OMADetermination Letter (non-binding)No violationClosed Sessions

Hinsdale D86 school board did not violate OMA in closed self-evaluation session

The closed session involved a self-evaluation of board procedures facilitated by a representative of the Illinois Association of School Boards.

Date issued: November 18, 2015
Request number(s): 37299
Public body: Board of Education for Hinsdale High School District 86
Statute(s): 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(16)
Exemption(s) discussed: 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(16) — Self-evaluation with a statewide/regional association
Outcome: No violation found

Plain-language summary

A school board member complained that their board held a private meeting that was supposed to be about improving board procedures but was actually used to attack political opponents. The Attorney General's office reviewed the matter and determined that the discussion was appropriate and stayed within the legal rules for closed-door self-evaluation meetings. As a result, no violation of the Open Meetings Act was found.

Legal question

Whether a public body violated the Open Meetings Act by discussing internal board interactions and political disagreements during a closed session held under the self-evaluation exception of 5 ILCS 120/2(c)(16).

Holding

The Board of Education for Hinsdale High School District 86 did not violate the Open Meetings Act by holding a closed session to discuss board procedures.

Summary

A Board of Education member alleged that the Board improperly used a closed session to discuss political disagreements rather than board procedures, but the PAC found the discussion remained within the scope of the self-evaluation exception.

closed sessionschool boardself-evaluationOMA

Reading view (590 words)

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.

RE: OMA Request for Review- 2015 PAC 37299 Dea and Mr. Richart:

This determination is issued pursuant to section 3 .5( e) of the Open Meetings Act (OMA) (5 ILCS 120/3.5(e) (West 2014), as amended by Public Act 99-402, effective August 19, 2015). For the reasons that follow, the Public Access Bureau concludes that the Board of Education for Hinsdale High School District 86 (Board) did not violate OMA when holding a closed session during a July I 0, 20 I 5, special meeting to discuss self-evaluation of Board procedures.

On September 3, 2015, submitted a Request for Review alleging that the Board violated OMA during the closed session on July 10, 2015, by discussing matters outside the scope of the exception provided in section 2(c)(l6) of OMA (5 ILCS 120/2(c)(l6) (West 2014)), which provides that part ofa meeting may be closed for the purpose of"[ s ]elf evaluation, practices and procedures or professional ethics, when meeting with a representative of a statewide association of which the public body is a member." In particular, who is a member of the Board, alleged that the Board "abused the OMA exception by engaging in an unseemly session of suppression of the political minority position as well as utilizing this vehicle to engage in a mud-slinging session." 1

DETERMINATION

Section 2(a) of OMA (5 ILCS 120/2(a) (West 2014)) provides that "all meetings of public bodies shall be open to the public unless excepted in subsection ( c) and closed in accordance with Section 2a." As described above, part of the July 10, 2015, special meeting was closed pursuant to section 2(c)(l6) of OMA.

We have reviewed and considered the verbatim record of the closed session for the July 10, 2015, special meeting, as well as the other materials provided by the Board. As described by the Board, a representative of the Illinois Association of School Boards met with five members of the Board to discuss Board procedures and how to improve them. Board members discussed the internal interactions between the members of the Board and candidly commented on those interactions. However, the context of those comments was the discussion of the Board's procedures and consistent with the scope of section 2(c)(l6) of OMA. Furthermore, the Board's discussion was facilitated by a representative of a statewide association of which it is a part, and the discussion did not involve substantive issues. Accordingly, we conclude that the Board did not violate OMA when conducting the closed session at the July 10, 2015, special meeting.

The Public Access Counselor has determined that resolution of this matter does not require the issuance ofa binding opinion. This letter serves to close this matter. If you have any questions, please contact me at [email protected] or (217) 782-9078.

Very truly yours, NEIL P. OLSON Assistant Attorney General Public Access Bureau 3 7299 o 2cl 6 proper sd

Notes from the original PDF (1)

1 Letter fro:to Sarah Pratt, Public Access Counselor (September 4, 2015), at I.