2024-02-06 P & Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RELEVANT LINKS: Mankato Free Press v. City of The Minnesota Court of Appeals considered a situation where individual North Mankato, 563 N.W.2d council members conducted separate, serial interviews of candidates for a 291 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). city position in one-on-one closed interviews. The district court found that no “meeting” of the council had occurred because there was never a quorum of the council present during the interviews. However, the court of appeals sent the case back to the district court for a determination of whether the council members had conducted the interview process in a serial fashion to avoid the requirements of the open meeting law. Mankato Free Press v. City of On remand, the district court found that the individual interviews were not North Mankato, No. C9-98- done to avoid the requirements of the open meeting law. This decision 677 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 15, 1998) (unpublished decision). was also appealed, and the court of appeals affirmed the district court’s decision. Cities that want to use this type of interview process with job applicants should first consult their city attorney. 6. Training sessions Compare St. Cloud It is not clear whether the participation of a quorum or more of the Newspapers, Inc. v. Dist. 742 members of a city council in a training program would be defined as a Community Schools, 332 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1983) and meeting under the open meeting law. The determining factor would likely A.G. Op. 63a-5 (Feb. 5, be whether the program includes a discussion of general training 1975). DPO 16-006. information or a discussion of specific matters relating to an individual city. A.G. Op. 63a-5 (Feb. 5, The attorney general has advised that a city council’s participation in a 1975). DPO 16-006. non-public training program devoted to developing skills was not a meeting subject to the open meeting law. The commissioner of the Department of Administration has likewise advised that a school board’s participation in a non-public team-building session to “improve trust, relationships, communications, and collaborative problem solving among Board members,” was not a meeting subject to the open meeting law if the members are not “gathering to discuss, decide, or receive information as a group relating to ‘the official business’ of the governing body.” However, the opinion also advised that if there were to be any discussion of specific official business by the attending members, either outside or during training sessions, it could be a violation of the open meeting law. 7. Telephone, email, and social media Moberg v. Indep. Sch. Dist. It is possible that communication through telephone calls, email, or other No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510 technology could violate the open meeting law. (Minn. 1983). League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 7/11/2023 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 23