This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued under Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2024). It is based on the facts and information available to the Commissioner as described below.

Facts and Procedural History:

Cheryl Neilon (Neilon) asked for an advisory opinion regarding the Twin Lakes City Council’s (Council) conduct under the Open Meeting Law (OML), Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D. The Council did not provide comments in response to this advisory opinion request.

A summary of the facts is as follows:

On June 3, 2025, the Council held an emergency meeting to approve a contract with MMS Environmental to perform wastewater services. The meeting minutes state:

Mayor Prestholt opened the meeting, stating we were there to hire MMS to do our water and sewer sampling and to keep us in compliance with the State. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency gal . . . . has been talking with the Mayor and she told him that we have to get this done as soon as possible. The Mayor said there is an open window for draining the sewer ponds as the water is correct and right. He said we’ve got to get the samples taken and mailed in.

At this meeting, one member abstained and the remaining members voted to approve the contract.

Neilon also provided a copy of the Council’s June 3 meeting minutes as well as a copy of the City’s contract with MMS Environmental to perform regular wastewater services for three years.

Issue:

Discussion:

The OML requires meetings of public bodies to be open to the public, with limited exceptions. The Legislature did not define “meeting” in the OML, but the Minnesota Supreme Court has determined that a meeting subject to the OML “are those gatherings of a quorum or more members of the governing body … at which members discuss, decide or receive information as a group on issues relating to the official business of that governing body.” Moberg v. Independent School District No. 281, 336 N.W.2d 510, 518 (Minn. 1983).

The Minnesota Supreme Court has stated that the OML will be interpreted in favor of public access and transparency. Specifically, in Prior Lake American v. Mader, 642 N.W. 2d 729 (Minn. 2002), it noted that “[b]ecause the Open Meeting Law was enacted for public benefit, we construe it in favor of public access.” The Court also stated the OML “will be liberally construed in order to protect the public’s right to full access to the decision-making process of public bodies governed by [the law]” St. Cloud Newspapers, Inc. v. Dist. 742 Cmty. Schs., 332 N.W. 2d 1, 6 (Minn. 1983).

One of the mechanisms to ensure a public body’s meetings are open to the public and transparent is to provide appropriate notice of its meetings as is required by Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.04. This section details how public bodies must provide notice for three different types of meetings. First, subdivision 1 requires public bodies keep a schedule of its regular meetings on file at its primary offices. No other notice for a regular meeting is required. Next, for a special meeting that is not on the regular meeting schedule, or a rescheduled regular meeting, subdivision 2 requires that a public body post a written notice of the date, time, place and purpose of the meeting on the principal bulletin board, or if there is not bulletin board, on the door of its usual meeting room. This notice must be posted at least three days before the meeting. Additionally, the public body must deliver a notice for this special meeting to any person who requested in writing to be notified of these meetings. A public body may publish this notice in an official newspaper in place of delivering these individual notices. Subdivision 3 describes the third and final type of meeting as an emergency meeting, which only requires that the public body make a good faith effort to notify news media that filed a written request to receive notice of an emergency meeting.

The notification requirements for emergency meetings are limited given that these meetings, by their very nature, are held to address issues that require immediate consideration by the public body. Section 13D.04, subdivision 3 defines an emergency meeting as “. . . a special meeting called because of circumstances that, in the judgment of the public body, require immediate consideration by the public body.” Under this definition, the subject matter of an emergency meeting is such that the three-day notice required for a special meeting is not possible. Additionally, the Commissioner has previously stated that public bodies should hold emergency meetings only in rare circumstances where public safety is at risk. Examples of emergency situations would include holding a meeting to respond to a natural disaster, or a health epidemic caused by an event such as an accident or a terrorist activity. (See Advisory Opinions 06-027 and 12-004.)

The Commissioner is limited to the information presented to her. From the information provided, it does not appear that the City’s need to sign a contract required immediate attention, or that waiting the three days required to notice and hold a special meeting would jeopardize public safety. If the City’s water issues created a public safety concern that required immediate approval of the contract, then holding an emergency meeting would have been appropriate under 13D.04, subd. 3. However, the minutes for the June 3 meeting only indicate that the Council wished to sign the contract with MMS Environmental to perform regular wastewater services to comply with other state requirements regarding its water services quickly. Given the Supreme Court’s direction that the OML must be interpreted in favor of public access, the Council’s decision to hold an emergency meeting on June 3 to discuss this contract did not comply with the OML.

Opinion:

Based on the facts and information provided, the Commissioner’s opinion on the issue is as follows:

Members of the Twin Lakes City Council did not comply with the Open Meeting Law, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13D, when they held an emergency meeting on June 3, 2025 to consider a contract.

Signed:

Tamar Gronvall
Commissioner

September 3, 2025