Douglas County trustees formally acknowledge state AG finding over curtailed public comment
Loading...
Summary
The Douglas County School District board voted to acknowledge a Nevada Attorney General finding that a trustee violated the Open Meeting Law by cutting off a public commenter. Public speakers urged apology or censure; the board voted unanimously to acknowledge the AG report.
The Douglas County School district board of trustees voted unanimously to acknowledge findings from the Nevada Office of the Attorney General that a trustee improperly curtailed public comment at a February meeting.
The attorney general’s document (AG file number 13897-510) concluded the board’s decision to stop a speaker was not content-neutral and therefore violated the Open Meeting Law. The district’s attorney read the AG’s finding into the meeting record and the board then considered a motion to formally acknowledge the opinion.
Why it matters: The AG opinion criticizes the board’s procedure for limiting public comment and flags a viewpoint-based restriction — a legal exposure that prompted multiple public speakers to press the board for accountability and corrective steps.
Public commenters who identified themselves as Douglas County residents framed the discussion as a First Amendment and civic-access issue. Leslie Hoganson, the speaker named in the AG complaint, read portions of the six-page opinion at the meeting and said the AG concluded her remarks did not disrupt the meeting and were stopped instead because they criticized a board member. “The AG finds that the board’s interruption of Miss Hokanson both rose to the level of public comment restriction and was applied based upon the speaker’s viewpoint,” Hoganson said, reading from the written opinion.
Parent Adrian Sawyer urged trustees to consider an apology as a way to restore trust: “The AG correctly held trustee Janssen accountable for restricting Miss Hokanson’s public comment based on her viewpoint,” Sawyer said, adding the AG’s opinion noted stopping a speaker solely for criticizing an elected official is a First Amendment violation.
Other public commentators, including May Hyatt, asked the board to go beyond an acknowledgment and to hold the individual trustee to account through apology or formal censure. Trustees debated briefly in open session and then moved to the formal acknowledgement. Trustee Miller moved the board “acknowledge the findings of fact and conclusions of law as presented by the attorney,” the motion was seconded, public comment on the item was opened and closed, and the motion carried.
The action taken at this meeting was a formal acknowledgement of the AG’s findings; there was no formal censure, apology, or disciplinary action recorded during the session. Several members of the public said they expect additional follow-up from the board in later meetings.
Ending: The board’s vote formally records acceptance of the AG’s written opinion in the meeting minutes. Members of the public who urged further accountability left the meeting urging the trustees to consider additional remedies in future agendas.
