2008_1110_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Information Policy Analysis Division Web Site of the cases will be discussed and analyzed In turn. the first case,, Minnesota Daily, v., Unil"Versity of Minnesota, 432 N.W.2d 189 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988), involved the Presidential Search Advisory Committee (P AC that was created. In 19,818 to, provide advice and consultation to the regents of the University on the selection of the next president. P C was mmalde. up of faculty., student ands staff members and its duties included the screening of applicants and creating a short list of finalists. PA's decisions were subject to review by the regents. At open meetings, PSAC established general procedures and adopted an evaluation system for candidates. Once specific candidates were to be discussed, P C meetings were closed. The Minnesota Daily sued alleging violations of the DIAL. The district court found that the 01 ML, did not apply to p C as it was not a committee of the regents., The Court of Appeals agreed finding that PSAC did not have the power to decide who the new university president would be and so was not transacting the public's business. As a result, P C did not have to comply with the L. 4P 4P 9 1P VP lot sk 0 0 In order to complete these tasks,, the standing committees of the Board will need to receive Inrormation and analyze It in order to make recommendations to the Boarid. The very nature of this process requires that the standing committees m�akel decisions about what should or should not be communicated to the (Board. Ms. Workman 'Indicated that when a comm-ittee has considered an issue, there Is. very little discussion by the IB,oa rd about that. issue. This appears to 'Indicate that the Board has dlelegated to the committees the responsibility to make recommendations on which the Board will act without much deliberation. This is the type of conduct that the Minnesota Supreme Court warned governing bodies to avoid when using committees. See Moberg v. Independent School District No., 281, 336 N, W, 510r 517 (Minn. 1983),, Given the nature of the work assigned to the standing committees and the level of responsibility placed in them by the Board,, the committees are transacting public business and so must comply with the OML,, Sovereign v. Dunn, 498 N-W,.2d Linn. Ct. App. 1993) is the second case referred to by the Board as supporting its conclusion that the OML does not apply to its standing committee So s., Kenneth vereign alleged that the City of'Lake Elmo had violated the. O when the mayor and a member of the city council attended a series of mediation sessions that were not open to the public. The purpose oftbe mediation sessions was to resolve an annexation dispute between Lake Elmo and the City of Oakdale. In upholding the district court's disc issa-1 of the action, the Court of Appeals http://www.ipad.st'atle,mn,.u,S/OP,,i'ni'ons/2005/05014.htmi 3/31/2007