The state’s independent ethics commission ruled Tuesday 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 manufactured by a company that used the same consulting firm Coffman hired for 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. It declined to investigate the complaint itself or use its power of subpoena, she said. And it 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.”
The commission’s 18-page opinion said, “Both parties had previously requested that the IEC independently subpoena documents and conduct a more extensive investigation. The only documents the parties requested that the commission subpoena were . . . privileged as a matter of law.”
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,” he said.
This marks the only complaint the commission has heard since its final members joined the panel last summer. Seven other complaints have been dismissed for jurisdictional reasons or because they were deemed frivolous, according to the commission.
