Don Shooter seeks $1.3 million from House speaker, Ducey's chief of staff following removal

Don Shooter, who was ousted from office after an investigation found he sexually harassed women over many years, filed a precursor to a lawsuit Monday, saying the process used to oust him from the House of Representatives was rigged.

Shooter claims he was denied due process, and that sexual misconduct allegations involving another lawmaker, Rep. Michelle Ugenti-Rita, were not given equal scrutiny. Ugenti-Rita was the first woman to publicly accuse Shooter of inappropriate behavior.

Shooter asks for $1.3 million to settle his case, according to his notice of claim, which names as defendants Gov. Doug Ducey's chief of staff, Kirk Adams, and House Speaker J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler.

The 17-page claim, obtained by The Arizona Republic, also calls for state officials to give Shooter access to all evidence compiled by investigators so he can make his own case in court.

"Having lost his job and been branded nationally as a sexual predator, his greatest fear is that for all of this, he may not have made a dent in the corrupt culture at the Capitol, and, in fact his expulsion is now a cautionary tale that will keep others silent,” his claim states.

“The compensation Mr. Shooter seeks is for the evidence of extraordinary actions by members of the Governor’s Office, in coordination with his prime accuser Rep. Michelle Ugenti-Rita and the Speaker of the House Javan (J.D.) Mesnard, be made public, including the circumstances and motivations behind the multi-million dollar technology, no-bid contracts.”

While Shooter seeks a $1.3 million settlement, his claim also states that, rather than settling, he would prefer to publicly argue his case in court and that all investigation records be released.

Shooter's political career came to an end in February, after the Republican-controlled chamber voted to immediately remove the powerful lawmaker on a vote of 56-3.

The vote capped a three-month investigation conducted by House staff and outside attorneys, who concluded there was "credible evidence" that Shooter violated House policy dealing with harassment, discrimination and a hostile work environment through his behavior toward multiple women.

Shooter claims retaliation after threat

In the filing, Shooter reiterates his claim that the Governor’s Office, through Adams, wanted him gone after he threatened to issue subpoenas tied to state technology contracts he found questionable.

During that Nov. 2 meeting, Shooter told Adams of “irregularities in the procurement process” and suspicious state procurement processes, the claim states. The notice of claim says Shooter told Adams he preferred that the Governor’s Office “clean up their own house” rather than doing so through a more public process.

Ducey’s administration has previously confirmed that Shooter threatened to issue subpoenas on the contracts, but has vehemently denied the allegations of questionable procurement activities.

Ducey spokesman Daniel Scarpinato said Monday of Shooter's notice of claim, "These are desperate claims by a disgraced, ousted lawmaker, and we dispute them entirely."

Five days after the meeting with Adams about the contracts, Shooter says, he was publicly accused of sexual harassment by Ugenti-Rita.

At the time of the sexual-harassment report, Ugenti-Rita was engaged to Brian Townsend, who lobbied for one of the companies whose contract Shooter was questioning. Townsend had previously worked as a policy adviser to Ducey, and years ago, as an adviser to Adams while at the House of Representatives.

Soon after Ugenti-Rita’s allegations, the claim says, Mesnard began pressuring Shooter to resign.

“The Speaker’s requests for resignation made clear that he was not an impartial arbiter,” the claim says.

“Though troubling, Mr. Shooter believed that once complete, the investigative report would be turned over to the Ethics Committee whose members had not publicly or privately weighed in.”

Mesnard released a statement Monday evening, saying the House was well within its powers to oust Shooter.

"The Arizona Constitution gives the Legislature broad powers when it comes to disciplining its own members, and Mr. Shooter's expulsion was well within that authority," Mesnard said. "It's unfortunate that Mr. Shooter continues to blame others for the consequences of his own actions."

On Nov. 8, Shooter asked for a thorough investigation into the allegations against him.

Other allegations involving Ugenti-Rita

Shooter’s claim then details what he says is the nature of other allegations involving Ugenti-Rita. Until now, no one has publicly stated what may be the scope of the allegations involving the Scottsdale Republican.

The claim does not provide a source of information about these allegations.

“At the same time, Rep. Shooter asked the House to investigate allegations that had surfaced concerning malfeasance and other bad acts by Rep. Ugenti-Rita. Rep. Shooter alleged violations of House policy by Rep. Ugenti-Rita including attempts to kiss, requests for sex, exposing her genitalia in person to a young female staffer and by ‘sexting’ her graphic ‘selfies.’

“Mr. Shooter alleged that Ugenti-Rita also carried on an affair with another subordinate House staff member. He requested the House complete a thorough investigation into those allegations, as well as any allegations against him.”

Ugenti-Rita was not immediately available for comment.

Speaker withholds investigation details

It is unclear if the internal House investigative team scrutinized those allegations specifically.

Mesnard has repeatedly rebuffed The Arizona Republic’s requests under the state Public Records Law to release all evidence compiled for the investigation.

In the final pages of the report, Ugenti-Rita’s then-fiance admitted to investigators that he engaged in inappropriate conduct that “involved unsolicited, sexually explicit communications.”

It is unclear to whom Townsend sent the explicit communications. Investigators did not describe the nature of the communications but called them “unwelcome,” “harassing” and “offensive.”

The report says investigators “had no doubt” the communications had occurred, suggesting they either obtained the communications or were shown them by recipients or others who somehow received them.

Investigators characterized Townsend’s conduct as “egregious and potentially unlawful.” He didn't immediately return a request for comment.

Investigators concluded Ugenti-Rita did not know about the communications and was “visibly distraught” when asked by investigators about them, their report states.

Instead of launching an inquiry though the House Ethics Committee, Mesnard hand-picked his own committee — comprised of his staff, in part — to review the allegations against Shooter and Ugenti-Rita, the claim states.

MORE ON POLITICS:

Woman at center of Phoenix lobbyist forgery scandal convicted, sentenced

Surprise city travel includes four-star hotel stays

Hiral Tipirneni outraises Debbie Lesko as Arizona's CD8 race enters final stage

Mesnard suspended Shooter from his position as House Appropriations Committee chairman, saying in a news release Shooter could not “properly fulfill his obligations” until the inquiry ended.

Mesnard did not strip Ugenti-Rita of her position as chairwoman of the House Ways and Means Committee.

“The disparate and preferential treatment of Rep. Ugenti-Rita was consistent throughout the investigation,” Shooter’s claim states.

Mesnard paid 25 percent more to the attorney representing Ugenti-Rita during the investigative process than the fees incurred by lawyers representing Shooter or Rep. Rebecca Rios, D-Phoenix, the claim states.

Mesnard originally said he would cap lawmakers' legal assistance at $300 per hour, with a maximum of $6,000, or 20 hours. Ugenti-Rita spent more than $8,000 while Shooter and Rios each spent slightly under $6,000.

Rios also was accused last year of having an inappropriate relationship with a House staffer. Mesnard directed the complaint against her to the House Ethics Committee.

The complaint against Rios was swiftly dismissed after the House ethics chairman concluded the accusation, leveled by another Democratic lawmaker, had been filed over a political dispute and lacked evidence.

A spokesman for Rios said the dismissal of that allegation "speaks for itself."

There is no policy prohibiting consensual relationships between lawmakers and House staffers.

Why Shooter thinks expulsion was unfair

Much of Shooter’s claim focuses on complaints that his removal violated House rules and his right to due process under the U.S. Constitution.

Shooter alleges that Mesnard wrongly applied the House’s more restrictive “zero tolerance” sexual harassment policy in its investigation. The chamber didn’t have a written harassment policy until November 2017, when Mesnard created it after harassment accusations arose.

Shooter's attorney, Kraig Marton, contends that Mesnard doesn't have the authority to unilaterally impose new harassment rules on elected officials without a vote of the House.

“To date, this policy has never been voted on and therefore has never been adopted by the elected members of the House,” Shooter’s claim states.

Shooter alleges the outcome of the investigation against him would have been different without with a “zero tolerance” policy in place. His claim states that while his behavior would have been found “offensive and uncouth on separate occasions,” it wouldn’t have created a hostile work environment.

The use of an outside law firm, appointed as special counsel, to lead the investigation against Shooter is another target of his claim.

Shooter contends the process used to oust him was a historical anomaly. His claim states that the House Ethics Committee or a special committee has overseen every other investigation of a state legislator accused of misconduct.

“Put another way, no Legislature in the history of Arizona, has considered the expulsion of a member without engaging a special or ethics committee consisting of elected members, and providing basic elements of fair disciplinary processes,” his claim states.

The House can expel any member for disorderly behavior with a two-thirds vote under the Arizona Constitution.

Shooter contends that failing to use the traditional process deprived him of an opportunity to respond through an impartial inquiry led by his elected peers.

His claim states that the House’s “zero tolerance” policy, adopted by Mesnard in November, was unfairly applied retroactively. Harassment allegations against Shooter date back to 2011, when he entered the state Senate.

Shooter was elected to the House in 2016, but investigators substantiated several allegations from his time in the Senate.

Other GOP lawmakers seek more details

A few of Shooter’s Republican peers in the House appear to agree, at least partly, with his assessment that his removal lacked due process.

Last month, Rep. Todd Clodfelter, R-Tucson, tried to force a House vote to release all records from the investigation. Mesnard said that motion was out of order, but Clodfelter sent lawmakers a letter outlining concerns that Shooter’s removal skirted House rules.

Clodfelter emphasized, as Shooter did in his complaint, that lawmakers still haven’t received all records from the investigation.

Clodfelter wrote that a lack of disclosure about information caused lawmakers to oust Shooter "without knowledge of evidence which could be exculpatory for Mr. Shooter as well as credible testimony and evidence of multiple incidents of sexual harassment by other representative(s)."

Follow the reporters on Twitter @yvonnewingett and @dustingardiner. Reach them at yvonne.wingett@arizonarepublic.com and dustin.gardiner@arizonarepublic.com.