House Ethics Committee finds probable cause on master-key and combined harassment allegations against Representative Weinberg, rejects other charges

The House Ethics Committee on Feb. 26 completed its preliminary review of multiple complaints against Representative Weinberg and concluded that probable cause exists on two matters while it declined to find probable cause on several others.

Madam Chair opened the meeting by noting the committee’s responsibility under House Rule 49 C to decide within 30 days whether probable cause exists on each allegation. "That deadline is February 26," she said, and explained the committee’s role is to determine whether evidence supports a reasonable belief that an ethics violation may have occurred.

Committee members debated whether the panel should reach findings on matters that are also the subject of a Secretary of State investigation. "There's already a complaint pending with the Secretary of State," Representative Garcia Sander said, and several members urged caution about duplicating that process. Attorneys from the Office of Legislative Legal Services told the committee it may still make a probable-cause determination and later refine recommendations based on the other forum’s findings.

On motions and outcomes: Vice Chair Representative Soper moved that the committee find probable cause on a campaign-finance allegation tied to Amendment 41; after roll call the motion failed 0–5 and the committee did not find probable cause on the campaign-finance/Amendment 41 allegation. Similar motions on alleged aggressive behavior toward Representative Bradley and on an allegation of firearm possession while intoxicated also failed on roll calls, each recorded 0–5.

The committee unanimously voted 5–0 to combine allegations of inappropriate comments with the Brown Palace dinner allegation and then, by the same 5–0 margin, to find probable cause that an ethics violation may have occurred on that combined harassment-related allegation. Vice Chair Soper said the committee saw a pattern of conduct that merited moving forward to the next procedural step.

After discussing swipe-log entries and photograph timestamps, members also found probable cause on the "master key" allegation by a 5–0 vote. Representative Garcia Sander reviewed the access logs and told the committee there were swipe entries at 6:53 p.m., 8:20 p.m., and later entries at 10:01 p.m. and 10:05 p.m. Committee members noted that leadership rekeying offices was an action taken in response to concerns about access and that the committee was evaluating whether a member had assumed authority to access spaces they should not have.

Christy Chase of the Office of Legislative Legal Services summarized the next steps under House Rule 49 D: "We will work with the chair to craft a letter to send to Representative Weinberg, and copy the speaker on that," she said, and confirmed that Weinberg would have seven days to request an evidentiary hearing; Ms. Chase noted, "So 7 days from today will be March 4." If Weinberg requests a hearing, the committee must commence it within 14 days of that request; if he does not, the committee can meet later to discuss recommendations.

Votes at a glance:
- Campaign-finance / Amendment 41 allegation — motion to find probable cause: failed, 0–5.
- Aggressive behavior toward Representative Bradley — motion to find probable cause: failed, 0–5.
- Firearms possession while intoxicated (CRS reference in record as "eighteen-twelve-one 106") — motion to find probable cause: failed, 0–5.
- Inappropriate comments and Brown Palace dinner (combined) — committee combined the two allegations (motion passed 5–0) and then voted to find probable cause on the combined allegation: passed, 5–0.
- Veterans and State Affairs Committee incident — motion to find probable cause: failed, 0–5.
- Master-key allegation — motion to find probable cause: passed, 5–0.

What the findings mean: a finding of probable cause is not a determination that an ethics violation occurred; it authorizes further process. The committee will notify Representative Weinberg of the findings and he will have seven days to request an evidentiary hearing. The committee’s staff said they will draft notification and may reconvene depending on whether Weinberg requests a hearing.

Background and context: members repeatedly noted the panel’s narrow role at this stage — to determine probable cause under House Rule 49 — and to avoid duplicating any ongoing Secretary of State processes; several members commented that disclosed campaign expenditures (meals, haircuts, sponsorships) were public and did not, by themselves, clearly rise to an ethics violation without additional facts. Discussion of the master-key allegation centered on swipe-record entries and photos the committee received; members described the question as whether a member had assumed an authority to enter secure areas that they should not have.

The committee adjourned after confirming staff will notify Representative Weinberg and preserve the committee’s ability to meet again if further action is required.