The audit of 10 of Utah's 40 school districts found that most school boards do not keep adequate closed meeting records, do not review the minutes and close meetings to the public for questionable reasons, making it difficult to tell if the topic was appropriate for a closed session.

Boards are interpreting the Open Meetings Act in a variety of ways, auditor Brian Dean told a legislative committee Thursday.

''School boards' actions do not comply with the law and raise concerns that school boards may be circumventing the legislative intent of the open meetings act that the 'people's business' be done openly and in the public,'' the audit said.

Utah law allows for boards to close their meetings to discuss an individual, collective bargaining, litigation, security, acquiring or selling property and investigating allegations of criminal misconduct.

Detailed records of these closed meetings must be kept unless it involves discussions of an individual or security. Those closed sessions only require the signature of the presiding officer on a note saying that was the closed session's sole purpose.

The audit found four districts - Jordan, Nebo, North Sanpete and Iron County - kept no minutes of their closed meetings.

The closed meeting records of four others - Salt Lake, Granite, Provo and Washington County - provided insufficient summary detail. Only Tooele County and the Carbon School Districts were in complete compliance with the act, Dean said.

Such records are important, Dean said, if the legality of the closed session were ever raised. If that happened, a judge would review the meeting record and determine if it was legal.

''The closed meeting records being maintained by most school boards are insufficient for a judge to independently assess the legality of school boards' closed meeting discussions,'' he said.

He also raised concern over the frequency of the closed meetings, which averaged one a month.

The Iron County district held eight closed meetings over the last 16 months, but the Washington County district had about 32 closed meetings during the same time.

The audit also found that inappropriate discussions - ones that should be held in open meetings - were occurring in the closed sessions.

''The extent of the problem is unknown for districts that don't keep closed meeting records,'' he said.

School district officials say they have received insufficient and inconsistent training on the legal requirements of closed meetings, and some suggested to the auditors that they were told summary minutes for closed meetings were acceptable and even preferred.

''We view this advice as a direct contradiction to the Open Meetings Act,'' Dean said.

There also were varying interpretations of what ''detailed'' minutes meant, he said.

Dean's recommendations included having the Legislature clarify in statute what requirements are expected of districts for closed sessions, requiring school boards or superintendents to approve closed meeting minutes, and considering methods - even strengthening sanctions - to compel compliance.

Dean also suggested having the attorney general's office issue a directive to all public bodies covered by the act clearly spelling out legal requirement with an emphasis on closed meeting requirements.

The audit was forwarded to the interim education and legislative process committees for further study.

The Open Meetings Act governs sessions of public bodies and limits reasons they can close meetings to the public, listing procedures they must follow to do so.