I’ve already written extensively about the Indianapolis Local Education Alliance. What it is. Its purview. What it might accomplish this calendar year.

But in brief, it’s a nine-member committee, led by the Mayor’s Office, and populated by representatives from IPS and the community. They will meet regularly in the coming months to develop long-term recommendations around facilities usage, revenue sharing, capital referendum processes, and transportation.

Much of the coverage around ILEA, both when it was first established during the April legislative session and now in the final days leading up to the first official meeting on June 26, has focused on the fact that ILEA is exempt from Indiana’s Open Door Law.

This law “states that government agencies must hold official meetings of a majority of their governing body… publicly.” It gives members of the public the right to attend and document these meetings, though it does not require the availability of a public comment session.

There are good reasons to want an advisory body like ILEA to operate with full transparency. I can think of equally valid reasons why ILEA might prefer at least some of their meetings to be in private.

ILEA, at the direction of the Mayor’s Office, seems to have landed on a balanced approach. They recently announced a series of initial public meetings while noting additional private meetings remain possible. The first three public dates are June 25, July 23, and August 20 (future dates will be announced as they approach). Community Members can sign up in advance to share public comment at each meeting.

Amid all the brouhaha, particularly stirred by folks who seem firmly entrenched on Team IPS, I admit I find myself a little perplexed. The possible lack of transparency and closed door meetings that have people clutching the proverbial pearls is something IPS is already doing, even if they haven’t technically run afoul of the open door law.

Consider this calendar year. IPS has held 21 executive sessions (as of May 20), which are definitionally private, closed-door meetings. Seventeen of them, per their posted notices, have included discussion of school consolidation. For many of these executive sessions, notice was only posted two or three days before the session (that’s common practice among governing bodies even if it’s not ideal for the public).

This is well within their rights, given an executive session does not involve a majority of the board and thus need not be public. But you can hardly call this transparency at its finest. The very issue clouding the waking nightmares of IPS defenders is being discussed among key members of the IPS board. Regularly. Behind closed doors.

Perhaps a question popped into your head. Do public school districts typically hold that many executive sessions? During IPS’ April board meeting, one public commenter raised this issue and compared IPS to other local districts (her comments begin at approximately 1:04:59 and end at 1:06:12 in that linked recording; note that as of that meeting, IPS had held 16 executive sessions in the calendar year).

Here’s how many times other districts held executive sessions during a window where IPS held 16 of them. Perry Township: three. Washington Township: three. Wayne Township: three. Decatur Township: five. Franklin Township: zero. The commenter went on to call for fewer executive meetings moving forward and greater transparency. Given the five additional executive sessions IPS held in the next 30 days after that board meeting, I’d say they didn’t listen.

ILEA’s first meeting is this month. Their cadence appears to be monthly, with some private meetings possibly in addition. That would mean they meet at least seven times publicly and likely no more than that privately between now and the end of the calendar year. Compare that to IPS’ 21 private executive sessions from January through May to start the year.

I’m all for transparency in public meetings. We all deserve to know what’s going on. We all deserve input. But let’s not pretend IPS is some bastion of transparency and that ILEA is suddenly about to trample over a long-held local principle. There’s a balance to be struck. ILEA is striking a good one. Maybe it’s time IPS struck a better balance too.