Advisory Opinion: 24AO:0004
DATE: June 27, 2024
SUBJECT: Attendance at social and ministerial events
This opinion concerns attendance at social and ministerial events. Advisory opinions may be adopted by the board pursuant to Iowa Code section 23.6(3) and Rule 497–1.2(2): “[t]he board may on its own motion issue opinions without receiving a formal request.” We note at the outset that IPIB’s jurisdiction is limited to the application of Iowa Code chapters 21, 22, and 23, and rules in Iowa Administrative Code chapter 497. Advice in a Board opinion, if followed, constitutes a defense to a subsequent complaint based on the same facts and circumstances.
QUESTION POSED:
Can government officials subject to Iowa Code chapter 21 attend ministerial and social events without violating open meetings law?
OPINION:
Iowa Code § 21.2 defines what constitutes a meeting under Iowa Code chapter 21.[1] “‘Meeting’ means a gathering in person or by electronic means, formal or informal, of a majority of the members of a governmental body where there is deliberation or action upon any matter within the scope of the governmental body’s policy-making duties…”
Specifically excluded from the definition of a meeting under chapter 21 is “a gathering of members of a governmental body for purely ministerial or social purposes when there is no discussion of policy or no intent to avoid the purposes of this chapter.” Iowa Code § 21.2.
Chapter 21 excludes events attended by members of a government body, such as social, political and civic events, so long as the members avoid deliberation on policy issues within their policy-making duties and their attendance at the event is not to avoid the transparency requirements of the open meetings law. “[T]he second sentence of section [21.2] merely reaffirms the right of a majority of a governmental body’s members to meet for a purely ministerial function, or in a social setting (as is often the case in a small community), without being required to follow chapter [21] provisions, so long as there is no discussion of policy and no intent to avoid the purposes of the act.” Telegraph Herald, Inc. v. City of Dubuque, 297 N.W.2d 529, 533 (Iowa 1980).
What is a purely ministerial event?
The Iowa courts have examined what is a purely ministerial event or purpose. Generally, gathering merely to receive information that will be reported on and acted upon at an open meeting does not constitute a meeting under Iowa Code § 21.2. See Id. at 534.
Situations in which members of a governmental body gather only to “receive information upon a matter within the scope of the body’s policy-making duties.” “[I]ndividual members may, by asking questions, elicit clarification about the information presented.” Hettinga v. Dallas Cnty. Bd. of Adjustment, 375 N.W.2d 293, 295 (Iowa Ct. App. 1985) (quoting Op.Att'y Gen. # 81–7–4(L) at 10) (emphasis added).
The court has held the following have been ministerial events (although the Court, in some cases, urged caution about concerns the government bodies in these situations were close to creating a chapter 21 meeting):
- When a majority of members were in a room outside a courtroom and received only information from the county attorney about the applicable law of a county zoning ordinance, but the merits of a case before the members was not discussed and no intention to avoid the statute was found. Hettinga v. Dallas Cnty. Bd. of Adjustment, 375 N.W.2d 293, 295 (Iowa Ct. App. 1985) (note the court cautions about concerns).
- Board members met with an engineering firm to elicit information about a report the firm prepared. Testimony established there was no deliberation. Dooley v. Johnson Cnty Bd. Of Sup’rs, 2008 WL 5234382 (Iowa Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2008).
- Three council members went to view rock the city administrator was considering buying, but facts established no deliberation occurred and bill for the rock was approved at a council meeting. Gavin v. City of Cascade, 500 N.W.2d 729, 732 (Iowa Ct. App. 1993)
Some circumstances in which IPIB has found the gathering was very purely ministerial purposes:
- A gathering with the purpose of introducing volunteers to supervisors and providing training to volunteers. 13FC:0011 11/14/2013 Lauris Olson / Story County Board of Supervisors
- A meet and greet social event in which members were tasked with set-up and clean-up of the event when no evidence showed any deliberation during these duties. 14FC:0067 08/28/2014 Karen Roode / City of Low Moor
- Discussion of three members after a meeting to schedule interviews of job applicants. 20FC:0027 Logan Nehman/Fonda City Council
- Board signing tax exemptions documents after the conclusion of a meeting. There was no evidence of deliberation occurring during the task. 24FC:0016 Valerie Close/Benton County Board of Supervisors
A ministerial or social event can become a “meeting” when there is deliberation or action taken by the government body.
How to avoid creating a “meeting” at a purely ministerial event?
“A meeting may develop, for example, if a majority of the members of a body engage in any discussion that focuses at all concretely on matters over which they exercise judgment or discretion.” Hettinga, 375 N.W.2d at 295 (quoting Op.Att'y Gen. # 81–7–4(L) at 10). Basically, deliberation occurs when “the information gathering evolves into discussion of [the government body] member opinions and the reasoning behind those opinions,” See Hettinga, 375 N.W.2d at 295. When the governmental body members begin talking about their thoughts, concerns, opinions, or potential action on the matters, the government body is deliberating and, by definition, the discussion has become a meeting subject to open meeting requirements.
To avoid deliberation, the members of a governmental body should ensure they take in the information received and ask clarifying questions if needed, but avoid providing any commentary on the topic. They should avoid any comments that begin with phrases similar to the following, which will likely lead toward deliberation.
- “I think we should..”
- “I feel this could..”
- “I support/won’t support this…”
- “My opinion on this matter is…”
- “I want to take a poll/see what you all are thinking”
A better option, if there will be information gathering on matters within the policy-making duties of the governmental body, is to conduct the conversation in an open meeting following the requirements of chapter 21, so there is no concern with the ministerial gathering becoming an improper meeting.
How to avoid creating a “meeting” at a social event or the appearance of a meeting?
When a quorum of members of a government body choose to participate in a social event, such as a business opening, civic event, or party, they can attend, but like ministerial gatherings, the members must avoid deliberating on matters within their policy-making responsibilities.
“Persons serving on governmental bodies should be constantly aware that their activities are subject to public scrutiny and should avoid even the appearance of engaging in unauthorized [meetings]. The public is entitled to openness in the making of public policy by governmental bodies.” Hettinga, 375 N.W.2d at 295–96. Keeping this in mind, members should also consider taking steps to avoid creating the appearance of deliberation or any intention to avoid the purposes of the law.
- Follow best practices. Provide notice the members of the government body will be attending the social event. Providing notice when the government body will be attending the event demonstrates transparency about why a quorum of the members are there.
- Do not sit together or gather in a majority at the event. Ensuring members are socializing with other attendees at the event prevents any deliberation on matters within the members’ scope.
- If members are together, make sure the conversation topics are social in nature to avoid bringing up government business.
Conclusion
Government officials can attend ministerial and social events, like political and civic events, without violating the open meetings law. But, officials need to make sure they take steps to avoid deliberation on areas within their policymaking duties and take common sense steps to avoid the appearance of improper deliberation or attempting to avoid chapter 21 requirements.
BY DIRECTION AND VOTE OF THE BOARD:
Joan Corbin
E.J. Giovannetti
Barry Lindahl
Luke Martz
Joel McCrea
Monica McHugh
Jackie Schmillen
SUBMITTED BY:
Erika Eckley
Executive Director
Iowa Public Information Board
ISSUED ON:
June 27, 2024
Pursuant to Iowa Administrative Rule 497-1.3(3), a person who has received a board opinion may, within 30 days after the issuance of the opinion, request modification or reconsideration of the opinion. A request for modification or reconsideration shall be deemed denied unless the board acts upon the request within 60 days of receipt of the request. The IPIB may take up modification or reconsideration of an advisory opinion on its own motion within 30 days after the issuance of an opinion.
Pursuant to Iowa Administrative Rule 497-1.3(5), a person who has received a board opinion or advice may petition for a declaratory order pursuant to Iowa Code section 17A.9. The IPIB may refuse to issue a declaratory order to a person who has previously received a board opinion on the same question, unless the requestor demonstrates a significant change in circumstances from those in the board opinion.
[1] “1. Members of a governmental body, as defined under Iowa Code § 21.2, meet; 2. This meeting is in person or by electronic means; 3. A majority of the governmental body is in attendance; 4. There is deliberation or action taken by the body; and 5. The deliberation or action is within the body’s policy-making duties.” 24AO:0001 - Chapter 21 Requirements for Work Sessions