2006_1031_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Chris Miller Ms. Dona Bacon October 26, 2006 Page 3 district court improperly decided a fact issue by making a finding on the Council members' "�easans" for using the interview technique that they chose. The key item noted by the Court of Appeals was that while the effect of the City's interview process may have frustrated the purpose of the Open Meeting Law, the rule of M__ _ober� recognizes a violation of the law only if the process was "designed" to avoid public meeting and discussion. The case went back to the district court, which resulted in the unreported decision also attached. The district court concluded that the City Council had relied on legal opinions of counsel, and had concluded that they would get more candid answers if the interviews were private. The district court therefore ruled that the process was not designed to avoid public hearings or to forge a majority in advance. It therefore ruled in favor of the City. This ruling was upheld on appeal. Thus we do have a case that has upheld non-public serial one-on-one interviews of fmalists for a position. While that is the case, I would candidly state to you that I am somewhat uncomfortable with the process. First, while the court upheld the process, the Court of Appeals' decisions do indicate that they believe the process violated the spirit and/or purpose of the Open Meeting Law. However, as courts are required to do, they ruled on the basis of the standard of law that the Supreme Court had laid down in Mober�, which does not relate to whether the spirit of the law was violated, but whether there was an intent to violate the law and avoid public discussion. I believe that the City Council in this case can do better than North Mankato and act in accordance with the spirit of the law. Second, while the court upheld the action of the City Council, this was after litigation that had gone on for the better part of four years. I see no need for the City to take action that could result in someone claiming there had been a violation of the law, and get embroiled in litigation. Finally, I am not so sure that I agree that one-on-one interviews have to be private in order for a finalist for a City Manager position to give candid answers. These individuals are generally experienced, knowledgeable about Open Meeting Law issues, and understand that the public has an interest in the person who might become the City Manager. They come ready and willing to answer all questions. While the "candid" argument sounds good, and it gives a basis for taking the action North Mankato took, I am not so certain that anything is gained from it. Certainly this is not to say that the one-on-one interview process may not be valuable, and give the Council members a better feel for the candidates. The question I am dealing with here is whether they should be public or private. Ultimately, I believe they should be public.