Secretary of State Jena Griswold filed another lawsuit on Tuesday against Mesa County Clerk and Recorder Tina Peters, this time in an effort to keep the embattled clerk from overseeing the 2022 elections.

Peters responded by casting the lawsuit as retaliation for her refusal to comply with Griswold’s “gag order.” 

Meanwhile, the state ethics commission ordered both parties to appear at its February 15 meeting. Executive Director Dino Ioannides said this is intended to allow both parties to argue their positions related to Peters’ request to delay the proceedings.*

Peters’ counsel had asked the commission to stay its proceedings, saying she faces a separate campaign finance complaint largely based on the same set of allegations and arguing the ethics panel should wait until that case has been concluded before deciding whether to move forward.           

Griswold filed her lawsuit in Mesa County District Court on the same day that Mesa County’s commissioners intended to also remove Peters as the Designated Election Official (DEO) for the county. 

“Every eligible Coloradan – Republican, Democrat, and independent alike – has the right to make their voice heard in safe and secure elections. As Clerk Peters is unwilling to commit to following election security protocols, I am taking action to ensure that Mesa County voters have the elections they deserve,” Griswold said in a statement.

Griswold had asked Peters on Jan. 10 to sign a certification and compliance letter stating she would comply with election-related security protocols. Peters refused.

In a statement, Peters argued that the secretary of state – whom she calls “Gestapo Griswold” – is effectively demanding that she recant her beliefs. Such a demand, Peters said, happens in communist countries or in “medieval Europe – not the United States of America.”

“Please name one time in the history of the world in which the side demanding you ‘repudiate’ your beliefs, especially beliefs for transparency, in exchange for return of your rights, have been the good guys? As I said before – I will not back down. Not now, not ever,” Peters said. 

Griswold’s statement noted that neither she nor the county could remove Peters from serving as the DEO; hence, her lawsuit, which seeks approval for Brandi Bantz, the county’s Director of Elections, to be appointed as the DEO for the 2022 elections. Bantz would be supported by former Secretary of State Wayne Williams and Mesa County Treasurer Sheila Reiner, who both handled the 2021 elections on behalf of the county. Williams continues to serve as the DEO.

Peters has been accused of allowing breaches in election security, ignoring election rules and orders from the Secretary of State and risking the integrity of Mesa County elections.  

Mesa County District Court Judge Valerie Robison earlier ruled that Peters’ actions allowed a security vulnerability into the county’s voting system equipment and that she breached her duties.

In August, Griswold ordered Mesa County to replace its voting equipment after system passwords showed up in a video posted on websites. Days later, exact digital copies of the county’s election system hard drive were posted online after Griswold’s staff discovered that 24-hour video surveillance of the election equipment had been turned off.

That same month, Peters showed up at a cyber symposium hosted by MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, a proponent of claims that the 2020 election was rigged against former president Donald Trump. 

Lindell said he flew Peters in for the event on his private plane, which led to two campaign finance complaints, as well as a complaint with the state ethics commission.

The state ethics commission Tuesday reviewed a response submitted by Scott Gessler of Gessler Blue Law, who is representing Peters. 

The response from Gessler seeks a delay in the ethics commission’s proceedings while the campaign finance complaints, which deal with the same issue, move forward. A hearing on the campaign finance complaints is scheduled for the Office of Administrative Courts next Monday and Tuesday, Jan. 24 and 25.

Ioannides called Gessler’s substantive response to the complaint allegations* “very lean,” describing it as a “blanket denial” on the ethics violation but not offering much details. 

The ethics complaint against Peters alleges she accepted a gift from Lindell that exceeds the state gift limit of $65.

Gessler wrote in his response, which the commission accepted as a motion, that “continuing with this complaint would be highly prejudicial to Ms. Peters and possibly subject her to liability on two contradictory theories.”

He said the campaign finance complaint alleges Peters accepted a campaign contribution – the plane ride – but at the same time the ethics complaint alleges the plane ride was a personal gift.

“Ms. Peters should not be required to bear the cost and burden of simultaneously defending two administrative matters that take diametrically opposite approaches,” Gessler wrote.

Gessler also said Peters face a criminal investigation by the District Attorney for the 21st Judicial District.   

“This ethics case also creates the strong possibility that prosecutors will use discovery in this case as part of their efforts to construct a criminal case; indeed, they have already sought to benefit from civil proceedings,” Gessler said. “Finally, the defense of this ethics complaint will likely expose Ms. Peters’ strategy in defending herself. It effectively serves as a mini-trial, allowing prosecutors to gain an insight into Ms. Peters’ defense and therefore craft their criminal charges accordingly.”

The commission then went into executive session to obtain advice from its legal counsel, a member of the Attorney General’s staff.

 The Attorney General is also suing Peters over fundraising for her campaign and for legal expenses, and the alleged failure to file campaign finance reports for the past two years. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Secretary of State’s Elections Division in November.

After the session, the commission decided to task Ioannides with contacting both parties for the February meeting, to provide a briefing to the commission and at which time the commission will discuss Gessler’s motion.*

In a statement, Peters said called Griswold’s Jan. 10 request a “gag order.” 

That “gag order,” Peters said, would have required her to say “I hereby fully and completely repudiate, retract and disavow the statement I made during a FacebookLive broadcast in which I stated, ‘We’ve got to get those machines so that they are transparent to the people.'”

Peters announced last week she is running for re-election and filed a candidate affidavit with the Secretary of State’s office Sunday.

Gessler, a former Secretary of State, has his own history with the ethics commission. He was found to have violated the state’s ethics laws in 2012 after he improperly tapped state funds – $1,278.90 – to pay for a trip to a Republican National Lawyers Association conference in August 2012, shortly before the Republican National Convention.

Gessler also asked his staff at the same time to give him monies remaining in a discretionary account but did not provide receipts for those funds, a total of $117.99, according to the complaint. Gessler challenged the commission’s findings all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the appeal. The lawsuit cost taxpayers at least $515,000. Gessler finally paid the ethics fine of $1,514 in 2019.