A bill banning sweeps during freezing temperatures passed a first hurdle Monday after City Council voted nine to four to pass the legislation along to a second and final vote next week.
"It seems only humane and logical to me that we don't shove people around when it's freezing out," said Councilmember Paul Kashmann, who cosponsored the bill with Councilmembers Sarah Parady, Shontel Lewis and Council President Jamie Torres.
A second bill would have raised the threshold to open emergency warming shelters from 20 degrees to 32 degrees. The sponsors of the bill decided to postpone it to work with the Mayor's office on a pilot program expanding emergency warming shelters.
Monday's bill initially would have stopped sweeps under the urban camping ban if temperatures were projected to dip below 32 degrees two days before a planned sweep, but Council narrowed the scope on Monday.
An amendment, passed unanimously, changed the bill to allow sweeps on a day with freezing temperatures as long as the sweep took place during a period of the day where temperatures rose above freezing. That amendment required city agencies to leave two hours at the end of a sweep for people to move elsewhere before temperatures dipped back below freezing.
In an email opposing the original bill, Mayor Mike Johnston said it would "effectively repeal the camping ban for a third of the year." According to a Denverite analysis, more than 95 percent of days in January, February, March, November and December went below 32 degrees. But according to Councilmember Sarah Parady, 88% of days in January over the past nine years had periods above 32 degrees that would qualify for a sweep under the new amendment.
However, city staff said the time window above freezing on winter days might not provide enough time to complete a sweep and build in two hours for someone to move elsewhere.
"I think that eight to 10 hours is actually quite a conservative estimate in terms of time," said Denver Police Chief Ron Thomas regarding potential time windows to clear encampments.
A second amendment, also passed unanimously, made clear the city would maintain authority to move people on the streets indoors to shelters and medical services during all temperatures, but be unable to move people who would continue to camp elsewhere in the city.
"Nothing about these ordinances is meant to prevent outreach or offers of housing or medical assistance," Parady said.
Councilmembers opposed to the bill said city staff should make the call on sweeps.
Under the legislation, a number of agencies would maintain authority to sweep encampments regardless of the temperature. According to the bill sponsors, the Denver Police Department would still be able to make arrests or move people trespassing on private property, and the Denver Fire Department would still be able to respond to calls of fire.
But the bill would restrict other city agencies' ability to sweep encampments purely because people were violating the urban camping ban. Under the ordinance, staff would only be able to sweep encampments in freezing weather if there was an imminent risk to life. According to the sponsors, that would exclude something like a rat infestation, a reason the city has cited for sweeping encampments in the past.
The legislation would leave that decision up to the discretion of the Department of Public Health and Environment (DDPHE). But Interim Deputy Director of DDPHE Bob McDonald said he was not clear on when to make that call.
"Nobody's talking directly with me about what it means to certify that one public health risk is more serious than another public health risk," McDonald said. "Quite frankly, I'm concerned about the idea of legislating the decision-making of people who have public health experience."
Councilmembers Kevin Flynn and Darrell Watson said the city was better off leaving the decision up to city staff. They voted no on the bill along with Councilmembers Amanda Sawyer and Diana Romero Campbell.
"I believe that we should leave these decisions in the hands of the professionals that we've hired to do this work," Flynn said. "I know that we have canceled and postponed cleanups in the past based on weather conditions. I don't think that's a judgment that we should make from this dais."
Councilmember Amanda Sandoval voted yes on the preliminary vote, but said she had a lot of lingering concerns and was not sure how she would vote ultimately. Still, she said she did not always trust city systems as they exist to make the right call.
"The system has been broken," Sandoval said. "I have been burned by the system. My family has been burned by the system, and I think a lot of BIPOC [Black, Indigenous and other people of color] people get burned by the system. So, I don't inherently trust a system."
Homeless advocates, healthcare staff and supportive Councilmembers said the city needs to take a harder line against sweeps during cold temperatures.
During a public hearing on the bill in December, a number of healthcare professionals and homelessness advocates spoke about increased risks of hypothermia and death when people are forced to move locations during freezing weather.
"Houseless people are forced to pack all their belongings in the cold and snow, often getting themselves and their property wet, dragging property long distances in the cold," wrote Housekeys Action Network organizers in a letter supporting the bills signed by more than 40 nonprofits earlier this month. "When someone is sick or disabled this process is even worse."
Parady emphasized that the bill was aimed at people who are unable or refuse to go inside to shelters during sweeps, not people who would move indoors on their own when provided resources and support.
"We are not talking about a radical measure here. We are literally talking about the coldest days of the year in Denver, Colorado, allowing someone to stay in a tent that is their only shelter," she said.
Lewis emphasized that the impetus behind the bill came from conversations with people living on the streets themselves.
"What we heard from those who are actually sleeping in our streets is that they wanted this," she said. "This is coming from those that are directly impacted by this."
While the bill passed a first vote Monday, it has a tricky road ahead before becoming city law.
All new bills must pass City Council twice, which means the ordinance will be up for a second vote next week. It needs seven votes to pass, and while nine Councilmembers voted in favor on Monday, a number of them voiced concerns and said they might not approve a final vote.
If it passes, the bill then needs Mayor Mike Johnston's signature. But Johnston voiced his opposition to the bill in the past over concerns that it would be too restrictive. If Johnston were to veto the bill, Council would need a supermajority -- nine votes -- to override the veto. Barring any postponement, City Council will vote for a second and final time on Tuesday, Jan. 16 before the bill could head to Johnston's desk.
