Laserfiche WebLink
RELEVANT LINKS: <br />Jacobsen v. Nagel, 255 <br />Minn. 300, 96 N.W.2d 569 <br />(Minn. 1959). <br />To constitute malfeasance or nonfeasance, a public official’s conduct must <br />affect the performance of official duties and must relate to something of a <br />substantial nature directly affecting the rights and interests of the public. <br />Jacobsen v. Nagel , 255 <br />Minn. 300, 96 N.W.2d 569 <br />(Minn. 1959). Claude v. <br />Collins, 518 N.W.2d 836 <br />(Minn. 1994). <br />“Malfeasance” refers to evil conduct or an illegal deed. “Nonfeasance” is <br />described as neglect or refusal, without sufficient excuse, to perform what <br />is a public officer’s legal duty to perform. More likely than not, a violation <br />of the open meeting law would be in the nature of nonfeasance. Although <br />good faith does not nullify a violation, good faith is relevant in <br />determining whether a violation amounts to nonfeasance. <br />Sullivan v. Credit River <br />Township, 299 Minn. 170, <br />217 N.W.2d 502 (Minn. <br />1974). Hubbard <br />Broadcasting, Inc. v. City of <br />Afton, 323 N.W.2d 757 <br />(Minn. 1982). In re D & A <br />Truck Line, Inc., 524 N.W.2d <br />1 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). Lac <br />Qui Parle-Yellow Bank <br />Watershed Dist. v. <br />Wollschlager, No. C6-96- <br />1023 (Minn. Ct. App. Nov. <br />12, 1996) (unpublished <br />opinion). IPAD 11-004. <br />The open meeting law does not address whether actions taken at a meeting <br />that does not comply with its requirements would be valid. Minnesota <br />courts have generally refused to invalidate actions taken at an improperly <br />closed meeting. <br />Quast v. Knutson, 276 Minn. <br />340, 150 N.W.2d 199 (Minn. <br />1967). <br />But the Minnesota Supreme Court has held that an attempted school <br />district consolidation was fatally defective when the initiating resolution <br />was adopted at a meeting that was not open to the public. <br /> III. Meeting procedures <br /> A. Citizen involvement <br /> Any person may observe council meetings. In fact, the council should <br />encourage citizen attendance to help raise awareness of the city’s problems <br />and help create support for programs suggested by the council. <br />Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. <br />6. Citizens must be able to hear the discussion at a meeting, and must be able <br />to determine who votes for or against a motion. One copy of the agenda <br />and of all materials made available to the council must be made available <br />to the audience unless doing so would violate the Minnesota Government <br />Data Practices Act. <br /> <br /> <br />Minn. Stat. § 412.191, subd. <br />2. <br />Although anyone can attend council meetings, citizens cannot speak or <br />otherwise participate in any discussions unless the mayor or the presiding <br />officer recognizes them for this purpose. The decision to recognize <br />speakers is usually up to the mayor or presiding officer, but the council <br />can overrule this decision. The council can, through a motion, decide to <br />hear one or more speakers from the audience. <br />League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 10/2/2014 <br />Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 25