Finance & Services Committee - Regular Meeting

Welcome back to this biweekly meeting of the Budget and Policy Committee of Denver City Council. Join us for the discussion as the Budget and Policy Committee starts now.

All right, thank you for joining us on this amazing hot July 13th day for the Denver budget, City Council Budget and Policy, Amanda Sandoval, Northwest Denver, District 1. Do we have, let's get started with our colleagues on Zoom and then we'll go around the room.

Hi, good afternoon. Diana Romero Campbell, Southeast Denver, District 4. Thank you. And then I'll start on my right.

Chris Hines, perfect 10. Kevin Flint, Southwest Numbers, District 2.

Mara Alvidrez, Lucky District 7. Amanda Sawyer, District 5. Jamie Torres, West Depper District 3.

Daryl Watson, Fine District 9. Paul Cashman, South Denver District 6.

Zanana Gonzalez-Cucheras, one of your council members at large. Thank you all. So we have the civil service charter change that Councilwoman Torres and I have been working on, and I'm going to pitch over to her at the end. into the table and I'll just interject as needed, but mostly we'll have Councilman Torres lead us through the presentation. Thank you.

Okay, perfect. Thanks everyone. And thank you all for those who we've been able to brief beforehand. This will largely be very familiar. So Council President Sandoval and I, after the passage of the charter change that authorized police and fire to recruit non-citizens. That passed in November of last year and was implemented and we had heard immediately from Gracie that they had received applicants in their police academy recruitment pool who were in that particular category and were excited to process through the application process. But that opened us up for really this bigger conversation about those two sections of the charter and whether or not they are as up-to-date as they need to be, as accurate as they need to be, and as contemporary. So we started looking at the two sections of charter that govern Civil Service Commission and classified service. One of the things that we led with, and Robin is here from the Office of Social Equity and Innovation. Robin Jones worked with us because she was already working with the Department of Public Safety on applying an equity lens to several different policies that they had. So she came on and joined us in applying and making sure we were ready to apply an equity lens to this work. So, it started with a workshop and making sure that we knew what that meant, particularly when we gathered all of the stakeholders who would be reviewing this language with us. These were the partners that were at the table with us from the very beginning. The Director of Civil Service Commission, Gracie Perez, originally then as a Civil Service Commissioner, Al Gardner, he later during that period of time became the Manager of Safety Director, so he was participating in both roles. The independent monitor, Liz Perez-Castle, Robin, both of our chiefs of the police and fire departments, Chief Fulton and Chief Thomas, and then representatives from the two unions, Chris Ferguson from Local 858, and originally Ryan was our rep from PPA and Brian, or was it? Tychus. Tychus. Tychus was our original one. Brian came on as president of the PPA earlier this year. Tyson.

Tyson. Thank you. Tyson, I got you.

Thank you. I mentioned what the problem was that we were looking at 9.3 and 9.4, the sections of the charter that we largely look at. It had not been amended significantly in several years, but it had undergone some incremental changes since 1904. It was clear that some of the requirements don't align with current department practices. Some were just outdated and needed to either be updated or our proposal was moving some of them to ordinance, which we'll discuss in a minute. So modernizing Civil Service 9.3 and Classified Service 9.4. What we're proposing is moving certain operational details to ordinance, which we are in the process of drafting right now. Updating the charter with gender neutral language, so both sections of this charter would begin to do that for the entire charter, which I hope would be a future body of work. We are removing another citizenship requirement. There was a requirement that commissioners for the Civil Service Commission be citizens. We're striking that. That doesn't seem to be something that's necessary, particularly as Denver is not the first nor the only public safety department to accept immigrant applicants. So other people can apply to serve as commissioners in the future. We still have the Public Safety Cadet Program. under the civil service section of the charter. It is not operationalized there. It's operated out of the manager of safety section. And so we're moving that to the actual manager of safety section of the charter, not taking it out, just moving it over to where it belongs. We did extend a couple timelines for the time period that the manager of safety has to assess and review disciplinary recommendations and suspension pending investigation. Those were increased by maybe 10 days depending on which one of those and At the request of the manager of safety, so those seemed easy and meaningful to update. 1 of the things that the chief asked us to take a look at in particular was allowing folks who are on probationary period to have that period extended for special circumstances of leave approved leave. Like, they've been called to military. They might be out for. Pregnancy or medical leave that they can come back and still finish out their probationary period without having to start from the very beginning again. And then we added 2 sections modification in what were what are. caps or limitations on how big the command staff for both the police and the fire department can get the request from those chiefs was that we eliminate the caps. We became fine with that, particularly because any future staffing increases are also a budget conversation. It's not just an internal. discussion that they increase or decrease command staff. If you're increasing it, you're also having to identify FTE and budget to go along with that increase. But we have heard from both departments that they would like to be able to have a contemporary command staff that reflects the different kinds of divisions that they're envisioning for the fire department and the police department. One example in particular was Chief Fulton. There is no deputy chief for EMT. And they would like that, particularly as they're growing that particular area out of our fire department. This is the language that we're proposing beyond the ballot. It's pretty... Brief and specific at the same time, we're removing outdated language. We're giving counsel the ability to add duties via code. So that's the companion ordinance that we're discussing and then the extension for probation when required for medical, military, or other approved leave. So the companion ordinance, we're aiming for this to accompany this charter amendment when it comes through committee and working on making sure that we are not proposing changes necessarily to that language. At this point, we just want to move what is overly prescriptive from charter and put that overly prescriptive into code where it can actually be updated when it needs to be at a future date without having to constantly go back to the ballot every time. And some of these things are really procedural stuff like timelines, deadlines, kind of application requirements. Where there is not a charter language for it or companion code, there exists civil service rules as well. So there are a lot of things that I think buffer what does the process look like. And we want to make sure that we're nimble and able to accommodate the kinds of changes that might be coming. This would be effective December of this year following the November election if approved by voters. This has been our engagement timeline so far. We obviously started with our meetings with OSCI and then we convened the committee in September of 2025 and had several different meetings with those committee members to make sure that we were identifying language that should be changed and everyone was able to offer. What does this mean? Can that be clarified? I don't like that language. I'd prefer this language. Everyone was able to offer. edits and then we were constantly in a back and forth with each of the departments and making sure that we were accurately reflecting what they were hoping to see in the language. This is our timeline. Today we are at July 13th budget and policy. We aim to be at governance and intergovernmental relations committee July 21st. with first reading July 27th, second reading August 3rd and aiming to be on the November 3rd ballot. Yeah. Any questions? Yes, we have a queue. And Council President, I welcome any comments that you might have.

Thank you. Just want to say thank you to our staff. So thank you to Melissa and Ian. They did an amazing job. And thank you to all the partners. This was a huge iteration that we would sit down at this table, have a working group, send out information, collect that information back. And so it took a whole army of people, literally, to get us this far. So thank you all for everyone who had a hand in dealing with this.

It's really important.

In the queue, I have Councilman Alvarez, Councilman Sawyer, Councilmember Flynn. Did I miss anyone else? Councilmember Hines? Yep. All right.

Go ahead, Councilmember Alvarez. Thank you so much. I'm sorry that I wasn't able to make the briefing work, but I appreciate this. It sounds pretty straightforward. I know you started by talking about the ordinance from a couple years ago that voters approved. That's exciting about people applying. Do we know if anyone's been hired?

Not that I know. No. Well, I don't know.

Okay. The class just finished. And so some paperwork hangups have happened because of the person who's in the White House.

Yeah, that is kind of what's been on my mind in general about just city workers in general that are struggling with that. And so I'm curious if anyone from. Can answer or what the procedure is there or how we're handling and bring the HR here because it doesn't have anything.

Our charter change doesn't have a pertain to HR, but I would suggest you reach out to them. It's super complicated.

It would have to do with the sheriff's department and I intervened on behalf of 1 applicant who was not getting their renewal of DACA in time of graduation. And I think they've tried to. offer some extension on the Sheriff's Department side. But that's been one of the ways that the federal government's been a particular barrier in getting folks on, and OHR handles the Sheriff's Department.

Same in DPD. I talked to Chief Sanchez, and someone graduated, and after, right the day before he graduated, he had to go to renew his DACA. They were not looking like it was going to be renewed.

Yeah. That's so challenging to hear about. For the charter change, I know you have the suggested language for the ballot, but do you have a red line of how the charter would look, how it looks now and how it would look differently with this change? There's a red line in legislature.

Oh, I didn't see that. And there's one in your calendar invite. So all of the documents pertaining this are in your calendar invite. Okay. That was my only questions. Thank you so much for that. except we have council member Sawyer followed by council member Flynn.

Thanks, Madam President. Thanks, you guys, for doing this. I really appreciate it. It was very necessary. As you know, I believe we should just rip up the charter and rewrite the entire thing. So, big fan of this. But I do appreciate your additional slide after our briefing about the companion ordinance.

Largely due to our conversation.

Yeah, just circle up with you on that to see how is that going? Is that where you guys landed? Did that seem like it addressed a lot of the challenges that we talked about, that kind of stuff?

Yeah, I think it was just a timing issue. We were trying not to overburden John, who was at the time our only attorney. But I think we have, since that time, worked on drafting it, met with Director Perez, Gracie, and we'll be kind of circulating it with our... Stakeholder partners before we get to committee on the 27th 21st 21st.

Yeah. Awesome. Okay.

So you all will see it as well before that date.

That is fantastic. I really appreciate it. I think that's just the. The easiest and most straightforward way to ensure that everyone feels comfortable that the language that is coming out of the charter is going someplace. And then after that, it can be. Changed by, you know, a majority of city totally agrees the way every other law is, but super appreciate that.

And we did talk to John. So thank you for your suggestion because that totally changed our trajectory. So we appreciate you giving us that. And I did talk with John. It doesn't need a majority vote for city council because it's a charter. The majority is with ordinance. Is that right?

The.

Yeah, that was actually one follow-up question. So, there's a difference between a vote of an ordinance and a vote of an ordinance that is approved by the voters that is a supermajority requirement.

So, Jonathan Griffin, Deputy Legislative Counsel. So, this would not trigger the supermajority requirement because it's not submitted to the voters. It's passed in conjunction with the charter change.

Fantastic. So, just straight majority.

Awesome.

So, that answers your question, too. Awesome. Thank you. That's it. Thanks. Thank you for your help with that. Council Member Flynn followed by Council Member Flynn.

Excuse me. Thank you, Madam President. Could you clarify who the Charter Review Committee is? Because I saw that you had some meetings with them in 2025, but the Council's Charter Review Committee hasn't met in two years. So is this another group?

Yeah, it was just the group that was convened to discuss these two sections of the charter. It was never meant to be like an iteration of the council charter review committee. So we had basically this group right here. This was who was convened around the table to review these two sections of the charter.

Okay, so you just ad hoc called them. Correct. Okay, confusing because I looked at our calendar and said they haven't been since June. No, no, correct. That's all, I just wanted a clarification.

Okay. Thanks.

Councilmember Heitz?

Thank you, Madam President. Thank you for the briefing before and also for bringing this forward. I reached out to firefighters, Local 858, didn't get a response. I did also reach out to PPA, who gave me a response. And it looks like it's a letter that they sent to the sponsors. And I just wanted to give you...

I met with them after that letter.

Okay. Yeah. And so are they... Amending the letter?

Probably, because there's some inaccuracies in the letter if you look at the letter. And so they issued us the letter on a Monday. I think we met with them on Tuesday. So we literally met with them the day after. And we pointed out some discrepancies in the letter that are 100% inaccurate. No city worker can strike. No one can strike. And so they're actually... Once we get the companion ordinance done, we're going to meet with them again, which can highlight a lot of their concerns in there. So we're circling back again before committee with them.

Okay, that was going to be my just to get your thoughts, but it sounds like.

Yeah, and to speak to I think one of the sections, we're removing the section that was about longevity pay. That was what we had a lot of dialogue with both the fire union and the police union about and John was really helpful. Since that section was put into charter, they have collective bargaining rights and we are not changing the collective bargaining sections of the charter at all. which authorize them to bargain on longevity pay. So the section that we've got in these sections of the charter is basically irrelevant language because it is superseded by the collective bargaining language around longevity pay. If they don't want to bargain on longevity pay, they won't. Otherwise, they have to. That is one of the things that it's not a backstop. It's not an effective safety net. If something happens during collective bargaining, it just doesn't work like that. It really is just... Old and outdated and useless language and it really does refer to numbers from a long time ago. They are paid much better longevity pay than what the charter dictates. So, I don't even know that they would want that language as a backstop. So. All that to say that was one of the big back and forths. We're not trying to change collective bargaining for either of the two safety departments. I think there was some overarching concern about us creating the companion ordinance, but that is in and of itself another legislative process and has to come through city council. And we're not changing any of the standards in what we're moving over to ordinance at all either.

Yeah, thank you for the explanation. And one of the points in the letters was removing authority from the voters. And while that's technically accurate, I think that's what you're touching on is there would be opportunity for City Council to review and potentially recommend changes. At that time, I'm assuming we would reach out to PPA and 858 and any relevant union or group of employees. All of our safety employees are represented by a union, but just in case. When I first read the letter, I was like, huh, well, that's interesting. But, you know, with your explanation and perhaps there's some inaccuracies in the letter, I think that's very helpful for me to, it's great context. So thank you. You bet. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you.

So next up we have Councilwoman Abi-Udaisi. Thank you. One of my questions is also around the authorized leave. My question is, could or is currently losing your work authorization protected leave?

No, because you're not requesting, I don't think that's an approved leave status as far as police and fire. I'd have to find out about how the Sheriff's Department, because they operate under OHR rules, how they handle something like that. But it's for the ways that we have leave, medical, military.

So those individuals would have to start their probationary period all over again.

Yeah, exactly.

Yeah, and it wasn't in legislature just so you know, but I think I might have it any minute now. Okay. Thank you.

So the leave is for military service and it's defined by certain status. So if you're an army guard and you need to be pulled up into that, and you get called to service, that's what that protective leave is. It's not necessarily protective leave when it comes to your status with being a United States citizen or a DACA. It's usually military service.

The other helpful document, if you go back to the calendar invite, which does have the red line, it also has...

I don't have the calendar because we didn't make the meeting, so it got off my calendar. Oh, it got off. Get an email.

There's another document that I think you'd find really helpful, too, and it's the one-pager. I'm going to send them all to her right now. Great. And it's a one-pager that goes section by section, what's changed and how it looks different. Awesome. Yeah.

Awesome. Next up, we have Council President Romero-Campbell.

Thank you. I don't really have a question more just of a statement. I appreciate the briefing that you guys provided, but I also wanted to just thank you for doing this work. I think it was just exceptional how the length of time that you took to really be thorough about this and then also how you presented it back for the briefing. So I just wanted to say thank you. I think it's all very, a lot of good common sense in there for the changes that need to be made. Thank you.

Just a good job.

Any other council members in the queue? Seeing none, if you have any questions, if you haven't had a briefing from us yet, feel free to reach out. We created a one pager which goes back and forth to all the places that we changed in the charter, the red line. And then once we get the ordinance, we'll probably circle back around and send it to you all. It shouldn't be different than what's in the charter, right? Because we're just pulling it out. So if you have questions, I don't think we're going to offer a briefing before committee because that's too fast because we have to get the August 3rd deadline to get this on the ballot. But if you do have questions, please feel free to reach out to Councilman Torres and myself and our teams. And hopefully we'll have more to come at committee from the two unions. And just want to say, Robin, thank you. It was a pleasure to work with you. It was amazing to learn through the equity lens and really have other agencies ground their work in an equity lens. I don't think several of them had done that before. So I appreciate you bringing that perspective. And again, to Ian and Melissa, we couldn't have done this without you all. So thank you. We'll see you. at safety um at the end of the month all right see no other further i'll see you oh i just wanted to make one last minute announcement um council member flynn i'll say this on the floor but council member flynn won't be with us tonight at council because he's going to um Lynn Bartleson's funeral, and so I wish I could be there. I'm really sad that I'm not gonna be there. I feel really heartbroken. I cried about it a lot, so I'm gonna let that go. But I'll make an announcement, and Councilmember Flynn, thank you so much for going to represent City Council. It's here in a few hours, right, during City Council. And then for anyone who had an intern, we're saying something about them at the 3.30 session, so if you could please have your intern in the City Council We'd really like to acknowledge in them as there are DPS is it's their last week for interns. Councilmember Flynn?

I wanted to bring that up. Anybody here not know? It's impossible that you didn't know her. She knew everybody.

I actually didn't know her.

You're the one.

So you're the one. I'm the unpolitical that didn't know her.

Thank you. Thank you. We stand adjourned.