Under Ohio’s Open Meetings Act, boards and other public bodies are permitted to enter executive session to discuss specific topics spelled out in the law. In essence, executive session is a built-in exception to the general requirement that public bodies conduct their deliberations in public. This provision recognizes that the nature of certain topics makes privacy and discretion in deliberations paramount.
In today’s Legal Ledger Sidebar, Sara Clark and John Price discuss committees and subcommittees, which is a topic that comes up frequently for our members. Specifically, they discuss when committees are required to comply with the Open Meetings Act and what that means.
In today's Legal Ledger, OSBA's division of legal services is introducing its new vlog, Sidebars, which will feature short conversations about legal issues frequently raised on the hotline and other topics. Today's Sidebar is a discussion between Sara and Jennie on executive sessions, which is a perennial hot topic. We'll cover the basics, delve into new case law, and provide practical guidance on how to manage executive sessions.
Ohio law requires boards of education to record the proceedings of their meetings. This document, which is more commonly known as the “minutes” of a meeting, constitutes the official record of all board actions and serves an important role in providing key information to members of the public.
Many school districts use their annual organizational meeting as a time to make board committee appointments. As school boards create new committees or invite new members to serve on these committees, it’s a good time to review the applicability of the Open Meetings Act to committees.
Late in December, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued an opinion providing important clarity to public bodies, including school boards, facing claims that they have violated Ohio’s Open Meeting Act (OMA). The case, Ames v. Rootstown Twp. Bd.
Yesterday, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued an opinion in Hicks v. Clermont County Board of Commissioners, in which a public body was sued for violations of the Open Meetings Act (OMA). The Supreme Court determined that, when alleging a violation of the OMA, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving the violation.
In February, the Ohio General Assembly passed House Bill (HB) 51, which allowed public bodies, including boards of education, to meet remotely, but only until June 30, 2022.
On April 1, 2022, the Ohio Court of Appeals for the First District, which covers Hamilton County, issued a ruling in the case of State ex rel. Mohr v. Colerain Twp., invalidating a land use plan created by a township subcommittee that operated in violation of the Open Meetings Act (OMA).
