Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meetings Disclosure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears Open Meetings Act, public-comment changes and new annual financial-disclosure requirement
Summary
Legal counsel reviewed the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act updates, public-comment requirements, rules for electronic and emergency meetings, GRAMA record rules for board emails and texts, closed-session purposes, and House Bill 80’s new annual financial-disclosure requirement for school-board members.
The board received a detailed training on open-meeting rules, public comment, electronic meeting procedures and a newly mandated annual financial-disclosure form for school-board members during the Jan. 7 meeting.
Legal counsel reviewed key obligations under the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act: agendas must be posted at least 24 hours in a publicly accessible place and on the state public notice website; boards must adopt an annual meeting schedule; and state law now requires school boards to provide opportunities for public comment in business meetings and to adopt written procedures for both oral and written public comments. Counsel said the statutory carve-out for work sessions and emergency meetings still applies (work or study sessions need not include public comment; emergency meetings are only those where 24-hour notice cannot be given).
Counsel described the state guidance on electronic participation: an “electronic meeting” is any meeting in which one or more members participates remotely; an electronic meeting in which all members participate remotely need not have a physical anchor location unless a written request from the public is received at least 12 hours before the meeting. Members were cautioned about serial electronic communications that can create rolling quorums and thereby run afoul of the Act; the counsel recommended avoiding “reply all,” copying multiple members into deliberative messages, or using electronic messaging to express approval or disapproval on matters likely to come before the board.
The training covered GRAMA (government records) obligations: board members’ emails and text messages about official business are public records and may be requested; the district’s records office will contact members if records are requested and board members are expected to perform a due‑diligence search and produce responsive messages. Counsel noted that failure to comply with a valid records request can lead to administrative resolution and that deliberate violations of Open Meetings Act closed-meeting provisions can carry criminal penalties (class B misdemeanor) in cases of knowing or intentional violations.
On financial disclosure, counsel explained that House Bill 80 (discussed in the meeting) now requires each school-board member to file an annual conflict-of-interest/financial-disclosure statement — including employment, entities for which the member or household receives $5,000 or more, and holdings or leadership roles — between January 1 and January 30 (the meeting cited the district’s schedule and stated the district would send a DocuSign form). The business administrator will serve as the special filing officer to confirm completeness of disclosures; the statute includes timelines for notices of deficiency and allows civil penalties and reporting to the attorney general for unresolved failures to file.
