File Photo by Gabriel Christus/Aurora Sentinel
AURORA | Court fees for English interpreters when people don’t appear for their jury trial are more than doubling in price.
In one attempt to reduce the city’s deficit going into 2026, city officials looked into raising fees in Aurora’s Municipal Court. After research and vetting other Colorado courts and state statute, they found that the only place city officials felt confident about raising fees was in the cost of interpreter charges for jury trials when an individual fails to appear.
“I was unable to find another Municipal Court that did charge interpreter fees,” Candace Atkinson, court administrator said. “There was only one that said they do sometimes for trials.”
During the study session, Aug. 25, city council moved forward on more than doubling the court costs for interpreters from $35 to $90.
This new fee applies only to individuals who fail to appear for their jury trial and does not include costs for regular hearings.
“I think having interpretation is part of the cost of business, especially in a city with over 100 languages,” Councilmember Crystal Murillo in opposition. “I think Aurora Public Schools said 160 languages, and passing that down onto the individual that wouldn’t be shared by everyone, is concerning to me. So I’m just concerned that this is going to just be an impact on our immigrant communities, folks who speak another language.”
Councilmembers Alison Coombs and Ruben Medina also said they were opposed.
“Whether the intent is simply cost recovery, ultimately, the impact becomes discriminatory, and so for that reason, I will not be supporting,” Coombs said.
The measure now moves to the council floor for formal consideration at a future meeting.
There seems to be some confusion to what failure to appear at a scheduled hearing where the defendant has made a decision about his upcoming courtroom case. This article is telling us Aurora will now double the fee for any FTA after the defendant has already had at least one appearance and most likely with free representation by a public defender and requested a jury trial rather than a bench trial.
“This new fee applies only to individuals who fail to appear for their jury trial and does not include costs for regular hearings.”
CM Crystal Murillo brings up APS and the various languages the schools deal with. She further states the public pays for this educationally industry as a whole. She is correct. So, she tries to stretch this evaluation to her next egalitarian goal. She tries to pontificate to us this APS shared expense to taxpayers is somehow akin and the same as having a court room staff, and a jury brought in processed and ready to go but the defendants’ decision — who cares if I want a FTA. Unlike this council members absurd perceptions how things work, the rest of council feels taxpayers should not be expected to pay for the direct choices people desire to make. These choices include seif- responsibility is the point. The big picture, there was a lot more cost for a FTA than just an interpreter @ $35.
“Whether the intent is simply cost recovery, ultimately, the impact becomes discriminatory, and so for that reason, I will not be supporting,” Coombs said.
What?? Now this council member throws out the “discrimination” card. “discriminatory” … Failure to Appear, Madam Coombs is clearly a self-made choice… Sorry, no discrimination exists as you claim.