Oversight in Denver

Overview

The Department of Public Safety (DOS) is headed by the Executive Director of Public Safety (EDOS) and staffed with civilians. The EDOS is a Mayoral appointee and is responsible for, among other things, managing the Denver Fire Department (DFD), Denver Police Department (DPD), Denver Sheriff Department (DSD), and the 911 Emergency Communications Division.  The Mayor also appoints the heads of the DPD, DSD, and DFD.

Public safety employees can be categorized in several different ways and have two completely separate personnel systems: career service and civil service. Deputy sheriffs and most civilian employees are part of the career service system, while police officers and firefighters are part of the civil service system. More practically, however, they can be divided into employees who are authorized to carry badges and guns, and those who are not. Here, we’ll collectively refer to employees authorized to carry badges and guns as “uniformed personnel.” The DOS is authorized to hire almost 2,500 uniformed personnel, including up to 1,596 police officers, 875 deputy sheriffs, and 12 fire investigators. These uniformed personnel are subject to a more rigorous disciplinary process than other employees, as will be described below.

Misconduct Complaints

Any member of the community can file a complaint against any uniformed personnel that they believe may have acted improperly. Complaints can be filed anonymously and can be made by anyone, including witnesses or those who heard about an incident from someone else. Complaint topics can include disrespectful treatment, improper use of force, or any other allegation against specific uniformed personnel, regardless of whether the complainant knows their name(s) or badge number(s). Complaints can be provided to the Citizen Oversight Board (COB), the Office of the Independent Monitor (OIM), or directly with departments’ internal investigative offices. The easiest way to file a complaint or commendation related to the DPD or DSD is through the OIM’s online form. The DFD has an online form available as well. 

Historically, both DPD and DSD had their own internal affairs offices that were responsible for investigating allegations of misconduct concerning uniformed personnel and recommending appropriate discipline. This is still the case for the DPD, which has both an Internal Affairs Bureau (IAB) responsible for initial screening of complaints, gathering evidence, and conducting interviews and a Conduct Review Bureau (CRB, often also referred to as the Conduct Review Office or CRO) responsible for evaluating the evidence and making initial disciplinary recommendations. However, the DSD’s internal affairs division was replaced in 2019 by a new Public Integrity Division (PID) within the DOS. The PID consists of an Administrative Investigations Unit (AIU) and a Conduct Review Unit (CRU), which have responsibilities similar to their DPD counterparts. While complaints can be made through many channels, complaints about DSD uniformed personnel are first evaluated by AIU, with the results of any formal investigation then going to CRU, which recommends specific outcomes. Similarly, complaints about DPD or DFD uniformed personnel are first evaluated by their respective IAB, with the results of any formal investigations then going to their CRB, which recommend specific outcomes.

Department heads can issue reprimands on their own, but if they wish to impose more severe discipline they must propose it to the EDOS, who is responsible for the final decision on any discipline for uniformed personnel more severe than a reprimand. This process is the same regardless of whether a complaint is initially submitted to the Board, the OIM, the DSD’s Grievance and Incident Review Team (GIRT), or directly to the internal affairs units.

After the EDOS makes the department’s final discipline decision, police officers and firefighters are able to appeal that decision to the Civil Service Commission, where a hearing officer is assigned to decide the appeal. The hearing officer’s decision can be further appealed to the full Commission. Sheriff deputies and most civilian employees can similarly appeal to the Career Service Board, which also uses hearing officers before a second appeal can be made to the Board itself. All employees are also able to appeal disciplinary decisions to the formal court system. 

Oversight

The OIM and the COB were created in 2004 as part of the reforms that were demanded in the wake of the fatal 2003 police shooting of Paul Childs, a developmentally disabled teenager. They replaced the Public Safety Review Commission, which was perceived to be ineffective at overseeing internal misconduct investigations of uniformed personnel.

The OIM is responsible for monitoring all aspects of the investigatory and disciplinary process for uniformed personnel and typically does so by reviewing records and making recommendations during investigations and after each stage of the process is completed. This includes reviewing cases that the law enforcement review units wish to close after an initial screening. If the OIM so chooses, they can also “actively monitor” a case. When the OIM actively monitors a case, its staff works closely with law enforcement internal investigators—including attending relevant interviews—and can provide feedback and recommendations in real-time. If the investigating unit declines the OIM’s recommendations, the OIM has the authority to conduct its own supplemental investigation. The OIM is also tasked with reporting on overall trends in complaints and discipline, which can inform policy recommendations.

In summary, this oversight system is intended to ensure that complaints will be handled properly, that any resulting investigation will be thorough, and that public safety leaders will hear an external perspective before they make any disciplinary decisions.

The Board is not directly involved in each step of the investigatory and disciplinary process like the OIM but is able to review confidential records and provide recommendations for both specific cases and general policies as it sees fit. The Board is also tasked with appointing the head of the OIM (with the consent of the City Council), removing them (after consulting with the City Council), and independently evaluating the effectiveness of the office.

A flowchart representing the discipline procedures previously described on this page.

 

Resources and History

DSD

Resources: 

 

Discipline: 

 

History: 

DPD

Resources:

 

Discipline: 

 

 

History: