Decision will have to waitPublished 11:53pm Tuesday, February 14, 2012
With all things considered, Seale said he feels there is no reason to believe the school board broke any laws in this case.
“I think that the board proved without question there was no violation of the Open Meetings Act,” he said. “Mr. Davis will file his brief. He’ll file his offer of proof and that offer of proof will be there was a violation of the Open Meetings Act.”
The burden of proof will now fall on Davis to show that Obomanu, Chestnut and board member Holland Powell participated in an illegal meeting and that Obomanu did not have the authority to sign the letter of termination.
“Until he really clarifies the issues we are not sure,” he said. “With regard to the Open Meetings Act there is clearly no violation.”
Until Davis submits his brief, Campbell said it’s hard to get a feel for which way the case could go.
“We’ll have to see what they say in the brief, but right now we’re not sure we know what he put in his complaint,” she said.
The most debated topic of the day, besides the letter, hinged on the way the Oct. 25 meeting was handled.
The special called meeting, which began at 5:30 p.m., was adjourned shortly after it began by Hicks, who left the building before the 6 p.m. meeting began.
Davis said Obomanu had no authority to step in and conduct the 6 p.m. meeting.
The case, Davis said, seems cut and dry to him.
“When a meeting is adjourned, a meeting is adjourned,” he said.