During the meeting, the board reviewed the complaint which accused a board member of engaging in a conversation with Ash after the adjournment of a previous meeting on May 11, 2026. The board concluded that since the conversation did not involve a quorum, it did not constitute a violation under the open meeting law. The open meeting law stipulates that such violations occur when a quorum of board members deliberates on matters within their jurisdiction outside of official meetings. Board members expressed confidence in their decision, referencing the law’s requirements and similar past experiences.

The board then moved to approve a draft response to Ash’s complaint. The response will be forwarded to both Ash and the Attorney General’s office. A roll call vote saw the majority of the board supporting the motion, with one member abstaining due to their involvement in the alleged incident.