AURORA | City council approved an “emergency” amended resolution to restrict public communications from the Aurora Police Department, including social media posts, mugshots and press releases.
The measure, brought by Councilmember Alison Coombs, requires police communications to follow established city communications policies and procedures, as well as prohibit posting mugshots and suspect names on social media in most cases until the suspect pleads guilty or is convicted. It makes an exception for releasing mugshots and names in the event of a public safety emergency.
It also restricts members of the police department from commenting in their official capacities on “official social media sites, media releases, or as a representative of the City on any pending or enacted city, state, or federal legislation,” unless with prior approval.
On Monday, the council voted 6-4 to approve the resolution, with council members Françoise Bergan, Curtis Gardner, Stephanie Hancock and Angela Lawson opposed. The vote came after numerous comments and testimony by family and activists linked to controversy over how Aurora police handled providing information to the public after cases involving police force.
Conservative members of council were adamantly opposed to the resolution, calling it “deeply disturbing” and saying it would stifle the police department and hurt public safety.
Hancock also accused the progressive council members of using the resolution to pressure Aurora Police Chief Todd Chamberlain into quitting.
“Let’s call this exactly what it is — a direct attack on our police chief, to muzzle our police and to make our city less safe,” Hancock said.
The measure bypassed the usual weeks-long path of city legislation that winds through committees and study session before becoming law on the council floor.
Coombs said in an interview before Monday’s meeting that past and recent public comments and social media posts prompted her concern, including a post about proposed legislation and past comments from police on suspects’ personal lives.
Local prosecutors, including 18th Judicial District Attorney Amy Padden, have raised concerns about some of the police department’s posts influencing litigation or violating civil rights, City Attorney Pete Schulte said at the meeting.
Schulte cited a May 5 social media post from the police department that describes an arrest of a man for suspected kidnapping, car theft and other charges. The post includes the name of the suspect and body cam footage of the arrest, and includes comments about the man’s extensive criminal history.
Schulte said that detail shouldn’t have been included because a person’s past criminal history typically can’t be used against them in court.
“None of the conversations I’ve had with the city manager or other city council members is trying to get APD to stop doing their good work and putting out factual information — we just don’t need the added editorial,” he said.
Chamberlain did not speak at the meeting on Monday.
In a statement released before the meeting, Chamberlain said the resolution would unfairly silence his office over diverging viewpoints and hamper the office’s ability to do its job.
“We should be able to agree to disagree, but it increasingly appears that when information, perspectives, or facts do not align with the views of certain groups, the answer is to silence those voices rather than allow open and honest public discussion,” Chamberlain said. “And if I as a public safety leader cannot discuss or share concerns without reprisal from the local level, my department and I are unable to effectively be what Aurora needs — candid, forthright, and open about how our work impacts the daily lives of those we serve.”
Chamberlain said his office has been successful with its approach to transparency and direct communication, citing a drop in crime, including the city’s reduced homicide numbers, improving community trust surveys and significant compliance with the consent decree. He said his department “has been nothing but professional.”
Coombs strongly disagreed that the police department’s communications, and those of the chief, have been professional, saying she feels there have been several instances of police communications undermining public trust or inappropriately taking political or policy stances.
At the meeting Monday, she said the tone and language not only puts the city at risk of lawsuits, but also fosters racist and divisive comments.
“The tone of innuendo, of opinion, of personal bias that is coloring what is coming out of our department that undermines public trust and it absolutely torches any credibility we may have had over the incredible amount of work that many members of the department and city staff have put into the consent decree,” Coombs said.
Councilmember Amy Wiles agreed that the tone and language of some of the police department’s recent posts were inappropriate, prompting her to feel the resolution is necessary.
“Honestly, I think it’s a shame that our police chief was not able to follow directions given to him previously to just post the facts,” she said. “If he posted the facts, I would absolutely vote no on this.”
Opposing council members worried that the resolution could allow misinformation or false narratives to spread in the absence of comment from the police department. They also questioned why the process of the resolution differed from the norm.
“If this passes, the community, what I call my residents, who live in my neighborhood, should be outraged because we’re not going to get any kind of information,” Lawson said.
Schulte said police would be able to share mugshots and names in the case of a wanted person or if they were seeking additional information or victims, as well as if the person posed a threat to the community.
Ultimately, Coombs said she felt it was necessary to take formal action through a resolution because the chief has “demonstrated that he’s uninterested and unwilling to be responsive” to requests that communications be professional and factual.
Coombs said the chief’s public comments about the personal life and gender identity of Blaze Aleczander Balle-Mason as unnecessary and harmful. Balle-Mason was a 17-year-old who was shot and killed by police in September after they called 911 and claimed they planned to “shoot up” a gas station and responding officers in a suspected attempt to die by suicide by cop.
“That really created a lot of concern and fearfulness and perpetuated stereotypes about transgender and non-binary people,” she said.
The resolution says the city desires consistency in communications on policy positions and notes that only city council, not other city employees, can take an official position on state or federal legislation.
Coombs pointed to a recent social media post from the Aurora Police Department that opposed legislation, SB26-190, which imposes new transparency requirements across the state on police in officer-involved shootings.
The bill, which is waiting for Gov. Jared Polis’ signature to become law, lays out a timeline for when police must share information with the families of people killed in officer-involved incidents, as well as expands who can get access to unedited body-worn cameras and audio recordings. It also prohibits police from making statements that may prejudice any litigation.
Sponsors of the bill said during hearings that some use-of-force cases arising from Aurora, including the deaths of Kilyn Lewis and Rajon Belt-Stubblefield, were linked to their carrying the bill.
The Aurora Police Department’s post, which is on X and Facebook, raises several concerns with the bill, saying it would prevent police from responding to misinformation and “takes us back to the days of saying no comment.”
“Police are no longer allowed to answer tough questions on scene or provide context to events – but anyone else in the community can,” the post says.
The post added that releasing unedited body-worn footage could negatively impact the privacy and dignity of the people and families involved. The post was not attributed to a specific author, though it quoted from an interview Chamberlain did with Fox 31 TV in Denver.
Colorado Democratic Senate President James Coleman said Monday he was surprised by the Aurora Police Department’s comments on the bill because he worked with law enforcement groups, including the Fraternal Order of Police, to craft the language in the legislation.
“I think the intent of that, which we came to an agreement on that language together, was that it would not jeopardize (police) statements and the body cam footage would not jeopardize the integrity of the criminal justice process, but it would also allow those families to have information that they may not have received weeks or months after their loved one life was lost,” Coleman said.
He said he stands by the legislation and is glad to have worked with both law enforcement groups and the families of people killed to promote more transparency.
Coombs said her intent with the resolution is to make sure police communications are transparent and accurate.
“We just want consistency, transparency, ensuring that professional standards and city policies are adhered to, and refraining from speculation and opinion,” Coombs said.