Laserfiche WebLink
RELEVANT LINKS: <br />See Requesting an Open <br />Meeting Law Advisory <br />Opinion. <br />Minn. Stat. § 8.07. <br />See index of Attorney <br />General Advisory Opinions <br />from 1993 to present. <br />Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. <br />1. <br />Claude v. Collins, 518 <br />N.W.2d 836 (Minn. 1994). <br />Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. <br />2. <br />O'Keefe v. Carter, No. <br />Al2-0811 (Minn. Ct. App. <br />Dec. 31, 2012) <br />(unpublished decision). <br />Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. <br />4. See LMC information <br />memo, LMCIT Liability <br />Coverage Guide, for <br />information about insurance <br />coverage for lawsuits under <br />the open meeting law. <br />Minn. Stat. § 13D.06, subd. <br />4. <br />A public body, subject to the open meeting law, can request an advisory <br />opinion. A person who disagrees with the way members of a governing <br />body perform their duties under the open meeting law can also request an <br />advisory opinion. <br />2. Attorney General <br />The Minnesota Attorney General is authorized to issue written advisory <br />opinions to city attorneys on "questions of public importance." The <br />Attorney General has issued several advisory opinions on the open meeting <br />law. <br />J. Penalties <br />Any person who intentionally violates the open meeting law is subject to <br />personal liability in the form of a civil penalty of up to $300 for a single <br />occurrence. The public body may not pay the penalty. A court may consider <br />a council member's time and experience in office to determine the amount <br />of the civil penalty. <br />An action to enforce this penalty may be brought by any person in any <br />court of competent jurisdiction where the administrative office of the <br />governing body is located. <br />In an unpublished decision, the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that <br />this broad grant of jurisdiction authorized a member of a town board to <br />bring an action against his own town board for alleged violations of the <br />open meeting law. This same decision also concluded that a two-year <br />statute of limitations applies to lawsuits under the open meeting law. <br />The court may also award reasonable costs, disbursements, and attorney <br />fees of up to $13,000 to any party in an action alleging a violation of the <br />open meeting law. The court may award costs and attorney fees to a <br />defendant only if the action is found to be frivolous and without merit. <br />A public body may pay any costs, disbursements, or attorney fees incurred <br />by or awarded against any of its members. <br />If a party prevails in a lawsuit under the open meeting law, an award of <br />reasonable attorney fees is mandatory if the court determines that the public <br />body was the subject of a prior written advisory opinion from the <br />commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Administration, and the <br />court finds that the opinion is directly related to the lawsuit and that the <br />public body did not act in conformity with the opinion. A court is required <br />to give deference to the advisory opinion. <br />League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 8/30/2022 <br />Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 1 Page 25 <br />