A Denver District Court judge has ordered the state's Independent Ethics Commission to release tape recordings made during a dozen secret meetings held earlier this year.
The order, issued Tuesday by Judge Larry Naves, finds that the commission violated the state open meetings law.
Five of the closed-door meetings involved the commission's deliberations in connection with a complaint filed against U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman, R-District 6, by Colorado Ethics Watch.
The complaint alleged that Coffman, who was then secretary of state, violated criminal laws and state personnel rules by permitting an elections division employee to operate a partisan "side business" that conflicted with his official duties and by approving the hire of an electronic voting system vendor that was represented by the same firm employed by Coffman to assist his congressional campaign.
The commission rejected the complaint against Coffman on April 14.
Judge Naves held that the commission had not followed the provisions in state law that require it to notify the public of the specific items that will be discussed in "executive session."
The commission argued that the deliberations were protected by attorney-client privilege.
However, the attorney for the plaintiff in the case, Center for Independent Media, says that claim was not well thought out.
"They weren’t discussing with the attorney legal questions," Christopher Beall, a partner at the Denver firm Levine, Sullivan, Koch & Schwartz, said. "They were discussing amongs themselves the policy question."
The office of attorney general John Suthers, a Republican, defended the commission in the lawsuit but was not involved in advising the commission in connection with the Coffman case because Rep. Coffman's wife is a deputy attorney general.
The commission delivered the tapes of the closed meetings that were recorded to Colorado Independent, an online news outlet published by the Center for Independent Media, shortly after Naves ruling.
The open meetings law has required advance disclosure of the subjects to be discussed in closed session since 2001.
Judge Naves has not yet ruled on the question whether the closure of the meetings violated the open meetings law.
Attorney fees must be awarded under state law to plaintiffs that prevail in an open meetings act case, Beall said. Judge Naves' order indicated that he would award those fees in this case.
No request for fees, which would specify a particular amount that must be paid by the commission, has been filed. Beall said his office expects to file such a request within ten days of Judge Naves' order.