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.

So it's like more time.

Good morning and welcome to the Health and Safety Committee meeting for December 10th.

My name is Daryl Watson, and I'm honored to serve as your chair of the Health and Safety Committee as well as a city council member representing all of the flying district nine.

We have one action item this morning and a briefing.

But before we roll into uh the briefing and the action item, why don't we go around the room and have introductions?

I do believe we have uh council members that are online, so why don't we start with them first?

Council President and Councilmember Lewis.

If you're there, I'll turn it over to Councilmember.

Is Council Council President or Lewis on?

I'm sorry, it's anything.

Council President Pro Tem, I see you.

You're on.

I'll have you do introductions and we're going around the table.

All right, good morning.

Uh Diana Romero Campbell, Southeast Denver, District 4.

All right, then we start to our right with Council Member.

Uh good morning, uh Kevin Plynn, Southwest Denver's District 2.

Good morning, Amanda Sawyer, District 5.

And can I just say, Lisa, I love your suit today.

It's so perfectly holiday.

I'm bringing the holidays.

Thank you.

I live it.

Uh good morning, everyone.

Uh Senator Gonzalski.

Can I one of your council members at large?

I did like your suit yesterday.

I didn't get a tense to tell you that it's really.

I know.

You're the best dressed one around here.

I'm like I said, trying to bring the spirit.

Uh Paul Cashman, South Denver District 6.

I'm dressed for a funeral, but don't uh don't have one do it 10 thing.

Um, I say, Sarah Barody, your others, the council member at large.

Uh thank you all so much.

And once the uh council members who are sign up for virtual uh show up, we will announce them.

It appears that council president.

I think you might be on.

Um I wanted to make sure we all pause for you.

Thank you, Mandy Shannon, North West Denver District 1.

Thank you.

And Jamie Torres, West Denver District 3.

Thank you.

Thank you all.

We have one action item.

It's a voting item uh today on the agenda.

It's 252032 from Department of Finance and Lisa Lumley.

I'll turn it over to you for introductions and the floor is yours.

Thank you.

Good morning, Lisa Lumely, Director of Real Estate.

And Greg Morrow, Director of Community Corrections, Department of Safety.

So we are here this morning for a proposed acquisition of Independence House, which is located at 4101 North Pecos Street.

So I'm gonna ask Greg to just kind of go over some background.

Good morning, Mr.

Chair, members of council.

Um as Lisa mentioned, I'm gonna go ahead and provide some background in the business case for the proposed acquisition.

I think that most, if not all, are extremely familiar with sort of where we're at with community corrections and sort of the transition, but I'll walk through this quickly.

Back in 2019, there was a policy decision to begin to shift us away from solely relying on the private sector as service providers for community correction services.

Specifically, that decision was intended to divest from two large for-profit prison operators, GEO and Core Civic.

Um that set into motion a number of actions.

Uh the first was the actual closure of six of our residential programs, representing about 500 beds.

And when I say beds, that really means in placement opportunity for someone who is exiting incarceration.

Um at the same time, during that transition, there was the formation of a community corrections advisory group, and that diverse group came up with a set of recommendations.

One of the recommendations from the work was that the city should explore the feasibility to purchase or lease some of the community correction sites that were closing, and that really has its roots in that the ability to zone a community corrections program is pretty limited, not only in our city but elsewhere in the state as well.

Um, since that time there have been three purchases of Core Civic and Geo properties by the city, um Dahlia Columbine and Thule Hall by the Geo Group, as well as uh lease acquisition for the site at 570 West 44th.

Um I think folks remember this slide.

This visually sort of illustrates where we are in this transition.

Um you can see that today we're roughly at 36% of our capacity from 2019.

What's not clearly represented here, and I just want to mention that while we had a strategic divestment strategy from JU and Core Civic, we've also lost unfortunately other providers along the way.

So that's what's brought us down to that all-time low of 270 votes.

So what was unplanned, but also why we're here today is that our last service provider that represents the private sector independence house owned and operated by Mr.

Manny Rodriguez has indicated that he wishes to sort of move away from the state contract and exit this space.

He is a pillar of community correction services, not only in our city but statewide, and so it's a tremendous loss, and we're sorry to see him go.

And we you know are here today to sort of talk about what the future holds.

Um what Lisa will talk to more in a moment is the acquisition of the site at 41st and PECOS that currently provides services to 75 men who are exiting incarceration.

In terms of the strategic bed capacity, we need to maintain that or would like to maintain that as part of our portfolio of community correction services moving forward.

If the acquisition is approved by council, then we will be able to maintain the 270-ish bed mark where we sit today and continue to move towards that 360 number in the future.

What is aligned here is Mr.

Rodriguez has shared with the city and then has been in conversations that if the acquisition goes through, he is committed to operating the program through the end of calendar year 26 or early 27, so that we have time to bring the Dahlia facility that is currently under a renovation project online.

Absent the ability for him to do that or the acquisition of this site, we don't have anywhere for the individuals currently in placement, let alone the individuals waiting to come.

I've shared with each of you in the briefing sort of the approximate numbers where we sit today.

I just checked this morning.

We're at 120 individuals who are waiting to come to community corrections, both from the Department of Corrections and been referred by our court system.

Um 50 of those individuals remain in the in the jail system, putting additional pressures on our sheriff's department and the challenges they face around staffing and whatnot.

Unfortunately, our wait time is almost six months now from either the sentence date or the acceptance date for placement.

So that remains a pain point, despite all the the great efforts to sort of recapture some of our capacity.

This slide is somewhat redundant to what I just said, but I'll repeat it.

The alignment would be that Mr.

Rodriguez and Independence House would continue to operate Pecos until we could open the Dahlia facility.

Um then the real estate transaction would move forward and we will be back on course for our targeted capacity of 360.

I'll turn it back over to you.

So as Greg said, uh right now it's serving 75 participant participants right now in the building.

Um there is a current service agreement with Manny again.

Um what we're doing, we're here.

This seems a little early for what real estate would normally do on coming this early.

The intention would be to close when the service agreement um expires, which right now is June, but the anticipation would be if approved, extending it through December, correct?

Correct.

And so what we want to do is align the closing to the end of next year.

Um Mr.

Rodriguez has asked that we do this together so that he does know that he has an exit strategy in place.

So the transaction terms would be the parcel is approximately 25,000 square feet.

The building is 70,0099 square feet.

Again, it's currently being used, so it's active.

Um purchase price is $8 million dollars.

Right now we have the capital improvement fund, uh, four million is in that in 2025, and then we have another four million that is in the 2026 budget.

And then actually I'll stop here for one moment.

What I'll just follow up with Greg um to say is that while we'll have the full year, we'll still have our normal due diligence period on the front end.

I anticipate that we will have some basic life safety and AD improvements we may need to make.

We've seen that with the other locations.

Excuse me.

And so the goal would be having the facility assessment completed in time that we can submit for 2027 CIP.

I can tell you right now.

Well, I cannot speak to this building, but based on what we've seen with the other buildings, Greg mentioned that we've acquired are normally we are talking some fire suppression.

Some BDA things, what we've seen in the last two buildings, it ranged from 250,000 up to about 400,000.

So again, I can't speak to this till we get the facility assessment going, but that's been the range so far of what we've dealt with with the other buildings.

So with that, we are coming for approval for the 8,025,000.

And I'll just pause for a minute.

The 25,000, just as a reminder, real estate is now intentionally carrying in our maximum contract amounts.

The amount that would be part of our closing costs, title, things like that, so that it's all in one number so that you all see that.

The purchase and sell agreement again would be between the city and county of Denver and Jose M.

Rodriguez for 4101 North Paco Street.

And with that, we'll ask if you have any questions.

Thank you so much.

Uh Lisa Lonely, thank you so much.

Um Greg Morrow.

We'll open a queue before we start.

Uh, Council President wanted to give you an opportunity to share any comments or ask questions first, and then we'll go to the queue.

Thank you, Councilmember Wacton.

Um, thank you all.

I know this site, uh, live on our side.

Um, this site for a really long time.

Independence has been an important um part of our correction community, and just want to say thank you, Manny, to you and your entire family for the work that you've done.

Um, I don't have any questions at this time, so I'll wait and refer to our colleagues to hear what they have to say.

Um, but I do understand his need to have insurances at this time for this transaction.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council President.

And and for our producers, um, we're we're having some technical video difficulties with the video for council president, it's fine for our the comments, but uh I'm certain if the council president comes back on, there'll be video, so thank you for letting us know.

Um council um member Sawyer and then council member Flynn are in the queue.

Thank you.

Um I don't have any questions about this, except I just want to make sure I understand where the funding source is.

It is CIP.

It is gonna be CIP, correct?

Okay, great.

Um and when we were looking at a purchase of an additional uh an a different building a while ago, a month ago, maybe we were told that there's about seven million dollars in contingency sitting in that CIP right now.

Um, question about whether like we don't know what we don't know, and we don't see actuals, right?

So I can't tell you as of today what the balance is in our CIP fund.

Do we have the dollars to cover in our CIP fund to make sure that this 8,025,000 is?

We do, okay.

Um, I can confirm that.

Like we do.

Great, perfect.

Thank you.

Um, just needed to know that.

Thank you very much.

And I just wanted to acknowledge both of you.

Greg took on an extraordinary amount of work in 2019 when we decided to move away from um uh private uh contractors running our community corrections program, and I know that it has been a really long six years with a lot of unanticipated and unexpected um challenges that came forward, and I just want to say thank you to you because you have done an incredible job in the face of adversity that none of us could have anticipated.

Um, and I think that you just need to be acknowledged publicly for that.

So thank you for all that you have done.

And um, Lisa, I also want to acknowledge you because you have pulled together everything you possibly could to work with a really difficult situation to preserve the number of beds that we are going to be able to preserve, which is not enough, but at least we're at you know in the 300 to 400 range.

Um so I just want to acknowledge you as well and say thank you because I know that that was a ton of work to get that done over the last six years.

I'm very supportive of this.

Um, I think that we should be so appreciative of Mr.

Rodriguez and all of the work that he has done in the community, and um, you know, this is not an opportunity that that we can let go, so really just supportive of it.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Sawyer, Councilmember Flynn.

Uh, thanks, Sir Chair, and um I want to echo what council president said, and councilwoman Sawyer about the work that Manny has been doing uh all along.

He still has a uh federal contract for community corrections for a facility in my district, and it has always been an asset to the community down there, and I know he's gonna transition out of that as well at some point.

I talked to him somewhat about that.

Uh, but I want to thank Manny for for all that work, and truly it's it is time for that old Marine to retire and enjoy the rest of his life with a career.

Um, Greg, can you talk a little bit, or Lisa, about the schedule at Dahlia and getting that up and ready in time, knowing how projects can be affected by scope creep, by unexpected uh things that we find in doing our renovations.

Uh, how confident are we that we can make the transfer when it has when it comes time to do that?

Let me make it.

Yeah, go ahead.

Councilman, great question, and certainly have tremendous confidence in our Dottie partners.

I mean, they are working diligently to get this project kind of started and finished on time.

They understand the importance of the transition of a live building into that existing one.

And as you know, right, we don't know what we don't know during our renovation process.

So we will be sure to communicate progress as we move along.

If the acquisition goes through, we're gonna have to come back and talk to counsel about the extension of the independent independence house operating agreement in early summer.

So we'll be sure to provide an update then and tell you where we are in terms of target dates to roll over at the end of the year.

And what what's the bed capacity of Ballion?

Remind me.

It's up to 90, up to 90, and then an independence house that's 75.

Okay, and looking at the chart uh since our um decision uh that I was one of the no groups on it, by the way.

But we used to have 700 and around 750 or so beds, and right now we're operating what is that 250?

270, 270?

But you say we only have a hundred and how many waiting?

120, 120 waiting.

What happened?

Because we used to have people in 700 some beds, but now with 270 in the system and 100 and what you just said, which just blew through my mind.

Um that's well below where we used to be in 20 up to 2019.

Our is community corrections not being recommended as often as it used to be.

I mean, I'm surprised that there are not more people waiting, and we're not looking more diligently to set our target above the 450 that's our target now, and back up to where it used to be.

There's a lot in that question, but let me let me talk.

It's mystifying as I'm sure you understand.

I the simple answer is fewer people are being afforded this opportunity when they come home from incarceration to Denver.

That's the reality.

How that is showing itself is sure.

The courts have to be more selective when they're offering an alternative sentence to prison and using community corrections.

They're well aware of the wait list.

They're well aware that folks will spend up to six months in jail before they get programming.

Individuals in DOC who have ties to Denver and would normally have come through the re-entry program here, either aren't getting that opportunity or having to look elsewhere, maybe to a neighboring judicial district.

We also during this transition lost a lot of our inpatient residential treatment.

So in my district.

I think perhaps it could be a future stated goal of 750.

Right now we've adjusted that downward, as you know, from previous conversations to be realistic.

And to get us back to that number that would accommodate the wait list and give us operating capacity in the programs as we begin to really lean into trying to restore some of those specialized treatment services.

We have strategic desire to bring back an intensive residential treatment program, the dual diagnosis program.

So those that's where we want to lean as we sort of stabilize this capacity.

And that particular one was not a result of any of our votes or decisions, that was CU.

Correct.

I don't know if you can answer this then.

Do you know when the courts are determining or DOC is determining placement?

Are they taking into consideration that we don't have beds and they're denying it to people who otherwise might qualify and benefit from it?

Is that concerns?

Yeah.

So the process for somebody who is leaving DOC is when they're eligible to be referred to community corrections, they identify their parole destination, which county they want to release from.

Doesn't always mean the county they were convicted from, but it's where they have ties, where they you know have employment, things like that.

So they will submit that application.

So I think what's happening as they folks incarcerated understand it's taking six plus months in this district to come back.

They are looking at alternative plans.

Um I certainly won't try to share what's going on in a judge's mind, but I think they are being more selective.

They're probably keeping people on probation that they would have sentenced to community corrections earlier, they might be sentencing them to jail, or they might be having to sentence them to DOC because of the limitations.

Those are the continued consequences of not having enough capacity.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh thank you, Councilmember Flynn.

Uh, Councilmember Torres, anyone.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um thank you both so much.

And um, Manny was part of the committee that was convened to help figure out how do we um walk ourselves out of um Core Civic and and GEO, so I appreciate his partnership and helping really kind of um uh create the path uh for us to follow.

So um thank you for this, and I also agree uh keeping the facility which is already zoned and already kind of uh being utilized in this space is really important.

Um, one of the questions um I have you mentioned in my briefing that uh the loss of the arts contract weight was a big impact on Independence House, and that was um the pro the medical provider or the um moving out of the Medicaid system.

Um, is that how big of an impact is that statewide um for that to no longer be an offering?

Thanks, Councilman Torres.

The um so the arts contract is referring to the programs operated by CU Denver, um known as Pier 1 for men and Haven for women.

It is approximately 125 um therapeutic community intensive um treatment vents for individuals with significant and severe substance.

You said 135, 125, 130, their capacity ebbed and float over the years.

So when those options went away, it continues to put strain on other parts of the system.

There are no more therapeutic community beds in the state community correction system when those closed.

And when we talk about a therapeutic community bed, we have a folks are assessed when they come into community corrections, and one of the uh outcomes of that assessment is what level of substance misuse treatment they might have.

And if you think about it on a linear scale from no treatment all the way up into a therapy community is the most intensive dosage type of treatment one can receive, that option is gone in quite honestly in the community correction system and in our state.

So where that lands is the next level down is intensive residential treatment and 90-day closed program.

So those beds are being maximized.

And I'm not saying that folks aren't in treatment.

We just can't always properly get them into the right treatment because everyone that comes into community corrections, if they have a treatment need, it's being met in some way.

So we're getting folks into whether it's mental health, substance abuse, other types of treatment, but we just would like to have all the options available to us.

Yeah, definitely.

Was that because CU decided to get out of that, or because Medicaid changed in a particular way?

It's a combination of sort of the changing sort of sustainability model of community corrections.

Um there's a lot of conversation about the state reimbursements and are they adequate to cover the costs, especially for these intensive treatment programs.

It's great that Medicaid can sort of either be a bridge or pay for that.

Um I think arts was challenged in many ways.

I mean honestly, the two years of the pandemic and operating at reduced capacities really hurt programs, and I think that layered into the Arts decision.

It certainly impacted the program that Councilman Flynn referenced, which was the dual diagnosis program in Council District 10.

So that's why that program closed.

Um arts has pivoted to providing services to not exclusively a justice-involved population, and they do work with folks who have Medicaid to pay for that, but it's a much smaller program, and so the end result for all of that for justice-involved clients coming through the community corrections system.

That treatment options gone.

Okay, all right.

Thank you for that.

Um, I'll also mention in terms of the reduced goal, the goal that we have is 450 beds.

Um, one I want to say when when we convened that committee after council voted the contracts down, one of the things that you led was kind of a a true assessment of how many beds do we really need based on how they're occupied because they're not occupied full calendar year one person, right?

Someone may leave mid-year, somebody may come in one year, and and and so you you I think provided a much more accurate assessment of how many actual positions or spots do we need for the people that are coming in and out, so we don't have basically vacancy um for too long a period of time, and it reduced I think how many beds we needed overall because we were using them better or actually counting them better, I think was part of that.

So I think you had a huge role in us figuring out well how much how many do we actually need um in order to run this.

How do we or what do you envision being needed to get to 450?

And the 450, you know, I think once we if the this purchase goes through and you know we play this forward, you know, to the point that we can reopen the PECO site, we'll be in that 360, 370 range.

I think one, the 450 target provides us some vacancy within the programs.

You know, there are situations where you don't want to have a full program for a variety of reasons.

So I think you know at that point we'll we'll assess.

And I don't mean to be elusive in my answer, but the reality is the system constantly is changing and morphing.

Um, you know, coming out of the pandemic, right?

Prison populations decreased, they're back on the rise.

Uh, the thing that's concerning is if you all are familiar with what's happening at the state, they are really looking at the prison population projections and seeing, you know, that they're out of room in the prison system, right?

DOC's vacancy rate is below three percent, which is already triggered statutory um factors into place to try to reduce that population, community corrections is seen as a viable option, right?

Because it allows people to return home in a structured way where they receive treatment.

So, as those populations change, our sort of anticipated bed number changes.

So I it's a moving target.

Okay, all right.

Thank you, both, so much.

Thanks, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you.

Uh Councilmember Torres.

Uh, Council Member Cashman.

Yeah, thank you, uh, Mr.

Chair.

Thanks for the presentation.

Um I was gonna make a bad joke about Greg because involving compliments.

I don't want them getting a big head, you know, but he has done spectacular work.

And I just want to recommend to my colleagues if you haven't taken a tour of our community correction facilities.

Um I had the pleasure of uh taking my staff to uh Project Elevate up on Carney and uh the Moore Center uh on West 44th, talking to not only the providers but also uh clients at each location, and it just really broadened my understanding of what goes on in these facilities as far as how extremely beneficial they are to the clients.

They're not just being warehoused, you know.

The services provided are are life-saving and life expanding for them.

So uh whether it's those two facilities or others, I would would recommend you take the time and uh uh let Mr.

Morrow and his team take you around.

We spoke with I think service providers is an empowerment out at Project Elevate, which is a women's facility, and then Second Chance Center uh up at the uh Moore Center uh men's facility uh really really uh good use of time.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh thank you so much, Councilmember Cashman and Greg.

If I may, I just want to take a moment.

First of all, thank you all for the compliments, and I'll accept them on behalf of the entire safety team and quite honestly the staff that work in the facilities, right?

They're there on weekends, holidays at three in the morning providing those services.

So I'll be glad to share that with my team and thank all of you, right?

From general services to real estate, a lot of city departments were affected in this transition, and we've had nothing but support.

Um, and again, Councilman Cashman, thank you for taking the time and to visit the programs.

I do my best to talk about the important work that goes on here, but the true way to see it is to visit.

So we are available anytime anybody wants to come and see.

If I might add, it was it was so interesting, Mr.

Chair.

Uh uh talking with the director uh out at uh uh Project Elevate, I mentioned that uh I had been to uh a place out in San Diego, uh Las Colinas, which is a women's facility that we visited with the sheriff and and the team when the sheriff uh Diggins was considering uh returning in-person visitation, and the uh director shared with me that she had done time at Las Colinas, you know, and that uh was again that the whole concept of uh lived experience and its importance in uh service delivery, uh, was was a great part of that discussion.

So uh yeah, thank you.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Cashman.

I want to look around the room and then also virtually if there are any council members that have any final comments.

I'll make a quick comment and I'll ask for a seconded motion uh since this is an action item.

I'll give uh council president and council president for time just a quick second, see if anyone wants to jump in.

Seeing no one at this point, uh I just wanted to say to uh Greg Morrow and um Lisa Lumley seeing some motion on my messenger.

Um thank you so much uh both for not just the the presentation but the the coordinated approach and really the thoughtful process of ensuring that there is there will be a space um if this passes through uh council or folks to actually move to while this construction is is ongoing, that we're not reducing uh more meds um within this process.

Um I had the pleasure uh um uh Greg to uh visit uh both Project Elevate and Moore Center and um really to sit with um uh residents there and listen to them.

And I know the importance of the uh the work that all the folks uh um both uh in both residences, what they do and how they uh impact communities, and more importantly, how they allow folks to come back to the communities that they love that they haven't been a part of um and be successful in um coming back to their homes and their families.

So thank you both for your good work.

Um, and so with that, um, do I have a motion and a second?

Moved, seconded.

Do we need a vote?

Thumbs up.

We look good.

Thank you so much, team.

And we look forward to seeing you on the floor.

Yep, yep, that was soy impaired.

I should have said that.

Okay.

That was very believed.

And so we have a transition for a briefing from the Office of the Independent Monitor.

So we have monitor Lizbeth Perez Castle.

If you think the and the monitor is here, it'll take just a few minutes as we transition.

Hello, good morning.

Good morning.

Thank you so much.

I know Anne will help you with setting up the presentation, and once you're ready to roll, the floor is yours, Monitor.

Okay.

Great.

And then you can just navigate with the arrows and it will pop up there.

These arrows.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Good morning, everybody.

Good morning.

I'm Elizabeth Fettis Castle and the Denver Independent Monitor.

I apologize ahead of time.

I am suffering from a wicked head cold.

My ears are clogged.

And tissues are my best friend right now.

So if I don't hear you, I'll just ask you to speak up and um forgive my.

Thank you.

Sorry, you don't feel that.

So thank you for inviting us here today.

The purpose of um I think of this meeting today is we, the Office of the Independent Monitor publishes reports, both an annual and semi-annual report or annual reports are published on March 15th or by March 15th of every year and cover the entire previous year.

The semi-annual reports cover uh information about um the departments and discipline from January through June.

So this is kind of a snapshot of the year so far.

But the full evaluation of the entire year and that information will be included in our annual report.

Uh key OIM responsibilities.

We monitor and make recommendations on complaint investigations and disciplinary findings.

We monitor officer involved shooting and in custody death investigations.

We make recommendations for improving policies, practices, and training.

We conduct outreach to community and law enforcement, and we cultivate community member officer dialogue through mediation.

What this semi-annual report does is address and highlights issues of importance and the work done by the OIM in the first six months of this year.

We will start with the first part of our report was which is generally a policy overview.

We have addressed this year in addition to many other topics, certain topics that we feel are of significant importance to the community and wanted to let the community know what concerns we have and what we are currently working on.

This first slide is suspected overdoses in DSD jails.

Excuse me, the number of drug overdose-related incidents within the jails has increased in recent years.

In response, the DSD has established the prevention detection and prosecution task force to reduce the introduction of contraband while supporting individuals suffering from substance misuse disorders, enhance the capability of detecting drugs inside the jails, take legal action against those who successfully introduce contraband inside jail facilities.

The OIM is a part of that task force in addition to the District Attorney's Office, DPD, DSD, Denver Crime Lab, several important parties are a part of that task force.

And we commend the Sheriff's Department for putting together that task force.

However, the issues obviously are of concern, are serious, and continue, and therefore the OIM will review the status of current efforts and make recommendations if more steps are needed to be taken to interdict control substances, contraband in jail facilities.

Investigations into non-fatal suspected overdoses.

So we have two, right?

We have overdoses that may have resulted in deaths.

We have overdoses that don't result in deaths.

And I think a little background information is necessary here.

We are notified of any time that there is a NARCAN use at the jail.

And NARCAM does not hurt typically someone.

So if it's if if there are someone collapses and it's let's say due to a medical condition, and they receive Narcan as a potential prevention, it's not going to harm them.

But they let us know every single time that they use NARCAN.

Some of those persons, if they lose consciousness, are then transported to Denver Health, and those are considered a little more critical.

There are many who are never lose consciousness and are treated with inside the jail.

Once they are sent to Denver Health, there is no way to confirm whether or not the medical incident, well, there is a way to confirm it.

Denver Health can confirm it, but it's my understanding, they what they do is they stabilize the person, make sure that they are well enough to go back into the facility and are not involved in testing as to whether or not there was a drug uh drug usage or what the levels of drugs were.

So we it's really difficult to know exactly how many of these instances are drug-related.

The ones that obviously result in death, that's different because there is an autopsy, and we do know do know about those.

So I wanted to preface this conversation with that.

Investigations into non-fatal suspected overdoses.

Um the OAM was concerned about the lack of administrative investigations related to suspected overdose incidents inside DSD jails and made direct recommendations to the Department of Safety.

On July 25th, 2025, and I believe it was Director Saldati's last day, the previous executive director of public safety, Armando Saldate, directed the opening of administrative investigations into suspected overdose incidents in DSG jail facilities.

So both the Department of Safety and the OIM have access to videos, facility videos, um, videos of interviews, um, a variety of information so that we can gather was there um was there uh were the rounds being done, when was the this happened, did the person receive proper medical attention, several different factors.

Like with all administrative investigations, the OIM will review each investigation and if necessary, make recommendations.

As of this year as reported in media, and again, it's hard to confirm until we look at all of the um the information on the deaths.

There have been nine deaths so far, four of those have been identified as overdoses.

This the kind of an update on the status of that, the OIM continues to not support education-based development.

We, if enacted, education based development will upend the current DPD discipline system by eliminating the possible imposition of discipline for certain misconduct violations.

By removing accountability and transparency from discipline, EBD will substantially undermine community trust in policing.

Despite our strong opposition to EBD, the OIM has worked diligently to provide recommendations through its review of draft EBD policies in March, July, and August.

The original, as we've spoken about before, original ID of EBD was presented to us in December of 2024.

The draft was shared with the first draft was shared with us in January of 2025, and there have been continuing drafts subsequent to that, and they continue to be continuing drafts.

Before continuing to develop the program, the DPD should convene a task force to determine whether an EBD program is consistent with community goals and expectations for officer accountability.

So kind of as a follow-up, you know, we've been discussing this uh for good part of this year.

As of today, um in July, DPD did publish a draft of the policy on their website.

They also um opened up a um portal, a uh for community to give input as as to the policy.

As of today, I checked this morning, that portal is still open.

Um, there continues to be um it looks like an opportunity for community members to weigh in.

And as of November 20th, the la it appears that the last amendment to the policy was November 20th.

Um the chief and I have discussed the kind of evolving nature of the changes in the policy, um, and he has assured me, as has the director of safety, that when the final draft of the policy is done, then it will be sent to the OIM for our review and recommendations.

Um as before, we were kind of playing um tag with the new versions of the draft.

So at some point it was a it was not a good use of our resources and time, and so we agreed.

Okay, once you have the final final draft, you're gonna send that to us, and then we will review review that final draft.

So that's kind of where we are to date on EBD.

The um Office of the Independent Monitor underwent an audit um starting in 2023, no, excuse me, 2024, which was finalized in September of 2025.

So it was a year-long process almost to the date, um, and uh it was conducted by the Denver Auditor's Office.

Um, so the in 2024, the Denver Auditor's Office began an audit of the OIM, the audit concluded in September on September 18th, 2025 with a presentation to the audit committee.

The final audit report presents four findings and six recommendations, and I can go through those um with you if you like.

And although the audit, as I'm sure you're familiar with, gives basis for its recommendations and findings.

Generally, we do not agree with their summation or their perception of what our office does, and then they claim that we were not transparent and not giving the community sufficient information.

However, we do agree to follow any recommendations that they may.

We can always be better.

We can always analyze the ordinance, which is the main thing that they ask us to do.

I would say the two big issues are there is a conflict between what is called deliberative privilege and reporting on specifics about cases.

We are not allowed to report recommendations, communications that are exchanged between the departments and the OIM based upon the deliberative privilege and the city attorney's understanding of deliberative privilege.

It allows for free flow of information and ideas, and that is codified in the ordinance.

So we can't just choose not to do that.

However, the ordinance does provide an opportunity for us to make these kinds of findings and reports in aggregate form.

And we do so if you just take a look at pick up any one of our reports, you'll see that we report on data and information, and are able to do it that way.

We cannot report on recommendations that we have made.

So to say that we cannot report recommendations, it's is inaccurate.

We just can't report what is discussed between between the parties.

And it is inaccurate to say that because there is an appearance of conflict that there is an actual conflict, however, we have agreed to look at that part uh of our procedures to see if that is the best way to go to go forward.

We do have acts, the ordinance allows us to hire uh private counsel, but as we all know, we don't have the money for that.

We're not in a budget situation to do so.

And it's my understanding is is that opportunity is for when there is a true conflict between the OIM's position and the city's position.

If we are at odds, that allows us an opportunity to go outside, but not unless there is need for that.

Um so that's essentially, you know, kind of where we are with the auditors' report.

Um aggregate information about investigation and discipline reviews.

Um the ordinance um asks us to report information on satisfaction of investigations and discipline and many um other different um uh topics in discipline.

It has been difficult to do so without a database, and without getting too much into the weeds, we have been working four years to get a database that allows us to obtain that information so we can report it to the community.

So in collaboration with the city's Technology Services Department, the OIM developed a database on the Salesforce platform to store detailed information about its DPD and DSD investigation and discipline reviews.

The development of this database was crucial for the OIM's ability to present information in statistical and summary form about the OIM's assessment of the sufficiency of investigations and the appropriateness of disciplinary actions as required by ordinance.

We obtained the system in 2023.

We actually began adding information to it in early of 2024.

And in this report is this semi-annual report is the first time that we are presenting some information in aggregate, and we will continue to build on that in future reports.

Of the 216 cases closed by the DPD in the first half of 2025, the OIM returned 34.7% for additional work.

So, and of the 178 cases closed by the DSD in the first half of 2025, the OIM returned 56.2 for additional work.

That is part of the process.

Once they complete an investigation, it is sent to us for our review.

Then we can send it back for additional with additional recommendations for additional information, specifications, discussion between between the parties.

And again, these are just half-year totals.

Seven officers were terminated, six officers retired or resigned prior to the completion of the disciplinary process.

Four officers were suspended.

Complaints against DSD deputies, 104 community inmate complaints recorded in the first half of 2025, which is a 12% increase from 2024, and 219 internal complaints record recorded in the first half of 2025, which is a 14% increase from 2023.

And the numbers are there for you, so you can see that we're talking of your, you know, we're not talking about thousands of numbers.

So the percentages don't always kind of equate with what with you know the numbers, so we have both there for you.

Eight deputies retired or resigned prior to the completion of the disciplinary process.

Two deputies were suspended, and there were 132 a summary of our semi-annual report.

Happy to take any questions.

Thank you so much, Independent Market Council.

Is essential.

You provide an opportunity to elevate the voices of folks that are directly impacted by Department of Safety.

And so we appreciate a semi-annual as well as the annual reports that you provide and the intentionality in the work that you and your team does.

So thank you so much for coming forward today.

I wanted to share for the portal review for education based policy that's being proposed by Department of Safety.

And as uh the the monitor shared the information for the outcomes of the um the actual policy draft policy that will be presented first to the monitor.

We will speak with um a Department of Safety when that's concludes to find a time in the first quarter for there to be a full presentation uh to this body, um, working with council president Sandoval for her direction uh to see if uh it's this body or mayor council where that comes, but expect uh members of the public for there to be a full briefing of all council members as well as a presentation um I would expect within this uh uh committee um within the first quarter.

So thank you so much for that information.

And um we have uh in queue we have council member parity, um council member Sawyer and Council President Sandoval.

Oh, well, Council President Sandoval's obviously.

So just parody and then uh Sawyer.

If anyone else wants to get into the queue, uh please uh let us know.

Great, thank you so much.

Thank you for being here.

I'm sorry that you're so good.

Thank you for sitting in front of us.

Um but we're grateful.

I was curious going back to the um overdose investigations.

First of all, I'm just really really glad that that's that you're all are looking into that, and you know it's a huge area of concern um for me for many of us on council, um the overdose crisis in the city in general um and the jail is always just a part of that web, you know.

Um can you explain a little more the difference between the administrative investigations that they're doing versus like a criminal investigation or kind of what does that mean?

Like who's investigating it?

Sure, what can that come to?

Um typically criminal investigations are triggered by either serious bodily injury or death.

So if there is an um I would point you specifically to our report, um I forget which page it is, but um in discussion of this particular topic, so it's towards the beginning of the report, it says exactly how those investigations are going to be handled, those internal investigations.

So when you have a death that um that triggers uh a criminal investigation, so DPD comes in and they do the investigation, um, and will interview any witnesses that are necessarily to necessary to be interviewed, um, look at um video, you know, do do a uh a complete um investigation.

If there is um are no criminal charges to but to be filed, then an administrative investigation um is launched and they're looking for, you know, you know, is there evidence of how the substances got in?

Is there evidence that the rounds were properly done?

Um you know what what were there signs that something was wrong?

Um and you know, for example, we in in some cases we may catch that rounds weren't done on time that sometimes that may mean that there was um uh attention to an inmate who was in crisis may not have happened as quickly as it should have, but um it may not have had anything to do with it at all, but those are the reasons why we are reviewing those.

Okay, thank you so much.

I again I'm really really glad that that's happening.

When do you think um you might have circular conclusions about any recommendations are natural.

Right.

It's a process, obviously, we hope by the um by the annual report.

Um but we'll we'll see how it goes.

Yeah, okay.

That's great.

Thank you.

Um and then the uh sort of switching to another topic that you that you just covered as well.

Um it's interesting that there's a um pretty big difference in the percentage of cases.

I mean, it's only the it's the first half of one year, but it is several hundred cases in each instance um between DP and DSD that get returned by OAM.

Um do you have any conclusions or thoughts about why there's a difference or recommendations?

No, because there's they're separate agencies with separate policies, separate procedures.

So we just we're just going off uh the data.

So we're just publishing the data.

Okay, thank you for doing that.

I if there's any way that you all um subclassify, like if you have a I I could see it being that the reasons that something gets returned are just like endlessly variable, but if there are sort of categories of reasons, that would be interesting as well.

Right, we yeah, we are definitely at the beginning of this process of reporting on aggregate information, and so we are um trying to figure out you know what what is the best way to identify the information uh overall and then start honing down on more specific issues.

Yeah, um that makes sense to me.

I also just want to flag one final thing, I guess, and it may be something that you have thoughts about, or maybe just something that I want to put out in the world, which is that I always um think about this issue of officers resigning while they're under investigation.

I'm glad to know how often that happens.

That's useful information because it just creates it it makes sense that we don't continue investigating someone that's not our employee any longer.

There's no point doing that for disciplinary purposes, but then it creates this gap in there as far as their post-certification and everything where you know someone can theoretically um kind of evade what would have been a disciplinary matter by having resigned.

So I just am always wondering if maybe there would be like I could see reasons to complete those investigations even after a person is gone because they also could be more about a system or something like that.

So, my understanding is they are completed, regardless of whether they resign the investigation is completed and department of safety does issue findings.

Okay, I I miss that they don't impact their post-certification still though, is that true?

That's an AG issue, I know it is that is a question that I can't answer accurately.

I think that's um, there have been different different opinions as to that.

Okay.

Okay, um, those were all things I would forget.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Uh thank you, Councilmember Parity, Councilmember Sawyer and Council Member Fly.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um, thank you so much and feel better.

Thanks for things for hauling yourself in here to have this conversation when you don't feel well.

Um I had a couple of questions and one comment.

I will just say you are preaching to the choir and running a foul of auditor recommendations.

Um the city council has had that experience as well.

So I really appreciate you kind of walking through some of the challenges there, but I will say um I don't think you'd need to defend yourself on that one.

Certainly not to us.

Um so I did have a question for you about the number of complaints, right?

They're going up, and I'm curious if there is um a reason why, right?

We've talked a lot about how the um independent monitor has to receive a complaint in order to act on it.

You don't proactively get information from the city attorney's office.

So uh I'm curious whether the number of incidents has gone up or whether the number of reports to you about those incidences has gone up.

So that's a that's a hard question to answer because we do go by you know complaints that are filed, and I I would just caution that because it is only a semi-annual report.

When you actually look at the numbers, yes, the numbers are going up.

Um but can we make any kind of um statistical uh or or come to any conclusions on that?

Not really.

It could be that more people are aware of the Office of the Independent Monitor and how to file complaints.

More complaints is not necessarily indicative of more misconduct.

It could be it means that the system is working and people are taking advantage and using um the surfaces of uh the the complaint process.

It could be a change in policy, a new policy can lead to violations because people are getting used to a new policy.

It could be a change in triage, how they triage cases, how they count cases.

So there are a lot of different factors that go into it.

Certainly, when we see a rise, we are going to pay attention and we are going to look at it to see if it continues and to see, yeah, is there is there something driving this?

But just based on what I have right now, no.

Okay.

That's really good to know.

I will just say from the way I read your slides before the briefing and sort of what you said during the briefing, like because you're a complaint-based system, and because conclusions really can't be drawn based on this, like my ask for you for next time would be to make that clear.

And it doesn't say, there aren't any conclusions that can be drawn from this.

There are a lot of reasons why complaints might be coming, it might be, you know, coming in at a higher level than than previous to the independent monitor's office, and I just like I want to make sure that the public understands that there are lots of reasons why that might be happening, not because there are more bad things happening in our jails or in within our police system, right?

Like I just no, I understand what you're saying.

It is in our report though.

All of those things that I just said are included in our report.

So, you know, without doing a basically taking the whole report and making it into a PowerPoint, but I see what you think.

Yeah, no, I really appreciate that.

It's just I feel like we know, right?

But um the public that's a nuance the public may not know, and there are lots of moments in this job where you find uh half truths occurring right in the press or whatever because um the information isn't clear that they're looking at, but it's public information.

So I just my ask for you would be to just make sure that you make that clear.

Is there by any chance I can say I think we sent the report along with the PowerPoint?

Is there a link to the report?

Okay, good.

Oh, there is not okay.

What we'll do um monitor, we'll make sure that we have an amazing team um that will pull that information, so uh we'll we'll make sure we have the final um report from you.

We'll have that uh placed on let's throw through a really great team that we we have here within um the city.

So we'll make sure if it's not there that it will be there.

So that uh just received notice and the report is attached.

Let's start with it.

It is it wasn't yes, it wasn't this weekend when I looked.

We'll make sure that we send that link out to everyone just in case everyone has that.

Um we wanted to make sure at least the presentation was clear, but I will make sure if we have the adjoining reports going forward that we ensure that both of those are communicated early to folks.

Okay, yeah, appreciate that.

Yeah, that's great.

Thank you.

Um I will say whether the report is up there or not, and whether the report says it or not, if you're only reading the slide deck, right?

It's not clear, I understand.

Um, so we'd really appreciate that.

And then just in terms of um what we can do to help support you and your team in the upcoming year.

Do you have any um like thoughts or ideas on things that we could do to kind of help um make sure that you guys are able to achieve your goals for 2026?

Well, if you have a pot of gold, somewhere, bear with us.

Sadly, no.

Really um, our biggest challenge is staffing.

Our biggest challenge continues to be staffing.

Um I appreciate city council and making um, you know, position for the OAM a priority.

Unfortunately, we were only gonna be able to get it right now for half a year, but I'll take it.

Um, we originally asked for this extra position that has finally been um approved in the budget, it was based upon 2022 caseload and numbers.

Well, we're going into 2026, so while um we submitted for the position in 233, it was approved for 2024, but then due to the budget cuts, we couldn't fill it, didn't fill it in 24, didn't fill it in 25.

Not gonna fill it in 26 halfway, but we're already way past the numbers that we had back in 2022.

Um we actively monitor we, although the ordinance says identifies cases that we um mandatorily have to actively monitor, and the difference between actively monitoring and monitoring is actively monitoring.

We are part of the investigation process.

So we are there from the get-go.

So when interviews are done, we are present at those interviews, as opposed to just monitoring, which is the investigation is done, and then we review it on the back end.

Um those numbers have increased, and you know, I can't tell you exactly why they have increased, but we review all cases.

We have to review all cases because there's no otherwise no way to establish is there a pattern, what is the pattern, what are we seeing, what is the problem.

Um, and those numbers have doubled since 2022.

Again, it's you know, I don't know that that it's anybody's fault, it's just that that's the work.

So where we are in the position that we're getting now in 2026 is all is already behind.

And and I've thanked the mayor for um providing us a position, but let him know I'm already behind the eight ball when even when we get a new position.

So um you'll you'll I'll be back next year begging a bended knee again, most likely for an additional position.

Currently, we have um three policy analysts.

Um I may be asking for uh a fourth analyst.

There's a lot of things that um I would like to work on that the community has asked me to work on and to publish, and we need both monitors and policy team members to be able to do that.

Great, really appreciate that.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Thank you, Councilmember Sawyer and the final person in the queue.

We have to uh thank Mr.

Chairman.

I commiserate with you.

Um I am in my two and a half weeks now trying to shake the remnants of whatever this thing is going to land.

I have complete sympathy uh for what you're going through.

Uh and thank you for being at the far end of the table.

Um I would urge you to remain or to have an open mind on EBD, uh, because frankly, the presentation you made earlier this summer I found to be uh very much um overstated and and lacking in foundation, the more I looked into what was actually being proposed.

Because everything I found out since then, this looks like it can be a very positive development in officer training and compliance.

Um I don't agree with your statement that it eliminates uh that it upends the discipline system.

I don't agree with that at all.

It becomes part of the system by offering a corrective action path rather than only a punitive path, and only for violations or complaints that are low-level uh things that ordinarily might result in a verbal reprimand or a letter in the file.

And if we can divert these into a corrective action, which we'd like to see corrective rather than punitive in a lot of uh in a lot of areas in public policy, and so I see this as a potentially very positive move for uh clearing out the backlog of complaints because even trivial complaints that have to go through the punitive path take an inordinate amount of time, and from what the chief has told me, what the DBD has told me, it's they are taking so long getting back to community members who file a complaint on something that could have been done by EBD and resolved quickly, and it's resulting in a lot of dissatisfaction out in the community.

It's all recorded in the IA pro system that you have access to, that you actually have uh input and make recommendation on whether a complaint goes to EBD or not before that decision is made.

And and so I I see this as something that can really be a positive change.

So I would just ask that maintain an open mind while you are uh negotiating or discussing this with DPD.

Um, because I really think the case against has been overstated.

Um I found that very concerning.

I think that where we were also in July when I made my presentation uh to city council, and where we are today, a lot of things have changed.

So all the information I gave you in July was based upon the draft that was available in July that had not been seen by the community.

So now that they it's there's more access by the community, more transparency, there's more opportunity for people to weigh in.

I continue to have um concerns.

I I position is not just my position, my position is based upon my engagement also with community.

Um, but we also do the do the research and this hasn't worked in in other places.

I would also identify that the training that is being proposed as a solution is great.

I mean, we have no problem with more training, um, but that's already available under the current matrix system.

Yes.

It it it's already there, so to completely revamp the discipline system for something that they can already do is part of the problem that that we're having.

And it's not just about training and making um providing an opportunity for officers to learn.

Yes, that's important, but there's also an accountability piece, and there's a piece that the community um insists upon, which is what how are you addressing my harm?

How are you addressing the harm?

And that is the purpose of uh the discipline component.

So it's a continuing, I agree, it is a continuing conversation.

It has morphed as time has gone on.

Um the policy that was presented in July, um, you know, the chief made comments about things that that he wanted to see in the policy that were not.

So I think we have to um wait until we get the final final draft to make sure that what he has in mind and what his recommendations are there, they're in writing, they're there for continuation going forward if it's going to be adopted.

But fundamentally, what we continue with our position that there's there's no data out there that says that this works.

Okay.

I I would disagree that uh that it removes accountability because uh when an officer acknowledges mistakes, takes responsibility and uh agrees to do training, uh, which by the way, this is not automatic, it's not automatic that any of these that are not outlined in purple, just the low-level complaints, uh many of which could be internal, uh it's not automatic that if the complaint is in that area, that EBD is offered, uh, because it's a one-time, it's a one strike, and and you're out because if there's a second violation, then you go the punitive route.

But the only change that I see here is the pathway is uh is to the corrective action rather than punitive.

And yes, they can do training as well as punitive, but by the first time, a one-time only offer of EBD, rather than going the punitive route, which again takes longer to resolve, and is very frustrating to feed if it's a complaint from the community is very frustrating when it could be resolved much earlier with positive training and a positive outcome.

One time only, I think is is something that is worth exploring.

And and again, you have access to all of this, none of this is done behind a curtain.

It's in IA pro.

And so again, I know it's changed, and in fact, when I look at the matrix here, I see some things I would want to question about it as well, and I'll offer those up to DPD as well.

But uh I don't agree with your recommendation that they should immediately suspend the development of it.

Monitor Castle and Councilmember Flynn appreciate the discussion back and forth.

I think one of the things that I try to do as chair, I preempted stating there's not a final document, and there will be an opportunity in the first quarter once that document is um that plan or direction is complete for us to have a full dialogue uh at council, um, and I appreciate the robust um discussion and look forward to us diving into the actual uh specific uh document once it's uh finalized.

So any additional comments, uh Councilmember Flynn?

Uh Councilmember Gonzalez Kateras.

Yes, thank you, Mr.

Chair, and thank you for for making that available so that we can have that dialogue.

So I really appreciate that once there is a one-final finalized document.

Um my question is about something you mentioned earlier, and I know you've talked about this before is that the deliberative process, um, and and when um investigation is occurring or when it has occurred, and then you provide recommendations, that information is not made to the public, made known to the public, right?

It's only what has been accepted as a recommendation.

Is that what you said, or can you clarify that?

Um all parties, so it's uh OIM, the COB, um, and the departments are are covered by deliberative privilege.

With regards to specific cases, investigations, discipline, communications, and um, and policy, sub policy recommendations, communications back and forth, we cannot um debulge.

However, we can still publish what happened with cases.

So we do that in our reports.

We publish um on specific cases that we believe um are of interest uh to the community.

We can also publish recommendations we make we are making, not recommendations we have made.

I can't talk about I recommended that they do this with this case.

I recommend you um make this policy change, but I can identify in our reports recommendations that we are making, not what we have made.

I think that's that.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you for that clarification.

Um as far as um actually I I'm good.

That's it.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you so much, uh Council Cateres.

Uh, once again, uh Meyer, thank you for your leadership.

Thank you for all the good work you and your team does.

Hopefully you're able to get some rest and uh get your help um back up.

But uh really appreciate you and thank you for being here.

You work with that.

We have two items on consent.

No, none of those items have been pulled off, so this meeting's adjourned.

Thanks, everyone.

Thank you, but school