Lora Thomas's SPOTLIGHT #25-11
Stop the Power Grab- Apr 25
- 5 min read
Updated: Apr 26
This section is copied from former Commissioner Lora Thomas's Newsletter #25-11
Douglas County Commissioners Sued for Violating Open Meetings Laws
On Tuesday I joined a registered Democrat, Robert Marshall, and a registered unaffiliated voter, Julie Gooden, to file a lawsuit against the Douglas County Commissioners for failing to follow Colorado's Open Meetings Laws by engaging in a series of unposted and unrecorded meetings that were not available for public scrutiny. No members of the public were able to attend these meetings because we didn't know about them! We have no idea what was decided or discussed because no record exists!
According to documents received from Douglas County through Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) requests, invitees to at least 12 unposted/unrecorded meetings included all three county commissioners along with the county manager and county attorney. Various other county staff members were also invited to these unposted/unrecorded meetings, including Ellie Reynolds, the CEO of the Douglas County Economic Council and Roger Hudson, a Castle Pines Councilman and a Communications Consultant working under contract for the county.
These secret meetings, referred to as "Advanced Planning Meetings", began on December 17, 2024, just a few hours after Kevin Van Winkle was sworn in as the Commissioner from District 3 (Highlands Ranch).
Our lawsuit is based upon the following Colorado statutes:
C.R.S. 24-6-401, often referred to as "Colorado Sunshine Law", says, "It is declared to be a matter of statewide concern and the policy of this state that the formation of public policy is public business and may not be conducted in secret."
24-6-402 (1) (b), “'Meeting' means any kind of gathering, convened to discuss public business, in person, by telephone, electronically, or by other means of communication."
24-6-402 (2)(b), "All meetings of a quorum or three or more members of any local public body, whichever is fewer, at which any public business is discussed or at which any formal action may be taken are declared to be public meetings open to the public at all times."
I believe this is how the commissioners prepared to vote on March 25 to place on the ballot the question to make Douglas County a home rule county in a June 24 Special Election, without a single mention of home rule being made in a public meeting so that citizens knew what our commissioners were planning/intending.
In addition to the meeting invitees for these secret meetings, CORA requests revealed an invoice for work done by Roger Hudson for the commissioners in the month of March 2025. That work included:
- researching home rule statutes (March 2) (I thought Hudson was contracted to do communications work, not legal research)
- providing home rule messaging with the commissioners (March 3)
- attending an Advanced Planning Meeting (March 4)
- reviewing work product from the county attorney (March 7)
- drafting a home rule communication plan (March 15)
- drafting a home rule release (March 16)
- writing the first draft of the home rule run of show for March 25 (March 18)
- reviewing the home rule announcement strategy with the commissioners (March 21)
- reviewing the second draft of the March 25 run of show (March 21)
- on-going strategy for home rule with the Douglas County Communications Director (March 22).
The total invoice for Hudson for March was $9735 charged at $150/hour.
It looks like a great deal of meeting, discussion and planning took place well before the Special Business meeting on March 25 announcing the home rule election--with absolutely none of it involving We the People!!
Then there's the March 24 email (the night before the rest of us found out about home rule) from the Chair of the Douglas County Republicans to several people that announced, "Our amazing Commissioners are going through with the Home Rule Initiative. I have the slates they have picked to run for the charter broken out by their district listed below. Please find the invitation to the press conference and luncheon tomorrow at the Douglas County Government offices (100 3rd St, Castle Rock 80104) starting at 11:30, attached."
The legal malfeasance that this lawsuit addresses is the complete, and apparently intentional and deliberate, lack of transparency and involvement of the citizens in the planning process to put home rule on the ballot. As Plaintiffs bringing this legal action, we have respectfully requested that the Court:
(1) Immediately enter a Preliminary Injunction that prohibits the Commissioners from committing further violations of the Colorado Open Meetings law (COML);
(2) Immediately enter a Preliminary Injunction that prohibits the Commissioners from giving effect to any Resolutions that were adopted outside of a lawfully convened public meeting, which are therefore invalid; and
(3) Enter a Declaratory Judgment finding that the Commissioners have violated the COML.
I have included below in this newsletter the Complaint that was filed on April 22, as well as the 8 Exhibits that support our claims.
The Commissioners responded to our suit, as documented in the Channel 7 coverage above, not with denials of wrongdoing or justification for their actions, but rather sought to deflect focus from their well-documented failure to follow the law with false accusations:
Douglas County commissioners declined to comment on specifics of the lawsuit but said it's an attempt "to keep voters from voting" on the home rule initiative.
Let me be crystal clear that the intent of this lawsuit is NOT TO PREVENT VOTERS FROM VOTING! It is to ensure that the commissioners follow the Colorado Open Meetings Laws and that any election on the issue of home rule not be a "rush to judgment" but rather the product of OPEN and PUBLIC discussion in which residents can directly and fully participate and that the voice of voters can be heard and considered. As elected representatives of We the People, our commissioners are duty-bound to follow the Sunshine Law of 1970 establishing that "...public policy is public business and may not be conducted in secret." Sec. 24-6-401 C.R.S.
We look forward to open and informed public discussion, debate and a fully-informed decision by Douglas County residents.
Comments