State ex rel. Ames v. Portage Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 2022 Ohio 336

Portage County Board of Commissioners created the Portage County Solid Waste Management District (SWMD) and conducts SWMD meetings by recessing the county meeting into a separate, public SWMD session.
In Sept. 2019 the board held very short SWMD meetings that adopted multiple routine resolutions via a single consent-agenda vote; minutes referenced an Exhibit A to one resolution that was not attached or produced.
On Dec. 26, 2019 Ames requested the Sept. 17 and 26 meeting minutes; the clerk produced the minutes the next day but without Exhibit A. Ames filed a verified mandamus petition seeking accurate minutes, an order prohibiting secretive consent-agenda use, and statutory damages under the Public Records Act.
This court initially denied relief (Ames I). The Ohio Supreme Court (Ames II) held SWMD is a separate political subdivision, concluded Ames’ consent-agenda theory was plausible, found the Sept. 17 minutes incomplete (missing Exhibit A), ordered production of Exhibit A, and remanded two questions: entitlement to further OMA relief and eligibility for statutory damages.
On remand this court found the board stopped using consent agendas (undisputed), so mandamus to stop that practice is moot; and Ames failed to show a statutory violation of R.C. 149.43(B), so no statutory damages were awarded.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the SWMD’s use of a consent agenda that bundled multiple resolutions entitles Ames to mandamus relief under the Open Meetings Act	Ames: consent agenda effectively closed meetings and hid individual resolutions from the public, violating OMA	Respondents: OMA does not prohibit consent agendas as a general matter; board has ceased using consent agendas	Held: Mandamus denied as to further relief because the board has already ceased the challenged practice; mandamus cannot compel future general compliance and is precluded where requested act already performed
Whether Ames is entitled to statutory damages under the Public Records Act for failure to produce full and accurate minutes	Ames: missing Exhibit A demonstrates respondents failed to comply with R.C. 149.43(B) and thus he is entitled to statutory damages	Respondents: minutes were produced promptly; the missing attachment is an inaccuracy but not proof of a statutory failure to comply with R.C. 149.43(B)	Held: No statutory damages — plaintiff did not establish that respondents failed to comply with a statutory obligation under R.C. 149.43(B) despite the minutes’ inaccuracy

State ex rel. Ames v. Portage Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 165 Ohio St.3d 292 (Ohio Supreme Court: SWMD is a separate political subdivision; consent-agenda claim plausible; ordered production of missing exhibit)
State ex rel. Am. Civ. Liberties Union of Ohio, Inc. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 128 Ohio St.3d 256 (mandamus will not issue to compel only future generalized compliance when the act is already performed)
White v. Clinton Cty. Bd. of Commrs., 76 Ohio St.3d 416 (R.C. 121.22, 149.43, and 305.10 construed in pari materia impose duty to maintain full and accurate minutes)
State ex rel. Armatas v. Plain Twp. Bd. of Trustees, 163 Ohio St.3d 304 (sets out statutory-damages entitlement test under R.C. 149.43(C)(2))
State ex rel. Citizens for Open, Responsive & Accountable Govt. v. Register, 116 Ohio St.3d 88 (production of records containing mistakes can still satisfy public-records duties)
State ex rel. Kirk v. Burcham, 82 Ohio St.3d 407 (mandamus will not be used to compel general future observance of law)
State ex rel. Dehler v. Kelly, 123 Ohio St.3d 297 (mandamus will not compel performance of an act that has already been performed)