After making a legally questionable motion, the board of trustees was forced to void an action regarding faculty tenure at a recent meeting.
The motion, which involved discussing the creation of a public forum to discuss policies and procedures regarding tenure, was made after an April 6 executive board meeting that was closed to the public. Only three of the five-person board were in attendance.
“After the executive session, it is this board’s custom that the meeting return to an open session, where typically the meeting is gaveled to a closure,” said Mark Lyons, an attorney for the college who was present. “This time, however, before closing the meeting, a motion was made to have a discussion at some point in the future. The motion was not on the agenda. I did allow that to happen believing that it was not substantive and that it related to scheduling an open meeting discussion at some point in the future.”
Trustee Christie Wood, who was one of the two trustees not present at the meeting, later called to have the motion rescinded, citing a violation of Idaho’s open meeting laws.
Lyons dismissed the idea of multiple violations.
“The board of trustees had a scheduled executive session meeting to discuss personnel matters specifically related to candidates for tenure and sabbatical,” Lyons said.
In Idaho, public officials are only allowed to meet behind closed doors to discuss personal matters.
Although discussing tenure and sabbatical could be construed as policy, Lyons said he holds that the only violation at the meeting was that a motion was made without appearing on an agenda for the public to see in advance.
“Mr. Lyons and I have disagreed on this on a few points, I felt there were more violations than just one,” Wood said. “But I respect Mr. Lyons for coming and stepping up and saying what he said. Our fellow board members have to rely on his advice at the meeting. I think that they did that. They trust him, I trust him.”
Trustee Ron Nilson said the motion was made in good faith.
“I made the motion [on April 6] and I stand by the motion that was made.” Nilson said. “There was no intent to do anything that was illegal. There was never a decision that was in the process, it was just open discussion.”
Lyons said the exact wording of the motion was for the board and the administration to have a public forum within the near future subject to scheduling to review and discuss the policy and procedures regarding tenure and sabbatical.
After going over Idaho law, Lyons and board Chair Ken Howard decided to void the motion after publically addressing it in a recent public session, and then allowing members to decide whether they wished to make the motion again.
“Everyone that went through this looked at the statutes,” Howard said. “There is a penalty indeed for having an illegal session. It costs $50, and I don’t want mark to have to pay the [fine], and so the way we can cure that is by doing what we’re doing.”
Wood made the voiding motion herself during the session.
“All I wanted to do was rectify that error,” Wood said. “I want to tell you that I do not believe there was any intent from the three board members that were there to violate the open meeting law. I don’t wish to vilify fellow board members in anyway. But I do wish for us to recognize the error and do the right thing.”
An amended version of the motion, which added the inclusion of an educational board workshop about tenure, was later passed at the meeting 3-2.
