Lakeland School District trustees voted Wednesday to approve an extension of interim superintendent Jake Massey’s contract, formally addressing an alleged open meeting violation that occurred when the board initially approved the same measure without listing it on the public agenda. The re-vote cures a procedural gap that drew scrutiny from a local news outlet and triggered investigation by the Kootenai County prosecutor’s office.
What Happened at the June Meeting
On June 17, the Lakeland board voted to extend Massey’s contract during a meeting, but the action did not appear on the publicly posted agenda—a requirement under Idaho open meetings law. Board Chair Michelle Thompson attributed the omission to operational issues, stating that “at the last board meeting, we had technical difficulties at the end that did not capture any motions.”
The oversight prompted a formal complaint to the Kootenai County prosecutor, who announced last week that the office would investigate whether the vote violated state law. School districts in Idaho are permitted under statute to acknowledge and cure open meeting violations to avoid civil penalties, a provision that appears to have guided the board’s decision to revisit the contract approval.
The Wednesday Re-vote
On Wednesday, July 15, trustees voted unanimously to approve Massey’s contract extension, this time with the action properly listed on the meeting agenda. The Kootenai County prosecutor’s office did not respond to requests for comment on whether the re-vote satisfied legal requirements or whether further investigation would proceed.
Neither the board chair nor other trustees publicly addressed the alleged violation or confirmed that they were aware of prosecutor contact, focusing instead on the substance of the contract renewal.
Broader Agenda Concerns
The incident has drawn attention to broader practices in how Lakeland posts agenda items related to executive sessions. Since March, the district’s public agendas have not listed specific items that could require board action following closed executive sessions—a transparency practice that differs from other North Idaho school districts.
Lakeland trustees have held 31 meetings this year, including 25 executive sessions. Of those 25 closed sessions, only six included any listed potential action items on the public agenda.
By contrast, the Coeur d’Alene School Board’s July 13 agenda listed specific possible actions that could be taken after executive sessions, offering greater clarity to the public about what decisions might emerge from closed discussions.
What Comes Next
The prosecutor’s office has not disclosed whether the re-vote resolves the alleged violation or whether further action will be taken. Kootenai County residents and school district stakeholders may continue monitoring how Lakeland posts agenda items and conducts executive sessions.