Ethics examined in senator's deals with State Fair

A legislative ethics board could
determine today whether state Sen. Abel Tapia erred in both funding and
contracting with the State Fair.

The four-lawmaker advisory panel's decision follows bipartisan
praise for Tapia's decade of ethical conduct at a previous meeting.

The lawmakers said at a hearing Thursday that Tapia's
contracts with the fair may appear improper but conflict-of-interest
laws are not clear enough on how legislators can do business with the
state.

The panel has not yet issued a formal opinion, though members
from both parties expressed respect for Tapia, the second-ranking
member of the Senate.

"We all have ties, particularly if we have lives," Tapia told the ethics board. "We tend to be under a microscope."

Tapia, a Pueblo Democrat, carried many bills directing money to
his hometown fair at the same time his engineering firm, Abel
Engineering Professionals, benefited from $440,000 in contracts he did
not disclose.

Following questions from reporters, Tapia last week asked a
panel of his peers to decide whether he was wrong in sponsoring a bill
giving the struggling fair $3.2 million a year to pay off its debts.

Other fair bills Tapia voted on or sponsored were not
addressed in his request, including a $1.1 million appropriation the
senator carried for a construction contract his firm had already won.

Awaiting the panel's opinion is Chan tell Taylor, director of
the government watchdog group Colorado Ethics Watch, who said the
state's new ethics commission — a separate body of Capitol outsiders —
may be a more appropriate venue.

The Independent Ethics Commission, likely months away from
hearing complaints, can subpoena information and compel testimony under
oath.

"The problem with (lawmakers) self-policing is there is a
reluctance to make a finding of wrongdoing because the tables might
turn, and that finding may be used against you," Taylor said.

Tapia volunteered financial information and confidential legal opinions to the legislative ethics board Thursday.

Those types of panels are rare, but none of the past two
opinions issued by similar legislative ethics boards have found
conflict-of-interest violations.

In 2006 an advisory panel gave then-Rep. Tom Plant the green
light to vote on bills giving money to the nonprofit that he was paid
to run.

State ethics laws are not strong or clear enough if perceived
conflicts like these are technically legal, Rep. Rob Witwer, R-Genesee,
told members at Thursday's meeting.

Under state law, Colorado lawmakers can contract with state
agencies if they disclose the connection or if the contracts are
awarded through sealed, competitive bids.

Colorado is among a minority of states that place few or no
restrictions on the transactions, according to an analysis by the
National Conference of State Legislatures.