Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Police Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Boulder oversight panel told state sealing law prevents civilian review of sealed police records
Summary
City attorney Chris Reynolds told the Boulder Police Oversight Panel that Colorado's sealed-records law generally bars the panel from reviewing sealed municipal court records; petitioning a court to unseal for limited-purpose review is possible but requires action by the defendant or legislative change.
Chris Reynolds, identified in the meeting as the city attorney, told the Boulder Police Oversight Panel that Colorado's statute expanding automatic sealing of criminal records prevents the civilian review panel from accessing sealed municipal records.
"Sealed records are just not going to be something that the police oversight panel is able to review," Reynolds said, noting the statute carved out limited exceptions that permit law enforcement access but not civilian oversight.
Reynolds said a person whose record is sealed can petition the court that ordered the sealing to ask that the record be unsealed for a limited purpose, such as a panel review; that petition process is controlled by the municipal judge and is tailored case-by-case. He said a legislative fix could explicitly permit limited inspection for civilian oversight, and said municipal courts have in prior instances unsealed records for narrowly defined purposes.
Panel members pressed for clarity on how the status quo will be communicated to the public and whether the panel or city could help a complainant with the petition process. Chico (panel member) asked whether the panel should post guidance so the community knows sealed records cannot be reviewed by the panel unless a defendant petitions a court. Reynolds and Independent Police Monitor Sherry said Professional Standards Unit (PSU) staff currently notify complainants when a record is sealed and that the panel could consider posting explanatory guidance on the oversight website and including language in intake communications.
Panel members discussed longer-term advocacy, including whether to pursue legislation to carve out limited inspection rights for civilian oversight. Reynolds said the change would be a legislative fix and that city intergovernmental staff and legislators might be a route for such a proposal.
Because PSU (a law-enforcement entity) can view sealed records under the statute, Sherry said those complaints will be reviewed by PSU unless a record is unsealed for the panel.
Panel members asked procedural questions about how often a judge grants unsealing and whether the city would assist petitioners; Reynolds said decisions are at the judge's discretion and that the petition would normally be filed by the person whose record was sealed. He encouraged the panel to add public-facing language explaining options for complainants whose underlying records are sealed.
