OMA section 2.01
OMA5 ILCS 120/2.01. Section 2.01 overview: Meetings have to happen at a place and time convenient and open to the public, and (with narrow exceptions for certain statewide/large-jurisdiction bodies) a quorum of members generally has to be physically present, not just dialed in.
29 issues across 27 determination letters:10 violation found · 17 no violation · 2 no determination / resolved.
Counts are per issue, not per letter, and come from automated extraction checked against sampled letters. Determination letters are not binding precedent.
Authorities the Bureau cites most on this issue
- Gerwin v. Livingston County Board, 345 Ill. App. 3d 352 (4th Dist. 2003) cited 6 times
- State ex rel. Badke v. Village Board of the Village of Greendale, 173 Wis. 2d 553, 494 N.W.2d 408 (Wis. 1993) cited 3 times
- Gosnell v. Hogan, 179 Ill. App. 3d 161, 170 (1989) cited 2 times
- Gerwin v. Livingston County Board, 345 Ill. App. 3d 352, 359 (4th Dist. 2003) cited 2 times
- Ill. Att'y Gen. PAC Req. Rev. Ltr. 17711 cited 2 times
- Argo High School Council of Local 571 v. Argo Community High School District 217, 163 Ill. App. 3d 578 (1st Dist. 1987) cited 2 times
- Gerwin v. Livingston Co. Board, 345 Ill. App. 3d 352, 361 (4th Dist. 2003) cited 2 times
- State ex rel. Badke v. Village Board of the Village of Greendale, 173 Wis. 2d 553, 579, 494 N.W.2d 408, 418 (Wis. 1993) cited 2 times
How to challenge a denial on this issue
AI-generated summary of the decisions listed on this page, with each point linked to the letters it comes from. Determination letters are not binding precedent and this is not legal advice. Open the letter and check the PDF before relying on any point.
When a challenge is strong
- A person was prohibited from entering the meeting room even though they were not disruptive, there was no court order barring them, and no demonstrable threat to safety. A public body may not exclude a person from an open meeting absent a court order, actual disruption, or demonstrable evidence of a threat to safety.Based on: 2024 · Restricted physical access and in…
- The public was unable to enter because the meeting room doors were locked and there were no measures to admit people. Locking doors without providing a way for the public to enter violates the requirement that meetings be open to the public.Based on: 2018 · Unannounced pre-meeting gathering…
- A municipal public body held a meeting where a quorum of members participated remotely, and no specific OMA exception (such as a gubernatorial disaster proclamation) applied. A quorum of members must be physically present at open meetings unless a specific OMA exception applies.Based on: 2026 · A village board's fully remote me…
- A majority of a quorum of the public body gathered before the official meeting and had a contemporaneous, interactive, deliberative discussion about public business. Such a gathering is a 'meeting' that must be held at a time and place open to the public.Based on: 2021 · A board's private discussion of e…
- The public body held a special meeting on a legal holiday, and that holiday did not fall on the body's regular meeting day. No public meeting may be held on a legal holiday unless the regular meeting day falls on that holiday, regardless of the meeting's purpose.Based on: 2018 · A public meeting on a legal holid…
When the public body usually wins
- The requester complained about access to a meeting after it concluded, without providing facts that the public body's actions or inaction prevented or dissuaded the public from attending the meeting itself. No OMA violation where requester fails to provide facts that the public body's actions or inaction prevented or dissuaded the public from attending the meeting.Based on: 2025 · A board's handling of post-meetin…
- The meeting was held in a building where visitors had to be buzzed in and escorted to the meeting room, but the public could still attend. Security measures like buzzing in and escorting do not violate OMA, which requires only reasonable accessibility, not absolute accessibility.Based on: 2022 · A housing authority's locked meet…
- The requester argued the meeting time was inconvenient because it conflicted with their personal work schedule. A meeting time is convenient if it is reasonable for the public in general; inconvenience to some individuals does not make the time unreasonable.Based on: 2018 · A council's meeting notices and m…
- The meeting was held during regular business hours and no facts showed the public was unreasonably deterred from attending. A meeting held during regular business hours is not inherently inconvenient, and absent evidence of deterrence, it satisfies the convenient and open requirement.Based on: 2016 · A TIF joint review board's 10:00 …
- The public body met at a restaurant, and there was no evidence that attendance was deterred. A restaurant meeting is not inherently improper if it does not deter attendance; OMA requires only reasonable accessibility.Based on: 2023 · School committee meetings at a re…
Points to put in your letter
- If you were excluded from the meeting room, state that you were not disruptive and had no court order banning you. The public body may not bar a person without those grounds.Based on: 2024 · Restricted physical access and in…
- If the meeting doors were locked and no one let the public in, explain that locking doors without measures to admit the public violates the requirement that meetings be open to the public.Based on: 2018 · Unannounced pre-meeting gathering…
- If a quorum of members participated remotely and no specific OMA exception applied, argue that a quorum must be physically present at the open meeting.Based on: 2026 · A village board's fully remote me…
- If a majority of a quorum gathered and deliberated about public business before the official meeting, argue that this gathering was a meeting that should have been open to the public.Based on: 2021 · A board's private discussion of e…
- If the public body held a special meeting on a legal holiday that was not its regular meeting day, point out that no public meeting may be held on a legal holiday unless the regular meeting falls on that day.Based on: 2018 · A public meeting on a legal holid…
Common mistakes
- Arguing that a locked building that requires buzzing in and being escorted violates OMA, even though security measures allow the public to attend.Based on: 2022 · A housing authority's locked meet…
- Claiming a meeting time is unreasonable solely because it conflicts with a personal work schedule, without showing the time is unreasonable for the public in general.Based on: 2018 · A council's meeting notices and m…
- Assuming that a meeting held at a restaurant is automatically not open and convenient, without any evidence that attendance was actually deterred.Based on: 2023 · School committee meetings at a re…
- Assuming any meeting on a legal holiday violates OMA, without checking whether the holiday falls on the body's regular meeting day.Based on: 2020 · A public hearing scheduled on a l…
- Demanding that all members be physically present for an entirely in-person meeting where no one participates remotely, confusing the physical quorum rule that applies only to remote attendance.Based on: 2017 · School board meetings without a p…
Facts to gather first
- Whether the meeting doors were locked and whether there was any way for the public to enter (e.g., buzzer, escort, staff present to open doors).
- Whether you were prohibited from entering the meeting room, and whether you were disruptive or subject to a court order.
- Whether a quorum of the public body's members attended remotely, and whether any statutory exception (such as a disaster declaration) applied at the time.
- The date of the meeting, whether it was a legal holiday, and whether the body's regular meeting day fell on that holiday or it was a special meeting.
- Whether a majority of a quorum of the public body gathered and discussed public business before the official meeting in a contemporaneous, interactive way.
These notes are based on non-binding determination letters from the Public Access Bureau; outcomes depend on the specific facts of each case and the current version of the Open Meetings Act, so always verify the full text of cited decisions and the statute.
Drafting brief for an AI assistant
Copy this into your assistant to help draft a request, appeal, or challenge to a denial that turns on this issue. It carries the rules and decisions, not your facts: add those yourself. Machine-readable version: oma-2-01.json.
Violation found (10)
Remote meetings without physical quorum
Rule: A quorum of members of a municipal public body must be physically present at open meetings unless a specific OMA exception applies.
Violation found A village board's fully remote meetings · March 13, 2026
Convenient and open meeting access
Rule: Public meetings must be held at times and places convenient and open to the public, requiring reasonable accessibility, not absolute accessibility.
Violation found Restricted physical access and in-person comment at a township board meeting · August 5, 2024
Prohibiting individual from entering meeting room
Rule: A public body may not exclude a person from an open meeting absent a court order, actual disruption, or demonstrable evidence of a threat to safety.
Violation found Restricted physical access and in-person comment at a township board meeting · August 5, 2024
Pre-meeting discussion by majority of quorum violated OMA
Rule: A gathering of a majority of a quorum of a public body for a contemporaneous, interactive, deliberative discussion of public business constitutes a meeting subject to OMA.
Violation found A board's private discussion of equipment purchases · January 26, 2021
Failure to hold meeting at specified time and place open to public
Rule: Meetings must be held at a specified time and place open to the public.
Violation found City council conference call gatherings without public notice · September 11, 2020
Special meeting held on legal holiday
Rule: No public meeting may be held on a legal holiday unless the regular meeting day falls on that holiday, regardless of the meeting's purpose.
Violation found A public meeting on a legal holiday at a locked facility · March 28, 2018
Failure to hold 6:30 p.m. gatherings at open times and places
Rule: All meetings required to be public must be held at specified times and places convenient and open to the public.
Violation found Unannounced pre-meeting gatherings and a blocked board meeting · February 20, 2018
Locked doors restricting access to September 26, 2017 meeting
Rule: Public meetings must be open to the public; locking doors without measures to admit the public violates OMA.
Violation found Unannounced pre-meeting gatherings and a blocked board meeting · February 20, 2018
Meeting room accessibility under OMA
Rule: A public body must take steps in response to increased public interest to ensure meetings are reasonably accessible, even if not every attendee can be accommodated.
Violation found Locked school doors during a public meeting · January 31, 2018
Failure to hold meeting at specified time and place open to public
Rule: A public body must hold meetings at a specified time and place that is convenient and open to the public.
Violation found An advisory committee's special meeting notice and agenda · April 7, 2017
No violation (17)
Open meetings access after meeting concluded
Rule: No OMA violation where requester fails to provide facts that the public body's actions or inaction prevented or dissuaded the public from attending the meeting.
No violation A board's handling of post-meeting attendee behavior · December 30, 2025
Board denied public access to meeting
Rule: A public body does not violate OMA when security personnel not under its control delay a person's entry, and the body waits and allows the person to speak.
No violation Denial of entry to an open meeting · May 8, 2024
Reasonable access to meeting
Rule: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a public body may satisfy the convenient and open requirement by providing legitimate remote access, even if some individuals are admitted in person.
No violation Meeting agendas, public comment periods, and COVID-19 meeting access · February 9, 2024
Meeting location not sufficiently open and convenient
Rule: Section 2.01 requires reasonable accessibility, not absolute accessibility; without facts showing attendees were deterred or restricted, the location was sufficiently open and convenient.
No violation A school board's conduct of public comment and meeting venue · October 3, 2023
Convenient and open meeting access
Rule: Locked building does not violate OMA if measures allow public access; lack of location notice impeded access but not deterrence.
No violation Meeting location notice on a hospital board agenda · June 13, 2023
Meeting location not convenient and open to the public
Rule: Section 2.01 requires reasonable accessibility, not absolute accessibility; a restaurant meeting is not inherently improper if it does not deter attendance.
No violation School committee meetings at a restaurant · March 6, 2023
Removal of speaker during business portion of meeting
Rule: The head of a public body may remove a person who disrupts the orderly conduct of business, even if the person was previously allowed to speak during public comment.
No violation Final action on unlisted fire department ordinance amendments · October 28, 2022
Conflict between OMA section 2.01 and local ordinance
Rule: Section 2.01 is permissive and does not require a public body to allow remote participation in closed session, so a local ordinance restricting such participation does not conflict with OMA.
No violation A village board trustee's request to attend a closed session remotely · March 10, 2022
Meeting not convenient and open due to locked doors and escort
Rule: Section 2.01 requires only reasonable accessibility, not absolute accessibility; security measures like buzzing in and escorting do not violate OMA.
No violation A housing authority's locked meeting room and delayed entry · January 18, 2022
Meeting location not convenient or open to public
Rule: A public body must provide reasonable accessibility, not absolute accessibility, and the Board's steps to accommodate an unusually large crowd satisfied this requirement.
No violation A school board's meeting room capacity and overflow accommodations · May 14, 2020
Public hearing held on legal holiday
Rule: A public body may hold a meeting on a legal holiday if the holiday falls on its regular meeting day, even if the regular meeting is not held that day.
No violation A public hearing scheduled on a legal holiday · November 18, 2020
Convenience of July 16, 2018 meeting time
Rule: A meeting time is convenient if it is reasonable for the public in general; inconvenience to some individuals does not make the time unreasonable.
No violation A council's meeting notices and member OMA training · December 19, 2018
Physical quorum requirement for open meetings
Rule: The physical quorum requirement applies only when members participate remotely by audio or video conference, not to in-person gatherings.
No violation School board meetings without a physical quorum · December 7, 2017
Adequacy of notice for relocated meeting
Rule: Public meetings must be held at specified times and places convenient and open to the public; the Board's measures to notify the public of the location change were sufficient.
No violation Notice of a school board meeting's relocated location · July 5, 2017
Failure to specify committee meeting times and places
Rule: Section 2.01 requires public meetings to be held at specified times and places convenient and open to the public, but committees that do not meet regularly have no schedule of regular meetings to publish.
No violation A village's committee meeting schedule · August 8, 2017
Meeting room accessibility under section 2.01
Rule: Section 2.01 requires only reasonable accessibility, not absolute accessibility; the room was reasonably accessible despite some attendees standing.
No violation A county board · April 6, 2017
Meeting time convenience under OMA
Rule: A public meeting held during regular business hours is not inherently inconvenient, and the facts did not show the public was unreasonably deterred from attending.
No violation A TIF joint review board's 10:00 a.m. meeting time · June 30, 2016
No determination / resolved (2)
Whether City Council meetings were sufficiently audible to comply with OMA section 2.01
Rule: OMA requires public bodies to provide reasonable access to meetings, including taking reasonable measures to ensure proceedings are audible to the public.
No determination / resolved Inaudible audio at a city council meeting · July 14, 2023
Meeting location convenience under OMA
Rule: A meeting location is convenient if it provides reasonable accessibility; the requester must provide facts showing attendees were deterred.
No determination / resolved A village board's special meeting location · May 23, 2023