Search Opinions
Browse Opinions by Date
Request an Opinion
Our Role
Help with searching
For a Topic Search use terms suggested on our Topics page. Please note that clicking the "Browse Topics" link on the Search Opinions tab will take you away from the search page to a different page, which will lose any existing search results or data that has been entered into search boxes. If you plan to search by topic, we recommend selecting your topic first, and complete any additional fields in the search form after that.
For a simple search, type a few words or a phrase in the Full Text search box, then hit Enter or click the Search button. Your search query can be a single word, multiple words separated by spaces, or it can use more advanced syntax described in the FAQ below. Try to use words that are likely to be unique to the content you're looking for.
Note: For best results when searching for a particular citation, spell out the section and subdivision. For example, “13.43, subdivision 4.”
About Search Results
The advisory opinion library currently includes:
- Data practices advisory opinions issued by the Commissioner of Administration from 1993 to the present.
- Open Meeting Law advisory opinions issued by the Commissioner of Administration from 2003 to the present.
The Commissioner's authority is found in Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072. Opinions are nonbinding, but a court may give them deference in a court action. Parties to a court action that act in conformity with an advisory opinion are not liable for certain damages or attorneys fees.
A written, numbered, and published opinion issued by the attorney general shall take precedence over an advisory opinion issued by the Commissioner of Administration.
Results 1 - 10 of 96
Advisory Opinion 25-002
March 27, 2025; Murray County Board of Commissioners
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2024). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A member of the public asked whether a county board of commissioners violated the Open Meeting Law when all commissioners gathered to tour a county building with potential tenants. The Commissioner could not determine whether the board violated the OML because there was a factual dispute over whether the board held the tour immediately after it adjourned a regular meeting or the board announced the time and place of the tour, recessed its regular meeting, and reconvened its regular meeting for the tour. If the board adjourned its regular meeting, then the board violated the OML because it did not appropriately notice a special meeting of the commissioners gathering to tour the building. If the board announced the time and place of the meeting before recessing the meeting, then the board did not violate the OML when meeting for the tour because it met the requirements of section 13D.04, subdivision 4(a).
Category: Open Meeting Law
Keywords: Open Meeting Law,
Commissioner: Tamar Gronvall
Advisory Opinion 25-001
March 11, 2025; Woodrow Township Board of Supervisors
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2024). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A member of the public asked whether a Township Board violated the Open Meeting Law when it selected a new Supervisor outside of an open meeting. The Board filled scoring sheets for candidates during a meeting, and those sheets were later tabulated to select the individual to fill the open position. The Commissioner opined that as the interviews were conducted at an open meeting, the scoring sheets were required to be public at the meeting.
Category: Open Meeting Law
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Journal of votes, ballots
Commissioner: Tamar Gronvall
Advisory Opinion 23-005
November 14, 2023; Woodbury City Council
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2022). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A member of the public asked whether a city council violated the Open Meeting Law when it closed a meeting on the basis of attorney-client privilege to discuss a contract it had with a local school district and decide whether to break it. The Commissioner opined that the council violated the OML because a public body cannot close a meeting for attorney-client privilege purposes when there was no threatened or pending litigation. The Commissioner noted the threat that litigation may be a result of a public body deciding a matter one way or the other is not sufficient justification to close a meeting, and therefore the public's right to hear the discussion about the contract outweighed the need for absolute confidentiality.
Category: Open Meeting Law, Closed meetings
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Closed meetings, Attorney-client privilege
Commissioner: Tamar Gronvall
Advisory Opinion 23-004
October 3, 2023; City of Fertile
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2022). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A data subject asked whether a city council violated the Open Meeting Law when it held multiple closed sessions under Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.05 subd. 2(b), to discuss allegations against an individual subject to its authority. The data subject also asked whether a city responded appropriately to a request for data made under Minnesota Statutes, section 13.04. The Commissioner opined that the Council did not comply with the Open Meeting Law when it held closed meetings under section 13D.05 subd. 2(b), as it had previously determined that discipline may be warranted and discussed matters outside the scope of closure permitted by the section. Additionally, the Commissioner concluded that the City did not respond appropriately to a request from the data subject because it did not provide access to the data within ten business days, as required by section 13.04.
Category: Open Meeting Law, Closed meetings, Requests for data, Data subjects
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Closed meetings, Requests for data, Data subjects, Timeliness of response to data subject - immediately or ten business days, Recording meetings
Commissioner: Stacie Christensen Temporary
Advisory Opinion 23-003
September 7, 2023; Crosslake City Council
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2022). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: Members of the public asked whether a city council violated the Open Meeting Law when it discussed topics during a special meeting that were not described in the special meeting notice's purpose. The Commissioner opined that the council did not provide appropriate notice of its special meeting because the purpose in the notice failed to describe all topics that councilmembers discussed.
Category: Open Meeting Law, Meeting notice
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Meeting notice, Special meeting notice
Commissioner: Stacie Christensen Temporary
Advisory Opinion 22-009
December 8, 2022; Modern Montessori Charter School
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2022). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A member of the public asked whether the school board of a charter school violated the Open Meeting Law when it did not record the closed portion of a meeting and whether the board provided appropriate notice of the purpose of a special meeting. The board acknowledged it failed to record the closed meeting at issue as required by the OML and described steps it would take to avoid similar situation in the future. The Commissioner opined that the board did not provide appropriate notice of the special meeting's purpose because the notice indicated the board would hold closed session "for preliminary consideration of allegations or charges against an individual subject to the board's authority." However, the board violated the OML when it moved beyond the stated purpose of a "preliminary consideration" when it also voted to impose discipline on the individual.
Category: Open Meeting Law, Closed meetings, Meeting notice
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Closed meetings, Meeting notice, Special meeting notice, Recording meetings
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis
Advisory Opinion 22-008
December 2, 2022; Thomson Township Board of Supervisors
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2022). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A member of the public asked whether a township board of supervisors violated the Open Meeting Law when it closed a meeting to review applications to appoint a new board supervisor. The board maintained that its meeting was properly closed under Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.05, subdivision 3(a) because it was reviewing applicant data of individuals who voluntarily placed themselves under the Board’s authority. The Commissioner opined that section 13D.05, subd. 3(a) permits public bodies to close meetings only to “evaluate the performance of individuals” rather than to discuss general personnel issues, such as hiring or appointment decisions. Therefore, the board closing its meeting to review applications violated the Open Meeting Law.
Category: Open Meeting Law, Closed meetings
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Closed meetings, Individual performance, Individual subject to authority
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis
Advisory Opinion 22-004
July 15, 2022; Hillman Township Board of Supervisors
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2021). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A member of the public asked whether a township board of supervisors violated the Open Meeting Law when a quorum of the board held a private discussion before its noticed meeting, and whether the board violated the OML when it did not provide access to public meeting materials during its meeting. The Commissioner opined that if the board discussed public business before its noticed meeting, it violated the OML. The Commissioner further opined that the board violated the OML when it failed to provide access to public meeting materials in the meeting room pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.01, subdivision 6.
Category: Open Meeting Law
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Members materials, Quorum
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis
Advisory Opinion 22-002
March 22, 2022; Turtle Lake Township Board of Supervisors
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2021). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A member of the public asked whether a township board of supervisors violated the Open Meeting Law when it directed him to access its record of votes that were contained in meeting minutes posted on its website. The Commissioner opined that the board violated the Open Meeting Law because the plain language of Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.01, subdivision 5 requires a public body to provide access to its voting record in the location where it is maintained regardless of the availability of the records online.
Category: Open Meeting Law
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Journal of votes, ballots, Townships
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis
Advisory Opinion 21-004
May 7, 2021; Windemere Town Board of Supervisors
This is an opinion of the Commissioner of Administration issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13.072 (2020). It is based on the facts and information ...
Description: A member of the public asked for recordings of a township board of supervisors meetings closed for labor negotiations pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 13D.03. The Board argued that members voted to post the recordings to the Township website and to make them available upon request, but it was unclear from the facts whether the Board actually made the recordings available. The Commissioner opined that the Board members did not comply if they did not make the recordings “available” to the public after it had signed all of the contracts for the current budget period.
Category: Open Meeting Law
Keywords: Open Meeting Law, Open meeting, Closed meetings, Record of meeting, Recording meetings, Labor negotiations, Open Meeting Law, Open Meeting Law (Ch.13D / 471.075) (See also: Public Meetings)
Commissioner: Alice Roberts-Davis;
Refine your search
Filter By Keywords
- All Results
- Open Meeting Law (95)
- Closed meetings (36)
- Personnel data (15)
- Meeting notice (13)
- Printed materials (11)
- Special meeting notice (10)
- Employee evaluation summary (8)
- Entities subject to (8)
- Notice (8)
- Open meeting (8)
- Attorney-client privilege (7)
- Journal of votes, ballots (6)
- Recording meetings (6)
- School boards (6)
- Individual performance (5)
- Interpretation of meeting (5)
- Record of meeting (5)
- Statement on record (5)
- Labor negotiations (4)
- Quorum (4)
- Townships (4)
- Email (3)
- Legislative authority and intent (3)
- Requests for data (3)
- Serial meetings (3)
- Statutory construction (Ch. 645) (3)
- Voting (3)