In law, interrogatories are a formal set of written questions propounded by one litigant and required to be answered by an adversary in order to clarify matters of fact…
— Wex Legal Dictionary
Standing at the podium, Archuleta County activist Wayne Bryant made an attempt to explain, at the August 6, 2019, Board of County Commissioner’s meeting, why he had brought along a check — a payment — to hand to BOCC Chair Ronnie Maez. Apparently, Mr. Bryant had previously made a payment in the same amount to the Archuleta County Treasurer, but the payment had been been returned to him as unacceptable. When he handed his new check to Commissioner Maez, the commissioner promptly handed it to County Attorney Todd Weaver, who then announced that the BOCC would not accept Mr. Bryant’s payment.
Mr. Bryant explained:
“How do I start out, with this mess. I guess it starts out with the interrogatories, and this is what’s really concerning. Under a [threat of contempt] some of us filled out these interrogatories and some of us didn’t. We chose to get out from underneath that by going ahead and writing checks and taking them down to the County Treasurer, with affidavits that you guys accepted. If you’ll notice, an uncertified amount of money by Judge Wilson — that was never brought to court — was submitted, so we went by that, and divided it by 14, thereby taking interrogatories. And you have a receipt that the Treasurer accepted this. And you also have a sheet that shows you accepted it and cashed it through the Treasurer.”
The checks mentioned here by Mr. Bryant, submitted to the County Treasurer and then later returned, came from several of the fourteen plaintiffs involved in the 2016 civil lawsuit 16CV4. District Court Judge Jeffrey Wilson had ruled that the case, brought against the Board of County Commissioners, was frivolous and also ruled that the plaintiffs “jointly and severally” owed the County government $18,565.50 in legal fees. Dividing that number by 14 would give $1,326.11 — according to my pocket calculator — and if each plaintiff paid that amount, then the judgement would presumably be satisfied?
It’s not every day you submit a check to your government — for a payment the judge says you owe them — and your government won’t accept the check.
But with all due respect to Mr. Bryant, the mess started out a while back. We could say that it began in 2013 when a group of community activists circulated 11 petitions, known as the “Liberty Zone” initiatives. These ballot initiatives were a challenge to the Archuleta County status quo, in more than one sense. The proposed initiatives — if they’d been taken up by the BOCC as valid petitions, and if they’d then been approved by local voters — would purportedly have done the following:
- Required the election of local judges and magistrates by the voters.
- Established ‘Common Law’ courts — “as originally intended by the Founding Fathers” — to hear cases according to ‘common law.’
- Created a Grand Jury for Archuleta County, with a preference for ‘volunteer’ members.
- Grand Jury trials for government officials accused of violating their oath of office.
- Demanded the protection of Habeas Corpus rights.
- Declared federal, state and local gun-control laws to be invalid in Archuleta County.
- Nullified the Affordable Care Act within Archuleta County.
- Allowed anyone and everyone to carry concealed firearms.
- Created an “Archuleta County Credit Union” owned by the residents of the County, for the deposit of County funds and to be used to improve the economic conditions in the community.
- Required a demonstrable ‘injured party’ for any legal action.
- Defined a statement to be read to juries, clearly stating that the jury may, in their decisions, nullify laws they considered to be unjust.
The petition forms were reportedly approved by the County Clerk & Recorder “per Colorado statutes” — and following their circulation, were accepted by the Clerk’s office. According to LibertyZone.org, at least one of the petitions was signed by over 600 county voters.
If the BOCC — composed at that time of Clifford Lucero, Michael Whiting and Steve Wadley — had agreed to place these initiatives on the 2014 ballot, or on any future ballot, the voters could have weighed in on some significant challenges to the status quo. It might be worth noting that a majority of the proposed initiatives addressed judges and legal processes.
The very act of bringing these petitions to the BOCC and requesting their placement on the ballot was itself a challenge to the status quo. To my knowledge, the Archuleta County government had never before been presented with these types of citizen initiative petitions.
The BOCC held a “work session” in December, 2013, purportedly to discuss the “Liberty Zone” petitions. It’s my understanding that the BOCC had the legal authority to place one or more of the proposed initiatives onto the 2014 ballot, or on a future ballot. The BOCC chose instead to ignore the petitions.
Which led, eventually, to the lawsuit known as 16CV4.
Speaking as someone who once sued the County government for alleged illegal behavior, I have more than a passing interest in how this lawsuit unfolded. So earlier this week, I sat down with former Commissioner Michael Whiting, to hear what he remembered about the “Liberty Zone” process.