Sunshine Law

This past July, the Supreme Court of Ohio issued an important decision in the case known as Look Ahead America v.

Many school districts use their annual organizational meeting as a time to make board committee appointments. As school boards create new committees or invite new members to serve on these committees, it’s a good time to review the applicability of the Open Meetings Act to committees.

Across the country, individuals have been required or encouraged to limit face-to-face meetings and practice “social distancing” to slow the spread of the Coronavirus (COVID-19). In light of these guidelines, OSBA has received numerous questions regarding the applicability of Ohio’s Open Meetings Act (OMA) during the pandemic. Because these state directives are changing on a day-to-day basis, boards should consult with legal counsel before making decisions about their meetings.

This week is Sunshine Week, which is a national initiative to educate the public about the importance of open government.

Ohio’s Open Meetings Act was enacted in 1975 as Ohio Revised Code Section (RC) 121.22. It, together with the Public Records Act (RC 149.43), is commonly referred to as “the Sunshine law.”

The Open Meetings Act’s basic purpose is to require public bodies, including boards of education to:

State lawmakers have finalized an expedited process to hear complaints from citizens alleging they were wrongfully denied access to public records. The bill, Senate Bill (SB) 321, received unanimous votes in the Ohio House and Senate and is awaiting signature by the Governor.

On Tuesday, the Ohio Supreme Court held in the case White v. King that Ohio’s Open Meetings Act prohibits any private prearranged discussion of public business by a majority of the members of a public body regardless of whether the discussion occurs face to face, telephonically, by video conference, or electronically by email, text, tweet or other form of communication.