McGown & Markling spends a great deal of time advising public officials on how to recess into executive session and notice public meetings properly. So much time is spent on these issues because the penalties for violating the Ohio Open Meetings Act can be quite serious – as the Switzerland of Ohio Local School District Board of Education (“Board”) discovered when it had two significant resolutions invalidated by a court. Please feel free to contact McGown & Markling to discuss how to properly recess into executive session and other Sunshine Law issues. In the meantime, the Keystone case is summarized below.
In the case of Keystone Commt. v. Switzerland of Ohio Sch. Dist. Bd. of Edn., 2016-Ohio-4663, a state appellate court invalidated two board resolutions closing the Beallsville High School for Open Meetings Act violations.
The Switzerland of Ohio Local School District (“District”) had experienced a severe loss of revenue due to local business closures and population decline which forced the District into fiscal caution. In addition, the District garnered poor ratings on academic achievement. As a result, the Board considered various means to ensure fiscal sustainability and academic improvement – including closing the Beallsville High School.
On May 6, 2014, the Board entered executive session for the stated purpose of considering “District staffing and matters to be kept confidential by federal law or regulations or state statues [sic].” Keystone at ¶ 28. Despite this stated purpose, the Board discussed the reassignment of students from the Beallsville High School.
An Ohio appellate court found that the motion to recess into executive session violated the Open Meetings Act because “‘District staffing’ does not qualify under any of the statutory exemptions.” Keystone at ¶ 28. Even if it did, the motion was not sufficiently specific under the law as “personnel matters must be particularly named in the motion. Merely using general terms like ‘personnel,’ ‘staffing’ and ‘finances’ are not sufficient.” Keystone at ¶ 28. The appellate court further found that “[t]he Board impermissibly conducted public business, which should have been conducted in an open meeting, behind closed doors during this executive session.” Keystone at ¶ 28.
On March 19, 2015, the Board again entered executive session. The stated purpose for this executive session was “considering the appointment, employment, discipline of a public employee or official; considering charges or complaints against a public employee, official, licensee or student; to consider matters confidential by statute or regulation; and, finally, to discuss security arrangements and emergency response protocol.” Keystone at ¶ 29. According to the appellate court, evidence suggests that the Board discussed academic course improvement, course offerings, and issues involving administrative buildings and grounds during this executive session.
The appellate court found that, while the executive session “language mirrors some language in the statute, the Board never specifically states in the notice the specific or actual purpose for the executive session.” Keystone at ¶ 29.
The appellate court further found that the Board engaged in illegal deliberations during both executive sessions. According to the appellate court, “[t]he record reflects that the discussions held in the executive sessions included topics such as staffing, administrative and curriculum; matters solely related to the closing of Beallsville High School.” Keystone at ¶ 31. Moreover, “[b]oth Board resolutions to close Beallsville High School were offered immediately after the Board adjourned both executive sessions.” As a result, the appellate court invalidated the resolutions to close Beallsville High School and ordered the Board to undergo a decision making process that is fully compliant with the Open Meetings Act.
As a final matter, the appellate court found that the notice for a special meeting to close Beallsville High School violated the Open Meetings Act because “[t]he stated purpose in the notice of the special meeting, ‘[t]o discuss the 2015-2016 school year,’ did not serve to inform the public of the true purpose of the meeting” as “the Board and its agents knew the meeting was about a very specific topic: the closing of Beallsville High School.” Keystone at ¶ 36.
To read the case, please click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and Patrick Vrobel
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is like the always changing Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.