An early April meeting by all three Douglas County commissioners and staffers to discuss home rule raised questions about whether the local officials violated Colorado’s open meetings law.

The county insisted the commissioners took part in an open meeting that the hosting group labeled a “private meeting” — and they didn’t violate any laws.

First reported by Colorado Community Media, all three Douglas County commissioners, plus some staff members, attended an event on April 2 organized by the Parker Conservatives. They allegedly discussed efforts to become a home rule county.

In March, Douglas County commissioners approved a resolution to pursue becoming a home rule county. Voters will decide whether to adopt the proposal in elections in June and November. Officials from the Republican-dominated county said the move will give the county government more local control.

The Parker Conservative’s April 2 meeting invite explicitly barred the media from attending.

Colorado law outlines what constitutes an open meeting: If a quorum or three or more members of a body discusses public business or potentially takes a formal action, it must be open to the public.

A 24-hour notice to the public is required if the body might adopt a policy, take a formal action — or when a majority or quorum is attending or is expected to attend the meeting.

“The meetings conducted by Parker Conservatives are private events exclusively reserved for members, affiliates, and guests of the conservative community,” Parker Conservative’s invite said for its April 2 meeting.

The group hosts a private meeting on the first Wednesday of every month.

“We maintain a closed-door policy to ensure a focused and confidential environment for our discussions,” the invite said. “Media representatives are expressly not invited to these gatherings. Any unauthorized individuals, including media personnel, attempting to gain access will be kindly escorted off the premises.”

The meeting occurred at Deep Space, a bar and event center that has previously hosted political forums.

Douglas County spokesperson Caroline Frizell said each commissioner received and accepted “personal” invitations.

“As soon as staff became aware that all three of them committed to going, we posted it online,” Frizell said, meaning the county scrambled to “notice” the meeting to comply with the law.

The invitation noted commissioners would discuss the state of the county and include a Q&A.

Douglas County officials couldn’t provide an exact timeline for when they posted the notice.

Douglas County officials denied they broke the law by attending the meeting.

“No policy was made at the Parker Conservatives meeting,” Commissioner Abe Laydon told The Denver Gazette. “No policy making was discussed because the policy that was discussed had already been made in a listed business meeting at the county.”

“Home rule is getting 95% favorability from folks we are talking to,” Laydon added.

At Tuesday’s Board of Commissioners meeting, multiple residents accused the commissioners of a lack of transparency, pointing to the April 2 meeting.

Lora Thomas, the former Douglas County commissioner who resigned in December, said on her Facebook page that home rule “is a bad idea.”

“And now,” she added, “the Board of County Commissioners violated Colorado’s open meetings law by speaking about home rule at a private event.”

At Tuesday’s meeting, Commissioner Kevin Van Winkle, who replaced Thomas, said the event was posted on the county website the day prior.

“Not one person was turned away,” Van Winkle said. “We ensured that not one person could be turned away, even if that was a member of the press.”

It is unclear whether any members of the press attended.

Van Winkle said 70 members of the public attended the meeting, while dozens of others either played poker or drank at the bar during the meeting.

Jeffrey Roberts, the executive director of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition, said in an email that he heard about the meeting from a few people.

“If the commissioners gave updates at the meeting about county business matters, such as the home rule proposal, that seems to be content rationally connected to their policy-making responsibilities, which would make the meeting open to the public and subject to the public notice provisions of the open meetings law,” Roberts said.

In an email, Douglas County Attorney Jeff Garcia said after the home rule resolution was approved on March 25, “the furtherance of Home Rule is no longer within the Board’s authority.”

That question, he said, is “now within the policy-making authority of Douglas County voters.”

Parker Conservative’s officials didn’t respond to a request for comment.