When a North Dakota county commission calls a special meeting, what notice does it have to give and what must the minutes record?

Plain-English summary

The Burleigh County Commission held a special meeting on January 13, 2023, to hear a presentation about renovating a county-owned building (the Provident Building) and to consider financing options. The notice was posted on the county website on January 11, filed with the County Auditor, and posted at the principal office and the meeting location on the day of the meeting. No one had requested individual notice. The official county newspaper was not separately notified.

Dustin Gawrylow, a citizen, attended or otherwise tracked the meeting and asked the AG three questions: was the notice adequate, were the minutes adequate, and did the commission stay on agenda?

The AG answered: agenda compliance OK; notice and minutes both fall short on a single specific issue each.

The notice problem: the county failed to notify the official county newspaper of the special meeting. North Dakota's open meetings law requires that notice for a special meeting go to the official newspaper, in addition to the principal-office posting, website posting, county-auditor filing, and notice to anyone who has requested it. The "official newspaper" requirement exists so the local newspaper can decide whether to send a reporter, even if the newspaper does not actually publish the notice in time. The AG cited prior opinions making clear that notifying the newspaper is "of particular importance because [it] compensates for the possibility that the public may not be aware of the special or emergency meeting." Skipping that notification is a violation, even if every other notice channel was used.

The minutes problem: the minutes recorded the time the meeting was called to order but not the time it was adjourned. The statute, N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21(2), is explicit: minutes must include "[t]he date and time the meeting was called to order and adjourned." Both. The other elements of the minutes (members present, topics covered, the fact that no action was taken so no votes to record) were fine. But missing the adjournment time means the minutes are not in substantial compliance.

Where the commission did fine: agenda compliance. The notice listed five specific topics, the minutes confirmed the meeting addressed those same topics, and there was no evidence of straying. The "Provident Building Renovation update" plus "financing options" frame was specific enough to satisfy the special-meeting requirement that topics "be limited to those included in the notice."

The remedy: correct the minutes to include the adjournment time and provide the corrected minutes to Mr. Gawrylow and anyone else who requests them, free of charge. Going forward, the commission needs to add official-newspaper notification to its special-meeting checklist.

What this means for you

If you are a county commissioner, city council member, or school board member: Special meetings have stricter notice requirements than regular meetings. The official newspaper is the most-missed channel. Most agencies handle the principal-office posting and the website posting; the official newspaper notification often falls off the checklist. Build it in. Even if the newspaper does not publish the notice (the printing schedule may not allow), the call gives the paper the chance to send a reporter, which is the point.

If you are a county auditor or city clerk responsible for posting notices: The minimum notice channels for a special meeting are: principal office, meeting location (on the day), website if you have one, county auditor (filing), anyone who has requested notice, and the official newspaper. Make a checklist and check every box every time. The audit trail (a date-stamped email or letter to the newspaper) is the proof.

If you take meeting minutes for a public entity: Six required minute elements: (a) members attending, (b) date and time called to order AND adjourned, (c) topics discussed, (d) motions made and whether seconded, (e) results of every vote, (f) each member's vote on every recorded roll call vote. Verbatim is not required. Public comment is not required. But all six items are required. The most common omission is the adjournment time; second is the seconded/not-seconded note on motions.

If you are a citizen or journalist tracking local government: Open-meetings violations are easier to surface than open-records violations because you can show up and watch what gets said. Three things to verify routinely: (1) was notice published at every required channel? (2) Do the minutes match what actually happened? (3) Did the meeting stick to the agenda topics? If you spot a violation, you can request an AG opinion under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1 (no fee, no lawsuit needed) or file under § 44-04-21.2 (with fee-shifting if you win).

If you are a county attorney advising on procedure: The official-newspaper notification is a low-cost, high-value compliance step. A simple email distribution list that includes the official newspaper handles it. Get the policy in place before the next AG opinion comes back against your county.

Common questions

What's the difference between a regular meeting and a special meeting for notice purposes?

Regular meetings happen on a published schedule. Special meetings are called outside that schedule. The notice requirements for special meetings include all the regular-meeting channels plus a separate notification to the official newspaper. Special meetings are also limited to the topics in the notice, where regular meetings can address other matters that come up.

What is an "official newspaper"?

Each county or municipality designates an official newspaper for publication of legal notices. The designation is a matter of state law and local choice. The county auditor or municipal clerk knows which paper has the designation; if you don't know, ask.

Why is the official newspaper notification required if other notices are posted?

The AG's reasoning, citing prior opinions: special meetings can be called on short notice, so the default-notice channels (website, principal office) may not reach all interested members of the public in time. The official newspaper either publishes the notice or sends a reporter; either way, the public learns about the meeting. The notification is a backstop, not a duplication.

What's the bare minimum for proper minutes?

Six elements: names of members attending; date and time called to order AND adjourned; list of topics discussed regarding public business; description of each motion and whether seconded; results of every vote taken; each member's vote on every recorded roll call vote. Without all six, the minutes are noncompliant. Verbatim transcription is not required, and public comment is not required to be reflected.

Can a special meeting cover topics not on the notice agenda?

No. Special meetings are limited to the topics in the notice. The agenda must be specific enough to "provide sufficient information to interested members of the public concerning the governing body's anticipated business." Catch-all phrases like "other business" or "additional topics" are not acceptable for special meetings. The Burleigh County Commission's agenda here was specific enough.

What's the remedy for a notice or minutes violation?

Corrective action specified by the AG opinion: in this case, correcting the minutes and providing them free to Mr. Gawrylow and anyone else who requests. If the entity does not take corrective action within seven days, mandatory costs, disbursements, and attorney fees follow if the requester prevails in a civil action under § 44-04-21.2. Personal liability for responsible individuals is also possible.

Background and statutory framework

The open meetings law, N.D.C.C. § 44-04-20, sets the notice requirements. Subsection (1) requires advance notice. Subsection (4) requires posting at the principal office (if one exists), at the meeting location (on the day of the meeting), filing with the county auditor (for county entities), and posting on the entity's website (if it has one). Subsection (5) requires notice to anyone who has requested notice. Subsection (6) is the special-meeting provision: notice "must also be given to the public entity's official newspaper" and topics "that may be considered at an emergency or special meeting are limited to those included in the notice."

The minutes statute, N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21(2), lists the six required minute elements: members attending, time called to order and adjourned, topics discussed, motions and whether seconded, results of every vote, each member's vote on every recorded roll call vote.

The AG's prior opinion practice on agenda specificity: "general, 'catch-all' phrases, such as 'other business,' 'additional topics,' 'any other issues that may need council attention,' or 'end-of-the-year recap' are not appropriate for special meetings because they do not provide the public with advance notice of what the entity would discuss." See N.D.A.G. 2013-O-06; 2013-O-01; 2010-O-11; 2009-O-04; 2009-O-03; 2005-O-17; 2002-O-11.

The official-newspaper-notice principle traces back through N.D.A.G. 2016-O-17, citing 2010-O-07 and 2005-O-20. The 2010-O-07 opinion explains: "[T]he purpose of providing notice to the public entity's official newspaper is not necessarily so it can publish the notice, but instead to notify the newspaper so it can cover the meeting if it desires."

The minutes-content principles trace through N.D.A.G. 2018-O-10; 2016-O-06; 2013-O-06; 2010-O-06; 98-O-14. These opinions confirm that minutes need not be verbatim but must cover the six statutory elements.

The enforcement track sits in N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1 (request for AG opinion) and § 44-04-21.2 (civil action with mandatory fee-shifting). The county commission as a public entity falls within the statute's scope. N.D.C.C. § 44-04-17.1(13)(b).

Citations

The open meetings notice requirements: N.D.C.C. § 44-04-20, particularly subsections (1) (advance notice), (4) (posting and filing), (5) (notice to those requesting it), (6) (official newspaper notification and topic limits for special meetings). The minutes requirements: N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21(2). The AG opinion authority: N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1(1). The fee-shifting penalty: N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.2. The public-entity definition: N.D.C.C. § 44-04-17.1(13)(b). Prior AG opinions on official-newspaper notice: N.D.A.G. 2016-O-17; 2010-O-07; 2005-O-20; 2013-O-01; 2011-O-16. Prior AG opinions on minutes content: N.D.A.G. 2018-O-10; 2016-O-06; 2013-O-06; 2010-O-06; 98-O-14; 2004-O-16. Prior AG opinions on agenda specificity for special meetings: N.D.A.G. 2024-O-09; 2021-O-04; 2011-O-15; 2013-O-06.

Source

• Landing page: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/burleigh-county-commission-2/
• Original PDF: https://attorneygeneral.nd.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-O-24.pdf

Original opinion text

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
www.attorneygeneral.nd.gov
(701) 328-2210

Drew H. Wrigley
ATTORNEY GENERAL

OPEN RECORDS AND MEETINGS OPINION
2025-O-24

DATE ISSUED: December 12, 2025

ISSUED TO: Burleigh County Commission

CITIZEN'S REQUEST FOR OPINION

Dustin Gawrylow requested an opinion from this office under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.1 asking whether the Burleigh County Commission failed to notice a special meeting on January 13, 2023, failed to follow the special meeting agenda, and failed to take complete minutes of the meeting, in violation of N.D.C.C. §§ 44-04-20, 44-04-21, and 44-04-20(6).

FACTS PRESENTED

The Burleigh County Commission (Commission) held a special meeting on January 13, 2023. The notice of the meeting was posted on the Burleigh County website by January 11, 2023, at 4:57 p.m. The notice and agenda were filed with the Burleigh County Auditor's Office. On the day of the meeting, the notice of the meeting was posted both at the Commission's principal office and the location of the meeting. No one had requested notice of the Commission's meeting, and the official county newspaper was not notified. The notice stated, "The Burleigh County Commission will be conducting a Provident Building renovation workshop." An amended notice and agenda listed five topics for the meeting:

1. Meeting called to order by Chairman of the Board.
2. Roll call of members.
3. JLG Architects present Provident Building Renovation update.
4. Deputy Finance Director Schulz present financing options pertaining to the proposed Provident Building Renovation project.
5. Adjourn.

The minutes from the special meeting summarizes it as follows: (1) the meeting was called to order at 1:30 p.m.; (2) the list of the commissioners present; (3) a representative of JLG Architects presented an overview of the drawings and estimates for the potential renovation project; (4) Deputy Finance Director Schulz presented financial information for the commission to consider; (5) no action was taken at the meeting; and (6) the meeting was adjourned. The minutes do not provide the time that the meeting was adjourned. The Commission claims no other topics were addressed at the meeting.

Dustin Gawrylow contacted Burleigh County Auditor/Treasurer Leo Vetter to obtain the video or audio of the meeting, as well as the packets and attachments that were given out. On January 19, 2023, Mr. Vetter provided the draft minutes, as well as the packets and attachments that were requested. Mr. Gawrylow replied the same day asking for a "Cliff Notes" version of what was presented to the Commission. Mr. Vetter replied that no such record existed. That afternoon, Mr. Gawrylow contacted this office for an opinion on whether the Commission discussed topics not on the agenda, whether the notice of the meeting was sufficient, and whether the minutes were adequate.

ISSUES

1. Whether the Commission provided notice of its January 13, 2023, special meeting in substantial compliance with N.D.C.C. § 44-04-20.

2. Whether the Commission kept adequate minutes of its January 13, 2023, special meeting in substantial compliance with N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21(2).

3. Whether the Commission considered only topics that were included in the notice of its January 13, 2023, special meeting in substantial compliance with N.D.C.C. § 44-04-20(6).

ANALYSIS

Issue One

A county commission is a public entity as defined by law and is subject to the open meeting and records laws. A governing body of a public entity must give advance notice of its meetings unless otherwise provided by law. Notice of a meeting must be posted at the principal office of the governing body if such an office exists and at the location of the meeting on the day of the meeting. County entities must file the meeting notice with the county auditor or designee of the county. If the public entity has a website, notice also must be posted on its website. Notice must also be provided to anyone requesting notice of meetings. For special meetings, notice must also be given to the public entity's official newspaper.

In this case, notice was not provided to the county's official newspaper. "Because emergency or special meetings may be called upon short notice, notifying the official newspaper is of particular importance because it compensates for the possibility that the public may not be aware of the special or emergency meeting." In addition to the possibility of the official newspaper "send[ing] a reporter to the meeting if it desir[ed] to do so," the official newspaper in this case published an issue before the special meeting was held, which could have notified the public of the special meeting if it desired to do so. Because of the Commission's failure to provide notice of the special meeting to the official newspaper, it is my opinion that the Commission did not substantially comply with N.D.C.C. § 44-04-20 when providing notice of the January 13, 2023, special meeting.

Issue Two

"Minutes must be kept of all open meetings and are records subject to [the open records law]." The minutes must include, at minimum:

a. The names of the members attending the meeting;
b. The date and time the meeting was called to order and adjourned;
c. A list of topics discussed regarding public business;
d. A description of each motion made at the meeting and whether the motion was seconded;
e. The results of every vote taken at the meeting; and
f. The vote of each member on every recorded roll call vote.

"Minutes are not required to be a verbatim report," and the minutes need not include "specific discussion or concerns raised by members of the public." Additionally, the Office of Attorney General "does not review any alleged inaccuracies in meeting minutes but will only review the content of meeting minutes to determine whether they meet the minimum requirements."

The Commission's minutes include the members present. The topics, although broad, are sufficient to provide the public with notice of the topics covered. The minutes identified the specific project being discussed by the Commission and provided basic information about the aspects of the project considered. The Commission did not use a generic category such as "other issues" which this office has previously deemed to be too broad. The minutes state that no action was taken at the meeting, thus, there were no votes to record. The minutes include the time the meeting was called to order but not the time it was adjourned. It is my opinion that the Commission failed to comply with N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21 with its minutes from the January 13, 2023, special meeting, because of the failure to include the time the meeting was adjourned.

Issue Three

Unlike regular meetings, topics "that may be considered at an emergency or special meeting are limited to those included in the notice." "The purpose of an agenda is to provide sufficient 'information to interested members of the public concerning the governing body's anticipated business in order that they may attend the meeting or take whatever other action they deem appropriate.'"

For the January 13, 2023, special meeting, there is no indication that the Commission addressed topics other than those included in the agenda. The minutes and the representations from Mr. Vetter are consistent with the topics in the meeting notice and agenda. It is my opinion that the Commission appears to have considered only topics that were included in the notice of its January 13, 2023, special meeting in substantial compliance with N.D.C.C. § 44-04-20(6).

CONCLUSIONS

1. The Commission did not provide notice of its January 13, 2023, special meeting in substantial compliance with N.D.C.C. § 44-04-20 because it failed to notify the official newspaper of the special meeting.

2. The Commission did not keep adequate minutes of its January 13, 2023, special meeting in substantial compliance with N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21(2) because it failed to include the time the meeting was adjourned.

3. The Commission considered only topics that were included in the notice of its January 13, 2023, special meeting in substantial compliance with N.D.C.C. § 44-04-20(6).

STEPS NEEDED TO REMEDY VIOLATION

The Burleigh County Commission must correct its minutes from the January 13, 2023, special meeting to include the time the Commission adjourned the meeting. Additionally, the Burleigh County Commission must provide the corrected minutes of the January 13, 2023, special meeting to Dustin Gawrylow and anyone else who requests them, free of charge.

While I have every reason to expect the Burleigh County Commission will remedy this situation, failure to take the corrective measures described in this opinion within seven days of the date this opinion is issued will result in mandatory costs, disbursements, and reasonable attorney fees if the person requesting the opinion prevails in a civil action under N.D.C.C. § 44-04-21.2. Failure to take these corrective measures may also result in personal liability for the person or persons responsible for the noncompliance.

Drew H. Wrigley
Attorney General

cc: Dustin Gawrylow