In the case of State ex rel. Ames v. Portage Cty. Bd. Of Commrs., Slip Opinion No. 2021-Ohio-2374, the Eleventh District Court of Appeals held that the Board may have violated the Open Meetings Act through its use of a consent agenda and the individual may be eligible for damages.
Here, the individual argued that by using a consent agenda and voting on items not communicated to the public, the Board was not keeping accurate minutes and effectively holding a closed meeting in violation of the Open Meetings Act.
The Court of Appeals held that while there is nothing in the Open Meetings Act that prohibits the Board from using a consent agenda, the method of use in this case could violate the Open Meetings Act because it does not allow for disclosure of voting issues to the public.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
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.