2024-04-03 P & R Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RELEVANT LINKS: However, not-public data may generally be discussed at an open meeting without liability or penalty if both of the following criteria are met: Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. The disclosure relates to a matter within the scope of the public body’s 1(b). authority. The disclosure is necessary to conduct the business or agenda item before the public body. Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. Data that is discussed at an open meeting retains its original classification 1(c). under the MGDPA. However, a record of the meeting is public, regardless of the form. It is suggested that not-public data that is discussed at an open meeting not be specificallydetailed in the minutes. 2.Interviews Channel 10, Inc. v. Indep. The Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that a school board must Sch. Dist. No. 709,215 interview prospective employees for administrative positions in open N.W.2d 814 (Minn. 1974). sessions.The court reasoned that the absence of a statutory exception indicated that the Legislature intended such sessions to be open. As a result, a cityAs a result, a citycouncilshould conduct any interviews of prospective should conduct any interviews of prospective should conduct any interviews of prospective officers and employees at an open meeting if a quorum or more of the officers and employees at an open meeting if a quorum or more of the council will be present. 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 requirementsof 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 Dec. 15, 1998)(unpublished decision).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 should first consult their city attorney. 3.Informational meetings and committees St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that informational seminars about Dist. 742 Community Schools, school-board business, which the entire board attends, must be noticed 332 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1983). and open to the public. League ofMinnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities7/11/2023 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and OrdinancesChapter7| Page 20