2021 Ohio 2374
Ohio2021Background
- In 1988 Portage County adopted a resolution establishing a Solid Waste Management District (SWMD); under R.C. 3734.52 and 343.01 the county commissioners serve as the SWMD board of directors.
- On Sept. 17 and Sept. 26, 2019 the board recessed briefy into separate, public SWMD meetings, each of which adopted a consent agenda approving multiple resolutions; each SWMD meeting lasted about a minute.
- Ames requested the minutes for those meetings; the clerk produced minutes that incorporated a purported Exhibit A (a Then-and-Now certificate/expenditure list) for Sept. 17 that was not actually attached or produced.
- Ames filed a mandamus action alleging Open Meetings Act (OMA) and Public Records Act violations—challenging (1) the SWMD’s validity and holding separate SWMD meetings, (2) the board’s use of consent agendas, and (3) the adequacy/production of meeting minutes. The court of appeals granted summary judgment to defendants; Ames appealed to the Ohio Supreme Court.
- The Supreme Court: (a) rejected Ames’s claim that the SWMD is fictitious and held separate SWMD meetings are permissible, (b) held that the board’s particular use of a consent agenda raised a viable OMA claim (so summary judgment was improper on that issue), (c) found the Sept. 17 minutes were incomplete because Exhibit A was omitted and ordered the board to produce Exhibit A, and (d) rejected mandamus relief against the court of common pleas and remanded other issues to the court of appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of SWMD / separate SWMD meetings | Ames: SWMD is fictitious; holding separate SWMD meetings violated OMA and minute statutes | County: SWMD created under R.C.; commissioners serve as its board and may hold separate public SWMD meetings | Held for defendants: SWMD valid; separate public SWMD meetings are permitted |
| Use of consent agenda at SWMD meetings | Ames: Consent agenda concealed which resolutions were being approved and prevented public observation of deliberations, effectively closing the meeting | County: Use of consent agenda is lawful and the vote occurred in public | Court: Consent-agenda use as done raised a plausible OMA violation; summary judgment for defendants on this issue was improper |
| Adequacy and production of minutes / public records | Ames: Minutes were not full and accurate; Exhibit A was omitted and not produced in response to records request | County: Minutes otherwise complied; Exhibit A available from auditor; omission not actionable | Court: Sept. 17 minutes were incomplete because Exhibit A was incorporated but not attached/produced; ordered production of Exhibit A and remanded for PRA damages inquiry |
| Mandamus against court of common pleas to enforce R.C. 121.22(I) relief | Ames: Seeks writ directing common pleas court to award injunction, costs, fees under R.C. 121.22(I) for OMA violation | County: Common pleas court is not a proper respondent; R.C. 121.22(I) relief must be sought and proved in common pleas court | Held for defendants: Court of common pleas is not a proper mandamus respondent; Ames must pursue R.C. 121.22(I) relief in common pleas court |
Key Cases Cited
- Danis Clarkco Landfill Co. v. Clark Cty. Solid Waste Mgt. Dist., 653 N.E.2d 646 (1995) (county commissioners may establish a SWMD and serve as its board)
- White v. King, 60 N.E.3d 1234 (2016) (official actions and deliberations must occur in open meetings; private prearranged discussions by a majority can violate OMA)
- State ex rel. MORE Bratenahl v. Bratenahl, 136 N.E.3d 447 (2019) (official action cannot be taken by secret ballot; OMA requires openness in the taking of action)
- State ex rel. Long v. Council of Cardington, 748 N.E.2d 58 (2001) (mandamus may compel preparation, maintenance, and public availability of full and accurate meeting minutes)
- State ex rel. Inskeep v. Staten, 660 N.E.2d 1207 (1996) (mandamus to open meetings and maintain minutes)
- State ex rel. Am. Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, Inc. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 943 N.E.2d 553 (2011) (standards for mandamus relief under the OMA and Public Records Act)
- White v. Clinton Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 667 N.E.2d 1223 (1996) (county clerk duty to keep full record of board proceedings)