“The Elections Division of the Secretary of State’s Office (Division) moves the Deputy Secretary of State to dismiss the above-entitled Lobbyist Complaint on the grounds that Complainant failed to specifically identify violations of Colorado lobbyist laws under section 24-6-301, et seq, C.R.S.”
Belinda Sturges approached the Lamar City Council during a public meeting this past November, asking about the legitimacy of the petitions filed with the City of Lamar which placed questions 2A and 2B on the November General Election before Lamar residents. Those ballot questions dealt with establishing levels of a tax placed on sales of recreational and medical marijuana and in the other portion, for voters to approve or reject the public sale of marijuana products, among other allowances. Both questions passed. Lamar Mayor Crespin and City Attorney, Lance Clark, explained at that time, that they were aware of the questions pertaining to the validity of the petitions, but as the matter was under legal review, they could not provide her at that time with any answers to her questions.
The State Elections Division noted, “On November 10, 2021, Belinda Sturges (Complainant) filed a Complaint with the Division, under Lobby Rule 5. 1.1 alleging that Cindy Sovine (Respondent) violated Colorado lobbying laws. Specifically, Complainant alleges that (1) Respondent engaged in lobbying without reporting her income on TRACER, (2) Respondent circulated petitions that were insufficient, (3) the parties carrying the petitions were not disclosed, and (4) Respondent “represented she was working for SOCO Rocks who only held a name reservation with the SOS.”
“On November 10, 2021, Respondent submitted a response to the Complaint, what included several supporting documents including a scope of work agreement for ballot campaign management services, communications with the Secretary of State’s office, communications with the City Clerk of the City of Lamar, and messaging related to the ballot question.”
“The Division moves to dismiss the Complaint on the grounds that Complainant failed to specifically identify violations of Colorado lobbyist laws under section 24-6-301 et sec, C.R.S.”
The full document can be found with the Secretary of State’s Office, “In the Matter of Cindy Sovine Lobbyist Complaint L2021-03 and was issued on December 1, 2021.
The Prowers Journal spoke with Sovine regarding the outcome of the claim who explained, “The City Charter was actually followed twice and I came on after the petitions were out, so my viewpoint is historical or after the fact. All required signatures were secured on the first petition. Actually, there were two because they pulled the binders apart the first time which wasn’t supposed to happen, so the city dismissed everything and rightfully so. The second petition also went by the book and that was the process the campaign went through.”
Sovine stated that she was lobbying for SOCO, but is independent from the group as she has handled similar matters in several local jurisdictions throughout Colorado, mostly working at the state level.
“Lamar had the most requirements I’ve ever seen as they inquired about the types of messaging we would use, how it would be applied, in what format…it all shows just how seriously the city took the campaign,” she…
Credit:Source link