STATE OF MICHIGAN

FRANK J. KELLEY, ATTORNEY GENERAL

Opinion No. 6074

June 11, 1982

OPEN MEETINGS ACT:

Impact upon workshop, seminar or other informational gathering attended by members of a public body

A public body may, without complying with the Open Meetings Act, attend a conference or informational gathering designed to focus upon issues of general concern and intended primarily to provide training and/or background information, provided that a public body may not, without complying with the Open Meetings Act, engage in discussions or deliberations during such a meeting or otherwise enter into the process of addressing or resolving issues of public policy.

Honorable R. Robert Geake

State Senator

The Capitol

Lansing, Michigan 48909

You have requested my opinion on the following question pertaining to the Open Meetings Act, 1976 PA 267; MCLA 15.261 et seq; MSA 4.1800(11) et seq:

The Open Meetings Act, supra, requires that meetings of a public body at which a quorum is present for the purpose of deliberating toward or rendering a decision on public policy must conform to the provisions of the Act regarding notice to the public, openness to the public, the keeping of minutes, and various other requirements. The Open Meetings Act, supra, does, however, contain serveral exemptions, including section 3(10), which provides:

The Open Meetings Act, supra, provides little direct guidance as to the precise scope of the exemption contained in section 3(10). Nowhere in the Act, for example, are the terms 'social or chance gathering' or 'conference' defined. However, these terms must plainly be construed in light of the provision contained in section 3(10) that the exemption applies only to gatherings which are 'not designed to avoid this act' and, further, in light of the general purpose and policy of the Act. As the Michigan Court of Appeals noted in Wexford County Prosecutor v Pranger, 83 Mich App 197, 204; 268 NW2d 344 (1978), 'the Michigan Open Meetings Act of 1977 is entitled to a broad interpretation to promote openness in government.' Accordingly, as the Court noted elsewhere in the same opinion, we must 'construe the closed session exceptions strictly to limit the situations that are not open to the public.' Id at 201.

The scope of the Open Meetings Act, Sec. 3(10), supra, has been considered in a number of Attorney General opinions. These opinions hold that the exemption contained in that section does not apply where a quorum of the members of a public body meet and discuss matters of public policy with a quorum of the public body present. OAG, 1977-1978, No 5298, p 434, 435 (May 2, 1978) states:

See also OAG, 1979-1980, No 5437, p 36 (February 2, 1979); OAG, 1979-1980, No 5444, p 55 (February 21, 1979).

However, a public body may accept an invitation to meet with a neighborhood organization or other group for the sole purpose of observing or gathering information without complying with the requirements of the Open Meetings Act OAG, 1977-1978, No 5364, p 606, 607 (September 7, 1978), concluded that a quorum of the members of a city council may accept an invitation to meet with a neighborhood organization or with the board of directors of a local bank, provided that the members of the public body did not discuss or deliberate upon public policy matters during such a meeting:

It does not necessarily follow that a public body may avoid the requirements of the Open Meetings Act, supra, by simply designating the meeting as a 'conference' and refraining from engaging in any actual discussion or deliberations during the meeting. Indeed, such a tactic was considered and rejected in OAG, 1979-1980, No 5433, p 29 (January 31, 1979). That opinion considered the question of whether a public body could utilize the 'conference' exemption contained in the Open Meetings Act, Sec. 3(10), supra, to justify a closed meeting between the public body and certain of its officers and employees. The opinion observed that:

While nothing that public officials should always be receptive to comments from the public, even at social gatherings or conferences, the opinion observed that a meeting between a public body and its administrative staff or other employees may not be characterized as a 'social or chance gathering or conference' within the meaning of the Open Meetings Act, Sec. 3(10), supra, even though that meeting may involve only presentations made by the staff with no discussions or deliberations on the part of the public body. Under such circumstances, the opinion concluded, the public body's staff are not meeting:

OAG, 1979-1980, No 5433, supra, went on to provide some examples of meetings which would fall within the 'conference' exemption of the Open Meetings Act, Sec. 3(10), supra.

What each of these examples have in common, it will be observed, is that neither is limited to matters or issues of interest to a single public body but instead has a relatively broad focus upon issues of general concern. Moreover, each of the examples involves a conferences designed primarily to provide training or background information rather than to directly address and resolve particular issues of public policy pending before a specific body. Such conferences are clearly within the legislative intendment of the Open Meetings Act, Sec. 3(10), supra. However, when a conference is scheduled by a public body for the express purpose of gathering information on or otherwise addressing a particular issue of public policy confronting that public body, that 'conference' must be considered to be a part of the deliberative process and, hence, would not fall within the exemption contained in the Open Meetings Act, Sec. 3(10), supra.

Thus, a public body may attend a workshop, seminar or other informational gathering without complying with the Open Meetings Act provided that (1) the purpose and function of the workshop, seminar or other informational gathering is to consider issues broader than those affecting the particular public body only; (2) the gathering is open to members of other public bodies or of the public generally and (3) the public body carefully refrains from any collective discussion of matters of public policy. However, if attendance at such a workshop, seminar or other informational gathering is limited to officers and employees of the public body only, an opportunity is presented for the public body to consider matters of public policy in the absence of proper notice to the public and an opportunity for the public to attend. To prevent a circumvention of the Open Meetings Act, supra, proper notice must be given to the public and such meeting must be open to the public.

It is my opinion, therefore, that a quorum of a public body may, without complying with the Open Meetings Act, supra, attend a conference which is designed to focus upon issues of general concern to similar public bodies and which is intended primarily to provide general training or background information rather than to directly address and resolve issues particular to the public body. It is my further opinion that a quorum of a public body may, at the initiative of a private group, meet with and listen to presentations by that group, provided that the members of the public body do not engage in any discussions or deliberations during the course of that meeting. It is my further opinion that if a quorum of the members of a public body engage in discussions or deliberations, or otherwise enter into the process of addressing and resolving particular issues of public policy pending before that public body, at such conference or gathering, discussion may not be conducted without complying with the Open Meetings Act, supra.

Frank J. Kelley