6 (b) Open Meeting Law - Discussion

Home Browse Search

RELEVANT LINKS: See section II.G.6.-Serial The Supreme Court concluded that the absence of a statutory exception to meetings. the open meeting law for interviews indicated that the legislature had decided that such sessions should not be closed.The reasoning would seem to apply to a city council's interview of prospective officers and employees as well, if a quorum is present. M North ankato res.V.Cit of In 1996, a district court found that it was not a violation of the open meeting 100036(Fifth hid.Dist law for candidates to be serially interviewed by members of a city council in 1996). one-on-one closed interviews. In this case, five city councilmembers were present in the same building but each was conducting separate interviews in five different rooms. Because there was no quorum present in any of the rooms, the court found there was no meeting.The decision, however,was appealed. Mankato Free Press v.City of In 1997,the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed the district court's North Mankato,563 N.W.2d 291(Minn.Ct App.1997). decision and remanded the case back to the district court for a factual Mankato Free Press v.City of determination on whether the city used the one-on-one interview process in North Mankato,No.C9-98- 677(Minn.Ct App.Dec.15, order to avoid the requirements of the open meeting law.On remand,the 1998)(unpublished decision). district court found that the private interviews were not conducted for the purpose of avoiding public hearings.The case was again appealed. In an unpublished decision,the court of appeals affirmed the district court's decision. The conclusion that can be drawn from this decision appears to be that if serial meetings involving less than a quorum of a public body are held for the purpose of avoiding the requirements of the open meeting law, it will constitute a violation of the law.Cities that are considering holding private interviews with job applicants should first consult their city attorney. 3. Executive sessions A.G.Op.63-A-5(June 13, The attorney general has advised that executive sessions of a city council 1957).See also Minn.Stat. §13D.01,subd.1(b)(4). must be open to the public. 4. Informational meetings and committees St.Cloud Newspapers,Inc.v. The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that informational seminars about Dist.742 Community Schools,332 N.W.2d 1 school-board business,which the entire board attends,must be noticed and (Minn.1983). open to the public.As a result, it appears that any scheduled gathering of a quorum of a city council where it receives information about city business must be properly noticed and open to the public, regardless of whether the council takes or contemplates taking action at that gathering. In addition, many city councils create committees to make recommendations regarding a specific issue. Commonly, such a committee will be responsible for researching the issue and submitting a recommendation to the council for its approval.These committees are usually advisory, and the council is still responsible for making the final decision. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2015 Meetings of City Councils Page 17