Pub. 6 2016-2017 Issue 1

18 The Necessity of Transparency of these complaints fall within a few key categories, all of which are related to lack of transparency. I have listed these common categories below and have summarized the intent and purpose behind each of them. I encourage you to determine if your school needs to adjust policy or practice to comply with these obligations and to avoid an actual or perceived lack of transparency. OPEN MEETINGS The Open and Public Meetings Act (OPMA) is a state law that requires the public’s business to be conducted in an open manner, allowing the public to watch or follow the proceedings. OPMA requires that a public notice be given before a meeting takes place. The posted meeting agenda must provide “sufficient specificity” to allow the public to know what topics will be discussed and what actions will be considered. OPMA also requires that the minutes of each meeting are kept with sufficient detail to allow a person who did not attend the meeting to understand the substance of the discussion, the board members who attended, and how the U nder the cloud of concern with the government making backroom deals and avoiding public scrutiny, transparency in public action and financial transactions has become today’s reality. The public demands to know how their business is being conducted with their hard-earned tax money. With the ubiquity of digital information technology, citizens expect timely, searchable information, especially from govern- ment. In addition, heightened sensitivity to tax burdens within the current economy has caused greater interest in how taxes are spent. While most charter schools are not governmental entities, as government-sponsored schools, their charters impose similar duties. As such, charter school leaders should learn to embrace transparency and to leverage it to improve the operations of their schools and their acceptance within the larger community. The Office of the State Auditor hosts a hotline for citizens and public officials to file complaints regarding potential waste, fraud, abuse, or noncompliance within government entities. The majority BY JOHN DOUGALL, STATE AUDITOR