My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2024-02-06 P & Z Packet
Centerville
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Agenda Packets
>
2024
>
2024-02-06 P & Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/31/2024 7:37:44 AM
Creation date
1/31/2024 7:37:36 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
59
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
RELEVANT LINKS: <br /> <br />To constitute malfeasance or nonfeasance, a public official’s conduct must <br />Jacobsen v. Nagel, 255 Minn. <br />affect the performance of official duties and must relate to something of a <br />300, 96 N.W.2d 569 (1959). <br /> <br />substantial nature directly affecting the rights and interests of the public. <br />Jacobsen v. Nagel , 255 <br />“Malfeasance” refers to evil conduct or an illegal deed. “Nonfeasance” is <br />Minn. 300, 96 N.W.2d 569 <br />described as neglect or refusal, without sufficient excuse, to perform what <br />(1959). Claude v. Collins, 518 <br />N.W.2d 836 (Minn. 1994). <br />is a public officer’s legal duty to perform. More likely than not, a <br />violation of the open meeting law would be in the nature of nonfeasance. <br />Although 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 Twp., <br />The open meeting law does not address whether actions taken at a meeting <br />299 Minn. 170, 217 N.W.2d <br />that does not comply with its requirements would be valid. <br />502 (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). <br />Sullivan v. Credit River <br />Minnesota courts have generally refused to invalidate actions taken at an <br />Township, 217 N.W.2d 502 <br />improperly closed meeting because this is not a remedy the open meeting <br />(Minn. 1974). Lac Qui Parle- <br />Yellow Bank Watershed Dist. <br />law provides. <br />v. Wollschlager, No. C6-96- <br />1023 (Minn. Ct. App. Nov. <br />12, 1996) (unpublished <br />decision). DPO 11-004. <br />Quast v. Knutson, 276 Minn. <br />But the Minnesota Supreme Court has held that an attempted school <br />340, 150 N.W.2d 199 (1967). <br />district consolidation was fatally defective when the initiating resolution <br />was adopted at a meeting that was not open to the public. <br /> <br />III.Meeting procedures <br /> <br />A. Citizen involvement <br /> <br />Any person may observe council meetings. In fact, the council should <br />encourage citizen attendance to help raise awareness of the city’s <br />problems and help create support for programs suggested by the council. <br />Minn. Stat. § 13D.01, subd. 6. <br />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. <br />DPO 08-015. DPO 17-006. <br />One copy of any printed materials relating to the agenda items of the <br />meeting that have been distributed or made available to all members of the <br />council must be made available to the audience unless doing so would <br />violate the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. <br /> <br />Although anyone can attend council meetings, citizens cannot speak or <br /> <br />otherwise participate in any discussions unless the mayor or the presiding <br />Minn. Stat. § 412.191, subd. <br />2. <br />officer recognizes them for this purpose. <br />League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 7/11/2023 <br />Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 | Page 28 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.