Categories: Municipal

New Medical Exception to Minnesota Open Meeting Law

Originally Published May 13, 2020

By Vince Rotty

Under the Minnesota Open Meeting Law (the “OML”), a municipality’s elected officials and commission, committee, board, etc. members are only able to remotely participate in public meetings under certain circumstances. When elected officials and members of a governing body participate in a meeting through interactive television means (e.g., videoconferencing), the OML requires that the person’s physical location be open to the public. The OML was recently amended to allow military servicemembers at a military location to remotely participate in public meetings without making their physical location open to the public.[1]

The OML was recently amended again to allow a remotely participating individual’s physical location to be closed to the public if “the member has been advised by a health care professional against being in a public place for personal or family medical reasons.”[2] This exception to in-person participation can only be used during a state of emergency declared under Minn. Stat. § 12.31 (National Security or Peacetime Emergency; Declaration) and for a period of 60 days thereafter.

It’s important to note that this new exception doesn’t modify the circumstances under which remote participation is allowed.[3] This new exception only affects the statutory requirement that an individual’s physical location be open to the public when the individual is remotely participating in a public meeting through interactive television means. Elected officials and members of a governing body must still be able to see and hear all discussion and testimony occurring at a public meeting and be seen and heard by all other elected officials or members of the governing body, and, members of public. Notice of the body’s regular meeting location and the remote location of any remote elected official or member must still be provided in compliance with Minn. Stat. § 13D.04.

It’s also important to note that this new exception doesn’t modify any other sections of the OML. Specifically, Minn. Stat. § 13D.021, which allows for remote public meetings to be conducted under emergency conditions, is not affected in any way. If a municipality has already followed the process set forth in § 13D.021, there is no need for an individual to have “been advised by a health care professional against being in a public place for personal or family medical reasons” to remotely participate in a public meeting.[4]

If you have any questions about the Minnesota Open Meeting Law, please speak with your attorney or a Bradley Law, LLC attorney to understand how the OML applies to you.


[1] Laws of Minnesota 2019, chapter 33, section 1.
[2] Laws of Minnesota 2020, chapter 74, article 1, section 1.
[3] Minn. Stat. § 13D.02.
[4] Laws of Minnesota 2020, chapter 74, article 1, section 1.

Michael Bradley

Mike Bradley is a partner at Bradley Werner, LLC. Mike has spent nearly his entire 30+ year career representing local governments and access television organizations on cable television and telecommunications issues. Throughout that time, he has had the privilege of representing many of his clients continuously. Mike has received the highest attorney ratings from Martindale-Hubble and is admitted to practice in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Washington and in multiple federal courts, including the United States Supreme Court.

Recent Posts

Understanding DISH’s Force Majeure Claims and Implications

Municipal governments and public entities that maintain cell tower leases, rooftop agreements, fiber transport contracts,…

3 weeks ago

Local Governments Stand Up to Unsupported Claims

On behalf of the Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission (NWSCCC), the North Metro Telecommunications Commission…

4 weeks ago

Xcel Energy Ordered to Refund $40.6 Million to Customers due to Outage

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) has ordered Xcel Energy to refund $40.6 million—plus interest—to…

4 weeks ago

Court Vacates Digital Discrimination Rules

Court of Appeals vacates Digital Discrimination Rules on Judicial Review.

4 weeks ago

California Court Upholds Tax on Video Streaming Services

A municipal voter-approved tax on video services was upheld to apply to video streaming revenues.…

4 months ago

Minnesota Local Governments Challenge FCC’s Authority on Broadband

A coalition of Minnesota local governments filed comments with the FCC, asserting that federal preemption…

6 months ago

This website uses cookies.