Court Opinion

ID: 9687882
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:52:28.471973+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:32.620917
License: Public Domain

Yetka, Justice
(concurring specially).
I concur in the majority decision that defendant board is estopped from rescinding its original approval of plaintiff’s plan. City of Rochester v. North Side Corp. 211 Minn. 276, 1 N. W. 2d 361 (1941); Village of Newport v. Taylor, 225 Minn. 299, 30 N. W. 2d 588 (1948).
However, I differ with the majority decision regarding the interpretation of Minn. St. 1971, § 471.705. The court has determined that the language in that statute which indicates “all meetings * * * shall be open to the public” requires notice to the public in some but not all instances. The statute is completely silent as to notice. It was passed originally in 1957 and amended at least twice since that date.1 Neither amendment added a requirement of notice. Moreover, the most recent amendment to the section, introduced in the 1973 session of the legislature, contained originally a requirement of notice which was deleted during the legislative process.2
Once the court has determined, however, that notice is contained by implication in the statute, it seems inconsistent to me to compel notice of some but not all meetings. The statute speaks of all, not some, meetings. Matters of extreme importance are as likely, indeed perhaps more likely, to come up at emergency meetings than at regular meetings. I would require notice of every meeting, whether a general, special, or emergency meeting. I would hold that notice should consist at the very least of posted notice on the town, village, or city bulletin board at the regular meeting place of the governing body.
*179In addition, a governing body either by special notice, by minutes of its meetings, or by bylaws, or a combination of any of the three, all properly printed in its official newspaper could thereby give notice not only to the public but to the news media as well of all regular meetings and most special meetings of the public body. Where a special or emergency meeting must be called where formal published notice cannot be given in the legal newspaper, in addition to posted notice, the proper official of the governing body should attempt to give notice to the area news media by a method selected and incorporated in the bylaws of the public body, which method could vary according to the size of the community and the type of public body involved, but could still be one reasonably calculated to give such notice to the news media.

 L. 1967, c. 462, § 1; L. 1973, c. 680, §§ 1,3.

 S. F. 1480, as originally introduced, contained this language: “The public must be given timely and reasonable notice of all meetings of such bodies * *