The Open Meetings Act states that a meeting occurs when a “governing body of a public body for which a quorum is required” convenes “to make a decision or to deliberate toward a decision on any matter” [T.C.A. § 8-44-102(b)(2)].
Some gatherings of members of a governing body would not be considered a meeting under the law.
For example, the open meetings statute says that a “meeting does not include any on-site inspection of any project or program” [T.C.A. 8-44-102(b)(2)].
It also says that a “chance meeting of two or more members of a public body” is not considered a meeting as defined by the law. But in very strong language that echoes the principles underlying the law, the statute makes clear that:
…no such chance meetings, informal assemblages, or electronic communication shall be used to decide or deliberate public business in circumvention of the spirit or requirements of this part. [T.C.A. § 8-44-102(c)]
This section of the law has been among the most contentious, but Tennessee courts have been helpful in laying out the boundaries.
The distinguishing factor under the open meetings law is that either a decision was made by the governing body or public business was deliberated by its members. The courts have said that to deliberate means “to examine and consult in order to form an opinion” and “to weigh arguments for and against a proposed course of action.”
Courts also have found that the use of email can constitute a meeting when used by members of governing bodies to decide or deliberate public business. (Johnston v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tenn. Ct. App. 2009).
In general, members of a governing body who try to circumvent the spirit or requirements of the open meetings law to decide or deliberate public business outside the public eye are likely to find themselves in conflict with state law.
