Aurora Councilmember Danielle Jurinsky threatened to pursue an ordinance that would stop the city from prosecuting domestic violence cases if legislation at the Colorado state Capitol about indigent defense contracts gets passed.

After a long and contentious push to see if the city of Aurora could save money by contracting out for indigent defense, which ended when a request for proposals came up empty in February, the issue arose once again with a proposed bill in the state House banning municipalities that handle domestic violence cases from using flat-fee contracting. 

The conversation about whether or not to contract out for indigent defense rather than keep the city’s in-house public defender’s office has been going on for months, with proponents of contracting out the work saying it could save the city money and opponents saying contracted public defense would not meet the level of defense provided by an in-house public defender’s office.

A request for proposals to gauge how much, if anything, the city could save through contracting went out in January and came up empty in February when no law firms submitted bids, according to documents collected by The Denver Gazette. 

At the time, Councilmember Dustin Zvonek — who drove the efforts to send out the RFP — told The Denver Gazette he would “move on,” saying he still believes it would have been possible to make the city’s indigent defense more cost effective, but nobody was willing to do it.

However, the topic came back up in last week’s Federal, State and Intergovernmental Relations Policy Committee meeting, at which staff presented a draft Colorado House bill that, if passed, would ban municipal governments that prosecute domestic violence cases from using flat-fee contracts for indigent defense services. 

It would require cities to instead pay contractors hourly at the same or higher rate that the state pays for its services, according to the draft bill from sponsor Rep. Mike Weissman, D-Aurora.

Aurora city staff recommended the council not take a position on the draft bill.

The way the language of the bill reads, it is targeted toward Lakewood, Westminster, Denver and Aurora, presiding Aurora Judge Shawn Day said in the meeting, since they are the only four municipalities that prosecute domestic violence cases.

Aurora is an outlier in having its public defender’s office in-house and also an outlier in handling domestic violence cases at the municipal level — one of the reasons opponents of contracting out say the city needs to keep its in-house public defender’s office.

The bill, if passed, would not affect the city of Aurora’s in-house public defender’s office, since it only applies to contract services.

However Jurinsky, who has also been a proponent of pushing the city to see if contracted indigent defense would be cheaper, said she will “not back off.” 

During the meeting she called out Aurora’s Chief Public Defender Elizabeth Cadiz, who has pushed back on the effort to contract out, alleging Cadiz was behind the house bill. 

“I’m sure this legislation came from our friend Elizabeth Cadiz, who is currently on this meeting … in an attempt to stop us from trying another RFP or continue our efforts to get rid of our in-house public defender’s office,” Jurinsky said. 

Cadiz said she was not asked to provide staff comment or recommendations concerning the bill and also didn’t request the opportunity to do so, nor did she provide the draft bill or ask for it to be put on the agenda.

“I will defer to the bill sponsor for questions concerning any other intention of the bill,” she wrote in an email to The Denver Gazette Monday. “I fear that any further comment concerning Council Member Jurinsky’s comments will attract further criticism and retaliation by a member of City Council.”

Day emphasized that the bill would not remove the city’s ability to contract out, just make it such that contractors have to be paid according to state standards. 

Councilmember Angela Lawson, the chair of the committee, acknowledged that staff recommended not taking a position on the bill, but said she wants to oppose it anyway. 

“The local control piece for me is very, very substantial,” Lawson said. “I have a lot of issues with that.”

Jurinsky said she and Zvonek have drafted an ordinance to get rid of domestic violence cases in the city’s municipal court altogether if the bill were to pass. 

“Should this legislation pass, we will no longer prosecute domestic violence cases in the city of Aurora at all anymore,” Jurinsky said. “So, go ahead and gripe about that. Go ahead and put it in your pipe and smoke it because that’s where we’re at and I strongly oppose.”