Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meeting Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Douglas County School Board publicly acknowledges attorney general finding on open-meeting law
Summary
Trustees voted unanimously to acknowledge a Nevada Attorney General finding that the board violated the Open Meeting Law by communicating outside a public meeting; public commenters urged stronger transparency and accountability.
The Douglas County School District Board of Trustees voted unanimously to acknowledge a finding from the Nevada Office of the Attorney General that several trustees participated in communications that constituted a constructive quorum and violated the Open Meeting Law.
The vote to “acknowledge the findings and fact and conclusions in regards to the open meeting law violation” was made by Trustee Miller and seconded by Trustee Zinky. Board counsel Ryan Russell read the required notice and explained the board was following an order that requires public acknowledgement, not that trustees concede they agree with the AG’s conclusions.
The finding stems from complaints reviewed by the attorney general’s office alleging that multiple trustees engaged in serial communications and reached a constructive quorum outside a public meeting while taking actions related to officer positions and other district business. Trustees voted to acknowledge the AG’s report at the meeting; board counsel instructed trustees that abstentions were not required and any trustee voting no would need to explain the vote publicly.
Public commenters who addressed the board during the item characterized the AG finding as confirmation of a lack of transparency. Adrian Sawyer, who identified himself as a parent of three district students, said the AG’s letter vindicated public concerns about the board’s conduct and urged trustees to accept the finding. Marty Swisher, a Gardnerville resident, reviewed a list of prior AG findings and urged trustees to explain any vote against accepting those findings.
Trustees conducted a roll-call vote after public comment. Board counsel recorded individual acknowledgements during the roll call and the motion passed unanimously. The board then moved on to other agenda items.
The AG finding and the trustees’ acknowledgement do not by themselves impose new penalties; rather the acknowledgement is the procedural response required by the AG’s order. Several public speakers urged the board to adopt further transparency measures and to explain, in public, the steps the board would take to avoid future Open Meeting Law problems.
