26FC:0014 Caleb Housh vs. Seymour Community School District - Investigative Report & Probable Cause Order

The Iowa Public Information Board

COMES NOW, Charissa Flege, Deputy Director for the Iowa Public Information Board (“IPIB”), and enters this Investigative Report:

On January 9, 2026, Caleb Housh (“Complainant”) filed formal complaint 26FC:0014, alleging that the Seymour Community School District (“Respondent”) violated Iowa Code Chapter 21.

The Iowa Public Information Board accepted this complaint at its meeting on February 19, 2026.

Facts

On January 8, 2026, Respondent held two separate meetings. The first was a school board work session. The posted notice stated that the work session was scheduled to commence at 5:30 p.m. and would consist of Open Meetings training for the board members. The second meeting was a special board meeting to receive an update from the superintendent on a contested harassment complaint against the school and to review open enrollment applications. The second meeting was scheduled to begin at 7:00 p.m. immediately following the first meeting.

Notice for both meetings were posted in an enclosed glass case outside the main entrance of the school building. Notice was posted by 4:12 p.m. on January 7, 2026, more than twenty-four hours in advance of both meetings. In support of these facts, Respondent provided timestamped images from the front-door security camera and an affidavit from the individual who posted the notice. On January 7, 2026, Respondent also posted notice of the 5:30 p.m. work session on its Facebook page. However, the 7:00 p.m. special board meeting to review open enrollment requests was not posted on social media.

The minutes from the prior regular board meeting listed January 21, 2026, as the next regular meeting (not January 8th).

Complainant alleges that the fact that only the earlier meeting was posted on social media, combined with the incorrect date for the next board meeting provided in December, demonstrates a bad-faith attempt to limit public access to the meeting involving government action, thereby rendering the notice deficient.

Complainant further notes that the agenda for the 7:00 p.m. meeting included several action items, including a harassment complaint against the district, and argues that the district had an interest in limiting public awareness and participation. Complainant also asserts that it is unreasonable to expect members of the public to check a physical display case daily in order to determine when a special meeting may occur.

Applicable Law

“Except as provided in subsection 3, 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.” Iowa Code § 21.4(1)(a)

Analysis

Respondent has provided sufficient evidence to establish that they posted notice “of the time, date, and place” of both meetings at least 24 hours in advance of the meetings. Iowa Code § 21.4(1)(a). The notice included an agenda that was sufficiently detailed to “apprise the public of that information.” Iowa Code § 21.4(1)(a). IPIB encourages public bodies to go above and beyond the minimum requirements for notice in order to further government transparency and the public’s faith in our government institutions. Many entities utilize social media postings, websites, and other means to provide greater access to notice; however, as of today, there is no legal requirement that these be used to meet their obligations to provide adequate notice under Chapter 21. IPIB acknowledges the frustration of relying on a paper posting at the building in the digital age, but it meets Chapter 21’s requirements.

IPIB does find it concerning to see the discrepancy in the notice provided to the public regarding different public meetings based upon the agendas provided. Best practice would certainly be to have a uniform practice and provide notice in both physical and electronic locations for all meetings regardless of the agenda content. The reason for this is evidence in the Complainant’s frustration with government transparency in this complaint. However, Respondent’s inconsistency in the use of social media doesn’t give rise to a notice violation of Chapter 21. Additionally, the failure to announce the January 8th meetings in December is not a violation. Special meetings are held by governmental bodies all the time for reasons that couldn’t be known at the last regular meeting. As long as these special meetings provide statutorily sufficient notice, it is not improper.

For the reasons listed above, Respondent met that standard for both meetings on January 8th and the complaint should be dismiss the matter for lack of probable cause to believe a violation of Chapter 21 has occurred.

IPIB Action

The Board may take the following actions upon receipt of an Investigative Report:

1. Redirect the matter for further investigation;

2. Dismiss the matter for lack of probable cause to believe a violation has occurred;

3. Make a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred, but, as an exercise of administrative discretion, dismiss the matter; or

4. Make a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred, designate a prosecutor and direct the issuance of a statement of charges to initiate a contested case proceeding.

Iowa Admin. Code r. 497-2.2(4).

Recommendation

Therefore, because Respondent posted both meeting notices twenty-four hours in advance at the main place of business on a bulletin board designated for this purpose, no violation of Chapter 21 occurred and it is recommended the Board dismiss for a lack of probable cause.

By the IPIB Deputy Director,

_________________________

Charisa Flege, J.D.

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

This document was sent on April 9, 2026, to:

Caleb Housh, Complainants

Seymour Community School District, Respondent

The Iowa Public Information Board

Under Iowa Admin. Code r. 497-2.2(4) the Board takes the following action:

☐a. Redirect the matter for further investigation;

☒b. Dismiss the matter for lack of probable cause to believe a violation has occurred;

☐c. Make a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred, but, as an exercise of administrative discretion, dismiss the matter; or

☐d. Make a determination that probable cause exists to believe a violation has occurred, designate a prosecutor and direct the issuance of a statement of charges to initiate a contested case proceeding.

By the Board Chair

___________________________________

Catherine Lucas

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

This document was sent on April 17, 2026, to:

Caleb Housh, Complainant

Seymour Community School District, Respondent