School Board Tour Complaint Awaits State Opinion After Final Responses
The Republican Women of Frederick County and FCPS counsel disagree over whether a discussion following a Carroll Manor Elementary tour was public business.
HERE'S WHAT WE KNOW
Five of seven school board members attended the June 25 tour and subsequent discussion. The women’s club says the discussion was public business; FCPS counsel argues the gathering did not violate the Open Meetings Act. Final responses have been submitted. An advisory opinion is expected by mid-November, but no exact date or outcome has been announced.
A state advisory opinion is pending after the Republican Women of Frederick County and Frederick County Public Schools’ chief legal counsel submitted their final responses in a dispute over a school board tour.
The complaint concerns five board members’ attendance at Carroll Manor Elementary School on June 25 and a discussion that followed in the school’s media center.
Rachel Simmonsen, counsel for Maryland’s Open Meetings Compliance Board, told The Frederick News-Post that the board’s workload made an exact decision date uncertain, but she expected an opinion by mid-November.
Kelly Foster and Cindy Rose filed the complaint on behalf of the women’s club in August. They contend that the gathering involved public business that residents should have been able to observe.
FCPS chief legal counsel Steven Blivess maintains that the school board did not violate the Open Meetings Act.
State Del. April Miller arranged the tour to examine the potential effects of a data center campus planned within 2,000 feet of the school. She initially invited board members Janie Inglis Monier, Jaime Brennan and Colt Black, who had sought a board discussion about data centers.
Board President Dean Rose and Vice President Rae Gallagher also attended. Rose had said he consulted FCPS counsel and believed their participation would not violate the law.
Other attendees included state officials, Maryland State Department of Education representatives and a representative of developer Rowan.
The parties disagree about how to characterize the discussion after the tour.
Foster argues that members were gathering information and forming opinions by listening to colleagues and guests. In her Oct. 19 rebuttal, she maintained that the public had a right to observe that process.
In his Oct. 27 response, Blivess characterized the discussion as a roundtable briefing and cited Ajamian v. Montgomery County in support of his position that a quorum’s presence does not necessarily establish a violation. He argued that the circumstances involved no vote, deliberation or intent to evade the law.
The dispute also includes accusations about election timing. Foster has questioned the delay in responding, while Blivess has accused the complainants of trying to influence the election. Those are the parties’ competing assertions, not findings by the compliance board.
The board’s written advisory opinion will address the complaint. No determination that a violation occurred—or that the school board was cleared—is reported in the supplied coverage.
WHAT IT MEANS
The key issue is the nature of the gathering and discussion, not merely whether a formal vote occurred. The compliance board has not yet resolved the competing positions, and allegations about either side’s political motives remain unproven in this report.
Want more Frederick updates like this?
Get local alerts, event reminders, restaurant openings, sports news, giveaways, live show updates, and community stories from Everything Frederick. Want to talk about what’s happening? Join the Frederick Connect community too.
