Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MPEL.RA NEWSL.ETTER <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />The 1990 Legi s 1 ature also adopted <br />statutory language to address the <br />conflicting requirements of the Open <br />Meeting Law and the Government Data <br />Practices Act where the public body <br />must discuss or consider data <br />classified as "not public." Formerly, <br />an open meeti ng coul d be temporari ly <br />closed while the body discussed <br />non-public data. The meeting would <br />then be reopened after the bOdy <br />finished its discussion of the <br />non-public data. The 1990 statutory <br />language requires meetings to remain <br />open in most instances. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />The new statutory language provided <br />for a limited number of exceptions in <br />which a meeting may be closed. Two of <br />these exceptions specify that: <br /> <br />· a public body shall close a <br />meeting for preliminary <br />consideration of allegations <br />or charges against an <br />individual subject to its <br />authority. If the members <br />conclude that discipline of <br />any nature may be warranted, <br />further meetings or hearings <br />must be open. A meeti ng must <br />also be open at the request of <br />the i ndi vi dua 1 who is the <br />subject of the meeting. <br /> <br />· a publ i c body may close a <br />meeting to evaluate the <br />performance of an individual <br />who is sUbject to its <br />author i ty . The pub 1 i c body <br />shall identify the individual <br />to be evaluated prior to <br />closing a meeting. At its <br />next open meeti ng, the publi c <br />body shall summari ze its <br />conclusions regarding the <br />evaluation. A meeting must be <br />open at the request of the <br />individual who is the subject <br />of the meeting. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />There are also two other narrow <br />exceptions to the Open Meeting Law: <br />one for labor strategy di scussions and <br />one for attorney-client discussions <br />regarding pending litigation. <br /> <br />The statute requires the public <br />employer to schedule a closed meeting <br />in a prior open meeting. This <br />precludes a public employer from <br />scheduling a future closed meeting <br />during a closed meeting. In addition, <br />this section only allows discussion of <br />labor negotiation strategy. The public <br />employer may not discuss any other <br />business a this meeting. <br /> <br />In the event the public employer wishes <br />to hold a closed meeting, it must take <br />a number of steps to comply with the <br />statute. One of the requirements is <br />that the proceedings of a closed <br />meeti ng shall be tape recorded at the <br />expense of the governing body and shall <br />be preserved for two years after the <br />contract is signed and shall be made <br />available to the public after all labor <br />contracts are signed by the governing <br />body for the current budget period. <br /> <br />Thus, these tapes do not have to be <br />released until all labor contracts for <br />the current budget period are signed by <br />the public employer. In the event one <br />1 abor contract is not signed, it <br />appears that the pub 1 i c emp 1 oyer wi 11 <br />not have to make any tapes of 1 abor <br />negotiations available to anyone until <br />the contract is signed, even if the <br />contents of the tapes deal wi th 1 abor <br />negotiations for a different labor <br />contract. <br /> <br />The second narrow exception to the Open <br />Meeting Law allows closed meetings for <br />attorney-client discussions regarding <br />pending litigation. This exception had <br />been long accepted by the Minnesota <br />Supreme Court and was added to the list <br />of Open Meeti ng exceptions in the <br /> <br />- 14 - <br />