OCN

Volunteers reporting on community issues in Monument, Palmer Lake, and the surrounding Tri-Lakes area

OCN > 2301 > Monument Board of Trustees/Town Council, December 2022 – Special investigator claims Home Rule Charter void in report alleging illegal electioneering by Monument staff

Monument Board of Trustees/Town Council, December 2022 – Special investigator claims Home Rule Charter void in report alleging illegal electioneering by Monument staff

By Chris Jeub

In November, following the election that passed the Home Rule Charter and replaced the sitting Board of Trustees with mostly new councilmembers, Monument’s town manager was granted the cancellation of December’s board meetings for his staff to enjoy the holidays. However, allegations of election campaign fraud brought the interim board back together three times in December. The investigation concluded that due to illegal electioneering, gerrymandering, and more, the Home Rule Charter—passed with 70 percent of the vote in November—was void. The report also made immediate recommendations: to publicly censure several acting and incoming councilmembers, hold some of them in contempt, terminate the town manager, and file an ethics complaint against the now-resigned town attorney.

Douglas County Attorney Grant Van Der Jagt was appointed independent special investigator. Those being investigated argued against the cost, the redundancy, and the legality of the outgoing members who called the special meetings together. The investigation concluded by finding the town’s new Home Rule Charter illegal and void, but the findings were kept from being discussed publicly due to interruptions from supporters of the charter and the indecision of the board on whether to move to executive session.

Here is the background of the election, reports of the three special meetings during the month, and details of the report delivered digitally to the board and the public on Dec. 28.

Background

The election in November brought two significant changes in Monument’s governing body: a new board and a new form of governance. Formerly called “trustees,” the transfer of governance is slotted to take place at the first meeting of 2023 on Tuesday, Jan. 3, where new “council members” will lead the town. Former Trustee Mitch LaKind will advance to become the new mayor, and four new members will be seated: Steve King, Sana Abbott, Redmond Ramos, and Kenneth Kimple. Ramos had been serving as an appointed trustee. King, Abbott, and Ramos will serve four-year terms; Kimple will serve a two-year term. Trustee James Romanello will remain as a member, and former Mayor Pro Tem Kelly Elliott’s second term expired. Trustees Darcy Schoening and Ron Stephens did not receive enough votes to remain on the board but finished the month of December 2022 as trustees of the town. In summary:

  • Old “Board of Trustees”: Mayor Don Wilson, Mayor Pro Tem Elliott, and Trustees Ramos, LaKind, Stephens, Romanello, and Schoening. Wilson resigned after winning a congressional seat.
  • New “Council Members”: Mayor LaKind and Council Members Ramos, Romanello, King, Abbott, and Kimple. A new council member will be nominated to fill LaKind’s seat, and one of the council members will be appointed mayor pro tem.

The special meetings were called to initiate an investigation into the Town of Monument for allegedly violating Colorado campaign finance laws. Elliott accused the town of contributing $2,500 on May 6 for yard signs and door hangers (see photos on page < 3 >) and substantiated the claim with documentation and receipts. She also accused the Monument Citizens for Home Rule, led by incoming council member King, of failing to account for all their expenditures, citing only $5 reported from March through October. Elliott submitted this complaint to the town clerk:

“I want to file a complaint against Monument Citizens for Home Rule with Steve King as their Facebook Administrator. There is no accounting for their funds used for signs and door hangers. They reported $5.00 March 2022—October 2022. If they refuse to accurately report their finances, then the signs need to be removed as they do not comply with state and town rules.”

Special meeting on Dec. 13

Elliott called the special meeting on Dec. 13 to propose Resolution No. 94-2022: “A Resolution to Launch the Investigation on Fair Campaign Practices Act to Investigate in Kind Donation From the Town of Monument to the Monument for Home Rule Issue Committee for Signs and Door Hangers. The Investigation, Paid for by the Town of Monument, Requires that the Town Staff and Any Others to be Investigated Fully Cooperate with the Investigative Attorney During Interviews, Provisions of Document, Access to Emails and Phone Records, and Timely Responses to Phone Calls and Email Questions as Requested by the Attorney. The Investigator Will Provide Weekly Updates to the Town Council on the Approximate Dates: December 19 and December 27 with the Goal to Have the Investigation Completed by December 30, 2022.” Though the new town attorney, Kathryn Sellars with Hoffmann, Parker, Wilson & Carberry P.C., was not present to advise the councilmembers, the resolution passed 4-2 with amended wording.

Elliott, Stephens, Romanello and Schoening voted for the investigation. Elliott emphasized how the town’s receipt for $2,500 of door hangers that specifically asked for a “yes” vote on Home Rule was illegal and needed investigation. She claimed she did not want to “drag this out” into the next administration, calling to conclude the investigation by the end of December. Stephens said, “Our oath calls us to uphold the law” and claimed the evidence justifies a thorough investigation. Schoening claimed a “breach of trust” and that if the “shoe were on the other foot” the other side would demand an explanation. “We owe it to the taxpayer to find out [the truth],” she said.

Ramos and LaKind voted against the investigation. Both mentioned several times of their uneasiness of making this decision without town legal counsel present. “Without legal representation, I do not feel good about this at all,” LaKind said. Ramos argued that an internal investigation should be made first. “Anyone can investigate this, but $20,000 to gain back $2,500 is unacceptable,” he said. Ramos proposed a postponement of the resolution, but the proposal failed.

A second resolution, Resolution No. 95-2022, called to hire an investigative attorney: “A Resolution to Hire Special Attorney Scott Gesler for the Investigation of the Town of Monument Related to Fair Campaign Practices Act (FCPA) by a Legal Signatory’s Signature on Mr. Gesler’s Letter of Engagement.” Attorney Gesler was not present for the meeting. LaKind expressed several problems with the board’s recommendation. “How did you [the other four councilmembers] come to the conclusion of this one candidate who is guilty of an ethics violation for the exact same thing you want to investigate, as being selected by the four of you, in some form of ‘walking quorum’ which is illegal?” Most of the others agreed, with Romanello calling for a postponement of the attorney appointment until questions could be answered. The postponement passed 5-1 with Schoening the only dissenter.

Public comments came from supporters of the Home Rule Charter. Laura Kronick, the one who signed the $5 expenditure report on behalf of Citizens for Home Rule, claimed it was an honest mistake and that a hearing officer had already dismissed it. Matthew Brunk pleaded with the council to search their hearts to do the right thing. Patty Shank attacked the council as “horrible, horrible, horrible people who have let this town down.” Jennifer Wagner claimed, “Most of the town would prefer you would walk out right now,” and Chad Smith followed, “It’s an enormous blessing to have you all off the board [next month].”

Incoming councilmember King, who won with the most number of votes in November but who is now being accused of electioneering, read from prepared notes that accused the councilmembers of ethics violations themselves. He claimed there was already an investigation with the secretary of state, a claim that turned out to be unsubstantiated (King later claimed to have heard this through a conversation with the town clerk). He also claimed that the trustees should have all left their posts immediately following the election. “If you had any ethics, you would have left on November 8 when your terms expired … instead of burning the town on your way out.” According to Deputy Town Clerk Tina Erickson, trustee terms expired in November but new councilmembers will not be sworn in until January.

The special meeting adjourned without responses from the board.

Special meeting on Dec. 16

The second meeting was called with an appointed parliamentarian, Gregory Carlson, to help keep the meeting to conform to Rules of Parliamentarian Law. The meeting passed Resolution No. 95-2022: “Resolution to Hire Special Attorney Grant Van Der Jagt for the Investigation of Concerns the Council has Identified Related to the November 2022 Election and 2A and to Fully Execute Mr. Grant Van Der Jagt’s Letter of Engagement.” The resolution passed 4-1 with incoming mayor-elect LaKind dissenting. Councilmember Ramos was not present.

Van Der Jagt declared to the board, “My allegiance is to seek the truth, not to any particular character.” He explained some background to friendships he has with many of the characters involved, including being Facebook friends with LaKind and personally investigating some online rumors about Schoening. “I don’t have any financial connection with the town of Monument,” he emphasized, “and I have no conflict of interest with any of you.”

LaKind presented an email he received that accused Van Der Jagt of representing Schoening in the past. “If you were to take this position, some of our citizens will report you to the bar,” LaKind said. Van Der Jagt read the email aloud and gave the context that Schoening was never his client, but that he did personal research to dispel an online rumor that Schoening was a convicted felon. “If she were my client, I would not be allowed to comment. I did this research myself.” Romanello asked, “Just to be sure, Darcy [Schoening] did not hire you and was not your client, correct?” Van Der Jagt affirmed this was correct. Romanello pressed further, “Why would you be qualified?” Van Der Jagt said that he had never had an ethics violation against him and that if he ever came across conflicting information, “I would have the legal duty to report it.”

Town Manager Mike Foreman asked the board for permission to hire an attorney to represent the town, with which both LaKind and Elliott agreed. LaKind motioned to hire a town attorney and Stephens seconded. Though Van Der Jagt cautioned that dealing with an attorney rather than the staff directly would slow down the investigation, the motion passed 4-1 with Schoening dissenting. Van Der Jagt followed, “My position is ‘truth over politics.’ I am political, it is my civic duty, but truth is my principle.”

Romanello, who lost to LaKind in his run for mayor of Monument, said, “None of this looks or smells good. I support Mayor LaKind 1,000%. I don’t have any sour grapes in this at all. But when I look at the emails and the Home Rule Commission were told something was okay, it is very concerning. If the interim town attorney was involved, there is a conflict of interest. Question for Foreman: Did you take part?”

Foreman responded, “The town has paid for educational materials before. In this case, the town did not knowingly pay for materials that told the town how to vote.” LaKind added, “And when it was discovered the town was made whole.” Schoening countered, “We shouldn’t use the term, ‘the town was made whole.’” LaKind returned, “I meant the town was paid back, and I can use the term that I want, whether you like it or not.”

Several public comments were made. Matthew Blunt expressed that he believed everything was done right. Ken Kimple accused the board of arrogance and declared, “A new day begins Jan. 3.” Laurie LaGraw noted that the board member names had been removed from the town website, and Elliott asked Foreman why they were (no answer was given). Joe Needler had an exchange at the podium with Van Der Jagt about the cost of his legal services. Van Der Jagt said, “You might be pleasantly surprised at my findings, and the results could be educational for the new board. This is money spent trying to make Monument run better.” Others commented on how the investigation was a witch hunt and a waste of money.

Before adjourning, Elliott noted her concern that “Monument is under a magnified glass.” She reiterated her complaint of the $5 declaration not making sense. “That, to me, is a slap in the face.”

Special meeting on Dec. 28

A special meeting was called Dec. 28 to hear the results of the investigation. All councilmembers were present except for Ramos. Parliamentarian Carlson was present to help keep the meeting respectful, and LaKind hired a personal attorney to counsel him during the meeting. About 40 members of the public attended, and several Monument police officers were present. As Mayor Pro Tem Elliott read from prepared notes on proper procedures, members of the public shouted comments in an attempt to disrupt the process. Threats to remove people came from Elliott and Schoening, but no one was removed.

LaKind made a point of order claiming private documents were leaked to the press and to some members of the public, and that Schoening reportedly turned over the private session documents to the press. Carlson, the parliamentarian, took the podium to advise the board that under Robert’s Rules of Order, the next procedural step would be to vote on whether to go into executive session. Van Der Jagt explained his legal obligation was to present his findings in executive session, but members of the public continued to shout down the option. LaKind then motioned to review the report in public, and Schoening motioned to waive attorney-client privilege, both passing unanimously. LaKind then objected to being presented the report minutes before the start of the meeting, so Elliott called for a 15-minute recess to look over the report. The report contained 16 pages of the findings and roughly 120 pages of evidence.

Van Der Jagt started to present the summary of his findings but was interrupted several times by audience members. Van Der Jagt asked the board to reconsider executive session to hear the findings of the report without interruptions from the audience, but the board refused. Van Der Jagt began his first reading but was quickly interrupted by Town Manager Mike Foreman, who was mentioned in on the first page of the report, claiming any mention of town staff needed disclosure. LaKind asked his lawyer, William Reed, to object citing open meeting laws: Any time a particular employee is discussed in executive session, they are to be notified. Foreman said he was not notified or given an opportunity to get an attorney. Romanello then asked Reed how to proceed, and Reed explained that town personnel must get their right of notification.

Due to the consistent heckling and the indecision of whether to proceed in executive session or not, Romanello motioned to adjourn and LaKind seconded. The motion failed 3-2. LaKind then announced “goodbye” and walked out. Elliott asked if there was a way to continue with the report without revealing any staff member, and Van Der Jagt said no. A second motion to adjourn was made, this time passing 4-0. Details of the report were never heard nor discussed at the meeting.

What was in the report

The report rules the charter void, concluding that the Town Council may not reform the charter after it passed “in its flawed form,” and that the charter must “start over.” The report also made four immediate recommendations:

  • Publicly censure Steve King, Kathryn Sellars, Sana Abbott, Mike Foreman, Redmond Ramos, Mitch LaKind, and Town Tech Drew Anderson.
  • Hold in contempt of Town Council the following: Foreman, King, Abbott, Ramos, and LaKind.
  • Terminate the town manager and town attorney, Foreman and Sellars.
  • File an ethics complaint against Sellars. Since the meeting Dec. 28 adjourned early, no action was put forward.

The report begins by emphasizing the apolitical nature of the investigation. “It is not a political piece,” it states, instead “a Constitutional audit of the [Home Rule] Charter, the election and the internal workings of the Town of Monument related thereto.” The report takes aim at how the town handled the election process for ballot issue 2A, particularly on illegal electioneering, but the report cited several problems. One footnote called the town “a hostile work environment” that included accusations of sexual harassment spoken from the dias by then-councilmember LaKind, an accusation that was dismissed by the town manager. Violations of open meeting laws, failure to record public meetings, and failure to respect proper procedure were included.

On misappropriation of funds, the report found Sellars culpable, intentional, or grossly negligent, claiming that the timing “was substantial enough to impact the election.” It also took issue with the attempt of Sellars (and Foreman by failing to account properly) to “cure” the problem by paying it back later. “Ultimately, the efforts of the 2A Charter, Town Attorney, and others to cure the misappropriation of funds do not satisfy either the FCPA (Fair Campaign Practices Act) or SOS (Secretary of State) rules for curing a reporting or spending transgression.”

On conflicts of interest, the investigation found, “Those in favor of 2A who participated in the transgressions reportedly all stand to gain power as a result of their failure to collaborate on fair election redistricting.” The first example: Sellars entered into too many roles for the town than just its legal counsel, particularly when she advised the Home Rule Commission. The investigation found the Sellar’s mistakes and poor advisements were “caused by her blinding self-interest, rather than her mistake or omission.” The second example: Foreman “alone” guided the writing of Section 7.2 on the qualifications of the town manager—while acting as the town manager. With the new charter, the town manager may be fired with at least five votes from the council, “almost impossible to terminate.”

On using the town seal, the investigation cited campaign finance laws prohibiting the use of a town seal as an endorsement of a ballot issue. The investigation goes so far as to claim the failure to follow the law—whether by error or intention—”renders the document void as a materially fraudulent misrepresentation to the public.”

The investigation goes into a complicated timeline in April and May of 2022 when $2,512.50 of town money was spent for alleged electioneering, about the same time the town put the question on the ballot. It concluded, “The timing of Foreman and Abbott’s actions … point to a clear scheme to deceive the [Board of Trustees] and the voters.” After the election materials started to appear on doorsteps around town in October, Schoening formally complained to Foreman and Interim Town Lawyer Joe Rivera, who both claimed, “The town seal is neither copyrighted nor protected.” Later that month, just before the election, Elliott filed her formal election campaign finance complaint. By then election campaigning was nearly over, and the investigation claims, “the facts were purposefully hidden from the Town Council.”

Above: Photos of sign and door hanger included in Kelly Elliott’s campaign finance complaint against Steve King. Courtesy the Town of Monument.

Also implicated in the report was Laura Kronick, the one who wrote the check for $2,500 (99.8 percent of the total) back to the town to “cure” the “mistake.” The investigation challenges the innocence of the action by signifying its result. “This illegal contribution undoubtedly had a direct impact on the outcome of the Home Rule Charter ballot question in the November 8th, 2022 election.” The investigation concludes the timeline with, “The actions of Mike Foreman, Sana Abbott, Brandy Turner, and the HRCC as a whole are a clear misappropriation of funds, and they covered up their actions throughout March-November of 2022.”

The investigation asks, “Does the Home Rule Charter violate Gerrymandering laws?” and uses six Colorado case law criteria to determine whether it did. If any one of the criteria substantially failed, it would fail constitutionally. The investigation shows the HRC failed in all six, citing the abuse and lack of transparency already revealed. On whether the redistricting was fair, Colorado law considers 5% or less “fair”; the charter moved 16% of Monument voters from their existing districts. The investigation called this a “whopping” disparity. When the investigator questioned Sellars why this disparity was not corrected, she resigned.

The investigation accuses several acting members of “cyberbullying” the investigator and witnesses to the investigation. Screenshots were provided of social media posts from Ramos, King, Abbott, and online blogger Ryan LeVier that the report said included “false claims and threats.” The investigation claims this led to hesitation from others to participate in the investigation.

The investigation returned to the issue of workplace harassment, something that appears to be out of the scope of the investigation but one that the report claims “an additional area of concern … that should be addressed.” Harassment was apparently reported several times in past years. One interview claims that a sexually offensive statement from then-Trustee LaKind was ignored by Foreman. “The Town Manager did nothing to stop the sexual harassment of a Coucilwoman [sic] and allowed the hostile work environment to continue, suggesting the councilwoman report it to police instead.”

The full report is 16 pages long and can be accessed at shorturl.at/imv13. The entire Google folder of screenshots, emails, and letters documenting the claims made in the report may be accessed at shorturl.at/nowxZ.

**********

The Monument Council usually meets at 6:30 p.m. on the first and third Mondays of each month at Monument Town Hall, 645 Beacon Lite Road. The next two regular meetings are scheduled for Tuesday, Jan. 3 and Jan. 17 (both dates following observed holidays). Call 719-884-8014 or see www.townofmonument.org for information. To see upcoming agendas and complete board packets or to download audio recordings of past meetings, see http://monumenttownco.minutesondemand.com and click on Town Council.

Chris Jeub can be reached at chrisjeub@ocn.me.

Other Monument Town Council articles

Reader Interactions

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *