DENVER-
Legislative leaders from both parties said Wednesday they have reached a compromise to fix the state’s tough new ethics law and take it to the voters next year rather than do it themselves.
Under the latest plan, lawmakers will establish an ethics commission and set up guidelines to submit to the state Supreme Court to determine if they are legal. That will give lawmakers up to a year to then work with proponents of the constitutional amendment to put a new measure on the ballot clarifying the law’s intent.
“The voters said they wanted higher ethical standards and we agree,” said House Speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver.
Voters approved Amendment 41 to ban lobbyists from buying meals or any gifts worth more than $50 for state lawmakers. The amendment also bans gifts to any state employee or their families worth more than $50. Employees of cities or counties with their own ethics guidelines are exempt.
There’s confusion, though, about how far the ban should go. Lawmakers say it isn’t clear whether state employees’ families can accept certain scholarships, whether professors can accept Nobel prize money and what gifts state employees can take.
Some lawmakers say their hands are tied because they are barred from passing any law that weakens the state Constitution.
Pete Maysmith, spokesman for Colorado Common Cause, one of the sponsors of the amendment, said his organization has been working with lawmakers on ways to clear up any confusion.
“I think it’s extremely encouraging that House and Senate leadership of both parties are having productive conversations. It sounds like progress is being made. We’re cautiously optimistic,” Maysmith said.
Some Republicans were uncomfortable with a previous plan that would have let lawmakers rewrite the amendment so it applies only to lawmakers and policymakers, including the governor and his department heads. That plan would have gone to the voters next year.
The House has a separate plan that would immediately put the new provisions in statute and ask voters to sign off on the changes next year. That proposal has raised constitutional questions.
Romanoff said lawmakers will scrap all those plans and move forward with the ethics commission and a new set of questions for the court based on guidelines for the commission. He said the new proposal would provide time for the courts to rule and for lawmakers to work with proponents to determine what they intended.
Romanoff said the latest plan would have no impact on several lawsuits filed to block implementation of the new law because those lawsuits are challenging the constitutionality of the new law.
Rep. Michael Garcia, D-Denver, has said voters meant what they said, even if the measure did have unintended consequences.
He said no gifts means no gifts, and passing a statute to go around the constitutional requirements wouldn’t solve the problem. He said lawmakers cannot ask judges or voters to step in each time a question comes up about what a voter-approved measure means.
