Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Board Legal Actions topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lakeville board votes to authorize three closed sessions on pending litigation and legal advice

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The board unanimously approved motions to enter closed sessions after adjournment to consult legal counsel on three pending or threatened litigation matters, including a named case. Each authorization was moved, seconded and approved by voice vote.

The Lakeville Area School District 194 Board of Education voted Jan. 14 to authorize three separate closed sessions to consult with the district's legal counsel on pending or threatened litigation.

Chair Matt Swanson read the statutory basis for closing portions of the meeting, citing the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. He told the board the district sought confidential attorney-client discussions under Minn. Stat. § 13D.05, subd. 3(b), because "it would be detrimental to the district's interest" for legal advice to be given in public.

The first closed-session item was described as consultation about litigation in the case recorded in the meeting as "Kagune at l versus ISD 194," court file number 22-cv-02135. Director Kim Baker moved to authorize a closed session to consult on that matter; Director Paul Carbone seconded. The board recorded a unanimous voice vote approving the closed session.

The second and third items were described as separate pending or threatened litigations by former students; both motions to authorize confidential attorney-client discussion were moved and seconded and approved by voice vote. The board recorded each motion as approved with an affirmative vocal "aye" and no recorded opposition.

After the votes the board directed that the closed sessions occur following adjournment; the chair and counsel clarified procedural points about adjourning into closed session and returning to adjourn the public meeting after the confidential discussion.