June 16, 2026 · 1,512 words · 7 speakers · 46 segments
There we go. All right. Good morning. The Senate Workplace Harassment Committee will come to order. Mr. Ben Fitzsimons, the Director of Legislative Human Resources Division, has notified the committee that a complaint has been filed under workplace harassment policy. Therefore, under Senate Rule 21G, subsection 3, the committee is convened. Ms. Berger, please call the roll.
Senators Frizzell?
Here.
Kip?
Here.
Simpson?
Present.
Roberts?
Here. All right. All four of us are present. Senate Rule 21G, subsection 2, directs the committee to elect a chair and a vice chair, one from each of the two major political parties. Is there a motion to appoint a member as committee chair?
Senator Kipp.
for Vice Chair. Thank you. That is a proper motion. Is there any objection? Seeing none, Senator Simpson will be appointed as Vice Chair. Okay, we will now hear from Mr. Ben Fitzsimons, Director of Legislative Human Resource Division. Mr. Fitzsimons, please, you are joined us at the table. Introduce yourself and you can proceed with your remarks.
Great, thank you. I'm Ben Fitzsimons from the Legislative Human Resources Division. To give you a little overview of of how the committee works. The framework and guidance for the Senate Workplace Harassment Committee comes from three sources, Senate Rule 21, Joint Rule 38, and the Workplace Harassment Policy itself. And generally how the committee works, if HR receives a complaint, a workplace harassment complaint, if the complainant requests the formal resolution process under that policy, and if the respondent, the person who has been accused of violating the policy, either a partisan staff member or a legislator, then the committee is convened to engage in the resolution process. So at the initial meeting, at the meeting today, you will hear the details of the complaint. I'll provide you with all the information that I have. Your first order of business will be to determine whether or not the complaint falls within the the scope of the policy. If it does, then you can let me know if you need additional information You can determine if you want a formal investigation You can determine whether you want HR to investigate or whether you prefer to have a third party investigator and we facilitate that for you And then ultimately after you have all the information that you need whether it you know, whether you have that today or whether you need HR to assist with gathering more information for you, you'll review all of the gathered information and determine, given all the information, was the policy violated? And if it was, then you'll recommend a range of corrective actions to chamber or caucus leadership. Implementing any of those actions does fall to either chamber or caucus leadership or supervising legislator, depending on the role of the respondent. I want to touch on confidentiality. There are specific confidentiality measures built into the policy, built into Joint Rule 38 and in statute to protect the identities of complainants, respondents, and witnesses throughout this process. And confidentiality is important for a number of reasons. It's important for maintaining the integrity of the process, of the resolution process. It's a proactive step to help prevent retaliation or any retaliatory behaviors from occurring. It helps to limit as much as possible the influence of politics into the process. And essentially, it protects everybody who is involved. So especially in an environment like this, people who have concerns and people who may have relevant information to provide, they need to trust that their identities are going to not be inappropriately disclosed. And similarly, anyone who has been accused of violating the policy needs to trust that they have access to the appropriate amount of due process without being prematurely or publicly judged. So limiting the number of people who have access to confidential information limits the number of people who could possibly break that confidentiality. Typically, the identities of anyone involved and anyone who provides information, all of that stuff, is maintained confidentially. In addition, records that are created related to complaints under this policy are not subject to public inspection under CORA. There are a few specific carve-outs there, and if any of them apply, we'll talk about those, of course. And Joint Rule 38 even specifies that the identities of involved individuals should not even be disclosed to the committee itself, except as necessary to do your work, to conduct an investigation, to implement any protective measures, any of that stuff. So everyone who may be involved in the process or may possess confidential knowledge is required to maintain that confidentiality, and violating the confidentiality may serve as a violation of the policy itself. So confidentiality is taken very seriously. In order for the committee to do its work in a manner that preserves confidentiality the Senate Workplace Harassment Committee is allowed under statute and rule to go into executive session to discuss the details of any complaint, investigation, or remedial action. So that's the general overview. I am here and will be available throughout the process to support you, answer any questions you have, and ensure that you all have the tools that you need to be able to do your jobs effectively.
Thank you, Mr. Fitzsimons. Committee members, are there any questions for him at this time? Okay, seeing none. Okay, so as Mr. Fitzsimons noted, Pursuant to Senate Rule 21G, Subsection 3 and Colorado Revised Statute 246402, Subsection 3A3, Colorado Revised Statutes, meetings of the Senate Workplace Harassment Committee may occur in executive session. This committee will be conducting an executive session pertaining to the General Assembly's workplace harassment policy. Mr. Vice Chair, could you please make a motion?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that the Senate Workplace Harassment Committee meet in executive session in accordance with Section 2464023A, Roman numeral 3, CRS, for the purpose of matters related to Senate Rule 21G3 and Joint Rule 38 pertaining to the General Assembly's workplace harassment policy.
That is a proper motion. Ms. Berger, please call the roll.
Senators Frazell?
Here. Aye. Sorry.
Kip? Yes.
Simpson?
Hi. That passes unanimously. The committee will enter now into an executive session. All people present in the Zoom meeting who are not members of the committee should leave the Zoom event. Please listen to the public audio broadcast to learn when the executive session has concluded. You will then be allowed to rejoin the Zoom meeting. All those present in the room who are not invited to attend the executive session should leave now. Thank you. All right, we are back. The executive session is completed. The room should be reopened and the audio again be made available to listen to the committee proceedings The committee will now proceed with the rest of its agenda Colleagues are there any motions that would like to be made at this time
Mr. Vice Chair. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I make a motion that the complaint does indeed fit within the scope of the workplace harassment policy. Thank you.
And Mr. Fitzsimons, if you want to explain what this vote is about with a little more context. Thank you.
For the record, Ben Fitzsimons from the Legislative Human Resources Division. The first decision point is whether or not the complaint fits the scope of the policy. So the questions to answer are, do the complainant and respondent's roles fit under the policy? Are they covered by the policy? Does the alleged behavior seem like it could be at face value connected to protected class? And then the third question, if the alleged behavior occurred exactly as it was reported, is it possible that it could be a violation of the policy? If the answer to those three questions is yes, then the complaint fits within the scope of the policy.
Okay. Is there any discussion before we vote? Senator Kipp.
So just to be clear, if we vote that it is within the scope of the policy, it does not necessarily mean that there is a violation of the policy at this time, correct? Mr. Fitzsimons.
Thank you. Yes, that is correct.
All right, so no further discussion. Ms. Berger, please call the roll or poll the committee.
Senator Sprizal?
Aye.
Kip?
Yes.
Simpson?
Aye.
Mr. Char?
Aye. That passes unanimously.
Mr. Vice-Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I make the motion we ask Director Fitzsimons to secure more relevant information as outlined in our executive session.
Proper motion. Any discussion? Seeing none, Ms. Berger, please poll the committee.
Senator Frizzell?
Aye.
Kip?
Yes.
Simpson?
Aye.
Mr. Chair?
Aye. That passes unanimously. All right. Seeing no further motions, we have discussed a second meeting date. Ms. Berger, we are hoping that June 30th at 11 a.m. is available. Is there anything else that the committee would like to say? All right. Well, thank you to our staff for all of your work thus far. We appreciate it. And with that, we will adjourn until our next meeting, which is scheduled for Tuesday, June 30th at 11 a.m. This committee is adjourned.