Finding blind spots, changing procedures and raising awareness of potential bias or discrimination in Wheat Ridge’s internal policies are parts of an upcoming equity audit.
The city council, by a 5-3 vote on July 13, approved spending up to $96,000 in reserve money for the audit. Council members Mike Okada, Rachel Hultin, Jenny Snell, Kathleen Martell and Susan Wood voted yes. Council members Pat Quinn, Scott Ohm and Dan Larson opposed the proposal.
Snell noted she had been involved in equity audit projects for some time in Wheat Ridge, as well as the city racial equality task force and IDEA (Inclusion, Diversity, Equity and Accessibility) committee.
“It’s time we finally get this in our rear view” mirror, she said. “We’re at a time in our country when federal money is being pulled back, protections are being pulled back and we’re losing money for programs that support Black and brown people and queer people. This is a time for us as a community to do the right thing and speak for our community and all of our community.”
On Oct. 27, 2025, Snell requested a study session discussion of an equity audit. That happened Jan. 4, where the council agreed to consider an audit contract. The IDEA committee reviewed the contract and recommended approval.
A memo to the council described an equity audit as a “systematic examination of the city’s policies, practices and culture to identify disparities and biases that may be affecting certain groups of employees or community members.”
The audit will provide a comprehensive understanding of the city’s “equity landscape,” identify areas for improvement and “blind spots,” and explain what can be done to promote greater equity and inclusion.
The memo added equity audits traditionally involve a close look at policies and procedures, decision-making processes, representation, diversity, support, access and human resource practices.
Audit cost negotiated down from initial proposal
The city received 11 audit proposals (one was considered local) and selected UPD Consulting of Baltimore, Maryland, to lead the project. The initial cost ranged from $65,000 to $125,000.
City and company officials agreed to reduce the cost to $90,000 plus $6,000 set aside for travel. The contract can not exceed $96,000 without written authorization.
City Manager Patrick Goff noted the city has “adequate” reserves to afford the audit. Deputy City Manager Marianne Schilling wrote in an email to the Gazette that the city has just more than $9 million in its reserve fund, enough to cover 17% of city operating expenses.
Goff added city sales tax revenue was up 3% through June. But he also noted the city expects “a lot of increases” in spending next year.
The audit is expected to take 4-6 months, with a desired completion date of Dec. 31.
UPD’s proposal includes:
• A review and analysis of city policies, programs, practices, training, organizational structure, protocols and initiatives;
• A listening campaign using a staff survey, interviews and group discussions;
• A review of current community engagement, internal/external communications and the city website; and
• A final report and presentations, identifying strengths and gaps, recommending IDEA priorities and strategies, and proposing short- and long-term actions with monitoring and evaluation methods.
The proposal also notes, “While UPD has limited direct Denver-metro project history, our team applies a disciplined ‘local learning’ approach in each engagement: rapid orientation to city context and priorities, stakeholder mapping, and alignment to the city’s existing routines, constraints and decision processes.”
Schilling said UPD’s audit team was familiar with the issues.
“Many of them have municipal government experience and the culture involved, so they will understand what it takes to put this process in place,” she said.
After a question about city employees leaving in large numbers, Carli Seeba, manager of people and culture, called the city’s employee attrition rate “pretty low” this year.
“When an employee doesn’t feel welcome, they usually simply leave,” she added. “We try to do exit interviews and some will say they had some issues with other city staffers or they don’t feel supported. This audit would help expose these types of things, if they exist on a larger scale.”
Council members explain audit positions
Larson said he “firmly believes having a diverse workplace is valuable.”
“It promotes problem-solving innovation,” he stated. “But I believe the money would be better spent on improving skills with training.”
Larson called the move “not an appropriate use of city funds.”
“I think we can accomplish what we need through a voluntary task force instead of mandatory compliance training,” he noted.
Quinn said he listened to citizen comments counter to his personal support of the audit.
“The voices of those folks who don’t believe this is a good expense at this time need to be heard to be fair and equitable,” he stated. “We’re also doing this at a time when we’re going to be going to the polls to ask for some major expenditures in the near future.”
Quinn said he supports the audit but opposes the cost involved.
“I’ve had several district citizens tell me they are very apprehensive about spending almost $100,000 out of the city’s reserve fund,” he stated. “I think this is something that would be more acceptable if we budgeted for it” in 2027.
Ohm noted a recent city survey found strong support for several diversity, equity and inclusion-related efforts, such as an equity audit. However, he also stated UPD’s recommendations have an unknown cost and might be unaffordable.
“I need to know why we should do this to really understand it, but I feel I’ve been excluded from that communication,” he said later. “I kept hoping we’d have more discussion, more information and I’d have a better understanding, but it just hasn’t happened.”
Ohm added he had talked to four people, three in favor of the audit and one opposed.
“That tells me this is not a hot button issue versus a really defined issue, like homelessness,” he said. “I’m just not comfortable spending $96,000 to find out if we have problems when we have really defined problems to address we know could help the community.”
Okada said he strongly supported the audit, adding its recommendations and changes can be far more effective as a proactive step.
He also added he had taken part in equity audit training.
“That told me there may be many moments where unconscious bias becomes conscious bias and that’s when you have something to work on,” Okada said.
Martell urged approval of the contract.
“Let’s do better; let’s learn and look at our procedures and processes,” she said. “This is a chance to bring people in that can help us make sure we do better. We have some serious expenses coming in and I think this is as important as those.”
Mayor Pro Tem Hultin said, “No one can assess their own blind spots; we lack a certain amount of expertise and this kind of work really relies on someone who comes from outside and can give us actionable, targetable, measurable recommendations.”
“Equity is a real trigger word these days, but at the end of the day it’s really about belonging,” she continued. “We’re trying to become a better community.”
