2015 ORS 192.640¹
Public notice required
  • special notice for executive sessions, special or emergency meetings

(1) The governing body of a public body shall provide for and give public notice, reasonably calculated to give actual notice to interested persons including news media which have requested notice, of the time and place for holding regular meetings. The notice shall also include a list of the principal subjects anticipated to be considered at the meeting, but this requirement shall not limit the ability of a governing body to consider additional subjects.

(2) If an executive session only will be held, the notice shall be given to the members of the governing body, to the general public and to news media which have requested notice, stating the specific provision of law authorizing the executive session.

(3) No special meeting shall be held without at least 24 hours notice to the members of the governing body, the news media which have requested notice and the general public. In case of an actual emergency, a meeting may be held upon such notice as is appropriate to the circumstances, but the minutes for such a meeting shall describe the emergency justifying less than 24 hours notice. [1973 c.172 §4; 1979 c.644 §3; 1981 c.182 §1]

Notes of Decisions

Notice which apprised peti­tioners of actual loca­tion of prop­erty and of nature of ac­tion under considera­tion was sufficient and peti­tioners suffered no prejudice because notice was posted nine rather than ten days before hearing. Turner v. Washington County, 70 Or App 575, 689 P2d 1318 (1984)

No emergency existed which would allow advance­ment of nonemergency meeting to earlier time to allow instead considera­tion of separate emergency matter at time initially noticed for nonemergency meeting, and emergency could not be predicated solely on convenience or inconvenience of members of the governing body. Oreg. Assoc. of Classified Emp. v. Salem-Keizer, 95 Or App 28, 767 P2d 1365 (1989), Sup Ct review denied

Notes of Decisions

A retained labor negotiator is neither a member of a public body nor a governing body, and ORS 192.610 (Definitions for ORS 192.610 to 192.690) to 192.690 (Exceptions to ORS 192.610 to 192.690) therefore have no ap­pli­ca­bil­i­ty to negotia­tions con­ducted by a retained negotiator. Southwestern Oregon Publishing Co. v. Southwestern Oregon Community College Dist., 28 Or App 383, 559 P2d 1289 (1977), Sup Ct review denied

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Secret ballot under Public Meeting Law, (1974) Vol 37, p 183; quality of openness in public meetings of public governing bodies, (1976) Vol 38, p 50; in­for­ma­­tion-gathering sessions as public meetings, (1977) Vol 38, p 1471; Home-rule cities and counties as subject to Public Meetings Law, (1980) Vol 41, p 28; Delibera­tion of Land Use Board of Appeals following hearings as subject to Public Meetings Law, (1980) Vol 41, p 218; Applica­tion of Public Meeting Law to meeting of Multnomah County Committee for Indigent Defense Certifica­tion, (1981) Vol 41, p 417; Discussion of salaries of public body in executive session, (1982) Vol. 42, p 362; Student govern­ment committees recommending fee assess­ments and alloca­tions as subject to Public Meetings Law, (1984) Vol 44, p 69; Oregon Medical Insurance Pool is funda­mentally private-sector body, under virtually total private control, created by state to fulfill public purpose and is not state agency or public corpora­tion subject to

Public Meetings Law, (1989) Vol 46, P 155

Law Review Cita­tions

53 OLR 339-354 (1974); 55 OLR 519-536 (1976)

Chapter 192

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Attorney Generals Public Meetings and Records Manual, (1973) Vol 36, p 543; public meetings and records manual, (1976) Vol 37, p 1087; pro­hi­bi­­tion on disclosing marriage records, (1998) Vol 49, p 21

  • Swider Medeiros Haver LLP Blog / Martin Medeiros, Nov 30, 2009
    “The so called Web 2.0 . . . has brought great change in our society: the disrup­tion, if not marginaliza­tion, of the tradi­tional print periodicals; a growing importance in intellectual prop­erty; and the rapid efficiency of in­for­ma­­tion flow. But, it also has complexities that must be attended to and not overlooked by its ease of use and entertaining value.”

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 192—Records; Public Reports and Meetings, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors192.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2015, Chapter 192, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano192.­html (2015) (last ac­cessed Jul. 16, 2016).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.