Did D-86 Board Follow Open Meetings Law?

HINSDALE, IL — Hinsdale High School District 86 did not give the public any notice that the school board would vote on a plan to suspend in-person learning late last week. And a watchdog group is calling the district's explanation not to give notice "rather convoluted."

The board voted 4-3 last Thursday against the administration's recommendation to go fully remote for two weeks, called an "adaptive pause."

This vote was taken despite the state Open Meetings Act, which generally requires government bodies to put the public on notice of any action they may take.

The law also mandates that entities provide the "general subject matter" on meeting agendas of items in which action may be taken. The district contends it followed the law, saying the vote did not constitute "final action."

Perhaps no school issue draws as much passion these days as whether to go fully remote. Yet the district's discussion about the issue fell under the item, "Return to School Update." That listing gave no indication the school board would vote on a plan to suspend in-person learning.

The vote on the administration's proposal lasted more than 10 minutes — unconventional compared to most other votes. It took so long because some members spoke for minutes at a time explaining their vote.

By his statements, board President Kevin Camden treated the exercise as a formal vote. At one point, he told a member her vote would be "recorded as yes." When the board members were done, he reported the tally and called the outcome "direction to the administration."

Camden said it was rare the board did not follow the administration's recommendation. He also said it was rare the board split 4-3 on an issue.

The next day, the district issued a statement by Superintendent Tammy Prentiss that reported the 4-3 vote.

The head of the Elmhurst-based Citizen Advocacy Center said District 86 said public notice is required under the law.

"Yes, the board should have (given notice) on the agenda 48 hours in advance that they were taking final action on the superintendent's recommendation to instate adaptive pause," Maryam Judar, the center's executive director, said in an email to Patch. "Obviously, based on the 4-3 vote, this is a contentious issue/vote that the public should have known about at least 48 hours beforehand as mandated in the Open Meetings Act."

In an email Monday, the district's spokesman, Chris Jasculca, said the board has listed a "Return to School Update" on the agenda for a number of its meetings. The community, he said, understands what this item means.

"Not only does stating 'Return to School Update' serve as adequate public notice for these discussions, the discussions themselves are then posted on the district’s website," Jasculca said.

He said a vote doesn't necessarily constitute "final action," which is the language used in the Open Meeting Act.

"The board can and does provide direction to the administration under the 'Return to School Update,' as has been the case at previous meetings," Jasculca said. "To provide direction and feedback to the administration on a subject that is within the administration’s purview is allowed and needed during board discussions. In this case, the board’s direction regarding the adaptive pause was not a 'final action.' Finally, even if it did rise to the level of a 'final action,' the Open Meetings Act is flexible enough to accommodate it. "

The Citizen Advocacy Center's Judar disagreed.

"That is a rather convoluted explanation," she said in an email. "The board took a vote as final action on the recommendation by the superintendent, and in their final action vote they voted against the recommendation 4-3."

Earlier this year, the school board adopted a resolution letting the superintendent suspend in-person learning if pandemic conditions warranted such action.

In Illinois, all members of government boards must take Open Meetings Act training.