After a scathing audit in September when the state auditor called the operations of the Colorado Division of Civil Rights and the state’s Civil Rights Commission on the carpet over delays and transparency, the agency and commission fired back Tuesday with a letter that some said was an effort to rewrite history.

In September, the auditor called into question the agencies’ transparency, compliance with several state laws and time delays. The audit made 11 recommendations to improve the agency’s processes, but in the audit, the agency noted it only “partly agreed” with seven of the 11, leading the auditor and the Legislative Audit Committee to surmise that the agency didn’t intend to follow through with compliance.

Among the recommendations that the agency disagreed with:

• That division requests for extensions of time be made for “good cause” rather than to accommodate division staff, who the audit said often failed to complete investigations in a timely manner. The division is required to complete an investigation in 270 days, but the audit found 367 complaints failed to meet that deadline. In its response in September, the division said it would not stop initiating time extension requests, claiming “its current practice preserves the rights of the parties and allows for the completion of the administrative process.”
• That the commission vote on appeals in open session rather than behind closed doors, a violation of the state’s open meetings law. The commission responded that its “confidential discussions are not subject to documentation. The Commission will not engage in creating a record of its deliberations.”

The Division of Civil Rights is responsible for enforcing the state’s civil rights law with respect to housing, public accommodation and employment. The Civil Rights Commission conducts hearings on complaints forwarded from the division.

On Tuesday, the agency submitted a five-page letter to the state auditor just as the hearing started, attempting to persuade the auditor and the audit committee that it really didn’t disagree with those recommendations, despite the written responses that said otherwise.

Deputy Attorney General Christopher Beall, who represents the agency, explained the letter’s contents during Tuesday’s hearing.

The letter disputed that the division disagreed with audit recommendations regarding time extensions. The letter stated that the division had agreed with a recommendation that extension requests had to articulate the reason more time was needed. An addendum from the auditor in that same report said it was unclear what they disagreed with.

A third recommendation, that the division would conduct a “good cause” analysis on time extensions to ensure they followed the rules, also received a “partially agree” response from the division in the audit. However, the letter disputed that, claiming the division had agreed with that recommendation.

“This letter is inaccurate,” said Deputy State Auditor Monica Bowers. State Auditor Dianne Ray added that subsequent email responses from the commission regarding the recommendations “do not align” with what they were claiming in the letter. 

The division did make changes in policy regarding the time extensions issue, according to Patty Salazar, executive director of the Department of Regulatory Agencies, who also attended Tuesday’s hearing. Salazar had attended several meetings in recent months with the commission, along with Beall, and told the committee that individual staff members would not be making the final call on time extensions, and that those extensions would have to be assessed and approved by a supervisor. 

As to voting on appeals, the commission in September began doing so in open session, but only on case numbers, not on the names of the parties involved or even on the issue at hand. That’s to preserve confidentiality, according to the commission.

State Sen. Paul Lundeen, R-Monument, said of the  seven recommendations partially agreed with, that in his mind that’s the same as partially disagreeing.

“It’s critically important that we get the record straight” as to whether the commission and division are in agreement with the recommendations, or if they were trying to back away in a manner that Lundeen said “is not in the best interest of the civil rights of the people of Colorado.”

Beall stated that the commission and division now do agree with those recommendations.

“This letter contradicts the audit,” said committee vice-chair Rep. Lori Saine (R-Firestone), and that she wasn’t pleased with it showing up at the last minute. “It reflects on the culture” of the commission and division, Saine said.