6 (b) Open Meeting Law - Discussion

Home Browse Search

RELEVANT LINKS: I. Penalties Minn.Stat§ 13D.06,subd.2. An action to enforce the open meeting law may be brought by any person in O'Keefe v.Carter.No.Al2- 0811(Minn.Ct.App.Dec. any court of competent jurisdiction where the administrative office of the 31,2012)(unpublished governing body is located. In an unpublished decision,the court of appeals decision).Minn.Stat.§ 541.07(2). concluded that this broad grant of jurisdiction authorized a member of a town board to bring an action against his own town board for alleged violations of the open meeting law.This same decision also concluded that a two-year statute of limitations applies to lawsuits under the open meeting law. Minn.Stat.§ 13D.06,subds. A councilmember who intentionally violates the open meeting law can be 1,4. subject to personal liability in the form of a civil penalty of up to$300. The city may not pay this penalty.A court may take into account a councilmember's time and experience in office to determine the amount of the penalty. Minn.Stat§13D.06,subd.4. In addition, a court may award reasonable costs, disbursements, and attorney See LMC information memo, LMCIT Liability Coverage fees of up to $13,000 to the person who brought the violation to court.The Guide,Section III-M,Open court may award costs and attorney fees to a city only if the action is found meeting law and bankruptcy lawsuits,for information to be frivolous and without merit.A city may pay for any costs, about insurance coverage for disbursements,and attorney fees awarded. lawsuits under the open meeting law. Minn.Stat 13D.06,subd.4. If a plaintiff prevails in a lawsuit under the open meeting law,an award of reasonable attorney fees is mandatory if the court determines the public body was the subject of a prior written advisory opinion from the commissioner of the Department of Administration, and the court finds that the opinion is directly related to the lawsuit and that the public body did not act in conformity with the opinion.A court is required to give deference to the advisory opinion in a lawsuit brought to determine whether the open meeting law was violated. Minn.Stat.§13D.06,subd.4 No monetary penalties or attorney fees may be awarded against a member of (d).C6-95-2436 5-2436ll v.Murray,App. a public body unless the court finds there was intent to violate the open C6-95-2436(Minn.Ct.App. p y p Aug.6,1996)(unpublished meeting law. decision).Elseth v.Hille,No. Al2-1496(Minn.Ct.App. May 13,2013)(unpublished opinion). Minn.Stat.§13D.06,subd.3. If a person is found to have intentionally violated this chapter in three or Claude v.Collins,518 N.W.2d 836(Minn.1994). more separate actions,the person must be removed from office and may not Brown v.Cannon Falls serve in any other capacity with that public body for a period of time equal Township,723 N.W.2d 31 (Minn.Ct.App.2006). to the term of office the person was serving. Minn.Stat.§ 13D.06,subd.3 If a court finds a separate,third violation that is unrelated to the previous (b)and(c). violations, it must declare the position vacant and notify the appointing authority or clerk of the governing body. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 11/9/2015 Meetings of City Councils Page 23