Last week I pointed out after seeing the city council’s informational meeting agenda on Friday afternoon that an item was removed by Monday (Mayor communications).
This Friday I noticed that the agenda was not posted by 5 PM. According to city charter;
§ 30.014 AGENDA.
   (c)   The proposed agenda shall be posted at the city clerk’s office and placed on the city’s website, with email notice sent to those persons who have requested notice pursuant to law by the close of business on the Friday preceding any meeting to take place on the following Tuesday. Proposed additions to the agenda, in their complete and final format, including a signed agenda approval form, shall be delivered to the city clerk’s office no later than Monday at 12:00 p.m. before the Tuesday meeting the next day. These items shall be listed as “Items added after agenda deadline†on a revised agenda which shall be posted, placed on the website and noticed at least 24 hours in advance of the Tuesday meeting to the council, the mayor, the directors and all persons who have requested notice pursuant to law. Any item to be placed on a revised agenda must be separately approved for the agenda by a vote of a majority of the city council members present in order to be considered that same evening.
As of Noon today, the agenda was still not posted, not even an amended one (I believe it is up now). This would be a violation of city charter by the Clerk’s office. But according to state law, there only needs to be a 24 hour notice;
The open meeting law is contained in SDCL chapter 1-25. Municipalities are required to hold open meetings. This includes any association, authority, board, commission, committee, council, or task force which is created by statute, ordinance, or resolution and is vested with the authority to exercise any sovereign power derived from state law (SDCL 1-25-1).
Prior to any city council, commission or board meeting, a notice including the proposed agenda must be posted in city hall in a place where it is visible, readable, and accessible for at last an entire 24 hours. The proposed agenda shall include the date, time and location of the meeting. The notice shall also be posted on the public body’s website upon dissemination of the notice, if such website exists. This requirement is mandatory for all meetings of the board, council or commission (SDCL 1-25-1.1).
When an entity is appointed by the governing body but does not meet the definition of an entity required to hold an open meeting, any report to the governing body must be given to the governing body in an open meeting. The governing body shall delay taking any official action on the recommendations, findings, or reports until the next meeting of the governing body (SDCL 1-27-1.18).
For special or rescheduled regular meetings, all bodies shall also comply with the public notice provisions of this section for regular meetings to the extent that circumstances permit. In addition, information in the notice must be given, in person, by mail, e-mail, or by telephone, to members of the local news media who have requested notice (SDCL 1-25-1.1).
So which is it? Good question. But I think if a city in South Dakota doesn’t follow it’s own Home Rule Charter there could be consequences, we will see.
UPDATE: Seems the city was a little worried about the misstep;
