From Deseret News archives:
State to scrutinize closed school talks
In September the Jordan school board entered into an open discussion about whether it should fund school resource officers at a higher cost.
Members debated whether it was prudent to spend $1.5 million over four years for resource officers or look at other alternatives like hiring private security.
But then in October and November the board continued the discussion in closed meetings.
Jordan officials said that since they were discussing security issues, the closed discussion was legitimate under the law's security personnel exception. That provision says boards can discuss issues "regarding the deployment of security personnel, devices and systems" in a closed session.
But media attorney Jeff Hunt said that exception comes into play when boards don't want to disclose security plans because the disclosure will compromise school security.
"This was not that type of discussion," he said. "It was about budgeting matters and matters of school policy — the kind of policy that should be discussed in open meetings."
In a letter to Hunt, Jordan District representatives said that there is no such limitation in the language of the law and the board does not have to show that information regarding security would compromise public safety in order to legally discuss it behind closed doors.
Paul Murphy, spokesman for the Attorney General's Office, said they are currently looking into the issue.
"We like to see them get involved in enforcing (open meetings law) in both educating school districts about responsibilities to comply and taking action in instances where there is going to be a violation," Hunt said.
Last year the Office of the Legislative Auditor General conducted a study that found a number of local school boards are inappropriately closing meetings — closing them often and, at times, not complying with the intent of the open meetings act.
"Remarkably, what should have been a wake-up call to school boards has been blithely, and at times brazenly, ignored," Hunt said. "School boards across the state continue to conduct the public's business behind closed doors in violation of the law. ... We haven't seen any improvements in open meetings practices."
A group of Bountiful parents sued Davis District earlier this month for closing meetings of the Boundary Advisory Committee, a group that was charged in creating a proposal for new high school boundaries.
That suit resulted in a temporary restraining order against any further discussion, decisions or research from the committee, and a hearing is set for next month to determine further action.
The Utah Open Meetings Act allows public bodies to close meetings for only a few reasons, including discussing the character, competence or health of an individual; and strategy sessions on collective bargaining, lawsuits and property sales, leases or exchanges.
E-mail: terickson@desnews.com
