CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
February 01, 2011 08:29 PM UTC
49 Comments
It’s either a states rights issue as guaranteed by our constitution, . . . or it’s an issue of federal law clearly and constitutionally overriding state law?
BS. Someone needs to make an Open Records Act request of Suthers’ office. The public has a right to know.
It’s attorney-client privilege, Craig.
CORA will get you nowhere.
Ummm… John Suthers, to my knowledge, is NOT acting as Gessler’s personal attorney, rather, as the attorney who looks out for the INTERESTS OF COLORADO
CORA should definitely apply, in this case
CO Atty General to CO SOS
for the SoS in The SoS’ capacity as a State elected official.
It’s not a court decision. It’s a privileged communication between an attorney (AG) and his client (SoS).
Call Luis at ethics watch. He explains it better than I can.
Nonetheless – you guys have clearly researched this
He acts as the SOS’s attorney in his “capacity as a State elected official.” This opinion has nothing whatever to do with Mr. Gessler’s official capacity. Therefore, it should be open records. Many AG opinions of this ilk are open for public review. I personally have cited them in cases on which I have worked.
in the context of his elected office. The AG’s response is privileged communication.
If was made in the context of his private employment, he would have asked his personal lawyer, not the AG.
And his personal lawyer wouldn’t tell you, either.
I interviewed Luis for the January 21 post in my blog. Here’s what Luis had to say:
http://www.junctiondailyblog.c…
Specifically excludes these types of records. Gessler can release the opinion if he wants, but an open records request will get you nowhere.
Doesn’t cost anything.
Stapleton, Romero, and Suthers himself?
a states rights issue as guaranteed by our constitution, . . . or it’s an issue of federal law clearly and constitutionally overriding state law.
If he won’t make it public then we can pretty musch assume the Attorney General told him his prospective moonlighting didn’t pass muster.
It has to come from Gessler. And soon.
of his attention being split and/or that he’s somehow dishonest. Nothing is more important than the public’s trust, so that’s why Gessler won’t be taking the position after all. He will continue to fight for all of these types of positions (elected officials) to be paid a rate that reflects the responsibility and value of said positions.
What probably really happened: As a professional, Suthers issued the legal opinion that the conflict is close enough to the brink to play better safe than sorry. Then as a fellow party member, Suthers called Gessler and shouted.
Tim Hoover in the paper that shall not be named reports that Gessler has changed his mind (Breaking…)
That’s gotta count for something.
It was to spend more time with his family…
No conflict of interest, problem solved. And all it took was a week straight of devastatingly bad press and more than likely, a big thumbs down from Suthers.
If Gessler makes a habit out of this kind of “decision-making” process for his whole career as SoS, this blog could run out of bandwidth and storage covering it.
I can just see it now:
Gessler: We are considering 527’s to be individuals for purposes of contributing directly to campaigns this year.
Unwashed Masses: You’ve got to be F’ing joking!
Media: Scott Gessler made yet another controversial move today which appears to violate Colorado law.
Suthers (officially to Gessler): Scott, the opinion of the AG’s office is going to have to be that this is a plain violation of the law.
Suthers (off-record conversation with Gessler): WOULD YOU STOP IT YOU FREAKIN’ IDJIT!?!!? You’re making us all look bad!
This Gessler is plainly Not Ready For Prime Time when it comes to politics.
Sorry, wrong thread.
The paper that shall not be named is also reporting that the JBC took $2 million from the SOS budget today, part of that $3.5 million that they just had layin’ around.
Chalk another irrelevant victory up to the Dem smear machine. Now Gessler’s mom will go hungry and the Dems get to claim a “win”. Meanwhile, most people in Colorado don’t care whether or not Gessler works an extra 5 hours a week to make ends meet and never did.
Beej cares about elderly women going hungry? Who knew?
Meanwhile, sarcasm.
Now we have to re-set the counter to zero. Until your post, this blog had gone five days without a response to bjwilson83. Of course, this blog had also gone five days without a comment from bjwilson83, but that’s beside the point.
I see your point.
Comment trolls do not need their own trolls — when I grow up I will find a new purpose and change my sig line — but not necessarily in that order.
…and apparently, the temptation was too great for you as well. 🙂
I won’t be expecting anything. I promise!
Not a very inspiring way to start the next four years, but the people of Colorado voted him in, so barring a recall, we’re stuck with him.
I know Scott is our favorite whipping boy. But now that he’s corrected himself (with a bit of help), what about the others that figure running a state agency is a part-time job? Especially Romero who also has a conflict every bit as large as Gessler’s.
Suthers, Stapleton, & Romero (and his boss Hick) – are you going to follow the lead of Scott Gessler and do the right thing?
was the most obvious potential conflict of interest. The low-hanging fruit.
I don’t think Stapleton and Suthers come close. Romero, maybe.
Maybe only if you buy David’s firm belief that the job of eco-devo and foreign trade chief will be to “boost ski visits.” There is no evidence for that other than David’s absolute conviction that that’s got to be what Romero will be doing. None.
As for the others, David’s take on the concept of full-time work is a bit Puritan, especially for someone who blogs and “interviews” for hours a week. Suthers was teaching classes before he election, so how come it’s only a problem now that it’s come to your attention? Shouldn’t you have had some indication he was shirking his job, especially as avid a Garnett supporter as you were? Frankly, that an attorney general teaches a couple law classes should be encouraged. And as far as Stapleton goes, the more he leaves his job to the pros, the better off the state will be.
I think Romero comes very close. Stapleton & Suthers are giving us less than full time but for them I don’t see any clear conflict.
But for Romero, economic development can directly increase the value of the properties he manages. If he was a Republican appointee this blog would be all over him.
And to use me as an example, yes I hit Pols while eating breakfast & then last thing at night – when I can. I’m not asking anyone to do nothing but work. But I also once did 2 interviews in 2 weeks and had my CEO tell me no more for a month. And because blogging isn’t a job, I could then drop it.
David, that’s the opposite of a conflict of interest, it’s a coincidence of interest, and your charge is hogwash whatever you call it.
So if the economy improves, Ken Salazar’s Dairy Queen can sell more Dilly Bars? He’d better not do anything to end this recession!
Sen. Steadman and Rep. Ferrandino are sponsoring the civil unions legislation upcoming — and, suspiciously, they are the legislators who will benefit most from it! There must be something wrong about that!
If your complaint was just that Romero can’t do his job in the 160 hours in a week when he’s not winding down his involvement in the development (while taking a 20 percent pay cut), that’d be one thing. But you’ve said what he’s doing is corrupt. That’s ludicrous.
Damnit! Watching Gessler getting tarred and feathered in the press was fun. I’m sure it won’t be long before he does something ridiculous again…
.
must have ended up on another thread ?
.
‘self correction.’ Or do you think, in Egypt, Hosni has now ‘self-corrected’ with his decision to step down eventually?
until Scott sliced it into the water hazard.
He’s one guy who understands what a conflict of interest is, and what the perception of a conflict is.
He’s an increasingly rare species in Colorado.
Rookie mistake.
Gessler is still the elected Secretary of State for the next four years. I think it’s time to let this go, and stop piling on him since he did the right thing. Unless you want to talk about Colorado 80% director of economic development?
Because it took a sh*tstorm to get him to do “the right thing”. Some people (read: anyone I would consider competent to run the SoS’s office) would never have considered what Gessler attempted to do without a thought.
An Arapahoe County GOP person “thinks it’s time to let this go.” I’m amazed.
Sorry – but the whole spectacle of Gessler seeing no possible conflict of interest in the Secretary of State doing part-time work for an ELECTION LAW firm is something that shouldn’t be soon forgotten.
If he doesn’t report his income publicly, then how would the public know if he moonlights or not?