Caledonia Argus

Lawsuit against school board alleges open meetings violations

Posted: 6/18/02

by Jane Palen
Managing Editor

The Caledonia Argus has initiated a lawsuit against the ISD #299 School Board alleging violations of the open meetings law and data practices act.

The complaint stems from a closed session held April 2, 2002, at which the school board evaluated the performance of Superintendent Percy Lingen.

According to Minnesota law, a public body may close a meeting to evaluate an employee, but at its next open meeting, it must issue a summary of the evaluation.

At its next meeting, the board issued a statement that read, ìThe board met in closed session from 10:15 p.m. to 12:20 a.m. on Tuesday, April 2, 2002, to review the performance of Superintendent Lingen. As a result of that review, strengths were noted and areas of improvement were defined. The board developed goals regarding communication and leadership.î

Because The Argus felt that the statement did not fulfill the requirements of the law, it requested an advisory opinion from the Minnesota Commissioner of Administration. The function of that office is to promote compliance and understanding of the laws that regulate the flow of information, and to define and interpret decisions regarding whether information is public or non-public.

In an advisory opinion dated May 15, 2002, the commissioner ruled that the school board did not respond properly to the newspaperís request for a summary of the superintendentís evaluation. Furthermore, the opinion stated that, ìClearly, the language of the Open Meeting Law indicates that the governing body ought to summarize each salient point of the evaluation so that the public is given the opportunity to get the best possible sense of the performanceógood, bad or indifferentóof the public employee.î

The school board did not respond to the opinion.

There are two charges against each school board member. Each member is named as a defendant in the action.

The first count is that the school board violated the data practices act by failing to provide a proper summary of its conclusions regarding Superintendentís Lingenís evaluation, and the second is that the school board violated the open meeting law by failing to provide the summary at its next meeting.

School board members face fines of $300 for each of the two violations. According to Minnesota statutes, fines may not be paid out of public funds.

The suit also asks for attorney fees and for the school board to refrain from any further violations.

This is the second instance in which the school board held a closed meeting to evaluate the superintendent. On July 17, 2001, the board met in closed session from midnight to 3 a.m. to discuss the superintendentís evaluation. The Argus also objected to that meeting, and the board was contacted by the newspaperís attorney, Mark Anfinson of the Minnesota Newspaper Association, in an effort to obtain a summary of the evaluation, which was not provided.

Top of Page