Cooler heads on the Aurora City Council prevailed this week as conservatives on the dais helped draw the city from the precipice of complicating the scourge of domestic violence just to score political points.
“I don’t understand why, something this drastic, why we have to rush into it,” Councilmember Curtis Gardner asked.
Gardner’s query came just before a council vote to stand down from a misguided plan to close Aurora’s storied domestic violence court system and send hundreds of so-called “DV” cases to county and district courts.
The plan to do just that came from council members Dustin Zvonek and Danielle Jurinsky. They both said that a recent statewide measure signed into law last week created an unfunded mandate by the state.
They’re certainly right about that.
The measure, House Bill 24-1437, sponsored by Aurora Democratic Rep. Mike Weissman, now prohibits any city court that tries domestic violence cases from hiring leased attorneys to provide public defense in the cases, instead of public defenders. It’s the same standard for county and district courts.
Aurora, which modified its city court system decades ago to accommodate the complexity of DV cases — and to ensure better resolutions for victims — has, also, always met that standard.
The new law changes nothing in Aurora, but Jurnsky and Zvonek pushed to close down the Aurora domestic violence court program, which would essentially flood courts in Adams and Arapahoe county and judicial districts.
Prosecutors there said it would create havoc.
“Arapahoe County in particular has warned that, without additional funding, such a change could result in justice for victims being delayed,” the Sentinel reported in a story earlier this week. “According to an estimate by the county, close to 1,600 cases would be moved into its jurisdiction annually as a result of the change, costing upward of $2.45 million.”
There’s no rational argument to support upsetting a solid system that has been praised across the nation for aptly handling an almost always complicated and difficult part of the law.
But Zvonek is absolutely right in questioning why Aurora taxpayers must foot the bill for prosecuting DV cases in city court, taking that shared burden off the state.
The $2.45 million Arapahoe County officials estimate it would cost their legal system doesn’t include Adams County DV cases currently heard in city court. For all practical purposes, only Denver and Aurora keep domestic violence prosecutions in local courts.
While Denver, too, must shoulder the cost of trying these cases in local courts, they are the local courts. Denver, being a city, county and judicial district, simply distributes the cost, and state contribution, to suit its own needs.
Aurora, only a city, and split among three counties and two judicial districts, is not compensated for what is clearly, the work of the state and local judicial districts.
There obviously is some specific cost and value associated with Aurora handling these cases.
The value is preventing domestic violence victims, already in crisis, from becoming further victimized by ham-handling cases or even by having to find a way to courts in Brighton to seek justice, or even just a way to keep things together.
Those on the city council who sniff at others saying how arduous it is to make it to Brighton for court have never actually had to ride an RTD bus there. Or they don’t understand how disrupted the life of domestic violence victims becomes when a partner is removed from the house and takes the car.
The cost to the city, however, is most likely between $2 million and $3 million. There’s no logical reason Aurora shouldn’t be compensated either by agreement, mediation or legislation from the state as a matter of fairness and equity to Aurora taxpayers.
The Sentinel will be keen to hear from prospective state legislative candidates about ensuring that issue moves ahead.
Zvonek is also right in pointing out this week that, despite his apparent lack of sympathy for victims and suspects having to travel to Brighton for court dates, that the county and judicial districts should accommodate Aurora by bringing some or all of the courts to us.
Despite Zvonek’s clouded understanding of or appreciation for Colorado history and the role of the “county seat,” he makes a valid point underscored repeatedly for the past 50 years in Aurora: This should be a city-county government like Denver.
The domestic-violence issue needs to be resolved now. The languishing City and County of Aurora conundrum is for another day.
The Sentinel Editorial Board is welcome for me having provided them this obvious answer to the conundrum weeks ago in response to their first article on this matter. I appreciate the acknowledgement.