended the rest in person. 

Mayor Pro Tem Steven Ward did not miss any of the meetings and attended one meeting virtually. He was in person for the other 33 meetings. 

Councilmember Jim Woodward had perfect attendance as well, and he attended all 34 meetings in person. 

Cheryl Wink speaks at the at-large candidates’ forum at The Sacred Grace church Oct. 27. Left, Steve Yates, incumbent councilmember, and candidate …

Wink: ‘I’m irritated about this stupid recall for these dumb reasons’

On June 2, Englewood Herald reporter Tayler Shaw called Wink to interview her about the recall petition’s claims that she has missed meetings excessively. 

“I mean, I’m irritated about this stupid recall for these dumb reasons. I mean, obviously, they’re recalling us because they thought we were gonna vote against that, you know, the R — the zoning thing. 

“And they peppered all of our recalls with some individual stuff they made up,” Wink said.

Among the listed claims in the recall petitions is that the four members support zoning changes contemplated in the CodeNext project including permitting “multiplex housing” in R-1 zone districts, which are areas that have single-family homes. 

CodeNext refers to an ongoing effort to update Englewood’s development code, called the Unified Development Code. The city is still in the drafting phase of the project. 

The Englewood City Council unanimously agreed to indefinitely end the conversation of potentially permitting two-to-four-unit residences in R-1 zone districts during an April 17 meeting. 

“I hope you’re not quoting all of this but I’m just so irritated that — at the superfluous nature of this stuff,” Wink told the Englewood Herald. 

“I don’t really have time for an interview. I said what I said in that meeting,” she added, referring to a May 15 city council meeting.

Wink continued to say a lot of citizens have told her they are happy to have her on council because of her professional accomplishments.

“They expect that I’m sitting here and I’m — my work isn’t busy and I’m not, you know, and it’s like they expect that I don’t have a career and a life,” she said. “These little citizens were angry about everything.” 

When asked what her response is to the claim that she has missed meetings excessively, she said, “I haven’t missed meetings excessively.”

“You know what my response is to it?” she added, explaining she would send an email to the Englewood Herald with a statement. 

Copy of petition to recall Englewood City Councilmember Cheryl Wink.

The emailed statement from Wink was a copy of her statement of defense, which is part of the petition to recall her. It reads:

“This recall petition is promoted by a small group of people who believe I should not serve as your Council member because the Englewood City Council EXPLORED housing ideas to address our region’s affordable housing crisis. 

“Should City Council be punished for DISCUSSING how to address our most pressing issues? Council heard our constituent concerns about density in neighborhoods and decided not to pursue multifamily units in all residential areas. 

“Further, during my time on Council I have advocated for and funded four new police officers, two Co-Responders, and a homelessness coordinator shared by Englewood, Sheridan and Littleton—all of which has led to a reduction in crime in the city including a 5% drop in car theft. 

“We have invested in $18.4 million to address flooding, have tripled our investment in streets starting this year, and have committed $200 million to improve the resilience and quality of our water system. In short, we have listened to our neighbors and are working everyday to improve the community we love.”

In response to being asked about her being physically present for 35% of the 34 meetings, Wink asked if the Englewood Herald knew what the requirement is for her to attend meetings in person. 

When the Englewood Herald said Harguth said there is no attendance policy, Wink said, “Exactly. So then, don’t hammer me about something if there’s no policy. Then, I’m not doing anything wrong, right?

“Why are you prosecuting me about, ‘Why didn’t you show up in person’ if you’re not required to show up in person?” she said. 

Following the end of the phone call interview, Wink called the Englewood Herald shortly after to confirm the newspaper got the email with the statement. 

“That’s what I’d like you to put in the Herald. And I’m calling you to ascertain that no detail of what I said to you on the phone, you’re going to put in that paper,” Wink said. 

When the Englewood Herald explained there was never an agreement about being off-the-record during the previous conversation and that the Englewood Herald had called to interview Wink, she responded, “You’re joking right now.”

“You’re going to write down standard conversational stuff now that I’ve had with you on the phone, as my interview?” Wink asked. “You’ve got to be joking. I have to call my attorney.”

Wink said she told the Englewood Herald she would send responses to the questions asked via email. It was then explained that the email was an addition to the phone call conversation. 

“Nothing I said to you, that outside of that email, was an official interview response,” Wink said. “I’ve never interviewed anybody like that. I mean, I’m not an idiot.” 

The Englewood Herald offered to go through the questions again but said the original conversation was on-the-record and for things to be off-the-record, there has to be a discussion and agreement beforehand, which did not happen during the June 2 conversation. 

Wink did not respond and appeared to have hung up the phone. 

Later that same day, Wink sent an email to the Englewood Herald stating, “When we spoke today I was operating under the assumption that my comments to you on the phone were off record and as I said to you several times, that my formal interview response comments would be sent to you via email, as was followed through on after our conversation.

“I respectfully ask that you honor this agreement and only print on the paper, the information I shared with you via email.”

In an effort to maintain transparency with readers, Colorado Community Media is sharing the audio recordings of both phone call conversations between Shaw and Wink. 

To access the first recording, visit: bit.ly/interviewone or click the audio recording below.

The second recording is available at: bit.ly/02interview and can also be heard through the recording below.

Wink explains attendance in response to public comment

During the May 15 city council meeting, Englewood resident Jan Weipert, as part of her public comment, said, “Cheryl Wink, you should be here in the chamber.” 

Wink, who attended the meeting virtually, addressed the comment and said, “I happened to undergo major surgery three days ago. Please try, if you can, to be respectful.

“In 2017, citizens were pleased to vote for me in large part due to my extensive accomplishments in higher education and in my career in software architecture and data science,” she continued. “Most individuals understand that that type of education and training correlates highly with someone whose career is highly demanding, as is rewarding.

“It’s unrealistic of you and your small group of colleagues to push a recall to continually verbally abuse me, a citizen with an extraordinary and accomplished career … merely because that career oftentimes requires out of town travel,” Wink said. 

Regarding Wink’s attendance last summer, she said her father was close to death for three months and passed away in July. 

Wink was not present for five of the seven regular city council meetings that occurred between May 2022 and July 2022. She attended two meetings virtually. 

“I traveled home to Illinois to be with my family as much as I could during that time frame,” Wink said. “Yet, again, you abuse me for not showing up to council meetings the entire time. Shame on you for treating me in this hateful manner. I am a human being.”

The Englewood Public Library is located inside the Englewood Civic Center. Image taken Feb. 1, 2023.

The recall process

On May 8, Englewood City Clerk Stephanie Carlile said via email that the four recall petitions have been authorized for circulation, meaning the residents can circulate the petitions for 60 days to get signatures. 

Each petition may be circulated and signed by registered Englewood voters “who would be entitled to vote for the successor of the incumbent sought to be recalled,” according to the Englewood Home Rule Charter. The number of signatures must equal at least 25% of the voters who voted in the last general election for that office.

Sierra represents District 1 of Englewood, Nunnenkamp represents District 2, Anderson represents District 3 and Wink represents the city at-large. 

The required signatures needed to proceed with the recall process are: 458 signatures for Sierra, 342 signatures for Nunnenkamp, 583 signatures for Anderson and 1,426 signatures for Wink.

Carlile said the deadline to file the petitions is on or before Thursday, July 6. 

“If the petitions are timely filed and deemed sufficient, council will set an election date not less than 60 days nor more than 120 days from the filing of the petitions,” Carlile wrote.