A group of Democratic state lawmakers say they did not violate the state’s gift ban when they attended a retreat at a ritzy hotel in Vail in October with lobbyists, but still won’t say where they got the money to pay for legislators’ hotel rooms, food and drinks, totaling $32,000.
In a response to complaints against the lawmakers filed with the state’s Independent Ethics Commission, the lawmakers say they are in the clear because their caucus covered the $32,671.15 tab with money given to the group.
State Sen. Lindsey Daugherty, an Arvada Democrat who leads the Opportunity Caucus, and Mark Grueskin, a taxpayer-funded attorney representing 15 of the 16 lawmakers facing ethics complaints stemming from the retreat, declined to say in an interview Thursday exactly where the funds came from that were used to pay for the event.
“That happens to be information that’s not required to be disclosed,” said Grueskin. “We’re not going to play that game.”
“What we’re refuting is that we legally did anything wrong,” Daugherty said.
The Colorado Sun first reported that at least 17 Democratic state lawmakers gathered with lobbyists during the Oct. 4 weekend for a retreat at the Sonnenalp Hotel in Vail organized by the Opportunity Caucus. The caucus is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit formed last year by Democratic state representatives and senators who are considered to be among the party’s more moderate wing at the Colorado Capitol.
The Opportunity Caucus also does not disclose its donors and is not required to under law.
In November, Colorado Common Cause, a liberal-leaning nonprofit that advocates for an open government, filed complaints with the state’s Independent Ethics Commission against 16 of the lawmakers who stayed at the hotel overnight.
The Democratic lawmakers who face complaints are Daugherty and Sens. Marc Snyder of Manitou Springs, Kyle Mullica of Thornton, Judy Amabile of Boulder, and Dafna Michaelson Jenet of Commerce City. Also there were Reps. Tisha Mauro of Pueblo, William Lindstedt of Broomfield, Michael Carter of Aurora, Jacque Phillips of Thornton, Meghan Lukens of Steamboat Springs, Matthew Martinez of Monte Vista, Katie Stewart of Durango, Sean Camacho of Denver, Rebekah Stewart of Lakewood, Karen McCormick of Longmont, and Cecelia Espenoza of Denver.
Mullica is the only lawmaker facing a complaint who did not ask for a taxpayer-funded lawyer and is responding to the commission separately.
The complaints ask the commission to investigate if the lawmakers violated the state’s gift ban by having their lodging paid for by One Main Street, citing an email sent from One Main Street Executive Director Andrew Short to the group’s board members in early September requesting the funds. One Main Street is a political nonprofit that doesn’t disclose its donors and has spent heavily in Democratic primaries to help more moderate candidates beat their more liberal opponents.
“I just spoke with Sen. Daugherty, Chair of the Caucus,” Short wrote to One Main Street board members Sept. 4. “Their room block is at risk if payment isn’t made on time, and they’ve asked OMSC to step in with $25,000 so they don’t lose the reservation.”
The complaints also allege One Main Street paid for legislators’ food and beverages.
The allegations were filed under Amendment 41 to the Colorado Constitution, approved by voters in 2006. The amendment says a lawmaker who is a scheduled speaker or participant at an event is allowed to have a state or local government or a nonprofit organization pay for their “reasonable expenses.” But in the case of a nonprofit, only if the nonprofit receives less than 5% of its funding from for-profit organizations.
In their responses, the 15 lawmakers represented by Grueskin say, in fact, the caucus did not use the $25,000 from One Main Street to pay for the retreat. They provided an affidavit from a bank employee showing that before receiving the $25,000 from One Main Street on Sept. 5, the caucus had received donations from “one nonprofit organization and one individual’s trust,” which were enough to pay for the $32,000 retreat.
At the time the caucus received the $25,000 donation from One Main Street, it had $33,853.48 in its bank account.
An affidavit from the Opportunity Caucus’ personal banker at FirstBank shows a timeline of some donations to the caucus:
- July 23: The Opportunity Caucus became a client of the bank.
- July 23: A check for $12,000 from One Main Street was deposited into the Opportunity Caucus account.
- Sept. 5 at 12:59 p.m.: A wire transfer for $25,000 was made into the Opportunity Caucus account from an undisclosed source that was not One Main Street.
- Sept. 5 at 1:30 p.m.: A wire transfer for $25,000 was made into the Opportunity Caucus account from One Main Street.
Grueskin also argued that even if the Sept. 5 funds from One Main Street were used to pay for the retreat, that wouldn’t have violated the gift ban because the Opportunity Caucus ultimately covered the tab.
“There would have been an ethical violation if One Main Street had gone to the hotel and paid for the hotel rooms and then said to the legislators, ‘You stay there,’” Grueskin said.
“And that did not happen,” Daugherty added.
The lawmakers also argue that they are exempt from the Amendment 41 gift ban requirements because the Opportunity Caucus is a “state or local government,” citing a 1983 Colorado Supreme Court decision finding that legislative caucuses are subject to open meetings laws.
Amendment 41 says that reasonable expenses paid for by a state or local government are exempt.
“We’re not trying to say that it’s not a nonprofit, but a caucus can be a nonprofit and still be deemed by the judicial branch of the state government … to be part of state government, therefore subject to that part of the exemption,” Grueskin said.
The Opportunity Caucus will likely never have to reveal who provided the money for the retreat, Grueskin said.
Daugherty said leading up to the retreat she discussed the retreat with potential donors, including One Main Street.
“As I did in every conversation with the donors when you’re planning a retreat, I conveyed a certain sense of urgency and getting any money in that was pledged,” she said.
Daugherty said she hopes the lawmakers’ responses to the ethics complaints will help relieve some of the tension the retreat has caused with more liberal Democrats in the state legislature.
“We never started the Opportunity Caucus to divide Democrats, rather to strengthen Democrats and our mission and what we are trying to do for the people of Colorado,” Daugherty said. “This has become just so toxic to everyone. I want to move on. This is just such a distraction.”
The responses will be presented to the ethics commission at its next meeting Jan. 20. The process moves slowly and it could take the commission years to provide a final ruling.