M1E3B6

In Reading Eagle, the Court entered a permanent injunction that required all subsequent announcements of executive sessions to be given with the necessary specificity. 627 A.2d at 308.

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

A court has the power, in its discretion and upon good cause shown, to declare void any action taken in violation of the OML. N.Y. Pub. Off. Law § 107(1) (McKinney 1988). This discretion may be exercised in instances of violations relating to executive sessions; however, "[i]nclusion by the legislature of this language vesting in the courts the discretion to grant remedial relief makes it abundantly clear that not every breach of the Open Meetings Law automatically triggers its enforcement sanctions." New York University v.

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

If a governmental body fails to fulfill the procedural requirements for convening an executive session, enforcement of the Alabama Open Meetings Act may be sought by civil action brought in the county where the governmental body's primary office is located. Such an action may be brought for failure of the governmental body to follow the notice requirements of the Act. Ala. Code §  36-25A-9(b)(1) (Supp. 2005). Remedies available include declaratory judgments, injunctions, invalidation of actions taken during the meeting held in violation of the act, and civil penalty up to $1,000.

Intentional violation subjects the violator to a possible civil penalty of not more than $500. Any binding action taken at any such meeting held in violation of the provisions of the Act is voidable. K.S.A. 75-4320(a).

The penalties and remedies are the same as for any other violation of the Open Meetings Law.

The Public Meetings Law imposes no additional requirements for executive sessions. Refer to specific statutes relating to the governing body or the governing body's ordinances or resolutions. Knowingly and willfully violating the Act by holding an illegal executive session is punishable as a misdemeanor. An illegal executive session may render any action by the governing body "null and void."

The Alaska Supreme Court recognized that individuals who are the subject of executive sessions based upon AS 44.62.310(c)(2), as the discussion would tend to prejudice their reputation or character, have additional rights personal to them as opposed to the public generally. The statute gives such individuals the right to require that the session the governmental body had proposed to conduct in secret instead be conducted in public. The Supreme Court has made it clear that individuals discussed in an executive session will have a remedy for failure to give adequate notice.

A court may void any action taken by a public agency if it fails to substantially comply with the notice requirements for closed meetings. See Ky. Rev. Stat. 61.848(5).