Laserfiche WebLink
RELEVANT LINKS: <br />Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. <br />A closed meeting held to discuss any of the not public data listed above <br />1(d). <br />must be electronically recorded, and the recording must be preserved for at <br />least three years after the meeting. <br />Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. <br />Other not public data may be discussed at an open meeting without liability <br />1 (b), (c). <br />DPo 09-012. <br />or penalty if the disclosure relates to a matter within the scope of the public <br />body's authority, and it is reasonably necessary to conduct the business or <br />agenda item before the public body. The public body, however, should <br />make reasonable efforts to protect the data from disclosure. Data discussed <br />at an open meeting retains its original classification; however, a record of <br />the meeting shall be public. <br />3. Misconduct allegations or charges <br />Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, <br />A public body must close one or more meetings for "preliminary <br />subds. 1(d), 2(b). DPO 03- <br />020. (Advising that when a <br />consideration" of allegations or charges of misconduct against an individual <br />meeting is closed under this <br />subject to its authority. This type of meeting must be open at the request of <br />exception, Minn. Stat. § <br />13.43, subd. 2 requires the <br />the individual who is the subject of the meeting. <br />government entity to <br />identify the individual who <br />is being discussed). <br />If the public body concludes discipline of any nature may be warranted, <br />further meetings or hearings relating to the specific charges or allegations <br />that are held after that conclusion is reached must be open. This type of <br />meeting must be electronically recorded, and the recording must be <br />preserved for at least three years after the meeting. <br />DPo 14-004. <br />The commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Administration has <br />advised that a city could not close a meeting under this exception to <br />consider allegations of misconduct against a job applicant who had been <br />extended a conditional offer of employment. The job applicant was not a <br />city employee. <br />The commissioner reasoned that the city council had no authority to <br />discipline the job applicant or to direct his actions in any way; therefore, he <br />was not "an individual subject to its authority." <br />DPo 10-001. <br />The commissioner has also advised that a recording of a closed meeting for <br />Minn. Stat. § 13.43. <br />preliminary consideration of misconduct allegations is private personnel <br />data under Minn. Stat. § 13.43, subd. 4, and is accessible to the subject of <br />the data but not to the public. The commissioner noted that at some point in <br />time, some or all of the data on the recording may become public under <br />Minn. Stat. § 13.43, subd. 2. <br />For example, if the employee is disciplined and there is a final disposition, <br />certain personnel data becomes public. <br />League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 8/30/2022 <br />Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 1 Page 16 <br />