Charge of disrupting meeting is dropped
Since when does disrupting a meeting have to mean the meeting could not continue? A disruption is an interruption that causes the meeting to stop, unable to function. The meeting can then continue once the disruption ends. In this case the person was arrested and the meeting was able to continue. The compliant indicated she disrupted the event but the charge is disturbing. Here is the law Ms. Watts was charged with:

§ 2917.12 Disturbing a lawful meeting.
Text of Statute
(A) No person, with purpose to prevent or disrupt a lawful meeting, procession, or gathering, shall do either of the following:
(1) Do any act which obstructs or interferes with the due conduct of such meeting, procession, or gathering;
(2) Make any utterance, gesture, or display which outrages the sensibilities of the group.
(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of disturbing a lawful meeting, a misdemeanor of the fourth degree.

Based on the TV footage I think this woman was guilty. This sounds like either a misinterpretation of the law, or a bit of judicial nullification.