Although part­ner­ing orga­ni­za­tions have yet to file a for­mal appli­ca­tion to open and oper­ate Denver’s first sanc­tioned home­less encamp­ments in Capi­tol Hill, those opposed — some high pro­file — are wast­ing no time.

Since offi­cials pro­posed the two sites last week, Coun­cil­man Chris Hinds — who rep­re­sents the dis­trict — said he’s received about 100 emails on the top­ic, esti­mat­ing that about 90 were against the notion. Oppo­nents include res­i­dents, busi­ness peo­ple and Pete Coors, vice chair of the Mol­son Coors Brew­ing Co.

The pro­posed sites are on the prop­er­ties of First Bap­tist Church in Capi­tol Hill and the Den­ver Com­mu­ni­ty Church’s uptown loca­tion on Pearl Street.

“I find it appalling that the cit­i­zens of Den­ver sound­ly opposed home­less camp­ing on city prop­er­ty yet City Coun­cil finds ways around our wish­es and laws by estab­lish­ing home­less encamp­ments on pri­vate prop­er­ty in our neigh­bor­hood,” Coors wrote in an email obtained through an open records request. “Home­less enclaves, whether on pub­lic or pri­vate land bring unwant­ed health and safe­ty issues.”

Coors, who did not respond to a request for com­ment, asked Hinds to reject the proposal.

But the deci­sion doesn’t rest with City Coun­cil. Rather, the sites only need a tem­po­rary zon­ing per­mit through Denver’s Com­mu­ni­ty Devel­op­ment and Plan­ning Depart­ment, said city spokes­woman Lau­ra Schwartz. As of Tues­day morn­ing the Col­orado Vil­lage Col­lab­o­ra­tive — which would oper­ate the encamp­ments — and the Inter­faith Alliance of Col­orado had not yet sub­mit­ted an appli­ca­tion for that per­mit, she said.

Oth­ers in the area wrote to Hinds to express con­cerns about safe­ty and hygiene, and a fear that the encamp­ments would become permanent.

Den­ver offi­cials ran into oppo­si­tion over two city-owned sites pre­vi­ous­ly pro­posed for the encamp­ments, which May­or Michael Han­cock com­mit­ted to cre­ate this sum­mer. He pulled the plug on each at the urg­ing of neigh­bor­ing busi­ness­es and residents.

Much of the push­back relies on incor­rect infor­ma­tion, said Travis Leik­er, pres­i­dent of the Capi­tol Hill Unit­ed Neigh­bor­hoods orga­ni­za­tion, which sup­ports the cur­rent proposals.

“They’re cit­ing no secu­ri­ty. There will be secu­ri­ty. They’re cit­ing a lack of clean­li­ness. There will be access to san­i­ta­tion ser­vices,” Leik­er said. “They’re cit­ing per­ma­nence. This is not per­ma­nent. This is a near-term solu­tion to an oth­er­wise per­ma­nent problem.”

Home­less advo­cates have expressed dis­ap­point­ment that there has been no con­crete progress bring­ing legal encamp­ments online in the city and say the pan­dem­ic — and impend­ing win­ter weath­er — have exac­er­bat­ed a need for them.