Wednesday, April 15, 2026, 10 a.m. (Denver time), City & County Building, Room 391
The Health and Safety Committee, chaired by Council Member Darrell Watson, held an extended meeting on a single action item: an ordinance revising criminal penalties for municipal offenses to align Denver's code with the Colorado Supreme Court's People v. Camp decision and state sentencing law. The bill sponsors presented a detailed overview of the proposed offense classes, the 10-day cap for municipal-only/petty offenses, regulatory-offense fine structure, elimination of mandatory prostitution fines, and an extensive stakeholder timeline going back to August 2024. Nine members of the public testified, split between supporters of sentencing reform and opponents (largely business, victim-advocacy, and enforcement perspectives); the committee also could not accommodate everyone who signed up. The chair read into the record a letter from District Attorney John Walsh opposing the bill and a letter from the presiding judge of the county court stating the court is already in compliance with Camp. Council members raised questions about the 'catch-all' general penalty, impacts on agency enforcement (Denver Public Health and Environment, Excise and Licenses, Denver Fire), domestic violence protections, and repeat offenders. The item was postponed in committee to May 13.
0:07 Welcome back to this weekly
0:08 meeting of the Health and
0:09 Safety Committee with Denver
0:15 City Council. Coverage of the
0:15 Health and Safety Committee
0:17 starts now.
0:33 And there was good Good
0:34 morning. APRIL 15 tax day and
0:35 you are at the Health and
0:38 Safety Committee meeting. My
0:39 name is Daryl Watts and I'm
0:40 honored to serve as the chair
0:41 of this committee as well as
0:42 the city council member
0:44 representing all of the fine
0:45 district 9 before we begin
0:47 with our one action items
0:49 today. When we go around the
0:50 room for a introduction for
0:51 city council members will
0:54 start for us on the right and
0:54 then I'll verify their council
0:56 members that are online. So
0:57 Councilmember Flint under
0:58 Kevin Flynn, Southwest
0:59 numbers, District 2. Good
1:02 morning. Stacie Gilmore
1:03 District 11. Good morning.
1:07 Paul Kashmann himself make
1:10 sense. Survey one of tell just
1:17 today we're going to district
1:19 Good morning. Everyone said I
1:19 can solace because your other
1:24 councilmember at large morning
1:26 the about customer district,
1:28 Jerry Torres was Denver
1:31 district. 3. Even has been key
1:33 to success and just checking
1:34 to see, do we have a council
1:35 member coming in virtual this
1:42 morning. That's a no.
1:49 Today we have one action item.
1:51 It ordinance to revise on
1:55 criminal penalties for
1:57 municipal offenses. This is an
1:58 extended to our meeting. We
1:59 have public comments as well.
2:02 Once we move from the
2:03 presentation from the sponsors
2:05 will go directly into public
2:06 comments and I'll share kind
2:07 of the announcement of how
2:10 that public comment process
2:12 will be facilitated. But first
2:12 to council sponsors the floor
2:13 is yours for your
2:17 presentation. Thank you. So
2:18 good Good morning, everyone.
2:19 And here to discuss or
2:21 billiken at municipal
2:22 sentencing. We said before,
2:25 because we've been many times
2:26 count on in the U.S. Can
2:26 something that sounds good
2:29 years. Incomes, women, parity,
2:31 we're excited to this change
2:32 will work, which is an
2:33 opportunity for us to align
2:35 our municipal code which state
2:36 charges and will allow the
2:37 prosecution in code
2:38 enforcement team to continue
2:39 to enforce important aspects
2:43 of the municipal code in the
2:44 city. A pass here. Either of
2:45 you want to add anything at
2:52 this moment. Once you're done.
2:53 And then I was to on this
2:55 like, no, I'm good. I'm good.
2:57 Now. Thank Kate. So we have
2:59 presented this numerous times.
3:03 All of you in a in our faces.
3:03 Lots of in in briefings and
3:04 things like that. So when talk
3:06 about what the problem and
3:08 that we're trying to address,
3:10 we know that in 2021, the
3:13 state legislature passed a
3:14 policy to change the
3:18 sentencing structures for
3:19 misdemeanor offenses. That
3:21 work was at the direction of
3:25 the governor and worked on in
3:29 a bipartisan multi stakeholder
3:30 fashion because at the state
3:31 it is partisan So this is a
3:32 little bit different than for
3:35 us here at the municipal
3:36 level. With that what that
3:37 created was an inequity when
3:41 it came to municipal crimes
3:42 versus state crimes that had
3:44 same type of conduct or that
3:48 were similar types of crimes
3:50 where we people in Denver are
3:51 facing senses up to 30 times
3:55 higher. And we say facing
3:56 because they could and what
3:58 was in our current ordinance
3:59 is that people can face up to
4:00 300 days in jail for the same
4:02 types of offenses that they
4:04 then got to 10 days. I'm so
4:08 sorry. So 2025 DECEMBER. 25 we
4:12 know that the Colorado state
4:13 Supreme Court, did make a
4:13 ruling and the decision was
4:16 that this was deemed
4:17 constitutional, that these
4:19 thresholds were different.
4:28 One? Oh, yeah. Okay. And
4:32 that's what you're it. So
4:34 going into what the current
4:35 landscape as I mentioned
4:42 before. As I mentioned before,
4:44 the current in our current
4:48 ordinance is a we have the
4:49 maximum sentence of up to 300
4:51 days in jail in 9 and a $999
4:52 fine, because that is our
4:56 city's general penalty. We do
4:57 not have our crimes at the
5:01 municipal level and Marked out
5:02 in different classes, right?
5:04 Just as they do at the state
5:04 level. We don't have that
5:08 currently in our ordinance. So
5:09 that currently what we're
5:14 dealing And the types these
5:14 types of sensors can carry a
5:17 lot of collateral consequences
5:18 from those that they get these
5:20 kinds of charges. And even
5:21 what by the mere fact of
5:24 having this kind of level of
5:27 sentencing penalty on the
5:28 books can create all kinds of
5:31 implications when it comes to
5:34 immigration status. When folks
5:35 are going into jail for long
5:37 periods of time, they face
5:39 losing public benefits such as
5:40 Social Security's snap
5:45 benefits, housing income,
5:46 Medicaid and the and in
5:46 sometimes and in some cases
5:47 can risk losing the custody of
5:48 their children depending on
5:52 the situation. And I did
5:53 discuss the problems all go to
5:56 the next slide. Thank you.
5:57 Skip, municipal numbers and
5:59 those bullet points. Was you
6:03 want to go into it. Sure.
6:04 Yeah. Yeah. So on that front
6:09 line states So one back. The
6:10 other. The other we wanted to
6:12 highlight here is that just
6:13 more about the numbers of
6:14 actual violence that happened
6:17 at a municipal court. I know
6:17 everyone is sort of familiar
6:21 the idea that everything
6:22 that's kind of felony level or
6:23 even more serious
6:25 misdemeanors. Those are state
6:28 crimes, the conduct that
6:29 handle in municipal court is
6:30 more equivalent of petty
6:32 offense isn't low-level
6:33 misdemeanors. And so that's
6:35 where where focus, we're
6:37 seeing 12,000 municipal
6:38 criminal case filings every
6:40 single So that's it's just
6:42 pretty striking. If you look
6:43 back over 5 years, you'll see
6:43 about 70,000 sentences handed
6:46 down by the municipal court 3
6:47 quarters of those charged are
6:48 at or below the federal
6:51 poverty line, which I also
6:52 think just really worst kind
6:56 of letting that's again, in
6:56 terms of the crimes that we
7:02 are that are petty offense is
7:04 so crimes that under this bill
7:04 in the camp decision will now
7:08 carry a 10 day sentence. Those
7:08 are relatively unusual among
7:10 those 12,000 cases per year
7:12 over the last 2 years, there
7:16 were 100 people roughly who
7:18 were sentenced to more than 10
7:20 days in jail for a municipal
7:22 only offense that would now be
7:23 limited to 10 days. So that
7:25 would only change the sentence
7:28 in about 100 cases from about
7:28 25,000 cases to those 100
7:31 people that really matters.
7:33 And the difference between a
7:35 10 day sentence and a 15 day
7:36 sentence was which is the most
7:37 common like you know, sensible
7:38 see this bill that has been
7:39 given down for those meaning
7:44 only offense is 15 days. If
7:45 it's more than 10, right,
7:45 occasionally you'll see a
7:46 little bit more might be 20
7:48 might be 30, but 14 days is
7:50 the cutoff to lose a lot of
7:52 benefits. And one thing I just
7:53 want people to keep in mind is
7:55 that if that person, then if
7:55 they lose their Medicaid
7:56 because they've been in jail
7:57 for 15 days and said 10,
7:58 there's still gonna go to
7:59 Denver Health. Gonna get
8:01 treated but it's not going
8:02 cover. So that's part of what
8:03 we're really trying to address
8:04 is the benefits last that
8:06 backlash and that is part of
8:07 why 10 days is the rights
8:10 sensing level for those crimes
8:10 I've 100 people from the 600
8:13 that you see on the side, the
8:19 other roughly 500 are people
8:20 were Texans for more than 10
8:21 days for a petty offense that
8:23 now under the cap decision and
8:24 this bill has to go down to 10
8:26 days in the future. So for
8:28 those people, that's what the
8:29 sentence would have had to be
8:31 with sons after the camp
8:31 decision. And the bill
8:33 accomplishes that effect. So I
8:35 just want to point out that
8:36 discretionary portion of the
8:38 change sentences for petty
8:40 offense is is almost a
8:41 vanishingly small number of
8:42 cases. But to those human
8:43 beings that doesn't really
8:48 matter. So wanted to around us
8:50 and some more data. And so as
8:52 you can see from this slide,
8:54 there's been a 24% decrease
8:56 and reported crime from from
8:58 2021 to 2025, which is
9:01 represented by the Orange bars
9:02 on this slide. And at the same
9:04 time, there has been a 52%
9:05 increase in municipal case
9:06 filings in that same time from
9:09 2021 to 2025. Would you
9:12 concede with the blue bars on
9:14 the slide and so ensure crime
9:15 is falling. But the 5 filings
9:16 are increasing more and more
9:20 at the municipal level. In
9:21 addition to that, what we
9:22 wanted to talk about some of
9:24 the jail data. So how are
9:26 these filings affecting the
9:28 city? Well, the cost of jail
9:32 per day is $240 per person.
9:32 Those increased violence that
9:33 we showed you on the last
9:35 slide mean that 40% charges
9:35 that people are facing while
9:39 held in Denver. Jails are for
9:40 municipal ordinance
9:40 violations. Most of them
9:45 preach trial. We as we have
9:46 heard many times in the past
9:48 few years, this is also
9:49 creating a bad situation for
9:51 the sheriffs who are
9:52 understaffed and doing the
9:53 best friend of these different
9:54 circumstances. And that 60%
9:58 number just to be super clear
9:58 on the prior slide. We were
10:01 talking about filings, the go
10:02 through municipal court. So
10:04 municipal cases on the but the
10:05 jail will hold people for
10:06 other jurisdictions and for
10:07 state crimes. So people could
10:08 be in our jail even though
10:10 their case was in state court
10:10 or even Jeffco Adams County or
10:14 something like that anywhere
10:15 that they are being charged
10:16 prosecutor, they might be in
10:16 our jail for a period of time
10:17 by suspicions to jails. So 60%
10:21 people in the jail are from
10:22 those. You know, 25,000 cases
10:22 in the last 2 years that we're
10:26 talking about here. So in
10:28 light of these problems and
10:29 the Constitution,
10:30 constitutional requirements we
10:33 are proposing the following in
10:34 this bill revised the Denver
10:36 revise the Denver revised this
10:38 accent is is to the maximum
10:42 sentences for the same or
10:43 identical conduct. This this
10:44 reflects the constitutional
10:46 requirement revised sentences
10:47 for all offenses in the
10:49 municipal code that do not
10:50 have a comparable state
10:50 offense at the level allowed
10:53 for petty offenses under state
10:53 has it up to sentence of 10
10:57 days in jail for $300 fine.
10:58 Revised the language of
11:00 certain offenses to align
11:00 prohibited conduct with a more
11:02 stringent state law and retain
11:04 paces ability to charge higher
11:06 sentences, which includes
11:07 domestic violence, cages
11:08 cases. And one walk to that in
11:10 a bit. Rewrite a few offenses
11:12 to align with state law. But
11:14 in a way that does not change
11:14 the severity of the punishment
11:16 for sentencing guidelines
11:18 available maintain current
11:20 finds available for some
11:21 regulatory offenses to give
11:22 city department's needed
11:24 leverage for enforcement and
11:25 eliminate mandatory
11:26 Constitution, prostitution to
11:32 align with state law. Yes. So
11:34 this is these are the new
11:34 classes. Offense is that we
11:35 would be creating and every
11:38 one of them lines up with a
11:39 state law class and penalty
11:40 other class one, which I can
11:43 explain in a second. So each
11:46 of these align a sentencing
11:48 category at the state and
11:50 therefore with the maximum
11:52 that could be sentenced under
11:54 camp equivalent municipal
11:57 crimes. So by aligning these
11:59 we're we're preserving the
11:59 ability to charge of the
12:01 highest level. The capital.
12:02 The difference with the class.
12:03 One offense is that we've
12:08 always had this outlier
12:08 category or general penalty.
12:10 As COUNCILMAN He tries
12:13 mention, has been 300 days in
12:15 jail and a $999 fine. So
12:16 that's the penalty for the
12:17 vast majority minute spa
12:18 fences. And we've also have
12:22 this very short list that time
12:24 after our last pass through
12:28 this code, we left at 364 days
12:30 in a 19 fine for sleeping.
12:31 Those along changing any of
12:31 them. They will continue to
12:32 have that same penalty. But
12:36 Senator, for 30, so then the
12:37 class to class 3, a and class
12:40 for often says are again
12:44 designed to align with. To
12:45 allow us to align the
12:45 sentences for municipal crimes
12:48 with the highest possible
12:49 sentence for the equipment's
12:53 to crime. So what if the state
12:55 says you can have up to 120
12:56 days in jail on a $750 fine.
12:57 That's not what are called
12:58 will say. If the state says
12:58 you can have 9300, that's not
13:02 what are called will say. And
13:04 if the state says 300,010 a
13:05 show, that's not what will
13:08 say. So in all instances where
13:09 aligning state law to preserve
13:11 the highest possible sensing
13:11 authority where there's muck
13:16 about a crime. And then sent a
13:17 couple people asked about
13:18 these Class 5 often This is a
13:20 group that we don't think
13:21 house contains anything in the
13:25 never municipal code. But if
13:26 we ever had something like
13:27 that or learned of something
13:29 like that camp would mandate
13:32 us treating it in this book so
13:33 the state has a category of of
13:34 crimes that only get 100 are
13:37 fine. Those are usually on
13:40 state kind of fences. And so
13:41 there are things that we just
13:43 don't deal with that the So we
13:45 haven't found any overlap
13:46 between that category at the
13:47 state and what we currently
13:49 cover in our Muni Code. But we
13:51 figured that we should have a
13:53 category there say in the
13:53 future, we decide to add
13:55 something to our Muni code.
13:56 What we're now going prosecute
13:57 people in city court for like
13:58 some state regulatory
13:59 violation. I don't know why we
14:01 would do that. It should have
14:02 that 100 are fine. So it's
14:03 just sort of making sure that
14:04 we have that container there
14:06 to remain in compliance with
14:07 camp. But I don't believe
14:08 there's anything in it at the