OMA Advisory Opinion (#OOG-2026-0005) – Board of Social Work

On October 9, 2026, Director of Open Government Allen issued Advisory Opinion #OOG-2026-005, in response to a complaint which asserted that: (1)the “DC Board of Social Work for January 26 and February 23, 2026…meeting links…were incorrect for both meetings” and that “[w]hile this is a violation in itself, the action is particularly troubling because during both of these meetings, they discussed controversial issues that have broad popular appeal among social workers but that the board has stood against;” and (2) that due to the erroneous link, several people attended “a nonexistent meeting” and “[t]he link in the agenda… downloaded… (after the open session meeting was over)…[was] different than the one… on the website,”  and that there was concern that their was the “appearance of hiding the error.”

Director Allen concluded that the Board of Social Work is a public body which falls within the Open Meetings Act’s (OMA’s) definition of a public body, and its scope and purpose constitute public business under the OMA. While the posting of an incorrect meeting link constituted deficient notice, the Director found that the violation was technical in nature and did not substantially impair public access because the correct link was provided upon request, recordings were maintained, and the Complainant was ultimately able to observe the meeting.

The Board acknowledged that the December special meeting link was incorrectly posted on the Board website for the January and February meetings, and the Director concluded that one or both of the agendas posted as required for notice  had the incorrect link prior to the Complainant’s efforts to join the two meetings, which, even as a result of a good-faith correction, was a violation of the OMA in that proper notice, specifically location, was not posted for those meetings.

Additionally, The Director stated that the topics discussed by the Board, and their relative significance, are beyond the scope of the OMA. The OMA only seeks to guarantee the ability to observe a meeting “while the meeting is taking place, or…as soon thereafter as reasonably practicable,” without regard to the relative significance of the public business  conducted.

Finally, the Director determined that there was no evidence that correcting the links represented a deliberate effort to conceal an error, though the recurrence of the same notice error at two consecutive meetings reveals deficiencies in compliance procedures.