Aurora lawmakers propose city hall camera restrictions, adding to protest fray

AURORA | Aurora City Council members fired another salvo in the ongoing battle between lawmakers and family members and supporters of a man fatally shot by police last year, this time, restricting cameras inside city council chambers.

The proposal, on tap for Monday’s Aurora City Council meeting, may violate state open meeting laws, according to a state expert and Colorado press attorney.

A resolution was added late Friday to Monday’s city council agenda would restrict where the public and media would be allowed to photograph and video proceedings. 

“It is for safety purposes,” Councilmember Françoise Bergan, the bill’s sponsor, said in an email.

Lewis was fatally shot May 23, 2024, by an Aurora SWAT officer during Lewis’ arrest at an Aurora apartment complex. The arrest was linked to attempted murder charges in Denver. Arapahoe County prosecutors said SWAT Officer Michael Dieck did not break any laws during the shooting. Aurora Police Chief Todd Chamberlain said internal investigations revealed Chamberlain did not break any police policies during the shooting. As police were yelling at Lewis to surrender during the parking-lot confrontation, Dieck fired at Lewis as he was raising his arms and hands. Lewis was holding a cell phone in his hand, and Dieck told investigators he thought it was a gun.  

Since then, friends, family members and activists have protested during, before and after Aurora city council meetings, sometimes shutting them down and spending hours speaking to or in front of the city council.

City lawmakers have increasingly restricted how the public addresses the city council without specifically targeting the Lewis coalition of about a dozen regular participants.

City Attorney Pete Schulte said Friday the city has received numerous complaints about the protesters recording in the “well” of council chambers and obstructing views in the audience with tripods live-streaming during the “public invited to be heard” session before the council meeting. 

“The use of cameras or any other recording device is prohibited in the well of the city council chambers during any meeting or public comment session, except by city staff,” the resolution states. “Cameras and recording devices used in the designated seating areas of the chambers must not obstruct views, interfere with the session, or disrupt the decorum of the session.”

Schulte described the “well” of the chamber as the floor space between the front row of the auditorium seating and the dais where city council members sit. 

This new rule, if passed by city council Monday night, would also preclude the media from being able to take photographs or video from that area.

Sentinel photojournalists point out that the restricted “well” is the only location in the council chambers with a clear view of the audience. Over the years, the Sentinel and many other media outlets have taken photographs and video from the council floor, including when officials are sworn into office or present the public with awards or honors.

State open meeting officials point out that it’s not uncommon to see photojournalists on the floor in front of the dais of most chambers of lawmakers, locally, at the state Capitol and even both chambers of Congress.

The proposal exempts city staff from the council well photography restrictions. That may run afoul of state open meetings laws and court cases upholding it, according to open meetings law experts and lawyers.

The Executive Director of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition, Jeff Roberts, said case law makes clear that the public has a right to record public and municipal meetings, but that reasonable restrictions are permitted.

Roberts pointed to a  Park County incident in 2019 where county commissioners told 9News they were prohibited from recording inside a meeting. A court ruled that, “it’s reasonable to request that someone record from the side or back of the room instead of the middle, so that audience members’ view isn’t blocked.”

Colorado media attorney Steve Zansberg said the right for the press to record municipal meetings is spelled out specifically in the Tarus v. Borough of Pine Hill case, decided by the Supreme Court of New Jersey in 2007, according to the CFOIC website. 

Roberts said, however, that the Aurora proposal explicitly excludes city staff from the photo restrictions, which is a possible violation of the Colorado Open Meeting Laws. 

“If a restriction is placed, it must apply equally to everybody and every meeting, not just to certain individuals or certain meetings,” Roberts said. 

The city council proposal would also allow only one person at a time at the lectern on the council floor when the public is addressing the council at the dais. 

Last month, MiDian Schofner, one of the regular Lewis protesters, invited people to stand with her at the lectern. The group stood together in the “well” throughout the public listening session. The group has similarly moved onto the council floor numerous times over the past 10 months.

In addition, the measure would no longer require city lawmakers to give a 24-hour notice when attending meetings virtually.

In the most recent meeting, more than half of city councilmembers attended the “public invited to be heard,” and the city council meeting virtually from the same building. The Sentinel requested a list of the city council members who failed to give the required 24-hour notice at the last meeting that they would attend virtually, and not in person. Councilmembers Danielle Jurinsky and Steve Sundberg did not give the notice required by current city council rules. 

Although Councilmember Alison Coombs said the rule was not strict, and it is common for council members not to give a formal notice. 

Under those new rules, council members are not obligated to be on the dais for the public comment portion of the meeting. The rules, however, require a 24-hour notice if they intend to attend the rest of the city council meeting virtually.