1975 c. 426
;
1987 a. 305
;
1993 a. 215
;
1997 a. 123
;
2007 a. 20
.
There is no requirement in this section that the notice provided be exactly correct in every detail. State ex rel. Olson v. City of Baraboo Joint Review Board,
2002 WI App 64
,
252 Wis. 2d 628
,
643 N.W.2d 796
,
01-0201
.
Sub. (2) does not expressly require that the notice indicate whether a meeting will be purely deliberative or if action will be taken. The notice must alert the public of the importance of the meeting. Although a failure to expressly state whether action will be taken could be a violation, the importance of knowing whether a vote would be taken is diminished when no input from the audience is allowed or required. State ex rel. Olson v. City of Baraboo Joint Review Board,
2002 WI App 64
,
252 Wis. 2d 628
,
643 N.W.2d 796
,
01-0201
.
Sub. (2) sets forth a reasonableness standard for determining whether notice of a meeting is sufficient that strikes the proper balance between the public's right to information and the government's need to efficiently conduct its business. The standard requires taking into account the circumstances of the case, which includes analyzing such factors as the burden of providing more detailed notice, whether the subject is of particular public interest, and whether it involves non-routine action that the public would be unlikely to anticipate. Buswell v. Tomah Area School District,
2007 WI 71
,
301 Wis. 2d 178
,
732 N.W.2d 804
,
05-2998
.
The supreme court declined to review the validity of the procedure used to give notice of a joint legislative committee on conference alleged to violate the sub. (3) 24-hour notice requirement. The court will not determine whether internal operating rules or procedural statutes have been complied with by the legislature in the course of its enactments and will not intermeddle in what it views, in the absence of constitutional directives to the contrary, to be purely legislative concerns. Ozanne v. Fitzgerald,
2011 WI 43
,
334 Wis. 2d 70
,
798 N.W.2d 436
,
11-0613
.
Under sub. (1) (b), a written request for notice of meetings of a governmental body should be filed with the chief presiding officer or designee and a separate written request should be filed with each specific governmental body. 65 Atty. Gen. 166.
The method of giving notice pursuant to sub. (1) is discussed. 65 Atty. Gen. 250.
The specificity of notice required by a governmental body is discussed. 66 Atty. Gen. 143, 195.
The requirements of notice given to newspapers under this section is discussed. 66 Atty. Gen. 230.
A town board, but not an annual town meeting, is a "governmental body" within the meaning of the open meetings law. 66 Atty. Gen. 237.
News media who have filed written requests for notices of public meetings cannot be charged fees by governmental bodies for communication of the notices.
77 Atty. Gen. 312
.
A newspaper is not obligated to print a notice received under sub. (1) (b), nor is governmental body obligated to pay for publication. Martin v. Wray,
473 F. Supp. 1131
(1979).