MONROE — A school board member who sought input from a private group during a closed-door meeting did not violate open government law, the school district’s legal counsel determined. The result was announced Feb. 6 after last week’s press time. Open government experts had
independently told the Tribune the same opinion.
The legal check-up was prompted by a parent’s accusation board member Molly Barnes violated the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA) to seek input from an online group of self-declared conservative women while she was in a closed-door meeting to evaluate superintendent candidates.
The Monroe Equity Community, a group that previously went by the name Monroe Equity Council, called on Barnes to resign in a letter sent to the board Feb. 6. The MEC group says even if Barnes’ act was legal, it was unethical to give special attention to a specific group’s opinion. The act “compromised the integrity of the School Board,” the MEC wrote.
The request for legal consultation was handled under Interim Superintendent Marci Larsen, said district spokeswoman Erin Zacharda. “The board had no involvement in consulting with legal counsel about whether or not a board director violated OPMA,” Zacharda said, who responded to a Tribune inquiry sent to school board president Jennifer Bumpus.
Update: The Feb. 13 school board meeting had nearly one hour of public speakers giving comments from both sides of this issue.
Prior story:
What can happen in a closed-door session
School boards and other government boards have limited authority for setting a closed-door session where the public can't attend. More commonly known as an executive session, these are reserved for discussing sensitive items such as a pending lawsuit, evaluating an employee, or discussing real estate.
By its essence, Lockhart contends, a closed-door session is meant to exclude the whole public the whole time. "The pure definition of an executive session is to exclude the public," Lockhart said.
Damerow, the state's open government ombudsman, disagreed that it's that distinct.
"The reason I can't get to that point (to say it's a violation) is you're not 'locked in' at the executive session, they can step out" of the room and might interact with the public, he said.
But if this is permissible, Lockhart said she thinks the law should have firmer separations to uphold excluding the entire public when a closed-door session is called.
Otherwise, certain people might have "insider access" to elected officials during a closed-door meeting by text message or over social media.
Attempts to interview WashCOG’s president for this story were not returned.
Kolrud said when she was on the board, she recalled during one executive session the superintendent phoned a real estate appraiser.
Kolrud likened that "if they can make a phone call" to someone outside the room during a closed-door meeting, it's no different than asking around for comments.
Can hiring interviews for public positions be done behind closed doors?
Members of the public questioned how the school board interviewed the superintendent candidates outside of public view.
The closed-door employee interviews are acceptable in this case, said Damerow. Only interviews for candidates for elected office must always be public, the law says.
Typically, area school boards have interviewed their candidates in the open. It's how Monroe interviewed candidates a year ago to select interim superintendent Marci Larsen.
This time, Monroe's only public interview time was a panel where community members asked the candidates questions before an audience.
Each candidate rotated in for the community panel, while a different candidate was being interviewed in private by the school board.
The public was asked to give feedback on the candidates for a window of time from what they saw in the public panel, including a while after the panel concluded.
