SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE CITY OF AURORA, COLORADO POLICE DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COMPLAINT NUMBER XX This matter was initiated by a complaint filed under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C.  12131-12134 with the United States Department of Justice (Department of Justice) against the City of Aurora Police Department (Police Department). The complaint alleged that when an individual who was deaf and used sign language for communication came to the Aurora Police Department an interpreter was not provided for him. The Department of Justice is authorized under 28 C.F.R. Part 35 Subpart F, to investigate fully the allegations of the complaints in this matter to determine the compliance of the Police Department with Title II of the ADA and the Justice Department's implementing regulation, issue findings, and, where appropriate, negotiate and secure voluntary compliance agreements. Furthermore, the Attorney General is authorized under 42 U.S.C. Section 12133, to bring a civil action enforcing Title II of the ADA should the Department of Justice fail to secure voluntary compliance pursuant to Subpart F. The parties to this Agreement are the United States of America and the City of Aurora Police Department. In consideration of the terms of this Agreement as set forth below, the Attorney General agrees to refrain from filing a civil suit in this matter. In the interest of securing compliance by voluntary means, the parties hereby agree as follows: 1. The Police Department does not admit by the signing of this Agreement that the operation of its police services, policies, or practices violates in any respect the ADA or its implementing regulation. 2. The ADA applies to the Police Department because it is a public entity as defined in the Department of Justice's regulation implementing Title II. 28 C.F.R.  35.104. 3. The subject of this Settlement Agreement is the provision of qualified interpreting services to ensure effective communication with individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing in various police situations. 4. The Police Department agrees to furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services when necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in, and enjoy the benefits of, the Police Department's services, programs, or activities. Auxiliary aids and services include qualified interpreters, written materials, and notepad and pen. 5. In any situation involving an individual who is deaf or hard of hearing, the Police Department agrees to give the individual the opportunity to request the auxiliary aid or service of his or her choice. The Police Department agrees to give primary consideration to the expressed choice of the individual unless the Police Department can demonstrate that another equally effective means of communication is available, or that use of the means chosen would result in a fundamental alteration in the service, program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens. 6. The Police Department has developed a written policy, which is attached, to provide that in those situations where the provision of interpreting services is necessary to ensure communication, the Police Department will secure such services. 7. Copies of the policy will be provided to members of the public upon request. 8. In order to inform members of the public regarding the provisions of Title II and their applicability to the Police Department, it will publish, within 30 days of the effective date of this Agreement, the following notice or an equivalent on two separate occasions in a newspaper of general circulation serving Aurora, Colorado. In accordance with the requirements of Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act, the City of Aurora will not discriminate against qualified individuals with disabilities on the basis of disability in the City of Aurora Police Department's services, programs, or activities. The Aurora Police Department will provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services, including qualified interpreters, whenever necessary to ensure effective communications with individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing. 9. The Police Department will provide a copy of the notice to any person upon request. 10. Beginning on the effective date of this Agreement, the Police Department will instruct all of its employees who are in any way responsible for the provision of appropriate auxiliary aids and services, including qualified interpreters, to comply with the preceding provisions of this Agreement. 11. Within 60 days of the effective date of this Agreement, the Police Department will submit a report to the Department of Justice dealing with the actions it has taken to comply with the preceding provisions. This report will include copies of notices published in the newspapers. 12. This Agreement is a public document. A copy of this document or any information contained in it, may be made available to any person. The Police Department will provide a copy of this Agreement to any person on request. 13. The Department of Justice may review compliance with this Agreement at any time. If the Department of Justice believes that this Agreement or any requirement thereof has been violated, it may institute civil action seeking specific performance of the provisions of this Agreement in an appropriate Federal court. 14. Failure by the Department of Justice to enforce this entire Agreement or any provision thereof with respect to any deadline or any other provision herein will not be construed as a waiver of its right to enforce other deadlines and provisions of this Agreement. 15. The effective date of this Agreement is the date of the last signature below. 16. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties on the matters raised herein, and no other statement, promise, or agreement, either written or oral, made by either party or agents of either party, that is not contained in this written Agreement will be enforceable under its provisions. This Agreement is limited to the facts set forth in the first paragraph, and it does not purport to remedy any other potential violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act or any other Federal law. This Agreement does not affect the Police Departments continuing responsibility to comply with all aspects of Title II of the ADA. FOR THE CITY OF AURORA POLICE DEPARTMENT: FOR THE UNITED STATES: (Signature) (Signature) Verne Saint Vincent, Chief of Police John Wodatch, Chief Joan Magagna, Deputy Chief Robert J. Mather, Attorney DATE: 4/11/96 Disability Rights Section Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice Post Office Box 66738 APPROVED AS TO FORM: Washington, D.C. 20035-6738 (Signature) Assistant City Attorney CITY OF AURORA POLICE DEPARTMENT POLICY ON EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION IN SITUATIONS INVOLVING INDIVIDUALS WITH HEARING IMPAIRMENTS It is the policy of the Aurora Police Department that it will furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services whenever necessary to ensure effective communication with individuals with hearing impairments. 1. Auxiliary aids and services include qualified interpreters, written materials, notepads and other effective methods of making aurally delivered materials available to individuals with hearing impairments. 2. The Aurora Police Department must provide an opportunity for individuals with hearing impairments to request the auxiliary aids and services of their choice and must give primary consideration to the choice expressed by the individuals. "Primary consideration" means that the Police Department must honor the choice, unless it can show another equally effective means of communication is available, or that use of the means chosen would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the service, program or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens. 3. This policy addresses those situations where a police officer, after consulting with the individual with a hearing impairment, determines that the services of a qualified interpreter are necessary to ensure effective communication. A. COMMUNICATING WITH A SUSPECT WITH A HEARING IMPAIRMENT PRIOR TO AN ARREST WHEN A POLICE OFFICER HAS PROBABLE CAUSE WITHOUT HAVING TO INTERVIEW THE SUSPECT. If an individual without a hearing impairment would have been arrested on probable cause then the suspect with the hearing impairment in the same situation does not need to be provided with a qualified interpreter. For example, if an officer responds to an aggravated battery call and upon arriving at the scene observes the victim bleeding and the individual with the hearing impairment holding a weapon in his hand and is told by witnesses and the victim that the individual with the hearing impairment struck the victim with the weapon, the officer obviously has sufficient probable cause to make a felony arrest without taking any statement from the suspect. However, a qualified interpreter may still be required if an officer is unable to convey to the arrestee the nature of the criminal charges by communicating on a notepad or by using another means of communication. If the arrestee does not decline the opportunity to communicate through an interpreter, the arrestee should be transported to a holding cell at the Aurora Police Department. The arresting officer can convey the information through the interpreter when the interpreter arrives. B. INTERVIEWING A SUSPECT WITH A HEARING IMPAIRMENT WHEN THE POLICE OFFICER NEEDS TO INTERVIEW THE SUSPECT TO ESTABLISH PROBABLE CAUSE. If a police officer needs to interview a suspect with a hearing impairment to determine if there is probable cause to make an arrest, a qualified interpreter must be provided if written communication is ineffective. When the services of a qualified interpreter are required to provide effective communication, but the officer cannot wait until a qualified interpreter arrives because the officer has to respond to another more urgent call, the following procedures apply: 1. If the investigation does not involve a serious offense, the officer must postpone the interview and possible arrest until the officer can return to the scene when a qualified interpreter is present. If this is not possible, the officer must document his or her investigation as completely as possible and file the appropriate report. 2. If the investigation involves a serious offense, the officer, before leaving the scene must contact the appropriate investigations division supervisor and advise the supervisor of the case. The supervisor will determine if a detective will be called in to wait for a qualified interpreter. If not, the officer must document his or her investigation as completely as possible and file the appropriate report. C. INTERROGATING AN ARRESTEE WITH A HEARING IMPAIRMENT. If an officer cannot effectively inform the arrestee of the Miranda warnings without the use of an interpreter, then the officer must secure the services of a qualified interpreter in order to communicate accurately the warnings to the arrestee prior to any interrogation. An officer seeking to interrogate an arrestee with a hearing impairment must obtain the services of a qualified interpreter prior to any interrogation whenever an interpreter is needed for effective communication. If exigent circumstances do not permit a delay in the interrogation of the arrestee, if an interpreter cannot be located within a reasonable period of time (which should occur very infrequently), if written communication between the officer and arrestee was effective in communicating an understanding of the Miranda warnings, and if the arrestee specifically declines the opportunity to communicate through an interpreter, the officer may proceed with the interrogation by using a notepad. However, if written communication becomes ineffective, for example, because the factual pattern is complex, because the arrestee is having difficulty communicating without an interpreter, or because the arrestee chooses to discontinue the interrogation, the officer must discontinue the interrogation and wait until a qualified interpreter is present before continuing with the interrogation. In most instances a qualified interpreter will be available and the interrogation will not be delayed. D. COMMUNICATING WITH A SUSPECT WITH A HEARING IMPAIRMENT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A NON-CRIMINAL CITATION WHEN A POLICE OFFICER HAS PROBABLE CAUSE WITHOUT HAVING TO INTERVIEW THE SUSPECT. If an individual without a hearing impairment would have been issued a non-criminal citation without being questioned by the investigating officer, then a suspect with a hearing impairment in the same situation does not need to be provided with a qualified interpreter. For example, if the suspect with a hearing impairment is caught on radar speeding, the investigating officer does not have to provide an interpreter to the violator. If an officer has stopped a suspect for committing a non-criminal infraction, if the officer is unable to convey to the violator the nature of the non-criminal infraction by communicating on notepad or by using other means of communication, then the officer should use his or her discretion as to whether to call a qualified interpreter to the scene or whether to issue a warning rather than a citation. E. INTERVIEWING A VICTIM OR CRITICAL WITNESS WITH A HEARING IMPAIRMENT DURING AN INVESTIGATION OF AN OFFENSE. If an officer is able to communicate effectively by writing questions on a notepad and having the victim or witness with a hearing impairment write his or her responses, then the officer may proceed with the interview using a notepad. However, if an investigating officer is unable to communicate effectively with a victim or critical witness by using a notepad or some other means of communication other than a qualified interpreter, then the investigating officer must provide the victim or critical witness with a qualified interpreter. If the investigating officer cannot wait until a qualified interpreter arrives because the officer has to respond to another more urgent call, the following procedures apply: 1. If the investigation does not involve a serious offense, then: (a) The officer can have a qualified interpreter dispatched to the victim's or critical witness's location and request the communications division to recontact the officer when the interpreter arrives. If a qualified interpreter is unable to respond or if the officer cannot return to the scene, the officer must document his or her investigation as completely as possible and file the appropriate report; or (b) The officer can ask the victim or critical witness to come voluntarily to the station when a qualified interpreter is available. At that time, the investigating officer can return to the station to complete the investigation. If a qualified interpreter is unable to respond or if the officer cannot return to the station, the officer must document his or her investigation as completely as possible and file the appropriate report. 2. If the investigation does involve a serious offense and if the victim or witness with a hearing impairment is critical to establishing probable cause for an arrest or for completing the investigation, then the investigating officer, before leaving the scene, must contact the appropriate investigations division supervisor and advise the supervisor of the case. The supervisor will determine if a detective will be called in to wait for a qualified interpreter. If the supervisor determines that a detective will not be responding, and if neither option (1)(a) nor (1)(b) above is available, then the officer may leave the victim(s) or witness(es) at the scene. The investigating officer must then document his or her investigation as possible and file a report. All identifying information on the interpreter must be included in the report. All written questions and responses between and among police officers and persons with hearing impairments must be treated as evidence and handled accordingly. A copy of the written questions and responses must be forwarded with the police report, and the originals must be placed into evidence. (agdilbeck) U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division Disability Rights Section P.O. Box 66738 Washington, DC 20035-6738 XX MAY 14, 1993 (STAMP) Stacie Glass Evans Assistant City Attorney City Attorney's Office City of Aurora 1470 South Havana Street Aurora, Colorado 80012 Re: The City of Aurora Police Department Complaint Number XX Dear Ms. Evans: This letter forwards an original of the fully executed Settlement Agreement between the City of Aurora and Department of Justice concerning title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The Agreement resolves a complaint alleging that the City did not secure an interpreter to ensure that communication with an individual who was deaf was as effective as that provided to others. The Agreement states that the City will take several steps to ensure effective communication with members of the public who are deaf or hard of hearing in the Police Department's programs, activities, and services. This Agreement closes our active investigation. The Disability Rights Section will monitor the City's progress in implementing the requirements of the Agreement. As a step toward implementation, the City will incorporate in its training program guidelines, to provide that in those situations where the provision of interpreting services is necessary to ensure effective communication, the Police Department will secure such services, as required by paragraph 11 of the Agreement, by June 24, 1996, 60 days after the effective date of the Agreement. Failure to implement the requirements of the Agreement may result in a finding on noncompliance with title II of the ADA. -2- The enclosed Agreement is not intended, and should not be construed, to cover any other issues regarding compliance with title II, which may exist and which are not specifically discussed herein. We appreciate your cooperation during our investigation and settlement negotiations. If you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact me at (202) 307-2236. Sincerely, Robert J. Mather Trial Attorney Disability Rights Section Enclosure