Indy Democrats’ closed-door meetings on soccer team raise Open Door Law concerns

(Adobe Stock)

Two closed-door meetings by the Democratic caucus of the Indianapolis City-County Council regarding Mayor Joe Hogsett’s attempt to create a tax district for a potential Major League Soccer team may have violated Indiana’s public access law or at least stretched its limits, leading authorities say.

Indiana’s Open Door Law generally allows political party caucuses to meet in private to discuss political strategy, as long as the members do not take official action.

While “political” caucuses are exempt from the Open Door Law, two leading authorities on Indiana’s public access laws told IBJ that it’s possible the definition of “political” is being stretched in the case of these meetings—an issue they say is common across the state when local government officials attempt to conduct some public business in private.

The mayor’s office, however, says its meeting with councilors on Monday was legally distinct from a caucus meeting and therefore allowable under the law. Council President Vop Osili also said in a written statement that the recent discussions about a “commercial prospect” were allowed under the law.

On the Indianapolis City-County Council, Democrats currently hold an 18-6 majority in what is temporarily a 24-member legislative body and largely control all policy issues that come before it.

A spokesperson for the Mayor’s Office confirmed that members of the Hogsett administration met with a “gathering of Indianapolis City-County Council members” on economic development prospects Monday night. A representative for the Democratic caucus separately confirmed that the meeting had occurred, while members of the GOP caucus told IBJ that  communications with the mayor’s administration have so far been through a letter and one-on-one meetings with the policy director.

Two days after the Monday meeting, the Democratic caucus held a closed meeting with Tom Glick, the soccer executive leading efforts to build an ownership group for a potential Major League Soccer application.

Denise Herd, a private communications consultant for the Democratic caucus, did not immediately return calls and messages requesting comment on the public access issue. Majority Leader Maggie Lewis also did not return calls or messages.

Public Access Counselor Luke Britt, whose job is to provide guidance on the state’s public access law, said no formal complaint has been filed challenging legitimacy of the meetings.  Because no formal complaint has been filed and Britt has not requested clarifying information from the council, he said his comments were speculative at this point. But he acknowledged that a violation was a possibility.

“I don’t know what these meetings have to do with political business,” Britt said. “I mean, they’re making political fallout. But, I don’t see how it’s strategizing, you know, a political platform or any kind of ideology or anything like that.”

Paul Jefferson, an attorney with McNeely Law who advises municipalities, agreed. He told IBJ, “It seems to me that it runs afoul of at least the spirit of the law, if not the letter of it.”

“I would have serious concerns that it does violate the Open Door Law and I would expect there’s probably going to be some litigation on that issue,” Jefferson told IBJ.

It’s common for political caucuses composed of a majority of council members of one political party to meet privately to discuss political strategy. But sometimes they are improperly used as what Britt described as an “escape hatch” to conduct public business in private.

In 2020, Britt issued an informal opinion against the Bloomington City Council for non-political caucus meetings where the entire nine-member council was composed of Democrats.

It’s a pretty regular occurrence, he said, because the line between political business and public business is “a fine line that a lot of folks don’t really understand.”

And even if these meetings don’t consist of votes or discussions related to positions, Britt said Indiana’s law is meant to be applied broadly. “Receiving information, as a majority of a governing body, is enough to trigger the definition of official action,” Britt said.

Alternatively, Britt said, the full City-County Council could have held an executive session. These closed meetings are typically used to discuss confidential economic development deals or personnel issues. That would have required a public notice 48 hours beforehand and the inclusion of the six-member Republican caucus.

Councilor Brian Mowery, the leader of the Republican caucus, said he is frustrated that all discussions related to the Major League Soccer expansion team application and the future of Eleven Park have been “behind closed doors.”

The questions about public access and transparency come less than a month after an attorney representing the Hogsett administration sent a warning to the council against meeting with Keystone officials regarding their Indy Eleven project.

In the letter, a copy of which was obtained by IBJ, an attorney for the Hogsett administration warned the caucus against agreeing to holding a meeting with Keystone Group, warning that doing so might violate the state’s Open Door Law. 

Faegre Drinker attorney Scott Chinn said in the April 20 letter that the earlier private caucus would have allowed the developer—Keystone Group—to circumvent city processes by going to the council directly, before negotiations with the city had been completed.

Chinn, who is representing the city on the MLS negotiations, said that in addition to violating state’s Open Door Law, a caucus meeting with the developer would have amounted to Keystone “skipping ahead in the process to get the formal attention of the Democratic Caucus in order to influence the outcome of arrangements that are not yet ripe.”

The mayor’s office contends that its meeting with councilors on Monday evening was different.

“The administration met with a gathering of councilors on Monday to discuss economic development prospects,” mayoral spokeswoman Aliya Wishner said in a written statement. “This is legally distinct from a caucus meeting.”

Mickey Shuey contributed reporting.