M1E2B6

The notice requirements supplement—but do not replace—any other notice required by law. See 5 ILCS 120/2.04. In addition, “failure of any news medium to receive a notice provided for by this Act shall not invalidate any meeting provided notice was in fact given in accordance with this Act.” Id.

The Statute does not exempt emergency meetings from the provision giving the court the discretion to invalidate action taken at such meeting.  RSA 91-A:8,II.

(This section is blank. See the point above.)

The penalties are the same for failure to provide adequate notice of regular meetings.

The penalties and remedies for failure to give adequate notice of a special meeting are the same as those for a regular meeting, i.e., injunctive relief, voiding of action taken, and fines. N.J.S.A. 10:4-15, 16 and 17. Where no valid emergency exists, or where there is not even an attempt to comply with the notice requirements for an emergency meeting, the same penalties may be imposed. See Dunn v. Mayor and Council and Clerk of Laurel Springs, 163 N.J. Super. 32, 394 A.2d 145 (App. Div. 1978).

The penalties and remedies described above in reference to general notice requirements of the Open Meetings Act also apply to emergency meetings.

Presumably, §10-15-3(A), NMSA 1978, would apply, and may invalidate any action taken by a body where it was determined that the body did not provide "reasonable notice" of any meeting.

Although the wording in the enforcement section of the statute emphasizes enforcement against illegally closed sessions, it specifically provides that a court may act when it finds "that a governmental body has violated any provision of this chapter." Iowa Code §  21.6(3). However, in order for a court action to be brought, the party seeking judicial enforcement must first show that the governmental body is subject to the open meetings law and that it "has held a closed session." Iowa Code §  21.6(2).

(This section is blank. See the point above.)

(This section is blank. See the point above.)