Hearing lifts veil on campaign for disputed measures

The head of a professional petition-circulation company in California saw a “cherry opportunity to make a stupid amount of money” by gathering signatures to get three controversial measures on the November ballot in Colorado.

Those words from Michael Rhodes, head of ProVote America, were part of a voice mail that was played twice Tuesday at a campaign-finance hearing in Denver.

The two-day hearing has raised the veil on the secretive effort to put Amendment 60, Amendment 61 and Proposition 101 on the ballot.

“We used to know only the tip of the iceberg. Now we know a lot more about the iceberg,” attorney Mark Grueskin said.

Grueskin represents a group of civic and business leaders who oppose the three ballot issues. The issues, aimed at reducing taxes and preventing the government from borrowing, could put the state into a second recession, opponents said.

Supporters say the measures will put more money in the pockets of taxpayers and avoid saddling future generations with debt.

“For me, it’s about ethical government,” said Michelle Northrup, an Amendment 61 supporter.

Colorado Springs resident Douglas Bruce was subpoenaed to appear at the hearing. But process servers have been unable to serve him despite about two dozen visits to his home at different times of the day and night.

Grueskin asked Administrative Law Judge Robert Spencer to keep the hearing open until Bruce’s testimony could be obtained. Spencer refused. After listening to final arguments and asking a few questions, the judge said that he would render a decision on the three campaign finance complaints in 15 days.

Grueskin alleges that the proponents of the three measures should have filed as issue committees and disclosed expenditures and contributions. But the proponents maintain they were simply acting as volunteers and received no money and spent no money.

But testimony showed money was needed for the printing of petition forms, for the creation and maintenance of websites explaining the measures, and to hire professional petition circulators.

Bruce, who has a law degree and wrote the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, has sought to downplay his role in the three measures, but testimony from witnesses revealed that he was deeply involved. He helped the proponents craft the ballot language, warned them about deadlines, gave them advice about how to file court motions, and even sent them sample motions, according to witnesses and documents.

Much of Bruce’s communication, or “coaching,” as Grueskin put it, was done through the e-mail address, info@cotaxreform.com.

Several sponsors said on the witness stand they didn’t know who the e-mail address belonged to, but Northrup on Monday testified that the address belonged to Bruce.

The e-mail address also popped up as a contact on the websites advocating passage of the measures.

Levi Price, who heads a Denver-based petition circulation company called Ballot Access Group, testified that he got a call from Michael Rhodes after answering an ad on Craigslist.

On Sept. 11, 2009, Rhodes called him and left him the voicemail  talking about the “stupid amount of money” he could make if he were willing to circulate the petitions at a conservative rally.

Price testified that Rhodes was offering $1.50 for a set of three signatures. Price said he decided not to take him up on the offer.

Rhodes collected thousands of signatures for the three statewide initiatives and also collected signatures for Issue 300, a measure written by Bruce that effectively ended payments to Colorado Springs from its revenue-producing enterprises, records show.

Price said after his testimony that it generally costs about $300,000 to $350,000 to get an initiative on the ballot.