In January, Governor DeWine signed House Bill 257, “to authorize certain public bodies to meet virtually,” which will take effect April 9, 2025. During the COVID-19 crisis, most public bodies took emergency action to conduct public meetings over the internet, pursuant to temporary changes to the Ohio Open Meetings Act effective in 2020-2022. Public bodies came to appreciate how such virtual meetings both made it easier to conduct business and allowed greater access by the public to the governmental process. Many looked for the Legislature to revise the law to allow these meetings to proceed on a permanent basis. What has been enacted in HB 257, though, provides only partial authorization for “certain public bodies” to meet virtually, and only if they meet certain requirements.
Who can benefit from this law?
The new provision is ORC 121.221, an adjunct to the existing public meetings law, which starts from the same premise: it applies to “public bodies” as that term has traditionally been known. But, there are exceptions: no virtual meetings if the members of that body are elected by the general public, or if those members are paid for serving on that body. Translation: this law would not authorize video meetings for Boards of County Commissioners, City or Village Councils, School Boards, or Boards of Township Trustees. Interesting exception: there doesn’t appear to be a prohibition against boards or commissions falling under one of those entities from conducting meetings using virtual technology, because even if, say, a councilperson serves on, say, a zoning commission, he or she would not typically be paid or elected as a member of that commission.
Are there other limitations?
Yes, even if you belong to a body that is eligible to carry on virtual meetings, there are some actions which the body is still forbidden to take:
- Approving “major nonroutine expenditures”;
- Approving a “significant hiring decision”;
- Proposing, approving, or voting on a “tax issue or increase.”
So, using virtual meetings on a routine basis as the “normal” way of conducting business may not be a realistic option based upon House Bill 257.
What are the rules for conducting virtual meetings?
If you happen to be a body that has not been excluded from the statute, then that body normally needs to operate in accordance with these rules to have virtual meetings:
- 72-hour public notice that there will be a meeting held virtually, and how it can be accessed publicly;
- Public access needs to, in fact, be set up for the meeting, typically by livestreaming;
- The system needs to be set up with sufficient sophistication so that the public can actually observe and hear the discussions and deliberations of the members participating, including any members who are accessing the meeting electronically, and allowing each member to be seen and heard at all times;
- All votes must be taken by roll call;
- Each of the members of the body planning to attend electronically needs to advise the Chair 48 hours in advance.
Those issues aside, the law further permits two members or 10% of the body (whichever is greater) to, on 48 hours notice, insist that any specific issue not be voted on at a virtual meeting. And, if the meeting is, in actuality, a “hearing,” any party to the matter can insist that it not be conducted virtually. And the system utilized needs to provide a means for public comments during the meeting, where they normally would be allowed.
Before going forward with a virtual meeting, the body needs to adopt a formal policy specifying how the foregoing rules will be implemented.
What about Charter municipalities?
Subject to the specific language of an individual charter, case law generally recognizes that a charter may authorize a city or village to vary from the Ohio public meeting law. Whether your charter does or does not permit your municipality to meet virtually should be unaffected by House Bill 257.
Questions about the impact of House Bill 257 on your public body’s ability to hold virtual meetings, the impact of your charter, or specific factual or policy-related questions should be directed to the law director or other legal counsel for the body.
[View source.]
