Police organization filed petition for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief, claiming that city violated city ordinance and the Open Meeting Act, by enacting amendments to city budget at a special meeting of the city council that were not included in the posted agenda.
The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of organization. City appealed.
The Supreme Court held that:
- A city must follow mandates of the Open Meeting Act when taking action pursuant to the Municipal Budget Act, whether the city is adopting or amending budget, and
- Agenda for special meeting was deceptively vague and likely to mislead, and thus, it was a willful violation of the Open Meeting Act, and actions taken at such meeting were invalid.
Agenda for special meeting of the city council at which city enacted amendments to city budget was deceptively vague and likely to mislead, and thus, it was a willful violation of the Open Meeting Act, and actions taken at such meeting were invalid; city knew that the council would continue discussions at special meeting about potentially reallocating funds within the city budget from prior meeting, but disregarded the Open Meeting Act and failed to include anything on the agenda to give the public notice of the matters under consideration, but rather, the agenda specifically limited council’s potential actions to adopting or rejecting the city budget, thereby concealing the actions taken by council.