Denver council approves $45,000 in liability settlements amid oversight debate

The Denver City Council approved two liability settlements totaling $45,000 Monday as members debated whether agency training, discipline and policy oversight contribute to the city’s broader settlement exposure.

Resolution 26-1140 authorizes $30,000 for Zsanae Martinez and her attorneys, AJP Law. Resolution 26-1141 authorizes $15,000 for Larissa Pacheco and AJP Law. Both payments come from the city’s liability-claims appropriation and resolve Martinez and Pacheco v. Jose Duran and City & County of Denver, Denver District Court case 2025CV33437.

The resolutions identify the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure as the department involved but do not describe the allegations, incident dates or locations, or specific conduct at issue. They call the payments full satisfaction of the plaintiffs’ claims.

Councilmember Shontel Lewis said the approvals brought 2026 city settlement spending to $3.992 million. She also said the council had approved more than $34.95 million in settlement-related measures since 2023. The meeting transcript records Lewis first stating a cumulative total of $34,957,300, then adding “$320, excuse me,” without clearly restating the figure. The record supports the rounded total but not a more precise corrected amount; it also lacks the prior itemized spending needed to independently calculate either figure.

Lewis said settlements are paid from the Liability Claims Special Revenue Fund rather than individual agency budgets and called for structural changes across city agencies, including DOTI and the Denver Police Department. Councilmember Parry linked public-safety liability exposure to training, internal policy and discipline in the Police and Sheriff’s departments. Parry said the Office of the Independent Monitor and Citizen Oversight Board should be involved when internal policies change, citing recent disciplinary-policy changes and a new Denver Police Department Taser policy.

The council approved no specific liability-reduction plan, new curriculum, disciplinary rule, reporting mandate or oversight procedure during the discussion.

The council also discussed Council Bill 26-1107, which the official Aug. 3 agenda describes as an $18.8 million rescission from General Fund contingency for transfer to the liability-claims fund. As of Aug. 5, Legistar listed the bill as “Second Reading” and “Pending,” with no final-action date. The transcript records discussion but no motion, vote or passage announcement, so the transfer cannot be reported as enacted.

During that discussion, Lewis said the city had made a $3 million rescission from General Fund contingency. The available records do not establish whether that referred to a separate or earlier transfer, an amount needed to replenish the liability fund, or a misstatement of the $18.8 million bill. Approved minutes, a final action record or an enrolled ordinance would be needed to reconcile the discrepancy.