Lewiston Daily Sun v. School Administrative District No. 43

On March 30, 1998, the board of directors of School Administrative District No. 43 (the district) (defendant) held a public meeting to hear complaints regarding the job performance of the district’s superintendent. The proceedings were conducted in closed session. Maine’s open-meetings law established that certain personnel matters, including employee complaints and employee discipline, could be discussed in closed session. The Lewiston Daily Sun (the newspaper) (plaintiff) objected to the district’s closed-session proceedings and asserted that the superintendent’s performance review had to take place in open session. On April 14, the district held a second closed-session meeting with the district’s attorney to determine how to address the complaints. The district’s attorney recommended conducting an independent investigation, and the board members expressed a general consensus with the proposed course of action. However, no formal vote was taken, nor was formal direction provided. On April 15, the district’s attorney engaged an outside attorney to conduct the independent investigation. On May 13, the newspaper filed a complaint against the district, alleging that the district violated the open-meetings law. Specifically, the newspaper alleged that the engagement of an outside attorney constituted official action and that Maine’s open-meetings law required that official action be conducted in open session. On May 26, following the newspaper’s lawsuit, the independent attorney’s report was considered during an open-session meeting of the board. At trial, the newspaper asserted that a ruling was necessary to prevent an ongoing controversy with the school district. However, no additional evidence was presented to support the newspaper’s assertion. The superior court determined that no official action took place during the closed-session meeting and, therefore, the district did not violate the open-meetings law. The newspaper filed an appeal.