23FC:0105 Jeff Law and Kourtney Mammen/River Valley School Board - Acceptance Order

Subject:
Jeff Law and Kourtney Mammen/River Valley School Board -  Acceptance 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: 

On October 29, 2023, Jeff Law and Kourtnee Mammen  (“Complainants”) filed formal complaint 23FC0105, alleging that River Valley School Board (“Board”) violated Iowa Code chapter 21.

Facts

Complainants allege River Valley School Board had a Board meeting and took a vote on October 16, 2023, to establish sports-sharing activities with the Kingsley Pierson School District (“KPSD”). They allege considering the sport-sharing with KPSD was a very secretive process pushed by a small number of individuals, including two members of the Board. The Complainants allege the vote by the Board on October 16, 2023, was illegitimate because 1) the agenda was not physically posted anywhere (except on the website); 2) the agenda was posted online at 5:00 on Sunday; 3) the agenda posted on Sunday did not have any mention of any kind of sports discussion, let alone a vote; and 4) it was discovered that, someone associated with the Board, modified the agenda after the meeting to include sports sharing with KPSD and there was no vote by the Board at the meeting to change the agenda.

They provided the following additional context. The week prior to the Board meeting there was a meeting with two of the Board members and two of KPSD's members. There were rumors going around among the volleyball athlete's parents about the potential for sports sharing, but no announcements were made to the public. Mr. Law discussed the matter with two of the Board members on Friday, October 13 but neither confirmed the fact they were planning a vote for the meeting on the 16th. 

On the day of the Board meeting there were over 100 concerned parents and students in attendance. At the end of the meeting the Board voted to approve sports-sharing. Complainants further allege the vote included no stipulations any high school sports would remain in Correctionville. They are upset the change is scheduled to begin immediately, even though River Valley had coaches and players lined up for the basketball season and people donated $5,000 for new jerseys for the high school girls.

In response, the Board admits that no agenda was physically posted, but that they substantially complied with the notice requirement because the agenda was emailed out and posted on the District’s website. Further, the Board has taken steps to ensure that physical notices are posted moving forward.

Applicable Law

Iowa Code § 21.4 requires 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. Reasonable notice shall include advising the news media who have filed a request for notice with the governmental body and posting the notice on a bulletin board or other prominent place which is easily accessible to the public and clearly designated for that purpose at the principal office of the body holding the meeting, or if no such office exists, at the building in which the meeting is to be held.”

Analysis

Agenda not physically posted; instead Agenda posted online at 5:00 p.m. on Sunday

The Complainants allege that the Board’s agenda was not physically posted, but was emailed out and posted on the website. The Board admits that the agenda was not physically posted. Iowa Code § 21.4 requires that an agenda be physically posted.[1] The Board’s policies also state that an agenda will be physically posted.[2]

The purpose of open meetings statutes is to require meetings of governmental bodies to be open and permit the public to be present. KCOB/KLVN, Inc. v. Jasper County Bd. Of Sup’rs, 473 N.W.2d 171 (Iowa 1991) (citing Dobrovolny v. Reinhardt, 173 N.W.2d 837, 84-41 (Iowa 1970)). “When procedures are imposed on county governmental bodies, the standard is substantial rather than absolute compliance with the statutory requirements.” Id. at 176 (citing Iowa Code §§ 331.301(1), (5)). The agenda was posted online and notice of the meeting was sent at least twenty-four hours in advance of the meeting. At the previous IPIB Board meeting, it was stated that an email was sent out to Board members on Friday, October 13 with a link to the agenda that would be available at 5:00 p.m. on Sunday, October 15. The website posted the agenda on Sunday, October15 at 5:00 p.m. for the District constituents. The meeting was scheduled for 5:00 p.m. on October 16, so the agenda was provided within the timeframe required in advance of the meeting.

The agenda was not physically posted on a bulletin board as required under Iowa Code § 21.4, the agenda was electronically delivered. The purpose of requiring that an agenda be posted is to ensure the community has notice of the time, place, and tentative agenda for a scheduled meeting. The Board should have physically posted the agenda as required. Currently, posting an agenda on a website does not meet the plain language of Iowa Code § 21.4.

The Complainants admit that 100 people attended the Board meeting, so there is no doubt that there was notice to the community. The Board did, however, technically violate the requirement to physically post the agenda.

The agenda did not have mention of any kind of sports discussion, let alone a vote.

In KCOB/KLVN, the Court held that an agenda item that included the employee’s name and the well-known company that addressed employee terminations, combined with previous agendas including deliberations on firing the custodian and publicity surrounding the termination of the employee in the community was specific enough to provide sufficient notice to the community. 473 N.W.2d at 173. “[T]he issue to be resolved is not whether the notice given by the governmental body could have been improved, but whether the notice sufficiently apprised the public and gave full opportunity for public knowledge and participation.” Id. 

In Barrett v. Lode the court explained that “adequacy of the notice must be determined on the basis of what the words in the agenda would mean to a typical citizen or member of the press who reads it.” 603 N.W.2d 766, 770 (Iowa 1999) (explaining the rationale for KCOB/KLVN decision). In Barrett, the court found a violation when the agenda included only a potential closed session for the school’s superintendent, but the Board discussed the administrative needs of the community, contracts, and other items. The Court held that there was “a deliberate decision to discuss an additional topic without showing it on the agenda.” Id. 

In an unpublished decision, the court reviewed a challenge to the specificity of an agenda item. Vandaele v. Board of Education ex rel. Wapsie Valley Community School District, 2002 WL 575666, *1 (Iowa App. Mar. 13, 2002). The agenda item stated “building closing study.” Id. This item came after the school superintendent sent out a newsletter article about the financial condition of the school and the need to start a process. Id. There was also a newspaper article in which he stated that the junior high school should be closed. Id. Despite the complaint that the agenda item did not apprise the public about the potential to establish a building study committee, approximately 200 people attended the meeting and the meeting was publicized by members distributing flyers. Id. at *3. The court found, “the tentative agenda, when viewed in the context of surrounding events, sufficiently apprised the public and gave full opportunity for public knowledge and participation in the meeting. Id.

This matter is more similar in nature to KCOB/KLVN and Vandaele. The Complainant stated that the community was aware that discussions regarding sports sharing were occurring, Mr. Law had conversations prior to the Board meeting with members regarding the subject, and more than 100 parents and students attended the meeting. The minutes reflect that a number of people took the opportunity to talk about their position on sports sharing during the public comment portion of the meeting, which was at the beginning of the meeting before the agenda item had even come up or been discussed. 

The IPIB at its meeting on December 21, 2023, determined the agenda item listed was insufficient to alert the community to the potential deliberations and action by the Board and directed staff to issue an Acceptance Order in this matter.

Conclusion

Iowa Code § 23.8 requires that a complaint be within the IPIB’s jurisdiction, appear legally sufficient, and have merit before the IPIB accepts a complaint. This complaint meets the necessary requirements for acceptance.

IT IS SO ORDERED:  Formal complaint 253FC:0105 is accepted pursuant to Iowa Code § 23.8(1) and Iowa Administrative Rule 497-2.1(2)(a). 

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 January 18, 2024.  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] Reasonable notice shall include … posting the notice on a bulletin board or other prominent place which is easily accessible to the public and clearly designated for that purpose at the principal office of the body holding the meeting, or if no such office exists, at the building in which the meeting is to be held.

[2] Policy 210.05: Meeting Notice: Public notice will be given for meetings and work sessions held by the board.  Public notice will indicate the time, place, date and tentative agenda of board meetings.  The public notice will be posted on the bulletin board in the central administration office at least three days before it is scheduled, but, at the minimum, twenty-four hours’ notice needs to be given. Available at https://simbli.eboardsolutions.com/Policy/ViewPolicy.aspx?S=36030888&revid=So4CTYKB2QT9QrWqMj0vaQ==&ptid=Q9JK4Eqdy16plusdAplusyItEMslshQ==&secid=&PG=6&IRP=0&isPndg=false