The state’s independent ethics commission ruled this morning that there was “insufficient evidence” that former Secretary of State Mike Coffman violated state ethics rules.
Coffman, now a U.S. congressman, repeatedly denied wrongdoing throughout the proceedings, which lasted more than a year.
The complaint against him alleged that he allowed a staffer to run a partisan side business and that he recertified electronic voting machines owned by a client of the consulting firm that also ran his congressional campaign.
While the authors of the complaint said the decision points to serious flaws within the commission, Coffman called it a clear and overdue victory, while blasting the group that brought the complaint against him.
“Colorado Ethics Watch wasted precious government resources by falsely accusing me of corruption and criminal misconduct when they knew they had not a shred of evidence to support these outrageous lies,” he said in a statement. “No one should ever take Ethics Watch seriously again.”
Chantell Taylor, Ethics Watch director, said the commission stymied her efforts to build a case from the beginning.
They declined to investigate the complaint themselves or use their power of subpoena, she said. And they didn’t let Taylor examine the evidence or witnesses presented by Coffman’s attorney, called discovery.
“They handicapped our ability to present our case, and the commission is clearly a sham if that’s how they’re going to hear complaints,” Taylor said. “This should have been a textbook violation.”
Instead of the victory they sought, Ethics Watch has been persecuted for bringing the complaint to the commission, she said.
Doug Friednash, Coffman’s lawyer and a former Democratic lawmaker, has repeatedly accused Taylor of launching a partisan attack against his client, one of the state’s top-ranking Republicans at the time of the complaint.
“They were more concerned about damaging his reputation publicly than building a case against him,” Friednash said.
This marks the first and only complaint the commission has heard since its final members joined the panel last summer. Seven others have been dismissed for jurisdictional reasons or because they were deemed frivolous, according to the commission’s Web site.
Ethics commissioners, who hail from both major political parties and include unaffiliateds, met largely in closed-door sessions to parse out the decision.
Executive Director Jane Feldman declined to discuss the Ethics Watch criticisms.
“You can say I had no comment on their allegations,” Feldman said. “I think the record and the decision speaks for itself.”
