[Music] [Music] love. Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Good night. [Music] [Music] I'll give everybody a couple minutes. Move over Study session of the or city council for Monday, September 8th, 2025 is called to order. Will the clerk please call the role? >> Mayor Kaufman >> here. >> Council member Bergen >> here. >> Council member Kums >> present. Council member Gardner >> here. >> Council member Hancock >> here. >> Council member Dinsky >> here. >> Council member Cass. >> Council member Lawson >> here. >> Council member Medina >> here. >> Council member Modio >> present. >> Mayor Proenber >> here. >> Okay. There is no mayor's update. Are there any issue updates? Seeing none, is there any objection uh to move the consent calendar forward? Item number 2 A through 2 I. Seeing no objection of the consent calendar, item number um 2A through 2 I. We'll move forward. Item number 4 A, Aurora Municipal Court hours of operation proposal. Uh presiding Judge Shandai. >> Thank you, Mayor, Mayor Port, members of council. Thank you for the opportunity to bring this issue before you for your consideration. I'm going to try to share my window because I do have a very short PowerPoint to hopefully help with this discussion. >> Can you see it? >> Not yet. I have a note that says stop sharing. Oh, there it goes. Can you see it now? >> No, >> I can't. >> I cannot. >> Well, wonder what's going on. >> There we go. >> There it is. >> You got it. Okay, great. Um, as you know, the current hours of operation for the court are five days a week, Monday through Friday, 8 to 5. Um, we also hold um weekend court because of the requirement to do bond hearings on Sunday mornings from 8:00 a.m. to noon. The proposed hours are moving the court from 5 days a week to four days a week. Monday through Thursday, we would begin at 7 o'clock in the morning to 6:00 pm. Um, weekend court would also move in order to meet the 48 hour requirement. Um, it would move to Saturday afternoons at 1:00 p.m. We tested the move for weekend court from Saturday from Sunday to Saturday over the July 4th weekend and it actually worked very well, very smooth um for that particular weekend. You may be asking yourself why the change now judge. Um traditionally our courts the different departments in the court would get together in August to develop the upcoming year's docket. Um we've had some big changes within the court is council's fully aware transfer domestic violence cases from the 17th and 18th. But really, one of the things that is driving this particular request is um a a response in the annual engagement survey that we um that the city proposes for all departments. And one of the consistent things for um all court departments was the request for the potential for hybrid work. Well, here because of the work that we do at the court, we wouldn't have the opportunity to go to a hybrid type of work schedule, um, we're always in person. We we will continue to be in person. We were in person over COVID. Um, and that's because of the type of work that we do. But it was a constant request from employees for the different departments of of the court. and there was a request and it was always at the top of consideration for a hybrid type of schedule. Now, in order to try to meet that specific request or demand from all court employees and team members, we think that a move to um five from five to four days may actually be a benefit and address that particular request from um our team members. There's also the upcoming budget reduction. We know that there's a request um that there needs to be savings within the court that we need to meet in the upcoming year of 2026. I've included in this particular slide the amount of incourt overtime hours. Now I want to highlight that it's only in courtroom overtime hours. It's not any hours outside of the courtroom. So you can see in 2023 we had 535.5 hours of overtime. in 2024 was 440.5 and as of August 1st of this year we are already at 262.75 of in court overtime hours that obviously um the city is incurring. Um we believe that adding to the beginning of the day and at the end of the day it will absolutely reduce the amount of overtime. We can start things earlier and hopefully end things sooner as well. Clearly there will be facility savings and not having the lights on and the power and and the heat of the building there's clearly going to be facility savings and by reducing this there will be reduct reduction in the amount of overtime payout. We also believe that by going to 410s we have the opportunity and I want to stress that it's an opportunity for the court to potentially meet the officers work schedules and reduce the amount of overtime that um APD is paying the officers uh that uh they're required to come into court after their schedule shifts. We'll have that opportunity to hopefully reduce the amount of overtime for APD as well. Um we also believe that um this gives the opportunity for our court team members to limit the impact of the plan 2026 furlow days. As I'm sure council is aware um many many court employees, team members um have secondary work. They're they are working outside of the court. By going to three consecutive days off, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, it benefits them and their work schedule. It makes them more attractive to secondary employers and it provides them with the opportunity for having consistent outofc court work schedules. By allowing them that additional day off, we also believe that it'll be less time off outside of court. there'll be less requests for time off, less coughs because they'll have that extra day to schedule doctor's appointments. Um any any other appointments that they'll normally have to take off for court because when somebody is out of court, we just can't keep that space um unstaffed, we have to bring in another staff member to to carry the workload for that person that's out of work. And so there's budgetary impact that goes along with that. Um, so we believe that there'll be cost savings in reducing the use of of out of uh court call offs or time off. We also believe that it'll be a benefit for our community. It'll be an opportunity for our community members to appear before their work begins at 8:00. We'll have a 7:00 start time and then also offer the opportunity for for kids to avoid missing school. They could appear before or after school as well. So, I believe that's a positive for our community. Uh, we do believe that by going to four um work days, it'll have a positive effect on recruitment and retention. I talked with Ryan and other members, Sarah, with um the HR department, and I believe there is some um pretty good studies and understanding of that that also could have a positive effect on recruitment and retention. Now, as it relates to retention, we believe, and I think this is something that really needs to be stressed, and that is is that by giving our our team members three consecutive days, they'll have a better opportunity to deal with what is a real real issue for anybody that's involved in our judicial system. And that's the impact of secondary trauma. Just as the police officers experience secondary trauma, just as 911 operators experience secondary trauma, so do the participants in the court system, they also deal with secondary trauma. As you can imagine, an attorney that's representing a party, if it's a victim or a witness, if it's a prosecutor or if it's a defense attorney that's representing an accused party, they also experience the effect of secondary trauma. There are plenty of studies out there that will go to uh show that having three consecutive days it days off it's a benefit than just having two days off on a Saturday or Sunday. It helps the party deal with um the issues of secondary trauma. Um and so I believe it will have a positive effect on retention. Um I think you've seen and you've heard about the the issues of um the turnover with according to the different departments and I think by going to 410s it will actually have uh a very positive thing for the the team members. So I do think it'll be a positive for our community. We did reach out to other jurisdictions that are already operating on 410s and they've all said that it's been a a great thing for their community because of the issues that I've just talked about. the early morning starts with people being able to come into court and then also the added hour on the end. Um I do think it'll be a positive for our court. This is not a change that we took very lightly. Um we looked at um what we think will truly be a benefit for our court, the in court team members, but also for our community. And so we're asking that council request that council supports this request. And I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have, >> mayor. >> Okay. Uh, let me uh ask the first one and then I'll Let's see. I've got council member Bergen. >> Um, council member Garder Gardner. >> Jerinsky second. >> Oh, Jerinsky. And then Gardner. Okay. >> Council member Mario. And then Kums is five as well. >> Mario and Kums. Okay. Um did you uh on this? So we we've got a case load certain case load and right now I think that uh that cases are that um hearings are allowed to go past 5:00 and it and it and it requires overtime. Correct. >> That's correct. Yes. >> Okay. But but you've got to but but you've got you're meet you're meeting that case load. I know we we're we're copying off domestic violence and but we're picking up vehicle registration cases >> and uh under this four days. Do you think you can still meet that case load? >> 100%. We wouldn't make the request if we didn't think that we could mayor and again I believe that it'll actually be a benefit for all parties in that again we'll be able to start the dockets earlier. We'll have an hour on the back end as well to where we will have the opportunity to reduce the amount of overtime that we're seeing in the court. >> Okay. Did you work with the city attorney's office on this? >> Uh we did speak with both the um the prosecutor, chief prosecutor Julie Hecman, who I believe is on the call, reached out to Pete Schulty as well. We did discuss this with um those parties in addition to all leadership over here at the court. Candace was involved in the discussion, Julie Hecman and Elizabeth Cadz. >> This requires uh the rescheduling of prosecutors. Um so can somebody from the city attorney speak to that? >> Sure, Mayor uh Mayor Coffman, uh members of council, judge, uh Pete Schulty, city attorney. We we've had some conversations about this and I what I'll tell you is uh my staff over at the the prosecutors uh on the criminal division are salaried. Um, they're not paid hourly, so they get paid what they get paid. Um, unless council would, unless if council wants us to go forward, great. But unless you guys tell me otherwise, I'm going to direct my staff to keep working uh Monday through Friday, the eight hours, because on that Friday when the rest of the courthouse is closed, they can be doing other things, victim witness contacts, those sort of things. So, you know, I I understand I I don't I don't want to get into the uh you know, you know, to the debate about whether you guys want to do this or not, but I've told the judge and I've told Miss Atkinson that, hey, we'll do what you want us to do. If we have to have a late trial, we have a late trial. But I, you know, I don't see my my staff moving to to the fours. >> Okay. Um I don't know how that complicates it, but Council Member Bergen. >> Uh yes. Thank you, Mayor. Um, Judge Day, um, I'm a little disappointed because you and I had a discussion. I know you reached out to every single council member, so I don't know if you have the votes or not, but I'm a little disappointed because I had asked I asked a lot of questions and um, and there were and I'll go over some of them. Um, but I was hoping that you were going to come back with some alternative proposals that were thoroughly thought out before we make this very important critical decision on staffing. So, couple things. You mentioned other cities that um have this particular um, you know, 410 schedule and I did my own research. Um, Denver actually is Monday through Saturday, so they actually work longer than we do. Um then um also Westminster I believe is the only court that I could find that has the Friday off. Uh Lakewood, Colorado Springs, Leland, Frederick um all still have the 8 to5 Monday through Friday. So that's one point. The other thing is you're hoping that it's going to reduce overtime savings. We've got DVs going away. But then also, if you just add 7 a.m. to 6 PM, and this is what you and I talked on our phone uh conversation about. If you just add 1 hour here and 1 hour on the tail end and do away with Friday, people who work, you know, till 5:00 at night, sometimes longer, sometimes till 6:00. Um even if you work till 5:00, 8 to 5 job, you've got to drive to the court. And then you told me yourself that the overtime of these cases sometimes can be 3 hours. Um, so that 6:00 sounds to me like it will probably extend would it normally extend into overtime into a 7:00 8:00 time frame. Um, so we're going to still pay overtime. So what I had asked was could you look at different scenarios? For example, um for those people that do work 8 to 5 jobs, maybe let's start one day a week. We would start a little bit um later and then we could go till 8:00 p.m. at night and that would offer them that flexibility. Um so I'm again I would like to see some different scenarios. Um I you know everybody in the city would love to have Fridays off. So, um I I understand that this is very appealing to the employees and I I can see that, you know, you want to make them happy and uh possibly it will help with recruiting. I'm not sure, but um we might as well close the entire city down on Fridays because I think everybody else would like to have Fridays off, but I'm really concerned about making sure that we are meeting the needs of our citizens and that we are offering them flexibility. And I don't I don't see that there's actual evidence that we're going to really reduce the overtime. Um and then the furlow days I believe um are likely to be reduced from what we are anticipating them to be. Um so I I just really wish um that you would have taken my you know my recommendation. I thought you said yes, you were going to look into it. And so moving forward, I would rather postpone this decision and just maybe come back with a couple different scenarios to really evaluate the effectiveness of doing this because it's a big move. And you know, again, we want to serve um the the the residents of our city. >> Yep. >> And and and also um you have relief judges, so not everyone works that half day on the weekend. Correct. That's correct. Yeah, it's just the relief judges in in for for judicial. That's correct. And I and I did and I I appreciated the conversation that we had. As I as I mentioned, there were some things that you brought up in the course of our conversation u about coming up with other ideas and other scenarios about how we could best address the issues that I put forth in the presentation. I did reach out and West Minister's four, Thornton's four, Lakewood's four, except for their Friday. They only have one court and they only take care of their in custodies. >> Lakewood is still working on Friday, >> but it's only for an in custody docket and it's a remote docket and it's that's the only docket that they have on Friday in Lakewood. Otherwise, everything else in the court is four days. And so when I say that I reached out and I and I told you that I was I did reach out to those jurisdictions that are doing uh the 410s to get their feedback and talk to them about it. And so I reached out to Thor and I reached out to West Minister um to get their um feedback. And as I said they they all felt those two felt and I've talked with Judge Bozart too. And >> but can't in those situations can't people still come into the court and pay fines? So the clerks the clerks are still open. >> No, there is. >> So they can't come in and pay fines on Friday? >> Not that I am aware of. They only have court Monday through Thursday in those jurisdictions. >> And judge, let me I I I looked too because I wanted to see kind of where we are. What I found out is like the courts were not having dockets on those days. So, I think you're absolutely right about the courts, but the clerks were open so people could come in to pay their citations, to do do other things, but the judges may not be there. >> I don't know how they're doing that to meet the 48 hour work week. They may have some flex schedule going on for their their core clerks. Um, I don't know how they would be operating on 410s and then also having their core clerk come in on Friday and then somehow some way keeping the 40 hours. They must be working on at least for the core clerks a flex schedule, but the court itself is only open on those 410s. And that's true for Westminster, too. The whole city, I believe, in Westminster is on 410s. We looked at and I talked with some of uh the the team members after our discussion, Council Member Bergen, about different options about expanding the hours on Tuesdays and Thursdays, which is our jury trial days, and then having a half day Friday, right? >> And it really it it wasn't um wellreceived because of what we were talking about with having that third day off to deal with um the setting of appointments, having a third day off to deal with. But, you know, I'm sorry to interrupt, but do we have a pretty um generous benefit package at the city of Aurora with paid time off? I I I don't see like, you know, again, yeah, I'm sure the employees would love to have Friday off. Um, but I I you're going back to the employees to find out what they want. What about the residents? And I again I appreciate this but I think can we at least look at making sure that this is the right move for the city and not just making a decision you know without without any kind of analysis like maybe we need a study maybe we need an outside you know consultant. >> Well as I said this isn't a decision that we've made lightly. We've looked at it and try to look at the benefits and the negatives about it. And we believe that it would be a benefit for our community as well because of the expanded hours. It also will give the opportunity for jurors not to be in court as long as they're in court. We'll be able to start earlier and finish earlier. As I mentioned earlier, anytime that we go past 5:00, which is often, we're looking at court overtime. And it may be, >> which is to my point, if you're if you're just open till 6, you're still going to go into overtime. Um because those typically don't just it's not it's going to go into, you know, 7:00, 8:00, >> right? But >> I just don't see a thorough analysis. I'm sorry. I don't I don't support it at at this juncture until I could see at least a couple scenarios. I mean, maybe this is the best proposal, but I don't I don't see it at this point. I'm sorry, somebody else. Thank you. Um, so I am very supportive of this. Um, I I think that, you know, this is a very common schedule. Um, you know, in police work, I know our detention workers um, you know, are working 410s. you see um you know nurses, doctors working 312s, 410s um and as judge day stated you know there there is trauma involved in this line of work and so I think that in trauma lines of work that's why we see you know firefighters work the schedules that they do and police officers work the schedules that they do and nurses and doctors work the schedules that they do and our detention workers and on and on and on and on. Um I I you know I I like the idea that people could potentially you know be called to jury dismissed and still make it to work um you know if someone takes a plea deal. Um, I I like the idea that it makes it more appealing um to get judges and I I think that, you know, having this one day a week uh will attribute to less people calling in, taking time off because they have a weak day that they can, you know, deal with getting an oil change or or deal with having a doctor's appointment. Um, I think that, you know, this is always something that if if we find that it's not working and it's not serving the people and it's not serving the purposes, I don't think any of us think that uh, Judge Days is uh, discreditable. Um, I think that he would be honest with himself and honest with us uh, you know, that we tried it, it's not working. Um, you know, I I I just I I would be curious to see, you know, the prosecutors and the public defenders. Um, you know, if a trial starts at 7 every day, um, and that public defender or that prosecutor is on that docket every single day, the 10 hours a day, then I think that those schedules would also need to be adjusted. They shouldn't be expected to work Monday through Friday. Um but holy as it stands um I I am very supportive. This is not an uncommon schedule for a lot of of trauma lines of work. Um and I I do find our judges included very much in the public safety um line of work. And so for all of those reasons, I am very supportive of this. Uh quick question before I go to council member Gardner and that is do you expect um so the trials would actually start at 7 o'clock? >> Yes, they'll be docketed at 7 o'clock. >> So then what time would jury selection have to start? >> We bring jurors in at 7:30. >> That doesn't Okay. I Okay. Council member Gordon. >> Yeah. Um so I I feel similar to Council Member Bergen. Judge Day, you and I had a conversation. I asked quite a few questions um about potential savings. I want to know impact on morale of other city departments that aren't going to be afforded the same opportunity. Um I I wanted to look into possibly having the day we're closed as Wednesdays, not Fridays, or having rolling 410s, so we're open 5 days a week, but each employee only works 410s. I think there's a lot of things we can look at. At the end of the day, uh we are in a customer service business. We serve our residents and we serve our community. Um I would love to have 410 too. I would love to have Friday every Friday off also, but that's not the reality um for most people. Um I do understand there is a trauma component uh to to folks that are that that work in our courts, which is why I think, you know, hey, let's look at an option. Like I said, maybe Wednesdays, maybe rolling 410s. Like there are other things that we could come up with. Um, you know, the overtime um argument to me isn't really it's not it doesn't move the needle enough. Um, you know, if we're talking 500 hours of overtime at let's say $50 an hour, um, that's $25,000 a year, that's that's not a significant um, needle mover. Um I and you know I understand retention of courts employees but then I then I'm going to say well what about retention of all the rest of the city staff that also wants to work four 10-hour shifts. Um I would suspect because it sounds like we pulled sta or the staff and that's what they wanted that if we pulled all of the city staff everyone in the city would say they'd want to work 410. I can't imagine anybody that wouldn't want to do that. Um some of us work 510 or more. And so I I just I think there's some other options we need to look at and I don't think that this is ready to move forward. I suspect I didn't get a call back because the votes are probably there and so my opinion doesn't really matter but I'm not supportive of this at the time. No, I think your opinion does matter and I took it to heart as to the discussion that we had and the different ideas that we talked about including the Wednesdays which would did not address the specific issue of the secondary trauma having that third day off as what some of the studies have shown is a big big benefit. It's a midday midweek break. But we did discuss it and we also discussed the rolling um four 410s and keeping the court open for uh the five days a week. um that was discussed. This was the proposal that we put forward. It doesn't mean if if it the council doesn't support it that we won't look for other things that could potentially benefit the court, but this is what this is what we're proposing that will have the the best benefit for what we believe is our incourt team members and also the community as well. >> Okay. And let me just say that we're we're actually over schedule right now. And so uh I'm going to recognize the people that are on the list, but um after that I think we're going to I council member Bergen made an offer that maybe we should continue this and and uh with um the chief judge uh presiding judge taking some of these comments that he's heard and and then coming back to council later on. Uh council member Mario. Thanks, Mayor. Um, and thanks, Judge Day. Um, uh, you know, I I was curious to hear, um, what the public defender team like feedback was here. Um, I think it it sounds like you did a lot of collaboration with the the team to really try to make something workable. So, that gives me a little bit of um I guess it alleviates some of my like just gut reactions, right? How are we going to take a whole day off? Um, I hear you on like the flexible timing. I mean, if we really wanted to be that customer service friendly, we should explore kind of the the virtual option, too, but I won't get into that right now. So, I guess all I'm saying is I I'm open to the idea. I would like to see some sort of like I don't know phasing approach or be really clear on like how we are measuring like impact um and uh how it's being received from community. So I want to be clear on like how we're measuring that if we do move forward with this >> council council. >> Thank you mayor. Um, so I think just a couple of items for thought since it sounds like we're going to continue this. Um, it sounds like we already currently bring jurors in at 8, so they're not coming that much earlier to do this option. Um, so I think that's a good point to note. Um, I would want to, as Council Member Murio mentioned, look at what it might take to have some virtual court options um to help be more effective at reducing failures to appear as well as making sure that we're addressing the needs of our community in terms of being able to make it to court. Um, so those and then of course you and I had talked about, you know, are there any potential issues for witness attendance as well as potential failures to appear that could occur on this schedule. And so I think if we can just have a little bit more time when we bring this back and a little bit more discussion on those and the other issues that folks raised. >> Okay. I think I think we need uh be respectful of the um public comment period given all that's happened. And so uh what I would ask without objection if we can continue um this item to the next study session uh giving uh individuals the opportunity to ask more questions and for uh judge day to come back with maybe some different scenarios as well. Uh and then uh is there is and without objection also I would ask to move 5A to the next study session >> and mayor oh sorry council member Bergen had asked me if we could dual list 5A at the next meeting since we didn't reach it today. Um that's her prerogative but I wanted to put it out there see if anybody was totally against doing that because we're we're not getting on this study session. >> Okay. Um is there is there is there okay let me first for um number 4 A is there objection to continuing that to the next study session seeing none we'll do that is there objection to uh uh continuing number 5A to the next study session and dual listing it um very well then that's what we'll do thanks everybody uh for those who want to uh participate uh in the public comment period I would suggest everybody do that uh That will begin in uh a couple more minutes. Let's see. Uh Katie, is that on the same are we on the same uh do we have to switch over for comment? >> We switch over to the regular council meeting. >> Yep. Regular council meeting. >> Thanks everybody. >> And mayor, whenever we start, uh let's do 30 straight minutes. [Music]