Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />February 18, 2003 <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />4. Meetings subject to the attorney/client privilege, which has been narrowly <br />construed in regard to public clients so that it only applies to meetings at <br />which litigation is discussed; and <br /> <br />5. Meetings to discuss labor negotiation strategy, but only if a majority of the <br />council votes at a public meeting to conduct such session at a closed meeting, <br /> <br />The Open Meeting Law does not define the terms "meeting" or "open to the public". <br />Therefore, the Minnesota Supreme Court and the Minnesota Appellate Court have <br />interpreted those terms. <br /> <br />1. The term "meeting" means a gathering of a quorum or more of the members <br />of a governing body or a committee of the governing body at which members <br />discuss, decide or receive information as a group on issues relating to the <br />official business of the governing body5, <br /> <br />(a) <br /> <br />The terms "gathering" and "as a group" seem to imply a physical <br />presence where council members discuss city business, What about <br />circumstances where the official business of the city is discussed by <br />means of correspondence, telephone calls, voice mail or e-mail? <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />In 1983, the Minnesota Supreme Court stated that the statute did not <br />apply to letters or telephone conversations between fewer than a <br />quorum, but in the same opinion the Court stated that "serial meetings <br />in groups of less than a quorum for the purpose of avoiding public <br />hearings or fashioning an agreement on an issue may also be found to be <br />in violation of the statute depending upon the facts of an individual <br />case". Ten years later, the Minnesota Appellate Court stated that <br />meetings of less than a quorum may violate the open meeting law if held <br />to avoid public discussion, to forge a majority view in advance of a <br />public meeting, or to hide improper influence6, <br /> <br />What can be accomplished at a physical gathering can also be <br />accomplished by other means of communication, Based upon the <br /> <br />SMoberg v. Independent School District #281, 1983, 336 NW 2nd 510; St. Cloud <br />Newspapers, supra; Op, Attv. Gen, 474-e, October 28, 1974; Op, Attv. Gen. 63-a-5, <br />October 28, 1974 <br /> <br />6Sovereign v, Dunn, App, 1993, 498 NW 2nd 62, review denied <br /> <br />e <br />