The City and County of Broomfield, along with council members Elizabeth Law-Evans and Sam Taylor, are facing a lawsuit that encompasses a broad range of topics that take root in oil and gas.

David Milender, a local attorney who represents the five residents and a community group called The Broomfield Way, filed the suit in 17th Judicial Court last week.

The group cites a conflict of interest for Law-Evans and Taylor, potential open meetings violations, issues with record-retention on council member’s private email accounts and phones, and they allege an open records request violation.

On Oct. 4, The Broomfield Way requested emails and texts sent among council members for certain hours and on specific dates in September that coincided with public meetings or study sessions. They also asked for emails and texts — sent or received — between council and people associated with the Front Range Energy Alliance, the Colorado Oil and Gas Association, Extraction Oil and Gas, Inc., 8 North, LLC, Tom Cave, Sue Saad, Karen Nelson and Brian Cain. Cain works for Extraction. Those requests include messages sent between Sept. 1 through Oct. 5 and include messages on personal devices.

An emergency injunction was filed Tuesday so the matter could be heard before the city council meeting where council voted to accept an operator agreement with Extraction Oil and Gas. However, no judge was available for the emergency hearing.

Residents who filed the suit believed that Law-Evans and Taylor should have recused themselves from the vote. However, City and County William Tuthill advised the two that he saw no conflict of interest and the vote went through, passing six-to-four, with both council members voting yes.

People involved in the lawsuit believe Law-Evans — a real estate agent — used her position on council to move proposed wells farther away from properties she represented near 160th Avenue and Huron Street.

Law-Evans said that at one point, Law and Evans Associates, Inc. was co-lister on some properties in the area, but after consulting Tuthill, she and her husband made the decision to withdraw from those listings.

“Any marketing or other materials that show LEA in any way associated with these properties is outdated,” she said in an email. “Please note that the decision was made to walk away from these business situations in order that I might serve my community better. A significant amount of money was spent in pursing these business situations. The decision was made to not only walk away from a job that could have put food on my family’s table, but to walk away from the expenses already incurred.”

It is unclear when she divested those interests.

Taylor was listed in the lawsuit because he is “wearing two hats.” He is interim head of the Broomfield Chamber of Commerce, and Extraction is a member of the chamber. As president and CEO, Taylor has to promote Extraction’s business interests, Milender said, which he cannot do if he is also representing residents interests as a councilman.

Taylor — who is term limited and cannot be elected in November — said Extraction is a chamber member, but that he also has board members from Anthem and Wildgrass.

“My position is to look at the facts and do what is in the best interest of Broomfield,” Taylor said.

“The suit was filed yesterday morning because we thought it was of utmost importance that we get some investigation into some of these questions we have,” Milender said Wednesday.

Some residents have concerns regarding record retention because Broomfield does not have a policy for council using private texts and emails to conduct council business, Milender said.

Deputy City and County Manager Pat Gilbert confirmed that there is no city policy on retaining messages on personal devices.

“I found it kind of alarming they were left to craft their own policy on their own devices,” he said. “It should be covered by city policy.”

Katherine Merlin is listed as an attorney on the lawsuit, along with Milender.

The Broomfield Way filed the suit, along with Madhav Narayan, Lanae Davis, Jodi Behrens-Stark, Christopher Cleary and Suzanne Kent.

After talking to Broomfield’s city attorney office, Milender said they amended some of those requests and on Oct. 10 were told the organization would need to provide a financial deposit to cover the city’s time to collect the data because of its large scope.

The next day, a check was delivered, Milender said, and on Oct. 17 some of the communications, including screen shots of some texts, were shared with the group. The group felt information was missing, so members asked for additional records.

Council members are custodians of records on their personal phones and emails. Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) requests require data be returned within three days, unless there is an exceptional circumstance. The Broomfield Way has not received an “exceptional circumstance” finding from the city, Milender said.

On Oct. 18, the group sent Broomfield a notice, required by law, informing them they intended to file suit within three days if the city doesn’t comply with the CORA request.

The residents filing the lawsuit claim they have concerns regarding open meetings laws and possible misconduct.

Milender said he and his clients still are discussing how to move forward and what steps to take.

“The suit doesn’t go away because they voted,” he said. “It’s not just about the MOU (memorandum of understanding with Extraction). It’s asking the court to order the city to comply with its own ethics code.”

It is concerning that members of city council are left to determine their own policies on what public records they keep or destroy at will, Milender said.

“It’s alarming, especially because they can communicate via email and text,” he said. “It fosters an environment with a lack of accountability. Someone can send a text and immediately delete it.”

The Broomfield Way began as a small community group with members who wanted more information and seek transparency in local government.

The name came from a sentiment that some council members were using it to divide the community by dismissing anyone who “wasn’t formed from the clay in the soil here, but rather chose to move their family” to the city, Milender said in an opinion piece published in the July 16 Broomfield Enterprise.

The group’s overarching mission is to seek accountability and responsiveness and know what’s going on in local government.

Residents also are worried that council may have “strayed off topic” during executive sessions and discussed items not listed on the agenda.

Red flags were raised when comments and emails from residents, who would not have been in the meetings, seemed to have information about items discussed at the meeting. Council members are not allowed to take vote in executive sessions — which are not open to the public — or to talk about what is discussed during those sessions.

Milender said residents have heard that a decision to not pursue any legal remedies, and to begin negotiations of an Extraction MOU, could have been made in one such meeting.

“I thought ‘I don’t remember us having a frank and honest discussion in an open forum,'” Milender said. “Why does (this resident) think these decisions have been made? It sounded suspicious.”

During executive sessions, council cannot vote, but can give direction to staff.

Milender plans to argue that Broomfield’s ethics code prohibits not just conflicts of interest, but appearances of impropriety.

According to the code, “no elected official or appointee shall use his or her official position for private gain or for the private gain of any person with whom the elected official or appointee has a business relationship, or otherwise engage in any activity that creates an appearance of impropriety.”

Jennifer Rios: 303-473-1361, riosj@broomfieldenterprise.com or Twitter.com/Jennifer_Rios