Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

School boards action in an executive session appointing an interim school superintendent held to have violated the State?s Open Meetings Law

School boards action in an executive session appointing an interim school superintendent held to have violated the State?s Open Meetings Law
Matter of Zehner v Board of Educ. of the Jordan-Elbridge Cent. School Dist., 2010 NY Slip Op 51709(U), Decided on October 1, 2010, Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Judge Donald A. Greenwood [Not selected for publication in the Official Reports]

David Zehner sued the Board of Education of the Jordan-Elbridge Central School District [and others] alleging that it had violated the Open Meetings Law when it appointed Sue Gorton as its Interim Superintendent during an Executive Session of the Board.

The Board subsequently issued a ?public information bulletin? to the school community, stating that "[t]he Board has decided to appoint as Interim Superintendent, Ms. Sue Gorton effective November 1, 2010." This was done, said the Board, in order to ensure a seamless transition and Ms. Gorton was to begin working during the summer of 2010 on District-wide matters with Mrs. Marilyn Dominick. Mrs. Dominick, the current superintendent, was scheduled to retire effective November 1, 2010.

Zehner attorney wrote to the Board contending that the appointment of Gorton was in violation of the Open Meetings Law and that it was not properly noticed on the meeting agenda or discussed in open session. The Board did not response.

Failing to receive a response from the Board, Zehner sued, seeking a court order declaring that the Board's actions to appoint Gorton as Interim Superintendent while in Executive Session violated the Open Meetings Law and is therefore null and void for a number of reasons including ?there is no statutory basis for the Board's action purporting to appoint an employee to the position of Interim Superintendent without a public vote or discussion and that the action?.?

Although the Education Law §1708.3 provides that meetings of the board of education must be open to the public, it also permits a board to hold Executive Sessions, at which sessions only the members of such boards or the persons invited shall be present.

Judge Greenwood said that ?The procedure and substance of those [executive] sessions is subject to the limitations of the Open Meetings Law,? citing Previdi v. Hirsh, 138 Misc 2d 436.

Judge Greenwood concluded that the Board violated the Open Meetings Law in number of ways, including failing ?to give a sufficient reason for adjourning to Executive Session.? The court said that the Board was required to be specific in its resolution to go into executive session and its failure to do so constituted a violation of the Open Meetings Law.

The court also faulted the Board for discussing the issue of the "superintendent search" in Executive Session as there ?is no exception for this type of discussion in the Open Meetings Law to take place in Executive Session.?

Further, the court held that the Board violated the Open Meetings Law by appointing Gorton as Interim Superintendent.

In the words of the court, ?The act of discussing and coming to a consensus in Executive Session, but not passing a formal resolution, does not shield the Board from a violation of the law.? Rather, the Open Meetings Law was designed to ?assure the public's right to be informed and it is the entire decision making process which the Legislature intended to affect by the statute, not only formal acts of voting or formal executions of documents.?

Judge Greenwood concluded that the Board members participated in a private meeting with a quorum of Board members present, where topics for discussion and eventual decision are such as would otherwise arise at a regular meeting occurred and in so doing the Board has violated the Open Meetings Law.

Finding that the Board?s appointing Gorton as Interim Superintendent violated the Open Meetings Law, Judge Greenwood declared its action void but denied Zehner motion seeking costs and reasonable attorney's fees pursuant to Public Officers Law §107(2).

The decision is posted on the Internet at:
http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2010/2010_51709.htm
NYPPL

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on October 12, 2010 (boomark / email).