Summary 2010 WY 2

Summary of Decision issued January 8, 2010

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Cheyenne Newspapers, Inc. v. Bldg. Code Bd. of Appeals, Cheyenne

Citation: 2010 WY 2

Docket Number: S-09-0103

Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County, the Honorable Edward L. Grant, Judge.

Representing Appellant Newspaper: Bruce T. Moats of Law Office of Bruce T. Moats, PC, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

Representing Appellee Bldg. Board: Kate M. Fox of Davis & Cannon, LLP, Cheyenne, Wyoming

Facts/Discussion: The Newspaper appealed from a summary judgment granted by the district court in favor of the Board declaring that certain Board action did not violate the Wyoming Public Meetings Act and that such action therefore was not null and void.
Quasi-judicial deliberations under WAPA subject to the Wyoming Public Meetings Act: All meetings of the governing body of an agency are public meetings. The Board was created by an ordinance of the City of Cheyenne which is a municipality. The Board is the group having ultimate control over its decisions, not the city council. Therefore, the “governing body” is the board itself. The Board met to discuss and deliberate the appeal from the action of the City’s Historic Preservation Board. Quasi-judicial deliberations after a WAPA contested case hearing may not be closed to the public. Section 16-4-403(a) mandates that all meetings of the governing body of an agency are public meetings except for executive sessions as described in § 16-4-405. The Act intends that an agency’s deliberations occur during a public meeting.
Action of the Board null and void: The Court noted the facts in the instant case were similar to those in Mayland v. Flitner where the commissioners entered into executive session in violation of the Act but took action later at an appropriately called public meeting. In the instant case, although § 16-4-403(a) was violated when the private meeting took place, the second sentence was not violated because the agency’s action took place at a public meeting. Therefore, the action was not null and void.

Conclusion: The Board violated the statute by deliberating at a closed meeting, but the agency action took place at a public meeting, so that agency action was not null and void. The Court reversed the conclusion of the district court that the Act does not apply to quasi-judicial deliberations of an agency after a WAPA contested case hearing, but the Court affirmed the conclusion of the district court that the Board took no action that must be declared null and void.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

C.J. Voigt delivered the decision.

J. Kite concurring, joined by J. Hill: The Justices agreed that the Board was a governing body covered by the Act and its meeting in executive session was illegal. The legislature has stated in clear and unequivocal language that agencies are prohibited from deliberating behind closed doors. For some reason, the Board concluded it was exempt from these requirements and went so far as to adopt regulations which purported to provide it with authority to ignore the statute and hold executive sessions whenever it chose. The Board also ignored the city attorney’s request that it conduct its deliberations in public. In the face of that direct defiance of the law, injunctive relief may have been appropriate.
J. Burke concurring in part and dissenting in part: J. Burke agreed with the majority that an agency’s deliberations after a contested case hearing are subject to the requirements of the Wyoming Public Meetings Act and that the Board violated the Act when it deliberated at a closed meeting. However, he concluded that the record was insufficient to support a finding that the board took no action during the meeting. He would therefore have reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment, and remanded for further proceedings to resolve that genuine issue of material fact.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/y8gy9bo .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]