US State Attorney General: E-Mail Communications May Constitute A Meeting

An opinion of the North Dakota Attorney General is reported to have concluded that e-mail communications among municipal commissioners may constitute a meeting for purposes of potentially violating the State's requirement for open, public meetings. In the situation on which the opinion was sought, the Attorney General said that a city employee may provide information to commissioners by e-mail without violating the law, but, by exchanging e-mail among themselves, the commissioners may have triggered a requirement to give public notice. Does such a conclusion have implications more widely for the application of relevant electronic communications provisions in other statutes? For example, many corporation statutes in Canada were amended in the 1980s to permit directors to meet "by means of such telephone, electronic or other communication facilities as permit all persons participating in the meeting to communicate with each other simultaneously and instantly" [Business Corporations Act (Ontario), RSO 1990, c B.16, section 123(13)]. When such provisions were enacted, the Internet was not yet pervasive, and it may have been assumed they were directed only to voice communications. However, with the ability to communicate by instant messaging, coupled with a facility for split-screen sharing of documents in real time, could a collaborative session among directors that does not include voice communication unintentionally become a formal meeting (if the session otherwise satisfied quorum and other meeting requirements)? Presumably, as in most such situations, expressed intentions of the parties will be determinative, but it may once again give pause for thought that new modes of communication do not always fit comfortably within older prescriptions. For an Associated Press article on the North Dakota Attorney General's opinion ("N.D. E-Mail Exchange Constitutes Meeting"), see: http://tinyurl.com/37xzfw Summary by: The Editor