23FC:0079: Steve St. Clair/Winneshiek County Board of Supervisors - Dismissal Order

Date:
09/21/2023

Subject:
Steve St. Clair/Winneshiek County Board of Supervisors - Dismissal Order

Opinion:

The Iowa Public Information Board

COMES NOW, Erika Eckley, Executive Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (IPIB), and enters this Dismissal Order.

Facts

Steve St. Clair filed formal complaint 23FC:0079 on July 28, 2023, alleging that the Winneshiek County Board of Supervisors (“Board”) violated Iowa Code chapter 21 on June 26, 2023.

Mr. St. Clair alleged that the Board failed to provide notice the Pledge of Allegiance would be recited at the meeting. He stated the Chair of the Board announced at the beginning of the weekly meetings that attendees would henceforth be called upon to recite the pledge.  Mr. St. Clair alleges that no motion was made, no discussion was invited, and no vote was taken. He says the agenda provided the public no indication the change in procedure was under consideration. The sudden and unexpected change in policy involved no public notice or input.

The Winneshiek County Attorney responded to this complaint. The Board’s position is that choosing to recite the Pledge of Allegiance “does not constitute ‘deliberation’ on a matter within the ‘policy-making’ duties of the Board. Reciting the pledge is more akin to a ministerial act than policy-making, as reciting the pledge was done without exercise of personal judgment by members of the Board and did not involve any discussion of policy.”

Mr. St. Clair claims choosing to adopt a practice and policy regarding the recitation of the pledge involved decision-making and the public should have had notice of the potential change. He believes that given religious and constitutional issues related to the recitation of the Pledge, that the public should have been notified of the modification to policy and been privy to the Board’s deliberation in choosing to adopt the Pledge. His complaint, therefore, is not that the Agenda failed to list the Pledge of Allegiance, but that the Board added the common ceremony of reciting the Pledge to its meetings at all without public input or discussion.

Law

Iowa Code § 21.4 states that “…a governmental body shall give notice of the time, date, and place of each meeting including a reconvened meeting of the governmental body, and the tentative agenda of the meeting, in a manner reasonably calculated to apprise the public of that information.” The code does not give any further guidance as to the content of the agenda for a governmental body.

Iowa Code § 331.301 grants Board of Supervisors the authority to exercise any power and perform any function it deems appropriate to protect and preserve the rights, privileges, and property of the county or of its residents, and to preserve and improve the peace, safety, health, welfare, comfort, and convenience of its residents.

Analysis

This complaint focuses on the failure of the Board to include notice of its intent to include the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of its meetings. However, the addition of the Pledge of Allegiance to the beginning of a Board meeting adds a common, ceremonial component to the Board meeting. Much like calling a meeting to order, taking roll call and adjourning the meeting, including the Pledge of Allegiance does not involve discussion or deliberation of policy within the scope of the Board. [1]  There is lengthy historical precedent of reciting the Pledge of Allegiance.[2] Since the complaint was filed, the Board has added the Pledge of Allegiance to its agendas.

The Board did not violate Iowa Code § 21 by failing to include the Pledge of Allegiance on its agenda. The Board has taken steps to ensure the recitation of the Pledge has been added to its agendas. Any failure to place the Pledge of Allegiance on the Board agenda was harmless error that has been remedied. Including a ceremonial component to the meeting did not require the Board to deliberate and debate before invoking the practice.

Conclusion

Iowa Code section 23.8 requires that a complaint be within the IPIB’s jurisdiction, appear legally sufficient, and could have merit before the IPIB accepts a complaint.  This complaint does not meet those requirements.

IT IS SO ORDERED:  Formal complaint 23FC:0079 is dismissed as legally insufficient pursuant to Iowa Code section 23.8(2) and Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(2)(b).  

The Board’s inclusion of the Pledge of Allegiance at the beginning of its meetings without first including the item on the Board’s agenda was harmless error that has been remedied.

Pursuant to Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(3), the IPIB may “delegate acceptance or dismissal of a complaint to the executive director, subject to review by the board.”  The IPIB will review this Order on September 21, 2023.  Pursuant to IPIB rule 497-2.1(4), the parties will be notified in writing of its decision.

By the IPIB Executive Director

Erika Eckley, J.D.

[1] To the extent that the Pledge of Allegiance is controversial, the Supreme Court of the United States has clearly held that individuals cannot be compelled to participate under First Amendment grounds which are beyond the jurisdiction of IPIB. See West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnett, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).

[2] See Pub.L. 83−396, 68 Stat. 249, H.J.Res. 243, enacted June 14, 1954.