Douglas County commissioners Abe Laydon and George Teal have again voted to remove Commissioner Lor Thomas from outside boards that oversee organizations in the community less than a week after they voted to censure — or formally disapprove — of her.

“Laydon and Teal continue to disenfranchise the residents of District III, which includes Highlands Ranch and Sterling Ranch,” Thomas said about the vote to remove her.

Teal and Laydon had also voted to remove her from leadership on outside entities around the early part of this year.

Thomas in the past has argued that her removal from outside entities raises issues for her ability to represent her area, or district, of Douglas County.

Laydon, the commissioner for District I, or northeast Douglas County, has called those concerns “wildly inaccurate,” noting the commissioners are all elected at large.

In Douglas County, the commissioners are required to reside in different districts, but voters throughout the entire county cast ballots for each seat.

The removal of Thomas from more boards during a meeting of county officials on Aug. 28 comes days after Laydon and Teal voted to censure her. The actions continue a yearslong string of 2-1 conflicts among the three leaders.

Thomas felt her colleagues have “no specific or substantive evidence” that justifies her removal.

Teal did not immediately respond for comment on the decision.

In the removal, Teal and Laydon voted to take Thomas off the boards of the Chatfield Watershed Authority, a body that works to protect water quality in the area, and the Douglas County Housing Partnership, an entity that works on housing affordability, according to county staff.

The week prior, Laydon and Teal had voted to censure Thomas in response to what Laydon has called public shaming of county volunteers with inaccurate information.

What led to censure

The conflict that led up to Thomas’ censure largely centered on her criticism of the actions of the Douglas County Cultural Council, a volunteer board that advises the county on how arts and culture funding should be spent.

Thomas in her email newsletter had criticized the council’s actions, pushing the group to support spending a part of its funding differently.

Laydon has said it’s not a problem for commissioners to ask questions about public funds but that it can be done respectfully, saying Thomas has spread misinformation.

“This year there was more funding available for distribution than there were requests, but (Douglas County) commissioners did not learn about this windfall until after the council had made recommendations,” Thomas wrote in an Aug. 6 newsletter.

Organizations outside of Douglas County that can prove that they provide services to county residents are eligible for funding, according to Thomas’ newsletter. 

But “I felt strongly that after all of the requests for funding had been fulfilled, that the Cultural Council should disperse the additional (money) only to organizations located in Douglas County,” Thomas wrote. 

The cultural council recently met, and the request to keep the dollars in Douglas County failed on a 5-2 vote, according to Thomas’ newsletter.

Thomas’ newsletter criticized the decision and said: “I would like to give credit and applaud the courage of Cultural Council members Ann Speer and Sid Simonson who voted in the minority to respect Douglas County taxpayers and organizations.”

The newsletter then included a link that read: “Click here for a roster of the cultural council members.” It led to a page on the county’s website that describes the cultural council and lists its members.

“I call it doxing,” Laydon said at an Aug. 8 meeting of commissioners and other county officials.

The Merriam-Webster website defines “doxing” as “to publicly identify or publish private information about (someone) especially as a form of punishment or revenge.”

But whatever a person calls it, “I don’t think that’s productive, and I don’t think that’s respectful,” Laydon said.

Thomas has said that the link to all the board members’ names is public information on the county’s website.

Thomas at an Aug. 22 commissioners meeting said: “I did not post anybody’s picture or name in a public place.”

But one of Thomas’ newsletters included what appears to be a screenshot of a videoconferencing meeting that includes video-feed images of members of the cultural council and their names.

Thomas argued that when people get involved in government and have input on public spending, the public has the right to information.

‘Best interest for Douglas County’

The cultural council works with the Scientific and Cultural Facilities District, a government body that includes seven counties in the Denver metro area. One penny on every $10 in sales and use tax collected goes to the district to fund organizations that provide arts or science programs, the district’s website says.

Counties make decisions about how some of the tax revenue is spent. Each county receives a share of the tax collected, and county cultural councils review applications from organizations and make recommendations on their county’s funding priorities, the district’s website says.

Those recommendations are then reviewed and approved by the county commissioners or city council and the SCFD board of directors, the website says.

James Smith, the recent Douglas County Cultural Council chair, wrote in a document sent to the county that the cultural council’s funding should focus on impact to residents.

“The Scientific and Cultural Facilities District's primary goal is to ‘bring arts, culture, and scientific experiences within reach for every resident,’” the document said. “The residents of Douglas County are our primary stakeholders, and decisions should reflect their interests, not the interests of a handful of organizations that have a home office in Douglas County.”

Other members of the cultural council defended their actions at the Aug. 22 meeting, with one saying: “We stand behind our decision as one that was thoughtfully considered and we believe that is the best interest for Douglas County.”

In the end, the county commissioners voted 3-0 to certify the funding as recommended by the cultural council, according to county staff.

Spreading word of censure

Actions including “public shaming” by Thomas have “diminished the council’s morale,” Smith wrote in a letter offering to step down after Thomas had criticized the group.

Based on Thomas’ criticism of the cultural council in “a tone meant to negatively represent the cultural council’s work,” Laydon and Teal voted to censure Thomas for “behavior contrary to the Douglas County commissioner code of conduct” and “conduct detrimental to Douglas County,” according to Teal’s reading of the censure resolution at the Aug. 22 meeting.

During the meeting of county officials on Aug. 28, along with Teal and Laydon’s vote to remove Thomas from the Chatfield and housing partnership boards, the two commissioners also voted to ensure that the county’s volunteer boards and some outside boards would hear of Thomas’ censure.

Laydon and Teal directed county staff to send a letter, the censure resolution and the communication from Smith with his resignation from the cultural council to every Douglas County board of volunteers.

Some examples of those boards include the county’s planning commission — a group of Douglas County residents who advise the county’s elected leaders on property development decisions — and the Douglas library board, among others.

Teal and Laydon also directed county staff to send the letter, the resolution and the resignation of Smith to all boards that Thomas sits on outside of Douglas County board authority, including the Colorado Counties Inc. board.

(Colorado Counties Inc. is a nonprofit that works to present a “united voice” of local governments to the state legislature to help shape policy, according to its website.)

Replacing Thomas

Teal proposed that he would replace Thomas on the Chatfield Watershed Authority board.

A watershed is the area of land that drains to a stream, lake or river, according to the authority’s website.

He also proposed that Laydon would replace Thomas on the Douglas County Housing Partnership board.

The proposals again were approved by Teal and Laydon over Thomas’ objection.

Thomas also saw removal from outside boards earlier this year.

In an early February newsletter, Thomas pointed to “the fourth time in just a few weeks that I have been replaced on boards” on which she says she has long served.

Laydon and Teal had voted to remove her from leadership on entities such as the Northwest Douglas County Chamber and Economic Development Corporation, a group that represents the local business community; and the Mile High Flood District, which oversees matters such as flood management, stream mitigation and stormwater around the Denver region.