DO U(;L/\ S F.

GANSLEn

Allom ey General

W
.
....

KATI-IERI NE WINFREE

Chief Deputy Allorney General

J OHN B. HOWARD, JR . Dl!puty AI/orney General

. .. :..

STATE OF MARYLAND
FACSIM ILE NO .

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

W RITER'S D IRECT DI AL No.

(41O}576-6483 tfa uIk@oag.state.md.us

March 4, 2013

State of Maryland Open Meetings Compliance Board 200 5t. Paul Place Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Re: Response of the University System of Maryland Boord of Regents To the Complaint of Craig O'Donnell- Complaint No. 13-4

Dear Board Members: Attached for your consideration, please find the University System of Maryland Board of Regents' ("Regents") Response to the Complaint 13-4 fi led by Craig O'Donnell. I wish to acknowledge the substantia l assistance on this response of DLA Piper, which was engaged at the request of the Chancellor and Chair of the Board of Regents to provide them with independent advice and counsel with respect to this matter. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely,

Thomas Faulk Assistant Attorney General

Attachment

200 Sa int Palll Place .:. Baltimore. Maryland 2 1202-2021 Main Ortiee (410) 576-6300 .:. Ma in Ofllee Toll Free (888) 743-0023
C onsllm cr C ompl ai nt s and Inquiri cs (4 10) 52R-8 662 .:. H!;alth Advoc acy Un it/B ill in g Comp lainls (4 10) 52 8- 1840

Hea lth Ad vocacy Un it Toll Free (8 77) 261 -8807 .:. Homebuilders Division To ll Free (8 77) 259-45 25 .:. Te lephone fo r Deaf (4 10) 576-6372
www.oag.slal c. llld.lI s

University System of Maryland Board of Regents' Response to Open Meetings Act Complaint (Craig O'Donnell- Complaint No.13-4) On or about January 30, 2013, Craig O'Donnell filed with the Open Meetings Compliance Board (the "OMCB") his fourth complaint (the "January 30 Complaint") in three months asserting that the University System of Maryland Board of Regents' (the "Board") has violated provisions of the Open Meetings Act, codified in the State Government Article of the Maryland Code at sections 10-50 1, et seq. (the "Act"). The January 30 Complaint recycles claims made in Mr. O'Donnell's prior complaints filed on or about December 19, 2012 and January 15, 2013 (the "December Complaint" and "January 15 Complaint", respectively), which took issue with the Board's practices related to closed sessions of its meetings and those of certain standing committees. Through the January 30 Complaint, Mr. O'Donnell now

specifically applies those same criticisms to meetings of the Board's Committee on Education Policy and Student Life. As the OMCB acknowledged in its opinion dated February 26, 2013, "the Board has outlined revised procedures that it will adopt for future meetings" that "in [the OMCB's] view ... are consistent with the Act. , . ," Because the claims asserted in the January 30 Complaint are not new - only the context in which they are presented is - and the Board has pledged to implement procedures that the OMCB has blessed, rather than restating its position the Board refers the OMCB to, and incorporates herein by reference, its February 15, 2013 consolidated response to Mr. O'Donnell's December and January 15 Complaints and respectfully requests that the OMCB consider the three complaints together.