In a four-to-one vote Monday afternoon, the Estes Valley Fire Protection District Board of Directors rescinded a letter issued on EVFPD letterhead by the prior Board and dated Jan. 3, 2025 which repudiated the decision of the Larimer County Court which found that the EVFPD violated the state’s open meeting law.
The letter was unsigned but Erika Goetz, who works as the administrative chief of staff at the District told the Board members she was directed to distribute the letter to the members of the Fire District. The letter was also sent by Goetz to two print publications in Estes Park. The letter identified as the “board’s official statement” was published in the Estes Park Trail Gazette on Jan. 6 and also on Jan. 10 in the Estes Park News.
At the May 27 EVFPD board meeting, Board Member Ryan Leahy brought the letter to the attention of the board and asked the board to discuss it. Sandra Smith, the new board president, asked that the matter of the letter be put on agenda for the June 16 meeting so the board could consider taking action to rescind the letter as the official position of the Board and District.
On June 16, Smith read from the letter and opened the matter for discussion saying that she felt it was not appropriate for the EVFPD Board to take a position on the court’s valid ruling regarding a matter that the court concluded was conducted in secret.
While the letter was sent by Goetz reportedly at the direction of one or more members of the previous Board, none of the members of the board signed the letter.
Newly elected Board member Scott Dorman, who served as the fire chief for the EVFPD from 1996 until his retirement n 2015, said because the letter was not signed, he could not vote to support rescinding the letter.
“My main concern is it’s not signed,” said Dorman. “I don’t know where this was originated. Maybe it was a Board member. Maybe it wasn’t, I don’t know, and that’s the only concern.”
Leahy, who was a firefighter with the District prior his election in May, said he received the letter via email from the District’s “admin” email account. Goetz then told the Board members that “My understanding it was a cooperative effort on the part of the Board.” She also told the Board that the letter was posted on the District’s website.
Chief Paul Capo commented on the record that he did not participate in writing the letter.
“I agree that this letter should not have been sent out,” Dorman said then commented that one or two Board members cannot write a letter on behalf of the Board, not have the backing of the Board through a vote, and then instruct a staff member to post such a letter out publicly.
Smith said she was concerned that the letter was communicated to the public as being the policy of the EVFPD Board. She went on to say that that the current Board should not stand behind the letter or the process in which the letter came about.
“If you can’t put your name on it, you shouldn’t put it out,” said Dorman.
“I definitely don’t want the public to feel like that’s how we feel moving forward. So, I think making the statement that this is not the position of this Board is pretty important,” said Leahy.
Smith, a licensed Colorado attorney, made a motion for the EVFPD Board to rescind the letter as it does not state the current Board’s position relative to the process undertaken by members of the previous Board in connection with the process for hiring Capo as the fire chief, and that “it also is not the position of this Board that we disagree with the court’s legal conclusion” or that the prior Board “made every effort to comply with the open meetings law at that time.”
The motion passed four-to-one with Dorman dissenting.
In the minutes of the May 28 meeting, it was noted that Smith stated that the EVFPD is a “public entity, we answer to the taxpayers and to the community that we serve. We are not going to do business in secret, not ever, unless the law requires that we act in executive session. Such executive sessions will be conducted in accordance with Colorado law. We will notice all meetings of 3 or more members of this board in advance.”
In other business, the Fire District Board voted unanimously to find an outside human resources firm to manage the District’s HR matters. Leahy raised a concern in May that the consolidation of the roles of chief of staff, human resources manager, and public information officer into a single role raises concerns about checks and balances, confidentiality, role clarity, and unintended bias.
As a former firefighter with inside working knowledge of the District, Leahy identified the “natural conflicts of interests” with having the administrative chief, who works in close proximity to the fire chief, also serve as the District’s HR administrator and the PIO.
Goetz will still manage routine onboarding for new members of the District, such as payroll and benefit paperwork and worker’s compensation applications, but matters related to grievances or other personal matters will be contracted out to an outside HR firm.
Conflict of interest policy and new legal counsel
To address the issue of conflicts of interest, Smith introduced a conflict of interest policy for the board, a copy of which was included in the board book packet.
The District also voted to hire new legal counsel. Presentations were made by representatives of Collins, Cole, Wynn, and Ulmer and Ireland Stapleton, two law firms that have special district practices. After the presentations, the Board voted four-to-one to retain the Collins firm.
The Board then voted to move into executive session for the purpose of receiving legal advice concerning complaints alleging discrimination and harassment, and for the purpose of receiving legal advice related to outsourcing the District’s human resources needs and the risks and benefits related to such action.
When the Board gaveled out of executive session and returned to the public meeting, they appointed a committee to address the human resources matter.
The Board did not take up the matter of the strategic planning process which began earlier this year. The previous Board decided at their last meeting in April not to adopt the strategic plan report as presented by Capo indicating that it needed specific goals and measurable objectives and that the new board that would be elected in May should address the strategic plan matter.
Due to an unforeseen medical issue, a report from the District’s auditor, Dazzio and Associates, PC., a firm in Colorado Springs, was deferred to the next meeting which will be June 30.