蜜桃影视

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for 蜜桃影视 Newsletter

Six Colorado news outlets, including Newsline, are suing Denver Public Schools to gain access a recording of the district board鈥檚 in which board members discussed school safety plans and emerged with a new policy.

Members of the district鈥檚 Board of Education held a special meeting following a shooting last month at Denver鈥檚 East High School, which left two administrators injured. The incident was the on or near East High property in as many months, and the 17-year-old suspect was later found dead in Park County of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Board members spent the majority of the lengthy meeting behind closed doors, and upon returning to the public, voted unanimously to without any public discussion.

Under Colorado鈥檚 Open Meetings Law, elected bodies such as school boards cannot make decisions on new policies or legislation out of the public eye. There are some exceptions that allow for closed-door executive sessions, including board consultations for legal advice, discussions on personnel matters and on individual students. Topics listed for discussion at the March 23 executive session included 鈥渟ecurity arrangements or investigations鈥� related to the March 22 shooting, and details about individual students 鈥渨here public disclosure would adversely affect that person or persons involved.鈥�

The lawsuit鈥檚 plaintiffs include Newsline, The Denver Post, Colorado Politics/The Denver Gazette, KDVR Fox 31, Chalkbeat Colorado and KUSA 9News. Each of the news outlets filed a Colorado Open Records Request for the executive session recording and were all denied.

Rachael Johnson, an attorney with the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, and Steve Zansberg, a First Amendment attorney and president of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition, are representing the coalition of news outlets. Zansberg said of the Colorado Sunshine Law.

Zansberg said the first issue the complaint addresses is the lack of proper notice regarding what board members would discuss behind closed doors. He said Colorado law says that when a public body fails to adequately announce its topic of discussion, the meeting is considered an 鈥渦nlawfully closed public meeting,鈥� not an executive session.

鈥淭hey just went behind closed doors and discussed public business,鈥� Zansberg said.

Even if the board properly announced the topics of discussion for a lawful executive session, Zansberg said the fact that board members left the five-hour discussion with a policy change and no public discussion is a blatant vilation of Colorado鈥檚 Open Meetings Law.

If there is probable cause to believe that a publicly elected board made a decision in an executive session, a judge will review the recording of the session and determine if this was the case, Zansberg said. Public bodies in Colorado are prohibited from adopting not just new policies, but any position on an issue behind closed doors.

鈥淚t was what the case law says was 鈥榓 rubber stamping鈥� of a decision that had already been made behind closed doors, and that too violates the Open Meetings Law,鈥� Zansberg said.

A 鈥榯remendous amount of public interest鈥�

Jeff Roberts, executive director of CFOIC, said there was an expectation that board members would have a public discussion following the private meeting where they discussed a high-profile situation with consequences for the entire district. He said there has been a 鈥渢remendous amount of public interest鈥� in school safety plans and changes around school resource officers.

鈥淏oth the open meetings law, and there鈥檚 a separate statute about school board meetings, both of them say policy decisions are not permitted in executive sessions,鈥� Roberts said. 鈥淔or executive sessions, there are certain authorized topics that they can discuss behind closed doors, but when they鈥檙e talking about changing a policy, which is what they did here, that鈥檚 something that needs to be done in a public setting. That鈥檚 the intent and the spirit of these laws.鈥�

The only time an executive session is not to be recorded is when an elected body receives specific legal advice from an attorney. DPS鈥檚 general counsel, Aaron Thompson, was present in the executive session, but it鈥檚 unclear what role he played in the board鈥檚 discussion and if there is a recording of the private portion of the meeting.

The minutes from the executive session also on how long board members discussed each topic, another requirement of state law.

The district has the right to release the recording of the meeting at any time, and Zansberg said this would be the best thing the district can do to save taxpayers 鈥渢he cost of having to defend this indefensible position.鈥� If that happens, there鈥檚 no reason left for the plaintiffs in the complaint to continue litigating.

鈥淚 would again urge the Board of Education to exercise its discretion and release this recording,鈥� Zansberg said.

Depending on how the district decides to respond to the suit, Zansberg said it can take a few months for the courts to issue a decision.

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Colorado Newsline maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Quentin Young for questions: [email protected]. Follow Colorado Newsline on and .

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 蜜桃影视鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.