INFORMATION #2 09-27-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

) ) '~) Moberg v.lndependent Sch. Dist. No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510 (MinD. 1983); St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. District 742 , Community Schs.. 332 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1983). i ' '",." Mankato Free Press Co. v: City ,.:' of North Mankato" 563 N. W. 2d 291 (MinD. 1997). CHAPrER 7 The Open Meeting Law does not defme the term "meeting." The Minnesota Supreme Court, however, has ruled die Open Meeting Law applies to gatherings where a quorum or more of the members of the council, committee, board, department, or commission are present, and at which the members intentionally discuss, decide, or receive information as a group on issues relating to the official business of that body. The law does not cover letters, e-mail, and telephone conversations among less than a quorum of the councilmembers. But the law does prohibit the use of telephone conversations, e~mail, or letters in a decision-making process among a '. quo.~m()f. meJllbers de~ig~.ed to ~void an open meeting. . It isa violation of the Data Practices Act to avoid a public meeting by having each member of the city council interview fmalists for a job , separately and then taking a straw vote to narrow the list of fmalists. .. ~': .~. : ''-': Decisions made this way deny the public an opportunity to observe the '" "/' '~ecision-makmg proCess, to know the council members' stance on issues. . ',. . '",. an~,to..~ fully informed about th~ ~o~~il's actions. \,. _. i., The Minnesota Supreme Court also decided that informational seminars about school board business. which the entire board attends. must be public ~, ", ,,_ ;...and open. Thus. any scheduled gatherings of a governing body must have. . l ..' . . '." ""'. .' ~ , ... " proper notice an~ be open. whether, or not the body takes or contemplates .... . " taking action. This includes meetings where members receive information ',' that may influence later decisions. but excludes chance or social gatherings. A quorum of members cannot discuss or receive information on official business in any setting under the guise of a private social gathering. .t',' :' St. Cloud NewsPaPers, Inc. v.' City of A,{ton, 332 N.W.2d 1 (MinD. 1983). ',. ,,"1 Hubbard Broadcasting v. City of Afton, 321 N.W.2d 395 (MinD. 1982); A.G. Op. 471-E (May 23,1978). Compare St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. District 742 Community Schs., 332 N.W.2d 1 (MinD. 1983) with A.G. Op. 63-A-5 (Feb.5,1975). . ~ ~ i The Supreme Court has warned that even though gatherings of less than a quorum do not constitute meetings under the law. serial gatherings of less than a quorum may be a violation of the statute depending on the individual case. It is not clear from the Court's recent rulings whether the participation of a city council in a League of Minnesota Cities sponsored training program to develop various skills constitutes as a meeting under the Open Meeting Law. The result may depend on whether or not the program includes discussions of particular matters 'within the council.s official duties or powers. . ;147