Open Meetings Act Manual

Office of the
Maryland Attorney General

Douglas F. Gansler
Attorney General
Seventh Edition
October 2010

Prepared by:

Opinions and Advice Division

Attorney General’s Office

200 Saint Paul Place

Baltimore, Maryland 21202
(410) 576-6327

Website: www.oag.state.md.us
e-mail: opengov@oag.state.md.us
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Chapter 1: Policy and Interpretive Principles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1

Chapter 2: Scope of Open Meetings Act.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1

A. “Public Bodies”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1

B. “Meetings”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5
C. Subject Matter: Functions Included and Excluded.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-11
D. Written Material.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-16

Chapter 3: Procedural Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1

A. Notice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1
B. Choice of Meeting Site. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4
C. Voting Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5
D. Minutes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7

Chapter 4: Open and Closed Meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1

A. General Openness Requirement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1

B. Observing and Taping. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1
C. Exceptions Allowing Closed Meetings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2

Chapter 5: Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1

A. Open Meetings Compliance Board. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1

B. Judicial Enforcement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-3
C. Civil Penalty. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-4

i
 Appendices

Appendix A: Text of Open Meetings Act. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1

Appendix B: Compliance Checklist. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1

Appendix C: Form of Statement for Closing a Meeting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1

Appendix D: Model Rules.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D-1

Appendix E: Complaint Procedures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E-1

Appendix F: Compliance Board Opinions ) Topical Index. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F-1

ii
 PREFACE

When the bill that later evolved into Maryland’s 1977 “Sunshine Law” was
endorsed by the House and Senate committees, they wrote of the need to find the
“proper balance between ... two imperatives”: “securing the public’s right to know public
business,” and yet preserving the “confidentiality [that] is indispensable to the efficient,
effective and fair conduct of government.” The 1977 Open Meetings Act tried to find
that necessary balance. It represented a major advance over prior law, which essentially
left the matter up to the agencies and therefore encouraged closed-door government.
Then, in 1991, the Legislature returned to the issue and shifted the balance more clearly
in favor of the public’s right to know, including an advisory process, through the Open
Meetings Compliance Board, as an alternative to litigation. Since that time, the
Legislature has periodically amended the Act largely in the interest of increased
government transparency.

This manual, which may be freely copied, is meant to help members of public
bodies, their lawyers, and members of the press and public understand the Act and
especially its practical application. It reflects the substantial body of guidance provided
by the opinions of the Compliance Board, which are available on the Attorney General’s
website (www.oag.state.md.us; click on “Open Government,” then on “About the
Maryland Open Meetings Act”) and in printed form (ordering information on the
website). This manual will be maintained and updated on the website.

I am grateful to the members of my staff who have served as counsel to the

Compliance Board, former Assistant Attorney General Jack Schwartz and Assistant
Attorney General William R. Varga. I also want to acknowledge the efforts of Kathleen
Izdebski of the Opinions and Advice Division who prepared this manuscript and who has
continuously provided exceptional staff support for the Open Meetings Compliance
Board. Finally, I thank the members of the Open Meetings Compliance Board )
Chairman Elizabeth L. Nilson, Esquire, Courtney J. McKeldin, and Julio A. Morales,
Esquire, as well as former members of the Board, the late Walter Sondheim and Tyler
Webb, Esquire. ) for their significant support. They have played a vital role in making
the promise of the Open Meetings Act a reality.

Douglas F. Gansler
October 2010

iii
 Chapter One
Policy and Interpretive Principles

Thedetermination
Open Meetings Act is based on the General Assembly’s policy
in favor of open decision-making by governmental bodies:

It is essential to the maintenance of a democratic

society that, except in special and appropriate
circumstances:

(1) public business be performed in an open and

public manner; and

(2) citizens be allowed to observe:

(i) the performance of public officials; and

(ii) the deliberations and decisions that the

making of public policy involves.

§10-501(a) of the State Government Article.1 The General Assembly came to this
policy judgment because public and news media access to the meetings of public
bodies “ensures the accountability of government to the citizens of the State.” §10-
501(b)(1). Furthermore, “[t]he conduct of public business in open meetings

1
The Open Meetings Act is codified as title 10, Subtitle 5 of the State Government
Article, Annotated Code of Maryland. All statutory references in this manual are to this
subtitle, unless otherwise indicated.

1–1
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 1-2

increases the faith of the public in government and enhances the effectiveness of
the public in fulfilling its role in a democratic society.” §10-501(b)(2).2

Thus, the general rule is that if a public body is meeting and the subject
matter is covered by the Open Meetings Act (matters that are discussed in the next
chapter of this manual), the body must meet in open session. §10-505. While the
Act sets out exceptions to this general rule, the exceptions themselves are to be
“strictly construed in favor of open meetings of public bodies.” §10-508(c).

Although the Open Meetings Act is the primary State law on this topic, it is
not the only potentially applicable law. If another State law applies to a meeting –
for example, Article 23A, §8, on municipal legislative bodies – compliance with
both laws is required to the extent possible.3 In addition, a local government might
be subject to its own “sunshine” law. In the event of a conflict between the Open
Meetings Act and another law on the same subject, the Open Meetings Act applies
“unless the other law is more stringent.” §10-504. So, for instance, if a municipal
charter requires all meetings of a town council to be open, the council may not
invoke an exception in the Open Meetings Act to close a meeting.4

2
The federal government and nearly every state have made the same policy
judgment. When it enacted the Government in the Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. §552b,
Congress declared that “the public is entitled to the fullest practicable information
regarding the decision making processes of the Federal Government.” Pub. L. No. 94-409,
90 Stat. 1241 (1976). For a comprehensive review of state “sunshine” laws, see Ann Taylor
Schwing, Open Meeting Laws (1994), and Peter G. Guthrie, Annotation, Validity,
Construction, and Application of Statutes Making Public Proceedings Open to the Public,
38 A.L.R. 3d 1070 (1971 and Supp. 2010). The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the
Press has published a survey on the public records and open meetings laws of the 50 states
and District of Columbia, titled Open Government Guide (5th ed. 2006), available online
at http://www.refp.org/ogg/index.php.
3
The Attorney General reviewed the continued effect of this statute and similar
provisions applicable to county governing bodies and boards and commissions in the
executive branch of State government in 94 Opinions of the Attorney General 161 (2009).
While the earlier provisions are in large part duplicative of the Open Meetings Act,
provisions prohibiting final adoption of certain measures in an executive session may not
be eliminated in nonsubstantive code revision legislation. Id.
4
See City of College Park v. Cotter, 309 Md. 573, 525 A.2d 1059 (1987). But see
J.P. Delphey Ltd. P’ship v. Mayor and City of Frederick, 396 Md. 180, 913 A.2d 28 (2006)
(continued...)
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 1-3

St. Mary’s County has its own separate Open Meetings Act, codified in
Article 24, Title 4, Subtitle 2 of the Maryland Code. Although the St. Mary’s County
Act in general is the more stringent of the two laws, a public body of the St. Mary’s
County government should comply with a provision of the State Open Meetings
Act if the latter leads to greater public access.5

4
(...continued)
(provisions allowing closure of meetings under the Open Meetings Act provide exception
to general prohibition under Article 23A, §8). See also 94 Opinions of the Attorney
General 161, 172 n.20 (2009) (recognizing that Cotter and J.P. Delphey are difficult to
reconcile).
5
The St. Mary’s County Act has been discussed and applied in 80 Opinions of the
Attorney General 241 (1995), 89 Opinions of the Attorney General 22 (2004), and 95
Opinions of the Attorney General 152 (2010). See also advice letter from Assistant
Attorney General Robert A. Zarnoch and Staff Attorney Kurt Wolfgang to Delegate J.
Ernest Bell, II (November 22, 1991).
 Chapter Two
Scope of the Open Meetings Act

A. “P UBLIC B ODIES”

he Open Meetings Act applies only to entities that consist of at least two
T people. §10-502(h)(1)(i). Thus, the Act is inapplicable to a meeting held by
the chief executive of a jurisdiction, a department head, or another official acting as “a
single member entity.” §10-502(h)(3)(i).1 If a statute requires a single official to hold
a public hearing, for example, the Open Meetings Act does not govern notice or other
requirements concerning the hearing; the other statute would.

From the initial passage of the Act, it has applied to multi-member bodies
created by the following formal legal instruments: the Maryland Constitution; a State
statute; a local government charter; an ordinance; a rule, resolution, or bylaw; an
executive order of the Governor; or an executive order of the chief executive of a
political subdivision. §10-502(h)(1)(ii). Therefore, the first and often determinative step
in analyzing whether the Act applies to an entity is to review the basis for the entity’s
existence. For example, the “public body” status of a county delegation to the General
Assembly depends on the formal legal authority for its existence, namely the pertinent
rule of the House of Delegates or the Senate.2

1
See 1 Official Opinions of the Open Meetings Compliance Board 175 (1996)
(Opinion 96-8). For brevity’s sake, we shall henceforth refer to the volumes of Compliance
Board opinions as “OMCB Opinions.”
2
80 Opinions of the Attorney General 53 (1995); advice letter from Assistant
Attorney General Richard E. Israel to Senator Timothy R. Ferguson (August 1, 2000).

In contrast, an entity formed as a result of a memorandum of agreement consisting

of a single representative from two local governments and one from a private association
is not a “public body.” 5 OMCB Opinions 194 (2007).

2–1
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-2

Sometimes a subgroup of a public body is itself a public body, separately

subject to the Open Meetings Act when it meets. In one case, for example, the
Court of Appeals held that a group of members of a school board, numbering less
than a quorum of the board, itself constituted a “public body” when authorized by
statute and board resolution to negotiate a labor agreement.3 Similarly, the
Compliance Board has concluded that an advisory panel consisting of members of
the Critical Area Commission required pursuant to a statutory directive that, among
other things, prescribed panel quorum requirements was a public body.4
Conversely, if the authority for the existence or the functions of a subgroup of a
public body is not set out in a statute, bylaw, resolution, or other formal instrument
identified in §10-502(h)(1)(ii), the subgroup itself would not be a “public body.”
Thus, the Compliance Board ruled, “[a] subcommittee that is simply designated by
the presiding official ... is not a public body.”5

Except as discussed below, the Act does not apply to bodies that exist simply
as a result of long-standing practice, informal arrangements, or other means apart
from any of these formal governmental enactments. For example, the Court of
Special Appeals held that the Act does not apply to a political gathering or party
caucus.6 Similarly, a political party central committee is not a public body, because
it is created by the party’s constitution and bylaws, not a State statute.7 A group of
employees, not chosen by a public official nor created by constitution, statute,
ordinance, rule, or executive order, is not a “public body”; therefore, the group is
not required to meet in open session.8

3
Carroll County Educ. Ass’n v. Board of Educ., 294 Md. 144, 155, 448 A.2d 345
(1982). See also Avara v. Baltimore News American, 292 Md. 543, 550-51, 440 A.2d 368
(1982) (legislative conference committee “authorized” by rule is a “public body”).
4
5 OMCB Opinions 189 (2007).
5
2 OMCB Opinions 70, 72 (1999) (Opinion 99-12). See also 1 OMCB Opinions 69
(1994) (Opinion 94-4).
6
See Ajamian v. Montgomery County, 99 Md. App. 665, 639 A.2d 157, cert. denied,
334 Md. 631, 640 A.2d 1132 (1994).
7
3 OMCB Opinions 278 (2003) (Opinion 03-6).
8
80 Opinions of the Attorney General 90 (1995). See also 4 OMCB Opinions 43
(2004).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-3

The second paragraph of the definition of “public body” extends the term )
and accordingly, the Act itself ) to certain entities created less formally.9 This
second paragraph describes two alternatives under which informally created
entities may quality as a public body subject to the Act.

First, the Act applies to “any multimember board, commission, or committee

appointed by the Governor or the chief executive authority of a political
subdivision of the State, or appointed by an official who is subject to the policy
direction of the Governor or chief executive authority of the political subdivision,
if the entity includes in its membership at least 2 individuals not employed by the
State or a political subdivision.” §10-502(h)(2)(i).10 For example, if the chief
executive uses a letter instead of an executive order to designate a group of people,
including at least two private citizens, to study a matter of public concern, the
entity will be covered by the Act.

Second, the Act applies to “any multimember board, commission, or

committee” appointed either by a public body in the Executive Branch of State
government whose members are appointed by the Governor or by an official who
is subject to the policy direction of such a public body, if the entity includes at least
two individuals who are neither members of the appointing entity nor employees
of the State. §10-508(l)(2)(ii).11

Some officials have expressed concern about the extension of the Act to
informal citizen groups – for example, if the mayor of a town appoints a committee
of citizens to make recommendations about the siting of a new playground. The
definition is indeed broad, and such a committee would be a “public body.” And

9
See City of Baltimore Dev. Corp. v. Carmel Reality Assoc., 395 Md. 299, 323, 910
A.2d 406 (2006).
10
The language about “an official subject to ... policy direction” was added by
Chapter 440, Laws of Maryland 2004. An account of the legislative history and an
application of Chapter 440 is set out in 4 OMCB Opinions 132 (2005).
11
This provision was added by Chapter 164, Laws of Maryland 2009. See
Memorandum from Assistant Attorney General William R. Varga to Principal Counsel
(September 14, 2009) (illustrating practical application of the change.

The Compliance Board has opined that §10-502(h)(2)(ii) does not apply to local
boards of education appointed by the Governor. 7 OMCB Opinions 21 (2010).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-4

if, as in this example, the committee is carrying out an “advisory function,” the Act
would apply.

In an era of privatization and entrepreneurial government, the status of

private corporations can be controversial. In general, private corporate boards are
not “public bodies.” Moreover, the receipt of public funds does not itself subject a
private corporation to the Open Meetings Act.12 Under a test adopted by the Court
of Special Appeals, however, the origin and functions of some nominally private
corporations would cause them to be considered “public bodies”:

A private corporate form alone does not insure that the

entity functions as a private corporation. When a
private corporation is organized under government
control and operated to carry on public business, it is
acting, at least, in a quasi-governmental way. When it
does, in light of the stated purposes of the statute, it is
unreasonable to conclude that such an entity can use
the private corporate form as a parasol to avoid the
statutorily-imposed sunshine of the Open Meetings
Act.13

According to the Court of Special Appeals, a private corporation that “was

organized and has functioned as an extension or sub-agency of the ... government”
is a “public body” under the Act.14 Moreover, the Compliance Board has opined that
if a corporation’s existence is authorized by a direct legislative act, and the
legislative body intended the corporation to be governmental in character, the
corporate board is a “public body.”15

12
1 OMCB Opinions 212, 216 n. 4 (1997) (Opinion 97-3). See also Opinion of the
Attorney General 96-011 (February 29, 1996) (unpublished).
13
Andy’s Ice Cream v. City of Salisbury, 125 Md. App. 125, 154-55, 724 A.2d 717,
cert. denied, 353 Md. 473, 727 A 2d 382 (1999).
14
125 Md. App. at 157.
15
See 1 OMCB Opinions 212 (1997) (Opinion 97-3). In addition, the Maryland
School for the Blind is specifically covered by the Act. §10-502(h)(2)(ii).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-5

More recently, the Court of Appeals addressed the application of the Act to
the Baltimore Development Corporation, a not-for-profit corporation formed to
plan and implement development strategies in Baltimore City. City of Baltimore
Dev. Corp. v. Carmel Realty Assoc., 395 Md. 299, 910 A.2d 406 (2006). Focusing
on the Mayor’s role in the selection of entity’s board of directors as well as public
traits of the corporation, the Court concluded that the Baltimore Development
Corporation is “in essence, a public body for purpose of the Open Meetings Act.”
Id.

The Act lists entities that are excluded from the definition of “public body”
and therefore are excluded from the Act’s coverage. Among these specific
exclusions are judicial nominating commissions, grand juries, petit juries, courts
(except when they are engaged in rulemaking), the Governor’s Cabinet, and a local
counterpart to the Governor’s Cabinet. §10-502(h)(3).16 The Act does not apply, for
example, to a meeting between a board of county commissioners that is the
executive as well as legislative head of county government and the heads of the
departments of county government, because that group of administrative advisers
to the executive would be the “local counterpart” to the Governor’s Cabinet in that
county.17 The actual nature of the body, rather than its label, determines whether
the entity is subject to the Act.18

B. “M EETINGS”

The Open Meetings Act applies only if a public body is holding a “meeting.”
The Act, however, does not specify the circumstances under which a meeting is
required; it merely governs the meetings that do occur. Furthermore, as the
Compliance Board put it, the Act does not “control a public body’s decision

16
Other exclusions are the Appalachian States Low Level Radioactive Waste
Commission, the governing bodies of hospitals, and certain self-insurance pools.
17
See 1 OMCB Opinions 50 (1993) (Opinion 93-10); advice letter from Assistant
Attorney General Jack Schwartz, Chief Counsel for Opinions and Advice, to Delegate
Stephen J. Braun (September 19, 1991). On the other hand, the “local counterpart”
exclusion does not extend to a meeting of town council members in their capacity as heads
of municipal departments. 3 OMCB Opinions 26 (2000) (Opinion 00-7).
18
See 1 OMCB Opinions 104 (1994) (Opinions 94-9); 1 OMCB Opinions 50 (1993)
(Opinion 93-10 ).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-6

whether to discuss a matter [at a meeting].”19 Other laws sometimes limit a public
body’s decision-making process to a convened meeting; the Open Meetings Act
does not.20

The term “meet” is defined as follows: “to convene a quorum of a public

body for the consideration or transaction of public business.” §10-502(g). A quorum
is a majority of the membership unless some other provision of law specifies a
different number. §10-502(k). Hence, the Act does not apply to conversations
between, for instance, any two members of a public body having a membership
greater than three. As the Compliance Board put it, the Act “does not preclude
politicking and lobbying, individually, outside the meeting.”21 If a public body
announced an open meeting but a quorum of members does not attend, the Act
would not govern discussions among the members who did attend. It would be
prudent, nonetheless, for those members to maintain the open session that
otherwise would have occurred, given their and the public’s expectation that the
matters would be discussed openly.

Although the presence of a quorum in the same room would ordinarily

characterize a “meeting,” joint physical presence is not a prerequisite to the
convening of a meeting. For example, a telephone conference call in which a

19
2 OMCB Opinions 70, 71-72 (1999) (Opinion 99-12 ).
20
Dictum in a 2009 Court of Appeals decision might be viewed as casting this
interpretation in doubt to the extent it cryptically endorsed the lower courts’ apparent
conclusion that the Act required a city council committee to hold a meeting. Armstrong
v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 409 Md. 648, 976 A.2d 349 (2009). Nevertheless,
the Court’s dictum and the Open Meetings Compliance Board’s long-standing
interpretation of the Act may be reconciled in that the requirement to hold a meeting
could be traced to a provision of the City’s zoning code. Any committee meeting
involving a zoning matter would need to be conducted in accordance with the Open
Meetings Act. §10-503(b)(2); see 94 Opinions of the Attorney General 161, 174 n.22
(2009).
21
1 OMCB Opinions 101, at 103 (1994) (Opinion 94-8) (internal quotation
omitted). See also 4 OMCB Opinions 51 (2004) (one-to-one serial conversations); Jochum
v. Tuscola County, 239 F.Supp. 2d 714 (E.D. Mich. 2003) (canvassing of votes
individually); Telegraph -Herald, Inc. v. City of Dubuque, 297 N.W.2d 529, 533 (Iowa
1980) (series of individual discussions); Moberg v. Independent School Dist., 336 N.W. 2d
510, 518 (Minn. 1983) (series of telephone calls). Other states have prohibited serial
communications. See Ann Taylor Schwing, Open Meeting Laws §6.40c.
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-7

quorum of members is conducting business simultaneously is a “meeting” that must

comply with the Act.22 If a public body meets in open session via telephone or
video conference, it must afford the public access to the discussion. A telephone
conference is open to the public if a speaker-phone is available at an announced
location; a video conference, if a monitor is similarly available.

A meeting can also occur in unconventional venues. For example, if a

quorum of a public body rides together in a vehicle and conducts public business
while doing so, they are holding a meeting. If the meeting is one that the public is
entitled to observe, the public body has violated the Act, for obviously the public
cannot gain access to the meeting site.

Although the common physical presence of members of a public body is not

a prerequisite for a “meeting” to occur, the possibility of immediate interaction is.23
Therefore, the Act does not apply to an exchange of correspondence among
members of a public body: “A piece of paper that moves from person to person does
not ‘convene a quorum of a public body,’ even if the paper reflects ‘the
consideration or transaction of public business.’ Because an exchange of paper is not
a ‘meeting,’ the Act does not apply.”24 Likewise, the Act does not apply to
conventional e-mail messages.25 Other law might address whether a public body
is allowed to make decisions by these means, but the Act does not.

The General Assembly’s statement of legislative policy speaks of the public’s

entitlement “to witness the phases of the deliberation, policy formation, and

22
4 OMCB Opinions 58, 61 (2004). See also H. Conf. Rep. No. 94-1441, 94th
Cong., 2d Sess. 11 (1976), reprinted in 1976 U.S. Code Cong. & Adm. News 2247
(explaining scope of term “meeting” in federal Government in the Sunshine Act).
23
See 2 OMCB Opinions 206, 208-09 (1997) (Opinion 97-2).
24
Letter of advice from Jack Schwartz, Chief Counsel for Opinions and Advice, to
Jeffery S. Getty, Esquire, City Attorney of Frostburg (July 11, 1995) (citing City of College
Park v. Cotter, 309 Md. 573, 595 n. 32, 525 A.2d 1059 (1987)). See also 6 OMCB Opinions
57 (2008); 1 OMCB Opinions 218 (1997) (Opinion 97-4).
25
81 Opinions of the Attorney General 140 (1996); 2 OMCB Opinions 78 (1999)
(Opinion 99-15). The Virginia Supreme Court reached the same conclusion about a
comparable provision in Virginia’s “sunshine” law. Beck v. Shelton, 593 S.E.2d 195 (Va.
2004). The result might be different if a quorum were participating in a simultaneous
medium like a pre-arranged “chat room.”
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-8

decision making of public bodies ....” §10-501(b)(1). “In this regard,” the Court of
Appeals has stated, “it is clear that the Act applies, not only to final decisions made
by the public body exercising legislative functions at a public meeting, but as well
as to all deliberations which precede the actual legislative act or decision, unless
authorized by [the Act] to be closed to the public.”26 This reasoning also applies to
briefings or other information-gathering. This often critical phase of the decision-
making process must be open to public view.27

A public body cannot avoid its obligations under the Act by labeling its
meeting a “work session” or “pre-meeting,” or by gathering together at some
location other than the customary meeting room. As the Court of Appeals put it,
“the Act makes no distinction between formal and informal meetings of the public
body; it simply covers all meetings at which a quorum of the constituent
membership of the public body is convened ‘for the purpose of considering or
transacting public business.’” 28 The Court of Appeals quoted with approval the
following passage from a Florida case:

One purpose of the government in the sunshine law was

to prevent at nonpublic meetings the crystallization of
secret decisions to a point just short of ceremonial
acceptance. Rarely could there be any purpose to a
nonpublic premeeting conference except to conduct
some part of the decisional process behind closed doors.
The statute should be construed so as to frustrate all
evasive devices. This can be accomplished only by
embracing the collective inquiry and discussion stages
within the terms of the statute ....29

26
City of New Carrolton v. Rogers, 287 Md. 56, 72, 410 A.2d 1070 (1980).
27
71 Opinions of the Attorney General 26, 29 (1986); 3 OMCB Opinions 30 (2000)
(Opinion 00-8); 1 OMCB Opinions 35 (1993) (Opinion 93-6).
28
Rogers, 287 Md. at 72.
29
Town of Palm Beach v. Gradison, 296 So. 2d 473, 477 (1974).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-9

As the Court of Appeals observed, “every step of the process ... constitutes the
consideration or transaction of public business.” 30

The fact that a quorum of a body might be together at the same time,
however, does not necessarily make that gathering a “meeting” subject to the Act.
Rather, both the context for the gathering of the quorum and the content of the
discussion must be considered, because the Act does not apply to “a chance
encounter, social gathering, or other occasion that is not intended to circumvent
this subtitle.” §10-503(a)(2).31

If a majority of members of a public body attends a gathering convened by

an entity to which the Act does not apply, the Act does not become applicable
merely because a quorum is present. In one case, the Court of Special Appeals held
that the presence of five members of the Montgomery County Council at a meeting
of the local Democratic Central Committee (“DCC”) did not violate the Open
Meetings Act.32 Although the members attending would constitute a quorum if
convened as such, and the discussion concerned issues before the Council, they did
not act in that capacity during the meeting. That is, the Court based its decision on
the activity of the Council members at the DCC meeting, rejecting the argument
that the mere presence of the Council members necessarily implicated the Act.
Likewise, the Compliance Board had opined, even before the court decision, that
a public body is not subject to the Act simply because a quorum is present at
another organization’s meeting.33 At the same time, a public body cannot escape its
obligations under the Act if, in the course of another group’s meeting, the public
body itself convenes and engages in business that is subject to the Act.34

30
Rogers, 287 Md. at 72.
31
5 OMCB Opinions 93 (2007).
32
Ajamian v. Montgomery County, 99 Md. App. 665, 639 A.2d 157 (1994), cert.
denied, 334 Md. 631, 640 A.2d 1132 (1994). See also Jochum v. Tuscola County, 239 F.
Supp. 2d 714 (E.D. Mich. 2003).
33
1 OMCB Opinions 6 (1992) (Opinion 92-2); see also 3 OMCB Opinions 242
(2002); 6 OMCB Opinions 77 (2009).
34
1 OMCB Opinions at 7 (1992) (Opinion 92-2). See also, e.g., 1 OMCB Opinions
142 (1995) (Opinion 95-10); 1 OMCB Opinions 120 (1995) (Opinion 95-4); and 1 OMCB
Opinions 104 (1994) (Opinion 94-9).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-10

The Act also does not apply to meetings with civic or neighborhood groups
that are intended merely to allow citizens to question members of the public body.
In the City of New Carrolton case, the Court of Appeals considered the Act’s
applicability to a meeting at which the city’s mayor and members of its council
went to a forum, at the invitation of a neighborhood group, “for the purpose of
answering questions that their residents might have about [the city].” The Court
held that “[p]ublic notice of this event was not required by the Act to be given to
the citizens of the [city] since, as we view it, it was not a ‘meeting’ of the public
body but rather, within the contemplation of §[10-503(a)(2)], was an [occasion that
is not intended to circumvent this subtitle].”35

The content of a quorum’s discussion can also determine whether the Act
applies. For example, a discussion of a member’s personal circumstances (illness, for
example), although it might be indirectly related to the carrying out of the
member’s duties, is not “the consideration or transaction of public business.”36
Moreover, the Act is not violated merely because a majority of a public body might
gather together informally before a meeting or during a break. So long as the
members simply engage in social conversation and avoid any phase of the public
body’s own decision-making process, the Act would not apply.37 Similarly, the Act
would not apply to a training session aimed at improving leadership or team-
building skills.38 Likewise, a public body does not engage in the conduct of public
business merely by listening to a general informational presentation not linked to
specific items of pending business. At a library board reception, for example, the
Act was not violated when board members heard “a summary of improvements to
the libraries as well as problems the libraries face in the future.”39 In a social
setting, the Compliance Board has recognized, public officials can be expected to
“make stray comments relating to public business.” This inevitable occurrence is

35
287 Md. at 71.
36
See 1 OMCB Opinions 129 (1995) (Opinion 95-7).
37
See, e.g., 6 OMCB Opinions 63 (2008); 3 OMCB Opinions 257 (2003) (Opinion
03-2); 1 OMCB Opinions 227 (1997) (Opinion 97-7); 1 OMCB Opinions 157 (1996)
(Opinion 96-3); and 1 OMCB Opinions 92 (1994) (Opinion 94-6).
38
80 Opinions of the Attorney General 241 (1995).
39
1 OMCB Opinions 227, 231-32 (1997) (Opinion 97-7).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-11

not a legal problem so long as the conversation is confined merely to “passing

references to the work of the [public] body.” 40

Whether a “retreat” is a meeting depends not on how it is labeled but rather

on its purpose. If, for example, the purpose of the retreat is simply to improve
interpersonal relations, the Act would not apply. 41 A retreat or similar informal
gathering would be a meeting, however, if it were a device to set the public body’s
agenda or discuss specific matters that are to be dealt with by the body.42

C. S UBJECT M ATTER: F UNCTIONS I NCLUDED AND E XCLUDED

1. Functions included.

The scope of the Act is determined in part by the “function” carried out by
the public body. If, at a meeting, a public body is engaged in an “advisory function,”
“legislative function,” or “quasi-legislative function,” the Act applies.

An advisory function is “the study of a matter of public concern or the

making of recommendations on the matter, under a delegation of responsibility” by
law, gubernatorial or other chief executive designation or by the designation of an
official who is subject to the policy director of the governor or other chief
executive, or by formal action of a public body. §10-502(c).43 A legislative function
is “the process or act of ... approving, disapproving, enacting, amending, or repealing
a law or other measure to set public policy.”44 It also includes “approving or
disapproving an appointment,” §10-502(f); this language refers to the public body’s
consideration of an appointment proposed by an executive official or a subordinate

40
2 OMCB Opinions 5, 7 (1998) (Opinion 98-2).
41
See 3 OMCB Opinions 274 (2003) (Opinion 03-5).
42
3 OMCB Opinions 122 (2001) (Opinion 01-10).
43
The reference to the designation of an official subject to the policy direction of
a chief executive was added by Chapter 643, Laws of Maryland 2007.
44
See, e.g., 64 Opinions of the Attorney General 208, 210 (1979) (action of Lottery
Commission to increase prize payout is the exercise of a legislative function). The
Compliance Board has considered how this definition applies to the role of local
government in the State legislative process. 4 OMCB Opinions 12 (2004).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-12

of the public body rather than to the public body’s making an appointment.45 A
quasi-legislative function includes the process of rulemaking, “approving,
disapproving, or amending a budget,”46 and “approving, disapproving, or amending
a contract.” §10-502(j). A contract can include an employment contract 47 or a
franchise assignment.48

The Act also applies to functions not defined in the Act at all. In the
Compliance Board’s simile, “just as the universe of subatomic particles probably
contains particles as yet undetected, so the universe of activities subject to the Open
Meetings Act contains functions that are undefined by the Act .... If a discussion fits
within none of the functional definitions of the Act, then the discussion is subject
to the Act.”49

2. Functions excluded.

The Open Meetings Act does not apply, however, to every possible item of
public business. With an important exception to be discussed below, it does not
apply when a public body is carrying out an “administrative function,” a “judicial
function,” or a “quasi-judicial function.” §10-503(a)(1).50 If the Act does not apply,
a public body is free, but is not required, to comply with the Act’s provisions on
notice, openness, and the like.

45
1 OMCB Opinions 252 (1997) (Opinion 97-14); and 1 OMCB Opinions 123
(1995) (Opinion 95-5).
46
See 4 OMCB Opinions 104 (2004).
47
1 OMCB Opinions 125 (1995) (Opinion 95-5).
48
5 OMCB Opinions 200 (2007); 5 OMCB Opinions 7 (2006).
49
1 OMCB Opinions 96, 98 (1994) (Opinion 94-7). See also 4 OMCB Opinions 12
(2004).
50
For many years, an executive order required agencies in the Executive Branch
to hold open meetings (with certain exceptions) even when carrying out what is now
called an administrative function. See Executive Order 01.01.1976.09 (issued May 25,
1976). This executive order was rescinded on January 12, 1987. See Executive Order
01.01.1987.01 (rescinding 52 executive orders said to have become “obsolete”).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-13

Of the activities that are outside the scope of the Open Meetings Act, the
definitions of judicial function and quasi-judicial function are straightforward. A
judicial function is “the exercise of any power of the judicial branch of the State
government,” except rulemaking. §10-502(e). A quasi-judicial function is “a
determination of ... a contested case” under the Maryland Administrative Procedure
Act or any other administrative proceeding subject to judicial review under Title
7, Chapter 200 of the Maryland Rules. §10-502(i).51

The term “administrative function,” defined in §10-502(b), is new, but the

underlying concept is not. In legislation enacted in 2006, the General Assembly
changed the former term “executive function” to “administrative function” but kept
the definition the same.52 This change in terminology, recommended by the
Compliance Board,53 is aimed at avoiding the confusion that arose between
“executive function,” the term previously used in the Act, and “executive session,”
commonly used to refer to any closed meeting. The change, however, does not
affect the interpretation of the exclusion. In other words, all prior judicial and
Compliance Board interpretations of the executive function exclusion are preserved
and may be used in applying the “administrative function” exclusion.

The Compliance Board has described the executive function – now termed the
administrative function – exclusion as “the most bedeviling aspect of Open Meetings
Act compliance ....”54 Applying this exclusion requires two distinct steps. First, the
public body must consider whether the matter to be discussed falls within the
definition of any of the other defined functions. If so, then the administrative
function exclusion is ruled out. §10-502(b)(2). If not, the public body must consider
whether the matter to be discussed involves the development of new policy, or
merely the implementation of an already-established law or policy. The

51
4 OMCB Opinions 76 (2004); 3 OMCB Opinions 260 (2003) (Opinion 03-3); 2
OMCB Opinions 1, 2-3 (1998) (Opinion 98-1).
52
Chapter 584 (House Bill 698) of the Laws of Maryland 2006 (effective October
1, 2006).
53
Open Meetings Compliance Board, Use of the Executive Function Exclusion
Under the State Open Meetings Act 19-20 (December 2005).
54
3 OMCB Opinions 105, 106 (2001) (Opinion 01-7).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-14

administrative function exclusion covers only the latter.55 Public bodies should be
particularly careful about aspects of the contracting process, which might seem
administrative in character but are a quasi-legislative, not an administrative,
function.56 The Compliance Board has issued numerous opinions examining this
exclusion in various contexts. References to these are included in Appendix F to this
manual.

In counties that have not adopted a form of home rule, in home rule counties
without a county executive, and in many municipalities, the legislative body
exercises administrative functions as well. The applicability of the Act will depend
on which role the body is playing.57 In a commissioner county, for example, the
early phases of the budget preparation process correspond to activities of the county
executive in a charter home rule county; these budget preparation activities are,
therefore, part of the administrative function, rather than the quasi-legislative
function of budget review.58

Similarly, a county board of education carries out some activities within the
administrative function exclusion and some that are not excluded. The Compliance
Board has given extensive guidance on this matter in an opinion involving the Board
of Education for Howard County.59

55
See 78 Opinions of the Attorney General 275 (1993). For example, this office has
concluded that the issuance of advisory opinions by the State Ethics Commission is an
administrative (formerly executive) function, not an advisory function. See 64 Opinions
of the Attorney General 162, 167 n.3 (1979); Opinion No. 78-079 (June 7, 1978)
(unpublished).
56
See 4 OMCB Opinions 127 (2005).
57
See Board of County Commissioners v. Landmark Community Newspapers, 293
Md. 595, 602-05, 446 A.2d 63 (1982); Compliance Board Opinion 92-2 (October 23, 1993),
reprinted in 1 OMCB Opinions 6. The Compliance Board has held that the distinction
drawn in Landmark, between the executive and the quasi-legislative phases of the budget
process, “is limited to a situation in which preexisting law clearly delineates the distinct
phases of the process in question.” 3 OMCB Opinions 105, 110-11 (2001) (Opinion 01-7).
58
Landmark Community Newspapers, 293 Md. at 605. See generally 1 OMCB
Opinions 227 at 229-30 (1997) (Opinion 97-7).
59
3 OMCB Opinions 39 (2001) (Opinion 01-10).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-15

Although administrative and quasi-judicial functions are generally outside the

scope of the Act, these exclusions do not extend to certain licensing and all zoning
matters. Under §10-503(b), the Act applies to a public body when it is meeting to
consider:

(1) granting a license or permit; or

(2) a special exception, variance, conditional use, zoning

classification, enforcement of any zoning law or regulation, or any
other zoning matter.

Thus, it does not matter whether a particular license application or zoning matter
would fit within the definition of the administrative or quasi-judicial functions. If
the item deals with “granting a license or permit” or with zoning, the Open Meetings
Act applies to the meeting at which the matter is considered.60

This provision has resulted in a significant change in practice for some public
bodies. Zoning appeals boards, for example, which once were outside the Act when
carrying out their quasi-judicial role, are required to conduct their deliberations in
open session unless one of the Act’s exceptions applies, and often none will. The
General Assembly unquestionably meant to legislate this result; not only is the
statutory language unambiguous, but the General Assembly also rejected
amendments that would have permitted these deliberations to be nonpublic.61

But the reach of §10-503(b) might not have been considered by the General
Assembly in another area: occupational licensing applications.62 When a person
applies for a license under the Health Occupations or Business Occupations and
Professions Articles, the licensing board’s meeting to consider the application would
fall within the terms of §10-503(b)(1) and therefore is subject to the Open Meeting
Act. Of course, exceptions in the Act might permit the meeting to be closed )
especially §10-508(a)(2), regarding the protection of personal privacy, and §10-

60
3 OMCB Opinions 182 (2002) (Opinion 02-3).
61
See generally Wesley Chapel Bluemount Ass’n v. Baltimore County, 347 Md. 125
(1997). This case decided that development or subdivision plans are, for purposes of §10-
503(b)(2), a “zoning matter.”
62
The only example that we could locate in the legislative history of a proceeding
to be covered by §10-503(b)(1) is liquor licensing.
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 2-16

508(a)(13), permitting invocation of confidentiality requirements in other law. These

and other exceptions are discussed in Chapter 4 below.

The Act applies even if the licensing board has before it a recommendation
that a license application be denied; the item to be considered remains whether to
grant the license. The Act would not apply, however, to suspension or revocation
proceedings, which do not concern the “granting” of a license.

D. W RITTEN M ATERIAL

With the exception of certain records required by the Open Meetings Act,
discussed in Chapter 3, the Act does not regulate access to documents. Instead, the
Maryland Public Information Act governs public access to State and local records.63
Thus, even if members of a public body refer to certain documents at a public
meeting, the Open Meetings Act does not require that the documents themselves be
made public; the status of the documents would be determined by the Public
Information Act or other law.64

63
See Title 10, Subtitle 6, Part III of the State Government Article. A manual and
other material about the Public Information Act may be found on the Attorney General’s
website, http://www.oag.state.md.us/Opengov/pia.htm.
64
2 OMCB Opinions 78 (1999) (Opinion 99-15).
 Chapter Three
Procedural Requirements

A. N OTICE

1. Applicability

Ifadvance
a meeting is subject to the Act, the public body must give “reasonable
notice of the session.” §10-506(a). In the case of an open meeting,
the Court of Appeals has written, “[o]bservation by citizens is possible only when they
have notice [of a planned meeting].” 1 Notice of the meeting is required, however, even
if the session may be closed under one of the Act’s exceptions. Moreover, notice of a
scheduled meeting is required despite the presiding officer’s anticipation that a quorum
will not attend.2

2. Content

Unless some unusual circumstance makes it impracticable to do so, the public

body should give a written notice that includes the date, time, and place of its meeting.
If the body intends to conduct all or a part of its meeting in closed session, the notice
should say so. §10-506(b). Although many public bodies have adopted the
commendable practice of including an anticipated agenda in their meeting notice, this
practice is not required by the Act. Hence, a variation from a previously announced

1
Community and Labor United For Baltimore Charter Committee (CLUB) v.
Baltimore City Board of Elections, 377 Md. 183, 194, 832 A.2d 804 (2003).
2
CLUB v. Board of Elections, 377 Md. at 195. See also 3 OMCB Opinions 314 (1993)
(Opinion 03-13); 3 OMCB Opinions 92 (2001) (Opinion 01-4).

18
Open Meetings Act Manual (6 th ed.) 19

agenda (for example, by adding an item) is not a violation.3 A meeting notice must be
retained for at least one year after the date of the meeting. §10-506(d).

3. Method

The Act allows a range of methods for giving notice. If the public body is a unit
of State government, it may publish its meeting notice in the Maryland Register. §10-
506(c)(1). Any public body may give the required notice “by delivery to representatives
of the news media who regularly report on sessions of the public body or the activities
of the government of which the public body is a part.” §10-506(c)(2).4 “Delivery”
implies an affirmative act; the public body may not rely on the happenstance that a
reporter will learn of a meeting from some independent source. 5 In addition, “if the
public body previously has given public notice that this method will be used,” it may
give notice “by posting or depositing the notice at a convenient public location at or
near the place of the session” – typically, on a bulletin board outside the town hall or
similar building. §10-506(c)(3).6 Finally, a public body may give notice “by any other
reasonable method.” §10-506(c)(4).7

A public body has a duty to ensure that staff members do not mistakenly omit
giving notice.8 A public body also has a responsibility to notify the public if a
previously scheduled meeting is canceled.9

3
See 3 OMCB Opinions 264 (2003) (Opinion 03-4); 2 OMCB Opinions 52 (1999)
(Opinion 99-7); 2 OMCB Opinions 31 (1998) (Opinion 98-9); 1 OMCB Opinions 110 (1995)
(Opinion 95-1); and 1 OMCB Opinions 16 (1992) (Opinion 92-5).
4
See, e.g., 3 OMCB Opinions 188 (2002) (Opinion 02-4).
5
4 OMCB Opinions 88 (2004).
6
The place used for a posting might be consistent with what the public was previously
told. 4 OMCB Opinions 88 (2004).
7
Cable television might, under some circumstances, be a “reasonable method” of
notice. 1 OMCB Opinions 166 (1996) (Opinion 96-5). A written version of the notice,
however, should also be available to the public.
8
1 OMCB Opinions 44 (1993) (Opinion 93-8).
9
1 OMCB Opinions 186 (1996) (Opinion 96-11).
Open Meetings Act Manual (6 th ed.) 20

4. Timing

The Act does not mandate any particular period of advance notice. Undoubtedly,
the General Assembly recognized that sometimes meetings have to be held on short
notice, and the Compliance Board has ruled that, “absent evidence that a public body
scheduled a meeting primarily to foil the public’s right to attend and observe, the
Compliance Board ordinarily will accept the determination ... that a meeting is needed
at a particular time.” 10 The rule of thumb, given the policies of the Act, is that notice
of a future meeting should be given as soon as is practicable after the body has fixed
the date, time, and place of its next meeting. If events require the prompt convening of
a previously unscheduled meeting, the public body is to provide the best public notice
feasible under the circumstances.11 For example, the public body would be well-advised
to provide immediate oral notice to reporters who are reasonably thought to be
interested, and a written notice should be posted in the customary public place as
quickly as possible.12 Impromptu meeting or not, the Act’s “procedures must be
followed ... [for] any session of a public body that is within the scope of the Open
Meetings Act.” 13

B. C HOICE OF M EETING S ITE

The Act’s statement of legislative policy calls on public bodies to hold meetings
“in places reasonably accessible to individuals who would like to attend these
meetings.” §10-501(c). A public body may not meet in a room posted as off-limits to
the public, even if a determined member of the public might be admitted despite the
sign.14 When a public body is considering where to meet, it should choose a room large
enough to accommodate those members of the public and the press who are expected
to attend. “That is, a public body would violate the Act if it had reason to expect a large

10
4 OMCB Opinions 51, 56 (2004).
11
See 1 OMCB Opinions 56 (1994) (Opinion 94-1).
12
4 OMCB Opinions 6, 9 (2004); 1 OMCB Opinions 186 (1996) (Opinion 96-11); and
1 OMCB Opinions 183 (1996) (Opinion 96-10).
13
1 OMCB Opinions 20 (1993) (Opinion 93-1).
14
4 OMCB Opinions 147 (2005).
Open Meetings Act Manual (6 th ed.) 21

crowd but deliberately chose to meet in too small a space when a suitable, larger space
was available.” 15

The location should be as convenient as possible for public attendance. “[T]he

law would almost certainly be interpreted to preclude selection of a meeting location
so distant and inconvenient as to prevent public attendance. Selection of such a site
would subvert the policy of open meetings ....” 16 Further, the room should be accessible
to members of the public with disabilities.17 Individuals who are deaf may request that
an interpreter be available at a public hearing; if feasible, the unit holding the hearing
should provide the interpreter. §10-507.1.18

Should a larger crowd than expected attend, the body may move to a larger
facility if one is readily available or may postpone the meeting until a larger space can
be found. As the Compliance Board wrote:

In our opinion, a public body, although not legally

required to do so, should move a meeting to a larger room
if the current meeting site cannot accommodate all who
have arrived, a larger room is readily available, a request
is made that the meeting be moved there, and moving the
meeting would not interfere with the public body’s ability
to conduct its business. To move a meeting under these
circumstance would advance the underlying goals of the
Open Meetings Act without unduly burdening the public

15
3 OMCB Opinions 118, 120 (2001) (Opinion 01-9).
16
Ann Taylor Schwing, Open Meeting Laws §5.72, at 213.
17
The Compliance Board has ruled that the Act is not violated if individuals with
mobility impairments are provided assistance to attend a meeting in a facility that is not
barrier-free. 1 OMCB Opinions 245 (1997) (Opinion 97-11). See also 3 OMCB Opinions 233,
235 (2002) (Opinion 02-13); 1 OMCB Opinions 237, 239 (1997) (Opinion 97-9). The
Compliance Board did not address the impact of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the
interpretation of which is outside the Compliance Board’s jurisdiction.
18
This provision, enacted by Chapter 31 of the Laws of Maryland 1997 as a
recodification of former Article 30, §2, applies to all “units” within the Executive and
Legislative Branches. The term “unit,” although undefined, is broader than “public body.”
Although this provision does not itself apply to local units of government, compliance with
it will avoid potential liability issues under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Open Meetings Act Manual (6 th ed.) 22

body. If a public body moves the meeting site, it should

post a notice to that effect at the original location, so that
latecomers will be directed to the proper place.19

C. V OTING R EQUIREMENTS

In general, the Open Meetings Act does not lay out rules of parliamentary
procedure.20 It is not intended to supplant or substitute for a public body’s own rules
or guidelines, such as Robert’s Rules of Order, for the conduct of meetings. In
particular, the Act does not dictate how a public body organizes its consideration of
issues that are permitted in closed session; it may meet for a closed session
unconnected with an open session, or it may hold a closed session before or after an
open session.21 The notice of the closed meeting, however, should “make clear to
members of the public that a meeting scheduled to begin at, for example, 9:00 a.m. will
commence with a closed session, the open session to commence at 10:00 a.m.” 22 Of
course, a notice of this kind merely states an expectation; if the Act applies, the actual
closing of the session requires compliance with the procedures discussed below.

The Act requires certain formal steps before a public body may meet in closed
session.23 First, the presiding officer must “conduct a recorded vote on the closing of
the session.” §10-508(d)(2)(i). In accordance with customary parliamentary procedures,
this vote would occur on a motion, properly seconded, to close the meeting. The motion
should state the legal basis for the proposed closing. The body may hold the closed
session only if the motion is supported by a majority of the members present and
voting. §10-508(d)(1). This vote must take place in an open session immediately

19
3 OMCB Opinions 118, 121 (2001) (Opinion 01-9).
20
3 OMCB Opinions 264, 268 (2003) (Opinion 03-4).
21
3 OMCB Opinions 26 4, 268 (2003) (Opinion 03-4).
22
1 OMCB Opinions 23 (1993) (Opinion 93-2).
23
If the public body is engaged in an administrative, judicial, or quasi-judicial function,
it need not vote to close a meeting, because the Act ordinarily is inapplicable. See Chapter 2,
Part C.
Open Meetings Act Manual (6 th ed.) 23

preceding the closed session.24 “[T]hose who participate in a closed session are
accountable for the decision to close.” 25 Hence, a public body may not close a meeting
based on a vote that occurred at a prior session.26

The presiding officer must ensure that a written statement is prepared setting out
the reason for closing the meeting, the specific provision of the Open Meetings Act that
allows the meeting to be closed, and the topics to be discussed at the closed session.
§10-508(d)(2)(ii).27 All justification for closing a meeting must be presented at this
time. After-the-fact justifications, not presented contemporaneously with closing, are
ineffective.28

While this written statement need not disclose sensitive information that the Act
permits to be discussed in closed session, the statement ought to be more than
“uninformative boilerplate.” 29 This statement is a matter of public record and is to be
sent to the Open Meeting Compliance Board if anyone objects to the closing of a
meeting. §10-508(d)(3) and (4). An objection, however, is not itself a complaint to the
Board, the procedures for which are summarized in Chapter 5. The written statement
must be retained by the public body for at least one year after the date of the session.
§10-508(d)(5).

D. M INUTES

The Open Meetings Act requires that public bodies keep written minutes of all
of their meetings, open and closed, and retain them for at least one year. §10-509(b)

24
3 OMCB Opinions 4 (2000) (Opinion 00-2);1 OMCB Opinions 191 (1996) (Opinion
96-12).
25
3 OMCB Opinions 4, 6 (2000) (Opinion 00-2).
26
Id.
27
A sample form for the required statement is set out in Appendix C.
28
See 1 OMCB Opinions 117 (1995) (Opinion 95-03); 1 OMCB Opinions 96 (1994)
(Opinion (4-7); 1 OMCB Opinions 73 (1994) (Opinion 94-5); and 1 OMCB Opinions 53
(1993) (Opinion 93-11).
29
See, e.g., 1 OMCB Opinions 23, 26 (1993) (Opinion 93-2).
Open Meetings Act Manual (6 th ed.) 24

and (e). The maintenance of untranscribed audiotapes does not suffice.30 Minutes are
to be prepared as soon as “practicable.” §10-509(b). This requirement, the Compliance
Board has opined, means that “[t]he cycle of minutes preparation should parallel the
cycle of a public body’s meetings, with only the lag time needed to draft and review
minutes.” 31 The Compliance Board found unlawful “routine delays of several months
or longer in preparing minutes.” 32 By contrast, the Compliance Board found that an
interval of about five weeks between a meeting and the disclosure of minutes reflected
“a reasonable preparation time.”33 The approved minutes of open meetings are publicly
available. §10-509(d). Draft minutes, however, need not be disclosed.34

The Act requires that the following information be set out in the minutes,
whether the meeting is open or closed: “each item” considered, the action taken on
each item, and each recorded vote. §10-509(c)(1).35 Although the Act does not specify
the level of detail in the description of an “item,” the description should be sufficient
so that a member of the public who examines the minutes of an open meeting (or of a
closed meeting, if the minutes are later released) can understand what the issue was.

A public body may, but is not required to, tape record a session. §10-
509(c)(3)(i).36 The minutes and any tape recording of a closed session are generally not
open to public inspection, unless the majority of the public body votes in favor of
disclosing them. §10-509(c)(4)(iii). When a public body has closed a meeting to discuss
the investment of public funds or the marketing of public securities, however, the
minutes and any tape recording of that portion of a closed session must be made
available to the public after the transactions have occurred. §10-509(c)(4)(i) and (ii).
The Act does not require that the minutes of a closed session be released after the

30
2 OMCB Opinions 87, 90 (1999) (Opinion 99-18).
31
2 OMCB Opinions 87, 89 (1999) (Opinion 99-18). See also 4 OMCB Opinions 1
(2004); 4 OMCB Opinions 24 (2004); 3 OMCB Opinions 233 (2002) (Opinion 02-13).
32
Id. See also 2 OMCB Opinions 11, 12 (1998) (Opinion 98-3).
33
3 OMCB Opinions 340, 342 (2003) (Opinion 03-18).
34
2 OMCB Opinions 13 (1998) (Opinion 98-3).
35
See 1 OMCB Opinions 155 (1996) (Opinion 96-2).
36
4 OMCB Opinions 74 (2004).
Open Meetings Act Manual (6 th ed.) 25

completion of other transactions ) for example, the purchase of real estate ) but the
public body might choose to make the minutes public at that time unless doing so
would cause some harm (as, for example, if negotiations for a similar tract of land were
still in progress). Minutes and any tape recordings are required to be maintained for at
least one year after the meeting. §10-509(e).

Finally, the public body has a duty to disclose certain information about a closed
meeting. The minutes of the next open meeting must include “a statement of the time,
place, and purpose of the [previous] closed session,” a record of how the members
voted on the motion to close the session, a citation of the provision of the Act that
allowed the meeting to be closed, and “a listing of the topics of discussion, persons
present, and each action taken during the session.” §10-509(c)(2).

The degree of detail in the minutes need not negate the confidentiality that the
closed session was meant to preserve. For example, if disclosing the fact that a
particular property was under consideration for acquisition might affect the price, the
minutes need not disclose that information.37 Another example relates to settlement
proposals. Suppose that a public body closed a meeting to seek advice from its counsel
about a settlement proposal in pending litigation. The statement in the minutes of the
next open meeting need not disclose details like the nature of the proposal or the exact
response of the public body.38 At the same time, a public body must avoid the use of
evasive boilerplate, a practice that does not meet the objective of §10-508(d)(2). A
description that the topic of a closed meeting was, simply, a “personnel matter” would
be impermissibly uninformative, because that description merely repeats the pertinent
statutory text.39 In the Compliance Board’s example, a public body “might say
(assuming this were the situation), ‘Consideration of disciplinary action for alleged
violations of municipal policy.’ As this example indicates, there is a middle ground
between identifying the individual whose personnel matter is involved, which is not

37
See 1 OMCB Opinions 110 (1995) (Opinion 95-1); 1 OMCB Opinions 73 (1994)
(Opinion 94-5); and 1 OMCB Opinions 16 (1992) (Opinion 92-5).
38
See 1 OMCB Opinions 73, 74 (1994) (Opinion 94-5).
39
See, e.g., 1 OMCB Opinions 110 (1995) (Opinion 95-1); and 1 OMCB Opinions 73
(1994) (Opinion 94-5).
Open Meetings Act Manual (6 th ed.) 26

required, and saying nothing more than the formulaic ‘personnel matter,’ which is
impermissible.” 40

The preceding discussion is predicated on the assumption that the Act applied
to the meeting in question. If a topic of discussion is excluded from the Act (see
Chapter 2C), ordinarily no minutes at all need be kept.

Recent legislation, however, requires certain disclosures “if a public body

recesses an open session to carry out an administrative function” in closed session.
§10-503(c).41 In that circumstance, the public body’s next open meeting minutes are
to contain “a statement of the date, time, place, and persons present at the
administrative function meeting and a phrase or sentence identifying the subject matter
discussed at ... meeting.”

40
4 OMCB Opinions 76, 78 (2004).
41
Chapter 584 (House Bill 698) of the Laws of Maryland 2006.
 Chapter Four
Open and Closed Meetings

A. G ENERAL O PENNESS R EQUIREMENT

Apublic body must hold an open meeting unless the matter under
discussion is entirely outside the scope of the Open Meetings Act ) for
example, if it concerns an administrative, judicial, or quasi-judicial function other
than licensing or zoning ) or, if the Act applies, one of the specific exceptions set
out in §10-508 is applicable. “When the ... Act requires a meeting to be open, it
must be open to all. The Act does not contain an intermediate category of ‘partially
open’ meetings, to which some members of the public are admitted and others
excluded .... Accordingly, a public body may not bar reporters from an open
meeting.”1

B. O BSERVING AND T APING

The Act entitles members of the public to observe open sessions of public
bodies; it does not afford the public any right to participate in the discussion.2
Indeed, disruptive attempts at participation can result in removal from the meeting.
§10-507(c)(1).3 Conversely, the Act does not affect the application of any other law
or policy that does grant members of the public the opportunity to be heard at a
meeting.

1
2 OMCB Opinions 67, 69 (1999) (Opinion 99-11).
2
1 OMCB Opinions 227 (1993) (Opinion 97-7).
3
Under §10-507(c)(2), “[u]nless the public body or its members or agents acted
maliciously, the public body, members, and agents are not liable for having an individual
removed ....”

4-1
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 4-2

Every public body has a duty to “adopt and enforce reasonable rules
regarding the conduct of persons attending its meetings and the videotaping,
televising, photographing, broadcasting, or recording of its meetings.” §10-507(b).
The Open Meetings Compliance Board has prepared model rules to assist public
bodies in carrying out this obligation; these are included in this manual as Appendix
D. As introduced, the 1991 legislation (Senate Bill 170) would have expressly
allowed public meetings to be videotaped, televised, photographed, broadcast, or
recorded. That provision was deleted by amendment. Nevertheless, the Act’s
statement of public policy refers to “[t]he ability of the public, its representatives,
and the media to attend, report on, and broadcast meetings of public bodies ....”
§10-501(b)(1).

Accordingly, a public body may not bar the use of recording and transmitting
devices, for a flat prohibition is not “reasonable”: “[A] rule restricting videotaping
or other similar activities is ‘reasonable’ only if it satisfies two criteria: (i) that the
rule is needed to protect the legitimate rights of others at the meeting and (ii) that
the rule does so by means that are consistent with the goals of the Act.” 4 Thus, in
regulating the taping of a meeting, a public body may not distinguish between
representatives of the media versus members of the public.5 The “legitimate rights”
of attendees at an open meeting does not include a right to avoid photography:
“There is no right to be protected against the gaze of an observer in a public forum,
or against the lens of the observer’s camera.”6 If a public body is concerned about
the disruptive effect of bright lights or camera operators moving around the room,
it can impose appropriate restrictions.

C. E XCEPTIONS A LLOWING C LOSED M EETING

If a meeting is within the scope of the Open Meetings Act, it must be open
unless one of the specific reasons for closing it can legitimately be identified. A

4
1 OMCB Opinions 137, 140 (1995) (Opinion 95-9).
5
5 OMCB Opinions 22 (2006).
6
Id. at 141.
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 4-3

public body may not avoid an open meeting merely because a topic is controversial
or potentially embarrassing.7

Fourteen circumstances exist under which a public body may close a meeting
in its entirety or may close a portion of a meeting that is otherwise required to be
open. All fourteen exceptions are to be “strictly construed in favor of open meetings
....” §10-508(c). Nothing in the Open Meetings Act itself requires a public body to
invoke an exception; unless some other confidentiality law applies, it may meet in
open session even if, under the Act, it could legally meet in closed session.8 When
a public body does invoke one of these exceptions, it must limit its discussion to
that topic only. If the public body wishes to discuss other matters, it must return
to open session, either to discuss the additional matter in public or vote to close the
session based on another applicable exception.9

If a public body anticipates returning to an open session after a closed

session, it should so inform those attending the meeting, Otherwise, if members
of the public are given the impression that the public portion of the meeting had
been completed, the reconvened open session could be “open in name but not in
reality,” resulting in a violation of the Act.10

One provision, §10-508(a)(13), recognizes that other law might require a

meeting to be closed. Thus, it permits a public body to close a meeting in order to
“comply with a specific constitutional, statutory, or judicially imposed requirement
that prevents public disclosures about a particular proceeding or matter.” Examples

7
The 1977 Open Meetings Act contained a provision, former §10-508(a)(14), under
which a public body could close a meeting to “satisfy an exceptional reason that, by two-
thirds vote of the members of the public body who are present at the session, the public
body finds to be so compelling that the reason overrides the general public policy in favor
of open sessions.” This provision was deleted when the Act was revamped in 1991.
8
See 65 Opinions of the Attorney General 347, 348 (1980).
9
3 OMCB Opinions 16, 21 (2000) (Opinion 00-5).
10
3 OMCB Opinions 115 (2001) (Opinion 01-8).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 4-4

of other law that might require a meeting to be closed include federal law,11 a State
constitutional privilege,12 a State statute,13 and a common law privilege.14

Two of the exceptions in §10-508 are designed to protect the privacy of

individuals. One generally permits a meeting to be closed to “protect the privacy
or reputation of individuals with respect to a matter that is not related to public
business.” §10-508(a)(2). The other permits a meeting to be closed when the
discussion deals with a “personnel matter” affecting one or more specific
individuals. §10-508(a)(1). This exception includes discussion of possible personnel
actions, compensation issues, and “performance evaluation of appointees,
employees, or officials over whom [the public body] has jurisdiction.” §10-
508(a)(1)(i).15 Like the other exceptions, this one is to be construed narrowly. It is
inapplicable to discussions of issues affecting classes of public employees, as distinct
from specific individuals.16 Thus, the Compliance Board has held that this
exception is not a basis to close a session to discuss matters such as agency
consolidations or outsourcing services.17 The exceptions only extends to discussions
pertaining to specific personnel.

11
Potomac Group Home v. Montgomery County, 823 F. Supp 1285, 1299 (D. Md.
1993).
12
Bill review letter (Senate Bill 170) from Attorney General J. Joseph Curran, Jr.
to Governor William Donald Schaefer (May 6, 1991).
13
Letter of advice from Assistant Attorney General Jack Schwartz, Chief Counsel
for Opinions and Advice, to Barbara R. Trader, Esquire (October 7, 1996) (discussing
provision of Public Information Act that bars disclosure of personnel records).
14
1 OMCB Opinions 96 (1994) (Opinion 94-7). See also 65 Opinions of the
Attorney General 341, 343-44 (1980).
15
The exception applies, however, to a discussion of any specific personnel matter,
even if the public body does not have jurisdiction. §10-508(a)(1)(ii); 4 OMCB Opinions
188 (2005).
16
The fullest discussion of this exception appears in 1 OMCB Opinions 73 (1994)
(Opinion 94-5). See also, e.g., 3 OMCB Opinions 335 (2003) (Opinion 03-17); 1 OMCB
Opinions 233, 236 (1997) (Opinion 97-8).
17
6 OMCB Opinions 180 (2009); 6 OMCB Opinions 104 (2009); see also 1 OMCB
Opinions 255.
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 4-5

All of the other exceptions are intended to protect the public interest by
allowing a body to discuss genuinely sensitive issues in closed session. Four of these
exceptions relate to business or financial transactions: the acquisition of real
property, §10-508(a)(3); proposals for a business or industrial organization to locate,
expand, or remain in the State, §10-508(a)(4);18 the investment of public funds, §10-
508(a)(5); and the marketing of public securities, §10-508(a)(6).

The Act also allows a public body to close a meeting in order to “consult with
counsel to obtain legal advice.” §10-508(a)(7). This exception is more narrowly
worded than its predecessor in the original Act. Prior to the 1991 amendments, this
exception authorized the closing of a meeting to “consult with counsel on a legal
matter.” The Legislature tightened the wording to avoid the situation in which a
lawyer sat in on a meeting to give a colorable basis for invoking this exception but
was not a genuine participant in the discussion (lawyer as potted plant). As
reworded by the 1991 amendments, §10-508(a)(7) requires that the issue be one on
which the body seeks and obtains the advice of the lawyer. As the Compliance
Board put it, “the exception is a relatively narrow one, limited to the give-and-take
between lawyer and client in the context of the bona fide rendering of advice.”19
Furthermore, “once the legal advice is obtained, the public body may not remain
in closed session to discuss policy issues or other matters. The exception for
consultation with counsel “may never be invoked unless the lawyer is present at the
meeting.”20 This exception only extends to discussions between a lawyer and public
body that actually involve rendering legal advice, not where a lawyer is actually
serving in an alternative capacity such as acting as a business agent.21

Another exception, §10-508(a)(8), permits a public body to close a meeting

in order to consult with any individual “about pending or potential litigation.” The
exception can be invoked “only when the discussion directly relates to the pending
or potential litigation; it may not [be invoked to] close a portion of the discussion

18
This exception applies to a discussion about a company’s plans to relocate within
the State. 1 OMCB Opinions 73 (1994) (Opinion 94-5).
19
3 OMCB Opinions 16, 20 (2000) (Opinion 00-5).
20
1 OMCB Opinions 35 (1993) (Opinion 93-6). See also 3 OMCB Opinions 16
(2000) (Opinion 00-5).
21
See 5 OMCB Opinions 130 (2007).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 4-6

that deals separately with the underlying [policy] issue.22 The exception applies
only if the potential for litigation is concrete, rather than speculative.23

Two other exceptions allow a public body to close a meeting in order to deal
effectively with labor negotiations and procurement matters. Under §10-508(a)(9),
a public body may “conduct collective bargaining negotiations or consider matters
that relate to the negotiations” in closed session. With respect to procurement,
“before a contract is awarded or bids are opened,” a public body may meet in closed
session to “discuss a matter directly related to a negotiating strategy or the contents
of a bid or proposal, if public discussion or disclosure would adversely impact the
ability of the public body to participate in the competitive or bidding proposal
process.” §10-508(a)(14). This exception is evidently intended to protect against
premature disclosure of sensitive information like the public body’s negotiating
strategy. Conversely, the exception was not intended to permit secret discussion by
a public body of open bids submitted by various bidders. More generally, as the
Compliance Board put it, “there is no exception in the Act for ‘negotiation issues’
as such.”24 Only negotiations of the types specified in the exceptions are covered.

Finally, three other exceptions deal with sensitive issues warranting closed
meetings: the discussion of “public security,” if “public discussion would constitute
a risk to the public or public security,” §10-508(a)(10);25 the preparation,
administration, or grading of “a scholastic, licensing, or qualifying examination,”
§10-508(a)(11);26 and the conduct or discussion of “an investigative proceeding on
actual or possible criminal conduct,” §10-508(a)(12).

The Open Meetings Act does not prohibit a public body from taking final
action at a session that is properly closed to the public under one of the exceptions.

22
1 OMCB Opinions 56, 60 (1994) (Opinion 94-1).
23
3 OMCB Opinions 233, 239 (2002) (Opinion 02-13); 1 OMCB Opinions 237, 240
(1997) (Opinion 97-9).
24
1 OMCB Opinions 233, 234 (1997) (Opinion 97-8) (exception does not apply to
negotiations among government jurisdictions over cost-sharing arrangement). See also 3
OMCB Opinions 233, 237 (2002) (Opinion 02-13).
25
See 1 OMCB Opinions 73 (1994) (Opinion 94-5).
26
See 1 OMCB Opinions 13 (1992) (Opinion 92-4).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 4-7

So, for example, a public body may vote to make a particular kind of investment of
public funds in closed session. Other law, however, may bar final action in a closed
session.27

27
See, e.g., Article 23A, §8 and Article 25, §5 of the Maryland Code (municipal and
county legislative bodies may not finally adopt an “ordinance, resolution, rule or
regulation” in an executive session); see also 94 Opinions of the Attorney General 101
(2009).
 Chapter Five
Enforcement

A. O PEN M EETINGS C OMPLIANCE B OARD

ThehasOpen Meetings Compliance Board, which began its activities in 1992,

responsibility to educate public bodies about their duties under the
Act, to provide a nonjudicial forum for resolving disputes about the Act’s
application, and to offer recommendations to the General Assembly about
amending the Act. The Board consists of three members, appointed by the
Governor, serving three-year terms. §10-502.2. The Attorney General’s Office
provides the staff for the Board.

The Compliance Board’s primary duty is to “receive, review, and resolve

complaints from any person alleging a violation of the provisions of this [Act] and
issue a written opinion as to whether a violation has occurred.” §10-502.4(a). The
Board’s procedures, as outlined in the Act, call for a written complaint stating the
nature of the alleged violation; a written response by the public body within 30
days, including certain documentary material if requested by the Board, §10-
502.5(c)(2)(ii); an “informal conference,” if the Board wants more information or
believes that oral presentations would be helpful;1 and the issuance of a written
opinion by the Board. §10-502.5.2 One commentator has praised the Compliance

1
Interestingly, the Act does not apply to these informal conferences conducted by
the Board. “[A] determination of ... a complaint by the Board” is defined as “quasi-judicial”
and is therefore outside the scope of the Act. §§10-502(i)(3) and 10-503(a)(1)(iii).
2
In 2007, legislation was enacted to provide an alternative process whereby the
Compliance Board will send a complaint to the appointing authority if the public body no
longer exists. See Chapter 643, Laws of Maryland 2007.

5-1
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 5-2

Board’s “important role in promoting the public policy under the Open Meetings
Act.... It is a public service in the best sense of the term.”3

The Board is not set up to resolve disputed issues of fact. If key facts about
a complaint are disputed, the Board will invoke its express authority to “state that
the Board is unable to resolve the complaint.” §10-502.5(f)(2).4 The Board has
prepared a summary of its complaint procedures, which are posted on our website
and reprinted in Appendix E.5

The Board’s opinions are “advisory only.” §10-502.5(i)(1). The Board is

prohibited from “requir[ing] or compel[ling] any specific actions by a public body.”
§10-502.5(i)(2).6 Indeed, if a complainant brings a lawsuit about a public body’s
alleged violation of the Act after the Board has issued its opinion, the opinion may
not even be introduced into evidence in court. §10-502.5(j).

In addition to receiving complaints of alleged prior violations of the Act, the

Board on occasion seeks to resolve disputes prospectively. Anyone who believes
that a public body is about to hold a closed meeting when the Act requires the
meeting to be open may complain, orally or in writing, to a member of the Board
(or, under authorization by the Board, to its counsel in the Attorney General’s
Office). The person who receives the complaint is to look into the situation and
advise the Board, following up later with a written report. If the Board concludes
that a violation of the Act would occur if the meeting were not open, the Board’s
representative is to counsel the public body in an effort to achieve compliance with
the Act. §10-502.6.

Finally, the Board is responsible for studying “ongoing compliance” with the
Act by public bodies and is to “make recommendations to the General Assembly for

3
Robert H. Drummer, May I Watch? Complying with the Open Meetings Act, 39
Md. Bar J. no 1, at 27 (January/February 2006).
4
See, e.g.,1 OMCB Opinions 56 (1994) (Opinion 94-1); and 1 OMCB Opinions 38
(1993) (93-7).
5
The current procedures were developed and posted as part of a settlement in a
declaratory judgment action brought against the Compliance Board in the Circuit Court
for Howard County.
6
See, e.g., 3 OMCB Opinions 182, 187 (2002) (Opinion 02-3).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 5-3

improvements in [the Act].” §10-502.4(c). The vehicle for any recommendations

is an annual report to the Governor and the General Assembly, which is to contain
any recommended amendments as well as a discussion of the Board’s activities.7

B. J UDICIAL E NFORCEMENT

Any person who believes that a public body has failed to comply with the
Open Meetings Act may file suit against the public body in circuit court. §10-
510(b)(1).8 The suit is to be filed within 45 days of the alleged violation. §10-
510(b)(2) and (3). If the person has chosen to file a complaint with the Open
Meetings Compliance Board, the 45-day statute of limitations is tolled while the
Board considers the matter. §10-510(b)(4).9

If a person files suit, he or she must overcome a presumption that the public
body did not violate the Act. §10-510(c).10 But if the person succeeds in carrying
that burden, the court has broad authority to issue injunctive or declaratory relief.
In particular, “if the court finds that a public body willfully failed to comply with
§§10-505, 10-506, 10-507 or 10-509(c) of this [Act] and that no other remedy is
adequate, [the court may] declare void the final action of the public body.” §10-
510(d)(4).11 In a decision later vacated, the Court of Special Appeals held that the

7
The Board’s most recent annual report is available on our website. Visit
www.oag.state.md.us, then click on “Open Government,” then on “About the Maryland
Open Meetings Act.”
8
This provision previously required a plaintiff to have been “adversely affected.”
This limiting language was removed from the Act when the General Assembly overrode
the Governor’s veto of House Bill 73 and Senate Bill 87 of 2004. See Chapters 1 and 6,
Special Session, Laws of Maryland 2004.
9
The 45-day limitations period does not apply to a claim about an Open Meetings
Act violation that is included in a petition for judicial review of a government agency’s
action. Handley v. Ocean Downs, LLC, 151 Md. App. 615, 827 A.2d 961 (2003).
10
This provision is not applicable to complaints to the Compliance Board. See, e.g.,
1 OMCB Opinions 180-81 (1996) (Opinion 96-9).
11
Although Article 8 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights bars legislation that
would vest in the courts power to void governmental actions on broad public policy
grounds, the standards in §10-510(d)(4) are constitutionally sufficient. See Sugarloaf
Citizens Ass’n v. Gudis, 319 Md. 558, 569, 573 A.2d 1325 (1990).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 5-4

term “willfully,” as used in §10-510(d)(4), “does not require knowledge that the
meeting actually violates the Open Meetings Act but instead refers to intentional
conduct.”12

In addition, the court may award attorneys fees and other litigation expenses
to the prevailing party. §10-510(d)(5)(i). The award of fees is not automatic,13 and
there is no presumption that a party who prevails on the merits is entitled to
attorneys fees.14 Fees may be awarded, however, even if the public body acted in
good faith.15

Three types of actions are excluded from judicial review: appropriating

public funds, levying a tax, or issuing bonds or other debt obligations. §10-510(a)(1).
The exclusion regarding appropriations encompasses “[t]he entire budgetary
process.”16

C. C IVIL P ENALTY

The 1991 amendments to the Open Meetings Act added a civil (not criminal)
penalty provision for knowing and willful violations of the Act. Specifically: “A
member of a public body who willfully participates in a meeting of the body with
knowledge that the meeting is being held in violation of the [Act] is subject to a
civil penalty not to exceed $100.” §10-511. Only a court may impose a civil penalty;

12
Suburban Hospital, Inc. v. Maryland Health Resources Planning Comm’n, 125
Md. App. 579, 596, 726 A.2d 807 (1999), vacated as moot, 364 Md. 353 (2001).
13
Wesley Chapel Bluemount Ass’n v. Baltimore County, 347 Md. 125, 699 A.2d 434
(1997) (identifying factors for courts to consider).
14
Baltimore County v. Wesley Chapel Bluemount Ass’n, 128 Md. App. 180, 736
A.2d 1177 (1999). See also Malamis v. Stein, 69 Md. App. 221, 516 A.2d 1039 (1986)
(award of fees within trial court’s discretion).
15
Baltimore County, 128 Md. App. at 189.
16
Board of County Commissioners v. Landmark Community Newspapers, 293 Md.
595, 607, 446 A.2d 63 (1982).
Open Meetings Act Manual (7 th ed.) 5-5

the Compliance Board may not.17 The civil penalty provision would not be
applicable if the violation of the Act were the result of mere carelessness, a good-
faith mistake, or reliance on incorrect legal advice.

17
1 OMCB Opinions 201, 205 (1997) (Opinion 97-1).
 ARTICLE – STATE GOVERNMENT

T ITLE 10. G OVERNMENTAL P ROCEDURES

S UBTITLE 5. M EETINGS

10-501. Public policy.

(a) It is essential to the maintenance of a democratic society that, except in special

and appropriate circumstances:
(1) public business be performed in an open and public manner; and
(2) citizens be allowed to observe:
(i) the performance of public officials; and
(ii) the deliberations and decisions that the making of public policy
involves.

(b) (1) The ability of the public, its representatives, and the media to attend,
report on, and broadcast meetings of public bodies and to witness the phases of the
deliberation, policy formation, and decision making of public bodies ensures the
accountability of government to the citizens of the State.
(2) The conduct of public business in open meetings increases the faith of the
public in government and enhances the effectiveness of the public in fulfilling its role
in a democratic society.

(c) Except in special and appropriate circumstances when meetings of public bodies
may be closed under this subtitle, it is the public policy of the State that the public be
provided with adequate notice of the time and location of meetings of public bodies,
which shall be held in places reasonably accessible to individuals who would like to
attend these meetings.

10-502. Definitions.

(a) In this subtitle the following words have the meanings indicated.

(b) (1) "Administrative function" means the administration of:

(i) a law of the State;
(ii) a law of a political subdivision of the State; or
(iii) a rule, regulation, or bylaw of a public body.
(2) "Administrative function" does not include:
(i) an advisory function;
(ii) a judicial function;
(iii) a legislative function;
(iv) a quasi-judicial function; or
(v) a quasi-legislative function.

Appendix A A-1
 (c) "Advisory function" means the study of a matter of public concern or the making
of recommendations on the matter, under a delegation of responsibility by:
(1) law;
(2) the Governor or an official who is subject to the policy direction of the
Governor;
(3) the chief executive officer of a political subdivision of the State or an
official who is subject to the policy director of the chief executive officer; or
(4) formal action by or for a public body that exercises an administrative,
judicial, legislative, quasi-judicial, or quasi-legislative function.

(d) "Board" means the State Open Meetings Law Compliance Board.

(e) (1) "Judicial function" means the exercise of any power of the Judicial Branch
of the State government.
(2) "Judicial function" includes the exercise of:
(i) a power for which Article IV, § 1 of the Maryland Constitution
provides;
(ii) a function of a grand jury;
(iii) a function of a petit jury;
(iv) a function of the Commission on Judicial Disabilities; and
(v) a function of a judicial nominating commission.
(3) "Judicial function" does not include the exercise of rulemaking power by
a court.

(f) "Legislative function" means the process or act of:

(1) approving, disapproving, enacting, amending, or repealing a law or other
measure to set public policy;
(2) approving or disapproving an appointment;
(3) proposing or ratifying a constitution or constitutional amendment; or
(4) proposing or ratifying a charter or charter amendment.

(g) "Meet" means to convene a quorum of a public body for the consideration or
transaction of public business.

(h) (1) "Public body" means an entity that:

(i) consists of at least 2 individuals; and
(ii) is created by:
1. the Maryland Constitution;
2. a State statute;
3. a county or municipal charter;
4. an ordinance;
5. a rule, resolution, or bylaw;
6. an executive order of the Governor; or
7. an executive order of the chief executive authority of a political
subdivision of the State.
(2) "Public body" includes:
(i) any multimember board, commission, or committee appointed by the
Governor or the chief executive authority of a political subdivision of the State, or

Appendix A A-2
appointed by an official who is subject to the policy direction of the Governor or chief
executive authority of the political subdivision, if the entity includes in its membership
at least 2 individuals not employed by the State or the political subdivision;
(ii) any multimember board, commission, or committee that:
1. is appointed by:
A. an entity in the Executive branch of State government, the
members of which are appointed by the Governor, and that otherwise meets the
definition of a public body under this subsection; or
B. an official who is subject to the policy direction of an entity
described in item A of this item; and
2. includes in its membership at least 2 individuals who are not
members of the appointing entity or employed by the State, and
(iii) The Maryland School for the Blind.
(3) "Public body" does not include:
(i) any single member entity;
(ii) any judicial nominating commission;
(iii) any grand jury;
(iv) any petit jury;
(v) the Appalachian States Low Level Radioactive Waste Commission
established in § 7-302 of the Environment Article;
(vi) except when a court is exercising rulemaking power, any court
established in accordance with Article IV of the Maryland Constitution;
(vii) the Governor's cabinet, the Governor's Executive Council as provided
in Title 8, Subtitle 1 of this article, or any committee of the Executive Council;
(viii) a local government's counterpart to the Governor's cabinet,
Executive Council, or any committee of the counterpart of the Executive Council;
(ix) except as provided in paragraph (1) of this subsection, a
subcommittee of a public body as defined under paragraph (2)(i) of this subsection;
(x) the governing body of a hospital as defined in § 19-301(g) of the
Health - General Article; and
(xi) a self-insurance pool that is established in accordance with Title 19,
Subtitle 6 of the Insurance Article or § 9-404 of the Labor and Employment Article by:
1. a public entity, as defined in § 19-602 of the Insurance Article;
or
2. a county or municipal corporation, as defined in § 9-404 of the
Labor and Employment Article.

(i) "Quasi-judicial function" means a determination of:

(1) a contested case to which Subtitle 2 of this title applies;
(2) a proceeding before an administrative agency for which Title 7, Chapter
200 of the Maryland Rules would govern judicial review; or
(3) a complaint by the Board in accordance with this subtitle.

(j) "Quasi-legislative function" means the process or act of:

(1) adopting, disapproving, amending, or repealing a rule, regulation, or bylaw
that has the force of law, including a rule of a court;
(2) approving, disapproving, or amending a budget; or
(3) approving, disapproving, or amending a contract.

Appendix A A-3
 (k) "Quorum" means:
(1) a majority of the members of a public body; or
(2) any different number that law requires.

10-502.1. Open Meeting, Compliance Board.

There is a State Open Meetings Law Compliance Board.

10-502.2. Same – Membership.

(a) (1) The Board consists of 3 members, at least one of whom shall be an
attorney admitted to the Maryland Bar, appointed by the Governor with the advice and
consent of the Senate.
(2) From among the members of the Board, the Governor shall appoint a
chairman.

(b) (1) The term of a member is 3 years.

(2) The terms of members are staggered as required by the terms provided for
members of the Board on July 1, 1991.
(3) At the end of a term, a member continues to serve until a successor is
appointed.
(4) A member who is appointed after a term has begun serves only for the rest
of the term and until a successor is appointed.
(5) A member may not serve for more than 2 consecutive 3-year terms.

10-502.3. Same – Quorum; meetings; compensation.

(a) A majority of the full authorized membership of the Board is a quorum.

(b) The Board shall meet at a time and place to be determined by the Board.

(c) Each member of the Board:

(1) may not receive compensation; and
(2) is entitled to reimbursement for expenses under the Standard State Travel
Regulations, as provided in the State budget.

(d) The Office of the Attorney General shall provide staff for the Board.

10-502.4. Same – Duties.

(a) The Board shall receive, review, and resolve complaints from any person
alleging a violation of the provisions of this subtitle and issue a written opinion as to
whether a violation has occurred.

Appendix A A-4
 (b) The Board shall receive and review any complaint alleging a prospective
violation of the provisions of this subtitle as provided under § 10-502.6 of this subtitle.

(c) The Board shall study ongoing compliance with the provisions of this subtitle by
public bodies and make recommendations to the General Assembly for improvements
in this subtitle.

(d) The Board, in conjunction with the Office of the Attorney General and other
interested organizations or persons, shall develop and conduct educational programs on
the requirements of the open meetings law for the staffs and attorneys of:
(1) public bodies;
(2) the Maryland Municipal League; and
(3) the Maryland Association of Counties.

(e) (1) On or before October 1 of each year, the Board shall submit an annual
report to the Governor and the General Assembly, in accordance with §2-1246 of this
article.
(2) The report shall include a description of:
(i) the activities of the Board;
(ii) the opinions of the Board in any cases brought before it;
(iii) the number and nature of complaints filed with the Board, including
a discussion of complaints concerning the reasonableness of the notice provided for
meetings; and
(iv) any recommendations for improvements to the provisions of this
subtitle.

10-502.5. Same – Complaint process.

(a) Any person may file a written complaint with the Board seeking a written
opinion from the Board on the application of the provisions of this subtitle to the action
of a public body covered by this subtitle.

(b) The complaint shall:

(1) be signed by the person making the complaint; and
(2) identify the public body, specify the action of the public body, the date
of the action, and the circumstances of the action.

(c) (1) On receipt of the written complaint, and except as provided in paragraph
(3) of this subsection, the Board shall promptly send the complaint to the public body
identified in the complaint and request that a response to the complaint be sent to the
Board.
(2)(i) The public body shall file a written response to the complaint within
30 days of its receipt of the complaint.
(ii) On request of the Board, the public body shall include with its written
response to the complaint a copy of:
1. a notice provided under §10-506 of this subtitle;

Appendix A A-5
 2. a written statement made under §10-508(d)(2)(ii) of this subtitle;
and
3. minutes and any tape recording made by the public body under §10-
509 of this subtitle.
(iii) The Board shall maintain the confidentiality of minutes and any tape
recording submitted by a public body that are sealed in accordance with §10-509(c)(3)(ii)
of this subtitle.
(3) (i) If the public body identified in the complaint no longer exists, the
Board shall promptly send the complaint to the official or entity that appointed the
public body.
(ii) The official or entity that appointed the public body shall, to the
extent feasible, comply with the requirements of paragraph (2) of this subsection.
(4) If after 45 days, a written response is not received, the Board shall decide
the case on the facts before it.

(d) The Board shall:

(1) review the complaint and any response; and
(2) if the information in the complaint and response is sufficient to permit a
determination, issue a written opinion as to whether a violation of the provisions of this
subtitle has occurred or will occur not later than 30 days after receiving the response.

(e) (1) If the Board is unable to reach a determination based on the written
submissions before it, the Board may schedule an informal conference to hear from the
complainant, the public body, or any other person with relevant information about the
subject of the complaint.
(2) An informal conference scheduled by the Board is not a "contested case"
within the meaning of § 10-202(d) of this title.
(3) The Board shall issue a written opinion not later than 30 days following the
informal conference.

(f) (1) If the Board is unable to render an opinion on a complaint within the time
periods specified in subsection (d) or (e) of this section, the Board shall:
(i) state in writing the reason for its inability; and
(ii) issue an opinion as soon as possible but not later than 90 days after
the filing of the complaint.
(2) An opinion of the Board may state that the Board is unable to resolve the
complaint.

(g) The Board shall send a copy of the written opinion to the complainant and to
the affected public body.

(h) (1) On a periodic basis, the Board may send to any public body in the State any
written opinion that will provide the public body with guidance on compliance with the
provisions of this subtitle.
(2) On request, a copy of a written opinion shall be provided to any person.

(i) (1) The opinions of the Board are advisory only.

(2) The Board may not require or compel any specific actions by a public body.

Appendix A A-6
 (j) A written opinion issued by the Board may not be introduced as evidence in a
proceeding conducted in accordance with § 10-510 of this subtitle.

10-502.6. Same – Prospective violations.

(a) On receipt of an oral or written complaint by any person that a meeting

required to be open under the provisions of this subtitle will be closed in violation of
this subtitle, the Board acting
through its chairman, a designated Board member, or any authorized staff person
available to the Board may contact the public body to determine the nature of the
meeting that will be held and the reason for the expected closure of the meeting.

(b) When at least 2 members of the Board conclude that a violation of this subtitle
may occur if the closed meeting is held, the person acting for the Board under
subsection (a) of this section immediately shall inform the public body of the potential
violation and any lawful means that are available for conducting its meeting to achieve
the purposes of the public body.

(c) The person acting for the Board shall inform the person who filed the complaint
under subsection (a) of this section of the result of any effort to achieve compliance
with this subtitle under subsection (b) of this section.

(d) The person acting for the Board shall file a written report with the Board
describing the complaint, the effort to achieve compliance, and the results of the
effort.

(e) The filing of a complaint under subsection (a) of this section and action by a
person acting for the Board under subsections (b), (c), and (d) of this section may not
prevent or bar the Board from considering and acting on a written complaint filed in
accordance with § 10-502.5 of this subtitle.

10-503. Scope of subtitle.

(a) Except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section, this subtitle does
not apply to:
(1) a public body when it is carrying out:
(i) an administrative function;
(ii) a judicial function; or
(iii) a quasi-judicial function; or
(2) a chance encounter, social gathering, or other occasion that is not
intended to circumvent this subtitle.

(b) The provisions of this subtitle apply to a public body when it is meeting to
consider:
(1) granting a license or permit; or

Appendix A A-7
 (2) a special exception, variance, conditional use, zoning classification, the
enforcement of any zoning law or regulation, or any other zoning matter.

(c) If a public body recesses an open session to carry out an administrative function
in a meeting that is not open to the public, the minutes for the public body’s next
meeting shall include:
(1) a statement of the date, time, place, and persons present at the
administrative function meeting; and
(2) a phrase or sentence identifying the subject matter discussed at the
administrative function meeting.

10-504. Conflict of Laws.

Whenever this subtitle and another law that relates to meetings of public bodies
conflict, this subtitle applies unless the other law is more stringent.

10-505. Open meetings generally required.

Except as otherwise expressly provided in this subtitle, a public body shall meet in
open session.

10-506. Notice of meetings.

(a) Before meeting in a closed or open session, a public body shall give reasonable
advance notice of the session.

(b) Whenever reasonable, a notice under this section shall:

(1) be in writing;
(2) include the date, time, and place of the session; and
(3) if appropriate, include a statement that a part or all of a meeting may be
conducted in closed session.

(c) A public body may give the notice under this section as follows:
(1) if the public body is a unit of the State government, by publication in the
Maryland Register;
(2) by delivery to representatives of the news media who regularly report on
sessions of the public body or the activities of the government of which the public body
is a part;
(3) if the public body previously has given public notice that this method will
be used:
(i) by posting or depositing the notice at a convenient public location at
or near the place of the session; or
(ii) by posting the notice on an Internet website ordinarily used by the
public body to provide information to the public; or
(4) by any other reasonable method.

Appendix A A-8
 (d) A public body shall keep a copy of a notice provided under this section for at
least 1 year after the date of the session.

10-507. Public Attendance.

(a) Whenever a public body meets in open session, the general public is entitled
to attend.

(b) A public body shall adopt and enforce reasonable rules regarding the conduct
of persons attending its meetings and the videotaping, televising, photographing,
broadcasting, or recording of its meetings.

(c) (1) If the presiding officer determines that the behavior of an individual is
disrupting an open session, the public body may have the individual removed.
(2) Unless the public body or its members or agents acted maliciously, the
public body, members, and agents are not liable for having an individual removed under
this subsection.

10-507.1. Interpreters for hearing impaired.

(a) This section applies only to the Executive and Legislative Branches of State
government.

(b) (1) On request and to the extent feasible, a unit that holds a public hearing
shall provide a qualified interpreter to assist deaf persons to understand the proceeding.
(2) The request must be submitted in writing or by telecommunication at least
5 days before the proceeding begins.
(3) Whether providing an interpreter is feasible shall be determined, in each
instance, by the unit involved.

10-508. Closed meetings.

(a) Subject to the provisions of subsection (d) of this section, a public body may
meet in closed session or adjourn an open session to a closed session only to:
(1) discuss:
(i) the appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline,
demotion, compensation, removal, resignation, or performance evaluation of
appointees, employees, or officials over whom it has jurisdiction; or
(ii) any other personnel matter that affects 1 or more specific individuals;
(2) protect the privacy or reputation of individuals with respect to a matter
that is not related to public business;
(3) consider the acquisition of real property for a public purpose and matters
directly related thereto;
(4) consider a matter that concerns the proposal for a business or industrial
organization to locate, expand, or remain in the State;

Appendix A A-9
 (5) consider the investment of public funds;
(6) consider the marketing of public securities;
(7) consult with counsel to obtain legal advice;
(8) consult with staff, consultants, or other individuals about pending or
potential litigation;
(9) conduct collective bargaining negotiations or consider matters that relate
to the negotiations;
(10) discuss public security, if the public body determines that public discussion
would constitute a risk to the public or to public security, including:
(i) the deployment of fire and police services and staff; and
(ii) the development and implementation of emergency plans;
(11) prepare, administer, or grade a scholastic, licensing, or qualifying
examination;
(12) conduct or discuss an investigative proceeding on actual or possible
criminal conduct;
(13) comply with a specific constitutional, statutory, or judicially imposed
requirement that prevents public disclosures about a particular proceeding or matter;
or
(14) before a contract is awarded or bids are opened, discuss a matter directly
related to a negotiating strategy or the contents of a bid or proposal, if public discussion
or disclosure would adversely impact the ability of the public body to participate in the
competitive bidding or proposal process.

(b) A public body that meets in closed session under this section may not discuss
or act on any matter not permitted under subsection (a) of this section.

(c) The exceptions in subsection (a) of this section shall be strictly construed in
favor of open meetings of public bodies.

(d) (1) Unless a majority of the members of a public body present and voting vote
in favor of closing the session, the public body may not meet in closed session.
(2) Before a public body meets in closed session, the presiding officer shall:
(i) conduct a recorded vote on the closing of the session; and
(ii) make a written statement of the reason for closing the meeting,
including a citation of the authority under this section, and a listing of the topics to be
discussed.
(3) If a person objects to the closing of a session, the public body shall send
a copy of the written statement required under paragraph (2) of this subsection to the
Board.
(4) The written statement shall be a matter of public record.
(5) A public body shall keep a copy of the written statement made under
paragraph (2)(ii) of this subsection for at least 1 year after the date of the session.

10-509. Minutes.

(a) This section does not:

Appendix A A-10
 (1) require any change in the form or content of the Journal of the Senate of
Maryland or Journal of the House of Delegates of Maryland; or
(2) limit the matters that a public body may include in its minutes.

(b) As soon as practicable after a public body meets, it shall have written minutes
of its session prepared.

(c) (1) The minutes shall reflect:

(i) each item that the public body considered;
(ii) the action that the public body took on each item; and
(iii) each vote that was recorded.
(2) If a public body meets in closed session, the minutes for its next open
session shall include:
(i) a statement of the time, place, and purpose of the closed session;
(ii) a record of the vote of each member as to closing the session;
(iii) a citation of the authority under this subtitle for closing the session;
and
(iv) a listing of the topics of discussion, persons present, and each action
taken during the session.
(3) (i) A session may be tape recorded by a public body.
(ii) A public body shall provide for the preservation for 1 year of its
minutes and any tape recording of its closed meetings.
(iii) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (4) of this subsection, the
minutes and any tape recording of a closed session shall be sealed and may not be open
to public inspection.
(4) The minutes and any tape recording shall be unsealed and open to
inspection as follows:
(i) for a meeting closed under § 10-508(a)(5) of this subtitle, when the
public body invests the funds;
(ii) for a meeting closed under § 10-508(a)(6) of this subtitle, when the
public securities being discussed have been marketed; or
(iii) on request of a person or on the public body's own initiative, if a
majority of the members of the public body present and voting vote in favor of
unsealing the minutes and any tape recording.

(d) Except as provided in subsection (c) of this section, minutes of a public body
are public records and shall be open to public inspection during ordinary business hours.

(e) A public body shall keep a copy of the minutes of each session and any tape
recording made under subsection (c)(3)(i) of this section for at least 1 year after the
date of the session.

10-510. Judicial Enforcement.

(a) (1) This section does not apply to the action of:
(i) appropriating public funds;
(ii) levying a tax; or

Appendix A A-11
 (iii) providing for the issuance of bonds, notes, or other evidences of
public obligation.
(2) This section does not authorize a court to void an action of a public body
because of any violation of this subtitle by another public body.
(3) This section does not affect or prevent the use of any other available
remedies.

(b) (1) If a public body fails to comply with § 10-505, § 10-506, § 10-507, § 10-508,
or § 10-509(c) of this subtitle any person may file with a circuit court that has venue a
petition that asks the court to:
(i) determine the applicability of those sections;
(ii) require the public body to comply with those sections; or
(iii) void the action of the public body.
(2) If a violation of § 10-506, § 10-508, or § 10-509(c) of this subtitle is alleged,
the person shall file the petition within 45 days after the date of the alleged violation.
(3) If a violation of § 10-505 or § 10-507 of this subtitle is alleged, the person
shall file the petition within 45 days after the public body includes in the minutes of an
open session the information specified in § 10-509(c)(2) of this subtitle.
(4) If a written complaint is filed with the Board in accordance with § 10-502.5
of this subtitle, the time between the filing of the complaint and the mailing of the
written opinion to the complainant and the affected public body under § 10-502.5(g) of
this subtitle may not be included in determining if a claim against a public body is
barred by the statute of limitations set forth in paragraphs (2) and (3) of this
subsection.

(c) In an action under this section, it is presumed that the public body did not
violate any provision of this subtitle, and the complainant has the burden of proving the
violation.

(d) A court may:

(1) consolidate a proceeding under this section with another proceeding under
this section or an appeal from the action of the public body;
(2) issue an injunction;
(3) determine the applicability of this subtitle to the discussions or decisions
of public bodies;
(4) if the court finds that a public body willfully failed to comply with § 10-
505, § 10-506, § 10-507, or § 10-509(c) of this subtitle and that no other remedy is
adequate, declare void the final action of the public body;
(5) as part of its judgment:
(i) assess against any party reasonable counsel fees and other litigation
expenses that the party who prevails in the action incurred; and
(ii) require a reasonable bond to ensure the payment of the assessment;
and
(6) grant any other appropriate relief.

(e) (1) A person may file a petition under this section without seeking an opinion
from the State Open Meetings Law Compliance Board.
(2) The failure of a person to file a complaint with the Board is not a ground
for the court to either stay or dismiss a petition.

Appendix A A-12
10-511. Penalty.

A member of a public body who willfully participates in a meeting of the body with
knowledge that the meeting is being held in violation of the provisions of this subtitle
is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $100.

10-512. Short title.

This subtitle may be cited as the "Open Meetings Act".

Appendix A A-13
 COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST

For all meetings covered by the Act, did you:

A. Provide proper advance notice?

B. Arrange for minutes to be taken?

For closed meetings covered by the Act, did you also:

A. Identify one or more of the following grounds for closing the

meeting? *

1. a specific personnel matter;

2. protection of personal privacy on a matter unrelated

to public business;

3. acquisition of real property;

4. a proposed business relocation or expansion;

5. the investment of public funds;

6. the marketing of public securities;

7. obtaining legal advice;

8. consulting about litigation;

9. collective bargaining;

10. public security;

11. scholastic, licensing, or qualifying examinations;

*
These items are merely synopses of the exceptions. The actual text of an exception should be
considered carefully before a meeting is closed on that basis.

Appendix B B-1
Compliance Checklist

12. criminal investigations;

13. other legal requirement; or

14. preliminary discussion of procurement issues.

B. Record a majority vote in favor of closing the meeting?

C. Prepare, at the time of the vote, a written statement of the reasons

and legal basis for closing the meeting and the topics to be
discussed?

D. Keep the closed-session discussion within the scope of the

exception that you cited?

E. Include in the minutes of the next open meeting a statement of the

time, place, and purpose of the closed meeting; a record of the
vote to close the meeting and the authority to do so; and a listing
of the topics discussed, the persons present, and the actions
taken?

For a meeting recessed into closed session to conduct an administrative function, did
you include in the minutes of the next open meeting a statement of the date, time, place,
and persons present and a phrase or sentence identifying the subject matter discussed
at the closed session?

After a meeting, did you file and maintain records in accordance with the record
retention requirements of the Act?

Revised October 2006

Appendix B B-2
 FORM OF STATEMENT FOR CLOSING A MEETING

Location: ____________________ Date: __________

Time: __________

Motion By: ____________________ Seconded By: ____________________

Vote to Close Session:

AYE NAY ABSTAIN ABSENT

Name [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Name [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Name [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Name [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]

STATUTORY AUTHORITY TO CLOSE SESSION

State Government Article §10-508(a):

(1) [] To discuss:

(i) The appointment, employment, assignment, promotion, discipline,

demotion, compensation, removal, resignation, or performance evaluation
of appointees, employees, or officials over whom it has jurisdiction; or

[] (ii) Any other personnel matter that affects one or more specific individuals.

(2) [] To protect the privacy or reputation of individuals with respect to a matter that
is not related to public business.

(3) [] To consider the acquisition of real property for a public purpose and matters
directly related thereto.

(4) [] To consider a preliminary matter that concerns the proposal for a business or
industrial organization to locate, expand, or remain in the State.

(5) [] To consider the investment of public funds.

(6) [] To consider the marketing of public securities.

(7) [] To consult with counsel to obtain legal advice on a legal matter.

(8) [] To consult with staff, consultants, or other individuals about pending or potential
litigation.

Appendix C C-1
F ORM OF S TATEMENT F OR C LOSING A M EETING

(9) [] To conduct collective bargaining negotiations or consider matters that relate to

the negotiations.

(10) [] To discuss public security, if the public body determines that public discussions
would constitute a risk to the public or public security, including:

(i) the deployment of fire and police services and staff; and

(ii) the development and implementation of emergency plans.

(11) [] To prepare, administer or grade a scholastic, licensing, or qualifying

examination.

(12) [] To conduct or discuss an investigative proceeding on actual or possible criminal

conduct.

(13) [] To comply with a specific constitutional, statutory, or judicially imposed

requirement that prevents public disclosures about a particular proceeding or
matter.

(14) [] Before a contract is awarded or bids are opened, discuss a matter directly related
to a negotiation strategy or the contents of a bid or proposal, if public discussion
or disclosure would adversely impact the ability of the public body to participate
in the competitive bidding or proposal process.

TOPICS TO BE DISCUSSED:
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

REASON FOR CLOSING:

________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

______________________________
Signature of Presiding Officer

Appendix C C-2
 MODEL REGULATIONS FOR OPEN MEETINGS

1.01. Public Attendance.

(a) At any open session of the [name of public body], the general public is
invited to attend and observe.

(b) Except in instances when the [public body] expressly invites public
testimony, questions, comments, or other forms of public participation, or when public
participation is otherwise authorized by law, no member of the public attending an open
session may participate in the session.

1.02. Disruptive Conduct.

(a) A person attending an open session of the [public body] may not engage
in any conduct, including visual demonstrations such as the waving of placards, signs,
or banners, that disrupts the session or that interferes with the right of members of the
public to attend and observe the session.

(b)(1) The presiding officer may order any person who persists in conduct
prohibited by subsection (a) of this section or who violates any other regulation
concerning the conduct of the open session to be removed from the session and may
request police assistance to restore order.

(2) The presiding officer may recess the session while order is restored.

1.03. Recording, Photographing, and Broadcasting of Open Session

(a) A member of the public, including any representative of the news media,
may record discussions of the [public body] at an open session by means of a tape
recorder or any other recording device if the device does not create an excessive noise
that disturbs members of the [public body] or other persons attending the session.

(b) A member of the public, including any representative of the news media,
may photograph or videotape the proceedings of the [public body] at an open session
by means of any type of camera if the camera:

Appendix D D-1
M ODEL R EGULATIONS FOR O PEN M EETINGS

(1) Is operated without excessively bright artificial light that disturbs

members of the [public body] or other persons attending the session; and

(2) Does not create an excessive noise that disturbs members of the [public
body] or other persons attending the session.

(c) A representative of the news media may broadcast or televise the

proceedings of the [public body] at an open session if the equipment used:

(1) Is operated without excessively bright artificial light that disturbs

members of the [public body] or other persons attending the session; and

(2) Does not create an excessive noise that disturbs members of the [public
body] or other persons attending the session.

(d) The presiding officer may restrict the movement of a person who is using
a recording device, camera, or broadcasting or television equipment if such restriction
is necessary to maintain the orderly conduct of the session.

1.04. Recording Not Part of Record.

A recording of an open session made by a member of the public, or any

transcript derived from such a recording, may not be deemed a part of the record of any
proceeding of the [public body].

Appendix D D-2
 Open Meetings Compliance Board Complaint Procedures

Filing a Complaint

The Open Meetings Act lets you file a complaint if you think that the Act might have
been violated. Here’s how to file:

! Send a letter to this address: Open Meetings Compliance Board, c/o Attorney General’s
Office, 200 St. Paul Place, Baltimore, MD 21202. The complaint must be signed and
include a return address.

! Tell the Compliance Board what public body is involved, what happened, what the date
was, and what possible violation you’re concerned about. You can include more than
one meeting or other issue in a single complaint. You may find it helpful, before you
file a complaint, to look over the Open Meetings Act Manual, available at this link:
http://www.oag.state.md.us/Opengov/Openmeetings/support.htm.

! Please be as detailed as you can. Usually, the Compliance Board issues an opinion
based solely on the information in the complaint and in the response from the public
body. The more information it has, the more focused its opinion can be.

! Identify any document that the public body might possess that you feel would assist the
Compliance Board in the review.

! The Compliance Board only has jurisdiction over complaints about possible violations
of the Open Meetings Act by public bodies. For example, if you only allege a violation
of a local ordinance, or object to a closed meeting held by a single official rather than
a public body, the Compliance Board can’t address the matter and will return your
letter.

! If your complaint seems to fall within the Compliance Board’s authority, it will be sent
to the public body involved for its response. If the Compliance Board spots issues based
on the information in a complaint, even if you don’t talk about them, the Compliance
Board might ask the public body to respond to those issues too.

! If the Compliance Board concludes that your complaint doesn’t provide enough
information to process it, you’ll be asked for additional information. Make sure you
provide the information within 30 days, or else the Compliance Board will dismiss the
complaint.

APPENDIX E E-1
Open Meetings Compliance Board Complaint Procedures

Responding to a Complaint

! The presiding officer of, or the attorney for, the public body should respond by letter
on its behalf. Send the response to this address: Open Meetings Compliance Board, c/o
Attorney General’s Office, 200 St. Paul Place, Baltimore, MD 21202.

! Respond within 30 days of your receipt of the complaint from the Compliance Board.
Please send the complainant a copy of your response.

! Address all allegations in the complaint and any other issues raised by the Compliance
Board. If you deny that the Act was violated, explain how the public body complied. If
you acknowledge that the Act was violated, explain how the public body has or will
change its procedures so as to comply.

! If the Compliance Board asks you for documents like meeting notices or minutes,
provide them with your response.

The Compliance Board’s Opinion

! Usually, within a month after receiving the public body’s response, the Compliance
Board issues an opinion. Occasionally, the Compliance Board asks all interested
persons to attend an informal conference, so it can get more information before issuing
an opinion.

! An opinion of the Compliance Board is strictly advisory. In it, the Compliance Board
will say whether it thinks the Open Meetings Act was violated and explain the basis for
its opinion. The Compliance Board doesn’t have authority to issue orders or impose
penalties.

! The Compliance Board opinion is posted on the Web shortly after issuance. You can
access any opinion via the following address:
http://www.oag.state.md.us/Opengov/openmeetings/board.htm

October 2006

APPENDIX E E-2
 OPEN MEETING COMPLIANCE BOARD OPINIONS
TOPICAL INDEX
July 1, 1992 through December 31, 2009
SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION
SEE ALSO EXECUTIVE FUNCTION EXCLUSION
h Within Exclusion, discussion of:
Acting pursuant to municipal charter, selection of clerk-treasurer 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Acting pursuant to statute, appointment of planning board members 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Briefing of school board on contract approval by superintendent
solely for informational purposes 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Complaint against licensee or regulatory board 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Consideration of motion to unseal minutes of closed session 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 105
School board’s discussions of internal school system audit 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
School board’s review of ethics panel recommendation 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 121
h Outside Exclusion, discussion of:
Briefing of school board on contractual matter if board’s consent
subsequently required 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Discussions of county department consolidation 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 180
Issuance of quitclaim deed 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

g ADVISORY FUNCTION
Authority of group derived from department head, not from law or
Governor: 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

g CLOSED SESSION DECISIONS

Public body has discretion as to those in attendance, provided some
apparent basis 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Final action in closed session: permitted 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Vote to select developer: permitted 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 126

APPENDIX F F-1
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g CLOSED SESSION PROCEDURES

h General
After-the-fact addition of reasons for closed session 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Conducting closed session in separate room permissible as long as any
interested observer allowed access to observe process by which
session closed 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Impromptu hallway meeting: subject to all procedural requirements 1 93-1.. . . . . 20
Oral presentation at next open session about prior closed session: 3 03-18.. . . 340
not required
c Practices permitted
Separate closed session or closed session before or after open 3 03-4.. . . . 264
session
c Practices in violation
Failure to meet procedural requirements 3 00-6.. . . . . 24
3 00-11.. . . . 50
3 01-18.. . . 115
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 136
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Invoking exception not linked to anticipated discussion 3 03-19.. . . 345

h Voting
Motion to close session: must be made by member of public body 3 02-8.. . . . 209
Vote to close must be held immediately preceding closed session 3 00-2.. . . . . . 4
Vote to close must be held in open session 1 96-12.. . . 191
1 97-1.. . . . 201
1 97-4.. . . . 218
2 99-13.. . . . 74
c Practices permitted
Open session in smaller room 5.. . . . . . . . . . . 105
If record reflects members present and any dissenting, voice
vote permitted 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Vote at same meeting , shortly before closed session 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127

APPENDIX F F-2
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g CLOSED SESSION PROCEDURES (Cont’d.)

h Voting (Cont’d.)
c Practices in violation
Failure to vote 3 02-2.. . . . 173
3 03-11.. . . 307
Passive assent without documentation 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Permitted if individual votes are recorded 3 02-6.. . . . 197
Vote at one meeting to close the next: violation 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
1 95-8.. . . . 133
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 160
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 177
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Vote during session open to the public not rendered invalid by
fact no member of the public present 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
h Written Statement
c Generally
Posting on website not required 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 165
c Practices permitted
Failure to post on Internet 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Identifying topic but not discussing it in meeting 1 93-9.. . . . . 47
Inclusion of statement in agenda 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Omitting identity of anticipated participants 1 93-9.. . . . . 47
Omitting identity of appointee 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Omitting identity of third party proposing action under discussion 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Omitting specification of “reason for closing” when clear from
other parts of statement 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Preserving confidential information 1 92-5.. . . . . 16
1 93-2.. . . . . 23
1 97-10.. . . 242
Reliance on written statement prepared by staff in advance as
accurate at time of closure 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

APPENDIX F F-3
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g CLOSED SESSION PROCEDURES (Cont’d.)

h Written Statement (Cont’d.)
c Practices permitted (Cont’d.)
Statements providing purpose of closed session, statutory authority,
and description of topics to be discussed 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Topic of discussion described briefly 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Topic of discussed described in a single phrase rather than a series
of items 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 188
c Practices in violation
Altering statement during closed session 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Document failed to satisfy Act’s requirement relating to minutes 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Failing to prepare written statement 1 97-5.. . . . 220
3 00-3.. . . . . . 8
3 02-2.. . . . 173
3 02-13.. . . 233
3 03-11.. . . 307
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Failure to timely disclose 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Omitting reason for closing 3 01-12.. . . 136
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Omitting specific statutory cite 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Omitting topic to be discussed 1 92-1.. . . . . . 1
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Oral discussion of basis for closing session, later recorded in 1 92-4.. . . . . 13
minutes 1 92-5.. . . . . 16
Preparing written statement before or after meeting 3 00-2.. . . . . . 4
3 01-16.. . . 147

APPENDIX F F-4
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g CLOSED SESSION PROCEDURES (Cont’d.)

h Written Statement (Cont’d.)
c Practices in Violation (Cont’d.)
Topic description reiterating statutory authority 3 01-6.. . . . 101
3 03-17.. . . 335
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 114
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 142
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 161
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 149
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 160
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Uninformative boilerplate 1 93-2.. . . . . 23
1 96-12.. . . 191
1 97-10.. . . 242
1 97-11.. . . 245
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 149
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 160

g COMPLIANCE BOARD – AUTHORITY AND PROCEDURES

h Generally
Minutes of closed sessions considered by public body as sealed –
obligation to treat as confidential 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 192
h Complaint
Basis: good-faith belief that Act was violated after reasonable 3 01-14.. . . 143
inquiry into available facts
Complaint should be limited to requirements of the Act 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Failure to respond in a timely manner 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 203
Limitations period of 45 days inapplicable 3 03-20.. . . 352
Must identify public body 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Neither party processes burden of proof 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Public body no longer in existence: complaint dismissed 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 111
Sufficient detail if public body may identify meeting and allegations 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

APPENDIX F F-5
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g COMPLIANCE BOARD – AUTHORITY AND PROCEDURES (Cont’d.)

h Jurisdictional limits
Disclosure of information about closed session by public body member 2 99-14.. . . . 77
no authority to address
Enforcing provisions of Act: no authority 1 95-2.. . . . 113
1 97-1.. . . . 201
Interpreting judicial review provision: no authority 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 186
Interpreting quorum provision of municipal charter: no authority 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Open Meetings Act issues only 2 99-14.. . . . 77
3 01-14.. . . 143
3 01-15.. . . 145
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 164
h Opinions
Allegations related to laws other than Open Meetings Act: 2 98-1.. . . . . . 1
not addressed 2 98-6.. . . . . 21
2 98-9.. . . . . 31
2 99-6.. . . . . 49
Disputed issues of fact: cannot be resolved 1 94-1.. . . . . 56
1 94-8.. . . . 101
2 99-4.. . . . . 43
2 99-13.. . . . 74
2 99-16.. . . . 80
3 01-12.. . . 136
Insufficient information about nature of meetings is presented: 3 01-13.. . . 140
no opinion issued
Public body’s exercise of discretion whether to invoke exceptions: 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
not addressed
Public body’s summary of discussion at closed session: presumed
to be accurate absent evidence to the contrary 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Reconsideration of prior opinion – standards 3 03-1.. . . . 255
h Response to complaint
Exception not cited by public body in written statement prior to closed 1 93-11.. . . . 53
session may not be asserted subsequently as justification for 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
closing session 1 94-7.. . . . . 96
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 104

APPENDIX F F-6
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g COMPLIANCE BOARD – AUTHORITY AND PROCEDURES (Cont’d.)

h Response to complaint (Cont’d.)
Failure to provide requested materials: violation 3 03-20.. . . 352
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Failure to respond: violation 3 00-1.. . . . . . 1
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 186
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

g EXCEPTIONS PERMITTING CLOSED SESSIONS

h Business Relocation, §10-508(a)(4)
Consideration of sale of land within county-owned business park:
within exception 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Discussion of collateral matters expected to be addressed in evaluating
business proposal: within exception 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 192
Lease of governmental controlled property to private entity: within
exception 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Proposal by business entity to move from one site to another in 1 93-3.. . . . . 28
Maryland: within exception 2 99-16.. . . . 80
Public university’s relocated facility: outside exception 2 99-8.. . . . . 56
h Collective Bargaining, §10-508(a)(9)
Discussion between county commissioners and school board 3 02-15.. . . 245
about funds available for potential contract: within exception
Discussion of existing collective bargaining agreements: outside
exception 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 104
h Competitive Bidding, §10-508(a)(14)
Advantages / disadvantages of RFP for audit services:
Within exception 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Disposition of municipal property without competitive process: 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
outside exception
h Criminal Investigation, §10-508(a)(12)
Discussion of investigation in which public body has no role:
within exception 3 00-11.. . . . 50
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

APPENDIX F F-7
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g EXCEPTIONS PERMITTING CLOSED SESSIONS (Cont’d.)

h Examinations, §10-508(a)(11)
Discussion of electrician’s examination, as part of process for 1 92-4.. . . . . 13
obtaining a certificate of registration: within exception
hInvestment of public funds, §10-508(a)(5)
Preliminary discussion of possible project for Revenue Authority
support: no opinion possible 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 114
h Legal Advice, §10-508(a)(7)
c Generally
Bona fide expectation of need for legal advice justifies use of
exception even if discussion obviates need for advice 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 172
Existence of attorney-client privilege not a prerequisite to
reliance on exception 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Initiation by counsel where public body aware of general
subject matter permissible 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127
c Within exception
Advice effectively determining public body’s decisions 1 96-6.. . . . 169
1 96-7.. . . . 172
Advice on advertisement on municipality’s buses 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 146
Advice on individual compliance with ethics law 1 92-1.. . . . . . 1
Consulting with counsel regarding the lack of a lease on
municipal property used by private group 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 160
Contract extension 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Fact that issue discussed with counsel earlier or lack of litigation
not determinative 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Lease provisions 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 161
Legal consequences of providing quitclaim deed 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Legal ramifications relating to negotiations with developer 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 130
Liability and related issues arising from possible agreement 3 03-8.. . . 293
between town and private school over use of town park

APPENDIX F F-8
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g EXCEPTIONS PERMITTING CLOSED SESSIONS (Cont’d.)

h Legal Advice, §10-508(a)(7) (Cont’d.)
c Within exception (Cont’d.)
Monetary offers to avoid litigation 3 02-13.. . . 233
Participation by non-lawyer who supplies information 1 92-1.. . . . . 1
pertinent to counsel’s formulation of legal advice
Possible cancellation of contract 3 03-19.. . . 345
Presentation on compliance with open government laws 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 114
Zoning board’s discussion with counsel about hearing 1 97-6.. . . . 224
requirements in a controversial matter
c Outside exception
Counsel not present 3 00-5.. . . . . 16
Instructions to counsel on how to proceed in negotiations with
developer on public body’s behalf 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 135
Policy deliberation or any other aspect of legislative process 1 95-11.. . . 145
Pursuing the outsourcing of municipal services 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Report from non-lawyer about counsel’s advice; counsel must 1 93-6.. . . . . 35
be present 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
1 94-7.. . . . . 96
1 95-2.. . . . 113
Substantive decisions by public body as to content of contract 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Topics beyond rendering of legal advice 1 92-1.. . . . . . 1
1 93-11.. . . . 53
1 95-2.. . . . 113
1 95-11.. . . 145
1 96-6.. . . . 169
1 97-1.. . . . 201
3 00-5.. . . . . 16
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Topic with incidental legal ramifications 1 93-11.. . . . 53

APPENDIX F F-9
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g EXCEPTIONS PERMITTING CLOSED SESSIONS (cont’d.)

h Litigation, §10-508(a)(8)
c Within exception
Effect of adoption of legislative findings on litigation 3 00-14.. . . . 61
Hearing requirements in a controversial zoning matter 1 97-6.. . . . 224
Pending or potential litigation even if counsel is not present 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Pending or potential litigation, including settlement options, 1 94-1.. . . . . 56
whether public body would be plaintiff or defendant
c Outside exception
Citizen complaint to federal agency 3 02-13.. . . 233
Litigation not yet a concrete possibility 1 93-7.. . . . . 38
1 97-9.. . . . 237
Underlying policy issue not directly related to litigation 1 94-1.. . . . . 56
h Other Law, §10-508(a)(13)
Preserving attorney-client privilege 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
h Personnel, §10-508(a)(1)
c Within exception, discussion of:
Alleged mishandling of funds by employee 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Appointment of town treasurer 3 03-11.. . . 307
Compensation for five individuals, related to specific facts 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
about each individual
Creation of new position linked to a specific employee 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Hiring of specific individual 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Job description and employment status of town manager 1 92-1.. . . . . . 1
Job status of particular employees under jurisdiction of another
public body 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Licensing of specific employee 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Management capabilities of individuals 3 02-12.. . . 227

APPENDIX F F-10
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g EXCEPTIONS PERMITTING CLOSED SESSIONS (Cont’d.)

h Personnel, §10-508(a)(1) (Cont’d.)
Offer to job applicant 3 02-1.. . . . 171
Performance of particular job responsibility 2 99-4.. . . . . 43
Raises and promotions for specific employees 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Review of city manager’s performance 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 104
School superintendent’s change of duties 1 95-5.. . . . 123
School superintendent’s contract 3 03-4.. . . . 264
Status of specific county employees in the event of transfer to 1 93-11.. . . . 53
city’s jurisdiction
c Outside exception, discussion of:
Attendance at a reception and meeting 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Budgetary impact of rising gas prices 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Department audit 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
Discussions of county department consolidation, severance
packages, layoff timing, and alternative options 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 180
Fringe benefits for a class of employees 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Hiring classes of employees 3 00-15.. . . . 67
Liquor service at an official dinner 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Merging two purchasing departments 1 97-15.. . . 255
New position and pay increases for categories of employees 3 03-17.. . . 335
Outsourcing municipal services 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Pay adjustment policy 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Policy issues related to a town newsletter 2 99-4.. . . . . 43
Procurement of call forwarding service 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Proposed annexation 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

APPENDIX F F-11
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g EXCEPTIONS PERMITTING CLOSED SESSIONS (Cont’d.)

h Personnel, §10-508(a)(2) (Cont’d.)
c Outside exception, discussion of: (cont’d.)
Retention policy 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Spaces at police academy 1 94-5.. . . . . 73

h Procurement, §10-508(a)(14)
c Within exception, discussion of:
Strategy for project to be put out to bid 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Vote to select particular developer 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 126
c Outside exception, discussion of:
Monetary offers to well owners 3 02-13.. . . 233
Negotiation strategy not involving competitive bidding or proposals 1 97-8.. . . . 233
h Property Acquisition, §10-508(a)(3)
c Within exception, discussion of:
Possible acquisition of a portion of property for public parking 2 99-16.. . . . 80
Possible lease of property for public library 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Public purpose aspects of acquisition 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 172
c Outside exception, discussion of:
Property acquisition if public body lacks power to acquire property 1 97-8.. . . . 233
under discussion
Sale of vehicles and acquisition of new ones 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Transfer of public body’s property interest 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
h Public Security, §10-508(a)(10)
c Outside exception, discussion of:
Procedures for handling petty cash 1 94-5.. . . . . 73

APPENDIX F F-12
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g EXECUTIVE FUNCTION EXCLUSION

SEE ALSO ADMINISTRATIVE FUNCTION
h Within Exclusion, discussion of:
Administration of existing leave policy 1 96-5.. . . . 166
Administrative and budgetary matters by community college board 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Administrative and housekeeping matters concerning school system 3 00-10.. . . . 39
Administrative matters by municipal planning commission 1 92-3.. . . . . 10
Administrative matters by Wicomico County Council 3 02-10.. . . 218
Agreement to dismissal of lawsuit filed against county council, 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
absent any reconsideration of council’s prior policy decisions
Appointment by county commissioners to fill planning 2 99-5.. . . . . 45
commission vacancy
Appointment by school board of interim superintendent 1 95-5.. . . . 123
Appointment by town council to fill council vacancy 1 97-14.. . . 252
Audit report, manner in which it would be released 3 00-15.. . . . 67
Budgetary administration not involving proposal to amend budget 1 93-2.. . . . . 23
Budget preparation and department head meetings by Wicomico 3 01-1.. . . . . 74
County Council
Budget preparation, financial oversight, and investment decisions 3 01-10.. . . 122
by Pratt Library Finance Committee
Choice of newspaper for legal advertising 1 96-13.. . . 195
Complaint against electrician by regulatory board 1 92-4.. . . . . 13
Complaint against licensee by regulatory board 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 102
Construction of barrier between elementary school grounds and 3 00-12.. . . . 53
adjacent retail property
Dismissal of employee 1 96-5.. . . . 166
Effect of cuts in state aid to counties 1 93-2.. . . . . 23

APPENDIX F F-13
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g EXECUTIVE FUNCTION EXCLUSION (cont’d.)

h Within Exclusion, discussion of: (cont’d.)
Evaluation of school superintendent’s performance 1 95-5.. . . . 123
3 01-18.. . . 159
Exercise of supervisory authority over town manager’s preparation 2 98-7.. . . . . 24
of compensation and benefit plans
Existing collective bargaining agreements 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Future budget options 2 99-10.. . . . 64
Hearing by municipal ethics commission on complaint of alleged 1 93-4.. . . . . 30
ethics violation
Hospital management issues when county commissioners have 1 92-2.. . . . . . 6
oversight responsibility over hospital
Interview process for filling school board vacancy 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Management issues under existing program and information briefing 3 02-9.. . . . 211
on possible future budgetary impacts
Merging of county and city purchasing departments under current law 1 97-15.. . . 255
Open Meetings Act procedures 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Oversight of election board performance 2 98-1.. . . . . . 1
Payment of bill under current budget 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 197
Personnel grievance hearing 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Preliminary budget matters between department heads and Wicomico 1 97-16.. . . 261
County Council
Press release about a controversial city event 1 95-8.. . . . 133
Procedure to regulate public comments by members of a public body 1 97-8.. . . . 233
Proposed development on border of municipality 3 00-4.. . . . . 13
Relationship between existing sewer connection ordinance and prior 3 00-7.. . . . . 26
sewer maintenance agreement with landowner
Remedies for breach of franchise agreement 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Remedies in enforcing loan agreement 1 95-7.. . . . 129

APPENDIX F F-14
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g EXECUTIVE FUNCTION EXCLUSION (cont’d.)

h Within Exclusion, discussion of: (cont’d.)
Request for appointment of counsel and payment of fee 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 197
School Board’s review of its ethics panel recommendation 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 121
Solicitation of advice from colleagues by town council member who
had certain administrative responsibilities 2 98-6.. . . . . 21
Specific schools eligible for reconstitution by State Board of Education 3 01-11.. . . 127
h Outside Exclusion, discussion of:
Amendment to inter-governmental agreement 3 02-10.. . . 218
Changes in law to achieve merger of county and city purchasing 1 97-15.. . . 255
departments
Composition of local management board 3 02-3.. . . . 182
Contract amendment 1 95-5.. . . . 123
Contract negotiation 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Developer’s proposal to buy property and convert it to low-income 2 99-16.. . . . 80
housing
Discussion with potential contractor 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 168
Effect of annexation agreement on proposed zoning ordinance 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Franchise reassignment 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Law enforcement matter beyond public body’s jurisdiction 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Mission of library 3 01-10.. . . 122
Municipal governance – general topics 3 02-12.. . . 227
Municipal governance issues in wake of charter amendment 3 02-11.. . . 224
Pay adjustment process 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Personnel matters within jurisdiction of another public body 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Petition drive within special tax district 1 94-7.. . . . . 96
Policy about attendees’ desire to address public body 1 95-2.. . . . 113

APPENDIX F F-15
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g EXECUTIVE FUNCTION EXCLUSION (cont’d.)

h Outside Exclusion, discussion of: (cont’d.)
Preliminary aspects of policy and contractual matters 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Procedures for school board’s recommendation to Governor about
board vacancy 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 163
Resigning school superintendent’s waiver of part of salary 3 01-18.. . . 159
Town council’s position on General Assembly bill to authorize 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
county tax
Transportation issues not administered by public body 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

g LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION
h Within function, discussion of:
Briefing about proposed city ordinance 1 93-6.. . . . . 35
County council’s position on General Assembly bill to authorize 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
county tax
h Outside function, discussion of:
Making an appointment, rather than approval of a proposed 1 95-5.. . . . 123
appointment
Town council’s position on General Assembly bill to authorize 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
county tax

g LICENSING MATTERS
Regulatory body’s conduct of occupational licensing examination 1 92-4.. . . . . 13

g “MEETING ”
h Generally:
Participation by commissioners in party central committee meeting 3 03-6.. . . 278
Public body’s consideration of public business in meeting of entity 1 92-2.. . . . . . 6
that is not a public body 1 94-9.. . . . 104
1 95-4.. . . . 120
1 95-10.. . . 142
1 96-3.. . . . 157
1 96-10.. . . 183
2 98-8.. . . . . 27

APPENDIX F F-16
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g “MEETING ” (Cont’d.)
h Determined to be a meeting:
Announcement, by chairman, at social gathering of planned process 3 01-2.. . . . . 78
for handling topic
Convening of “accidental quorum” to hear briefing about budget 3 00-8.. . . . . 30
process
Convening of quorum of council during course of informally
designated subgroup meeting 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Convening of quorum for purpose of informal identification of 3 01-2.. . . . . 78
consensus about an issue
Convening of quorum with Governor’s staff during legislative
session 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Discussion of means of discerning resident’s reaction to annexation
proposal 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 168
Future meeting agenda discussion 3 01-2.. . . . . 78
Information-gathering at the earliest stages of policy formulation 1 93-2.. . . . . 23
1 93-6.. . . . . 35
1 95-7.. . . . 129
1 97-2.. . . . 206
Initial meeting of advisory board 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Opportunity for a public body’s quorum to explore issues as a
group and exchange comments and reactions 2 98-2.. . . . . . 5
Retreat at which matters of public business were discussed 3 01-10.. . . 122
Training session focused on particular public body’s practices 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
h Determined not to be a meeting:
Breakfast gathering before an open meeting at which public business 3 03-2.. . . . 257
was not conducted
Budget retreat called by Mayor at which council members 3 02-14.. . . 242
attended
Celebratory dinner following swearing in of officials at which public
business not considered 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 93

APPENDIX F F-17
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g “MEETING ” (Cont’d.)
h Determined not to be a meeting: (Cont’d.)
Conference in which each board member participated in a 3 01-17.. . . 150
separate small group discussion
Conversation among quorum limited to personal information or 1 95-7.. . . . 129
social “small talk” 2 99-5.. . . . . 45
Dinner at which quorum attended but discussion limited to social 3 02-11.. . . 224
matters 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
E-mail canvass of members 2 99-15.. . . . 78
Gathering limited to effort at improving interpersonal relations 3 03-5.. . . . 274
Informal gathering before a meeting or during a break, so long as 1 94-6.. . . . . 92
no discussion occurs about meeting topics 1 95-6.. . . . 127
1 96-3.. . . . 157
Members-elect not considered in determining presence of
a quorum 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Private entity’s session at which members of public body did
not convene to discuss public business 3 03-12.. . . 310
Quorum not present or convened 1 94-8.. . . . 101
1 94-10.. . . 107
1 95-10.. . . 142
1 96-1.. . . . 151
1 97-4.. . . . 218
1 97-12.. . . 248
1 97-13.. . . 250
2 99-5.. . . . . 45
2 99-6.. . . . . 49
3 01-4.. . . . . 92
3 02-5.. . . . 191
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 114
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Retreat limited to discussion of interpersonal relations and
social conversation 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
School Board’s attendance at County Council meeting for sole
purpose of answering questions 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

APPENDIX F F-18
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g “MEETING ” (Cont’d.)
h Determined not to be a meeting: (Cont’d.)
Social event with general topical presentation 1 97-7.. . . 227
Social event at which public business is mentioned only briefly 2 98-2.. . . . . . 5
and in passing and is not discussed 2 99-13.. . . . 74
2 99-16.. . . . 80
Training session limited to general topics 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

g MINUTES
h Generally
Access to sealed minutes by individual member of public body in
public body’s discretion 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Level of detail required 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Method by which minutes are prepared or amended, within public 1 94-2.. . . . . 63
body’s discretion
Posting on public body’s website, not required 3 03-18.. . . 340
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 187
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 203
Preparation following all meetings, required 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Preparation following session without quorum, not required 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Preparation via alternative method required when unusual
circumstances preclude preparation through customary means 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Preparation within reasonable time, required 2 99-18.. . . . 87
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 161
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Public body that meets only periodically responsible for ensuring
minutes available within reasonable time 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Public entitled to assume approved minutes accurate 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 145
Tape recordings not required but if made, must be retained for at 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
least one year

APPENDIX F F-19
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g MINUTES (Cont’d.)
h Closed Session Statement
c Generally
Meeting recessed for closed session under administrative function
exclusion – Required disclosures 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Written statement prepared in closing meeting and subsequent
disclosure as part of minutes distinct requirements 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 165
c Practices permitted
Preserving confidentiality justifying closed session 1 92-5.. . . . . 16
1 94-5.. . . . . 73
1 95-1.. . . . 110
Protecting identity of business considering relocation 2 99-9.. . . . . 60
c Practices in violation
Changing justification for closed session 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 177
Failure to cite authority for closing a session or to list the topic of 1 94-2.. . . . . 63
discussion and the persons present
Failure to identify attendees and to provide other required 1 94-3.. . . . . 67
information 3 02-15.. . . 245
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Failure to identify certain attendees involved in business location
discussion even by generic description 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Failure to include description of any action taken during closed 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
session
Failure to include statutory citation 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Failure to prepare minutes of closed sessions or to disclose
summary about closed sessions 3 03-20.. . . 352
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 98
Failure to report required information as single item 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127

APPENDIX F F-20
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g MINUTES (Cont’d.)
h Closed Session Statement (Cont’d.)
c Practices in violation (Cont’d.)
Inadequate description/information 3 02-2.. . . . 173
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 114
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 139
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 165
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 189
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Reusing written statement prepared prior to closing session 3 02-7.. . . . 202
h Contents
c Practices permitted
Brief description of required elements 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Omitting confidential information from summary of topics 1 95-1 . . . . 110
discussed and actions taken at closed session 2 98-5.. . . . . 18
Transcript disclosure as minutes 1 96-4.. . . . 162
Transcript not required 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 110
c Practices in violation
Action and votes taken, failure to include 3 01-19.. . . 164
Administrative function disclosure, no detail beyond
“administrative matters” 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
Dissenting votes, failure to include 1 96-2.. . . . 155
Information about topics discussed, failure to include 1 95-1.. . . . 110
2 98-5.. . . . . 18
Item of business conducted, failure to include 1 94-2.. . . . . 63
Required elements, failure to include 3 00-3.. . . . . . 8
3 01-5.. . . . . 96
3 02-13.. . . 233
Specific statutory authority for closing a session, failure to include 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
Tape recording disclosure in lieu of minutes 2 99-18.. . . . 87
2 99-19.. . . . 92

APPENDIX F F-21
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g MINUTES (Cont’d.)
h Procedures
c Practices permitted
Atypical, brief delay in availability of minutes attributable to
unusual workload 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Delay in approval of closed session minutes 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Disclosing minutes of a meeting closed to discuss a specific 2 98-4.. . . . . 16
personnel matter
Preparing closed session minutes by the time of the public body’s 1 95-3.. . . . 117
body’s next regularly scheduled meeting
Preparation time beyond 10 days after meeting 3 01-3.. . . . . 85
Preparation time of five weeks 3 03-18.. . . 340
Taking a reasonable amount of time to review draft minutes for 2 98-3.. . . . . 11
accuracy and to approve them 2 99-18.. . . . 87
Prohibiting inspection of draft, unapproved minutes 2 98-3.. . . . . 11
Relatively brief delays in preparing minutes, attributable to 2 99-19.. . . . 92
staffing constraints
c Practices in violation
Failure to approve minutes of closed sessions 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Failure to approve minutes without undue delay 3 01-5.. . . . . 96
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 118
Failure to prepare for meeting limited to procedural matters only 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Failure to prepare minutes 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Failure to produce 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 203

APPENDIX F F-22
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g MINUTES (Cont’d.)
h Procedures (Cont’d.)
c Practices in violation (Cont’d.)
Failure to review and approve minutes 3 00-3.. . . . . . 8
3 03-10.. . . 303
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 120
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 187
Failure to timely disclose 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Lag time of nearly 4 months in approving minutes 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Requiring member of public to submit written request for open
session minutes 3 01-3.. . . . . 85
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

g NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
h Applicability
Failure to provide notice: violation 3 01-5.. . . . . 96
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Notice of cancelled meeting: may be omitted if notice of meeting 3 01-19.. . . 164
had not been given originally
Notice required in advance of conference call dependent on whether
quorum could be anticipated or in fact occurred 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Notice required of scheduled meeting even if quorum does not in 3 03-13.. . . 314
fact convene 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
h Content
Agenda information: not required 1 92-5.. . . . . 16
1 94-4.. . . . . 69
1 95-1.. . . . 110
2 98-9.. . . . . 31
2 99-7.. . . . . 52
3 02-2.. . . . 173
3 03-4.. . . . 264
3 03-10.. . . 303
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 168
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 117
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 110
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Anticipated closed session: should be included 3 00-3.. . . . . . 8

APPENDIX F F-23
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g NOTICE REQUIREMENTS (Cont’d.)

h Content (Cont’d.)
Closed session not anticipated until shortly before meeting:
Failure to reflect in notice not violation 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Explanation of why meeting is expected to be closed: not required 3 02-6.. . . . 197
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Omission of name of public body and place of meeting: violation 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Omission of time or place of meeting or both; violation 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 155
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 168
One-time publication of schedule of anticipated meeting times, if 1 94-4.. . . . . 69
coupled with posted notice of each meeting: permitted
Prince George’s County Council: role as district council need not
be specified 2 98-9.. . . . . 31
Revision of prior meeting notice: not required for immediately 3 03-9.. . . . 297
scheduled closed session
Variation from published agenda does not violate Act 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 117
h Method
c Practices permitted
Announcement of future meeting at open meeting attended by 1 93-5.. . . . . 33
press 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 155
Announcement at public meeting coupled with written notice to 3 02-4.. . . . 188
press
Information provided to public via generally distributed newsletter 3 02-6.. . . . 197
and posted agenda
Multiple channels of distribution 3 03-4.. . . . 264
Newspaper advertisement and public posting 3 01-14.. . . 143
Notice via cable television if public is informed and if a written 1 96-5.. . . . 166
version is available
Notice to press and others at open session of intention to hold 3 02-15.. . . 245
unanticipated closed session
Notice via some legally sufficient method no less legally valid even
if it differs from method routinely used 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

APPENDIX F F-24
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page

g NOTICE REQUIREMENTS (Cont’d.)

h Method (Cont’d.)
c Practices permitted (Cont’d.)
Notice via state agency’s press release 2 98-8.. . . . . 27
Notice by task force affiliated with State agency via agency’s
website calendar 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Notice to newspaper that is the primary source for reporting
on government activities in community 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Omitting notice of meeting cancellation when meeting is 3 02-4.. . . . 188
cancelled because quorum fails to attend
Omitting notice to reporters if another means of notice has 1 97-9.. . . . 237
been provided
Oral announcement of legislative committee’s immediate meeting
during last few days of General Assembly session 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Posting in a single location if public is told of the practice 1 92-3.. . . . . 10
1 93-4.. . . . . 30
2 98-5.. . . . . 18
2 99-17.. . . . 84
Posting outside of town hall 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Proper written notice satisfied Act notwithstanding misinformation
allegedly provided by staff member to one member of public 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Public body has discretion in selecting appropriate media outlet 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 164
Public body that had previously provided notice via website did
not incur new obligations under 2007 legislation 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
c Practices in violation
Failure to deliver notice to news media 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Failure to notify public of canceled meeting 1 96-11.. . . 186
Failure to provide notice of “continued” meeting 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Failure to retain copy for one year 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
“Informed verbal” notice 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Notice to public body members only 3 01-4.. . . . . 92
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 178

APPENDIX F F-25
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page
g NOTICE REQUIREMENTS (Cont’d.)
h Method (Cont’d.)
c Practices in violation (Cont’d.)
Posting in a location not described previously to public 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Staff's clerical error resulting in failure to post notice 1 93-8.. . . . . 44
h Timing
c Generally
Original and revised notices must be timely 3 01-3.. . . . . 58
Prompt scheduling of meeting does not excuse failure to provide 1 96-10.. . . 183
notice
Public must be informed when time of meeting is changed 2 99-7.. . . . . 52
Scheduling of meeting on short notice requires best public notice 1 93-7.. . . . . 38
feasible under the circumstances 2 98-3.. . . . . 11
2 99-3.. . . . . 39
c Practices permitted
Deciding that meeting is needed on short notice 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Late notice to news media when other forms of notice made
available earlier 3 00-13.. . . . 58
Meeting continued following night - announced during prior day’s
session and posted next day 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Notice advertised two business days in advance of meeting
if promptly provided on scheduling of meeting 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Notice given soon after scheduling of meeting for next day 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Notice of Tuesday meeting posted n preceding Friday 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Notice of Wednesday meeting posted on preceding Friday 2 98-5.. . . . . 18
Notice provided 5 days before meeting, absent any evidence
suggesting intentional delay 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Notice posted 6 days before meeting, absent any evidence of
intentional delay 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Notice to press and others at open session of intention to hold 3 02-15.. . . 245
unanticipated closed session

APPENDIX F F-26
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page
g NOTICE REQUIREMENTS (Cont’d.)
h Timing (Cont’d.)
c Practices permitted (Cont’d.)
Oral announcement of legislative committee’s immediate meeting
during last few days of General Assembly session 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Same-day notice of urgently called meeting 1 96-11.. . . 186
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Posting notice 6 days before meeting, coupled with announcement
at prior meeting 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
c Practices in violation
Failure to give timely public notice 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Providing notice only 24 hours before meeting if public body
was aware of relevant statutory deadline requiring action 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 139

g OPEN SESSION REQUIREMENT

h Generally
Accommodation of people with disabilities 1 97-9.. . . . 237
1 97-11.. . . 245
3 02-13.. . . 233
Manner in which a public body makes decisions at an open session: 1 92-5.. . . . . 16
outside the Act
Entire discussion of open session matter, from beginning to end, 1 94-5.. . . . . 73
must be in open session 1 96-4.. . . . 162
Open meeting must be conducted in a manner that, as a practical
matter, does not exclude public 1 94-6.. . . . . 92
1 96-4.. . . . 162
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 127
Reopening meeting following erroneous closing required good-faith 3 01-8.. . . . 115
effort to notify public and press of changed situation
h Practices permitted
Brief delay in permitting access by camera crew 1 96-8.. . . . 175
Ceasing discussion immediately of newly raised topic that is not 1 95-3.. . . . 117
permitted to be discussed in closed session
Choice of conference room for meeting 3 01-9.. . . . 118

APPENDIX F F-27
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page
OPEN SESSION REQUIREMENT (Cont’d.)
h Practices permitted
Denying public access to document distributed to members at meeting 2 99-15.. . . . 78
Disallowing public comment on public body’s decisions 1 97-7.. . . . 227
4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Open meeting in conference room after closed session 1 97-6.. . . . 224
Open meeting in conference room prior to open session in regular
meeting room 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Posting of notice that legislative committee is holding a voting
session 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Regulating location of cameras set up in hearing rooms 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 154
Rescheduling of meeting to larger site 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 155
h Practices in violation
Conducting discussion after announcing adjournment of open session 1 96-4.. . . . 162
1 96-9.. . . . 178
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
Conducting discussion during announced recess 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Conducting discussion in advance of scheduled meeting 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Discussing matters beyond those identified in closing a meeting
violated open session requirements 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Excluding reporters from meeting open to the public 2 99-11.. . . . 67
Failure to provide notice to general public 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 178
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Meeting in a room off-limits to the general public 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 147
Prohibiting audiotaping of discussion by advisory group 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Prohibiting videotaping by individual not affiliated with the news
media 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Prohibiting videotaping of audience at meeting 1 95-9.. . . . 137
Prohibiting videotaping even if public body makes transcript of 3 03-21.. . . 356
meeting available

APPENDIX F F-28
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page
OPEN SESSION REQUIREMENT (Cont’d.)
h Practices in violation (Cont’d.)
Session of county council held without notice and in an unusual 1 93-8.. . . . . 44
meeting place

g PUBLIC BODY
h Generally
Receipt of public funds: irrelevant to public body status 1 96-11.. . . 186
1 97-3.. . . . 212
h Determined to be a public body:
Board of legislatively created corporation, intended by the General 1 97-3.. . . . 212
Assembly to be a governmental entity
Committees comprising residents appointed by resolution of 1 94-4.. . . . . 69
city council
Panel of Critical Area Commission 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 189
State Biosolids (Sewage Sludge) Task Force 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 182
Town council members despite their role as heads of departments 3 00-7.. . . . . 26
h Determined not to be a public body:
Advisory committee appointed by county parks director 3 03-15.. . . 325
Advisory group to county planning 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 132
Board of Baltimore Area Convention and Visitors Association 1 96-14.. . . 196
3 03-7.. . . . 284
Board of directors of private, non-profit hospital 1 92-2.. . . . . . 6
City, county, or school board staff members 1 92-2.. . . . . . 6
2 98-8.. . . . . 27
2 99-2.. . . . . 37
Committee that carries out pre-application review process identified 3 00-9.. . . . . 36
in local law
County department County department heads and county
commissioners in a county in which commissioners are executive
head of county government 1 93-10. . . . . . . . . . 50
Environmental Assessment Committee of the Baltimore County 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 84
Public Schools

APPENDIX F F-29
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page
g PUBLIC BODY (Cont’d.)
h Determined not to be a public body (cont’d.)
Individual hearing examiner holding hearing on behalf of zoning
board 1 96-8.. . . . 175
Informally created committee consisting of two jurisdictions’
officials 2 98-2.. . . . . . 5
Informally created subgroup established by single council member
6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 155
“Management Committee”formed pursuant to memorandum of
agreement 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 194
Management committee informally established by executive
director of the Baltimore Metropolitan Council 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Maryland Public Secondary Schools Athletic Association 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Municipal officials and individual members of city council 1 93-6.. . . . . 35
Political party central committee 3 03-6.. . . . 278
Private, voluntary association of public officials and others 1 95-4.. . . . 120
Student government association at public college 2 99-1.. . . . . 35
Subcommittees not formally created 1 94-4.. . . . . 69
2 99-12.. . . . 70
Subcommittees of Maryland Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory
Committee 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 140
Wicomico County Council and county department heads 1 97-16.. . . 261

g QUASI-JUDICIAL FUNCTION
h Within the function:
Animal control commission proceeding to determine dangerousness 3 03-3.. . . . 260
of dog
Appellate role of city council in dispute over referendum petition 2 98-1.. . . . . . 1
Personnel grievance hearing, if subject to certain judicial review 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
provisions

APPENDIX F F-30
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page
g QUASI-LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION
h Within the function:
Amendment of employment contract 1 95-5.. . . . 123
Budget review by county legislative body 1 93-8.. . . . . 44
1 97-2.. . . . 206
Franchise reassignment 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . 200
Review of staff’s proposed budget by library board committee 1 97-7.. . . . 227
hOutside the function:
Presentation on topic with likely fiscal implications but not involving
budget amendment itself 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . 104

g RECORDS
Act does not govern access to records not required under provisions of
the Act 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
Public access to recordings of meetings governed by Public Information
Act ,rather than Open Meetings Act 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . 164

g SCOPE OF ACT
Activity by public body that falls within none of the defined 1 94-7.. . . . . 96
functions: covered by the Act 1 94-10.. . . 107
1 95-2.. . . . 113
5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Individual actions of presiding officer: not covered by the Act 2 99-12.. . . . 70
Library board: covered by Act in addition to provision about meetings
in Education Article 5.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
Pen Mar Development Corporation: exempt from some, but not all,
provisions of the Act 4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Survey of members without convening a quorum : not covered by
Act 6.. . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

APPENDIX F F-31
 SUBJECT Vol. Opn. Page
g ZONING MATTERS
Permissible use of mobile homes on certain lots 3 02-3.. . . . 182
Planning 1 92-3.. . . . . 10

APPENDIX F F-32