Explaining the ethics complaint that names Boulder County’s Amabile and McCormick — and 15 other lawmakers

Earlier this month, the Colorado Independent Ethics Commission advanced complaints filed against Boulder’s state Sen. Judy Amabile and Rep. Karen McCormick of Longmont, along with 15 other Democratic state lawmakers.

All the legislators are members of the Opportunity Caucus, a relatively new group of Democratic lawmakers who describe themselves as pragmatically focused on “kitchen table” issues and prioritizing common ground over “extremes.” They are often viewed at the Capitol as more moderate than the legislature’s progressive wing. The complaints were brought by Common Cause Colorado, a nonpartisan government ethics watchdog that advocates for campaign finance transparency and limits on special-interest influence. 

The complaints allege that the chair of the Opportunity Caucus — Sen. Lindsey Daugherty of Arvada — solicited and accepted $25,000 for hotel rooms in Vail for an Opportunity Caucus retreat from One Main Street Colorado, a political nonprofit that supports pro-business Democratic candidates. One Main Street is considered a dark money group because it doesn’t disclose its donors. 

The $25,000 was used to cover a block of rooms used by lawmakers. The complaint alleges that accepting the funding violatesColorado’s gift ban, outlined in Article 29 of the Colorado Constitution. The complaint also alleges One Main Street paid for lawmakers’ drinks and food at the Opportunity Caucus retreat, which could also constitute a violation.

The ethics commission unanimously determined all 17 of the complaints were “not frivolous,” clearing the way for investigations and public hearings.

“At a first look, I think it is very problematic,” said Jane Feldman, a former executive editor of the ethics commission and government ethics consultant, adding that she was surprised legislators went ahead with the event without getting an opinion from the commission.

“It’s certainly not consistent with the spirit of Article 29, even if it’s not an actual violation. I think the commission is correct to have said it’s not a frivolous complaint and it needs to be investigated.”

Article 29, the gift ban, allows a nonprofit to pay “reasonable expenses” for legislators at an event they’re participating in, “provided that the non-profit organization receives less than 5% of its funding from for-profit organizations.” 

The complaint argues this exception does not apply to One Main Street, because its known contributions from for-profit companies exceed the 5% cap set in the gift ban exemption. Feldman agreed, while acknowledging she hasn’t heard the full defense from the Opportunity Caucus. While One Main Street does not disclose all its donors, two documented for-profit business contributions exceeded 7% of its total revenue in 2022 and 2023 — a $50,000 donation from Xcel Energy in 2022 and a $75,000 donation in 2023 from Occidental Petroleum.

The Vail retreat was attended by lobbyists who represent Xcel, the Colorado Association of Realtors, the private prison contractor GEO Group and the Colorado Restaurant Association, among others. The retreat and involvement of One Main Street were first reported by the Colorado Sun.

Sen. Judy Amabile said the Opportunity Caucus retained an attorney, who was at the Vail retreat and advised them that “what we were doing was fine.”

“I’ve been invited to lots of meetings and conferences where the organizers offered to pay my airfare and my hotel, and I have been advised that that’s perfectly acceptable,” she said. “This did not seem extraordinary to any of us, because everybody’s had that same experience.” 

According to Feldman, while there are exceptions to the gift ban — for example, speaking events are excluded and those are clearly laid out in the law — none appeared to apply to this event.

Amabile said she believes “these accusations are politically motivated. The extreme groups promoting these complaints are using them to fundraise,” she said, referring to Common Cause, the decades-old national nonprofit of which Common Cause Colorado is a state chapter and that has among its current priorities limiting money in politics. She said she has received several fundraising emails from Common Cause that reference the complaint.

A joint statement from the Opportunity Caucus called the accusations in the complaint “inaccurate,” according to reports, alleging Common Cause filed the complaint as part of a “publicity and fundraising campaign to silence Democratic incumbents ahead of their 2026 elections.” 

Feldman said that an ethics complaint from a nonpartisan group like Common Cause is unusual. More often, she sees complaints against Democrats come from a few Republican lawyers. She also noted that Common Cause helped draft the gift-ban amendment and get it on the ballot in 2006.

“I thought it was interesting that they jumped on this before the partisan groups did,” Feldman said. She suggested that because Common Cause helped craft Amendment 41, the organization “probably feels that they have to be really even-handed” about bringing complaints.

A political divide

The Vail retreat and resulting pushback reflect a growing division in the Colorado Democratic Party between progressive legislators and more moderate ones. 

However, Amabile disputes defining the Opportunity Caucus along political lines. She doesn’t identify as a moderate and says the caucus is united less by policy and more by “how you approach the work.”

“I have run, and said yes to, some of the most progressive legislation of any legislator, particularly in the criminal justice reform arena,” she said, citing her current priorities of ensuring treatment for people found incompetent to stand trial, reforms to the state’s Youthful Offender System and safeguards around the use of Flock cameras. 

However, she’s also worked on several bills that progressives “hated,” she said, including one allowing adjustments to the tip credit, an AI regulation bill with less stringent regulations that ran counter to one from progressives, and bills regulating marijuana use. 

One Main Street / Opportunity Caucus connection

The Common Cause complaint also alleges that “the Opportunity Caucus and [One Main Street Colorado] have not operated as independent entities,” arguing the political caucus was “conceived, staffed, and funded by” the PAC to influence legislators. 

The Opportunity Caucus was formed shortly after the 2024 elections, and includes eight of the 11 candidates One Main Street endorsed and spent nearly $800,000 to back, according to the Denver Post.  

The organizations are also interwoven. Katharine Marrs, One Main Street’s director of advocacy and leadership development, is the caucus’ registered agent and remains on its staff. And One Main Street Director Andrew Short provided the language for an op-ed announcing the Opportunity Caucus’ launch, according to emails obtained by Common Cause. 

Locally, when One Main Street considered getting involved in Boulder’s 2025 city council election, it asked candidates if they were, or “desire to be,” members of the Colorado Opportunity Caucus.

“It’s not random that One Main Street supported many of the people who are in the Opportunity Caucus,” Amabile said. But she said that the caucus does not restrict what members can say about bills and does not vote as a bloc. 

Similarly, she pushed back on criticism of Opportunity Caucus members meeting lobbyists in Vail, saying that everyone, including more progressive groups, has lobbyists, and meeting with them is necessary to run good legislation.

“It doesn’t mean you do everything they want you to do,” she said. 

“That’s actually sort of the whole basis of this Opportunity Caucus; we are legislators who believe engaging in conversation and hearing all points of view is what we’re supposed to be doing.”