Waukegan School Board violated OMA by failing to provide notice or agenda for collective bargaining meeting

This reading view follows the source PDF's positioned text blocks. Page headers, repeated office furniture, and lower-margin notes are kept out of the narrative; source notes are available below. Reconstruction is automatic and imperfect — the PDF is the authoritative version, and it's linked on this page.

Public Schools i Unit School District Number 60 hours' advance public notice, an agenda, public participation or tape recording of the meeting[.]"' The Board alleged that the meeting was convened under the authority of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act ( 115 ILCS 5/ 1 et seq. ( West 2012)) and claimed that section 18 of that Act 115 ILCS 5/ 18 ( West 2012)) makes OMA " inapplicable to unilateral labor negotiation discussions." Z The Board also provided this office with minutes of the October 7, 2014, meeting indicating that it voted to enter closed session pursuant to the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act and section 2( c)( 2) of OMA ( 5 ILCS 120/ 2( c)( 2) ( West 2013 Supp.), as amended bylPublic Acts 98- 756, effective July 16, 2014; 98- 1039, effective August 25, 2014). did not submit a written reply.

DETERMINATION

The intent of OMA is to " ensure that the actions of public bodies be taken openly that their deliberations be conducted openly." 5 ILCS 120/ 1 ( West 2012). To that end, ion 2( a) of OMA ( 5 ILCS 120/ 2( a) ( West 2013 Supp.), as amended by Public Acts 98- 756, ctive July 16, 2014; 98- 1039, effective August 25, 2014) provides: "[ a] Il meetings of public ies shall be open to the public unless excepted in subsection ( c) and closed in accordance t Section 2a." Section 2( c)( 2) of OMA permits a public body to hold a closed meeting to uss "[ c] ollective negotiating matters between the public body and its employees or their esentatives, or deliberations concerning salary schedules for one or more classes of doyees." However, section 2a of OMA ( 5 ILCS 120/ 2a ( West 2012)) only allows a public y to " hold a meeting closed to the public, or close a portion of a meeting to the public, upon a Drity vote of a quorum present, taken at a meeting open to the public for which notice has 2 given as required by this Act." ( Emphasis added.) Additionally, section 2. 02( a) of OMA (5 S 120/2. 02( a) ( West 2012)) provides: "[ p] ublic notice of any special meeting except a ting held in the event of a bonafide emergency, or of any rescheduled regular meeting, or of reconvened meeting, shall be given at least 48 hours before such meeting, which notice shall include the agenda[.]"

Request for Review alleged that he went to the Board' s meeting place on October 7, 2014, and was told by the Superintendent that the Board was having a closed meeting, despite not having provided advance notice to the public or otherwise abiding by OMA. In its response to this office, the Board acknowledged that it did not provide advance notice or post an agenda for its October 7, 2014, Board meeting, but claimed that the meeting was exempt from OMA under section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act, which provides: t]he provisions of the Open Meetings Act shall not apply to collective bargaining negotiations and grievance arbitrations conducted pursuant to this Act." In support of its position, the Board cited the dissent in a 1987 Appellate Court case. See Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board v. Homer Community Consolidated School District No. 208, 160 Ill. App. 3d 730 ( 4th Dist. 1987) ( McCullough, J., dissenting). The Board has not cited any binding authority supporting the position that section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act makes OMA inapplicable to the Board' s unilateral labor negotiation discussions. Rather, the Board cited two judicial opinions and a formal Attorney General opinion which each acknowledge that discussions concerning collective bargaining are properly held in closed session during public meetings pursuant to DMA' s collective bargaining exception. See Illinois Educational Labor Relations Board v. Homer Community Consolidated School District No. 208, 132 Ill. 2d 29, 36 1989); People v. Board ofEducation ofDistrict 170 ofLee and Ogle Counties, 40 Ill. App. 3d 819, 821- 23 ( 2nd Dist. 1976); Ill. Att' y Gen. Op. No. 80- 024, issued August 12, 1980, at 9- 11.

In construing statutory provisions such as section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act and section 2( c)( 2) of OMA, the primary goal is to ascertain and effectuate the or of the General Assembly. See Southern Illinoisan v. Illinois Department ofPublic Health, 218 111. 2d 390, 415, 844 N.E.2d 1, 14 ( 2006). The best indicator of legislative intent is the language of the statute, which must be given its plain and ordinary meaning. See, e.g., Bettis v. Marsaglia, 2014 IL 117050, 113, 23 N.E.3d 351, 356 ( 2014). When a statutory provision is ambiguous, a reviewing body turns " to aids of statutory construction, including legislative history and established rules of construction." BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v. Mitchell, 2014 IL 116311, ¶ 38, 6 N. E. 3d 162, 170 ( 2014). " Under the doctrine of in pari materia, two legislative acts that address the same subject are considered with reference to one another, so that they may be given harmonious effect." ( Emphasis in original.) See, e.g., Citizens Opposing Pollution v. ExxonMobil Coal USA., 2012 IL 111286, ¶ 24, 962 N. E. 2d 956, 964 ( 2012). It is also a well-established principle of statutory construction that " each word, clause and sentence of a statute must be given a reasonable construction, if possible, and should not be rendered superfluous." See, e.g., Home Star Bank and Financial Services v. Emergency Care and Health Organization, Ltd., 2014 IL 115526, ¶ 24, 6 N. E. 3d 128, 135 ( 2014).

Under the plain language of section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act, " collective bargaining negotiations" are not subject to OMA. Negotiations are commonly understood to involve parties with differing interests each advocating for their own interests; Black' s Law Dictionary defines negotiations as "[ d] ealings conducted between two or more parties for the purpose of reaching an understanding." Black' s Law Dictionary ( 9th ed. 2009), available at Westlaw BLACKS. Section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act does not Irefer to discussions concerning collective bargaining negotiations, but to the collective bargaining negotiations themselves. Accordingly, the plain language of section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act does not evince the intent to remove a public body' s internal discussions concerning collective bargaining negotiations from the purview of OMA.

This interpretation is further supported by the fact that OMA contains its own excepting collective bargaining negotiations from discussion in an open meeting. As set forth above, section 2( c)( 2) of OMA allows a public body to hold a closed session discussion of "[c] ollective negotiating matters between the public body and its employees or their representatives[.]" If, as the Board contends, section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act renders OMA inapplicable to discussions of collective bargaining matters by a school board, as opposed to applying only to negotiations or grievance arbitrations conducted under that Act where both educational employees and employers are present, then section 2( c)( 2) of OMA is superfluous. The exception permitting a public body to discuss collective negotiation matters in closed session would be pointless if OMA does not apply to a public body' s discussion of collective bargaining negotiations. On the other hand, section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act and section 2( c)( 2) of OMA can be construed in a manner that gives effect to both provisions: section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act applies when a public body meets with the opposing party in a collective bargaining dispute to negotiate, whereas a public body' s internal discussions about collective bargaining matters are subject to OMA. Thus, it comports with and effectuates both section 18 of the Illinois Educational Labor Relations Act and section 2( c)( 2) of OMA to conclude that OMA applies when a board holds a meeting for the members to discuss collective negotiating matters among themselves.

Accordingly, the Board violated OMA by holding a meeting that was subject to on October 7, 2014, without providing advance notice, an agenda, or otherwise abiding by We note that the conclusion that OMA applies to unilateral meetings to discuss collective ning does not mean that those discussions cannot be confidential; it simply means that a that wishes to discuss collective negotiating matters confidentially must make a motion te to enter closed session during a properly -noticed open meeting to discuss those matters. on our review of the minutes and the Board' s assertions, it appears that no final action was at the Board' s October 7, 2014, meeting. We caution the Board to comply with all the ements of OMA in the future.

The Public Access Counselor has determined that resolution of this matter does not require the issuance of a binding opinion. If you have any questions, please contact me at the Chicago address on the first page of this letter. This letter shall serve to close this matter.

Very truly yours,