Advisory Opinion 10-012
April 23, 2010; Middle Snake Tamarac Rivers Watershed District Board
Background & Issues
A watershed district board established a litigation subcommittee consisting of three of its seven members to discuss legal issues with its attorney in closed sessions. A former board member asked whether this subcommittee was required to comply with state open meeting laws.
Commissioner Decision
The Commissioner determined that the board's litigation subcommittee is subject to the open meeting law and must follow its requirements.
Automated synopsis generated for quick reference only — it has not been reviewed word-for-word against the official record and is not legal advice. Always review the full opinion text below for the Commissioner's actual determination, or see the original document on mn.gov. Think this summary misstates the opinion? Report it.
Excerpted Ruling / ConclusionBased on the facts and information provided, the Commissioner's opinion on the issue Mr. Elseth raised is as follows:
The litigation committee or subcommittee of the Middle Snake Tamarac Rivers Watershed District Board (MSTRWDB) is subject to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D.
April 23, 2010; Middle Snake Tamarac Rivers Watershed District Board
4/23/2010 10:15:43 AM
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to section 13.072 of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13 - the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. It is based on the facts and information available to the Commissioner as described below.
Facts and Procedural History:
On March 10, 2010, the Information Policy Analysis Division (IPAD) received an email from Elden Elseth. In his email, Mr. Elseth asked the Commissioner to issue an advisory opinion regarding the Middle Snake Tamarac Rivers Watershed District Board (MSTRWDB) and the Open Meeting Law (OML), Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D. Mr. Elseth submitted the $200.00 fee required by Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072. IPAD, on behalf of the Commissioner, wrote to Douglas Sorenson, Chairman of the Board, in a letter dated March 16, 2010, to notify Mr. Sorenson of her intent to issue the opinion and to give the members of the Board an opportunity to explain their position. On April 5, 2010, IPAD received a response, dated same, from Gerald Von Korff, an attorney representing the Board. A summary of the facts follows. In his opinion request, Mr. Elseth, a former member of the Board, wrote, [o]n October 15th, 2007, the MSTRWD Board of Managers established a litigation subcommittee' to discuss litigation matters coming before the watershed district. Three of the seven members of the board were appointed to this committee or subcommittee. Mr. Elseth stated: [a]ccording to the October 15, 2007 minutes . . . of the MSTRWD Board, the purpose of this subcommittee was to address litigation or potential litigations in scheduled, closed sessions, with the District's legal council [sic]. According to Mr. Von Korff, [t]he litigation committee was formed by the Managers upon our advice as a means of addressing attorney-client complications arising from the existence of three related litigations . . . . Mr. Von Korff stated that litigation committee meetings were conducted in compliance with the open meeting law. Issue:
Based on Mr. Elseth's opinion request, the Commissioner agreed to address the following issue:
Discussion:There is no dispute between the parties that the Middle Snake Tamarac Rivers Watershed District Board is subject to the Open Meeting Law. The issue before the Commissioner is whether the litigation committee is also subject to the OML. According to Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.01, subdivision 1, the OML applies to: All meetings, including executive sessions . . . (c) of any (1) committee, (2) subcommittee, . . . of a public body; The Legislature did not define meeting in Chapter 13D; however, in Moberg v. Independent School District No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510 (Minn. 1983), the Supreme Court wrote: Meetings subject to the requirements of [Chapter 13D] are those gatherings of a quorum or more members of the governing body, or a quorum of a committee, subcommittee, board, department, or commission thereof, at which members discuss, decide, or receive information as a group on issues relating to the official business of that governing body. Moberg at 518. Thus, based on the above, meetings of the litigation committee of the Board are subject to the OML. Opinion:Based on the facts and information provided, the Commissioner's opinion on the issue Mr. Elseth raised is as follows:
Signed: Sheila M. Reger
Dated: April 23, 2010 |