Which ACC schools voted to sue Florida State? We’re trying to find out

TALLAHASSEE — During Tuesday’s hearing at the Leon County Courthouse, Florida State’s counsel dug into a subject that’s either mind-numbingly boring, a crucial factor in the nine-figure lawsuits between the Seminoles and the ACC or both.

The minutes of a board meeting from three months ago.

“Where are they?” FSU attorney Peter Rush asked rhetorically.

The Tampa Bay Times has been wondering the same thing for weeks. The few public details of that special Jan. 12 meeting — when the ACC’s board of directors voted to sue FSU — have been tantalizingly vague.

So where are they? After sending open-records requests to most public schools in the ACC, here’s our answer: in a read-only document stored in a secured digital box and shared with a very small circle — a group that has not yet included FSU.

Background

The ACC did not vote before filing its initial lawsuit against FSU in North Carolina on Dec. 21. That’s not in dispute (though the school and conference disagree on how much that matters).

On Wednesday, Jan. 10, ACC commissioner Jim Phillips emailed the school presidents and chancellors that comprise the league’s board of directors about a special meeting. It would “continue the discussions we started on Tuesday regarding a Conference legal matter.”

The legal matter was not specified, but the board held its regular Zoom meeting a day earlier. Attorney James P. Cooney — who is representing the ACC in its litigation against FSU — was invited. So were all 18 schools, including incoming members Cal, Stanford and SMU.

But Phillips only emailed 17 schools about the special Jan. 12 meeting. FSU was excluded; the ACC has said the litigation creates a conflict of interest for the Seminoles.

Phillips asked board members to waive the customary three-day notice period for the meeting. He needed three-quarters to approve.

“I support and will attend,” Pitt chancellor Joan Gabel wrote.

“Me too,” replied Miami president Julio Frenk.

The leaders of SMU, Georgia Tech and Louisville also responded with a reply-all affirmation, according to emails obtained from North Carolina State.

It was a similar process two months later against Clemson. After the Tigers sued the ACC on March 19, the commissioner’s executive assistant sent the 16 current/future members (no FSU or Clemson) a link to a Doodle online scheduling service to set up a meeting the next morning. At least eight schools responded: Miami, SMU, Wake Forest, Boston College, North Carolina State, Pitt, Notre Dame and Virginia.

The 7:15 a.m. virtual meeting would “address Conference legal matters regarding challenges to the grant of rights.” Video was not mandatory, if the school’s “exec prefers not to be ‘on’ that early.”

The Jan. 12 meeting

In court filings, the ACC has included a pair of sworn affidavits that mention the Jan. 12 meeting — one from deputy commissioner Brad Hostetter and one from Virginia president/board chairperson James E. Ryan. Ryan said the members “present voted unanimously” to approve an amended lawsuit, including claims from the initial one in December.

But who was present? The participants weren’t relevant to the vote, so they weren’t included. After a question from the judge during Tuesday’s hearing, Cooney — an attorney for the ACC — said 12 members were there. FSU wasn’t invited. Cooney said Clemson didn’t participate. That leaves one unknown absence.

Hostetter said in his affidavit that a pair of incoming, non-voting members were there, too. SMU said it would attend, which suggests either Cal or Stanford didn’t.

Meeting minutes would clear this up. Hostetter said they were scheduled to be approved by the board on March 19.

Two days later, the Times started asking for them.

‘Secured box’

The minutes exist.

On Feb. 15, Hostetter emailed the presidents/chancellors of 17 schools — all current/future members except FSU — about them. He said minutes from meetings on Jan. 9, 12 and 23 were all “initially reviewed” by the board chairperson, commissioner and the conference’s general counsel, Pearlynn Houck. Minor revisions followed, according to emails obtained from Georgia Tech.

For the 14 current members — again, all but FSU — Hostetter said the minutes were “being shared in a new folder [titled “ACC Board of Directors (14 members)]” they would be separately invited to.

“This folder,” he wrote, “is necessary due to pending litigation.”

So what is that Box folder?

In a response denying the Times’ public-records request for the minutes, Georgia Tech described it as a “secured Box set up by the ACC that is not downloadable” and provides “view only access … to the board members.” It’s a standard process ACC schools agreed to and have used before this litigation.

North Carolina denied the Times’ request for minutes in that box, too, saying there are “no existing or responsive University records” subject to disclosure. Louisville and North Carolina State have not yet responded to requests from three weeks ago, and Cal has not responded to a follow-up email.

3 reasons why this matters

The first is broad. Public entities — not just FSU and Clemson — have millions of dollars at stake. Decisions about the litigation were made by the top executives at those public entities. There’s a significant public interest in what happened.

The second is technical. It involves the dispute over who sued whom first. The ACC argues the Jan. 12 vote ratified the league’s initial complaint against FSU. If that’s true, that’s a compelling point that the ACC properly sued Florida State first. If it’s not, that’s a point in FSU’s favor. The difference is relevant as judges weigh whether the cases belong in the ACC’s home court (North Carolina), FSU’s home court (Leon County) or both. The minutes could provide some clarity and inform future decisions and appeals.

The final point is pure intrigue. The seismic impact of conference realignment leaves the industry searching for tea leaves to read. What other school missed the meeting when the ACC voted to sue one of its members? Did the school object because it’s pursuing its own exit strategy, like Clemson and FSU? Or was it a routine scheduling conflict?

The answers will come eventually. The notes likely will be turned over during the discovery process. For now, we’re left wondering whether the minutes are mundane, monumental or both.

• • •

Sign up for the Sports Today newsletter to get daily updates on the Bucs, Rays, Lightning and college football across Florida.

Never miss out on the latest with your favorite Tampa Bay sports teams. Follow our coverage on Instagram, X and Facebook.