Douglas County asks Supreme Court to weigh open meetings lawsuit

Douglas County is asking the Colorado Supreme Court to review a lawsuit that could decide how much notice residents receive when commissioners discuss major policy changes behind closed doors. The fight centers on the county’s push for Home Rule and on whether the Board of County Commissioners followed Colorado’s open meetings law while moving that question to voters.

The case was filed April 22, 2025 by former commissioner Lora Thomas, state Rep. Bob Marshall and voter Julie Gooden, putting a Republican, a Democrat and an unaffiliated voter on the same side. Thomas has said the dispute is about transparency, not politics. She argues that county leaders discussed public policy in closed-door sessions that were not properly posted or recorded, leaving residents unable to follow what was happening as the proposal moved forward.

Douglas County’s court timeline shows the fight has already moved through multiple rulings. A district judge denied a preliminary injunction in May 2025 and later denied an injunction pending appeal on June 8, 2025. The Colorado Court of Appeals reversed on April 2, 2026 and sent the case back to district court. County officials now want the state’s highest court to step in, saying they are seeking legal clarity after what they call a novel appellate ruling and after their request to publish the opinion was denied in May 2026.

The appeals dispute involved 11 closed, unnoticed meetings and three executive sessions between December 2024 and April 2025. The court found those discussions involved policymaking. Colorado’s Division of Local Government says the Open Meetings Law applies to county commissioners and other local public bodies that make policy, a standard that sits at the center of the lawsuit.

The broader political backdrop was Douglas County’s Home Rule campaign. Commissioners adopted a resolution supporting a charter commission at a June 10, 2025 business meeting in Castle Rock, saying home rule would protect local authority over matters of local concern, residents’ constitutional rights, and the county’s land, water and environment. Voters then rejected the effort in the June 24 special election, where 95,689 ballots were cast and Question 1A failed 71.09% to 28.91%, with 67,109 votes against and 27,287 in favor. The county later said voters decided a Home Rule Charter Commission would not be formed at this time.

A Supreme Court review would not only decide this lawsuit’s next step. It could also define how Douglas County handles notice, records and executive sessions when commissioners debate structural changes that affect who governs the county and how the public sees those decisions.