Denver Mayor Michael Hancock is preparing an executive order that would step up the city’s resistance to Trump administration immigration policies and create an immigrant legal defense fund, his advisers confirmed Tuesday.

To underline Denver’s stance, the new legal fund — operating mostly off donations to provide grants to nonprofits that aid immigrants facing removal proceedings — would operate through Jan. 20, 2021, the last day of President Donald Trump’s term.

Hancock’s draft executive order, which his staff provided to The Denver Post, would make clear that local law enforcement and jail deputies cannot aid in the enforcement of federal immigration laws. It would bar them from allowing federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers into secure areas of jails and other buildings to arrest immigrants without a warrant, and they would not be allowed to maintain written information about foreign nationals being held in local jails.

But the mayor’s attempt to elevate city policies and practices and even stake out some new ground to protect the rights of immigrants living in the country illegally has revealed a developing rift with some City Council members.

For two weeks, two members have been floating a proposal that would tackle similar objectives — and take tougher positions on information-sharing with the federal government — using the different vehicle of a city ordinance. They see that as a firmer change than an order that Hancock’s successor could reverse with the stroke of a pen.

Council members Robin Kniech and Paul López affirmed Tuesday that they don’t plan to drop their effort.

Community groups and advocates who have pushed the city to better protect immigrants, including by working with the council members, applauded the mayor’s attention. But several said his executive order was not strong enough.

“We’ve been trying to have this conversation with the mayor, but he hasn’t tried to engage with us to solve the problem,” said Salvador Hernandez of Mi Familia Vota, an organization that advocates for Latinos on social and economic issues. “We’re still going to push for a city ordinance, which we think is the appropriate way to do it.”

By unveiling his own action via executive order instead, Hancock is stopping short of some calls to end all cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

The administration is attempting to straddle a line that Denver’s deputy city attorney characterized as safeguarding tangible protections for immigrants while avoiding stands that would invite Trump to “double down on Denver and send in mass ICE raids.”

“For us, it’s critical that the community know that we stand with them and that they be able to trust the city and law enforcement and all of our partners,” Cristal DeHerrera said in an interview Tuesday morning with The Post.

Hancock hasn’t signed the draft order but could do so in coming weeks after reaching out to immigrant advocates, Latino community groups and others for feedback on the document, administration officials said.

Meanwhile, the council’s safety committee is set to having another hearing on the López/Kniech legislation at 10:30 a.m. Wednesday. The meeting will include time for more public testimony.

A key difference between approaches

Unlike the council’s proposed ordinance, Hancock’s draft order would not bar jail deputies from notifying federal authorities in most cases when an inmate wanted on an immigration detainer is about to be released from jail, as the jail does now.

Often those notifications come within hours before the release — less time than ICE has requested — and the city for three years hasn’t honored federal requests to detain inmates beyond their normal release dates.

Last week, Attorney General Jeff Sessions threatened to disqualify such cities from receiving some large federal grants if they do not provide advance notice of jail releases and don’t allow ICE agents access to interview inmates who lack legal immigration status. Denver does both of those things, but for the last two years the jail has given inmates a document advising them that they can refuse ICE interview requests — a practice incorporated in detail into Hancock’s proposed executive order.

Julie Gonzales, policy director for the Meyer Law Office, which has handled high-profile local immigration cases, said she preferred the council’s proposed ordinance because it would go further in limiting the coordination between ICE and Denver law enforcement, including by eliminating most release notifications.

“There’s quite a bit of daylight between the two,” Gonzales said of the ordinance and the executive order.

Both the council’s proposal and the mayor’s potential order grew out of officials’ attempts to address community fears about ramped-up deportations and immigration policy pronouncements since Trump’s inauguration in January.

But the mayor’s office hopes to avoid making Denver a federal target.

“That is a hard line to walk, but we’re committed to it,” DeHerrera said. “That is the mayor’s goal.”

The council members see it differently.

“We recently learned from the mayor’s office that they are considering issuing an executive order to codify many of the practices the city already does regarding public safety,” López and Kniech said in a statement to The Post. “We do not believe that their draft accurately does that or that it goes far enough to ensure greater safety for our Denver residents.”

Ultimately, they said, their council colleagues will “ask questions and debate the issues to come up with the best solution for Denver.”

Violations of order could bring discipline

If signed by Hancock, the order would mark the unusual step of making city employees who violate its directives “subject to discipline up to and including termination.”

The executive order would give the force of law to current practices and policies in the justice system and in other areas affecting immigrants, while implementing several new policies.

Here are some of the draft’s provisions:

Federal immigration officers could not enter secure areas of local jails or other city-owned law enforcement facilities in order to take custody of an individual on an immigration violation. However, agents still could enter public spaces of courthouses and other buildings. ICE has rebuffed local officials’ request not to do so despite concerns that agents’ presence could scare away immigrants from testifying in trials or showing up for court dates.

The sheriff’s department this spring stopped keeping records of its notifications to foreign consulates when their nationals were in jail custody. Deputies now make those notifications verbally.

The city would continue “to protect victims of crime and hold violent offenders accountable” by participating in a federal U-Visa program that provides assurances to victims who aid prosecution of crimes.

Denver Human Services would continue working with foreign consulates to assist families that are facing deportation proceedings so that the child has a guardian and, if necessary, visitation rights with the deported parent.

Using an executive order “gives us the nimbleness to deal with Jeff Sessions (and) the Trump administration,” DeHerrera said. “I mean, we now have the director of Homeland Security (John Kelly) as chief of staff (to Trump). We don’t know what’s going to come out next week, and we need to have a nimble vehicle to best protect Denver families. And an XO (executive order) gives us the ability to do that.”

DeHerrera credited Councilman López for pushing for the legal defense fund that the order seeks to set up with partner organizations. Several U.S. cities recently have established funds or programs to help immigrants with legal services, including Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C., according to research provided by the mayor’s office.

So far, Denver officials haven’t set a fundraising target and said they could consider supplementing the fund with city money.

But Hernandez, of Mi Familia Vota, argued that the lack of a firm financial commitment from the city made him skeptical the legal defense fund would happen.

Other moves aimed at helping immigrants

The order would build on a move in May by the mayor and the council to reduce low-level city court sentences in a way that could help financially needy immigrants avoid deportation.

While Hancock hasn’t taken a position on the council proposal, it’s clear he prefers the executive order approach.

The administration previously sent a memo to the council outlining Hancock’s concerns, including: “Adopting broad prohibitions on our communications and interactions with federal authorities, with only limited exceptions, ignores the complexities of law enforcement and does not account for myriad fact-specific circumstances, thus potentially limiting the ability of local law officers to keep the public safe.”

Last month, the Federation for American Immigration Reform also criticized the council proposal, with a spokesman arguing the changes were motivated by politics rather than actually benefiting the police-community relationship.

A risk inherent in Hancock’s approach is that a new mayor could rescind his executive order without a vote of the council, although such changes have been rare.

The lower level of permanency in an executive order is a concern for the American Civil Liberties Union of Colorado, said Denise Maes, the organization’s public policy director.

“Mayor Hancock’s draft executive order is definitely a good start, and we applaud the city’s initiative to ensure that Denver remains a safe and welcoming city,” Maes said. “However, an executive order is only as good as the executive who is willing to stand behind it.”

Maes encouraged the mayor and council to work together to enact a permanent ordinance in its strongest possible form.

Below is an administration summary of the executive order. The actual document was reviewed by The Post but still is being finalized.