Health Safety Education and Services - Regular Meeting

Welcome back to this weekly meeting of the Health and Safety Committee with Denver City Council. Coverage of the Health and Safety Committee starts now.

Good morning and welcome to the August 5th meeting for the Health and Safety Committee. My name is Darrell Watson. I'm honored to serve as the chair of the Health and Safety Committee and also as the city council member representing all of the fine District 9. We have two action items this morning and four items on consent. But before we roll into the agenda, why don't we have introductions by city council members and I'll start on my right.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Kevin Flynn, Southwest Denver's District 2.

Good morning, Diana Romero Campbell, Southeast Denver District 4.

And good morning, Paul Cashman, South Denver District 6.

Good morning, Amanda Sandoval, Northwest Denver District 1. Jamie Torres, West Denver District 3.

Just verifying, I don't think we have any participants that are virtual. Seeing none, we have the first action item. It's 261127, the Office of Children's Affairs. We have a presentation, so I'll turn it over to our good friend, Red Gutierrez, to introduce himself and his team, and I'll turn the floor over to you.

Yeah, thank you. Mr. Chairman. I lead the policy and legislative work for the office of children's affairs and I always feel like it's a privilege to be with you all and to sit at the same with y'all. But today feels a little extra special for me personally, because I'm joined by 2 colleagues that I couldn't be more excited to have their expertise at the table with me. And so I'll hand it over to these young leaders to introduce themselves.

Hi, my name is I recently finished my 3rd term on the commission and graduated high school.

Hi, my name's Anya Sharma, and I recently also completed my third year. And I'm a rising senior at Northfield High School.

So, we are also missing 1, other gentleman, Nico Franco, who is a junior at George Washington high school who couldn't be with us today, but know that his imprint is all over this presentation as well. And the reason I lean on here with me today is because we're talking about the mayor's youth commission and making some updates to the commission and to the ordinance that governs it. So, just as a little overview of what we'll be talking about, we'll give you a. A little bit of background on the youth commission will give you a little bit of the overview of what we're asking to change. But why behind it? Some of the strategic partnerships that really led to that work and you'll see some of those folks in the audience today. And then we'll lead us in a deep dive of what those changes will look like and what and what that impact will be. Then we'll obviously leave time for questions. In short, we're looking to amend the Denver Revised Municipal Code, Chapter 2, Article 8, the ordinance governing the Mayor's Youth Commission so that the Youth Commission can be more representative and more inclusive of all Denver youth, and so that that group can have more impact throughout the city. I'll hand it over to Eileen.

All right, so the Mayor's Youth Commission has a deep history in Denver. A former mayor has even mentioned serving on a previous version of the commission themselves. But for our purposes today, the commission was established in 2003. At that time, two advisory groups were created under the Mayor's Office of Education and Children, MOEC. One was the Youth Commission, which is the precursor to the Mayor's Youth Commission. The other was the Commission on Youth, which oversaw a lot of the youth development work that OCA still leads today. In 2013, MOEC transitioned into the Office of Children's Affairs, and the Commission on Youth was replaced by youth development work that was already underway. That left the Mayor's Youth Commission as the sole advisory group within OCA. In 2015, the Mayor's Youth Commission grew from 12 youth members to 20, while the adult commissioners supporting them dropped from 10 members to eight. So there's already some precedent for the kinds of changes we're proposing today. In 2025 NYC made a significant programmatic shift moving towards a policy development role and program advisory role beyond solely advising OCA. Around the same time OCA also launched its partnership with UNICEF USA joining the child friendly cities initiative. That brings us to today, 2026, where we're hoping to make some changes to the ordinance.

So currently, NYC is made up of a total of 28 commissioners, 20 of which are youth and eight of which are adults. We serve as advisors on the problems affecting our youth, identifying the challenges young people face and developing ideas and creative solutions for the mayor's office and OCA. So our youth are high school students who live in or attend school here, while the adult commissioners are city employees and representatives from youth serving organizations. So before we get into the details, I want to give a quick overview. We're proposing several updates to the mayor's youth commission ordinance. These changes are meant to strengthen the commission, increase youth participation, and make sure more young people have a voice. We'll walk through each change in the upcoming slides. So proposing these changes helps fulfill one of these three goals. First, it increases youth participation from all around and ensures the many diverse perspectives that each youth can bring to the table. It is also meant to position the Youth Commission to be more involved in the decision-making process, as youth voice is very necessary to effective policy and program design. Now these changes aren't just an investment in young people, they're an investment in Denver. By creating more opportunities for youth to participate, we're building stronger partnerships and creating policies that successfully reflect the needs of our communities. I'm gonna pass it back to Rhett for the next couple slides.

Thanks, Anya. And like Anya said, our primary driver behind this is making sure that the Youth Commission is an inclusive space for all youth in Denver. I've received a criticism in the past, or a piece of feedback is maybe a better way to put it, that folks didn't want to use the Youth Commission as an advisory board because it didn't represent Denver youth. It was often a lot of the overachievers, the kids who were looking to pad their resumes before going off to some fancy college. And I can totally appreciate that. And I feel like that's not doing its job. If we can't convene a group of youth that represents the young people in Denver. So, really, this, this change is designed to make the youth commission more impactful, more representative and really be a strong advisory body, not just for, but for the city as a whole and to support a lot of the great work that's ongoing. So, to do that, we want to again, these goals are really driven by our equity goals to make this group inclusive and I'm by no means an expert. So I always call on my friends who are, which is why we've been engaged with the office of social equity and innovation and their equity maps program, or their equity maps tool, which is a way to assess potential policy changes for their impact either and advancing our equity goals or. to the extent which they could inhibit those equity goals from being achieved. So I want to give a lot of love and a lot of credit to the folks who are over in the audience, led by Bobby Alexander from Office of Social Equity Innovation for bringing together folks from DDPHE, CASR, DHH, Denver Public Library, God bless you. And I think I said the public library, so many of these partners who have a vested interest in youth being at the table for decisions being made and who really believe in advancing this work. This group's not only been great at developing and vetting these proposed changes that you'll see today, but also in helping shape how leads a recruitment process that is more equitable and more inclusive, getting to more young people how our application was even outdated and not representative of youth needs. It's been a really beneficial thing, not just from the legislative standpoint, but also from a programmatic standpoint. And so just a lot of credit to Bobby, not only for leading this group, but she is also the mother of a former youth commissioner herself. So she has contributed more to the youth commission than the average person. I also would be remiss in not mentioning that this change falls squarely in line with our goal to become a child friendly city as certified by UNICEF. UNICEF USA has really leaned into child centered governance, basically how we put young people in leadership positions. As you'll see today and from Desi in a little bit and Elle as well, who will be participating in the public comment. Our young people are not the future, they are the present. And it is incumbent on us as the adults in the room to make sure that they not only have a seat at the table, but that their voice plays an active role in how we make decisions. 1 of the things that I most appreciate about our partnership with USA is that we talk a lot about child centered governance and how we can embody that as a city. Denver is already ahead of the curve on so many of these things. Youth counselor are 1 of the 5 main child centered governance strategies and the mayor's youth commission has been ongoing for. Decades now, at this point, and even previous iterations go even further back than that. So we have a strong foundation and we want to continue to enhance this so that we don't just have this cute thing off to the side. That's a nice app. But youth voice is an essential part about how we make our decisions here in the city. So, with that, I will now pass it over to Eileen on you to lead us in a little bit more detail about the proposed changes.

All right, so our first proposed change is to increase the number of youth commissioners from 20 to 30 youth. This would have the benefit of adding more youth voices as well as a better representation of Denver's youth. Additionally, increasing the size of the Mayor's Youth Commission would allow the youth to have more projects. In the past few years, we've typically had three or four subcommittees that would each propose one project or policy change. With more youth commissioners, youth would have better access to work in their areas of interest as well as cover more issues in the city. Our second proposed change is to help ensure more geographic diversity within the commission. As an example, the 2025-26 commission had zero youth members in districts 3 and 9 who either lived in that district or attended school there. On the other hand, districts 5, 6, and 8 had more representation. In the upcoming program year for the Mayor's Youth Commission, all 11 council districts will have youth representation. This change would ensure that in the future, each council district will continue to have at least two youth commissioners who either live or attend school there.

So our next change is updating the age eligibility requirement. Under the proposed ordinance, youth would be eligible if they're between 14 and 18 years of age at the time of appointment. Now, this change does a few important things. First of all, it allows commissioners to serve their full terms after high school. So it gives people the option to stay even after graduation. This also gives a wider range of youth perspectives by including students who may be transitioning from high school into college, work, or various other career pathways. This will create more continuity for the commission while more experiences and viewpoints are represented. So another change to the ordinance is to clarify the role of the mayor's youth commission. Currently the ordinance states that the commission advises only OCA. Now this change proposes that the commission also serves as an advisory board to the mayor and other leaders. This will also reflect the work that the commission already does and creates more opportunities for youth input. This won't limit youth engagement to just one department. And as you can see on the slide here to your right, this picture shows a gathering that we had with various departments in which we exchanged ideas and talked about the problems that we saw. My group spoke with the Department of Economic Development and Opportunity, and it launched a whole new line of work that we think DETO and OCA can support long term. This really shows how youth can provide valuable input that leads to stronger programs in the long run.

Our next proposal is to remove the prohibition on youth commissioner compensation. Like other boards and commissions in the city, members of the Mayor's Youth Commission are not compensated. However, the Mayor's Youth Commission is inherently different from these boards and commissions, as it is predominantly made up of youth. Some youth may need to work a part-time job to supplement their family's income, save up for college, or just to have some spending money. In the past, the inability to be compensated has led to some youth being unable to join or fully participate in the Mayor's Youth Commission. While removing this prohibition would not require youth to be compensated, it would open the door to compensation in the future, allowing for a wider range of youth to participate. To be clear, this change would only apply to youth, and our wonderful adult commissioners would continue to be a part of the Mayor's Youth Commission out of the goodness of their hearts.

So this next change shortens the term length for commissioners from three years to just two years. High schoolers face rapidly changing schedules, responsibilities, and priorities. A student may join as a freshman, expecting to have the time to serve for three years. But by junior or maybe even senior year, they may have new responsibilities like sports, jobs, leadership roles, or college applications. Now, these shortened terms provides greater flexibility, allowing more students to participate in the Mayor's Youth Commission without feeling constrained by long-term commitment. For commissioners who wish to remain involved, this change creates the option to seek reappointment, creating opportunities for sustained engagement and leadership while making the program more accessible to a wider range of students. So we would also want to focus on how commissioner terms are structured. Under the current system, if a commissioner leaves, either because of graduation or anything else, before their term ends, the person who replaces them only serves the remainder of that term. So an example would be if a commissioner starts serving as a junior and completes their term upon graduation and leaves NYC after two years, the seat would only have one year remaining for another commissioner to serve. In practice, OCA and the mayor's office try to appoint a senior to those types of seats, but it can be a challenge and it definitely limits the possibility, given some of our previous proposed changes, to have commissioners serve beyond graduation and can impact representation from various districts. Now, this change proposes that new commissioners serve the full term when they're appointed, which provides a more consistent experience for them and gives each member the same amount of time to contribute and grow in their roles. This also simplifies the appointment process and reduces some administrative challenges that come with the current system.

Our final proposed change is to remove the position of the chairperson. I served as the chairperson in the 25-26 term, and it required a fair amount of time and effort. While I did learn a lot from this role, it is a lot to expect from just one youth who is also busy with school, other extracurriculars, and work. By removing this role, NYCU would have more design flexibility to shape this role into what works best for that year's group of youth commissioners, such as having two youth work together in this role in order to lessen the workload. These proposed changes would allow the Mayor's Youth Commission to better represent Denver, support youth, and make change across the city. We are very grateful for your time today and welcome any questions that you have.

Thank you so much, Anya and Eileen. Eileen. Eileen. You demonstrated, and we're going to have a longer discussion on this, but you demonstrated the value that the Commission provides. I so appreciate the energy you put into this presentation and the clarity that you're providing to us. And Rhett, thank you for scheduling this and allowing for Youth Voices to lead this presentation. Once again, a great example of what you're proposing to us as far as the change I'd like to welcome Pro Tem Gonzalez Gutierrez to our meeting. We have public comments scheduled for commenters. It's a two-minute presentation for each public comment. The screen may have a... clock that shows you the two minutes. If it doesn't, I'll wave my hand vigorously or to let you know when there's only 30 seconds left. If these leaders are in the audience, we have Ellie Williams, Sarah McGill, and Desi If you're all here, we'll start first with Ellie. If you don't mind coming up to the mic that is there, please introduce yourselves. It's online, counsel. It's Ellie's. Okay. I see you.

Okay. My name is L. Williams. I'm a rising junior at Denver East High School, and this upcoming year will be my second year on the commission. The Mayor's Youth Commission is a crucial tool that has allowed me, my fellow commissioners, and our peers to have a true voice in our city government. The commission's biggest strength is allowing a space for a variety of voices to be heard. When NYC is able to draw off an array of experiences, we're better able to understand and convey what Denver's young people really need. No two people have the same life in Denver, and each commissioner can only speak for their experiences and the experience of youth in their communities. That's why expanding the reach of NYC is so important. Through an assortment of steps, this ordinance aims solely to increase representation within the Mayor's Youth Commission and therefore increase representation within our city's government. requiring at least two young people from each district will ensure that communities and districts that are often forgotten will have a voice in myc increasing our size means more young people will be able to serve more voices will be heard and more perspectives brought to the table when we work together to synthesize different perspectives the commission is able to present more thorough inclusive and thoughtful solutions restructuring our vacant terms guarantees that anyone being appointed to fill a vacant spot will get fair access to an entire term, meaning they'll have more time to share their opinions and leave their mark on NYC. Removing the role of chairperson calls for more collaborative leadership, allowing even more voices to step into that space. All in all, these changes simply allow more opportunities for more youth. They allow people from different backgrounds to be present in the same space, allow commissioners to learn to manage clashing opinions, and most importantly, they provide NYC with the most in-depth understanding and representation of Denver's youth. Not only is this change incredibly impactful for the Mayor's Youth Commission, but it will have great benefits for the city as a whole. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Elle, for presenting and Sarah McGill.

Hello. I might grab it. My name is Sarah McGill, and I proudly serve as an adult commissioner on the Mayor's Youth Commission. Professionally, I have worked with youth for over 20 years, and I'm the director of teen and alumni programs at Girls Inc. of Metro Denver. I'm inspired by the commitment of the OCA staff and team that supports the Mayor's Youth Commission and the youth and adult commissioners. I think that the proposed changes we were speaking of today will help build upon the amazing work that has already been done and enhance the functioning of the commission. I'd like to highlight a few changes I find particularly important. One is expanding the commission from 20 to 30 youth. The more youth who are exposed to this leadership experience, the better for their own development, but also as a lot of folks have spoken to, the broader diversity of experiences and ideas will really strengthen the commission itself. Paired with the proposal to have two student commissioners representing each city council district, I think that this will also really allow commissioners to partner with their district council members and make meaningful change together. I also support shortening this term of service from three to two years. With the responsibilities and activities that young people juggle during their high school career, It will make it a lot easier for students to commit to the commission. Even for us adults, it can be difficult to think about a three year commitment at times. And it will also, shortening the term, will also engage more youth in this experience. Lastly, I do think that removing the prohibition on compensation for youth commissioners will really increase access for youth who may otherwise have to prioritize employment over volunteer opportunities like this. Compensation will also help youth practice accountability and professional skills and perhaps increase engagement and participation. We ask a lot of time and dedication from our commissioners. And I also believe that all people, especially youth, deserve compensation for their labor and the work that they're doing to contribute to our community.

Thank you so much, Sarah. Thank you. I appreciate you coming forward. Thank you. Betsy Belafaz. Great job with the mic there.

Good morning, everyone. My name is Dusty Belafis, and I have the privilege of serving on the Mayor's Youth Commission. I've been on the commission since my freshman year of high school, and I'm now currently entering my junior year. I have seen firsthand how powerful it is when youth are given a chance to use their voices and be a part of change. Through the commission, I've had the opportunity to work on projects that support youth in Denver, collaborate with other student leaders, and share our own experiences and perspectives with city leaders. These experiences have made me grow as an active youth advocate, and have shown me that when students are included in these conversations, we can make real change. I'm here today to support these proposed updates to the Mayor's Youth Commission Ordinance. Expanding the commission from 20 to 30 members and ensuring representation from every city council district will give more students the opportunity to serve and ensure youth from across Denver have a voice. Everyone has different experiences and needs and ensuring representation from every district will allow more youth to have their voices heard. I also support the Mayor's Youth Commission's role as an advisory board for the entire city. Young people are impacted by decisions all around, from transportation and public safety to mental health and parks. Strengthening our role in this city allows more city leaders to hear directly from the source, through the students. These decisions affect the youth, and by allowing them a greater role will lead to better decisions for Denver's youth. These changes aren't just about improving the commission, but also ensuring that Denver hears from young people who are being directly impacted by the decisions being made. As Denver works towards becoming a UNICEF child-friendly city, it's important that youth continue to be included in these conversations as they are the future and have a meaningful impact on our city. Thank you for your time and for considering these updates. I respectfully ask that you support the proposed ordinance changes so the Mayor's Youth Commission can continue to grow, expand through more representation, and create an even greater impact for Denver's youth. Thank you.

Thank you so much, Desi. We often provide opportunity for other folks in the audience that didn't sign up. Since we started a little bit late, I think I'm going to just transition to questions from council members and then we'll ask for a motion and a second to move this forward. So we have a queue of council members starting first with Councilmember Torres, then Councilmember Sandoval.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Rhett. Thank you both. And to our speakers, thank you for taking the time to come today. A couple questions. The expanded seats, will those be appointed immediately? And how are you determining which ones you need?

Yeah, that's a great question because of the timing of this, we've gone through kind of a 1st iteration of appointment that would kind of. Be our normal cycle that will have us ready, but we also have a secondary. Uh, batch, if that makes sense that if these organ changes go through, we'd be ready to put forward to the mayor's office for appointment consideration. So that would be effective our program here in September.

The chart that you shared showed that we don't have anybody from Council District 3 represented. I really appreciate it. I think this opens the door to a lot more interaction and engagement with Denver City Council. I'm noticing though that we don't confirm any of the appointments. Is that something that can be added to this so that we like maintain an active role in who's on and who are we replacing and what that conversation is? Over the long term.

Yeah, I think that's certainly something we could explore. We didn't include it in this batch. Um, I know there's some. I like the formality of it. I'm personally like, I want to get these kids in front of city council as often as I can. Um, and I say kids, so I apologize. I should say, uh, young adults. I need to break that part of my brain. I'd be open to having a longer conversation about that for sure. And I do think that the spirit behind this rule to make sure that there's representation from every city council district is 1 to strengthen the partnership that our commission has with you all. And also we, it's a value of ours to make sure the whole city is represented. And I don't think we've met that value as much as we would like to in recent years. There is certainly as long as I've been with the city. Um, and that's something we're really, we want to codify so that that's just our, our expectation moving forward. So, again, longer conversation would be happy to have it with you.

Um, if we can have, um, that I'm super satisfied with the process that you went through and the recommendations that you're making, um, that that would need, um, if we can have that soon. Um, so we know whether or not by the time this comes out of mayor council. whether or not that's a piece that we're amending because it currently just says appointed by the mayor in the language and whether or not we can add and confirmed by City Council by the time it gets filed for first reading. Let me know. I'd love to figure out if there are advantages or disadvantages to it. It certainly does take another week, right, longer than that process. But I do think if there's intentionality behind this dialogue with council districts, that's one of the ways to make sure that it stays alive. I think that's it. Thank you so much and thank you for leading on this. When I was in a city agency, we did a whole overhaul of our boards and commissions and it's a lot of work. And so I thank you for working through that, both the OCA team, but also those of you on the commission and bringing your expertise forward for the next group of people that come through your shoes. So thank you so much.

Thank you. That's awesome. Thank you, Council Member Torres. Council Member Sandoval.

Thank you. So I appreciate the addition of adding to each council district. I think that's really great because I have North High School and then I have Career Education College, CEC, in my council district. It's like a more non-traditional high school, so I would love to figure out how we could get them involved I was just wondering in the ordinance there's talk about compensation and it's kind of clear but not exactly clear. It talks about youth commissioners may be compensated subject to appropriation and approval in a manner determined by the Director of the Office of Children's Affairs. How does that work? Does that mean, did you put that language in there right now because of the budget constraints or? I do some concern that the way it's written, they're gonna say they never have budget. And so I would rather have compensation in there. We compensate our other commissions. I don't know if the other commissioners get compensated, but I understand that right now in a budget crisis, you might not, but the way that it's written, maybe like I'm just concerned that may be compensated subject to appropriation that that's always going to say we don't ever have money and I would rather have it so that it's written in a way where we do have money.

You would say you prefer it shall the commissioner shall be 100%. Yeah, maybe that personally would like that. I think the reason we have it worded that way is it gives us some flexibility what compensation looks like. So, for example, that could look like stipends, or it could in future years look like scholarships, or it could look like partnerships with external organizations who would also like to. invest in the youth voice and also participate in some of the commission's activities. It gives us flexibility without hamstringing us in terms of what that competition is. In the budget sensitive environment, I understand the concern, but we, we are committed to making sure that our young people's expertise is compensated.

Okay. And then youth commissioners may be reimbursed for reasonable expenses. Like, that's fair. Do you give do you provide them? Like, if they need to go down to Carla Madison or somewhere, do you provide them equal passes or.

thankfully that right now they have a rt is a free fair for youth which is great been big help sometimes um especially late at night we don't always want to put them on a sometimes hour-long public transit commute so we'll give them ubers and they'll get reimbursement for those if we don't provide it directly if they purchase any supplies for a project they're working on or if they do anything like that and that language is pretty standard throughout most other ordinances

Okay, and then I would agree with council mentors before this comes to, because this would go to mayor council next week if it's moved out of committee, I would love to see it confirmed. And I'll just explain to the youth why I'm saying confirmed by city council. So we have these business improvement districts and then city council confirms them as well. And then I know in my area who I can reach out to so I can track those and then I usually write them a thank you note directly from me so then I can participate more and it's on my radar. So if this is only approved by the mayor, it leaves us out of the process of knowing how we can participate and looking back in Logistar and all of our documents it's easy to find that name and then I can directly go to that to that individual and say hey you're in northwest Denver And that's how I work is I don't always wanna go to the mayor's office to say, hey, who's this appointee on behalf of me? I would like to see appointed and then what it does also is it lives in the permanent record when you're appointed by the mayor. There's no... record of it and so this goes to the clerk and recorder and you can actually find archives and i'm like really big on history and so i love looking at archives and i dig into them so then i can understand who are we appointing what are we doing what does the demographics look like what's the demographic makeup of my council district are we actually pulling back the layer of the onion to make sure that we're getting representation that is needed and i don't know that i'm not saying i don't trust the mayor's office but i it just gives us extra um it gives us a different type of step so i would really love to support council mentors on an amendment to this to see if we could do maybe and it's not uncommon to have it say appointed by the mayor and confirmed by city council lots of commissions um have that Anything that I've ever worked on, I always add that. So just would love to see that before it comes to the floor. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Council Member Sandoval, Council Member Cashman, and Council President Romero-Campbell.

Oh, thank you, Committee Chair. Thank you, Rhett, Eileania, for your presentation. 100% supportive, along with support for my colleagues adding a council confirmation on this. One thing you didn't mention, and it's not directly tied to this, Rhett, but could you talk briefly about expanding youth participation on city boards and commissions?

Yeah, it's not part of this, but I do think that what we've learned through really our work with UNICEF USA and then our broader work just in UCA trying to get more youth involved, is we have a lot of phenomenal young people in this city. and we have so few slots on the Mayor's Youth Commission, so there has to be another place to get them plugged in. This year we're launching a pilot program with Human Rights and Community Partnerships called the Student Ambassador Program, where young people have the opportunity to serve on the other boards and commissions in the city. So the Latino Commission, the LGBTQ Commission, the Women's Commission, on and all the boards and commissions that The overseas, we're going to point at least 2 youth to every single 1 of those commissions as well. And again, just want to get more and more opportunities for young people to be involved. And we find that just for context there, if these ordinance changes are not adopted this year, there are 8 slots available for the youth commission for the 2627 program here. And there were over 80 applicants, and I would have pointed every single 1 of them. If I could, they were phenomenal. I am. I wouldn't say I'm surprised anymore how great these young people are, but I am constantly encouraged about what the future holds because they're rock stars out there. We just need to keep giving them spaces to be in charge.

And thank you for that. Yeah, I think it's so important to expand the involvement of youth voices in our governing process. It's not always, and for me it's not, let them sit at the table and listen and learn. For me it's I want to hear their voices because while not always the youth voices are often disruptive to the status quo and most often the status quo needs to be disrupted. and changes need need to to be heard so uh i couldn't be more supportive of that the other thing i wanted to say um you know talking about our current budget situation um you know the mayor i think the past two years has had is among his major goals supporting youth I think child-friendly came in this year I'm long been a supporter of the statement that don't tell me your values show me your budget and I'll tell you your values and so I would challenge the mayor And I guess all of us, as we look to this budget season, to not only stand here in vocal support of our youth, but that our budget will reflect that. And so I also do, I'm gonna kinda look at the wording about compensation of our young leaders and make sure that that's strong enough. Thank you, Committee Chair. Thank you, Council Member Cashman.

Council President Romero-Campbell.

Thank you, Committee Chair. And thank you again for your presentation to the speakers today. I have a question specifically around the number of youth commissioners. We've talked about having representation from the districts. 30, so there are 11 districts and two at large. 30 would mean that we'd have a few that don't have that representation. Is there thought about going up to 33 so that you would at least have representation or three from each council district?

I think that is certainly we'd be open to it. I think our thinking behind 30 is a number is it allows 2 in every city council district and then 8 who can serve at large kind of similarly to how. You all are operating and again, those relationships can kind of be built with those city council members individually. I'm thinking of Alexa and district 4 who also goes to CEC actually. So talk about it. a student who's going all over town, but we want to build those relationships with our council members and even our at-large members too. So if you're thinking about young people being a mini representative in the community, it makes sense in our brains to have for each council member serving at-large to kind of also support those same efforts. So I think we'd be super open to it. That's our current thinking. We'd be happy for longer conversations.

I hear the at-large piece of it, but I also think it's nice to be able to have, you know, there are so many young people within and different experiences. Like you said, I have a representative that lives in the district that goes to school in another district across town. The other question is, is it going to stay with eight adult leaders and would those terms also change?

Yeah, we're not changing anything with the adult commissioner number. We think eight will continue to be a good number to help support our young people, especially because OCA staff are also there as a support. So there's always at least another adult in the room to support. And then those terms will also be two-year terms with the opportunity for reappointment.

Okay. And with those, I'm just wondering if you have, and so you feel like eight is going to be sufficient with... an increase of 10 to 13 more young people?

We feel confident, yeah, that they'll still be able to support them. I mean, that breaks down to about, I mean, a little less than four to a little bit more than four per as like a student to adult ratio. I think we have some professionals who work in the youth development space too who can really support that work.

Great. Thank you for that. And then lastly, the expansion of having, you know, youth be able to advise the mayor or you had kind of an other in that language. What is your process to be able to prioritize what that scope would be for the youth commissioners?

That's a great question. This is largely, I think, representative of something that the youth already do, which is they're asked to advise on things ad hoc. So we want to formalize that they are here for more than just OCA. They're here for the city of Denver. They're the mayor's youth commission to service the city and county. The nice thing that I get to say is it's not up to me how we determine that scope. The young people tell us what's important to them, what that they see as the emerging issues in their community. And then it's our job to then facilitate those conversations. So Julian and Eric from DDPH are a great example who came to our youth commission meetings just to understand what they were talking about when it came to the youth mental health. And I think there's more partnership that will come from those conversations. So I do think that the youth will determine kind of what the priorities will be. And then OCA will facilitate those conversations turning into the work product, if that makes sense.

And then I guess I do want to just circle back one more about the number of young people in participation. We know there's a ceiling. Is there a minimum number that you have or is it just a constant roll if you don't have those seats fully filled?

We're allowed to currently serve a point 20 youth and so we try to maximize that number as much as we can. But, for example, in the case of adding in the appointment criteria, where we had 2 members from every council district. If that were to be adopted, and we weren't able to, for whatever reason, in our typical recruitment cycle, get a young person from a city council district, or hit that to council district. Is that two representative minimum? We would hold a seat open so that we could do some additional recruitment in those communities. So it is an up to number. We try to fill it as much every year as much as we can, but there's nothing that requires that.

Thank you. And I just echo my colleagues interest in wanting to make sure that our council offices are connected and either can assist with outreach and be able to connect with the folks in our district. I think it's tremendous that you all are here and I think it also speaks volumes of the direction we'd like to go to be able to have more young people involved in multiple spaces that we have through this process or through our legislative process. So thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you so much, Council President. We have Council Member Flint and Council Member Protem Gonzalez-Guterres.

Sorry. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Could you give us a deeper dive, maybe, Rhett and the youth representatives here, What is the process for recruiting members or identifying members? What's the engagement that you do in the schools or in the community? Because when I look at the appointment criteria, current members based on residency, 16 based on residency, which implies to me that the four members don't live in Denver, but go to school at one of the Denver schools. So what is, how do you do that engagement? Because the one representative from District 2 is based on school, and I looked at the website and it says student at Mullen, which is in my district. So how will we fill those other 10 seats and how will we go about looking at the distribution geographically of the future membership?

Yeah, it's a great question. And I think, again, this is something that was really supported by our work with OSCI and the equity match process about how we do recruitment. Historically, what was a sufficient way to get to the numbers, the 20 youth that we were recruiting, was we would just go to the schools and we would say, hey, counselors, principals, activity leaders, send us some kids that you think are great. We'll interview them and appoint them. More recently, we are working with community-based organizations that are in those communities, especially in communities where we haven't always had representation from. So in Southwest specifically, we've done a lot more outreach to those individual schools, activity leaders, club leaders who are maybe not We're going like deeper levels of the end of the schools and then the community organizations and then once we're in a school, the strongest recruitment what we have is word of mouth. And so once we have a foothold into a community, it's a lot easier to get the next iteration and just to kind of maintain momentum in those communities. So we definitely do an all hands on deck approach from OCA and our partner agencies who share this out on social media, kind of in our newsletter, and we will continue to do that. We're always looking for more ideas. It's definitely not my area of expertise on how we best recruit and market to young people, but our youth are pretty great. pretty great megaphones for some of the work that we're doing and their social media presence is much stronger than mine.

Could I ask maybe Ailey and Anya and Desi, how were you recruited? How did you find out about this? Just real briefly because we have other items.

Yeah, I think for me it was just over social media. I think my mom actually saw it on the mayor's social media.

That's unusual for your parents to see something on social media. Or you.

Maybe following different social media accounts.

Yeah, mine was also the same. My mom found it and she was like, this would be a great opportunity.

Let's hear it for mom. Moms are our number one recruiting tool.

Fair.

Mine was also similar, but I think it was my dad who kind of...

I love that. Thank you. Thank you. Next, clarifying the role, removing the prohibition on compensation, shortened terms, I understand that. Remove the position of chairperson. If we didn't have our chair here organizing the meeting, we would devolve into chaos. So how do you see a meeting being run without someone to preside, a presider of such? Madam Chair?

Yeah, so I think so I was the chairperson this last year and most of what I did was just kind of sending out the email and I'd work with Rhett to kind of come up with a meeting agenda. And if we had anyone from like a city agency or anyone coming in, like figuring out what times they would be there and reaching out to the. like smaller subcommittee chairs for if they wanted to talk to any city agencies and stuff. So there's a lot of like sending emails and more like administrative stuff. It wasn't exactly leading the meeting that kind of came from like both Red and then like subcommittee chairs and then also a little bit of me. So it's kind of more of a group effort in the actual leading of the meeting. So I think the reason for eliminating the kind of role of chairperson is to just give more flexibility in case there's not a youth who wants to do all the administrative stuff. It's not maybe not the most fun job. And it would also allow us to maybe split it up between a couple different youth to make the workload a little bit easier because we are all super busy. So I think it's more just to lessen like all of the administrative burden on one youth. But those responsibilities would still be done just maybe by more youth. If that makes sense.

Yeah, I would say we're not going to get rid of the leadership structure, but maybe just the formalized leadership structure that the ordinance has so that we can... I will use a coaching cliche because I also come from the schools and I was a high school football coach. You got to play to your personnel more so than your scheme. So sometimes if you have a rock star who can take on the administrative work, like Eileen did this last year for us, phenomenal. But sometimes that may need to be... a group of young people or a different structure together. We just want that flexibility.

Thank you. And a quick clarification, finally. Based on school, there are 20 members based on school. There's only 17. Does that mean that three of the youth members are not currently in a school?

Um, so the way it'll look on that chart, there's, um. If you are both a resident of the city and county and a student in your account, your double count, you're counted there twice. So it won't add those 2 numbers. Don't add up to 40. They will add up to 35 or whatever it is.

Which one? There's three, there's 17 members based on school. So that implies to me either they're not in school or perhaps they are based on residency. But their school would be outside of the city.

Denver? Their school would be outside of the city and county. So like Kent, Denver, for example, is outside of the city. We had a student at a Jeffco school once. Colorado Academy. Yeah, exactly. CA. All right.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you so much, Council Member Flynn. Pro Tem Gonzalez-Guterres.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you all for doing this work. I think this is great. It's always great to have young people leading these types of changes. I've worked in the youth space for a couple of decades, and mostly with kids that are involved in the juvenile justice system and whatnot. I want to thank Bobby for your work in that equity piece, because I know you and I have talked about that. Bobby and I used to work together. Sorry. Um, in human services, and so I appreciate that lens on it. Um, with that said a couple of questions or a couple of things that I wanted to raise up. I am in full support of Councilman Torres's, um, uh, addition and and Santa's addition of, um, adding the confirmation from city council. And so I would. really, really like to see that language in the bill going forward, especially because of the change that has been made in the language on page one at the bottom when it talks about who the commission is advising. The commission is now advising, it says, the mayor, the director of the Office of Children's Affairs, and other officials of the city and county of Denver, which includes, I would imagine, city council, maybe agencies, maybe the clerk and recorder. Other officials can asks ask for your advisement right and so with that said it would be great to have that language and i would fully support it um and i'm curious to what you think about that but also another proposal that i'd like to put on the table because it is called the mayor's youth commission right but what we're talking about here is a change um to you know the who who who's being advised um and adding these other officials and whatnot that perhaps it could be a proposal of the denver's youth commission denver youth commission as opposed to mayor's youth commission since we are now broadening the scope here which is a great thing i think it's definitely needed and so one at one see thoughts about making that change of city council confirmation. This is, as you all know, everybody calls it the sausage-making time in committee. Confirmation by city council, and then two, changing the name from Mayor's Youth Commission to Denver Youth Commission.

Yeah, I, on the 1st point, I, I don't have any, my only concern will be timing and mostly because we're going to be coming up against our program here for this year. So, um, I think conceptually, I'd be totally fine and totally comfortable moving forward with a council confirmation again. Anything that puts our young people in a position where they can look their name up and legislature again, maybe I'm a nerd and I love that kind of stuff, but. I kind of work with the nerds of the city too. So I think that's a cool thing, respectfully, lovingly. I think in terms of changing the name, I don't have any strong initial reaction to it. I think we want this to be an advisory board for the city and county. So yeah, I don't have a strong reaction, but would it be happy to consider that and have another, include that in the conversation that we have leaving here today?

I'll follow up with you all right away after this so that we can talk about that some more because I'm sure you have to go talk to some folks about that. And then the last thing I'll just say because I know you talked about council district representation. So I'm one of the at-large members. So I represent the whole city in hearing that Councilwoman Sandoval might be able to then reach out to the commissioners that are part of her district or represent District 1. i know that you can't necessarily make like at large maybe representation but what i will say is to all of the youth is that you know my door will always be open and by having the confirmation piece that will also help me and my office to be able to reach out to youth across the city um that are that are commissioners so thank you um so much and that's all mr chair

Thank you so much, Pro Tem. Quick comment. Any youth commissioners that are in the audience, please stand if you are able. I just want to make sure we acknowledge you. So any current youth commissioners in the audience? Thank you so much, Juan. Thank you. Any parents or the older leadership folks that are youth that are part of the commission, any of the non-youth leaders that are part of the commission, please stand. If you are able, and parents. I don't have any questions, just kudos. You've demonstrated the value you've provided, not just in the presentation, but in your comments and for everyone that's participated. We are, the value we receive from you and the work that we do is essential. This is an action item and so- So moved. Second. So it's been moved by Cashman, seconded by Pro Tem, I saw.

Sure.

Is there a need for a vote? Seeing none, this will move to the floor. Thank you all so much for your leadership and presentation. We'll take a few seconds for transition for the presentation from Denver Health and for correctional health care services. So Sheriff Diggins. Thank you all.

We did it.

Minister, let me know if you are, is the presentation set, are you ready?

I want to say thank you so much. I know we're doing a little bit of a transition, but we'll turn the floor over to the discussion for the agreement with Denver Health to provide correctional health services. I will turn it over to Sheriff Diggins. Sheriff, if the team doesn't mind going around the table, introducing themselves, and then the presentation is yours. Sheriff Elias Diggins, I'm the Sheriff of the City and County of Denver.

Esther Lee Leach, Director of Policy and Legislation for Department of Safety. Kim Hoffman with the Mayor's Office.

Donna Lin, CEO of Denver Health.

Thank you. Welcome. The floor is yours. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Council. Always good to be before you. Before we begin, I'd like to thank the men and women of the Denver Sheriff's Department, as well as the folks from Denver Health who work in the jails every single day, 24 hours, seven days a week. They always show up. So I just want to make sure that I say thank you to them first. I'll jump right into the presentation so we can get to some questions. I'm going to go over the history of our portion of the contract with Denver Health, talk about contractual services that they provide, their reporting requirements, and also do a brief review of the budget. We entered into the operating agreement in January of 1997. Denver Health, at that time, was already providing services at the county jail as well as the old Patef that some of you may remember, which those services transitioned to the downtown detention center when we moved. That section for the jail services was covered under B3 in the operating agreement. This contract pulls those exact same services out. The other sections, A6 and C7, that we maintain in the operating agreement have to do with Denver Health. particularly at the old Denver General, at the hospital. So whenever someone comes into custody and there's a need for deputies to sit on them or at CCMF, those sections are covered by that portion of the operating agreement. Let me just say, in the same way that Denver Health is the safety net hospital for the rest of the city, they are for the people in custody as well. We have about 23,000 people every single year that come into our custody. Let me say that again. 23,000 people that are booked into our jails, and Denver Health touches every single one of those people and provides services for them as well. We believe that the continuity of care that Denver Health provides for us is extremely important, and they do outstanding work. I'll be the first to tell you they are the best amongst the best. As you all may remember, I'm an auditor and a commissioner for the American Correctional Association. I've been to jails from border to border and coast to coast. When it comes to medical services in incarceration settings, no one compares to Denver Health. Next slide. So we coordinate with Denver Health in our contract to ensure that those health services are provided at both of those facilities. We also coordinate on behavioral health and other support service programs. They also coordinate with us for the purpose of identifying and intervening in suicides and mental health crises and providing stabilization and transitioning people who are in our custody when they leave so folks can continue with Denver Health once they leave our custody by beginning those services with us if they choose to. Denver Health also provides appropriate treatment practices consistent with the standards of care for the opioid epidemic which has hit us very hard. We have a number of people who we have to get stabilized when they come into our care going through withdrawal protocols every single day denver health does that fabulously next slide denver health complies with and meets the standards of the national commission on correctional health care those are 52 rigid standards that denver health has to be they get audited every single year on paper and three every three years we have commissioners that come in from out of state to review their medical practices medical practitioners who get sent in by the NCCHC to see if Denver Health is up to par. We've been accredited completely by the NCCHC. In fact, I just received another certificate today. They also collaborate to maintain behavioral health management teams with us to work side by side with Dr. Johnson and our crisis response team. They credential all of their health services personnel and apply with the training requirements that we have for them as well. So, in addition to the medical training that they have, they have to be trained on security protocols. We have to make sure they understand what it means to work in the jail for every single person that works for them. Denver Health also provides annual TB screening for our sworn staff. and other people that come into frequent custody with people who are working for us. And they also review best practices for onboarding requirements annually to make sure that we're staying up to snuff with that. Next slide. You all know we have a general medical administrator, Rodney Brown, and she oversees Denver Health's contract for us. She oversees the reporting that they do. So every single month, they provide statistical reports on health services to us. They have a schedule of health care personnel, which can be provided to us upon request. And if there is a communicable disease, MRSA, hepatitis, during COVID, we work side by side with Denver Health to manage our facilities. I'd like to highlight the fact that we had... thousands of people who were at our custody during COVID. We did not have one person that passed away due to the great work of Denver Health. Unfortunately, we lost two deputy sheriffs during that time, but we did not lose a person in custody to COVID because of the great work. Denver Health also provides monthly invoices, which Ronnie Brown and the chief financial officer and her team for safety over Across the street go through and I'll go through the last slide, which is the budget. The dispensing machine is to automate the pill dispensing that is done for all those people that are in custody is something that we've been trying to do for a number of years working very hard. We didn't help to achieve that. There is. Three numbers for personnel, 21 million for 2026, 22 and 27, and 23 and 28. 10% administrative fee for $2 million for a total of $24 million, plus professional insurance for $2.5 million. Total for both of those years is $55 million. That is it for my presentation. We will stand for questions. Donna is at the table to answer questions about the operating agreement. Tim is here to answer questions on behalf of the Mayor's Office for the process of RFP.

You weren't joking. You weren't joking when you said you're going to be fast. I appreciate that. So we have two members in the queue. We have Councilmember Torres and then Councilmember Sandoval.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you so much. Actually, I don't have questions about the content of the items. So, Tim, I probably have questions for you about the actual contract itself. Oh, thank you. I was hiding. Hiding behind heads. Thank you so much. So from what I'm understanding and hearing, this was extracted as a component of the operating agreement. That is negotiated with. So, my question is, how does it come through as a contract with the Department of safety? Which sounds to me like a new contract. Um, and and why did it circumvent knowing. We have a relationship with Denver Health. You provide exactly what the jail needs, but what are our fiscal rules say about establishing a contract of any size with any vendor? And why is it not a new operating agreement with the sheriff's department? Like, just talk to me about the structure and I hate to be a stickler about just like the framework, but those are my only questions.

yeah absolutely uh thank you councilwoman uh tim hoffman in the mayor's office so our uh our fiscal rules in terms of how we select new contracts go through rfp or not are governed by executive order eight um in this case when you look at executive order eight and it's um 4.4.2 and then it would be um sorry i'm just trying to find it um need an assist from city attorneys or no it is oh here it is it's 4.4.2.6 the sheriff talked about continuity of service and so under the theory of this being within the operating agreement since i believe as far back as 1998 so we're coming up on 30 years every single year that has been part of the negotiation within the operating agreement the continuity of service with denver health and the sheriff department is how this contract when it was pulled out of the operating agreement negotiated as a standalone contract was not put out to rfp because of that continuity of service that denver health has been providing for that many years

Okay. I need to look at section 4.4.2. So I'll read through that while you're taking other questions. But I appreciate that. Can you tell me a little bit more about why it's not an operating agreement with the Sheriff's Department?

So that I would get even more over my skis in terms of giving you kind of legal advice.

I think it's more of a practical.

I apologize. Do you mind reintroducing yourself just for the record?

Donna Lynn, CEO of Denver Health. I think it's more of a practical matter. We negotiate the operating agreement with DDPHE. This is outside. DDPHE is not our partner in the context of the jails, and so the relationship has always been with the sheriff and his team. So I think that's... I think both sides thought it was just easier to split it into two. The other concern I think we have around an RFP, I'm just going to be frank, is that is a very long process. I know. I know. And with a lot of disruption, which I think we both have real concerns about the disruption as I mentioned last week to the people who are in the jail. And quite frankly, some of the costs that might arise, if there was such a transition, we're not adverse to an RFP, but. Quite frankly, the discussion that we've had with the city that's been ongoing around recovering both our wage increases, the amount of practice insurance, and the indirects was not one that we could just keep kicking down the road for an RFP process. If we were to have an RFP and we were to bid, we would have put some of our true costs, which are not even reflected in this arrangement that we have with the city, although we're very happy that we were able to reach an agreement.

Just out of curiosity, because there are other contracts that the city has with Denver Health that are not part of the operating agreement. Are those negotiated just with you all, or are you responding to an RFP in those cases?

Those are just... negotiated with us, but Stephanie stood up, which means she's going to say more.

Yeah, I just want to make something clear. Stephanie, do you mind? Oh, yeah, sorry. Stephanie Steiner, Government Community Relations for Denver Health. So one thing to clear up, DDPHE is our city partner that we do the majority of our operating agreement negotiations with. However, Each of the separate sections are negotiated each year by that agency with the city, right? So that's why jail already has or the jail medical already has a line item in the sheriff's budget each year for it, right? So while it lives under the operating agreement, it does not get funded through DDPHE. Then secondly, When it comes to the pulling it out for RFP process, right? The contract that we pulled out was still the same language. It just was updating the current condition of the contract based off of the budget request that we needed. Yeah. Okay. Thank you for that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Council Member Torres. Council Member Sandoval and then Council Member Cashman.

Thank you. So I appreciate Denver Health and all the work you do, and I appreciate the sheriff. I just feel like this needed more clarity. because I'm a stickler for the rules. And to see that this is a contract when the other one is an operating agreement, it just didn't feel right. So I just have to say that for the record. And when I look at all of the language, I got what was pulled over and what's the new language. 75% of this is new language. It really is. Everything in the black is the older language, and that's not the majority of what's in here. And I understand why. I'm not trying to say I don't understand why. There's things in here that I really, I think give clarity. I just want to say for the record that when these type of things happen, we should be notified in advance and we should be explained thoroughly why we're not going out to a competitive bid process because any other agency we would be doing this. And what was my concern is that this was with the Department of Safety and we always negotiate the Denver Health with DDPHE. So it's moving something completely into a different item, which you all pay for. I understand that the operating agreement gets sourced from different areas. I understand that. But now this is a contract with the Department of Safety, and the operating agreement is an operating agreement to operate. So I just have some concern on process and even on interpretation. I was just perusing Executive Order 8, so I can understand the interpretation of our city attorneys. I just probably will say it, I just don't agree with it. And I understand these services and to your point, Donalyn, I understand RFPs take a really long time. We've been going out with RFPs for a host for our sheltering system and it is a really challenging process. There's no doubt about that. So my question is, is the 10% admin fee, is that, when I've been looking at other admin fees, that's bigger than any other admin fees that we have, administration fees for other contracts. So how did we get to the 10%? Just talk to me about that negotiation process of the 10%, and then I would like to understand the 3% escalator, and I understand that's for merit increases for the personnel. And I'll just say, Unless it's a collective bargaining agreement, I've never seen 3% in a contract for merit increases. That's what you do for a collective bargaining agreement. And that's why I believe an operating agreement would have been a better tool for this than a contract. Because of the escalator, you're guaranteeing for two years that people get a merit increase. And I will say something. My staff did not get a merit increase this year. And my staff is not guaranteed a merit increase next year. No city employee outside of police, sheriff, and fire got a merit increase this year. outside of police, sheriff and fire in 2027, no one is looking for a merit increase in Denver. And so again, I'm concerned with the tool, the instrument that we're using this for, for the 3% escalator, which would have been an agreement to say, hey, like a collective bargaining agreement, you can guarantee 3% across the board. So two questions. A, how is the 10% negotiated? And three, and second, where do we have another contract that guarantees merit increase outside of a collective bargaining agreement? That seems outside of a contract.

I'll defer to the Donna.

Okay. The 10% was based on actually several other contracts that we looked at with the city. And so I, I'm not at liberty to say, maybe Stephanie knows who they were, but other vendors that the city uses for services actually found even some that were higher than 10%.

Yeah. And actually Denver health's federal indirect cost is 33%. So when we originally were talking about indirects when we were doing negotiations for the operating agreement, we talked about escalating from a 3% up to a 10% because in the operating agreement, there is no indirects for anything else. And so when they went through negotiations, the mayor's office, our legal team and she was gonna see if she could figure out which contracts that they mirrored from the city to get them to the 10%. We feel like if we're 33% on the federal side, 10% was a good way to balance out making sure that our indirect costs, a lot of the things that we provide in the jail, so we don't bill but we do do prescriptions and we do refill on the other end, those are not covered in our day-to-day services. So there is a lot of indirect cost. 10% is not gonna cover the totality of our indirect costs. And then one other thing, on the operating agreement too, when they negotiated in 1997, there were different levels of care, right? A is a core service. The city said, we have to have this service in order to continue the healthcare, right? B, which is what the sheriff, the jail contract is, was B3. B3 is a non-core service. So it was a contract that was negotiated between the agencies. So that's where the operating agreement gets so complicated, right? Because there's just different weeds and pathways through it. But jail is considered a non-core service, which is why it makes sense to pull it out and make it its own entity. And the 3% for the raises piece, This position is really hard to fill and it's very costly to hire. This is another part of the indirect cost, right? It's very hard to hire these individuals to work in this environment and not be able to get the 3% raise that the other nurses and folks at our hospital. So it was really about fairness for those employees to ensure that there was a pathway that we could keep having a competitive rate because if they continue to fall back, we will not be able to fill those positions.

And that's my concern. Let me clarify one thing. Hold on, can I? For 2026, which is what? you know, your comparison to your staff and to others. This doesn't cover 2026. This covers 2027 and 2028. And traditionally, two things. One, we took a $5 million cut from the city for 2026, which meant that anything that we did for our employees, we had to absorb. And traditionally, the city actually has, you have to go back and look at the years. Sometimes they've provided us for these services, additional money so that we could fund raises and sometimes they have not. So we frequently have had to reach into our pockets to provide these increases. And when I say into our pockets, that means we're taking money away from other services that we should be providing to the people of Denver. So just as... The city thinks of us as a contractor, and I made that point last week, which I don't think of us as a contractor. I think of us as part of the city. But we do have an obligation to try to find the people that are willing to work in very, very difficult situations. who, you know, as the sheriff said, 23,000 intake exams. Lots of work throughout the course of someone's stay in the jails. Let me just clarify.

I'm not concerned with the service. I'm concerned with the process. Let me say that again. I appreciate the service. I'm not talking about the service, Donna. I'm really not. I'm talking about the process from the administration and not informing city council that's the approval body for this and clarifying it. It has nothing to do with Denver Health. And if we're sitting down and we're negotiating a 10% admin fee and we're negotiating 3% escalator for merit increases, that feels like a new contract. That is not in the current language. It's not. I've looked at it. You know I study my language. And so then therefore, I don't understand how Executive Rule 8 works in this situation because we are drawing new things into this. And I don't know if anyone else does that. I don't know what kind of services are out there. I would not want to ruin this relationship. I'm not talking on Denver's health side. I'm not talking about the contracting side. I'm talking about the fact that the administration made this and now we're having to prove it and I was on consent. I didn't have a chance to talk about it at committee and I didn't get a chance to understand how we got here. And I really like to understand how I get somewhere when I approve something, 100%. And it's a two-year contract. What are we gonna do in two more years? Are we gonna go out for an RFP? Are we gonna just let this sit? Are we gonna have another escalator? And I'm gonna keep questioning, is a contract the correct tool to get this outcome instead of an agreement? because of the pay to the employees, the 3%, and the way that the contract is written. It's very different than the other contracts I read, and I read the contract thoroughly. So I just want to say for clarity, I'm not here to say, don't appreciate your services. I appreciate your services. I feel your employees should get paid. I understand it's a super challenging job to fill. And at the same time, these jobs in Denver are hard to fill. We're not filling them, we're letting people go, and none of our employees are guaranteed a raise. And so when I'm voting on something like that, it's hard for me to look at my staff and say, I'm guaranteeing someone else a raise, and I can't guarantee you. It's really hard. It puts me in a very uncomfortable situation. So let me just say to Tim and the mayor's office, Please don't do this to us again. It doesn't feel good. This is a weird contract. for numerous reasons. I won't even call them all out right now. And I wish it would have been made clear to me what we were doing, and we didn't. I never got a briefing from the administration. I got a briefing from Denver Health. I never got a briefing from the administration that is asking us to do this. That's my problem. And I just want to air it very clearly. That's my concern. Because then when I get questions, I don't want to do committee work on the floor. I'm really trying not to do that. So if this could have been way early, I mean, it's August and this is for 2027, so we're codifying this really early on. It could have been really easy to come to all of us and say, hey, I just wanna give everyone the heads up. We are taking this out of the operating agreement. This is how we're doing it. This is our rationale why we're doing it. This is our reasoning for doing it. And you can discuss it at committee, but we feel very strongly in this determination from a lawyer looking at Executive Order 8. So I just want to say that clearly and I understand that the issues that you are dealing with, Sheriff Diggins, I really do and I'm not trying to be combative. I'm about process and I think you all know me well enough to understand this is about process and that's my concern. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Councilmember Sandoval.

Councilmember Cashman. Thank you. Thank you very much. Just a detail. I'm assuming, and we all know not to assume, but this applies to both in jail and care for the Sheriff's Department at Denver Health.

No, I think that's what we were trying to clarify. This is the care inside of the two jails. Strictly the jails. And CCMF, which is our inpatient unit where patients are often transferred, heart attack, pregnancy, whatever, is still done separately.

And why is that? Since it's a jail related service, is there a particular reason?

The CCMF is an embed in the hospital itself, and it was identified as a core service. And so before, so the core service has to have its own set of negotiation. The sheriff does provide a. a sheriff in CCMF, and they were all in custody. And that CCMF not only houses Denver residents, but any other prisoners throughout the system that need that long-term care.

Yeah, it actually does make sense. Thank you so much. Thank you, Councilmember Cashman. Councilmember Torres.

Thank you. Okay, so 4.2.6 makes sense to me. That wasn't the reason we were given as we were given before. So that, I think, is what Councilmember Torres is...

It's been a long day. It's been a long day.

Councilmember Sandoval is mentioning just in terms of we need that communication because otherwise we go spinning off into, well, why doesn't it follow a known protocol, right? So continuity of services, this is a two-year contract. So we need to be thinking now about what happens at the end of that two years. So that's what I just wanna prime for you all. I don't know what that is. If it's not an RFP, tell us why not and what the protocol will be if it's gonna continue as a direct contract with the Denver Sheriff's Department. So that's my only ask. And I'll make a motion for this to come out of committee.

I'll second.

No other comments from anyone else? Just wanna make sure. It's been moved and seconded. Do we need thumbs up? Perfect. This action item is good for the floor. Thank you so much for your presentation. We have four items on consent that have not been pulled off. And with that, the meeting has been adjourned.

Thank you.