ADV OM 99-08 (1999).
Case Date | May 20, 1999 |
Court | Rhode Island |
Rhode Island Attorney General Opinions
1999.
ADV OM 99-08 (1999).
State of Rhode
IslandDepartment of the Attorney GeneralADV OM 99-08 (1999)AVD OM 99-08 Providence School BoardOM Advisory
99-08May 20, 1999Joseph Rotella,
Esq.Providence School BoardProvidence, Rhode
Island 02903Re: Providence
School BoardRequest for Open Meetings Act Advisory Opinion
Dear Mr. Rotella:
We acknowledge receipt of your letter faxed to this Department on
May 20, 1999. You are the legal counsel for the Providence School Board (Board)
and in that capacity you are requesting an advisory opinion on the Open
Meetings Act (OMA).
In your letter you relate that the Board has scheduled an
informational session with President Gordon Gee of Brown University concerning
the search process to name a new Superintendent for the Providence Public
Schools. It is your understanding that President Gee will present general
information regarding the search process and update the Board concerning its
status. You expect that the members of the Board will ask President Gee
questions. This session has been advertised as an executive session, but
according to your representations, the Board plans to hold this meeting in open
session.
You are requesting an advisory opinion concerning "whether or not
this meeting which was advertised as an executive session may be held in open
session without violating the Open Meetings Law."
At the outset we note that the OMA mandates that all "public
bodies" hold open meetings unless closed pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws
§§ 42-46-4 and 42-46-5. Based upon the information conveyed in your
letter, we are of the opinion that this discussion is not proper for executive
session.
Presumably, the Board had planned to convene in executive session
pursuant to R.I. Gen. Laws § 42-46-5(a)(1), which permits a public body to
convene in executive session for "discussions of the job performance,
character, or physical or mental health of
Mr. Joseph Rotella
May 20, 1999
Page 2 of 3
a person or persons." Based upon your representation that
President Gee will be providing information of a "general nature with no
specific reference to any individual," we believe that this discussion falls
outside the ambit of subsection (a)(1). See Moon v. East Greenwich Fire
District, OM 96-23 (closed session to open job applications was improper). But
see Finnegan v. Scituate...
To continue reading
Request your trial