Search Committees and the OML
I concluded my previous entry by saying that "it seems clear from the court's opinion that no one even questioned the fact the advisory committee was not subject to the Open Meeting Law."
The reason for this is simple -- it was already established case law from sixteen years earlier (Minnesota Daily v. University of Minnesota, 432 N.W.2d 189 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988)).
A legislative information brief about the Open Meeting Law explains, referencing this case (p. 4):
The reason for this is simple -- it was already established case law from sixteen years earlier (Minnesota Daily v. University of Minnesota, 432 N.W.2d 189 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988)).
A legislative information brief about the Open Meeting Law explains, referencing this case (p. 4):
The Minnesota Court of Appeals has held that the open meeting law does not apply to certain types of advisory groups. In that case, a presidential search advisory committee to the University of Minnesota Board of Regents was held not to be a committee of the governing body for purposes of the open meeting law. In reaching its holding, the court pointed out that no regents were on the search committee and that the committee had no power to set policy or make a final decision.
Labels: manager search, process
Post a Comment