Laserfiche WebLink
A.G.op.63a-5(Aug.28,1996) In a 1996 opinion,the Attorney General concluded that separate notice was <br /> not needed when a quorum of a city council attended the meeting of a properly <br /> noticed council committee. But it was suggested that notice of a special <br /> council meeting might be needed if the members were to participate in <br /> committee discussions or deliberations. <br /> 5. Chance or social gatherings <br /> SL Cloud Newspapers,Inc v. Chance or social gatherings of a quorum are not considered meetings under <br /> District 742 Carty.Sch.,332 the Open Meeting Law and are therefore exempt from it.However,a quorum <br /> N.w,za 1(Minn.1983) may not,as a group,discuss or receive information on official business in any <br /> Moberg v Independent sm.Dist setting under the guise of a social gathering. <br /> No.281,336 N.W.2d 510(Minn. <br /> 1983) <br /> Hubbard Broadcasting,Inc v. In a 1982 decision,the Minnesota Supreme Court held that a conversation <br /> City ofAflon,323 N.W.2d 757 between two councihnembers over lunch regarding an application for a special <br /> (Minn.1982) use permit did not violate the Open Meeting Law because a quorum was not <br /> present. <br /> A.G.Op.63a-5(Aug.28,1996) A committee meeting at which additional councilmembers attended as <br /> audience members,resulting in a quorum of councilmembers in attendance <br /> was found not to violate the Open Meeting Law.Because public notice had <br /> already been given for the committee meeting,additional separate notice of a <br /> special council meeting was not required,as long as the additional <br /> councilmembers did not participate in the discussion or deliberations. <br /> However,if the additional councilmembers had participated,notice of a <br /> special council meeting may have been required. <br /> 6. Serial gatherings <br /> Moberg V.Independent Sch.Disc The Minnesota Supreme Court has noted that meetings of less than a quorum <br /> No.281,336 N.W.2d 510(Minn. held serially to avoid public hearings or to fashion agreement on an issue may <br /> 1983) violate the open meeting law. In short,this type of situation is a circumvention <br /> Also see Part I1—G-Interviews of the statute.As such,councilmembers should avoid this type of practice. <br /> and Technology trouble <br /> Mankato Free Press v.City A 1997 Minnesota Court of Appeals decision would also support that serial <br /> of North Mankato,563 meetings could violate the Open Meeting Law.In this decision,the court <br /> N.W.2d <br /> > 291(Minn.App looked at a situation where the members of a city council conducted individual <br /> interviews of candidates in separate rooms.Although the district court found <br /> that no meetings had occurred because there was never a quorum of the <br /> council present,the court of appeals remanded the decision back to the district <br /> court for a determination of whether the councilmembers had used this <br /> interview process for the purpose of avoiding the Open Meeting Law <br /> requirements. <br /> Meetings of City Councils 23 <br />