Las Vegas Sun

March 28, 2024

School administrators’ union alleges school board, superintendent violated open meeting law

Jesus Jara

Christopher DeVargas

Clark County School District Superintendent Jesus Jara speaks with the Las Vegas Sun regarding the issues facing the school district, Friday June 14, 2019.

Clark County School District Superintendent Jesus Jara has been criticized by some for his decision to eliminate 170 school dean positions in order to make up for a $17 million budget deficit next school year. But did Jara and the Clark County School District Board of Trustees also break the law?

A suit filed Thursday in Clark County District Court on behalf of the union that represents the deans alleges that the school board and Jara violated the state’s open meeting law by deciding to eliminate the dean positions during a closed-door board meeting June 5.

Stephen Augspurger, president of the Clark County Association of School Administrators and Professional-Technical Employees, informed administrators of the suit yesterday in an email shared with the Sun.

“CCASAPE believes that Superintendent Jara and the Board of School Trustees broke the law and violated public trust when they made a secret decision to eliminate one hundred and seventy dean positions,” he wrote.

The suit claims that Jara asked school board members to cast a vote on whether to eliminate the dean positions during the closed meeting, based on information from three unnamed board members. Five members voted in favor and two voted against eliminating the positions, the suit states. Actions of a public body must be taken in a public setting, according to the Nevada Open Meeting Law.

Through the lawsuit, filed by Las Vegas law firm Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, the school administrators’ union hopes to stall the district’s decision to eliminate all dean positions. If the court finds that an unlawful vote was taken at the closed-door board meeting, then that vote could be rendered void.

Augspurger could not immediately be reached to clarify which school board members informed the union of the alleged private vote. Minutes from closed-door meetings are private under Nevada law until the matters discussed are no longer considered confidential.

CCSD spokesperson Mauricio Marin said the district strives to comply with the open meeting law at all times, but he did not say whether an official vote was taken during the meeting in question. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss how the superintendent’s decision to eliminate the deans would affect “ongoing collective bargaining and potential legal action” associated with a potential teacher strike next school year, Marin wrote in an email.

In Nevada, discussions about collective bargaining are not required to be held in public meetings, Jara said in an interview with the Sun last week. Also, the superintendent does not need to obtain approval from the school board on decisions relating to budget cuts, Marin said.

“It wasn’t decided (at the meeting) because the board is not the entity attached with deciding that,” said Lola Brooks, president of the School Board of Trustees.

Furthermore, although the school board did learn of the superintendent’s intention to eliminate the dean positions during the closed-door meeting, that information was shared in the context of a collective bargaining discussion, Brooks affirmed.

“We typically have closed sessions before every board meeting if we have anything to discuss relating to collective bargaining or anything relating to legal (matters),” Brooks said.

In addition, the school district is not required to give notice about a closed-door meeting, Brooks said. Nonetheless, she declined to say whether she believes the school board violated the open meeting law.

Trustee Danielle Ford said that while she doesn’t think the board violated the law as no vote was taken, board members did discuss the decision to eliminate dean positions during the meeting.

“We definitely gave our input and voiced our concerns,” Ford said.

She added that holding the meeting in private was “a mistake,” as she believes administrators should have been included in the conversation.

The union plans to submit a motion to the court today requesting that it force the school district to keep the dean positions in place until the court rules on whether an open meeting law violation occurred, Augspurger wrote. It also plans to file an open meeting law complaint with the Nevada Attorney General.

“In the event of a favorable (court) decision, any further action conducted by the Trustees regarding the elimination of the dean of students position will be required to be held in a public meeting, so that the public may witness the actions of the Trustees, as entitled under Nevada law,”Augspurger added.