The two main investigators behind a recent report that said no contract-for-silence deal existed in the Colorado Judicial Department are expected to testify Tuesday before a legislative committee on judicial discipline.

Former U.S. Attorney in Colorado Robert Troyer and former Denver Independent Monitor Nicholas Mitchell are scheduled to appear before the special committee to discuss their 70-page report that found misconduct surrounded a multimillion-dollar contract awarded to a former judicial employee — but no quid-pro-quo deal.

It will be the first time the men have spoken publicly about the investigation they conducted into the circumstances surrounding a contract given to the department’s former chief of staff, Mindy Masias, who was being fired for financial irregularities.

The interim committee of eight legislators was formed this spring as part of a bill that independently funded the Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline, which had been trying to investigate the scandal but met with resistance from the state Supreme Court. The commission had been funded through attorney registration fees controlled by the Supreme Court.

Troyer and Mitchell concluded that while several instances of misconduct occurred in the acquisition and awarding of the Masias contract, it was not the result of threats to disclose judicial misdeeds, many of them sexual in nature, in a discrimination lawsuit.

It had been alleged that then-Chief Justice Nathan “Ben” Coats had agreed to the contract in order to avoid the embarrassment of a lawsuit. Troyer and Mitchell said it didn’t happen that way, although they did say Coats approved of the Masias contract despite her being fired for allegedly forging reimbursement receipts.

The investigators did not interview the three main players in the contract — Masias, former Human Resources Director Eric Brown and former State Court Administrator Chris Ryan. All three were under criminal investigation at the time of Troyer’s inquiry and refused to be interviewed.

The report was produced by RCT Ltd. under a $75,000 deal the Judicial Department inked last October following a lengthy public bid process.

At the center of the scandal is a two-page memo that highlighted several instances of alleged personal misconduct by judges over several years that were either never reported or were glossed over. The memo also contained numerous examples of mistreatment of women within the department.

Troyer’s firm investigated the circumstances of the contract, but not the allegations of misconduct contained in the memo.

A different firm, Investigative Law Group, is looking into the alleged culture of sexual harassment in the department and its report is expected before the end of the month. It began that inquiry last fall under a $250,000 contract it signed with the Judicial Department.

The interim committee’s focus is on whether the state’s system of judicial discipline needs an overhaul, specifically if a constitutional amendment to separate the process from Supreme Court oversight is warranted.

Troyer and Mitchell found a department largely devoid of knowledge — even by the Supreme Court justices themselves — about how judges are investigated or disciplined in Colorado. That made it difficult for anyone to trust whether their complaints would be investigated.

“During our investigation, employees, including Justices, were unable to describe the complaint-handling process and relevant standards for handling complaints against judges,” the RCT report said. Employees couldn’t “… describe how such complaints were received, by whom, when they would be referred (to the discipline commission), how they would be tracked, and what steps would be taken to make sure that complainants were protected against retaliation.”

Because Masais handled many of the complaints while she was human resources director, there was a perception she was a “fixer” for the Supreme Court with the power to make complaints disappear if she wanted, according to the report.

At the committee’s inaugural meeting in June, the discipline commission revealed how the Supreme Court had ignored a subpoena for evidence in its investigation into the scandal for more than five months.

The commission has recommended nine changes to the discipline process, many of them requiring a change to the Colorado Constitution, which can only occur by voter referenda.